Superstars cant win alone, so they need to join forces?

[bluefear]

owners, fans and players looking out for their own interests

no need to get aggrevated over it

i would like to spend more time with my good friends while getting paid millions if i could as well

[NY Knicka]

Dirk didn't have the average "roleplayers." Most of those "roleplayers" were all-stars before.

+1

[Game Show]

A team with 3 Hall of Famers is not a super team?

Obviously it would depend on what you classify as a "superstar" team. The meaning of "super team" has become something like "3 super stars teaming up through free agency to win a championship".

The Spurs also have 3 HOFer's, but I wouldn't really call them a "superstar team", you know?

I don't think many people consider Manu and Parker hall of fame material.

Manu is a lock due to international play

Parker is a maybe, his (undeserved) FMVP might get him in

Dirk didn't have the average "roleplayers." Most of those "roleplayers" were all-stars before.

But they aren't all-star material anymore

[WillyJakkz]

^ Yeppers.

I'm still trying to figure out what the "Super teams" have won?

Guys clicking up like this isn't a guarantee of a title, it's a guarantee of having a better shot maybe but not a title.

Celtics, Lakers, Bulls...........

I'm referring to the inference that the OP seems to be making that guys are clicking up (player created Super Teams) and out of the guys that clicked up they haven't won jack.

Last I checked the Mavs (who got Tyson Chandler gifted to them) won it all.

The Heat, a player created Super Team beat a GM created Super Team in large part to D Wade goin' UFC on Rajon Rondo and Ainge trading away Perk thinking Shaq would be healthy is what cost the C's another Finals run.

I think he's talking about the Heat and the soon to be Knicks.

[JunkYardSubs]

Dirk didn't have the average "roleplayers." Most of those "roleplayers" were all-stars before.

Who cares about the past? Jason Kidd at 39 isnt an all star.

[EscapoTHB]

You know why superstars these days do it? Because bitchy fans and **** media won't get off their back. If you don't have a ring by the time you are 25 or 26 your career is a failure and you are a choker/not a winner. Every superstar is put against an imaginary standard of Jordan, found wanting because they don't have the rings or some other reason--and castrated before the 24 hour sports media.

I mean it's ridiculous. KG was a better player in Minnesota. But there he was a loser who could never get it done in the playoffs. He goes to the Celtics and wins some titles--now he's a winner and will go down as an all-time great player.

You guys did the same thing to Lebron. Couldn't be happy enough with what he was doing in Cleveland. If he wasn't winning 72 games every year and stacking up the rings, he wasn't as good as Kobe or Michael.

Superstars these days aren't really allowed to learn hard lessons anymore. They pretty much have to put themselves in a position where they can start stacking rings, or their career is null and void by the age of 27.

So I'd say they're not the problem. We're the problem.

And at any rate, almost every team that has won a title did it with at least two hall of famers on their team. You can literally sit here and name the expections to that. Lakers, Celtics, Bulls--all of the dynasties had multiple hall of famers on their team. And for the Lakers they've had multiple times through their history where they've had at least two of top five players in the game on their side ala the Heat.

The talent level of these teams is not new, and if you knew your NBA history you'd know that.

The thing that has changed is that the players are the ones assembling the teams now, not the organizations.

Which is of course a direct effect of the NBA's max salary restrictions in the CBA which make it not really that much of a big deal financially for a star to take less money to sign somewhere else, because they make more off the court anyways.

The difference between what the Cavs could have offered Lebron to keep him, and what he Heat got him with, is a drop in the hat compared to how much more money he'll make if he wins a ring with the Heat. If the Cavs had put another star with Lebron like the Thunder did with Durant, I doubt Lebron would have left in the end. But his final year there was nothing on that team with a future.

[EscapoTHB]

Oh and before you applaud Dirk and the Mavs--don't forget they had one of the highest salaries in the entire game. If the Heat had spent as much money on their roster as Cuban had, the heat would have swept, all in blowouts. The Mavs had Dirk and just about every top role playing former star you can get--and they still only won because Lebron choked.

[Raps in 4]

^ Yeppers.

I'm still trying to figure out what the "Super teams" have won?

Guys clicking up like this isn't a guarantee of a title, it's a guarantee of having a better shot maybe but not a title.

It's not what they've won, but how they've thinned out the league's talent pool. The NBA (like any sport) is in short supply of superstars, and having them band together like this only magnifies the problem. The NBA is quickly becoming the basketball equivalent of a European soccer league.

[USA]

Dirk didn't have the average "roleplayers." Most of those "roleplayers" were all-stars before.

Who cares about the past? Jason Kidd at 39 isnt an all star.

