To copy or to innovate?
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, why
are some successful and others unsuccessful?
by rick olivares
When the San Antonio Spurs carted home their fifth
Larry O’Brien Trophy, they were universally celebrated for their unselfish team
play and how they were a “team” in the truest sense of the word. When they
finally triumphed, some celebrated them and took a shot at the vanquished Miami
Heat by saying that a super team is vastly superior to a Big Three.
In fairness to the Miami Heat, the Big Three may take
center stage but during their two-year title reign, they had a team to backstop
them. Wasn’t the acquisition of Ray Allen, Mike Miller, and Chris Andersen
supposed to be a tipping point in their quest to win and repeat?
Moving on from that, there remains a question to be
answered, “In order to win a NBA title, does one build a team like San Antonio
– acquire fundamentally sound players of good character; athletes who are
complete packages in terms of speed, size, and outside shooting?”
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery then
the NBA is guilty to a point of having copy cats. So why not?
Except that San Antonio was not built in a day and
certainly not in one NBA Draft. It took years of patience while adding the
pieces. For sure anyone trying to copy what the Spurs built through the draft,
free agent signings, bringing in European and role players will need some
patience, money, and a lot of luck (not necessarily in that order).
NBA history has shown us that when a team is
successful, opposing general managers and coaching staffs study the winners’
route to the top.
When Earvin Johnson won a title in his rookie year
with the Los Angeles Lakers, teams tried to emulate by looking for tall point
guards.
The Boston Celtics took in the 6’4” Dennis Johnson
who first made a name for himself as a slam dunking shooting guard for the
Seattle Supersonics and the Phoenix Suns. Once DJ got to Boston, he reinvented
his role into a point guard on offense and a defensive guard in the opposite
end.
The exciting and high scoring Denver Nuggets of the
mid-1980’s also used a tall court general in 6’3” Lafayette Lever.
Another “stratagem” that caught the fancy of a few
teams was when the Houston Rockets of 1986 reached the NBA Finals on account of
its Twin Towers of 7’4” Ralph Sampson and 6’11” Akeem Olajuwon.
A few squads looked to field their own fir trees.
The New York Knicks fielded Bill Cartwright and
Patrick Ewing to disastrous results but the Boston Celtics won a title with
Kevin McHale starting alongside Robert Parish in 1986 (McHale was previously
coming off the bench as the Sixth Man).
While Larry Bird is most commonly associated with the
point forward position, it gained a lot of traction in Milwaukee in the early 1980s
when Paul Pressey and Marques Johnson played that role.
That position was refined by Bird and a few years
later, by Scottie Pippen, then with the Chicago Bulls.
Speaking of the Bulls, after their successful run, a
few other teams tried to run the triangle offense. Tim Floyd, who replaced Phil
Jackson in Chicago tried to run it to unspectacular results. The Bulls went
49-190 and Floyd was sent packing.
Even Jackson’s disciples, Jim Cleamons with the
Dallas Mavericks, and Kurt Rambis with the Minnesota Timberwolves, were also
unsuccessful, and both were sent packing.
In this off-season, we see teams scrambling to
rebuild there teams. Houston has been enticing Carmelo Anthony and if they
prove to be successful, they will have their own Big Three in James Harden,
Dwight Howard, and Anthony.
Some are trying to build well-balanced lineups such
as Golden State.
So why are the copycats unable to succeed?
1. Some tandems click; some don’t. The Twin Towers combo
did not initially work until Tim Duncan joined David Robinson in San Antonio.
Imagine if the pairing took place when both players were coming up together and
are trying to make a name for themselves. In this case, Robinson was older and
he knew his days were close to done.
2. It takes the right circumstances for things to
happen. When Boston formed its second Big Three with Paul Pierce, Ray Allen,
Kevin Garnett, one of their biggest motivations was to prove they could be not
only winners but champions. They had previously failed a lot and they sure
sacrificed some to win a title in Beantown.
3. Others prove to be impatient. Imagine if Oklahoma
City was able to hold on to James Harden. That would have been their own Big
Three there.
4. Some systems such as the Triangle Offense take time
to and maturity of the players to learn. In Phil Jackson’s instance, it took
him a couple of years to get it to work with Chicago. Once he learned how to
install it better then it clicked right away when he went to the LA Lakers.
Critics of the triangle will say that the Zen Master has top players in those
two clubs. But look at it this way, did those teams – with those same players –
win anything before Jackson’s arrival? I think not.
But if you ask me, there’s no sure fire formula.
Teams win in many different ways. It’s all in the moment as a lot of factors
come together – a balance of heady vets and talented newbies, players
understanding their role in the scheme of things, a system they can call their
own, and a very good coach.
Hmm.
The be-medalled coach who can command respect? One in
the vein of a Phil Jackson, Greg Popovich or Pat Riley? Right now, there are
only two other coaches there who have won something and that’s Miami’s Erik
Spoelstra and Los Angeles’ Glenn Rivers. It is definitely not an easy part of
the puzzle to acquire.
But having a top-notch coach certainly is pointing
your team in the right direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment