[trelos6Participant]

The age old addage goes: you need a superstar to win a championship.  And this has largely held true throughout history. 

I was looking through the rosters, and it’s amazing that pretty much every team in playoff contention besides the Celtics and Bucks has an established star.

GSW – Curry, Thompson, Green
CLE – LBJ, Kyrie, Love
SAS – LMA, Kawhi, Duncan
HOU – Harden, Howard
OKC – Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka
LAC – Paul, Griffin, Jordan
CHI – Buttler, Gasol
MEM – Gasol, Conley, Randolph
ATL – Horford, MIllsap, Teague
MIA – Bosh, Wade, Dragic
NOP – Davis
WAS – Wall
TOR – Lowry
MIL – ??? Giannis, Monroe??? 
UTA – Hayward, Favors
IND – George, Ellis
PHO – Bledsoe
BOS – ?????
DAL – Dirk
SAC – Cousins, Gay
DET – Drummond
BRO – Johnson, Lopez
NYK – Melo
POR – Lillard

And for the fringe teams

CHA – ??? Jefferson, Batum ???
ORL – ???Harris, Oladipo???
MIN – Wiggins
DEN – Gallinari
LAL – Kobe
PHI – Noel, Okafor

 

[Dazzling Dunks and Basketball BloopersParticipant]

 2014 spurs didn’t really have a superstar on their roster. Duncan was a former superstar and Leonard may one day be a superstar but neither would qualify as a superstar during that season. That was just an incredibly deep and balanced team with great leadership and coaching. Same holds true for 2004 pistons. Can’t really think of another team in my lifetime (32 years) that has won without a superstar on their roster. You’d probably have to go back to the 79 sonics maybe.

[trelos6Participant]

That’s why so many loved the 2014 Spurs.  Great unselfish team ball.

 

[T Rex]

 And Brad Stevens is a Pop desciple. Unselfish team ball is how they went 24-12 down the stretch to make the playoffs for the 7th time in 8 years.

 

 

[T Rex]

 And Brad Stevens is a Pop desciple. Unselfish team ball is how they went 24-12 down the stretch to make the playoffs for the 7th time in 8 years.

 

 

[trelos6Participant]

That’s why so many loved the 2014 Spurs.  Great unselfish team ball.

 

[DrivingDownTheStreetinmy64]

 Wow!! U fellas don’t know jack about basketball if Yall agree with this clown that Duncan can’t turn back the clock sum nights and play like his former self!!!!!!!!!!!!

[DrivingDownTheStreetinmy64]

 Wow!! U fellas don’t know jack about basketball if Yall agree with this clown that Duncan can’t turn back the clock sum nights and play like his former self!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ballislyfe25Participant]

+1 but IMO Duncan should qualify as a superstar for that Spurs team. His defense was phenomenal, probably the most text book and fundamental big man defense I can recall seeing. His per game numbers from the 2014 post season do not scream superstar but the film absolutely does. At times, he was unselfish nearly to a fault. He posted 9 double-doubles, which could have been closer to 15 with a few extra rebounds and minutes. 

[ballislyfe25Participant]

+1 but IMO Duncan should qualify as a superstar for that Spurs team. His defense was phenomenal, probably the most text book and fundamental big man defense I can recall seeing. His per game numbers from the 2014 post season do not scream superstar but the film absolutely does. At times, he was unselfish nearly to a fault. He posted 9 double-doubles, which could have been closer to 15 with a few extra rebounds and minutes. 

[Dazzling Dunks and Basketball BloopersParticipant]

 2014 spurs didn’t really have a superstar on their roster. Duncan was a former superstar and Leonard may one day be a superstar but neither would qualify as a superstar during that season. That was just an incredibly deep and balanced team with great leadership and coaching. Same holds true for 2004 pistons. Can’t really think of another team in my lifetime (32 years) that has won without a superstar on their roster. You’d probably have to go back to the 79 sonics maybe.

[Dazzling Dunks and Basketball BloopersParticipant]

 And I think you are being way too liberal with the superstar label. In my opinion there are really only a handful of true superstars in the league right now ( lebron, Durant, ad, Westbrook, curry, harden, paul, griffin). I’m talking guys you could throw on just about any team and they basically become instant playoff contenders. Guys like cousins, wall, George, Aldridge, Leonard, kyrie etc. are all very good players but not quite superstars (at least not yet imo)

 

 

[WinterSoldierParticipant]

 I agree with you about Superstars and good players. I have a question though, realistically how much difference is there in production between a really good player like Aldridge and a Superstar like Griffin?

[trelos6Participant]

The difference is when CP3 goes down injured.

Griffin will produce a string of 36ppg, 15rpg, 6apg performances and carry the team to a few W’s.

Aldridge can’t really do that.  He will plug away and give you the 26/12 he can normally provide though.

