LA Dynasty

["hironaka@xxxxxxxxx"<hironaka@xxxxxxxxx>]

A Toronto paper says Lakers have a long way to go be like 
the Celtics. You don't have to tell us that! 

Go Celts 2002-03!


http://www.canoe.ca/TorontoSports/ts.ts-10-29-0134.html
Tuesday, October 29, 2002 
L.A. dynasty has long way to go to match Celtics
By BILL HARRIS, TORONTO SUN

The Boston Celtics won eight NBA titles in a row without 
ever having the best player in the league. 

Think about it. 

When the Celtics were winning all those championships 
from 1959 to 1966, the dominant player in basketball -- 
the Michael Jordan or Shaquille O'Neal of his era -- was 
7-foot-1 centre Wilt Chamberlain. 

The last time we checked, Chamberlain never wore Celtics 
green. 

Numerically, there's no doubt the Celtics dynasty is the 
greatest in NBA history. But when you consider the 
Chamberlain factor as well, it's apparent the Celtics are 
due even more credit for getting the job done with a 
combination of hoops savvy and team play. 

Bill Russell provided the leadership and Red Auerbach 
manipulated the Xs and Os. The rest was history. 

On only four other occasions has a team won as many as 
three titles in a row: The Minneapolis Lakers from 1952-
54; the Chicago Bulls from 1991-93, and again from 1996-
98; and the Los Angeles Lakers from 2000-02. If the 
Lakers can win again this season, from a mathematical 
perspective they will have established the second-
greatest dynasty in NBA history. 

Interestingly, each NBA dynasty, save the Celtics, 
boasted the best player of its era. 

Minneapolis had George Mikan, the only effective "big 
man" of the late 1940s and early '50s, even though at 6-
foot-10 he probably would be a power forward in today's 
game. 

Chicago had Jordan, of course. 

And the current Lakers have Shaq, who just now is 
beginning to be appreciated for his unique skills, after 
a decade of reviews that were slow to give the 7-foot-1, 
315-pounder his due. 

O'Neal's detractors claim he has no physical rival, as if 
that somehow is his fault. 

Probably the same things were said about Mikan. But 
again, why should someone have to apologize for being the 
biggest and the strongest player in the league? 

Jordan wasn't exactly huge by pro basketball standards -- 
6-foot-6 -- but he heard many of the same arguments 
during his heyday. Jordan had no nemesis, the critics 
contended, whereas Larry Bird and Magic Johnson had to 
lock horns through the 1980s. 

But when you have no nemesis, all it means is you stand 
heads-and-tails above anyone else at that particular 
moment. There's no law against that. 

Jordan's supporters say there might not be a gap between 
the Bulls' two three-peats had Jordan not left for 1 1/2 
years to play baseball. 

But the fact is, Jordan did leave -- as much to recharge 
his batteries as to pursue his dreams of playing 
baseball. 

Yes, the Bulls might have won championships in 1994 and 
1995, too, had Jordan played. But who knows how burned 
out Jordan would have been after that? Perhaps he would 
have left for a few years beginning in 1996 or '97, thus 
wiping out the Bulls' second title run. 

That's why it will be so impressive if O'Neal and the 
Lakers can hold it together, both physically and 
mentally, long enough to win a fourth championship in a 
row. 

Already there are some negative signs, with O'Neal, 30, 
set to begin the season on the injured list because of 
his increasingly problematic right big toe. Plus, quality 
teams such as the Sacramento Kings, San Antonio Spurs and 
Dallas Mavericks have been stockpiling talent and are 
circling L.A. like vultures, waiting for any slight sign 
of weakness. 

True, unless the Lakers get to eight titles, it'll be 
tough to put them in the same class as the Celtics. But 
getting to four titles in the modern-day NBA -- with its 
free agency, salary cap and increased player movement -- 
nonetheless would be an achievement worthy of the utmost 
respect. 

***
-------------------
L'e-mail gratuit pas comme les autres.
NOMADE.FR, pourquoi chercher ailleurs ?