Marcos Bretón: No great player, no title, no coincidence

#1
Marcos Bretón: No great player, no title, no coincidence

By Marcos Bretón -- Bee Sports Columnist

Published 2:15 am PDT Friday, May 12, 2006

They can hire a new Kings coach who is more "personable" than the old one. Or they can hire a coach who is more "defensive" minded, whatever that means. But teams win NBA championships with great players, and the Kings have not had one in 21 years of Sacramento hoops, not a single Hall of Fame talent.

Oh, they've had rosters of good players, some terrific players, a player who was elite until his knee exploded - and a potential great one in Ron Artest. Underline the word: potential.

But if you want to point to one reason an NBA championship banner does not hang in Arco Arena, it's been a lack of greatness on the Arco floor. It's been a lack of a Shaquille O'Neal, who could impose his will on a playoff series; a lack of a Kobe Bryant, who can do things with a basketball that no other human can do.

Or it's been a lack of a Tim Duncan, who can grasp the rock in his big paws, back his huge behind toward the basket and do whatever he pleases.

But isn't it curious how this undeniable truth - an honest assessment of Kingly shortcomings - is completely overlooked in the wake of a horribly handled Kings coaching change this week?

Indeed, the current conversation is all about what Rick Adelman could or couldn't do in eight playoff seasons - the only winning campaigns posted by any coach in Sacramento Kings history.

Or we get speculation on a host of stiffs who supposedly could do what Adelman couldn't.

It's all hogwash (not the word I wanted to use), and it's endemic to the delusional nature of Kings basketball culture.

There are obviously no mirrors at Arco Arena, or else no one in authority ever peers into one.

Why bother, when you can blame the refs, fate or Adelman for not being a "defensive" coach?

Fine. The team belongs to Joe and Gavin Maloof, and they can do whatever they please with it, no arguments here.

But consider two important points for why Adelman's dismissal is a bad move made on a whim by the Kings owners - and not because of any real shortcomings on Adelman's part.

First, the Kings didn't win a title in their two-year window (2001-02 and 2002-03) because they missed 14 free throws in Game 7 of the Western Conference Finals at Arco Arena in 2002 against the Los Angeles Lakers.

Vlade Divac - a terrific player lacking Hall of Fame skills - missed five free throws. Another near-great in Peja Stojakovic had a wide-open look that might have sealed the win but threw up an airball. Another good one - Doug Christie - melted down under the pressure. And a player who was elite for a moment in Chris Webber played just OK.

Then in 2003, Webber's knee exploded in the second round of the playoffs - his chance at greatness heisted by destiny along with that championship ring bearing a Kings logo.

Ask yourself this: Would the San Antonio Spurs have won if Duncan blew out his knee in the playoffs? Would the Detroit Pistons have won if Ben Wallace needed surgery in early May of 2004? Would the Lakers have won with Kobe or Shaq in street clothes?

And then consider the elite list of NBA coaches with at least 700 career wins, a list Adelman is on.

Now reduce that list to coaches with championship rings, and what do you have?

Men blessed with great players: Phil Jackson with Shaq, Kobe and Michael Jordan, perhaps the greatest ever; Pat Riley with Kareem and Magic; Larry Brown with Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Chauncey Billups; Jack Ramsay had Bill Walton, etc.

Even Jerry Sloan in Utah - with no championship rings, either - had Karl Malone and John Stockton.

And what of Adelman? He had a Hall of Famer in Clyde Drexler when he coached in Portland, but then he came to Sacramento, where he was dealt a hand that was very good but not great.

It might have been great if Adelman himself were allowed to shoot free throws against the Lakers in 2002, but coaches can't play for their players.

They can only hope a great player comes their way - along with a ton of luck - so they can get treated with respect and be called a genius.

All I can say is it must be nice to be an owner or team brass, where money and titles say you're never wrong and you know everything.

Because then you can fill a team with offensive players, bemoan a lack of defense, dump your fall guy - and go watch Barry Bonds in San Francisco as Gavin Maloof did this week.

