RealGM

How great are these playoffs? There are no overwhelming favorites, and it feels like anyone can win. A 7 and 8 seed made the conference finals. The NBA is just so much better this way.

Super Teams ruin this and there is usually no question who is going to make the finals unless there is an injury.

The last 2 years playoffs have been excellent. I know it's inevitable that it will happen again but this is great while it lasts. It also feels like the NBA is getting more talented overall so maybe it's more difficult to build a superteam than before. We've had a lot of star players enter the league in the last 5-7 years.

Prior to KD leaving the Warriors, we had superteams for like 10 straight years (Heat, Warriors, Celtics), and pretty much knew who would be in the finals every year so the semi's and conference finals were mostly boring.

I just don't remember a time where it was THIS unknown going into the playoffs, even in round 1.

This is why everyone hated KD's GS decision so so so much imagine the rivalries between GS-OKC and GS-Cle if KD didn't go to GS.

Give me this over 2017 every time.

In the Semis I felt like every team could win the title (minus Knicks, sorry Knicks fans).

nbafan38 wrote:This is why everyone hated KD's GS decision so so so much imagine the rivalries between GS-OKC and GS-Cle if KD didn't go to GS.

It would still be **** because the East would still be garbage outside of Cleveland.

I hate the stupid asterisk* title placed on championships because of injury. Injuries happen every season, based on luck, and unavoidable.

But I truly believe superteam rings with that were made with implicit collusion should come with an asterisk. Forming a superteam is a guaranteed way to contend and no superteam has failed to win a ring outside of injury

It's been fantastic, especially after the Bucks got eliminated. They were the closest thing to a consensus finals pick but even they had a ton of questions.

Golden State was a very unique situation with the perfect cap spike and KD being the perfect fit. We have seen teams going away from the "big 3" concept because it's just too hard to build around those guys. Nets failed pretty spectacularly so i think it's going to be a while before teams mortgage their future for 3 stars.

Yank3525 wrote:

nbafan38 wrote:This is why everyone hated KD's GS decision so so so much imagine the rivalries between GS-OKC and GS-Cle if KD didn't go to GS.

It would still be **** because the East would still be garbage outside of Cleveland.

It's incredible how bad the East was for like 2 decades.

Jadoogar wrote:It's been fantastic, especially after the Bucks got eliminated. They were the closest thing to a consensus finals pick but even they had a ton of questions.

Golden State was a very unique situation with the perfect cap spike and KD being the perfect fit. We have seen teams going away from the "big 3" concept because it's just too hard to build around those guys. Nets failed pretty spectacularly so i think it's going to be a while before teams mortgage their future for 3 stars.

True super teams constructed with players in their primes that have stayed healthy haven't failed. It is a successful method if done properly.

Lebrons heat
Curry-KD warriors

The super teams that have failed have generally been teams that either suffered major injuries in the playoffs (Nets) or teams that weren't true super teams because some of the players were well past their primes and shells of themselves (2004 lakers, 2012 lakers, 2014 nets).

nbafan38 wrote:

Jadoogar wrote:It's been fantastic, especially after the Bucks got eliminated. They were the closest thing to a consensus finals pick but even they had a ton of questions.

Golden State was a very unique situation with the perfect cap spike and KD being the perfect fit. We have seen teams going away from the "big 3" concept because it's just too hard to build around those guys. Nets failed pretty spectacularly so i think it's going to be a while before teams mortgage their future for 3 stars.

True super teams constructed with players in their primes that have stayed healthy haven't failed. It is a successful method if done properly.

Lebrons heat
Curry-KD warriors

The super teams that have failed have generally been teams that either suffered major injuries in the playoffs (Nets) or teams that weren't true super teams because some of the players were well past their primes and shells of themselves (2004 lakers, 2012 lakers, 2014 nets).

i think those kinds of super teams are just more susceptible to injuries because they are naturally more shallow and less adept to handle injuries.

This is much more entertaining to me. The finals might be a bit less, but the run up the finals is massively better.