 

 

  

[trelos6Participant]

The difference is when CP3 goes down injured.

Griffin will produce a string of 36ppg, 15rpg, 6apg performances and carry the team to a few W’s.

Aldridge can’t really do that.  He will plug away and give you the 26/12 he can normally provide though.

 

 

  

[WinterSoldierParticipant]

 I agree with you about Superstars and good players. I have a question though, realistically how much difference is there in production between a really good player like Aldridge and a Superstar like Griffin?

[trelos6Participant]

"established star"

[SkalAndJamalParticipant]

 So you have Okafor?

[trelos6Participant]

C’mon, it’s the Sixers.  I felt bad for them.

Plus, I do think Okafor will be a stud on offense from Day 1.

 

  

[trelos6Participant]

C’mon, it’s the Sixers.  I felt bad for them.

Plus, I do think Okafor will be a stud on offense from Day 1.

 

  

[SkalAndJamalParticipant]

 So you have Okafor?

[trelos6Participant]

"established star"

[Dazzling Dunks and Basketball BloopersParticipant]

 And I think you are being way too liberal with the superstar label. In my opinion there are really only a handful of true superstars in the league right now ( lebron, Durant, ad, Westbrook, curry, harden, paul, griffin). I’m talking guys you could throw on just about any team and they basically become instant playoff contenders. Guys like cousins, wall, George, Aldridge, Leonard, kyrie etc. are all very good players but not quite superstars (at least not yet imo)

 

 

[ZachAttackParticipant]

 How the heck is Batum even considered a fringe star?

[trelos6Participant]

I was stretching to find someone on the Hornets lol 

[trelos6Participant]

I was stretching to find someone on the Hornets lol 

[ZachAttackParticipant]

 How the heck is Batum even considered a fringe star?

[NBAjunkie81Participant]

 both were legit stars back then – Sikma was a #8 overall Lottery pick & Johnson was one of the few players who ever was drafted in the 2nd round who led their team to a Championship & made the Hall of Fame as a Player… Sikma was just below Hall of Fame level but he was a great player… That 79 Sonics team was A lot like the 2004 Pistons in that 5 or 6 players contibuted to that team… you are 100% correct though, there is Only one team in NBA /ABA history that won a Championship w/o a Hall of Fame player taking a mojor role & it’s the Utah Stars – they had a player was Very close to Hall of Fame level leading them & the Only NBA team in that category is the 2004 Detroit Pistons – but they had 5 All Stars & I believe that when it’s all said & done I believe that 1997 #3 overall pick Chauncey Billups – the 2004 Pistons PG & Leader will eventually make the Hall of Fame…

 but you made a great point- this is why teams are so desperate to get those top picks… To win a Ring a team Must have at least one & sometime two future Hall of Fame players & historically almost All of them have come from the top 8 of the NBA Draft – there are a handful that came after that but just about All NBA MVP’s & Title winning Finals MVP’s are found in the Draft Lottery – it’s a higher percentage than Any other sport… 

In fact, in the History of the NBA / ABA only 3 men Drafted outside the top 10 of the Draft Lottery have ever won MVP – Steve Nash, Karl Malone & Kobe Bryant (Kobe was a fluke in almost Any other year he would have been top 5)….  Awesome post! It’s such a great topic b/c when you look at the history it’s really incredible…

So excited for the 2015 / 16′ NBA season – good luck to everyone & the teams we all follow – I’m praying we get 100% health so we can see the Very best matched up against the Very best! 🙂

 

 

[trelos6Participant]

I thought it would be an intersting topic.

Also, even though you have star players, some teams like the 86 Celtics were just such a good team and played as a team.  Watching youtube footage of them and it’s like the Spurs ’14 mixed with Warriors ’15.  Bird was obviously the leader and alpha male, but he was such a great passer and always found the open man.

  

[trelos6Participant]

I thought it would be an intersting topic.

Also, even though you have star players, some teams like the 86 Celtics were just such a good team and played as a team.  Watching youtube footage of them and it’s like the Spurs ’14 mixed with Warriors ’15.  Bird was obviously the leader and alpha male, but he was such a great passer and always found the open man.

