- Aug 17, 2006
- 23,322
- 21,634
- AFL Club
- Geelong
It's pretty much a rule, especially for big guys. No matter how bad you're supporting cast is, no matter how strong the West is, you're not a top five player, if your team can't make the playoffs.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's pretty much a rule, especially for big guys. No matter how bad you're supporting cast is, no matter how strong the West is, you're not a top five player, if your team can't make the playoffs.
wat?
It's essentially what you could point to as the difference between Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett around the time that KG was on his way out of Minnesota. If you're not good enough to drag your team to the playoffs by yourself, I don't think you're a top five NBA player. If LeBron is fit, you could put him on any team and they'd make the playoffs. Back in the days when many of us started watching the NBA, players like Jordan (before Pippen took off), Barkley (until the wheels came off for him in Philadelphia), Wilkins, Ewing, Olajuwon and Robinson all played with average-to-terrible supporting casts at times, yet those players rarely (if ever) missed the playoffs. Later, it was what separated Iverson from many others. And in a league where dominant big men are so scarce, that's what Davis must do, to justify all the hype he's been getting. I hope he can.
At first I thought you may have been implying Cousins and the post was sarcastic.
fwiw I think you can be a Top 5 player and not make the playoffs. It would be hard to argue Westbrook wasn't Top 5 last year. You also used a bunch of examples from the 80s that while the teams made the playoffs, they had horrible records. MJ played on a few 30-40 win teams that made the playoffs. Back then 8 of the 11 teams in a conference made the playoffs, so you didn't have to be very good.
I dont buy into this crap about putting LeBron on any team in the league and they make the playoffs. Put him on the Lakers roster and they still miss the playoffs.
Hahah true. If he went to LA, Wade, Bosh, Mo Williams, Kyrie, TT, Jones, the corpse of Mike Miller etc would all follow.You forgot that LeBron would bring friends. He doesn't like playing alone
Seriously though, Lakers might be the only team that wouldn't make the playoffs. Nets, Philly and Minny are the only other ones I can think of.
I am basing that on him being healthy.
When he was 22, LeBron James took a starting lineup of Eric Snow/Boobie Gibson, Drew Gooden, Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Larry Hughes to the Finals, never mind the playoffs. And he certainly wasn't better as a 22 year old than he is as a 30 (soon to be 31) year old.
Also Gooden once upon a time was a pretty decent PF. Big Z was an excellent big man and Larry Hughes was a nice second option.
Anyways, putting LeBron on any squad doesnt get them to the playoffs.
Prime Jordan? Probs
I think they get worse as time goes by. True, they were not a good side and didnt have much business being in the Finals and promptly got swept. The East wasnt much chop though, hasnt been for years an years. They were sadly the best of a crap bunch. Only Detroit had a better record in the East that year.Dude that was one of the shittiest Finals teams of all-time. In modern times only the '01 Sixers and '02 Nets come close & even then I think the Cavs 'win'.
Gooden was what he is now - a waste of space - and Larry Hughes is nobody's idea of a second banana. The less said about that Cavs bench the better too.
I think they get worse as time goes by. True, they were not a good side and didnt have much business being in the Finals and promptly got swept. The East wasnt much chop though, hasnt been for years an years. They were sadly the best of a crap bunch. Only Detroit had a better record in the East that year.
Detroit went 53-29 and Cleveland went 50-32. They were seeded 1 and 2. Horrible stuff.
Whilst the cream of the East has gotten better since 08 it's still not being great. If the playoffs werent East v West with one coming out of each conference, im not sure an Eastern Conference team makes the NBA Finals in the last 10 or so years.The cream of the East has been OK since 2008, no weaklings in that stretch unless you count Cleveland being partially crippled last year. Shallow conference though.
But the East from 2000-2003 was just putrid, like the Western Conference in the 80s minus the Lakers. Prime Detroit and briefly Miami were legit, but they were both in decline by 2007. If the Pistons had kept Ben Wallace they could have made the Finals a couple of more times.
Whilst the cream of the East has gotten better since 08 it's still not being great. If the playoffs werent East v West with one coming out of each conference, im not sure an Eastern Conference team makes the NBA Finals in the last 10 or so years.
In other words, usually the best 4-5 teams in the league are in the West. But only one plays in the NBA Finals.
Whilst the cream of the East has gotten better since 08 it's still not being great. If the playoffs werent East v West with one coming out of each conference, im not sure an Eastern Conference team makes the NBA Finals in the last 10 or so years.
In other words, usually the best 4-5 teams in the league are in the West. But only one plays in the NBA Finals.
In other words, usually the best 4-5 teams in the league are in the West.
This isn't really true either. Without looking I'd say every year there was a team out East that would have a pretty strong argument that it is in the Top 4 teams in the league. The real argument about East vs West is more that 6 of the Top 8 teams are in the West (or something similar).
With the exception of 2001-03 - Lakers, Spurs, Kings & Mavs - this holds true.
And yes you're right, it's been a shallow conference rather than a Bradbury one since then, with the probable exception of 2007.