Which NBA team would have still won missing 2nd and 3rd best player?

[hateraid]

Not trying to make this a Lebron boosting thread.

Based on all NBA Finals, which team could have still won minus their 2nd and 3rd best player?

***Provided they went out during the finals

Possibly '89 Pistons without Dumars and Laimbeer? Had Vinny Johnson/Mark Aguire and Bhudda/Salley/Mahorn to step up. Plus they still had Dennis Rodman. Isaiah was on another level at the time too.
Maybe my 83 Sixers without Doc and Toney? Tough call there.
Other than that I can't really see another team doing it.

[Quickening]

Warriors minus Curry and Green/Thompson may still have won, stacked as fck

[Marchesk]

67 76ers and 72 lakers.

[hateraid]

Warriors minus Curry and Green/Thompson may still have won, stacked as fck

Good call. The do get defensively better relying on Iggy, Bogut, and Livingston.

[Suguru101]

Won against this GS team? Probably less than 5.

Wln the title? Depends on match ups. I see lots of teams missing 2 stars winning vs the 07 Cavaliers.

[jlip]

Considering no team had ever won a Finals game before this season while missing its 2nd and 3rd best players I would say more than likely none. The '81 Celtics may have been able to defeat the Rockets in the Finals without Parrish and Maxwell (I doubt it though), but they would have never beaten the Sixers in the ECF without those two.

[Fallen Angel]

2007 Spurs

[StephHamann]

One of those Celtic Russell teams

[ISHGoat]

shaq lakers no doubt

they might have needed kobe to get through the western conference, but the pacers, nets, sixers?? lmao

[Legends66NBA7]

Good call. The do get defensively better relying on Iggy, Bogut, and Livingston.

They aren't winning without Curry.

[funnystuff]

Shaqs Lakers, easily

[G0ATbe]

Lakers 09/10

[jzek]

Early '00 Lakers

Shaq would have won regardless of his #2 or #3 or #whatever. No human alive in the past, present, or future could ever stop a 7-1, 330 lb monster with the athleticism and quickness of a guard.

[G0ATbe]

Early '00 Lakers

Shaq would have won regardless of his #2 or #3 or #whatever. No human alive in the past, present, or future could ever stop a 7-1, 330 lb monster with the athleticism and quickness of a guard.
Right...:roll: .Who's going to take all the shots in the 4th when shaq has to sit due to hacking in crunch time? Who's he going to rely on to make a play when he's getting triple teamed the 1st 3 quarters:lol . Shaq would be ringless if he didn't run off to join Goat level SGs just like lebald.

[clipps]

easily the 2000's Lakers, definitely the 2001 Lakers. Elite teams build their defenses for the sole purpose of slowing down Shaq. Teams could care less if Kobe dropped 35 or 40.

[HOoopCityJones]

Early '00 Lakers

Shaq would have won regardless of his #2 or #3 or #whatever. No human alive in the past, present, or future could ever stop a 7-1, 330 lb monster with the athleticism and quickness of a guard.

Without Kobe Lakers lose to The Pacers. His perimeter defense alone was elite and invaluable at that time and disrupted their shooters like Reggie and playmakers in Mark Jackson. Plus, the infamous game 4.

[Ne 1]

Without Kobe Lakers lose to The Pacers. His perimeter defense alone was elite and invaluable at that time and disrupted their shooters like Reggie and playmakers in Mark Jackson. Plus, the infamous game 4.
Don't forget Game 7 of the WCFs as well. A 21 year old, thin shooting
guard who wasn't in his prime yet puts up 25/11/7 while the league MVP, a 7 foot 300 pound center, the most dominant player ever at his peak puts up 18/9/5. Kobe also hit a huge jumper late in the 4th to give the Lakers the lead and then followed up with an epic alley oop to Shaq to secure a huge come back victory and send L.A. to their first Finals since '91. Kobe made that play happen too. He reads the defense, crosses up Scottie Pippen, and once he gets by Pippen the defense collapses and Shaq's defender helps out on Kobe leaving Shaq open to roll to the rim.

[Wade's Rings]

The 2006 Heat

[outbreak]

You mean missing their first and third best player?

[TheCorporation]

To better put things into context we would need to have them lose their #4 starter as well (Varejao)

So, taking away a teams #2, #3, and #4 starters, all the while playing against the 2015 Warriors while GSW have HCA? No team in NBA history has a shot. I'd be willing to bet no team in NBA history has a chance to even win more than 1 game.

[TheCorporation]

The 2006 Heat

By taking away Shaq, Walker, & Jason Williams or Haslem?

LMFAO

Not even a snowballs chance in hell brah

[Smoke117]

easily the 2000's Lakers, definitely the 2001 Lakers. Elite teams build their defenses for the sole purpose of slowing down Shaq. Teams could care less if Kobe dropped 35 or 40.

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u187/JJatFSU/The-Rock-Clapping-Reaction-Gif.gif

[Chadwin]

some of those old as **** Celtic teams

[plowking]

The 2006 Heat

We're one of the worst championship teams ever, and you think we have a shot without more of our players? :oldlol:

[AintNoSunshine]

Warriors minus Curry and Green/Thompson may still have won, stacked as fck


No fking way.

