milkyway21
10-21-2005, 12:42 AM
The stars shine bright
Chemistry has its limits in building a title contender
With Tim Duncan on the floor, the Spurs can afford the luxury of playing the offensively limited, but defensively astute Bruce Bowen.
Bob Rosato/SI
Star Power
Year Champion All-NBA team members
2005 Spurs Tim Duncan, 1st team
2004 Pistons Ben Wallace, 2nd
2003 Spurs Duncan, 1st
2002 Lakers Shaquille O'Neal, Kobe Bryant, 1st
2001 Lakers O'Neal, 1st
2000 Lakers O'Neal, 1st
1999 Spurs Duncan, 1st
1998 Bulls Michael Jordan, 1st
1997 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1996 Bulls Jordan, Scottie Pippen, 1st
1995 Rockets Clyde Drexler, Hakeem Olajuwon, 3rd
1994 Rockets Olajuwon, 1st
1993 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1992 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1991 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1990 Pistons Joe Dumars, 3rd
1989 Pistons none
1988 Lakers Magic Johnson, 1st
1987 Lakers Johnson, 1st
1986 Celtics Larry Bird, 1st
1985 Lakers Johnson, 1st
1984 Celtics Bird, 1st
1983 Sixers Julius Erving, Moses Malone, 1st
1982 Lakers Johnson, 2nd
1981 Celtics Bird, 1st
The theme of this week's Sports Illustrated 2005-06 NBA preview issue is "chemistry." While I don't remember much about the subject from my high school days at good old St. Ignatius (sorry, Rev. Perrine), I do know its importance in the NBA. In short, it's critical.
Just ask Shaq and Kobe.
Or Bob Whitsitt's old Blazers teams.
Or maybe Heat coach Stan Van Gundy right now.
But let's not get carried away. While bad chemistry can wreck a team, good chemistry still ranks somewhere around fourth on the list of ingredients needed to win an NBA title. The first three, of course, are talent, talent and talent.
And at least one of those talents had better be of the superstar variety.
"I think you can build a successful team without [a superstar], but to what extent?" Grizzlies GM Jerry West says.
"You can have a team full of guys who play hard and hustle," echoes Bulls GM John Paxson. "But let's not fool ourselves. You need talent to win."
West and Paxson are two GMs who know how difficult it can be to find this proper blend of superstar talent and chemistry. The Grizzlies and Bulls, respectively, have been prime examples in recent years of teams that rely on depth, hustle and team play rather than one or two individual stars. Yet each has flamed out in the first round of the playoffs.
As West points out, superstars give teams a go-to guy in the final minutes, and a guy to whom the officials will grant favorable calls :rolleyes . "I think teams that win titles usually have one really great player and another who's very good," West says. "Then they have complementary players that do the dirty work."
:lol
West says a superstar also makes it much easier for a GM to build a championship team. Instead of having to go out and find players who do a lot of things well, the GM instead can focus on specific needs. He cites the Spurs as an example of a team that has done a masterful job over the years at putting the right pieces around Tim Duncan.
"Most of the time good teams have the ability to go out and get players who maybe other teams don't covet as much because they do specific things very well," West says. "Bruce Bowen does a tremendous job in San Antonio. He's on a team with a great, great player in Tim Duncan and a rising star in Manu Ginobili. But he does so many little things for them. Robert Horry is another example. Those are two very good role players who have helped them tremendously."
Nearly every champion of the past 25 years has had a player on one of the three all-NBA teams (see above Star Power). Most of them had a first-teamer. The only one that didn't feature a player among the top three was the 1988-89 Pistons, and that team had Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars.
Still, there is no denying that the notion of "chemisty" is rising in importance. The current Pistons have shown over the past two seasons that you don't necessarily need a superstar to play for the NBA title. Instead they have done it with five really good players, all of whom know their roles and are committed to the team concept. Partly because of their success, and partly because of the economics of the salary cap and luxury tax, more and more teams have tried to follow the Detroit model.
"I think it's a combination of both," Bucks GM Larry Harris says. "As you try to build a team, you hope the players you have develop into stars. Detroit is a perfect example. They traded Grant Hill, but one of the guys they got (Ben Wallace) turned into an All-Star. You can't always go out and get a Shaq or a Tim Duncan. You have to get players who can develop into All-Stars."
Another reason chemistry will continue to be a priority in building NBA teams is because of the increasing number of former players serving as GMs. Guys like West, Paxson, Dumars, Thomas, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Danny Ainge understand the nuances of locker room chemistry. They are perhaps more likely to put an emphasis on it than some of their peers who didn't play in the NBA.
"All of us who played on good teams understand the value of a group that is cohesive, all playing for the same things," Paxson notes. "We also know the worst experience is being on a selfish team, maybe a team that for whatever reason had lots of talent but on the floor but it didn't work out."
But is the NBA going to see a radical shift in philosophy, a primacy of system over superstars? Will we ever see the day when a team passes on a Shaq or a Kobe in favor of two mid-level players who do the dirty work?
Don't count on it.
As West says, "There are a number of successful teams that don't have a superstar. But how many are competing at the highest level? ... If you want to win the championship, you've got to have talent."
