By Louis Sears

There exists three basic paths in the NBA to win a championship. Follow the Los Angeles Lakers example of two mega stars (not mere All-Stars), with Kobe and Shaq and then add a superstar coach. Or you can follow most teams that pile money onto mediocre players, old and young alike, and wonder why at best they may be fodder for a first round loss or once again an entry into the lottery. Then there exists teams that understand Kobes and Shaqs can not easily be drafted, molded or acquired, and instead create an exceptional starting team, and supplement it with a bench that resembles a better team than most starting teams in the NBA. The Portland Trail Blazers attempted to take this route, spend gazillions of dollars and managed to squander two sure championships by losing the 1999 Western Conference Finals to the San Antonio Spurs and the 2000 Western Conference Finals to the Lakers in the greatest seventh game collapse of all-time.

Instead of viewing the GM of the Blazers as visionary for being able to assemble a team of All-Star type players and have them play for a championship instead of individual accolades and stats, the Blazer model fell into disrepute after the 2000-01 season when the Blazers collapsed and became non-contenders, but merely viewed as selfish and malcontents. And the Blazers proved that assembling so many egos will not win a championship. Better to lose with a tiny payroll than not win with a massive payroll. Instead, wait and hope two mega superstars fall into your teams lap and until then spend foolishly on mediocre talent that will hopefully keep the fans believing you want to win and continue to improve, all time knowing that you have no opportunity.

The Sacramento Kings have followed the Blazers model with Chris Webber, Predrag Stojakovic, Mike Bibby, Doug Christie, Vlade Divac, and Hidayet Turkoglu, minus the Blazes foibles of trading away players every season and trading for old established players. The depth and quality of the current Kings fail to match the assembled talent of the near miss Blazer teams combined with the fact that the Lakers have become better than the team they were when they made the miracle seventh game comeback. If this had been the years after Jordan retired for the second time and left a vacuum, or when the Spurs one their title or the Lakers their first with Shaq-Kobe-Phil, this team would be championship bound. Instead the Kings will most likely again face angst and disappointment as they exit second round or maybe in the WCF.

Instead of throwing money tirelessly at old talent ala the Blazers, the Mavs understand the importance of youth and not every player must be a character and leader. The Blazers thought Pippen a leader until the seventh game debacle, when he cemented his status as nothing more than a cog in the greater Jordan scheme. The Blazers should have defeated the Lakers the first year of Jackson's tenure, and history would have changed into teaching teams to defeat dominant talent requires not dominant talent, but quality players, including the reserves. Instead the Blazers became NBA buffoons and the GM further tarnished his reputation.

Will the Mavs succumb to defense during the finals? Doubtful, since they have the best offensive coach in the game in Don Nelson. Nelson, unlike the deposed former coach of the Blazers, Mike Dunleavy, enjoys the up tempo game that allows so many offensive minded players to be productive and remain happy. Forget about sacrifice for the team, the only sacrifice for the Mavs has been not playing defense and instead allowing their play tire the other team.

The Mavs may gain notoriety for dethroning the Lakers by assembling good talent, but the idea did not originate in Dallas, instead the plan was copied from the innovative GM of Portland. Keep in mind when you have the talking heads pontificating on how the Mavs snookered the Lakers by having assembled a team of good players instead of phenoms, that the impetus and blueprints came from Portland.