Stacked Teams That Didn't Do Much

[ShaqAttack3234]

How about the Suns with Kidd and Penny(Backcourt 2000). Injuries affected the team like the 2009 Rockets, but they had prime Kidd, Penny who was still at an all-star level, Cliff Robinson who was a 19 ppg scorer and an all-defensive player, Rodney Rogers who won the 6th man award that year averaging 14 off the bench, rookie Shawn Marion who was already a solid player providing energy, versatility, defense, rebounding and a finisher and Tom Gugliotta.

Kidd had the broken foot, though he did return in the playoffs, but didn't seem 100%, Hardaway was actually healthy in the playoffs and averaging 20+, though Gugliotta had a season ending injury.

They lacked a center and size outside of Luc Longley, but were still an excellent defensive team under Scott Skiles. They were 53-29 despite the injuries and 33-12 when both Kidd and Penny played, but they lost in the second round to the Lakers.

How about the '94 Suns? They started off 24-6, but Barkley and KJ missed some games around the same time. Charles was producing at about his MVP level before his injuries, and though that was the end of his prime, he was still one of the best players. KJ was arguably the best PG in the league and really good in the playoffs, plus they had Dan Majerle, Cedric Ceballos, Danny Ainge and AC Green. They lost in the second round to the Rockets in 7 games, but blew a 2-0 series lead and had a big lead in game 3.

Their problem was defense, particularly in the front court which was a problem vs Houston with Hakeem and Thorpe, but they had more overall talent than Houston, imo and they were the best offensive team in the league.

There have been quite a few when you factor in injuries.

You look at that and think how the hell could they lose? But that was before Dirk turned into Superman I guess.

It was their horrible defense, lack of a center, 1 or 2 tweeners too many ect. Pretty much problems typically associated with Don Nelson being your coach.

A lot of offensive talent, but easy to see why they didn't do much.

Im a huge Nick Van Exel fan but there were 2 teams he was apart of that were fairly stacked and didnt meet expectations:

1998 Lakers:

PG Van Exel (all-star)
SG Jones (all-star)
SF Fox
PF Horry
C Shaq (all-star

Kobe (all-star) dont be fooled by the all-star selection, Kobe was a good 6th man but not even close to what he become.
Elden Campbell
Derek Fisher
Sean Rooks
Jon Barry
Corie Blount
Mario Bennett

Got swept by Utah in WCF, Van Exel and Del Harris were feuding, EC was lost behind Shaq, Fisher was young and EJ was never real great in the playoffs.

Yeah, like Portland in '00, and Sacramento in '02, the '98 Lakers were clearly the most talented team in the league. They really should've only had 2 all-stars(Shaq and Jones) as opposed to 4, but they had more talent on their roster than anyone else.

But that was an immature group, and obviously some feuds such as Del Harris and Van Exel, and Shaq and Van Exel(due to Nick reportedly discussing vacation plans during a timeout of an elimination game. You're right that Jones was usually disappointing in the playoffs, also as the man on the 2000 Hornets during his career season and in a smaller role on the '05 Heat.

But I'm still puzzled at just how badly such a talented team played outside of Shaq in that series.

Shaq- 31.8 ppg, 57 FG%
Jones- 51 ppg, 41 FG%
Kobe- 10 ppg, 37 FG%
Fox- 9.8 ppg, 41 FG%
Van Exel- 9 ppg, 24 FG%
Fisher- 5.5 ppg, 35 FG%
Horry- 4.5 ppg, 36 FG%
Campbell- 2.8 ppg 21 FG%

I mean the team was an impressive 15-7 without Shaq that year, and Shaq was the most dominant player by that point, imo. In some ways, they may have been built more for the regular season due to maturity, their sometimes excessively flashy style, and Jones was known as somewhat of a choker, while Van Exel was more style than substance to me(no offense since you're a fan of him), and Kobe was at that point in his career as well. Campbell was also always less effective with Shaq in the lineup than when he was out and he got to play center and play in the post more. Shaq also typically wasn't as good of a playoff performer in the 90's as he was in the 00's(though I thought he was great in the '98 playoffs), but he seemed like less of a leader in the 90's than when Phil started coaching him.

But for such a talented team to be reduced to that level of play is something that I still can't figure out.

1992 - 95' Magic

a core group of ..

Shaq
Penny (didn't arrive till 93')
Nick Anderson
Dennis Scott

throw in..