Must be nice.

Link
 

pdxKingsFan

So Ordinary That It's Truly Quite Extraordinary
Staff member
#3
Whatever, nobody on the Pistons was considered "great" until they sealed the deal. Especially in a world where winning it all increasingly establishes greatness this is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
#4
coolhandluke said:
First, the Kings didn't win a title in their two-year window (2001-02 and 2002-03) because they missed 14 free throws in Game 7 of the Western Conference Finals at Arco Arena in 2002 against the Los Angeles Lakers.

Link
Great job Breton, you completely nullified your article there. Maybe that "great player" would have made those freethrows.
 
#5
wow...the Maloofs are really taking a beating on this one. If the team goes downhill next year they are going to continue getting all the blame. They probably deserve it but I wonder how they are going to take all of this.
 
#6
Amazing how Breton invalidates his entire article with one line:

"Larry Brown with Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Chauncey Billups"

Sounds just like our team, bunch of very good players, but no elite superstars.
 
#7
I, as a Sacramento resident, am very proud of the Kings organization and absolutely embarrassed by our newspaper due to such "journalism."
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#8
Ooh, nicely done. Breton is starting to scare me now with his accuracy.

His only misfire was with Detroit -- the exception team that continues to prove the rule.

Setting aside the Pistons, and their FOUR TIME DPOY (who might himself make it), can anyone tell me the last time a team won a title without a HOF player? I can tell you for a fact its been since the 70's at least -- maybe the Sonics of 78-79? I think even rest of the 70's champs had one -- Cowens, Barry, Unseld, Walton, etc.
 
#9
pdxKingsFan said:
Whatever, nobody on the Pistons was considered "great" until they sealed the deal. Especially in a world where winning it all increasingly establishes greatness this is ridiculous.

Took the words right out of my mouth....Excellent point
 

pdxKingsFan

So Ordinary That It's Truly Quite Extraordinary
Staff member
#10
Bricklayer said:
Setting aside the Pistons, and their FOUR TIME DPOY (who might himself make it), can anyone tell me the last time a team won a title without a HOF player? I can tell you for a fact its been since the 70's at least -- maybe the Sonics of 78-79? I think even rest of the 70's champs had one -- Cowens, Barry, Unseld, Walton, etc.
The Sonics is the correct answer assuming we're granting HOF status to certain current players on the most recent champions. But had we won during our last window Webber would be a lock right? Winning defines greatness.

10 years from now if King James hasn't won anything that's all we'll hear about is never winning the big one yet if he were to join the Spurs or Pistons or other powerhouse and play on a championship team before he turned 25 he'd receive his official coronation as better than Jordan.
 
#11
Bricklayer said:
Setting aside the Pistons, and their FOUR TIME DPOY (who might himself make it), can anyone tell me the last time a team won a title without a HOF player? I can tell you for a fact its been since the 70's at least -- maybe the Sonics of 78-79? I think even rest of the 70's champs had one -- Cowens, Barry, Unseld, Walton, etc.
The question to ask, though, is... does HOFamer make the title, or does title make the HOFamer??? I say that if Webber won a title or two here, he would increase his chances greatly of being in the HOF...
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#12
Chicken and egg, with truly great players winning BECAUSE they are great.

Setting that aside, which of these palyers do you think would NOT be in the HOF even if they had never won it all?

Duncan
Robinson
Shaq
Kobe
Jordan
Pippen
Zeke
Dumars (closest)
Magic
Kareem
Bird
Dr. J
Moses
...

you see where I'm going? A title is only going to push the most "borderline" HOF type player over the top. The greats are Greats regardless. And of course BECAUSE they are Greats, that is why they win. And if you don't have them...you pretty much don't. Even if you get unlucky enough to have a great, but run into a Great (or a pari of them), you still don't win.

And its easy enough to trace with our own history, and with Rick's. When Webb was at his peak, so were we. Right there to grab a title. Battling it out with one of the greatest duos in NBA history. And then he blew out his knee, and that was over. We lost our great, and it was done.

