Middle Child wrote:Lakers should use the remaining cap space to field depth.
They should look at what happened to GS when KD then Klay went down.
Being top heavy isn’t a good thing.
Raptors had depth, weren’t special players at all but they had enough depth.
Disagree in the respect that if you can have superstars AND depth, that's the best case scenario, but if you're trying to win a championship, superstars are gonna get you there, not depth. You're talking about a team that won championships with two superstars from 00-02. They had more depth in 09 and 10, but it was largely Kobe and Pau. You need the superstars FIRST. There have been teams like the Bad Boy Pistons who were deep and had Isiah (a superstar) and Dumars (a 2nd tier star) and they won twice, but Dumars was a great player in those years and won FMVP in 89. Hakeem had depth, but he was the best player in the world those years with Jordan playing baseball. I saw Hakeem and he elim'd the Lakers in 96 while making Vlade look hapless. He was serious as a heart attack good. Back to the point, it's the BIG NAMES that are most important. The Kawhi Leonards.
2000 Two Deep vs Too Deep (LA Times
' headline on morning of Gm1 of the Conf Finals vs Porty). Lakers won agonizingly close, but they won. Ironically, their supporting cast WAS very important, but they were viewed as nothings compared to their cohorts from Portland. At some point, the law of diminishing returns takes effect when you got 20 forwards who are all about as good as each other.