  

[NBAjunkie81Participant]

 both were legit stars back then – Sikma was a #8 overall Lottery pick & Johnson was one of the few players who ever was drafted in the 2nd round who led their team to a Championship & made the Hall of Fame as a Player… Sikma was just below Hall of Fame level but he was a great player… That 79 Sonics team was A lot like the 2004 Pistons in that 5 or 6 players contibuted to that team… you are 100% correct though, there is Only one team in NBA /ABA history that won a Championship w/o a Hall of Fame player taking a mojor role & it’s the Utah Stars – they had a player was Very close to Hall of Fame level leading them & the Only NBA team in that category is the 2004 Detroit Pistons – but they had 5 All Stars & I believe that when it’s all said & done I believe that 1997 #3 overall pick Chauncey Billups – the 2004 Pistons PG & Leader will eventually make the Hall of Fame…

 but you made a great point- this is why teams are so desperate to get those top picks… To win a Ring a team Must have at least one & sometime two future Hall of Fame players & historically almost All of them have come from the top 8 of the NBA Draft – there are a handful that came after that but just about All NBA MVP’s & Title winning Finals MVP’s are found in the Draft Lottery – it’s a higher percentage than Any other sport… 

In fact, in the History of the NBA / ABA only 3 men Drafted outside the top 10 of the Draft Lottery have ever won MVP – Steve Nash, Karl Malone & Kobe Bryant (Kobe was a fluke in almost Any other year he would have been top 5)….  Awesome post! It’s such a great topic b/c when you look at the history it’s really incredible…

So excited for the 2015 / 16′ NBA season – good luck to everyone & the teams we all follow – I’m praying we get 100% health so we can see the Very best matched up against the Very best! 🙂

 

 

[BEARDED-DRAGONParticipant]

 fairly interesting topic, tough to say tho because "established star" or "superstar" is kind of subjective… i mean, we can go through history and looking back there mostly isnt any teams that won that dont have a hall of famer (probably first ballot), which we could consider a basis for "superstar". but then you name guys for these "contending" teams that arent even all-stars, which would be my basis for them being "established stars". and yes, drummond or someone else on the pistons will have to make an all-star team before they get anywhere close to even a conference finals i would think. 2014 spurs had tony parker, and non-all-star but 1st ballot hall of famer duncan; 2004 pistons had ben wallace(already a back to back defensive poy) and non-all-star but probable(?) hall of famer billups, and 79 supersonics had jack sikma and dennis johnson both all-stars that year, 

[BEARDED-DRAGONParticipant]

 whoops, meant to say johnsons in the hall of fame too.

possibly a tougher question is which guys on contending teams does everybody think are hall of famers?

also, does ben wallace have a shot? 4 time all-star, 4 time defensive player of the year, nba champion.

[trelos6Participant]

I’d give Ben Wallace a 50% chance of making the HOF.

About the same shot as Amare Stoudamire has right now.

 

 

  

[trelos6Participant]

I’d give Ben Wallace a 50% chance of making the HOF.

About the same shot as Amare Stoudamire has right now.

 

 

  

[ChoppyParticipant]

 There are numerous players considered superstars that are basically offence-only (Harden is an example of this type of player). Because they do the flashy things, they are more popular and more likely to end up in the HOF. Wallace was a superstar on the defensive end. He was at least as good at defence as Harden is at offence. Wallace should make the Hall in my opinion. Championship? Check. All star? Check. 4 time DPOY. Should be a no brainer. 

[ChoppyParticipant]

 There are numerous players considered superstars that are basically offence-only (Harden is an example of this type of player). Because they do the flashy things, they are more popular and more likely to end up in the HOF. Wallace was a superstar on the defensive end. He was at least as good at defence as Harden is at offence. Wallace should make the Hall in my opinion. Championship? Check. All star? Check. 4 time DPOY. Should be a no brainer. 

[ZachAttackParticipant]

 Mutombo made it. And he was strictly defense so, I think with Wallace’s defensive ability along with the fact that the guy was undrafted he should be a HOFer

[ZachAttackParticipant]

 Mutombo made it. And he was strictly defense so, I think with Wallace’s defensive ability along with the fact that the guy was undrafted he should be a HOFer

[BEARDED-DRAGONParticipant]

 whoops, meant to say johnsons in the hall of fame too.

possibly a tougher question is which guys on contending teams does everybody think are hall of famers?

also, does ben wallace have a shot? 4 time all-star, 4 time defensive player of the year, nba champion.

[BEARDED-DRAGONParticipant]

 fairly interesting topic, tough to say tho because "established star" or "superstar" is kind of subjective… i mean, we can go through history and looking back there mostly isnt any teams that won that dont have a hall of famer (probably first ballot), which we could consider a basis for "superstar". but then you name guys for these "contending" teams that arent even all-stars, which would be my basis for them being "established stars". and yes, drummond or someone else on the pistons will have to make an all-star team before they get anywhere close to even a conference finals i would think. 2014 spurs had tony parker, and non-all-star but 1st ballot hall of famer duncan; 2004 pistons had ben wallace(already a back to back defensive poy) and non-all-star but probable(?) hall of famer billups, and 79 supersonics had jack sikma and dennis johnson both all-stars that year, 

[Bmore_DCParticipant]

 I disagree with the 2014 Spurs not having a superstar. 

Between Duncan, Parker and Leonard there was super-stardom there, just might not be the super-stars you think of. 

