Sports WI: No 0.4?

The San Antonio Spurs had won the 2003 NBA Finals behind the strong play of two-time MVP Tim Duncan, and had gotten off to a 57-25 record, despite the retirement of David Robinson and the departure of key contributors like Stephen Jackson. After sweeping the Memphis Grizzlies in the first round of the playoffs, the Spurs would face the Los Angeles Lakers, led by Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant, and supported by two future Hall of Famers in Karl Malone and Gary Payton. After splitting the first two games with each team winning on their home court, Game 5 was a defensive match. In the waning moments of the game, Duncan hit a shot to put the Spurs up by two, however, Derek Fisher would hit the game-winning three-pointer with 0.4 seconds left on the clock, to steal Game 5 on the Spurs' home floor. The Lakers would close out the series in Game 6, preventing the Spurs from repeating as champions, but would fall to the defensive-minded Detroit Pistons in five games in the Finals.

So, what if Fisher either does not get the ball off in time or the shot misses?
 
The San Antonio Spurs had won the 2003 NBA Finals behind the strong play of two-time MVP Tim Duncan, and had gotten off to a 57-25 record, despite the retirement of David Robinson and the departure of key contributors like Stephen Jackson. After sweeping the Memphis Grizzlies in the first round of the playoffs, the Spurs would face the Los Angeles Lakers, led by Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant, and supported by two future Hall of Famers in Karl Malone and Gary Payton. After splitting the first two games with each team winning on their home court, Game 5 was a defensive match. In the waning moments of the game, Duncan hit a shot to put the Spurs up by two, however, Derek Fisher would hit the game-winning three-pointer with 0.4 seconds left on the clock, to steal Game 5 on the Spurs' home floor. The Lakers would close out the series in Game 6, preventing the Spurs from repeating as champions, but would fall to the defensive-minded Detroit Pistons in five games in the Finals.

So, what if Fisher either does not get the ball off in time or the shot misses?

The Spurs end up winning that series in 7, and they probably find a way to beat the Sam Cassell-less T-Wolves in the WCF. That sets up a Spur-Piston matchup a year earlier. I believe that Detroit would have taken that series.

As for the Lakers, I wonder what would have happened if they lose two rounds earlier. Would Shaq still have been traded? Or do him and Kobe come back motivated to get back to the Finals? It would have been interesting to see.
 
Being a lifelong Laker fan, Fisher missing the 0.4 then the Lakers probably lose the series. The year before though, Robert Horry missed what would have been a game winning shot in Game 5, and if he'd made it the momentum gained from the shot probably would have meant they'd beat the Spurs and go on to win the title.

As for the fate of Shaq and Kobe, only winning the title of 2004 could have possibly convinced either of them to stay. The whole Colorado rape case and the ensuing drama that unfurled was like nothing else even a city like LA, known for its internal drama, had ever seen, and by that time the Shaq/Kobe relationship was beyond saving, sort of like by the late 1980s it would have been close to impossible to save the Soviet Union (interestingly, Greg Popovich, coach of the Spurs, compared the Laker breakup in 2004 to the collapse of the Soviet Union).

Malone and Payton were both at the end of the line by that point, and besides, Malone was injured at the latter part of the year so it probably wouldn't have made that big a difference in the big picture had the Lakers kept Robert Horry instead of letting him go with the Spurs. Gary Payton also never fit with the triangle offense, and plus he also took time from Fisher, and the reason why I believe he left the Lakers for three years after the season was over.

Thus, more than anything else, the Lakers of 2004 destroyed themselves from within more than the Pistons beat them in that ill-fated series. There was also the underlying issue in that Shaq wanted a contract extension of nearly 30 million a year to 2009, and that Kobe was going to be a free agent after 2004, and Jerry Buss, having to make a choice between an aging Shaq and Kobe coming into his prime, he decided to trade Shaq.

Its too bad though, considering that the immediate post-Shaq years coincided with Kobe's prime, where he largely wasted being forced to play with the likes of Smush Parker and Kwame Brown...