Horace Grant
Scott Skiles
Tree Rollins
Brian Shaw

Actually, it was really the '95 and '96 Magic. Both had arguably the most talented rosters in the league. '93 and '94 Magic obviously weren't the best or going to win titles.

'96 is easier to see why they didn't win playing against the 72-10 Bulls essentially without Horace Grant and Anderson and Shaw later getting injured.

But the '95 Magic were healthy and more talented than Houston. But Anderson blowing game 1 really broke them, both star duos played well, but Houston's role players really stepped up, while Orlando's choked. Dream also played better than Shaq at the key moments.

Really, Houston had nothing beyond their top 6 and no big men outside of Dream, and faced multiple teams more talented than they were throughout that run, all without HCA.

Not in the finals. Karl Malone, while old and not what he was, was the Lakers glue guy. He defended well, was a great passer, and played within the team. When he went down, the Lakers had Slava Medvedenko replace him and that left them with Kobe, Shaq and a old Payton. I think there is this misconception about how stacked that team was, and people really forget Malone's impact on the team and the fact he was out in the finals.

I agree with this. Malone's injury killed them. When he was healthy, he was the best 3rd guy the Shaq/Kobe/Phil Lakers had. He made an effort to learn the triangle, and his passing and mid-range shooting made him an ideal fit alongside Shaq, much like Horace Grant in Orlando. And his post defense was a key to their success since LA faced the Spurs and Wolves, similar to why even an older Horace Grant was the best 4 the 3peat Lakers had due to his defense vs Sheed, Webber and Duncan in their primes during the '01 run.

It is annoying when people talk about the Lakers losing with Mallone, because when they lost, they didn't really have him.

Payton was a massive disappointment. He put up pretty good numbers in the regular season(15/4/6), but never really fit in the triangle, and he was shockingly bad during the playoffs(9 ppg, 37 FG%), and the finals in particular(4 ppg, 32%) when Billups also had his breakout series vs Payton completely torching him.

Detroit also matched up really well as it turned out, playing Shaq 1 on 1 worked out well, and Prince defended Kobe very well. But it would have been a closer series at the very least if Malone was even as healthy as he was during the 1st 3 rounds(when he still wasn't 100%).

But Shaq was also a bit past his prime, and Kobe wasn't healthy much of the season and had the off the court issues, though oddly, he was great in the 2nd half of the season before his play fell off in the playoffs.

1993-94 Seattle SuperSonics

Won 63 games. First top seed since revamped playoff format ten years earlier to lose to a #8 seed (a 42-40 Denver team built around Abdul-Rauf, Laphonso Ellis and Mutombo).

Shawn Kemp
Detlef Schrempf
Gary Payton
Ricky Pierce
Kendall Gill
Sam Perkins

Rock solid bench play from Michael Cage, Vincent Askew, Nate McMillian.

5th in the league in offense, 6th in defense. Best players in their mid-20's, great veteran leadership in Schrempf, Pierce, Perkins.

Great example because for a team considered the most talented in the league(rivaled by arguably only Phoenix), to get the best record in the league and lose in the first round or is underachieving far more than most of the teams mentioned, many of which made the conference finals or even the finals.

They were actually 2nd in offense(points per possession) and 3rd in defense(opponents points per possession).

And none of that matters if Kobe gets the ball to Shaq instead of throwing up brick after brick.

Of course it still would've mattered. Kobe was horrible in the series, particularly his shot selection with all of the long contested jumpers vs Prince, and going to Shaq more could've made the difference in games 1 and 4. But that team had a lot more problems beyond Kobe. Kobe was actually the only Laker who really played defense in fairness.

[MeLO MvP 15]

Last years Spurs team was pretty stacked.

[RedBlackAttack]

One of the most entertaining teams of all-time, Golden State's Run TMC, finished just six games over .500 in '91, although they did make it to the second round of the WC playoffs before being dispatched by the Spurs. Such a fun team.

PG - Tim Hardaway
SG - Mitch Richmond
SF - Chris Mullin
PF - Tyrone Hill
C - Alton Lister

Bench:
Sarunas Marciulionis
Mario Ellie
Rod Higgins
Tom Tolbert
Jim Petersen

[magnax1]

And none of that matters if Kobe gets the ball to Shaq instead of throwing up brick after brick.