 

[Bmore_DCParticipant]

 I disagree with the 2014 Spurs not having a superstar. 

Between Duncan, Parker and Leonard there was super-stardom there, just might not be the super-stars you think of. 

 

[canadabasketballisrisingParticipant]

 Their are excpetions to almost every rule or standard. Generally, I agree with this, however there have been teams with: great coaching, great depth, and great chemistry that don’t have a superstar. but have a few allstars or near allstars. I don’t think we will ever see a team win with great depth, but without allstar level player leading them (Denver when they traded Carmelo)… 

[canadabasketballisrisingParticipant]

 Their are excpetions to almost every rule or standard. Generally, I agree with this, however there have been teams with: great coaching, great depth, and great chemistry that don’t have a superstar. but have a few allstars or near allstars. I don’t think we will ever see a team win with great depth, but without allstar level player leading them (Denver when they traded Carmelo)… 

[canadabasketballisrisingParticipant]

 I htink Parker MAY  have still been a supertsar… his stats or deflated a bit because of his system. Now, he no longer is.  

[canadabasketballisrisingParticipant]

 I htink Parker MAY  have still been a supertsar… his stats or deflated a bit because of his system. Now, he no longer is.  

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 So who is a STAR?

I think there are 10 (or fewer) SUPER STARS in the NBA.  There could be 50 stars, and I think there is a big difference still between stars and super stars.  Only a select few teams have super stars.  Most all teams have stars.  Maybe they aren’t stars in their prime, but they used to be stars, or they could be in the future.  I would bet that Olynyk or Marcus Smart or another guy on the Celtics squad will be a star in the future.  And, the C’s have David Lee — a guy who has been an all-star at least once and had one really good game in the Finals.  To me, that is a star, just not a super star.

I think the Cavs have one SUPER STAR in LeBron, and two STARS in Love and Irving.  Either or both of those guys could turn into legit SUPER STARS.  

The Grizzlies have 3 stars: Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph, and Mike Conley.  I am not sure I would even call Marc a SUPER STAR.  I think it will depend on what he does this year.

Pretty much every NBA has a "star".

And, everyone on here is right — NBA champs very nearly always have at least one SUPERSTAR.

Current teams with a superstar: Cavs (LeBron), Warriors (Steph), Clippers (CP3, Blake), Thunder (Russ and Durant), Rockets (James Harden), and Pelicans (Anthony Davis).

Without a LEGIT super star, the upside this year for the Bulls, Spurs, and Grizzlies will probably be something less than a title.  

The Pelicans lack that second guy.

So, the other teams with at least one super star make up my top contenders list: Cavs, Warriors, Clippers, Thunder, and Rockets.

The Spurs either need a throwback year from Tony Parker, a breakthrough year from Kawhi, or a hungrier/angrier LaMarcus Aldridge.  And, this team arguably has several stars (when healthy): TP, Manu, Kawhi, LMA, and TD.  That’s five.  That STILL might not be enough, even with GOATPF in Tim Duncan.  Aldridge or Kawhi (and I am thinking Kawhi on this one) HAS to step up and be a superstar.

A few years ago, I did a star system, based on 5 stars where the TOP ECHELON SUPERSTARS were five star guys (then I had LeBron and Durant only), 4 star guys as your superstars, 3 star guys as your "all star players", 2 star guys as your top notch non-all stars, then 1 star guys as your high level role players.  I think that system would still work.

I would give the Warriors 5 stars for Steph, 3 for Klay, 3 for Draymond Green, 1 for Barnes, 1 for Bogut, and 1 for Iggy.  That’s 14 points.

Spurs:  ok, let’s stretch it and go 4 for Kawhi.  3 for Aldridge, 3 for Duncan, 3 for Tony Parker, and maybe 2 now for Manu.  So that is 15 points maximum.  But, if Kawhi is not a super star, and if TP slides down as does Manu then they are below the Warriors on a points system.

Cavs: Lebron for 5 points.  Let’s give Kyrie and Love 3 stars each.  Mozgov 1 star and TT 1 star.  That’s 13 points.  You could go to 14 if either Kyrie or Love is a legit "super star" or if you give a point to JR Smith.

Grizzlies: 4 (best case scenario) for Marc Gasol. 3 for Zach and 3 for Conley. 1 for Tony Allen. 1 for Jeff Green.  1 for Courtney Lee.  13 points.  Maybe even that is too high.

The Thunder is an interesting case.  You could give a maximum five points to both Westbrook AND Durant.  2 for Ibaka.  1 for Kanter?  13 points.

Bulls: Let’s go 3 for Butler, 3 for D Rose, 3 for Pau, 2 for Mirotic, and 1 for Taj Gibson.  12 points.

