NBA: Best team to never win a championship together

[AaronY]

The 96 Sonics team is the best non championship team in NBA history imo

[timvp]

I was checking some stat and during 2001-2002, Webber was arguably better than Kobe both during RS and POs. Dude was shooting .50 averaging 24 pts, 10 reb, 5 assists, 1.5 blks his PER POs was at 22 while kobe was "coasting at .47 FG in RS, .43 in POs with 6 reb, 5 assists and 26 pts, POs PER 20.5. So the Lakers didn't had the two best players, Shaq was the best player of the serie then I'd consider Webber.

Kobe being able to play unlimited minutes and Webber being a noted choker at the time made Kobe the better player, IMO. Webber was 43% in fourth quarters that playoffs. The previous season, he put up a ~14 PER in the playoffs ... which was half ac ulated as the Lakers were sweeping the Kings.

As for Kobe, that might have been his clutchest season. ~50% in fourth quarters in the playoffs and actually showed up in the Finals

On top of that, unless I don't know how to read numbers (which is highly possible), kings was a better offensive team than the lakers (second in the league in total points and second in FG%, lakers being 3rd and 6 in the league in FG% despite >.50 Shaq). Interestingly enough kings were also the best rebounding team during the season.

Check the per possession numbers. The Kings played at by far the fastest pace in the league, so their totals will be skewed in their favor. Per possession, the Lakers had the better scoring rate, were the better offensive rebounding team and the better defensive rebounding team.

[timvp]

Can't agree on timvp here. Those players wee branded great because of the championship. If the kings won in 02, webber would be on the Sam conversation as dirk and gasol.

Dirk >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Webber

That's not even a discussion. Webber had three seasons with a PER above 22 and zero seasons with a PER above 25. Dirk has four seasons with a PER above 25 and 11 seasons with a PER above 22. I'd probably also take Gasol and his six seasons with a PER over 22.

Webber was erratic early in his career. Traded twice (well, thrice if you count draft night). He eventually figured things out and put together three prime seasons in 2000, 2001 and 2002. Then he signed a gigantic contract, his play fell off, his knee exploded in the playoffs and his career was basically over. , if he didn't get romanticized because of that ref fiasco (and for being part of maybe the most popular college basketball team ever -- and his timeout, tbh), he'd be remembered as a Zach Randolph-ish type player.

[UZER]

Still can't believe the Suns shot 64 free throws to 36 for the Sonic in game 7 WCF. Wow!

That Sonic team was a tough team.

[JMarkJohns]

The 96 Sonics team is the best non championship team in NBA history imo

This is my pick. Followed by the 93 Suns. Basically an MVP, two other All-Stars (KJ year prior/after), a hoard of veterans like Ainge, Tom Chambers, etc. and two of the greatest instant offense scorers in the game at that time in Dumas and Ceballos. That team had the best record in the League despite KJ missing 30 games. They were deep at every position but C, and really didn't need depth there vs. Bulls. Ceballos went down vs. Seattle and KJ tweaked his surgically repaird knee. At their peak, they were the most talented Suns team. They just played boneheaded too often and vs. the Bulls, you just can't do that. With Ceballos, I still think that's a tougher series. Having a guaranteed 30 points off the bench twixt he and Dumas was a huge advantage that was lost before the Finals even started.

[JMarkJohns]

Still can't believe the Suns shot 64 free throws to 36 for the Sonic in game 7 WCF. Wow!

That Sonic team was a tough team.

Ricky Pierce killed Phoenix that series.

Suns were great at getting to the FT line. Barkley, Kj, Ceballos, Dumas were always around the rim on offense. Found them taking close to 6-to-12 FTs each most games.

[JamStone]

I might say the Kings because I thought they were a great "team." They were so well balanced offensively. And as many pointed out, since they probably win a championship if not for officiating in the Lakers series, they are probably up there near or at the top of the list.

I do think the 1995-96 Orlando Magic could also be in the argument. I know they got swept and blown out by the Bulls in the playoffs. But that Magic team had the makings of a championship caliber squad. After adding Horace Grant, their starting unit was really nice. Shaq, Penny, D-Scott, Grant, and Nick Anderson make a really nice starting 5. They probably needed another year or two to gel. So if Shaq stayed and Penny could have remained relatively healthy, they may have been on their way to a le or two. But of course those are ifs and could'ves.

[baseline bum]

I might say the Kings because I thought they were a great "team." They were so well balanced offensively. And as many pointed out, since they probably win a championship if not for officiating in the Lakers series, they are probably up there near or at the top of the list.