If Shaq and Kobe would have stayed together, it would have been utterly unfair. For instance, Shaq and Kobe decided to get along in 2001 and then they proceeded to crush the Blazers, Kings and the Spurs. 2003 was an abberration, and had Shaq and Kobe managed to get along in 2004, so long as you had Derek Fishers, Robert Horrys and other solid role players around them they'd have crushed the Pistons, and also win most of the titles from 2005-07, as that was before the 2003 class came to prominence and that aside from the Spurs, there was no other teams in the West that could have beaten them in a seven game series, never mind a much weaker East. By beating the Lakers in 2004, Detroit was a perennial Eastern Conference champion for the next 5 years, and if it hadn't happened they'd have quickly fallen into irrelevence like the Nets and the Sixers had before them, and the Heat probably would have remained a middle of the pack team.

Speaking of Derek Fisher, it wasn't surprising that he hit a clutch shot. It was what he was known for throughout his Laker career (like the game tying 3 vs Orlando in Game 4 of the 2009 finals, his Game 3 performance vs the Celtics and a whole bunch of clutch shots). Though he was slow, short and couldn't jump, he was a great leader and the only guy for like 10 years who could walk up to Kobe and say f-you to his face and Kobe nodding his head in acceptance, and also one of the only true friends he has ever made during his playing career.

In the big picture though, so long as the Lakers managed to keep Kobe after 2004 and the Laker front office having any sort of competence, the Lakers more than likely end up competing for a championship again sooner or later, as we saw in 2009 and 2010 when they won the title.

We can also make the conjecture that what would have happened if David Stern hadn't blocked the Chris Paul trade, which would not only have given the Lakers the best point guard in the league in his prime, but also saved the Lakers millions of dollars. Then again, the Lakers did end up getting Steve Nash, so yeah, being a Laker fan isn't all that bad at all.;)

(Speaking of which, Bill Simmons, an avid Laker hater, always seems to complain about how the Lakers always seem to get great players for trash)


http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8182261/game-nba-thrones-part-i
 
If Shaq and Kobe would have stayed together, it would have been utterly unfair. For instance, Shaq and Kobe decided to get along in 2001 and then they proceeded to crush the Blazers, Kings and the Spurs. 2003 was an abberration, and had Shaq and Kobe managed to get along in 2004, so long as you had Derek Fishers, Robert Horrys and other solid role players around them they'd have crushed the Pistons, and also win most of the titles from 2005-07, as that was before the 2003 class came to prominence and that aside from the Spurs, there was no other teams in the West that could have beaten them in a seven game series, never mind a much weaker East. By beating the Lakers in 2004, Detroit was a perennial Eastern Conference champion for the next 5 years, and if it hadn't happened they'd have quickly fallen into irrelevence like the Nets and the Sixers had before them, and the Heat probably would have remained a middle of the pack team.

2003 was also the year Robinson was retiring so practically everyone on the Spurs roster was plating extra hard (see the case of Michael Finley), not to mention Duncan's 2003 run would be what LeBron's 2012 run is closest to (24/17/5/5 against 29/10/7)

And Detroit made the Eastern Conference Finals 6 years in a row, though the beginning of the end of their being league elites came when LeBron scored 29 of the Cavaliers' 30 last points to win Game 5, then getting upended by the Celtics in 6 games. By 2009 they were a sub .500 8th seed and the next season they were a lottery team.

Bmao said:
Speaking of Derek Fisher, it wasn't surprising that he hit a clutch shot. It was what he was known for throughout his Laker career (like the game tying 3 vs Orlando in Game 4 of the 2009 finals, his Game 3 performance vs the Celtics and a whole bunch of clutch shots). Though he was slow, short and couldn't jump, he was a great leader and the only guy for like 10 years who could walk up to Kobe and say f-you to his face and Kobe nodding his head in acceptance, and also one of the only true friends he has ever made during his playing career.

IMO Fisher was sorely missed in LA. If he weren't playing for the Thunder the Lakers could have had led that series 3 games to 1, as they lost a tight games 2 and 4.

Of course, he was a non-factor in the Finals, so Fisher and Kobe couldn't win titles without the other. ;)

Bmao said:
In the big picture though, so long as the Lakers managed to keep Kobe after 2004 and the Laker front office having any sort of competence, the Lakers more than likely end up competing for a championship again sooner or later, as we saw in 2009 and 2010 when they won the title.