Clips: 4 stars for CP3.  4 for Blake.  3 for DeAndre Jordan.  Let’s give Lance Stephenson the benefit of the doubt and give him 2 points.  1 point for Jamal Crawford and 1 for JJ Reddick.  So, 15 maximum points?  Or, 16 if you give Paul Pierce a point.  Upside wise: this team looks good on paper.

The Heat are interesting.  They are sneaky here, they have talent.  

Heat: 3 for D Wade, 3 for Bosh, 2 for Whiteside, 2 for Dragic, and I would even give 1 to Justise Winslow for the benefit of the doubt.  Oh, and give 1 (at least) to Luol Deng).  That’s 12 points (or so).  So, maybe not a top tier team but right there in the second tier, which is basically where they belong.  Also tied with the Bulls.  I have the Cavs at 13 points (baseline), so they are a bit better but not too much.

Hawks: 3 for Horford, 3 for Millsap, 3 for Jeff Teague, and 2 for Kyle Korver.  Another point for Tiaggo Splitter.  12 points basically there too.  MAYBE 13 if Schroder picks it up more.  

Rockets: 4 for Harden, 3 for Dwight Howard, 2 for Ty Lawson, 2 for Corey Brewer, and 2 for Ariza.  13 points.  That looks like a best case scenario, but on paper this is a very good team led by a true super star.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 So who is a STAR?

I think there are 10 (or fewer) SUPER STARS in the NBA.  There could be 50 stars, and I think there is a big difference still between stars and super stars.  Only a select few teams have super stars.  Most all teams have stars.  Maybe they aren’t stars in their prime, but they used to be stars, or they could be in the future.  I would bet that Olynyk or Marcus Smart or another guy on the Celtics squad will be a star in the future.  And, the C’s have David Lee — a guy who has been an all-star at least once and had one really good game in the Finals.  To me, that is a star, just not a super star.

I think the Cavs have one SUPER STAR in LeBron, and two STARS in Love and Irving.  Either or both of those guys could turn into legit SUPER STARS.  

The Grizzlies have 3 stars: Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph, and Mike Conley.  I am not sure I would even call Marc a SUPER STAR.  I think it will depend on what he does this year.

Pretty much every NBA has a "star".

And, everyone on here is right — NBA champs very nearly always have at least one SUPERSTAR.

Current teams with a superstar: Cavs (LeBron), Warriors (Steph), Clippers (CP3, Blake), Thunder (Russ and Durant), Rockets (James Harden), and Pelicans (Anthony Davis).

Without a LEGIT super star, the upside this year for the Bulls, Spurs, and Grizzlies will probably be something less than a title.  

The Pelicans lack that second guy.

So, the other teams with at least one super star make up my top contenders list: Cavs, Warriors, Clippers, Thunder, and Rockets.

The Spurs either need a throwback year from Tony Parker, a breakthrough year from Kawhi, or a hungrier/angrier LaMarcus Aldridge.  And, this team arguably has several stars (when healthy): TP, Manu, Kawhi, LMA, and TD.  That’s five.  That STILL might not be enough, even with GOATPF in Tim Duncan.  Aldridge or Kawhi (and I am thinking Kawhi on this one) HAS to step up and be a superstar.

A few years ago, I did a star system, based on 5 stars where the TOP ECHELON SUPERSTARS were five star guys (then I had LeBron and Durant only), 4 star guys as your superstars, 3 star guys as your "all star players", 2 star guys as your top notch non-all stars, then 1 star guys as your high level role players.  I think that system would still work.

I would give the Warriors 5 stars for Steph, 3 for Klay, 3 for Draymond Green, 1 for Barnes, 1 for Bogut, and 1 for Iggy.  That’s 14 points.

Spurs:  ok, let’s stretch it and go 4 for Kawhi.  3 for Aldridge, 3 for Duncan, 3 for Tony Parker, and maybe 2 now for Manu.  So that is 15 points maximum.  But, if Kawhi is not a super star, and if TP slides down as does Manu then they are below the Warriors on a points system.

Cavs: Lebron for 5 points.  Let’s give Kyrie and Love 3 stars each.  Mozgov 1 star and TT 1 star.  That’s 13 points.  You could go to 14 if either Kyrie or Love is a legit "super star" or if you give a point to JR Smith.

Grizzlies: 4 (best case scenario) for Marc Gasol. 3 for Zach and 3 for Conley. 1 for Tony Allen. 1 for Jeff Green.  1 for Courtney Lee.  13 points.  Maybe even that is too high.

The Thunder is an interesting case.  You could give a maximum five points to both Westbrook AND Durant.  2 for Ibaka.  1 for Kanter?  13 points.

Bulls: Let’s go 3 for Butler, 3 for D Rose, 3 for Pau, 2 for Mirotic, and 1 for Taj Gibson.  12 points.