Much more entertaining! Every team entering the playoffs has a legitimate shot at winning the Championship! Rounds 1 through 3 are way more exciting! Teams are so close in terms of talent, it’s all based on how teams match up against each other, coaching adjustments, strategies, role players catching fire, momentum shifts etc. that’s the difference. Much better entertainment, than just sitting there bored waiting for the finals.

You mean you didn't enjoy seeing Golden State vs Cleveland in the finals 4 years in a row????

Yank3525 wrote:

nbafan38 wrote:This is why everyone hated KD's GS decision so so so much imagine the rivalries between GS-OKC and GS-Cle if KD didn't go to GS.

It would still be **** because the East would still be garbage outside of Cleveland.

No one wants to hate on lebron for that though ... smh

nbafan38 wrote:This is why everyone hated KD's GS decision so so so much imagine the rivalries between GS-OKC and GS-Cle if KD didn't go to GS.

That's exactly why I despised KD. He took the fun out of basketball. The worst thing about it was because Lebron is such a polarizing figure you had people who were happy Durant formed the super team simply because it ensured Lebron would not win another title. I'm not a fan of either Lebron or KD but this was the main argument on here when people would bring up how KD ruined competition it was well Lebron did it too and you should accept it. '15-'20 is my least favorite era of the NBA and I have been watching the league since '92.

Onus wrote:

Yank3525 wrote:

nbafan38 wrote:This is why everyone hated KD's GS decision so so so much imagine the rivalries between GS-OKC and GS-Cle if KD didn't go to GS.

It would still be **** because the East would still be garbage outside of Cleveland.

No one wants to hate on lebron for that though ... smh

It isn't about hating Bron, it is more like there were deeper issues then KD just going to GS. Yeah, him staying in OKC would have helped the west. But it does nothing for the east with only one serious contender.

Onus wrote:

Yank3525 wrote:

nbafan38 wrote:This is why everyone hated KD's GS decision so so so much imagine the rivalries between GS-OKC and GS-Cle if KD didn't go to GS.

It would still be **** because the East would still be garbage outside of Cleveland.

No one wants to hate on lebron for that though ... smh

LOL Sure.

I like it better but you have to look at it as a business:

A) Parity is better for existing fans.

B) Teams that peak and make noise around the world are better for bringing in brand new fans and growing the overall size of the NBA. That's why superteams are marketed heavily. It's why the rules are tweaked to generate offense. It's why individual impact is way overhyped in the NBA vs any other sport on earth (except the NFL). It's also easier and cheaper to market when you focus on franchise players rather than convincing a fan about the complexities of a team.

Bringing in 1 new fan is worth way more than making 1 existing fan a little happier. I think the NBA realizes it went too far as it always does, but they always let the pendulum swing back.

Fadeaway_Jumper wrote:I hate the stupid asterisk* title placed on championships because of injury. Injuries happen every season, based on luck, and unavoidable.

But I truly believe superteam rings with that were made with implicit collusion should come with an asterisk. Forming a superteam is a guaranteed way to contend and no superteam has failed to win a ring outside of injury

So, if a player is lucky enough to get drafted into a fortunate situation where they have great players and are a super team, that counts. But if they go to the super team via trade/FA, that doesn’t count?

Why does the player that was drafted into the situation get more credit for his championships? He still has the same exact benefit of being on a super team.

You either count all super team championships, or you discount all super team championships. How they were put together doesn’t determine how easy or not it was to win that title.

Sane wrote:I like it better but you have to look at it as a business:

A) Parity is better for existing fans.

B) Teams that peak and make noise around the world are better for bringing in brand new fans and growing the overall size of the NBA. That's why superteams are marketed heavily. It's why the rules are tweaked to generate offense. It's why individual impact is way overhyped in the NBA vs any other sport on earth (except the NFL). It's also easier and cheaper to market when you focus on franchise players rather than convincing a fan about the complexities of a team.

Bringing in 1 new fan is worth way more than making 1 existing fan a little happier. I think the NBA realizes it went too far as it always does, but they always let the pendulum swing back.

How many new fans could the NBA generate if teams like the Pelicans, Hornets, Kings, Magic started having runs as legit title contenders though? Those markets could generate plenty of new fans if their teams gave them something to really jump on…

Lakers are super team, they have two superstars playing together.