Chemistry has its limits in building a title contender
With Tim Duncan on the floor, the Spurs can afford the luxury of playing the offensively limited, but defensively astute Bruce Bowen.
Bob Rosato/SI
Star Power
Year Champion All-NBA team members
2005 Spurs Tim Duncan, 1st team
2004 Pistons Ben Wallace, 2nd
2003 Spurs Duncan, 1st
2002 Lakers Shaquille O'Neal, Kobe Bryant, 1st
2001 Lakers O'Neal, 1st
2000 Lakers O'Neal, 1st
1999 Spurs Duncan, 1st
1998 Bulls Michael Jordan, 1st
1997 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1996 Bulls Jordan, Scottie Pippen, 1st
1995 Rockets Clyde Drexler, Hakeem Olajuwon, 3rd
1994 Rockets Olajuwon, 1st
1993 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1992 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1991 Bulls Jordan, 1st
1990 Pistons Joe Dumars, 3rd
1989 Pistons none
1988 Lakers Magic Johnson, 1st
1987 Lakers Johnson, 1st
1986 Celtics Larry Bird, 1st
1985 Lakers Johnson, 1st
1984 Celtics Bird, 1st
1983 Sixers Julius Erving, Moses Malone, 1st
1982 Lakers Johnson, 2nd
1981 Celtics Bird, 1st
The theme of this week's Sports Illustrated 2005-06 NBA preview issue is "chemistry." While I don't remember much about the subject from my high school days at good old St. Ignatius (sorry, Rev. Perrine), I do know its importance in the NBA. In short, it's critical.
Just ask Shaq and Kobe.
Or Bob Whitsitt's old Blazers teams.
Or maybe Heat coach Stan Van Gundy right now.
But let's not get carried away. While bad chemistry can wreck a team, good chemistry still ranks somewhere around fourth on the list of ingredients needed to win an NBA title. The first three, of course, are talent, talent and talent.
And at least one of those talents had better be of the superstar variety.
"I think you can build a successful team without [a superstar], but to what extent?" Grizzlies GM Jerry West says.
"You can have a team full of guys who play hard and hustle," echoes Bulls GM John Paxson. "But let's not fool ourselves. You need talent to win."
West and Paxson are two GMs who know how difficult it can be to find this proper blend of superstar talent and chemistry. The Grizzlies and Bulls, respectively, have been prime examples in recent years of teams that rely on depth, hustle and team play rather than one or two individual stars. Yet each has flamed out in the first round of the playoffs.
As West points out, superstars give teams a go-to guy in the final minutes, and a guy to whom the officials will grant favorable calls :rolleyes . "I think teams that win titles usually have one really great player and another who's very good," West says. "Then they have complementary players that do the dirty work."
:lol
West says a superstar also makes it much easier for a GM to build a championship team. Instead of having to go out and find players who do a lot of things well, the GM instead can focus on specific needs. He cites the Spurs as an example of a team that has done a masterful job over the years at putting the right pieces around Tim Duncan.
"Most of the time good teams have the ability to go out and get players who maybe other teams don't covet as much because they do specific things very well," West says. "Bruce Bowen does a tremendous job in San Antonio. He's on a team with a great, great player in Tim Duncan and a rising star in Manu Ginobili. But he does so many little things for them. Robert Horry is another example. Those are two very good role players who have helped them tremendously."
Nearly every champion of the past 25 years has had a player on one of the three all-NBA teams (see above Star Power). Most of them had a first-teamer. The only one that didn't feature a player among the top three was the 1988-89 Pistons, and that team had Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars.
Still, there is no denying that the notion of "chemisty" is rising in importance. The current Pistons have shown over the past two seasons that you don't necessarily need a superstar to play for the NBA title. Instead they have done it with five really good players, all of whom know their roles and are committed to the team concept. Partly because of their success, and partly because of the economics of the salary cap and luxury tax, more and more teams have tried to follow the Detroit model.
"I think it's a combination of both," Bucks GM Larry Harris says. "As you try to build a team, you hope the players you have develop into stars. Detroit is a perfect example. They traded Grant Hill, but one of the guys they got (Ben Wallace) turned into an All-Star. You can't always go out and get a Shaq or a Tim Duncan. You have to get players who can develop into All-Stars."
Another reason chemistry will continue to be a priority in building NBA teams is because of the increasing number of former players serving as GMs. Guys like West, Paxson, Dumars, Thomas, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Danny Ainge understand the nuances of locker room chemistry. They are perhaps more likely to put an emphasis on it than some of their peers who didn't play in the NBA.
"All of us who played on good teams understand the value of a group that is cohesive, all playing for the same things," Paxson notes. "We also know the worst experience is being on a selfish team, maybe a team that for whatever reason had lots of talent but on the floor but it didn't work out."
But is the NBA going to see a radical shift in philosophy, a primacy of system over superstars? Will we ever see the day when a team passes on a Shaq or a Kobe in favor of two mid-level players who do the dirty work?
Don't count on it.
As West says, "There are a number of successful teams that don't have a superstar. But how many are competing at the highest level? ... If you want to win the championship, you've got to have talent."