Clips: 4 stars for CP3.  4 for Blake.  3 for DeAndre Jordan.  Let’s give Lance Stephenson the benefit of the doubt and give him 2 points.  1 point for Jamal Crawford and 1 for JJ Reddick.  So, 15 maximum points?  Or, 16 if you give Paul Pierce a point.  Upside wise: this team looks good on paper.

The Heat are interesting.  They are sneaky here, they have talent.  

Heat: 3 for D Wade, 3 for Bosh, 2 for Whiteside, 2 for Dragic, and I would even give 1 to Justise Winslow for the benefit of the doubt.  Oh, and give 1 (at least) to Luol Deng).  That’s 12 points (or so).  So, maybe not a top tier team but right there in the second tier, which is basically where they belong.  Also tied with the Bulls.  I have the Cavs at 13 points (baseline), so they are a bit better but not too much.

Hawks: 3 for Horford, 3 for Millsap, 3 for Jeff Teague, and 2 for Kyle Korver.  Another point for Tiaggo Splitter.  12 points basically there too.  MAYBE 13 if Schroder picks it up more.  

Rockets: 4 for Harden, 3 for Dwight Howard, 2 for Ty Lawson, 2 for Corey Brewer, and 2 for Ariza.  13 points.  That looks like a best case scenario, but on paper this is a very good team led by a true super star.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 2004 NBA Title based on PEAK Point Totals

LA Lakers: Shaq 5, Kobe 5, Karl Malone 4, Gary Payton 4, Horace Grant 3, Rick Fox 2, Derek Fisher 1, Luke Walton 1, Bryon Russell 1.  26 points.

Detroit Pistons: Ben Wallace 3, Rasheed 3, Billups 3, Rip Hamilton 3, Tay Prince 2, Elden Campbell 2, Corliss Williamson 1, Mike James 1.  18 points.

BUT,

Malone and Payton were past their primes along with Ho Grant and Bryon Russell.  Even Shaq and Rick Fox were past their primes.

On the other hand, the majority of the Pistons were in the their primes with the Wallace duo at or near their respective peaks.  Elden Campbell and Corliss Williamson were the only guys past their primes.

So, more likely the points break down like this if you take into account how valuable guys were AT THE TIME of the 2004 Finals.

Lakers: Shaq 5, Kobe 5, Gary Payton 2, Karl Malone 2, Rick Fox 1, Fisher 1.  16 points.

Pistons: Ben Wallace 3, Rasheed 3, Billups 3, Rip Hamilton 2, Prince 2, Corliss 1, Mike James 1, Okur 1.  16 points.

So, the Pistons AT THE TIME were equal to the Lakers in terms of points.  In terms of points they would be high even in today’s league.  PEAK POINTS wise they would look even better since they had a rotation that included 5 future All Stars with a player in Tayshaun Prince who was also pretty good for years.

Not sure how many NBA teams have had 5 current or future All Stars on their team.  As opposed to say, PAST All Stars like that 2004 Lakers team or the other Lakers team with Mitch Richmond barely hanging on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 2004 NBA Title based on PEAK Point Totals

LA Lakers: Shaq 5, Kobe 5, Karl Malone 4, Gary Payton 4, Horace Grant 3, Rick Fox 2, Derek Fisher 1, Luke Walton 1, Bryon Russell 1.  26 points.

Detroit Pistons: Ben Wallace 3, Rasheed 3, Billups 3, Rip Hamilton 3, Tay Prince 2, Elden Campbell 2, Corliss Williamson 1, Mike James 1.  18 points.

BUT,

Malone and Payton were past their primes along with Ho Grant and Bryon Russell.  Even Shaq and Rick Fox were past their primes.

On the other hand, the majority of the Pistons were in the their primes with the Wallace duo at or near their respective peaks.  Elden Campbell and Corliss Williamson were the only guys past their primes.

So, more likely the points break down like this if you take into account how valuable guys were AT THE TIME of the 2004 Finals.

Lakers: Shaq 5, Kobe 5, Gary Payton 2, Karl Malone 2, Rick Fox 1, Fisher 1.  16 points.

Pistons: Ben Wallace 3, Rasheed 3, Billups 3, Rip Hamilton 2, Prince 2, Corliss 1, Mike James 1, Okur 1.  16 points.

So, the Pistons AT THE TIME were equal to the Lakers in terms of points.  In terms of points they would be high even in today’s league.  PEAK POINTS wise they would look even better since they had a rotation that included 5 future All Stars with a player in Tayshaun Prince who was also pretty good for years.

Not sure how many NBA teams have had 5 current or future All Stars on their team.  As opposed to say, PAST All Stars like that 2004 Lakers team or the other Lakers team with Mitch Richmond barely hanging on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ChoppyParticipant]

 I think your points system over values scorers. No way is Ben Wallace less than a 4. He was a true defensive superstar, and he gets a 3? I don’t buy it. 