True, Kobe was a better building block than Shaq because he was younger and not unreliable at the line in crunch time. Of course, getting Pau Gasol for Kwame Brown was a big trade steal, but the Lakers have never found it necessary to rebuild because they could always attract prime free agents with Hollywood glitz.

[quote="Bmao]"We can also make the conjecture that what would have happened if David Stern hadn't blocked the Chris Paul trade, which would not only have given the Lakers the best point guard in the league in his prime, but also saved the Lakers millions of dollars. Then again, the Lakers did end up getting Steve Nash, so yeah, being a Laker fan isn't all that bad at all.;)

(Speaking of which, Bill Simmons, an avid Laker hater, always seems to complain about how the Lakers always seem to get great players for trash)


http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8182261/game-nba-thrones-part-i[/QUOTE]

Paul would indeed by a great fit for the Lakers - it was their first post-Jackson season since 2005, which meant they had to adapt new offensive schemes - and Mike Brown is a "defensive coach", in other words, a euphemism for "give the ball to the highest paid guy on the roster and let everyone else just work on defense". A floor general would mean Kobe doesn't have a horrid 40/30/80 season, which wasn't unlike his prime seasons spent with Kwame Brown as his center.
 
Being a lifelong Laker fan, Fisher missing the 0.4 then the Lakers probably lose the series. The year before though, Robert Horry missed what would have been a game winning shot in Game 5, and if he'd made it the momentum gained from the shot probably would have meant they'd beat the Spurs and go on to win the title.

As for the fate of Shaq and Kobe, only winning the title of 2004 could have possibly convinced either of them to stay. The whole Colorado rape case and the ensuing drama that unfurled was like nothing else even a city like LA, known for its internal drama, had ever seen, and by that time the Shaq/Kobe relationship was beyond saving, sort of like by the late 1980s it would have been close to impossible to save the Soviet Union (interestingly, Greg Popovich, coach of the Spurs, compared the Laker breakup in 2004 to the collapse of the Soviet Union).

Malone and Payton were both at the end of the line by that point, and besides, Malone was injured at the latter part of the year so it probably wouldn't have made that big a difference in the big picture had the Lakers kept Robert Horry instead of letting him go with the Spurs. Gary Payton also never fit with the triangle offense, and plus he also took time from Fisher, and the reason why I believe he left the Lakers for three years after the season was over.

Thus, more than anything else, the Lakers of 2004 destroyed themselves from within more than the Pistons beat them in that ill-fated series. There was also the underlying issue in that Shaq wanted a contract extension of nearly 30 million a year to 2009, and that Kobe was going to be a free agent after 2004, and Jerry Buss, having to make a choice between an aging Shaq and Kobe coming into his prime, he decided to trade Shaq.

Its too bad though, considering that the immediate post-Shaq years coincided with Kobe's prime, where he largely wasted being forced to play with the likes of Smush Parker and Kwame Brown...

If Shaq and Kobe would have stayed together, it would have been utterly unfair. For instance, Shaq and Kobe decided to get along in 2001 and then they proceeded to crush the Blazers, Kings and the Spurs. 2003 was an abberration, and had Shaq and Kobe managed to get along in 2004, so long as you had Derek Fishers, Robert Horrys and other solid role players around them they'd have crushed the Pistons, and also win most of the titles from 2005-07, as that was before the 2003 class came to prominence and that aside from the Spurs, there was no other teams in the West that could have beaten them in a seven game series, never mind a much weaker East. By beating the Lakers in 2004, Detroit was a perennial Eastern Conference champion for the next 5 years, and if it hadn't happened they'd have quickly fallen into irrelevence like the Nets and the Sixers had before them, and the Heat probably would have remained a middle of the pack team.