And Rick himself had another great -- Drexler -- and while he had him and Clyde was at his peak, Rick's team's were right there battling it out...against Zeke and Dumars and Rodman and Jordan and Pippen etc. Able to beat everyone except the teams that had multiple Greats, and not surprisingly, won multiple titles. Put Jordan on that Blazers team and Drexler on that BNulls team when they met, and you wanna take any bets about whether it turns out different?
 
Last edited:

pdxKingsFan

So Ordinary That It's Truly Quite Extraordinary
Staff member
#17
Bricklayer said:
Setting that aside, which of these palyers do you think would NOT be in the HOF even if they had never won it all?

Duncan
Robinson
Shaq
Kobe
Jordan
Pippen
Zeke
Dumars (closest)
Magic
Kareem
Bird
Dr. J
Moses
Without rings besides Dumars I think Pippen and Duncan would not be locks. Pippen because he is horribly underappreciated as maybe riding off of Jordan when in truth they were one horrible call from the NBA Finals in Jordan's first baseball year. Duncan because if he had no rings and blew out his knee tomorrow would probably be where Webb is.

Other than Larry Bird who played with a boatload of HOF guys on the Celts what does every player on your list have in common? Why they played alongside the guy above or below them of course. And that's why the Pistons of the past few seasons completely discount Breton's point. The Kings at their peak were the offensive version of the Pistons. Maybe only one bordeline superstar surefire hall of famer but arguably an all-star at every position in the starting 5 and sixth and seventh men that would start on half the teams in the league.
 
#18
I think people forget how truly talented the Pistons are. Ben Wallace proves the singular genius of Rodman. If Rodman had not been flamboyant he would have the same reputation of Wallace, where we debate if he is truly great or not. Nobody questions if Rodman was great. They question his attitude, his behavior, but not his greatness. Certainly no one feels that the Bulls could have reeled off that second three-peat w/out him.

Rasheed Wallace is a GREAT player, and extremely versatile. That Portland team, which was VERY GOOD, revolved around Rasheed. Now, he probably was not suited for that role, and he benefits greatly from having Billups and Hamilton around, but the dude is awesome. In his prime, the big debate was whether or not Rasheed, Webber, or Duncan was the best PF in the game!

Rip is the best shooter in the league, hands down. Did anyone question the greatness of Reggie Miller? Rip has not had some of the 4th quarter theatrics of Reggie, nor the feud with a star like Spike Lee, but he has a ring and Reggie doesn't.

Tayshaun is has proven to be so good that passing up Carmello isn't even a debate anymore. Sure, they could have used Bosh or Wade, but is anyone wondering how Anthony would have looked in a Pistons uniform?

And Billups is just solid, clutch, nails. Fantastic player. The kind of PG we all wish we had. The Pistons are not some ragtag collection of talent. They have GREAT players. That is a better team than the Kings were.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#19
pdxKingsFan said:
Without rings besides Dumars I think Pippen and Duncan would not be locks. Pippen because he is horribly underappreciated as maybe riding off of Jordan when in truth they were one horrible call from the NBA Finals in Jordan's first baseball year. Duncan because if he had no rings and blew out his knee tomorrow would probably be where Webb is.

Other than Larry Bird who played with a boatload of HOF guys on the Celts what does every player on your list have in common? Why they played alongside the guy above or below them of course. And that's why the Pistons of the past few seasons completely discount Breton's point. The Kings at their peak were the offensive version of the Pistons. Maybe only one bordeline superstar surefire hall of famer but arguably an all-star at every position in the starting 5 and sixth and seventh men that would start on half the teams in the league.
Uh...the 1 in 30 year exception completely discounts Breton's point? Hardly. Best such an oddity can do is show that it might be poassible. Maybe. IF you happen to decorate your team with defensive monsters. But more likely it just highlights how incredibly rare that acheivement is.