[ChoppyParticipant]

 I think your points system over values scorers. No way is Ben Wallace less than a 4. He was a true defensive superstar, and he gets a 3? I don’t buy it. 

[PulseGlazerParticipant]

 Ben Wallace is one of the most underrated stars ever. Rasheed, too, as the star on multiple 60 win teams. Meanwhile, OP thinks every damn body is a star.  Try limiting it to the top 8 or so players in the league.

[PulseGlazerParticipant]

 Ben Wallace is one of the most underrated stars ever. Rasheed, too, as the star on multiple 60 win teams. Meanwhile, OP thinks every damn body is a star.  Try limiting it to the top 8 or so players in the league.

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 ^^^

there are lots of "stars" out there.  Few ALL STARS and even fewer SUPER STARS.  I would say that Mike Conley is a star, but not even an ALL STAR.  

I thought about putting Ben Wallace as a 4 star guy… his offense needed work though.  He still scored a few points though and his offensive rebounding has to count for something.  So, a 5 on defense and maybe a 2 on offense (scoring/passing/shooting/getting to the line) at best.  That would be about a 3.5 which sounds about right.

That Pistons team was literally on the way up with FIVE current or future All Stars on the roster.  There might be a team with more, but I can’t think of one. 

I actually left out Okur’s points on the PEAK POINTS breakdown.  Give him 3 for his AS year and that takes that Pistons up to 21 points.  If you wanna say that Ben Wallace was a 4 star guy at his peak then you give that team 22 points, which is very, very high.

Last year’s Golden State Warriors theoretical All Time Peak: Steph 5, Klay Thompson 4, Draymond Green 4, Iggy 3, David Lee 3, Bogut 2, Harrison Barnes 2, Shaun Livingston 2, Barbosa 2, Mo Speights 1.  28 points.  If Klay and Draymond peak as legit all stars, then you go a bit lower to 26 points.

1995-1996 Chicago Bulls PEAK POINTS:

Jordan 5, Pippen 4, Rodman 4, Ron Harper 3 (did he OFFICIALLY make the all star game? I don’t think so, but still really good at the PEAK), Toni Kukoc 2, James Edwards 2, Luc Longley 2, John Salley 1, Bill Wennington 1, Steve Kerr 1.  25 points.  Probably the best team EVER.  Best on defense, and at the top of the lineup, even if it wasn’t the deepest ever.  The point totals is inflated a bit due to the Bulls version of John Salley being on his last legs and the James Edwards version REALLY being on his last legs.  You can probably downgrade Ron Harper to a 2 if you want.  Then does Steve Kerr get only 1 star for being a solid but not great role player throughout his career, OR does he get 2 points for being an ideal floor spreader, and sublime 3 point shooter?  On the other side, you could probably give John Salley 1 point or 2 points.  Both Kerr and Salley had interesting skill sets, with perhaps deflated numbers BUT they really helped out title teams as top shelf role players.  Kukoc gets 2 points.  A 3 for offense and a 1 (or less) for defense.  Also helps that he could give you minutes at the 4.  

The Warriors and the vintage Bulls teams had guys who made the AS Game but guys like David Lee and Iggy are past their AS prime, and even Rodman was a few years removed from his All Star team appearances.

That Bulls team only had 2 current and/or future All Stars in Jordan and Pippen.

Last year’s Warriors team probably only had 3: Steph, Klay, and Draymond.

The ’86 Celtics were another team stocked with All Stars on the roster, but Dennis Johnson, Bill Walton, and I think one of their other guys off the bench, were PAST All Stars.  Current/future Celtics All Stars only include Bird, McHale, and Parish.  That is close to the high end for championship teams.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 ^^^

there are lots of "stars" out there.  Few ALL STARS and even fewer SUPER STARS.  I would say that Mike Conley is a star, but not even an ALL STAR.  

I thought about putting Ben Wallace as a 4 star guy… his offense needed work though.  He still scored a few points though and his offensive rebounding has to count for something.  So, a 5 on defense and maybe a 2 on offense (scoring/passing/shooting/getting to the line) at best.  That would be about a 3.5 which sounds about right.

That Pistons team was literally on the way up with FIVE current or future All Stars on the roster.  There might be a team with more, but I can’t think of one. 

I actually left out Okur’s points on the PEAK POINTS breakdown.  Give him 3 for his AS year and that takes that Pistons up to 21 points.  If you wanna say that Ben Wallace was a 4 star guy at his peak then you give that team 22 points, which is very, very high.

Last year’s Golden State Warriors theoretical All Time Peak: Steph 5, Klay Thompson 4, Draymond Green 4, Iggy 3, David Lee 3, Bogut 2, Harrison Barnes 2, Shaun Livingston 2, Barbosa 2, Mo Speights 1.  28 points.  If Klay and Draymond peak as legit all stars, then you go a bit lower to 26 points.

