Kerrsed wrote:This is seriously going to be the summer of Super Teams. With the cap going up to crazy heights, you already have teams with star players that now have the cash to grab another. Look at GS, who had a crazy good year with a team full of great players. This season they were over the cap with a $94M team.In the offseason they will be trimming some of the fat (losing some unused players to FA) and will be at $74M. If they really wanted to add Durant, and Durant really wanted to win, it could be done. Could you imagine a team with Curry/Thompson/Durant/Green/Bogut? Insane.
You have OKC who is only losing 3 players to FA (Not counting Durant). They have only $66M committed next season. That gives them close to $30M to spend on better players in the offseason, after which they can then re-sign Durant and exceed the cap.
Cavs are also in a very similar situation.
OKC is obviously well equipped to beat GS but blew the series. If they could get home court, that could be the difference. I don't think Durant is going anywhere, at least not yet. He may sign a 2 year deal with a player option in year 2, if for no other reason than so he can get a super max in 2 years.
Kerrsed wrote:My point is that this is the season to go big and swing for the fences. If teams dont, the rich will continue to get richer and i can see a NBA where the top 4-6 teams will dominate for years and years to come, while others just become/stay perennial losers.
Hasn't the league always been where 4-6 super teams dominate for years and years? It's actually more like 2-3 in the 80s, 2-3 in the 90s, 2 in the early 2000s, 2 in the late 2000s, and then around 2-4 in the 2010s.
Sure you can throw in others besides the ones I mentioned, like
In the 80s is was pretty much dominated by LA and Boston, though Philly and Houston were tough and at least went to the finals one year, and then the Bad Boy Pistons in the last year.
In the 90s you had the Bad Boy Pistons for one more year, then pretty much domination from the Bulls when Jordan was there and Houston when he was not, and the Spurs won it all in 99.
You could throw a bunch of other tough teams in the 90s such as the Knicks, Pacers, Suns, Blazers, Spurs, Jazz who had the STARS.
Early 2000s you had LA and SA alternating with Detroit for a year, with Sacramento and then Minnesota right there until the Suns broke through to compete with SA, and Dallas got better with Dirk and Detroit breaking through one year and being tough for a few.
In late 2000s LA and Boston once again with Cleveland being tough and Orlando getting to finals once, and of course the Suns with one last shot until we gradually tried to hang onto a playoff spot for 5 years, before finally realizing "wait, we are not really playoff caliber"
Then of course in the 2010s it's been Miami, SA, OKC, a dose of Dallas, and then the Warriors the last two years.
I know you already knew all this though, so I guess I'm just rambling.
The league has always been dominated by the teams with stars for a decade or so, while the rest bounced around between topping out at a 2nd round playoff spot or being in the lottery.
I really do wish there was less predictability in seasons overall. I mean most playoff series are pretty much just going through the motions...I think there is about 1 maybe 2 surprises a year in the playoffs.
But most of all, there are usually only about 1, maybe 2 surprises about which teams make the playoffs, even before the season starts.
