What's new
By:
Filters

Should two great players be sufficient to win an NBA championship?

Hopper

Hopper

Banned
Many of the Sloan-bashers around these here parts insist that it should. This guy takes a look at some of the great "duos" that didn't, such as Jerry West/Elgin Baylor ("Both Baylor and West averaged at least 30 points per game in 1961-62. Baylor put up a remarkable 38.3 ppg that year") and Oscar Robertson/Jerry Lucas ("Robertson usually averaged around 30 points and 10 assists, while Lucas added about 20 points and 20 rebounds per game").

LINK
 
Depends on who they are playing against. What if the other team also has two great players? Most true contenders do.

While it kills me that the Jazz had so many shots from 1994 to 1999 and came up empty, I can see why. In general, they were facing teams that also had two great players. The 1994 Rockets might be an exception (with Hakeem and a bunch of three-point shooters). 1999 was also an exception, but the Jazz ran into a young, deep Portland team after the lockout had accelerated the season and left them worn out. Besides those two years, they met Olajuwon/Drexler, Kemp/Payton (not as great, but surrounded by an overall more talented team), and Jordan/Pippen/Rodman (twice).
 
You've got to have good role players around the two superstars.
It's pretty easy to negate 1 or 2 players in a series. The Boston/LA series was a classic example. The stars didn't win the series. For the most part, the games were determined by which role players stepped up. Kobe scored a lot of points, but he didn't shoot very well for most of the series. When it counted, the Laker bench beat up on the Celtics in Game 6, then Artest came up huge in Game 7, just like Big Baby did for the Celtics in Boston.

I think you generally need at least 2 superstars (Detroit being the exception), but at the same time, you can't have any major weaknesses.
 
Two bonafide stars and a third borderline stud is needed. If you dont have that third stud your two stars better be really good. Not just all stars but almost franchise players, top 10-15 in the NBA, like a Lebron or Kobe or Pierce. We have really just one stud-Deron. Jazz need to get two more stars. Good luck with that. (Booz is just borderline, in my opinion. He can be a third option at best) If Booz leaves, no matter who we draft at 9, this season's team will be Deron + a bunch of role players, some of them good, others not quite. That would barely be sufficient to make the playoffs.
The Jazz need a Deron-Joe Johnson-Bosh type nucleus to contend along with some really good specialist role players.
I dont see it happening any time soon
 
You've got to have an interior scorer, tough interior defense and at least two players who can hit big shots. I don't think 2 great players can do it, unless they're superstars. Remember the Lakers when they had Shaq and Kobe, got big contributions from players like Robert Horry and Ron Harper. Two superstars have to lead, but there has to be pretty good depth at all positions.

The best shot the Jazz have with their current outlook would be:

1) Deron Williams,
2) re-sign Boozer,
3) draft either George or Babbit and hope the guy turns out to be a total stud and lights-out shooter,
4) bring in Tomic to be our version of Pau Gasol
5) get a lock-down defender at the other wing position who can hit open shots

This is why I say there really is no point drafting a player like Aldrich, Udoh or Patterson.

If the Jazz can make a move in this draft and somehow get a hold of Wesley Johnson or Demarcus Cousins, they should. They should be willing to move AK, Miles and even Millsap in the right deal.

Otherwise, given that the Jazz have Millsap and Tomic waiting in the wings, they really should consider getting a talented wing player. If they can get another player like Whiteside, Sanders or maybe Brackins also in the draft, they should.
 
Last edited:
You have to have at least 1 superstar, 1-3 other "stars," and some damn good role players coming off the bench to win a championship these days.
 
what, no talk of the officiating? isn't that like the fifth dimension of winning it all?

You folks are disappointing.
 
The biggest thing is that one of the two stars be at least 6'10" and be a dominant big. The other star needs to be a scoring 2. Solid role players are a given. But if you look at the NBA champs in recent years they all have a dominant big and scoring 2.
 
I think you need 2 superstars and good role players. The 04 pistons are really the only exception I can think of, but they were one of the best defensive teams ever. The spurs had duncan and robinson, then duncan, parker and ginobili. Lakers had shaq and kobe, then kobe and gasol. Bulls had Jordan and Pippen.

The Jazz need a legit superstar next to dwill if we hope to win it all. That is why this draft is so important.
 