1995-1996 Chicago Bulls PEAK POINTS:

Jordan 5, Pippen 4, Rodman 4, Ron Harper 3 (did he OFFICIALLY make the all star game? I don’t think so, but still really good at the PEAK), Toni Kukoc 2, James Edwards 2, Luc Longley 2, John Salley 1, Bill Wennington 1, Steve Kerr 1.  25 points.  Probably the best team EVER.  Best on defense, and at the top of the lineup, even if it wasn’t the deepest ever.  The point totals is inflated a bit due to the Bulls version of John Salley being on his last legs and the James Edwards version REALLY being on his last legs.  You can probably downgrade Ron Harper to a 2 if you want.  Then does Steve Kerr get only 1 star for being a solid but not great role player throughout his career, OR does he get 2 points for being an ideal floor spreader, and sublime 3 point shooter?  On the other side, you could probably give John Salley 1 point or 2 points.  Both Kerr and Salley had interesting skill sets, with perhaps deflated numbers BUT they really helped out title teams as top shelf role players.  Kukoc gets 2 points.  A 3 for offense and a 1 (or less) for defense.  Also helps that he could give you minutes at the 4.  

The Warriors and the vintage Bulls teams had guys who made the AS Game but guys like David Lee and Iggy are past their AS prime, and even Rodman was a few years removed from his All Star team appearances.

That Bulls team only had 2 current and/or future All Stars in Jordan and Pippen.

Last year’s Warriors team probably only had 3: Steph, Klay, and Draymond.

The ’86 Celtics were another team stocked with All Stars on the roster, but Dennis Johnson, Bill Walton, and I think one of their other guys off the bench, were PAST All Stars.  Current/future Celtics All Stars only include Bird, McHale, and Parish.  That is close to the high end for championship teams.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 How many FIVE STAR guys are out there?  Possibly only 6: LeBron, Durant (giving him the benefit of the doubt), Steph Curry, Russell Westbrook, Chris Paul, and Anthony Davis.

AD is a borderline 5 star guy, but I have him here anyway as the best big out there, and one of the few top shelf MVP candidates.   Harden needs to polish his defense.  He is the best 4 star guy on the board at the moment and SHOULD get to 5 star level.  Blake Griffin is probably a 4.  Carmelo probably slipped a little and was never a 100% superstar.  I would put down Marc Gasol as a 4.  The factors are all there: starting all star, DPOY, all around weapon on offense, and a WCF appearance for the Grizzlies.  You should probably put down John Wall as a 4 star guy, too.  Wall is a step up from your basic All Star.  

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 How many FIVE STAR guys are out there?  Possibly only 6: LeBron, Durant (giving him the benefit of the doubt), Steph Curry, Russell Westbrook, Chris Paul, and Anthony Davis.

AD is a borderline 5 star guy, but I have him here anyway as the best big out there, and one of the few top shelf MVP candidates.   Harden needs to polish his defense.  He is the best 4 star guy on the board at the moment and SHOULD get to 5 star level.  Blake Griffin is probably a 4.  Carmelo probably slipped a little and was never a 100% superstar.  I would put down Marc Gasol as a 4.  The factors are all there: starting all star, DPOY, all around weapon on offense, and a WCF appearance for the Grizzlies.  You should probably put down John Wall as a 4 star guy, too.  Wall is a step up from your basic All Star.  

 

[PulseGlazerParticipant]

 Unpopular opinion alert- I think I’d rather have Ben Wallace on my team than, say, Melo. He offers more and takes less off the table, and when you count salaries, it gets even further into Ben’s favor.  On offense Wallace could basically require a body on him at all times or he was an auto offensive rebound, and he was a 1’man defensive wrecking crew.

[ChoppyParticipant]

 Your opinion is not unpopular with me. Ben Wallace was one of my favourite players ever.

[ChoppyParticipant]

 Your opinion is not unpopular with me. Ben Wallace was one of my favourite players ever.

[sitlbitoParticipant]

 And I’d rather have Rudy Gobert than a lot of the offensive superstars. Seriously,I’d rather have Gobert than Cousins.

[sitlbitoParticipant]

 And I’d rather have Rudy Gobert than a lot of the offensive superstars. Seriously,I’d rather have Gobert than Cousins.

[PulseGlazerParticipant]

 Unpopular opinion alert- I think I’d rather have Ben Wallace on my team than, say, Melo. He offers more and takes less off the table, and when you count salaries, it gets even further into Ben’s favor.  On offense Wallace could basically require a body on him at all times or he was an auto offensive rebound, and he was a 1’man defensive wrecking crew.

[Author]

Posts