Speaking of Derek Fisher, it wasn't surprising that he hit a clutch shot. It was what he was known for throughout his Laker career (like the game tying 3 vs Orlando in Game 4 of the 2009 finals, his Game 3 performance vs the Celtics and a whole bunch of clutch shots). Though he was slow, short and couldn't jump, he was a great leader and the only guy for like 10 years who could walk up to Kobe and say f-you to his face and Kobe nodding his head in acceptance, and also one of the only true friends he has ever made during his playing career.

In the big picture though, so long as the Lakers managed to keep Kobe after 2004 and the Laker front office having any sort of competence, the Lakers more than likely end up competing for a championship again sooner or later, as we saw in 2009 and 2010 when they won the title.

We can also make the conjecture that what would have happened if David Stern hadn't blocked the Chris Paul trade, which would not only have given the Lakers the best point guard in the league in his prime, but also saved the Lakers millions of dollars. Then again, the Lakers did end up getting Steve Nash, so yeah, being a Laker fan isn't all that bad at all.;)

(Speaking of which, Bill Simmons, an avid Laker hater, always seems to complain about how the Lakers always seem to get great players for trash)


http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8182261/game-nba-thrones-part-i

Simmons has a hypocritical view. Now, I don't like the Lakers, but the Celtics have gotten players in BS fluke ways over the years as well. So, he shouldn't be complaining.

Also, you said that 03 was an aberration. I don't really think it was. The Spurs had a good team. They had a better team than they had the last two years they lost to LA.

Speaking of those Kobe-Shaq Laker teams, I always thought they were a little overrated. They had two players and a bunch of stiffs. People overplay Shaq and his dominance, and they say that the 01 Lakers were so great. However, who did they beat in the Playoffs that year? Besides the Spurs, nobody.
 
Simmons has a hypocritical view. Now, I don't like the Lakers, but the Celtics have gotten players in BS fluke ways over the years as well. So, he shouldn't be complaining.

Also, you said that 03 was an aberration. I don't really think it was. The Spurs had a good team. They had a better team than they had the last two years they lost to LA.

Speaking of those Kobe-Shaq Laker teams, I always thought they were a little overrated. They had two players and a bunch of stiffs. People overplay Shaq and his dominance, and they say that the 01 Lakers were so great. However, who did they beat in the Playoffs that year? Besides the Spurs, nobody.

They beat the Sacramento Kings, back when they were Cowbell Town and had a great squad with C-Webb, Divac, Doug Christie, etc. In the first round they also beat the Blazers who took them to 7 games the year before, but in the case of the Blazers they had already imploded by then.

Philadelphia though I agree. Aside from AI and Mutombo they had nobody else worth a crap, which speaks to how weak the east was in those immediate post-Jordan years.

As for stiffs, I agree that guys like Samaki Walker, Travis Knight-those were stiffs. Big shot Robert Horry, Derek Fisher and Rick Fox weren't stiffs-they were guys who were elite role players who'd always hit big shots, come up with big stops and the big rebounds. In the case of the earlier two, given that they had rather average NBA talent, the fact that they have both had 16 year NBA careers suggests a value that goes beyond mere statistics. Derek Fisher, for instance, was basically the only guy on the Kobe-led squads that could say !@#!$ you to Kobe and get away with it, and was pretty much one of the only friends Kobe ever made in his NBA career. So I stand by my assertion that in most NBA seasons of the first part of the 2000 decade, the only way the Lakers could lose was if they destroyed themselves from within, which ended up happening in 2004.
 
They beat the Sacramento Kings, back when they were Cowbell Town and had a great squad with C-Webb, Divac, Doug Christie, etc. In the first round they also beat the Blazers who took them to 7 games the year before, but in the case of the Blazers they had already imploded by then.

Philadelphia though I agree. Aside from AI and Mutombo they had nobody else worth a crap, which speaks to how weak the east was in those immediate post-Jordan years.

As for stiffs, I agree that guys like Samaki Walker, Travis Knight-those were stiffs. Big shot Robert Horry, Derek Fisher and Rick Fox weren't stiffs-they were guys who were elite role players who'd always hit big shots, come up with big stops and the big rebounds. In the case of the earlier two, given that they had rather average NBA talent, the fact that they have both had 16 year NBA careers suggests a value that goes beyond mere statistics. Derek Fisher, for instance, was basically the only guy on the Kobe-led squads that could say !@#!$ you to Kobe and get away with it, and was pretty much one of the only friends Kobe ever made in his NBA career. So I stand by my assertion that in most NBA seasons of the first part of the 2000 decade, the only way the Lakers could lose was if they destroyed themselves from within, which ended up happening in 2004.

I really don't agree with that point of view about those Laker teams only losing because they beat themselves. The way I see it, they were lucky to get three titles. I don't know how Shaq and Kobe ever got along at all, and the Blazers and Kings were more talented teams in 00 and 02.

As for Horry, he was lucky in a lot of ways. He was like Paxson for the Bulls in that he would hit clutch shots, but always be wide open because of the play(or luck in Horry's case, like during Game 4 of the 02 WCF). As for Fox, my friend said that the Lakers just had him because he was a pretty boy, and that fit into the Hollywood factor.

They were also lucky to have Phil Jackson as head coach. In 98, they had more talent around Shaq and Kobe than any of their title years, but the Jazz schooled them. In 99, the Spurs did the same thing. If it wasn't for Phil, I am not sure that Shaq stays around much longer. He even said on ESPN 12 years ago that he would have wanted to leave LA if the Lakers didn't get a good coach.
 
I really don't agree with that point of view about those Laker teams only losing because they beat themselves. The way I see it, they were lucky to get three titles. I don't know how Shaq and Kobe ever got along at all, and the Blazers and Kings were more talented teams in 00 and 02.

As for Horry, he was lucky in a lot of ways. He was like Paxson for the Bulls in that he would hit clutch shots, but always be wide open because of the play(or luck in Horry's case, like during Game 4 of the 02 WCF). As for Fox, my friend said that the Lakers just had him because he was a pretty boy, and that fit into the Hollywood factor.

They were also lucky to have Phil Jackson as head coach. In 98, they had more talent around Shaq and Kobe than any of their title years, but the Jazz schooled them. In 99, the Spurs did the same thing. If it wasn't for Phil, I am not sure that Shaq stays around much longer. He even said on ESPN 12 years ago that he would have wanted to leave LA if the Lakers didn't get a good coach.

Of course, there is always a bit of luck involved in these sort of circumstances. I could also argue that if Robert Horry hit that 3 pointer at the end of Game 5 which went in and out vs the Spurs where the Lakers had come back from 20 down in the 4th, then the momentum they carried could have beaten the Spurs in Game 6. As for Fox, he completely shut down Peja Stojakovich in 2001. Even with Shaq and Kobe, you don't win titles if you don't have role players who are willing to step up.

The Blazers definitely had a more talented team in 2000, but they were a bunch of nutcases with guys like Rasheed Wallace, Damon Stoudemire not to mention a jaded Scottie Pippen. Same in 2002, the Kings were chokers and before you tell me about the 'rigged' Game 6, I think the bigger problem for the Kings was that they let the refs be a distration throughout the series and Kings fans still can't get over it.

The 1998 team was one of my favorites, but they were sort of like the Oklahmoa City Thunder of their day; uber-talented but lacking in experience and poise. It also didn't help that Nick Van Exel was a head case who infamously screamed 'Cancun' after a Laker huddle before Game 4 of the WCF vs the Jazz, and that the previous year he bumped Ron Garretson out of bounds. Eddie Jones played the same position as Kobe, and sooner or later they were bound to clash, so they got rid of him (to this day many of my cousins in their 30s still wear their Eddie Jones jerseys). Elden Campbell was one of the better backup centers in the league, but he played with seemingly no pulse and was basically ground to a grease spot by Malone in both the 97-98 Jazz series.

As for Shaq wanting to leave, I wouldn't blame him if he felt that the management wasn't making the best efforts to put a good team around him. Kobe almost left in 2007 for similar reasons and it was only salvaged after they stole...er...traded for Gasol from Memphis.

To be honest, it was a miracle that Shaq and Kobe got along as long as they did. Credit has to be given to Phil of course, but also Brian Shaw, a backup guard during the 3 peat era who was an old friend of Shaq's during the Orlando days who served basically as an ambassador between the two and later went on to be an Assistant Coach for the Lakers. They also really went at it during the 2000-01 season, where Kobe decided to abandon the offense to 'step up his game' before they managed to pull together.
 