He may not have the physical ability of an allstar anymore but he most definitely has the mental ability of an allstar and that is huge. Same goes for any past allstar players. They played at that level and know what it takes. That mental aspect is irreplaceable.

[picc]

Kidd did more for that Mavs team than a lot of 'actual' all-stars did for their teams in the playoffs. Make no mistake, the Mavs do not prove you don't need a plethora of talent to win a title in this league.

[EscapoTHB]

^ Yeppers.

I'm still trying to figure out what the "Super teams" have won?

Guys clicking up like this isn't a guarantee of a title, it's a guarantee of having a better shot maybe but not a title.

It's not what they've won, but how they've thinned out the league's talent pool. The NBA (like any sport) is in short supply of superstars, and having them band together like this only magnifies the problem. The NBA is quickly becoming the basketball equivalent of a European soccer league.

The sport has always been at it's most popular when the talent is consolodated in a few great teams rather then spread from team to team. It's because the length of the season, and because it's not as popular as other sports--so it's easier for the casual fan to follow the league and get excited about it when you have a bunch of truly marquee matchups.

When any of the Bulls, Heat, Knicks, Lakers, or Celtics play each other it is must see TV that everyone, even if they don't care about the NBA tunes into see. A knicks-heat, or Lakers-Heat/Knicks playoff series would probably smash all of the NBA's all-time ratings records.

[Pattycakes]

You know why superstars these days do it? Because bitchy fans and **** media won't get off their back. If you don't have a ring by the time you are 25 or 26 your career is a failure and you are a choker/not a winner. Every superstar is put against an imaginary standard of Jordan, found wanting because they don't have the rings or some other reason--and castrated before the 24 hour sports media.

I mean it's ridiculous. KG was a better player in Minnesota. But there he was a loser who could never get it done in the playoffs. He goes to the Celtics and wins some titles--now he's a winner and will go down as an all-time great player.

You guys did the same thing to Lebron. Couldn't be happy enough with what he was doing in Cleveland. If he wasn't winning 72 games every year and stacking up the rings, he wasn't as good as Kobe or Michael.

Superstars these days aren't really allowed to learn hard lessons anymore. They pretty much have to put themselves in a position where they can start stacking rings, or their career is null and void by the age of 27.

So I'd say they're not the problem. We're the problem.

And at any rate, almost every team that has won a title did it with at least two hall of famers on their team. You can literally sit here and name the expections to that. Lakers, Celtics, Bulls--all of the dynasties had multiple hall of famers on their team. And for the Lakers they've had multiple times through their history where they've had at least two of top five players in the game on their side ala the Heat.

The talent level of these teams is not new, and if you knew your NBA history you'd know that.

The thing that has changed is that the players are the ones assembling the teams now, not the organizations.

Which is of course a direct effect of the NBA's max salary restrictions in the CBA which make it not really that much of a big deal financially for a star to take less money to sign somewhere else, because they make more off the court anyways.

The difference between what the Cavs could have offered Lebron to keep him, and what he Heat got him with, is a drop in the hat compared to how much more money he'll make if he wins a ring with the Heat. If the Cavs had put another star with Lebron like the Thunder did with Durant, I doubt Lebron would have left in the end. But his final year there was nothing on that team with a future.

Good post

[Teen Girl Squad]

Meh. Personally I enjoy the "superstars willing to take less to win rings" ideology more-so than the old school approach of "I'll play for whoever puts the most 0s at the end of my checks" philosophy.

[EscapoTHB]

Those guys in the 90s got seriously paid. Remember when they didn't have the rookie scale and guys used to hold out for huge rookie contracts?

[BoutPractice]

Let's put this in perspective and look at some of the teams that won championships in the last decade or so.
The '04 Pistons. The 4 Spurs championship teams. The '11 Mavs.
How many of you think those teams wouldn't beat the current superteams? Mavs actually did beat one. Pistons beat the '04 equivalent. And I'm fairly certain that most if not all Spurs teams would embarrass the Heat or a Paul/Anthony/Stoudemire New York.

Teams win championships. Even if more superteams are formed, I'm confident the league will remain competitive thanks to the few smart GMs that always seem to play their cards right. The game of basketball is such that there is no strategy that can "guarantee" a championship.

[picc]

You know why superstars these days do it? Because bitchy fans and **** media won't get off their back. If you don't have a ring by the time you are 25 or 26 your career is a failure and you are a choker/not a winner. Every superstar is put against an imaginary standard of Jordan, found wanting because they don't have the rings or some other reason--and castrated before the 24 hour sports media.

I mean it's ridiculous. KG was a better player in Minnesota. But there he was a loser who could never get it done in the playoffs. He goes to the Celtics and wins some titles--now he's a winner and will go down as an all-time great player.