I don't know how true this is. Kobe played poorly for certain, but they got the ball to Shaq an awful lot. Especially considering how much resources Detroit put into keeping the ball away from him. Kobe really had to shoot if he couldn't get the ball to Shaq, because he and Kobe were the only offensive options on that team by the time the finals came along.

[magnax1]

94 Sonics were definitely stacked too me. They had like 4 players averaging close to 2 steals a game. Nate McMillan averaged an insane 4 steals per 36 minutes (that has to be highest all time) They just had a ton of guys who could put pressure on an opposing offense. They however weren't exactly overflowing with great scorer.

[Xiao Yao You]

One of the most entertaining teams of all-time, Golden State's Run TMC, finished just six games over .500 in '91, although they did make it to the second round of the WC playoffs before being dispatched by the Spurs. Such a fun team.

PG - Tim Hardaway
SG - Mitch Richmond
SF - Chris Mullin
PF - Tyrone Hill
C - Alton Lister

Bench:
Sarunas Marciulionis
Mario Ellie
Rod Higgins
Tom Tolbert
Jim Petersen

It't too bad we only got Webber's rookie year in GS. They were poised for big things.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I'll also add the '10 Nuggets. The '09 Nuggets got to the WCF and were arguably the most talented team in the league, they gave the Lakers a good series and beat Dallas despite Dirk playing incredibly well.

The 2010 Nuggets had the same team as they did in '09, but George Karl having to leave the team due to his cancer really hurt them.

Carmelo was playing MVP-caliber ball the first 2 months of the season prior to some injuries slowing him down, it was the best he's played before this recent stretch with the Knicks.

Billups wasn't quite as good as '09, but he had a career high scoring season and was still one of the better point guards. JR Smith was an extremely explosive scorer off the bench, Nene was one of the more productive centers, Kenyon Martin was basically a double double guy and a very good defender and Ty Lawson was a talented backup point guard.

To show how talented this Nugget team was, they trade Melo and Billups and still make 2 consecutive postseasons. But they lost in the 1st round in '10.

Not sure they're stacked, but the 2000 Hornets should've done better than getting eliminated in the 1st round by a less talented Sixer team.

They had Eddie Jones at his peak who was the 3rd best SG that year behind Kobe and Iverson, imo. A 20 ppg scorer who was athletic and a good shooter, plus an elite defender. Easily one of the best two-way players, and he made an all-nba team that season.

They also had a more talented front court than many as well. Anthony Mason was one of the most versatile players and could guard post players or perimeter players, handle the ball as a point forward, rebound and post up. He made the all-star team the following season in Miami. Derrick Coleman was lazy, but very skilled and talented, and still a 17/9/2 bpg guy, Elden Campbell was also a skilled big man and a 13/8/2 bpg player, and Brad Miller was a good big man off the bench.

David Wesley was also a pretty good player back then. The team went into a slump after Bobby Phills died, but they bounced back and finished the regular season strong.

The '93 and '94 Blazers also come to mind as teams who lost in the first round. Not all of these players were in their prime, but none were far removed. They had Drexler, Rod Strickland, Cliff Robinson, Terry Porter, Jerome Kersey and Buck Williams were on both teams. While the '93 team also had Duckworth and Mario Elie and the '94 team had Harvey Grant

One of the most entertaining teams of all-time, Golden State's Run TMC, finished just six games over .500 in '91, although they did make it to the second round of the WC playoffs before being dispatched by the Spurs. Such a fun team.

PG - Tim Hardaway
SG - Mitch Richmond
SF - Chris Mullin
PF - Tyrone Hill
C - Alton Lister

Bench:
Sarunas Marciulionis
Mario Ellie
Rod Higgins
Tom Tolbert
Jim Petersen

True, Nelson's small ball lineup was entertaining and better teams were prone to getting upset if they tried to beat Run TMC at their own game. They really ****ed with the Spurs and took away a lot of one of the Spurs greatest strengths(Robinson's defensive impact), by having Tom Tolbert play center and stay out on the perimeter keeping Robinson away from the basket.

Not fully equipped to win a title, but one of the most talented trios in the last 20 years. All 3 were among the top 5 players at their position, and Sarunas Marciulionis was another good and creative scorer off the dribble.

Teams really weren't accustomed to playing at that pace and vs a lineup like that.

They however weren't exactly overflowing with great scorer.