Of course, there is always a bit of luck involved in these sort of circumstances. I could also argue that if Robert Horry hit that 3 pointer at the end of Game 5 which went in and out vs the Spurs where the Lakers had come back from 20 down in the 4th, then the momentum they carried could have beaten the Spurs in Game 6. As for Fox, he completely shut down Peja Stojakovich in 2001. Even with Shaq and Kobe, you don't win titles if you don't have role players who are willing to step up.

The Blazers definitely had a more talented team in 2000, but they were a bunch of nutcases with guys like Rasheed Wallace, Damon Stoudemire not to mention a jaded Scottie Pippen. Same in 2002, the Kings were chokers and before you tell me about the 'rigged' Game 6, I think the bigger problem for the Kings was that they let the refs be a distration throughout the series and Kings fans still can't get over it.

The 1998 team was one of my favorites, but they were sort of like the Oklahmoa City Thunder of their day; uber-talented but lacking in experience and poise. It also didn't help that Nick Van Exel was a head case who infamously screamed 'Cancun' after a Laker huddle before Game 4 of the WCF vs the Jazz, and that the previous year he bumped Ron Garretson out of bounds. Eddie Jones played the same position as Kobe, and sooner or later they were bound to clash, so they got rid of him (to this day many of my cousins in their 30s still wear their Eddie Jones jerseys). Elden Campbell was one of the better backup centers in the league, but he played with seemingly no pulse and was basically ground to a grease spot by Malone in both the 97-98 Jazz series.

As for Shaq wanting to leave, I wouldn't blame him if he felt that the management wasn't making the best efforts to put a good team around him. Kobe almost left in 2007 for similar reasons and it was only salvaged after they stole...er...traded for Gasol from Memphis.

To be honest, it was a miracle that Shaq and Kobe got along as long as they did. Credit has to be given to Phil of course, but also Brian Shaw, a backup guard during the 3 peat era who was an old friend of Shaq's during the Orlando days who served basically as an ambassador between the two and later went on to be an Assistant Coach for the Lakers. They also really went at it during the 2000-01 season, where Kobe decided to abandon the offense to 'step up his game' before they managed to pull together.

Yeah, in 01 it was a miracle that they did put it together. That was a crazy era in NBA History. You had the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, you had the psycho Blazers, you had the talented but sort-of-soft Kings, you had the solid, always contending Spurs, and you had an Eastern Conference that was at it's all-time weakest.
 
Its too bad though, considering that the immediate post-Shaq years coincided with Kobe's prime, where he largely wasted being forced to play with the likes of Smush Parker and Kwame Brown...
Absolutely. However, I suppose one could argue that without those pitiful years, Kobe would have never gotten as self-sufficient as he currently is in terms of putting a team on his back and pushing through. You can call Kobe selfish, but the magical part is that he can always have the ball in his hands and hold out (and that's because of playing with the likes of Kwame Brown). :)eek:)
As a lifelong Knicks fan (born and raised that way), I still remember how the Nets dominated us that year in the playoffs. What are the chances that if the Nets continue that comeback they had in Game Six, that they finish the deal and beat the Lakers.
 
Absolutely. However, I suppose one could argue that without those pitiful years, Kobe would have never gotten as self-sufficient as he currently is in terms of putting a team on his back and pushing through. You can call Kobe selfish, but the magical part is that he can always have the ball in his hands and hold out (and that's because of playing with the likes of Kwame Brown). :)eek:)
As a lifelong Knicks fan (born and raised that way), I still remember how the Nets dominated us that year in the playoffs. What are the chances that if the Nets continue that comeback they had in Game Six, that they finish the deal and beat the Lakers.

The Nets getting to the Finals twice in a row is more of an indictment of how weak the Eastern Conference was before the 2003 draft class. Jason Kidd's supporting cast were practically Richard Jefferson and Dikembe Mutombo (and Keith Van Horn in 2002), and none of those made an All-Star team save Mutombo.
 
Top