You guys did the same thing to Lebron. Couldn't be happy enough with what he was doing in Cleveland. If he wasn't winning 72 games every year and stacking up the rings, he wasn't as good as Kobe or Michael.

Superstars these days aren't really allowed to learn hard lessons anymore. They pretty much have to put themselves in a position where they can start stacking rings, or their career is null and void by the age of 27.

So I'd say they're not the problem. We're the problem.

And at any rate, almost every team that has won a title did it with at least two hall of famers on their team. You can literally sit here and name the expections to that. Lakers, Celtics, Bulls--all of the dynasties had multiple hall of famers on their team. And for the Lakers they've had multiple times through their history where they've had at least two of top five players in the game on their side ala the Heat.

The talent level of these teams is not new, and if you knew your NBA history you'd know that.

The thing that has changed is that the players are the ones assembling the teams now, not the organizations.

Which is of course a direct effect of the NBA's max salary restrictions in the CBA which make it not really that much of a big deal financially for a star to take less money to sign somewhere else, because they make more off the court anyways.

The difference between what the Cavs could have offered Lebron to keep him, and what he Heat got him with, is a drop in the hat compared to how much more money he'll make if he wins a ring with the Heat. If the Cavs had put another star with Lebron like the Thunder did with Durant, I doubt Lebron would have left in the end. But his final year there was nothing on that team with a future.

Good post

Very good. Especially his first point, something I don't think anyone has brought up but is very poignant. Lot of pressure to do what usually cannot be done. Team up and people call you a b-i-t-c-h, stay put and people call you a loser who didn't have what it took to win.

[picc]

Let's put this in perspective and look at some of the teams that won championships in the last decade or so.
The '04 Pistons. The 4 Spurs championship teams. The '11 Mavs.
How many of you think those teams wouldn't beat the current superteams? Mavs actually did beat one. Pistons beat the '04 equivalent. And I'm fairly certain that most if not all Spurs teams would embarrass the Heat or a Paul/Anthony/Stoudemire New York.

Teams win championships. Even if more superteams are formed, I'm confident the league will remain competitive thanks to the few smart GMs that always seem to play their cards right. The game of basketball is such that there is no strategy that can "guarantee" a championship.

3 of the Spurs teams had Tim Duncan in his prime plus two other allstars in their primes and good roleplayers. The 04 Pistons in todays league with a prime Ben Wallace, prime Sheed, prime Billups, prime Rip, and Tayshaun Prince would be stacked with talent, and Mavs were stacked top to bottom with deep talent, which is just as hard to do as getting 3 superstars.

Its VERY rare to win without a plethora of very good to great players.

[schematics]

^ Yeppers.

I'm still trying to figure out what the "Super teams" have won?

Guys clicking up like this isn't a guarantee of a title, it's a guarantee of having a better shot maybe but not a title.

Celtics, Lakers, Bulls...........

WOW @ Bulls! SMDH...

[Next Coming]

Let's say you're 25 and you're working at a small marketing firm in New Orleans, Cleveland and Orlando. You get payed fairly but work is stressing.

Now let's say a bigger, more affluent marketing firm in LA, Miami, New York want your services. You'll be taking a miniscule pay cut but work is more rewarding and you get all the perks of being a single guy living in Miami/New York/LA.

Of course you're taking option 2. Fact of the matter is management in Cleveland, Orlando and New Orleans didn't take advantage of 3 generational players youth. Why waste your 20's in a city you don't want to live in for management who won't help you succeed? WHY?

Kevin Durant is going to be a Thunder for a very long time because they built their team the right way. Got lucky a few times and capitilazed. It's not because he's a higher character guy or the anti-LeBron.

[JazzyPhinz]

Let's say you're 25 and you're working at a small marketing firm in New Orleans, Cleveland and Orlando. You get payed fairly but work is stressing.

Now let's say a bigger, more affluent marketing firm in LA, Miami, New York want your services. You'll be taking a miniscule pay cut but work is more rewarding and you get all the perks of being a single guy living in Miami/New York/LA.

Of course you're taking option 2. Fact of the matter is management in Cleveland, Orlando and New Orleans didn't take advantage of 3 generational players youth. Why waste your 20's in a city you don't want to live in for management who won't help you succeed? WHY?

Kevin Durant is going to be a Thunder for a very long time because they built their team the right way. Got lucky a few times and capitilazed. It's not because he's a higher character guy or the anti-LeBron.

You can make this argument if Durant signs as an UFA.

But the fact is, every star sticks around for the 1st contract since it is RFA.
Then after that contract it is almost a guarantee they will bolt to the large market.

Unless the Thunder are winning multiple championships when its time to resign, I'll put money on Durant leaving to a larger market as more likely than not.