I don't agree with that all. They had a lot. Detlef Schrempf, Ricky Pierce, Shawn Kemp, Gary Payton, Kendall Gill and Sam Perkins could also score.

Not all were "great" scorers, but all of those guys were good, and some very good.

Plus, Kemp was on the all-nba 2nd team, Payton was already all-nba 3rd team and Schrempf made the all-nba 3rd team the next season in '95.

[magnax1]

I'll also add the '10 Nuggets. The '09 Nuggets got to the WCF and were arguably the most talented team in the league, they gave the Lakers a good series and beat Dallas despite Dirk playing incredibly well.

I wouldn't call the 10 or 09 team stacked. They had Billups, Melo, and some really good role players like Smith, Nene, and Martin.
On top of that, they were beaten by the Jazz quite convincingly without their starting center and SF. Millsap was starter quality by that point, but a front line up of 6-7 and 6-8 players is troublesome for rebounding and defense. Then on top of that, they started an absolute scrub in CJ Miles at SF.

I don't agree with that all. They had a lot. Detlef Schrempf, Ricky Pierce, Shawn Kemp, Gary Payton, Kendall Gill and Sam Perkins could also score.

Not all were "great" scorers, but all of those guys were good, and some very good.

Plus, Kemp was on the all-nba 2nd team, Payton was already all-nba 3rd team and Schrempf made the all-nba 3rd team the next season in '95.

They had a lot of good scorers, but the fact that they didn't really have anyone who broke down defenses consistently hurt. Kemp did sort of, but his team mates didn't really see a lot more good shots because of it, and Mutumbo around the rim just shut him down.
My point wasn't that they didn't have offense, but that they had a lot of efficient scorers who weren't really great creators in the halfcourt setting. Schrempf might have been the best at that, but he wasn't exactly the ideal guy for that role on a championship caliber squad.

[kNIOKAS]

10' Cavs

Lebron
Shaq
Mo Williams
Antwan jamison
Zydrunas Ilgauskas

They look alright on paper, and they certainly won regular season games. Just that they don't have a dynamics of a truly great team. The skillset of players don't exactly overlap, and some overlapping is somewhat needed when playing in playoffs. All unique players, but not a balanced team.

Damon Stoudamire/Rod Strickland/Greg Anthony
Steve Smith/Bonzi Wells
Scottie Pippen/Stacey Augmon/Detlef Schrempf
Rasheed Wallace
Arvydas Sabonis/Dale Davis

Swept in the first round...
yeah they faced the eventual champs. but still dissapointing. Especially after the succes we had in 2000 (eliminated in game 7 of the WCF). We had Shawn Kemp on the roster as well.. but he was fat and lazy and sucked. Dissapointing. Dale Davis was coming of an All star campaign that year but wasnt that great either. Stacked roster.. but dissapointed heavily.

This is such a shame... This could easily be one of my favourite teams. Yet, underachieved as mofos.


'11 Celtics come to mind too. They had... Just about everything. Yet, got roasted by the Heat which later proved they haven't even had heart left after that... Sad.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I wouldn't call the 10 or 09 team stacked. They had Billups, Melo, and some really good role players like Smith, Nene, and Martin.
On top of that, they were beaten by the Jazz quite convincingly without their starting center and SF. Millsap was starter quality by that point, but a front line up of 6-7 and 6-8 players is troublesome for rebounding and defense. Then on top of that, they started an absolute scrub in CJ Miles at SF.

Not all of the teams mentioned in this thread were truly stacked, but they were about as close as any team in '10. And you mentioning Denver losing to that Jazz team is exactly why they fit in this thread, because it's about talent teams that didn't live up to their potential and losing in the 1st round that year was a lot less than they were capable of since they were the same team that got to the WCF in '09. I wouldn't really call Nene and Smith role players, either, they weren't all-stars, but role players is underselling them a bit, imo.

They had a lot of good scorers, but the fact that they didn't really have anyone who broke down defenses consistently hurt. Kemp did sort of, but his team mates didn't really see a lot more good shots because of it, and Mutumbo around the rim just shut him down.
My point wasn't that they didn't have offense, but that they had a lot of efficient scorers who weren't really great creators in the halfcourt setting. Schrempf might have been the best at that, but he wasn't exactly the ideal guy for that role on a championship caliber squad.