I do think the 1995-96 Orlando Magic could also be in the argument. I know they got swept and blown out by the Bulls in the playoffs. But that Magic team had the makings of a championship caliber squad. After adding Horace Grant, their starting unit was really nice. Shaq, Penny, D-Scott, Grant, and Nick Anderson make a really nice starting 5. They probably needed another year or two to gel. So if Shaq stayed and Penny could have remained relatively healthy, they may have been on their way to a le or two. But of course those are ifs and could'ves.

I don't think I'd cite Anderson as a plus though; seemed like he never recovered from blowing those four free throws, and one of which would have iced game 1 vs Houston. Plus I loved the way Shaq played in that 94-95 season when we went to that hook a lot more. Seemed like his footwork wasn't as good after that season until Phil Jackson got to LA and made everyone play solid fundamental classball. Think I'd take the 95 Magic over the 96 team in a second.

[JamStone]

Fair enough. But it's not like Nick was a horrible player. He'd be the 4th or 5th best player in the starting unit. I was talking about the starting unit as a whole was very good. The 95 team didn't have Horace Grant, I believe. I think he could have been a key complimentary piece to Shaq in a championship run. But it was over after that year.

[roycrikside]

I get what you're saying about Webber not being good enough to be the best player on a championship club LJ, but at the same time for whatever reason those Kimgs matched up really well with the Lakers and outplayed them in five of the first six games of that series.

It took a miracle Horry three to win one game for the Lakers and ridiculous officiating to win another. Heck, IIRC the Kings even got to OT in G7 despite shooting something like 20-for-40 at the line.

There are exceptions once in a while to that stud player theory. The '04 Pistons were a machine and their best player, Billups was not as good as Webber, IMO, but they had a lot of good "B" or "B+" players in Sheed, Prince, Hamilton, even Okur. Nobody was beating them that year, not even the Spurs.

[Brazil]

Kobe being able to play unlimited minutes and Webber being a noted choker at the time made Kobe the better player, IMO. Webber was 43% in fourth quarters that playoffs. The previous season, he put up a ~14 PER in the playoffs ... which was half ac ulated as the Lakers were sweeping the Kings.

As for Kobe, that might have been his clutchest season. ~50% in fourth quarters in the playoffs and actually showed up in the Finals

Webber is not the one who choked in game 7 neither in game 6 IIRC. I do believe performance in the fourth quarters is really an interesting stat but at the end of the day, it appears that Kobe has been awful the first 3 quarters because he ended up with 43% during the POs. Probably if it was not for his chucking in the three first quarters he wouldn't need to be clutch in the fourths. Regarding Webber a 24 pts 10 reb 5 assists 1.5 blks average pg while shooting 50% is damn amazing during the course of 16 games even with a poor shooting performance in the fourths, his FT% was awful though. During 2001 - 2002 RS and POs I don't see Kobe being better than Webber.

Check the per possession numbers. The Kings played at by far the fastest pace in the league, so their totals will be skewed in their favor. Per possession, the Lakers had the better scoring rate, were the better offensive rebounding team and the better defensive rebounding team.

Point taken here.

Still if game 6 was just half decently officiated, serie is over and kings would have destroyed the nets in finals. It's one thing during a serie to be screwed by one play (argh manu) or one bad call, it's another to be stolen of a le during a decisive game by the most awful officiating ever.

I understand the arguments saying kings blew their chances and could have killed the serie before but come on this was against Kobe and Shaq in their prime, it's already a monster serie to play (I hope nobody was expecting kings to sweep or win in 5) therefore for a young team like that, overcome the most biased officiating game ever and finish the serie in a game 7 is too much to ask. IMHO fwiw

[JamStone]

Chris Webber gets a lot of heat, some deserved, some less so. He was a notorious choker, and not winning it all at least once surely doesn't help his cause. It would have been the same for Dirk had he not won the le a couple years ago. If Webber didn't try to stretch his career after he was clearly done, he likely ends up averaging 20/10 for his career and that would have put him in elite company career wise. Still one of the more versatile bigs the league has ever seen. One of Webber's biggest problems is that he played in an era with two of the best PFs of all time in Duncan and KG, and to a lesser extent around the time of Dirk and Karl Malone. And as such, his career will always be compared to theirs. He's clearly below those players. But perhaps not as significantly below as some may suggest. An immense talent who didn't quite realize his full potential and a blatant choke artist. And that's how he'll be remembered. Career wise, and I know some will disagree, his career production puts him in the HOF.

[mindcrime]

Chris Webber gets a lot of heat, some deserved, some less so. He was a notorious choker, and not winning it all at least once surely doesn't help his cause. It would have been the same for Dirk had he not won the le a couple years ago. If Webber didn't try to stretch his career after he was clearly done, he likely ends up averaging 20/10 for his career and that would have put him in elite company career wise. Still one of the more versatile bigs the league has ever seen. One of Webber's biggest problems is that he played in an era with two of the best PFs of all time in Duncan and KG, and to a lesser extent around the time of Dirk and Karl Malone. And as such, his career will always be compared to theirs. He's clearly below those players. But perhaps not as significantly below as some may suggest. An immense talent who didn't quite realize his full potential and a blatant choke artist. And that's how he'll be remembered. Career wise, and I know some will disagree, his career production puts him in the HOF.