Chances of getting a legit superstar at 9, are doubtful. Would need a risky pick like Whiteside developing into the next Bill Russell.
 
The Lakers, Celtics, and arguably the Spurs all had more than two.

Utah's best chance would be to supply the third superstar by committee (and maybe the second, too).

That's why it's so crucial for the role players to get development time, especially at the 5 spot and the backup 1.

10 to 15 minutes of second-string PG per game can make a difference between a win and a loss.
 
cowhide said:
I believe he was drafted 13th and Stockton was 16th.
Click to expand...

Well, you're probably right then. Either way, there's always hope. But I don't really see "hope" as the thing turns a relatively low-rated prospect into an all-time great NBA player anyway.
 
Hopper said:
Many of the Sloan-bashers around these here parts insist that it should. This guy takes a look at some of the great "duos" that didn't, such as Jerry West/Elgin Baylor ("Both Baylor and West averaged at least 30 points per game in 1961-62. Baylor put up a remarkable 38.3 ppg that year") and Oscar Robertson/Jerry Lucas ("Robertson usually averaged around 30 points and 10 assists, while Lucas added about 20 points and 20 rebounds per game").

LINK
Click to expand...

Still got that ole Jer mancrush eh Ain't? Jerry Sloan = God, the one who does no wrong.

Only your article kills your entire point: number one on the list is Stockton and Malone. The biggest one-two failure of all time in regards to winning a championship:

"1. John Stockton and Karl Malone (Utah Jazz)

Stockton and Malone made the playoffs in each of their 18 seasons together. They led the Jazz to back-to back NBA Finals appearances in the '90s and could've won a title or two if Michael Jordan hadn't gotten in the way.

Stockton is the league's all-time assists leader, and Malone is second all-time in scoring behind Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

This Hall of Fame duo is always considered one of the NBA's greatest even though they never won a championship together."

LOL. Thanks Jerry. Adam Keefe salutes you.
 
Rimcheck said:
The biggest thing is that one of the two stars be at least 6'10" and be a dominant big. The other star needs to be a scoring 2. Solid role players are a given. But if you look at the NBA champs in recent years they all have a dominant big and scoring 2.
Click to expand...


That's a good point.
One thing I have been thinking about is how in the last 2 decades we have rarely, if ever, had a team winning a championship that had a great PG-PF duo like the Jazz had. In fact Isiah Thomas maybe the last example of a dominant PG winning a championship. Almost all other teams had a dominant big and a scoring wing. Shaq-Kobe, Duncan-Ginobli(Parker was'nt that dominant although he was good and before him they had Avery Johnson), Shaq-Wade(more of a 2 than 1), Gasol-Kobe, Garnett-Pierce/Allen, MJ-Pip, Olajuwon/3-pt shooters and so on..PG was'nt the best position on those teams.

And especially so in these last few years, a scoring wing seems vital in addition to a great big man. We neither have this great big man nor do we have the stud wing. Our wings are all essentially backup material. We can even get Favors, but it would'nt make a difference, until we fix one of the wings. Part of the reason why Celtics have had some success in the postseason despite their age is because the Kobes and Lebrons have to guard BOTH their wings-Allen and Pierce. That takes away some from their offensive game.Against the Jazz though, Kobe can always stay fresh on offense because he doesnt have to guard anybody.He also has Artest to take care of the difficult defensive assignment anyways.

Jazz really need 2 bigtime replacements. One at 4/5 and another at 2/3. Unless they have both, it will be a first round or second round exit for the next 2 years. Deron, one good 4 or 5 and a bunch of roleplayers at the 2 and 3 wont cut it.
 
vj_74 said:
In fact Isiah Thomas maybe the last example of a dominant PG winning a championship... Garnett-Pierce/Allen, ..PG was'nt the best position on those teams.
Click to expand...

Kevin Garnett was quoted at length sayin that without Rondo they were nuthin. He gave Rondo the major credit for making the team go.

Granted, the Celts weren't quite world champs, this year.

Every position is important, but in many ways the point guard position may well be the most important. Obviously, if you have all-stars at virtually every position, that beats the hell out of just having an all-star point guard or center. I see no reason why you should have no chance of winning a championship, as some have claimed, just because your best player happens to be your point guard (as Magic Johnson arguably was on some great Laker teams).

Your "best player," whoever he is and whatever position he plays, is never going to win you a championship all by himself anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top