And yes, Pippen would be in the Hall. And Duncan? Are you kidding me? Multiple MVPs, 7 straihgt All-Defensive teams or whatever? People arguing whether he or Malone was the greatest PF of all time?

P.S. Unlike Venom I don't actually think the Pistons team is that overwhelmingly amazing talentwise. But they are a teamwork machine and absolutely maximize what they have.
 
#21
We need a complement to Artest go over the top. We have too many so so good players, but need the guy like Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, Ben Wallace, etc. I love Bonzi and he works great with Artest, but if he goes nuts and wants $10M+, we'd be good sign and trading him with Miller, K9, Corliss, Hart etc for Kevin. I had the privelege of living in Chicago and watching the Bulls, probably one of the best, if not the best team ever and Jordan, with Pippen, Rodman etc was something to behold. In the early years, Jordan would single handedly score 40+ pts like Kobe is now doing in LA and the team would win or lose, but not be great. It was not until Jordan got his supporting cast and another great player(s) that the Bulls had their dynasty.

The Spurs have Tim Duncan & Tony Parker, with Ginobelli, plus an unbelieveable bench of veterans who can and do take the big shots.

The Kings have Bibby and Miller who were both good in the past, Brad has fallen off his great play as of late. He really has fallen off a lot since his leg fracture last year. Bibby is still good and gives us the scoring punch we need, KMart is very promising, as is Cisco if given time. We need KG, TD, Ben Wallace more than we think and until we get them, we will have year after year of near misses. Even a new young guy like Lebron has taken his team from jokes, to going somewhere, although not all the way. We need to make the big move to get the whole thing...we need to go big or go home simple as that. We got Artest, now we need to go farther and get him the PF/C that will make us good inside to out, as well as improve our bench. A tall order, but we can go pretty far with a good upgrade at PF/C. We no longer have the Princeton system and now more than ever don't need Miller's shooting away from the basket, but need a stay at home near the basket center to solidify our interior.
 

pdxKingsFan

So Ordinary That It's Truly Quite Extraordinary
Staff member
#22
Bricklayer said:
And Duncan? Are you kidding me? Multiple MVPs, 7 straihgt All-Defensive teams or whatever? People arguing whether he or Malone was the greatest PF of all time?
His reputation is largely built on winning championships. The MVPs and all the accolades followed. If I remember right his first MVP actually came in a down year as a makeup for the prior year.

It really is a chicken and the egg thing but I do think had we won in 2001-2002 Webber would be a HOF lock and Bibby would be a 4 time all star completely negating this argument.
 
#26
I am jumping in late but that Article is close to what I agree with and I think Brick and others have already pointed out similar points of view and covered anything I could possibly add.

Usually I don't even read Bretons stuff because I have been so turned off by his previous stuff but this was a really good article.

And IMO if anyone thinks we are going to win a ring with Artest and good role players around him I think you need to look at championship teams over the past 20 years. Unless Artest elevates his game to elite status we are still going to need that superstar level player.
 
#29
kupman said:
This may win the award for the most circular conversation/thread ever. Good luck catching your tails.
So true. I considered joining in but I am not sure exactly where to begin... but I'll say this. A ring may make a player great, but there are a lot of those who are great without one.
 
#30
Man, i am so ridiculously sick of hearing all that BS about rings=greatness. There are Sooooo many other variables as to why or why not a certain player has won a ring or not.

-Supporting cast
-coach
-coach's system
-OTHER dominant TEAMS during that era.

Garnett, Barkley, Malone, Reggie were all GREAT players that were either robbed by overly dominant players/teams during their primes or their organization didn't put the necessary talent around them in order to succeed.Does that make them less of a player because of that? Hells no.


Trade Garnett for Duncan and you have the same exact scenario. One team racking up the championships and the other struggling to make the playoffs. One of the 2 has perhaps the best supporting cast in the league and the other has by far the worst.

Players don't f***ing win championships people, TEAMS do.
Some of you guys make it look like its a freaking individual award.
 
Last edited: