Hollinger: Is the NBA in the middle of a new age of parity? Or is it about to exit one?

[Basketball_Jones]

I’d say if the Celtics take it this year they could be the first reigning team in a long time. But I don’t know about everyone’s contract situation (White, Kristap) and Jrue is old now (though still good). The fun part is that the West is so stacked that they’ll always have a good test in the finals. Weak finals is what’s been hurting the nba for a while imo.

[PushDaRock]

Parity is just another way of saying there aren't as many clear superstars while we have allowed 3 point shooting to give us the impression that we have many stars. Personally, I find the league today seriously lacks superstars outside of Jokic, Doncic and Giannis. The next part of this list are all aging stars.

Jokic has dealt with some injuries to his team (this year notwithstanding )and Doncic really hasn't had a great supporting cast, but those are your only true new superstars who aren't from the previous era. Of course you can throw Giannis in there too and again they have dealt with injuries.

What about SGA and Ant? Or are you just listing superstars who have won, or are about to win?

I would not classify either as a legit superstar right now (there's no longevity there), though i do think Shai is closer than ANT who has been getting more hype.

To me a superstar is someone who will make the other team legitimately cower in fear. I think teams could tell ANT was inconsistent and Shai's midrange game could be overcome. Shai is more like Steph where you need a really good team around you that does everything well. Guys like Jokic, Luka and Giannis overwhelm you and can carry you on their own. Those to me are legit superstars.

I mean by that definition, pretty much nobody under 6"7 can be a Superstar.

[StopitLeo]

So if you actually look at this closely, the era really only changed a year ago.

2019 - Golden State still makes the finals.
2020 - Lakers with Lebron win (Curry and Klay miss entire season)
2021 - Lebron injured for significant time and Klay misses entire season. This opens it up for new teams like Phoenix and Milwaukee to fill the void.
2022 - Warriors healthy and win again.

I'd say the new era really started last year as the Curry-Lebron era finally appears to have ended.

I think it will now be the Luka-Jokic era (kind of like when you had the Lakers and Spurs in the early 2000s battling it out) in a stacked West.

I agree.

There's no parity now so much as a lack of utter dominance like we saw with the Warriors and whatever team LeBron was on.

You just have to follow MVP voting to see who the true contenders are. As you said, we have Luke and Jokic in the West, with SGA right there as well and I'd predict Wemby sooner rather than later. In the East it's probably Giannis, Embiid, and Tatum—maybe Edwards joins that group if he can maintain his level of play.

[JB7]

What about SGA and Ant? Or are you just listing superstars who have won, or are about to win?

I would not classify either as a legit superstar right now (there's no longevity there), though i do think Shai is closer than ANT who has been getting more hype.

To me a superstar is someone who will make the other team legitimately cower in fear. I think teams could tell ANT was inconsistent and Shai's midrange game could be overcome. Shai is more like Steph where you need a really good team around you that does everything well. Guys like Jokic, Luka and Giannis overwhelm you and can carry you on their own. Those to me are legit superstars.

I mean by that definition, pretty much nobody under 6"7 can be a Superstar.

I think the most dominant superstars are usually the guys that are in the 6'6 to 6'9 range. Usually wings, who can both handle the ball, and guard almost anyone on the court. Think Jordan and LeBron.

The limit on the dominance of players like Jokic and Giannis, is both still rely heavily on another teammate for offense. And in Luka's case, I just don't think he is athletic enough to be as dominant as Jordan or LeBron, because he'll never be able to defend like they could.

Could ANT or SGA become this dominant? TBD

[Drakeem]

What about SGA and Ant? Or are you just listing superstars who have won, or are about to win?

I would not classify either as a legit superstar right now (there's no longevity there), though i do think Shai is closer than ANT who has been getting more hype.

To me a superstar is someone who will make the other team legitimately cower in fear. I think teams could tell ANT was inconsistent and Shai's midrange game could be overcome. Shai is more like Steph where you need a really good team around you that does everything well. Guys like Jokic, Luka and Giannis overwhelm you and can carry you on their own. Those to me are legit superstars.

I mean by that definition, pretty much nobody under 6"7 can be a Superstar.

I mean, I think historically that proves true to some extent. Not saying that you CANT be shorter and a superstar, but lets take a look at some of the all time lists. If we look at a somewhat typical top 10-20 list OAT:

Jordan
Bron
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Russell
Wilt
Kobe
Duncan
Shaq
Curry
Hakeem
Oscar Robinson
Garnett
Dirk
Durant
Barkley

etc, etc. Now, out of that list, how many of them would be under 6'7? And out of that batch, how many of them hover around that 6 foot PG mark? Height matters and will always matter in basketball. Just gives you too much of an advantage.

[KrazyP]

This right here is the biggest takeaway for people trying to act like there is parity in the league. People like to use the heat as an example, but don't realize they are a massive outlier.

You do not have a legitimate chance to win anything, unless you are a high seeded team. You don't become a high seeded team, unless you are good. You do not become good, without elite talent.

This is why I am not a fan of the whole "team compete" mantra, top talent always wins out. The Mavs are even an outlier of an outlier. They were a "lower" seed, being 5th in the west, yet they also had the 6th best record in the league. That is not a fringy lower seed, that is a stacked west coast. And that still doesn't take into account Kyrie being out for a huge stretch of the season.

Before he was back for good, the Mavs were 26-23, which puts them on pace for a 42-38 season. With him back in the lineup, they went 24-7, which was on pace for a 63-19 season. The Mavs doesn't even qualify to be one of the poster children of the outliers, really only the Heat do.

The teams that lose in the playoffs are either young teams with elite talent (OKC), or teams that had less elite talent than their opponents (DEN). You flat out, do not win without top shelf talent. Parity is a mirage.

Yes the general rule is elite talent wins out in the NBA. Sometimes elite defense is able to overcome (Pistons championships).

I think the reason for the parity amongst champions recently though is a combination of: there is not one player that dominates above all elite talent; and with the current and upcoming CBA, building around those elite players has become much more difficult.

Yeah, I think it's a lot to do with what TheGeneral was saying, the parity is there cause the elite players are spread around a bit more. But it's still not "real" parity. The same top teams will continue to be the real threats, but now it's maybe 3-4 teams instead of 1-2.

I'd argue the supermax combined with the current tax aprons may get in the way of the ability of current top teams to sustain their success over multiple years the way the Warriors did or where ever Lebron decided to setup shop during his prime. Talent is and will continue to be more spread around.

Middle of the pack teams are encouraged now more than ever to make bold moves when competing for talent instead of just sitting back and watching show. I'd also ad that players are also more empowered now. Nobody is signing for a discount in a world where VanVleet and OGs are asking for and getting borderline max contracts so even if you have an MVP talent, getting and keeping the right mix of talent around them is no easy task.

[Scase]

Yes the general rule is elite talent wins out in the NBA. Sometimes elite defense is able to overcome (Pistons championships).

I think the reason for the parity amongst champions recently though is a combination of: there is not one player that dominates above all elite talent; and with the current and upcoming CBA, building around those elite players has become much more difficult.

Yeah, I think it's a lot to do with what TheGeneral was saying, the parity is there cause the elite players are spread around a bit more. But it's still not "real" parity. The same top teams will continue to be the real threats, but now it's maybe 3-4 teams instead of 1-2.

I'd argue the supermax combined with the current tax aprons may get in the way of the ability of current top teams to sustain their success over multiple years the way the Warriors did or where ever Lebron decided to setup shop during his prime. Talent is and will continue to be more spread around.

Middle of the pack teams are encouraged now more than ever to make bold moves when competing for talent instead of just sitting back and watching show. I'd also ad that players are also more empowered now. Nobody is signing for a discount in a world where VanVleet and OGs are asking for and getting borderline max contracts so even if you have an MVP talent, getting and keeping the right mix of talent around them is no easy task.

For sure, but the problem remains is getting that MVP player in the first place. So as much parity as there may seem to be, it is still a have/have not system. Middle of the pack teams will have 2 realistic ways out. Tanking and getting said MVP level prospect, or trading for them. And the latter, oddly seems to be a much harder thing to pull off.

Middle of the road teams will now just appear to be a by product of said parity, they will be making the 4/5/6 slots in their conference, but with no real chance of actually winning anything. Much like the Pacers this year, they made it as far as they did due to injuries and then as soon as they came across a team with an MVP level player, just decimated.

The situation is no longer going into the start of season knowing who exactly will be in the finals, but rather picking from 4 teams who will be. Front runners are still front runners, no level of parity is going to change a roster not having a top level player.

[YogurtProducer]

Yeah, I think it's a lot to do with what TheGeneral was saying, the parity is there cause the elite players are spread around a bit more. But it's still not "real" parity. The same top teams will continue to be the real threats, but now it's maybe 3-4 teams instead of 1-2.

I'd argue the supermax combined with the current tax aprons may get in the way of the ability of current top teams to sustain their success over multiple years the way the Warriors did or where ever Lebron decided to setup shop during his prime. Talent is and will continue to be more spread around.

Middle of the pack teams are encouraged now more than ever to make bold moves when competing for talent instead of just sitting back and watching show. I'd also ad that players are also more empowered now. Nobody is signing for a discount in a world where VanVleet and OGs are asking for and getting borderline max contracts so even if you have an MVP talent, getting and keeping the right mix of talent around them is no easy task.

For sure, but the problem remains is getting that MVP player in the first place. So as much parity as there may seem to be, it is still a have/have not system. Middle of the pack teams will have 2 realistic ways out. Tanking and getting said MVP level prospect, or trading for them. And the latter, oddly seems to be a much harder thing to pull off.

Middle of the road teams will now just appear to be a by product of said parity, they will be making the 4/5/6 slots in their conference, but with no real chance of actually winning anything. Much like the Pacers this year, they made it as far as they did due to injuries and then as soon as they came across a team with an MVP level player, just decimated.

The situation is no longer going into the start of season knowing who exactly will be in the finals, but rather picking from 4 teams who will be. Front runners are still front runners, no level of parity is going to change a roster not having a top level player.

We are not even into the new CBA yet, I think it is a little early to be speaking with such absolutes.

If the NBA and NBAPA ever increase the max contract % we would start to see some non-mvp stars making more noise

[KrazyP]

Yeah, I think it's a lot to do with what TheGeneral was saying, the parity is there cause the elite players are spread around a bit more. But it's still not "real" parity. The same top teams will continue to be the real threats, but now it's maybe 3-4 teams instead of 1-2.

I'd argue the supermax combined with the current tax aprons may get in the way of the ability of current top teams to sustain their success over multiple years the way the Warriors did or where ever Lebron decided to setup shop during his prime. Talent is and will continue to be more spread around.

Middle of the pack teams are encouraged now more than ever to make bold moves when competing for talent instead of just sitting back and watching show. I'd also ad that players are also more empowered now. Nobody is signing for a discount in a world where VanVleet and OGs are asking for and getting borderline max contracts so even if you have an MVP talent, getting and keeping the right mix of talent around them is no easy task.

For sure, but the problem remains is getting that MVP player in the first place. So as much parity as there may seem to be, it is still a have/have not system. Middle of the pack teams will have 2 realistic ways out. Tanking and getting said MVP level prospect, or trading for them. And the latter, oddly seems to be a much harder thing to pull off.

Middle of the road teams will now just appear to be a by product of said parity, they will be making the 4/5/6 slots in their conference, but with no real chance of actually winning anything. Much like the Pacers this year, they made it as far as they did due to injuries and then as soon as they came across a team with an MVP level player, just decimated.

The situation is no longer going into the start of season knowing who exactly will be in the finals, but rather picking from 4 teams who will be. Front runners are still front runners, no level of parity is going to change a roster not having a top level player.

I dont agree that the pool of potential finals teams is limited to 4 and you can easily predict who they will be when the season starts.

Nobody predicted the Wolves would be as good as they were this year. Nobody thought the Mavs would be this good post tradeline just by making some minor tweaks to their roster. How many people thought the Knicks would easily take out the 76ers and their MVP-Embiid heading into the season? I'd bet a healthy Knicks team could lay a great playoff beat down on a lot of teams despite the lack of a real "MVP." The field is wide open.

[Pointgod]

It’s obvious the era of the super teams are dead and the big 3 model is irrelevant now. Not sure if this is true parity because the Celtics could very well end up in the next two finals or Denver could make the finals next year, but the thing is that injuries and NBA coaching is sophisticated that you just can’t out talent teams in the playoffs anymore.

However within the top of the league, I think the same teams will have a 2-3 year run before the new CBA kills them.

[Vampirate]

The Spurs might be the next dynasty depending on how Wemby develops and how they build around him.

In order for it to happen you need a very very young surefire generational player, which Wemby is.

[agkagk]

Were in an age of mediocrity induced parity.

Like theres only 3 - 5 real teams.

Htg, in a 7 game final, i feel like gstate and the lakers are two of the best teams in the league.


I honestly cant name 7 or 8 teams that can execute in the half court with any kind of precision and mastery let alone competency


Den, bos, nyk, lak, lac, gstate….not confident in naming any other team.


Edit: random theory. We reached the saturation point for the current salary cap and the teams got stretched too thin…just throwing it out there!