RealGM

Ever since the Heatles, we've seen multiple teams trying to emulate the three star super team lineups. Most recent attempt is the Suns. It's evident that is not working for the Sun's due to a lack of depth. It didn't work for the Nets due to ego and once again injuries. Many teams try and attempt this often, but it hasn't worked much. The typical downfall is an extreme lack of depth and injury issues. It worked with the Heatles because LeBron is LeBron, but that team still wasn't a great fit. The Warriors obviously worked due to the huge cap increase and cheap deals on the team. That was something that will never be replicated.

Is the 3 star superteam method overrated at this point? I'd rather have 2 stars and great roleplayers/depth to be honest.

It really depends on the 3. Nets had huge character flaws and injury issues but re roll the dice of history and they win it all in 2021. No way in hell the bucks hawks or suns beat them if even 2 of the guys were healthy.

The Suns messed up with Beal...he's a SG,like Booker,they need a PG(although) they try making Booker one

Beal hasn't been healthy this year, so I'm not sure that's the best example.

Yoshun wrote:Beal hasn't been healthy this year, so I'm not sure that's the best example.

These teams often have stars that are over 30. The injuries and lack of depth are definitely fair game for criticism in my opinion.

ScrantonBulls wrote:

Yoshun wrote:Beal hasn't been healthy this year, so I'm not sure that's the best example.

These teams often have stars that are over 30. The injuries and lack of depth are definitely fair game for criticism in my opinion.

That's a fair point. I thought about it after my post.

I think then the issue isn't necessarily having a "big 3," it's more about what big 3 you have.

Superteams work. It’s only injuries and acts of god (covid) that prevents them from winning it all.

Once the fading stars retire, hopefully we’ll be done with them.

Let's see. New CBA means it's only going to get harder, but who knows, it might just mean FOs need to get more creative.

Depends on the trio of stars. There were too many red flags about some of the trio

Nets- Irving (injury-prone and character issues), Harden (old, character, and some conditioning issues), Durant (old and injured prone)
Lakers - WB (old, bad fit and kind of washed)
Suns - Beal (injured and not an obvious fit), Durant ( (old and injured prone)

Besides, it's not hard getting role players in one or two years.

Miami (LeBron, Bosh, and Wade), the Bucks, and now the Celtics were successful.

In those types of setups, one of the stars has to become a glorified role player. Like Bosh did in Miami. Because not all 3 of them can have the ball all the time. One of them has to be ok with being the 3rd option and take a back seat. It's about knowing your place in the pecking order and being ok with that. Also the coach needs to have enough impact to not let the offense turn into "your turn my turn".

But I don't think the Suns "Big 3" would work anyway. Beal is basically Booker, but worse at everything. I also don't think he qualifies as a real star, he has 3 all-star nods (two of them half a decade ago) and mostly puts up stats on bad Wizards teams.

The Nets team didn't work because Kyrie and Harden aren't mature enough to handle it, and KD isn't a leader to keep things together.

It worked in GS because Klay, Steph and even Draymond accepted their spots and let KD be the best player.

It worked in Miami because LeBron, Wade and Bosh are all high-character mature players.

Every big three team has the same problem. Not enough depth, no breathing room for unexpected injuries and all three stars are giving up usage and touches to accommodate the other two stars.

I’d choose to build around two superstars + six high quality rotation players.

2020 Lakers
Lebron + AD

Rondo
Caruso
KCP
Kuzma
Green
Morris

Howard + McGee as the situational subs.

2023 Nuggets
Jokic + Murray

Gordon
MPJ
KCP
Brown
Braun
Green

Makes way more sense to build a team like that imo.

What's the definition of a star?

Super teams been around since the beginning of the league.

I don't understand why NBA fans like to believe that superteams or Big 3s started with the Heat.

And it's the model that works the most lol.

The answer is generally no. People forget the vast majority have failed.

It's very rare to get 3 stars with minimal overlap and the ability to compliment eachothers strengths/weaknesses.

It's also likely butchering your depth which plays a big role across the year.

Less coverage if one of the 3 is injured.

Hard to also find 3 that will have personalities that mesh.

The number 3 generally needs to take a big step back (see Bosh who did it well), which is often difficult for anyone to do.

There is this continual idea that 'superteams' that are top heavy are a problem in the NBA or are somehow unfair, and it's generally clear that Lebrons success has caused a lot of errr people who don't like him to get a warped view.

The reality was Lebron was that good (and Bosh fitting into his role) + finding solid role players/vets was the main reasons for their success. Not because it was a collusion of talent. There was too much overlap. Anyhow I digress.

The 3 star collection are far more likely to fail give Salary Cap + overlap being too much of a hurdle and 1-2 star + strong core formula has proven far more resilient.

But don't let that distract you from the "but superteam colussion crowd"

threethehardway wrote:Super teams been around since the beginning of the league.

I don't understand why NBA fans like to believe that superteams or Big 3s started with the Heat.

And it's the model that works the most lol.

Probably because it used to be that teams were primarily assembled by draft picks and built from within. That's not to say free agents didn't exist but it just was unheard of to go about it like now.

And the Heat had three of the best plays in the league, not to mention from each of their prior teams, and then put them together. Dunno.

Sent from my [Samsung Z4 Fold] using RealGM mobile app

3 stars where 2 can play off ball is a sure fire championship team. A lot of these recent failed three headed monster teams have 3 players that need the ball to be effective

Yoshun wrote:Beal hasn't been healthy this year, so I'm not sure that's the best example.

When has Beal been healthy though? The past 4 seasons before this year, he has played 57, 60, 40, 50 and now 6 games so far. Suns are just expecting different results from a player who has proven to be injury prone. This is who Bradley Beal is. The Suns formed up their own Big 3 and gutted the team knowing this has a high chance of happening and you no longer have the assets and flexibility to build a better team around them. They're just poorly constructed.

in an incubated circumstance yes,,,,,as long as they don't all do the same thing
but no such thing has any real chance. there's still a certain amount of equity that has to be spread across the board

but also add the environment of the game. as this is a parity year, one would think that 3 stars can do it. but beal never won sh**, booker never became sh** even with a pretty good team in phx, and kd never did until gsw

in a parity year you may not have the likes of a kd or curry or lillard but teams have several lesser players to make up for it. and you DO need defense cuz bad defense makes everyone on the other team better

I never thought it was effective. The 3rd player always has to take a step back and his abilities and impact are reduced.

Yes they may come in handy if 1 or both of the other stars are having a bad game. However, bad games are quite contagious.

I always look at it as it’s better to get 2 consistent role players instead of a 3rd star.

Not unless they have LeBron..