[SouBeachTalents]

2003 Spurs
1994 Rockets
1975 Warriors

[iamgine]

Whenever Bob Cousy was the 2nd or 3rd best player. Removing him would improve the team.

[Wade's Rings]

By taking away Shaq, Walker, & Jason Williams or Haslem?

LMFAO

Not even a snowballs chance in hell brah

True

[Wade's Rings]

We're one of the worst championship teams ever, and you think we have a shot without more of our players? :oldlol:

Nah

[nba_55]

2000 Lakers, 2001 Lakers

[ArbitraryWater]

2003 Spurs
1994 Rockets
1975 Warriors

Nah.... Not taking the '75 mention too seriously since the 70's was so weak but look at some of the contributions on the '94 Rockets.. without Horry and/or whoever else, they're not winning... probably the same if you take away S-Jax and someone else from the '03 Spurs.

Like jlip said, a team has never even won one game in this scenario (finals).

[SouBeachTalents]

Nah.... Not taking the '75 mention too seriously since the 70's was so weak but look at some of the contributions on the '94 Rockets.. without Horry and/or whoever else, they're not winning... probably the same if you take away S-Jax and someone else from the '03 Spurs.

Like jlip said, a team has never even won one game in this scenario (finals).

Believe me, I don't think they actually win, but I'd give those 3 a better shot in this scenario than any other champ

[TheCorporation]

True

Wade's peak during that Finals run was legit af, but no team would beat this Warriors without their #2, #3 and #4 starters. Just no way.

[choppermagic]

What you are looking for is either:

(a) a team with one mega star that dominates the ball and is so hot that role players can be replaced around him, or

(b) a team with so many good role players that plays a system that allows stars to be replaced into the system.

Dirk was on mega-fire in 2011 and other role players might have stepped up to fill out the play around him. Possibly this; and

The Spurs teams of late, when Pops system made role players into stars because the system allowed them to be.

[jstern]

Not including the Warriors, since they were going up against the depleted Cavs. But perhaps the early 2000 Lakers, based on what Robert Horry, or Rick Fox said. Which was no disrespect to Kobe, but.... So perhaps those Lakers.

[TheCorporation]

What you are looking for is either:

(a) a team with one mega star that dominates the ball and is so hot that role players can be replaced around him, or

(b) a team with so many good role players that plays a system that allows stars to be replaced into the system.

Dirk was on mega-fire in 2011 and other role players might have stepped up to fill out the play around him. Possibly this; and

The Spurs teams of late, when Pops system made role players into stars because the system allowed them to be.

Not even close. Dirk shot 40% in the finals (if I recall correctly) and that was WITH Jason Terry, Marion, & Tyson Chandler.

Take away Terry, Chandler and Marion and that team doesn't win ONE game vs the Warriors.

[3ball]

If the Warriors and Cavs played another 7-game series right now, the Warriors sweep.

Naturally, 7-game series allow time for adjustments - but not unlimited adjustments - at some point, there are no more adjustments that can be made.. That was the case by Game 4 in 2015 Finals.

Once the Warriors made the necessary adjustment in Game 4, the Cavs were getting beat every game after that..

And yes, I do think the aforementioned inflexibility, rigidity and monopolizing nature of Lebron's style limits the number of counter adjustments the Cavs can make.. Of course, if Lebron shot better than 32.5% on isolations and 39.8% overall against single-coverage, the Cavs wouldn't NEED any adjustments - the Warriors would've been the team running out of adjustments.
.

[Wade's Rings]

Wade's peak during that Finals run was legit af, but no team would beat this Warriors without their #2, #3 and #4 starters. Just no way.

I thought it would be Wade vs the 2006 Mavs? I didn't know it was geared towards this years Warriors'

[HurricaneKid]

2000 Lakers

Were down 15 points in the 4th qtr of G7 against Portland. With Kobe. Do you hate Kobe so much that you think they would be that much better without him?

[ShackEelOKneel]

Warriors minus Curry and Green/Thompson may still have won, stacked as fck

lol, how do the Warriors score without Curry drawing doubles?

[ShackEelOKneel]

Not including the Warriors, since they were going up against the depleted Cavs. But perhaps the early 2000 Lakers, based on what Robert Horry, or Rick Fox said. Which was no disrespect to Kobe, but.... So perhaps those Lakers.

Yeah, if Kobe and Rice went down in the Finals, Shaq would have still won. Same with 2001 and 2002. Shaq doesn't get to the Finals without Kobe and his #3 in each year, but he wins if already there and they go down.

[ShackEelOKneel]

Were down 15 points in the 4th qtr of G7 against Portland. With Kobe. Do you hate Kobe so much that you think they would be that much better without him?

From the OP:


***Provided they went out during the finals

[The Iron Fist]

2009 and 2010 Lakers didn't even have a 2nd and 3rd best player. It was Kobe and scrubs.

[SouBeachTalents]

2009 and 2010 Lakers didn't even have a 2nd and 3rd best player. It was Kobe and scrubs.

Gasol puts up 18/11/3 on 58% and 20/11/4 on 54% in those two playoff runs, plus outplays Howard & KG in the Finals, but that's just scrub production/play

[TheCorporation]

2009 and 2010 Lakers didn't even have a 2nd and 3rd best player. It was Kobe and scrubs.

You spelled Gasol wrong lol