I don't really agree, I think you're underselling them, most of the top teams had less scorers and offensive talent than Seattle. really all of them, except Phoenix who paled in comparison defensively. Of course, Seattle forcing turnovers helped their offense quite a bit.

'11 Celtics come to mind too. They had... Just about everything. Yet, got roasted by the Heat which later proved they haven't even had heart left after that... Sad.

Didn't have a center. Shaq had the season-ending injury, they traded Perkins and Jermaine O'Neal was a corpse.

[AlphaWolf24]

They look alright on paper, and they certainly won regular season games. Just that they don't have a dynamics of a truly great team. The skillset of players don't exactly overlap, and some overlapping is somewhat needed when playing in playoffs. All unique players, but not a balanced team.

This is such a shame... This could easily be one of my favourite teams. Yet, underachieved as mofos.


.

so the Cavs win 63 games and play great all season then lose to the Celtics and all of a sudden it's because there talent doesn't overlap??.....I don't know what that even means??

The team was absolutley "balanced"...Cavs had great shooters , two 7'ers who could rebound and clog the paint....multiple great husle guy's who played great interior defense and Lebron James....

once again you can't say that the 09' 10' Cavs wern't a great team because they lost in the ECFinals...that makes no sense..


team plays great for 90+ games then loses a 6 - 7 game series and all of a sudden they wern't great???


come on..

[Nash]

so the Cavs win 63 games and play great all season then lose to the Celtics and all of a sudden it's because there talent doesn't overlap??.....I don't know what that even means??

The team was absolutley "balanced"...Cavs had great shooters , two 7'ers who could rebound and clog the paint....multiple great husle guy's who played great interior defense and Lebron James....

once again you can't say that the 09' 10' Cavs wern't a great team because they lost in the ECFinals...that makes no sense..


team plays great for 90+ games then loses a 6 - 7 game series and all of a sudden they wern't great???


come on..

You crazy if you think Cavs 2010 were stacked.

Mo Williams = Bench player for Clippers. Alright player nothing more nothing less.
Anthony Parker = Scrub
Antawn Jamison = Almost 34 year old Antawn Jamison as your 2nd option? lol
38 year old Shaq = Yeah, dude retired the next season.
Illgauskas = Retired the season after.

Cleveland were everything but stacked. And if you still insist on them being stacked.. well, then you're just being stubborn.

[AlphaWolf24]

You crazy if you think Cavs 2010 were stacked.

Mo Williams = Bench player for Clippers. Alright player nothing more nothing less.
Anthony Parker = Scrub
Antawn Jamison = Almost 34 year old Antawn Jamison as your 2nd option? lol
38 year old Shaq = Yeah, dude retired the next season.
Illgauskas = Retired the season after.

Cleveland were everything but stacked. And if you still insist on them being stacked.. well, then you're just being stubborn.

Mo williams was an allstar and is not a starter because he is playing behind Paul....

Jamison was coming off a 20PPG 8REB season...

Anthony Parker is far from a scrub...in fact he is a great role player and very versatile..to go along with ...JJ Hickson , Anderson Varajao , Delonte West

throw in Ben Wallace , Shaq and Big Z (who was an allstar the year before Lebron joined)....and the Cavs were absoluley a stacked team....they had many great role players with stars who could create...


they won 60+ games back 2 back and had the number 1 overall seed for 2 years straight....that is a great team....

anyone who says otherwise shouldn't even watch basketball.

[Nash]

Mo williams was an allstar and is not a starter because he is playing behind Paul....

Jamison was coming off a 20PPG 8REB season...

Anthony Parker is far from a scrub...in fact he is a great role player and very versatile..to go along with ...JJ Hickson , Anderson Varajao , Delonte West

throw in Ben Wallace , Shaq and Big Z (who was an allstar the year before Lebron joined)....and the Cavs were absoluley a stacked team....they had many great role players with stars who could create...


they won 60+ games back 2 back and had the number 1 overall seed for 2 years straight....that is a great team....

anyone who says otherwise shouldn't even watch basketball.

None of what you wrote just made them stacked. You're trying to make them look better than they are but they are nowhere near stacked. And Ben Wallace wasn't even there. Z and Shaq were not all stars my man. This was 2010, not 2005, dudes were old. They had one star in Lebron, the rest were not stars at all. And when Lebron left them they went off and showed their true worth by having the WORST LOSING STREAK IN NBA HISTORY!

So much for being stacked. Stop being stubborn and just give up.