Kings don't get robbed in game 6 and nobody is talking about CWebb as a choker. You mentioned this when speaking about Dirk. All it takes is one win and everything is forgotten. See Lebron James

[mindcrime]

Webber is not the one who choked in game 7 neither in game 6 IIRC. I do believe performance in the fourth quarters is really an interesting stat but at the end of the day, it appears that Kobe has been awful the first 3 quarters because he ended up with 43% during the POs. Probably if it was not for his chucking in the three first quarters he wouldn't need to be clutch in the fourths. Regarding Webber a 24 pts 10 reb 5 assists 1.5 blks average pg while shooting 50% is damn amazing during the course of 16 games even with a poor shooting performance in the fourths, his FT% was awful though. During 2001 - 2002 RS and POs I don't see Kobe being better than Webber.



Point taken here.

Still if game 6 was just half decently officiated, serie is over and kings would have destroyed the nets in finals. It's one thing during a serie to be screwed by one play (argh manu) or one bad call, it's another to be stolen of a le during a decisive game by the most awful officiating ever.

I understand the arguments saying kings blew their chances and could have killed the serie before but come on this was against Kobe and Shaq in their prime, it's already a monster serie to play (I hope nobody was expecting kings to sweep or win in 5) therefore for a young team like that, overcome the most biased officiating game ever and finish the serie in a game 7 is too much to ask. IMHO fwiw

This. The game 6 travesty was too much for a young team to overcome mentally.

[stretch]

Kings don't get robbed in game 6 and nobody is talking about CWebb as a choker.

Not necessarily. Dude was known for imploding in the playoffs consistently, and beating a Nets team in the finals wouldn't have rid him of that label. He had a lot more making up to do to shed himself of a fully deserving choker le.

[mindcrime]

Last note: Game 6 officiating is legit then Kings win ship in 2002. Knee doesn't explode in 2003 and Kings have a very good shot at repeating. Spurs were great but so were the Kings. That series goes 7. Possible back to back ships and nobody is talking about Webber as a choker.

[JamStone]

Kings don't get robbed in game 6 and nobody is talking about CWebb as a choker. You mentioned this when speaking about Dirk. All it takes is one win and everything is forgotten. See Lebron James

It's not like C-Webb's teams got robbed every single season he played. He had other chances to win a le. Dirk and the Mavs arguably got robbed in 2006. But they found a way to do it in 2011. Pistons felt like they got robbed in 1988. They came back and won back-to-back les. It just takes one le to dismiss the stain of being a choker, but you still got to do it. He didn't. He keeps that reputation forever.

[Riddler]

Best team to never win a championship together? Just about every time Kobe's team lost.

[mindcrime]

Not necessarily. Dude was known for imploding in the playoffs consistently, and beating a Nets team in the finals wouldn't have rid him of that label. He had a lot more making up to do to shed himself of a fully deserving choker le.

You must not have watched basketball back in 2002. Everybody knew that the Western Conference Finals was the championship. Whoever came out of the West was skull ing the winner of the east.


Also, winning in 2002 would have meant the Kings denied the mighty Lakers the chance to three-peat. This in itself was huge.

[mindcrime]

It's not like C-Webb's teams got robbed every single season he played. He had other chances to win a le. Dirk and the Mavs arguably got robbed in 2006. But they found a way to do it in 2011. Pistons felt like they got robbed in 1988. They came back and won back-to-back les. It just takes one le to dismiss the stain of being a choker, but you still got to do it. He didn't. He keeps that reputation forever.

Dirk's knee didn't explode the year following the 2006 finals. Had he sustained the same injury as Webber he would not have been around in 2011 to win.

[JamStone]

Unfortunate for C-Webb, now isn't it. But he still has to live with the label of a choker. Tough .

[mindcrime]

Unfortunate for C-Webb, now isn't it. But he still has to live with the label of a choker. Tough .

And you have to live with the label of ty poster. Now go yourself.

[Brazil]

[JamStone]

[stretch]

You must not have watched basketball back in 2002. Everybody knew that the Western Conference Finals was the championship. Whoever came out of the West was skull ing the winner of the east.


Also, winning in 2002 would have meant the Kings denied the mighty Lakers the chance to three-peat. This in itself was huge.

You must have reading comprehension, because I said that the Nets were a team, which pretty much means I acknowledged that the Kings win easily.