Good call; here's the modified list: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=Qzt4v Still very short.
After Oden went down this month, I saw somebody on here mention him having hip surgery or something as a kid, which is supposedly why one leg is 1/4" shorter than the other. The only source I can find for that on Google is some guy's blog. If such a thing was true, I'm sure we would have heard about it long before December 5th, 2009.
Good question. Leading the league in scoring usually means you are on a flawed team. Maybe Chamberlain when he won a title in Philly?
Didn't this happen when he was 12? He missed one game in his entire High School career before he broke his wrist at Ohio State. Not exactly a history of injuries.
MJ did . . . 1990-1 1991-2 1992-3 1995-6 1996-7 1997-8 Every year he won a ring, he led the league in scoring. Guess that kills the theory you can't win the scoring title & a championship.
Guys other than MJ (who did it 6 times) who have lead the league in scoring AND won a championship. Shaq 1999-00 Jabbar 1970-71 Mikan 1949-50 Mikan 1948-49 I think that's it, but I may have misses one or two.
So basically, unless you're Michael Freaking Jordan, you probably won't win an NBA title if you win the scoring title.
LBJ probably will, but that's pretty much it for the foreseeable future. I don't see Roy pulling a scoring title out of his ass in any of the four championships I still see us winning.
It is only possible - based on past history - IF the SuperStar scorer is paired with a dominant big man (which only brings you back full circle to the idea that to win you need a dominant big); OR the SuperStar scorer is also a great defender and the team defense is outstanding (which explains the Jordon era Bulls). Look at all the recent champions: They either were built around a dominant MVP caliber big alone (Hakeem, Duncan), the classic build around a dominant two-way big model, OR built around an MVP caliber dominant big and an MVP caliber SuperStar scorer (Shaq & Kobe, Shaq and Wade), the new school Stern-era Two Superstar model, OR built around MVP caliber SuperStar scorer paired with outstanding team defense (Jordan era Bulls), OR built around a collection of All-Star caliber players that either creates decent offense with outstanding defense (Detroit both times, Boston in 08), or creates outstanding offense with decent defense (80's eara Lakers and Boston teams). A player like Durant didn't exist on any of these teams. Durant needs to become more of a faciltator, point-forward type AND he needs to become a better rebounder AND he needs to become a much better defender. Only then, would he be one piece of a championship puzzle. Yet he would still need to be paired with an MVP caliber big or several all-star caliber players.
It's a very valid point. But what really stands out to me in your post is that you describe 5 different models over 25 years, with 3 dominant players (Shaq, Jordan, Duncan) in over half the championships. If there were just one or two models, and there were dozens of different stars conforming to those models, it'd be a more compelling case that Durant can't create a new model for winning a championship. As it is, you could just as easily make the case that the most dominant model in the NBA is that the very best player in the league tends to win championships. Period. Now, I'm not saying Durant will be that good. (My money is on LeBron for the foreseeable future.) But it's certainly possible.
To use injuries which happened after the pick on 1 player, and compare that tragedy to lack of skill or talent of other players, makes this list into pieces of several different lists and renders it completely useless. To say we shouldn't have drafted Oden is like saying NYC should have evacuated on 9/10/2001. Shows the author for the idiot he is.
Not necessarily. Good chance that Kobe does it this year. It certainly isn't a regular occurrence. I did notice that there were several players who won NBA Championships and finished 2nd or 3rd in scoring FWIW: Shaq 2001-2 (2nd Place) Shaq 2000-1 (3rd Place) Hakeem 1994-5 (2nd Place) Hakeem 1993-4 (3rd Place) Rick Barry 1974-5 (2nd Place) Bob Pettit 1957-8 (3rd Place) Paul Arizin 1955-6 (2nd Place) Neil Johnston 1955-6 (3rd Place) George Mikan 1952-3 (2nd Place) George Mikan 1951-2 (2nd Place)
It seems too early to call any player on their rookie contract a bad draft pick. Assessing after 5 years seems fair, but Oden's draft class is only 2.5 seasons into their careers.
No Period. The "very best" player tends to be defined by the best player on the championship team. It is backward looking. During any particular season it is often hard to pick out the absolute single best player for that year. There are candidates. During the Jordan era for example, Shaq, Malone, David Robinson and Hakeem put up some incredible season's. Look at their numbers. Amazing. But, Jordan won the rings so he is the "best". Additionaly, Boston recently, the Pistons, the last Spurs title team. None of those teams had the "best" player in the league. LeBron was the best player in the NBA last season. Did he win? I don't agree that having the #1 player in the league is the model to win a ring. You have to have: The #1 player (BUT, must be a two-way player) and a good cast of surrounding talent that plays great defense. Or Two of the top 5 players. Or Four or five All-Star caliber players that compliment each other. And you are right about LeBron. He, like Durant is a matchup nightmare and a great scorer. But, he always could rebound. And LeBron plays defense. Always has just a little, and really turned it up the last couple seasons.
