Superteams and parity

[StrengthAndHonor]

Reddick nailed it...

753635936194486274

[Silver&Black]

See you're having problems with that tweet.....

753635668547530752


tbh...

[HarlemHeat37]

The majority of sports fans and sports media are idiots, tbh..they have short memories, too..

The part I find most laughable is how the media and fans began judging players with a larger emphasis on ring count in the 2000s, yet they get angry and mock players that form "super teams" to increase their number of championships:lol..they created this trend..

If players were judged and ranked appropriately, without having the "need to win or he's a career loser" pressure, you would have far more players staying in their respective situations..

[313]

Most of the competitive balance complaints have been in the east and rightfully so tbh Before this KD to Dubs fiasco, the west haven't had all the talent in the respective conference come together on one team LeBron heat, 16 dubs, etc

[StrengthAndHonor]

See you're having problems with that tweet.....

753635668547530752


tbh...

Yes, that's the tweet. Thanks.

[JoeTait75]

There hasn't been any real parity in the NBA since the late 1970s. The '80s Lakers and Celtics were "superteams" that came about through different means than the "superteams" of today, but the end results were pretty much the same.

[midnightpulp]

I was pissed when Boston did it, as well. The Spurs are always on the receiving end of this superteam bullshit coming off a title ('04 Lakers, '08 Celtics).

Harlem makes a good point, but the main issue this exposes about the NBA, and basketball in general, is just how easy team building is. Simple formula: Get star, get success.

And :lol people wanting to shorten the season, which will make team building even a bigger joke than it is.

[Thread]

The majority of sports fans and sports media are idiots, tbh..they have short memories, too..

The part I find most laughable is how the media and fans began judging players with a larger emphasis on ring count in the 2000s, yet they get angry and mock players that form "super teams" to increase their number of championships:lol..they created this trend..

If players were judged and ranked appropriately, without having the "need to win or he's a career loser" pressure, you would have far more players staying in their respective situations..

No. "ring count" started in the early '80's as Bird & Johnson came into the NBA after dueling bitterly in college. Before that "ring count" consisted of the Celtics counting theirs boundlessly, the Lakers acting the fool as their permanent punching bag. Magic Johnson changed all that. The Celtics/Media recognized the threat immediately and tried to get it stopped, but, could not. Stern in New York bought it, whole, saw the % and broke the stranglehold that Boston had on the NBA. The seminal moment arrived in the '85 Finals when Strom fouled McHale out, in Boston, 4th quarter. That was it. The NBA would never be the same again.

Stern

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I was pissed when Boston did it, as well. The Spurs are always on the receiving end of this superteam bullshit coming off a title ('04 Lakers, '08 Celtics).

Harlem makes a good point, but the main issue this exposes about the NBA, and basketball in general, is just how easy team building is. Simple formula: Get star, get success.

And :lol people wanting to shorten the season, which will make team building even a bigger joke than it is.

And yet Curry lost.

[midnightpulp]

And yet Curry lost.

They weren't a superteam. Built on the draft. The Cavs were actually more of a superteam construction-wise.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They weren't a superteam. Built on the draft. The Cavs were actually more of a superteam construction-wise.

You read like marketing hype.

[midnightpulp]

You read like marketing hype.

The Warriors never drafted higher than 5.

[Clipper Nation]

They weren't a superteam. Built on the draft. The Cavs were actually more of a superteam construction-wise.
The Warriors were totally a superteam. The Cavs were built more like the average early 2000s team: one superstar (LeBron) and a bunch of D-League scrubs.

[ambchang]

Warriors weren't even supposed to be a contender until Kerr replaced Jackson.

With Durant they are a super team, but the way they were built up to that point was just traditional building a team.

[siraulo23]

the media downplaying durant to gsw is a joke, a complete and utter joke

this move is nothing like any other, this is an mvp/franchise player in his prime leaving his team, a contender in OKC (whos got as good a shot as any team to win the championship next year) to join a historically great team in the warriors whos been in the finals the past 2 seasons and could EASILY have won back to back. Oh and btw curry, thompson and green are also in their prime

if they lose next year, they would be one of the biggest failures in NBA history. If they win, who gives AF, they're supposed to win

[Thread]

the media downplaying durant to gsw is a joke, a complete and utter joke

this move is nothing like any other, this is an mvp/franchise player in his prime leaving his team, a contender in OKC (whos got as good a shot as any team to win the championship next year) to join a historically great team in the warriors whos been in the finals the past 2 seasons and could EASILY have won back to back. Oh and btw curry, thompson and green are also in their prime

if they lose next year, they would be one of the biggest failures in NBA history. If they win, who gives AF, they're supposed to win[/b]

Nothing trumps your '13. They were selling your shit on the television.

[poeticism707]

Nothing trumps your '13. They were selling your shit on the television.

Hilarious, Dale!

But that's how the ball bounces sometimes..

You have to credit the Heat for not panicking,

and fighting back to overtime.

Guts.

And 14m Gino for choking from the line,

per par...

[midnightpulp]

The Warriors were totally a superteam. The Cavs were built more like the average early 2000s team: one superstar (LeBron) and a bunch of D-League scrubs.

How? I can't stand them, but all of their core players were mid-lottery picks and 2nd rounders.

[TDMVPDPOY]

if u dont go by ring count, then clowns like KG or any volume stat padder gets ranked higher then clowns who dont pad their stats yet still wins games...

now regarding superteams, those guys who come together, their rings will be judge different, u be stupid to compare those rings with franchise players who ring, those rings should be compared with role players...

[djohn2oo8]

The Warriors were totally a superteam. The Cavs were built more like the average early 2000s team: one superstar (LeBron) and a bunch of D-League scrubs.

The Warriors weren't a superteam because all it took was Bogut going down for them to return to normal chuckers with no defense. But now they are one, because they have no reason to lose with Durant.

[Clipper Nation]

How? I can't stand them, but all of their core players were mid-lottery picks and 2nd rounders.
Superteams can be built through the draft, tbh. The Showtime Lakers, the '80s Celtics, the MVPippen Bulls, the Duncan Spurs, and the modern-day Warriors: all superteams, all built through the draft. Hell, even teams like the '99 Rockets, the '08 Celtics and the Big Three Heat still had a franchise player that they drafted.

You're too hung up on free agency being the only way to make a superteam, when really, drafting and/or trading are more likely methods of doing it.

[TDMVPDPOY]

whatss the definition of a superteam?
fa franchise players coming t ogether?
players u drafted who have 4 guys appearing on allstar team same year? or have multiple current/former allstars?
team winning +70 games?

[whitemamba]

Superteams can be built through the draft, tbh. The Showtime Lakers, the '80s Celtics, the MVPippen Bulls, the Duncan Spurs, and the modern-day Warriors: all superteams, all built through the draft. Hell, even teams like the '99 Rockets, the '08 Celtics and the Big Three Heat still had a franchise player that they drafted.

You're too hung up on free agency being the only way to make a superteam, when really, drafting and/or trading are more likely methods of doing it.

:lol If you draft a "superteam" you deserve a superteam. They didnt trade they built. Dubs just became a superteam when they added DB

[Mikeanaro]

See you're having problems with that tweet.....

753635668547530752


tbh...

Reddick has wrong numbers, the Superteam lasted form ´10 to ´14 with they winning 2 rings out of 4.

[RsxPiimp]

those 2 rings belonged to the Spurs and maybe OKC had Lebron stayed in Cleveland.

[Clipper Nation]

:lol If you draft a "superteam" you deserve a superteam. They didnt trade they built. Dubs just became a superteam when they added DB
I didn't say those franchises didn't deserve their superteams, just that they did indeed build superteams.

[whitemamba]

I didn't say those franchises didn't deserve their superteams, just that they did indeed build superteams.

What other teams have done that tbh? It's pretty impressive. Drafting people at #1 does not count, thats a 50/50 chance that players becomes a superstar.

[Silver&Black]

Reddick has wrong numbers, the Superteam lasted form ´10 to ´14 with they winning 2 rings out of 4.

Reading comprehension, tbh. He said, Since Miami formed their superteam in '10". He didn't say, "5 different winners from 2010-2014."

1. Dallas
2. Miami (x2)
3. Spurs
4. Warriors
5. Cavs

5 different champs in 6 seasons. Numbers look right to me.

[Mikeanaro]

Reading comprehension, tbh. He said, Since Miami formed their superteam in '10". He didn't say, "5 different winners from 2010-2014."

1. Dallas
2. Miami (x2)
3. Spurs
4. Warriors
5. Cavs

5 different champs in 6 seasons. Numbers look right to me.

No, subject here is superteams, he was talking about that and added the warriors to the mix... they were not superfriends ´till now.

[Silver&Black]

No, subject here is superteams, he was talking about that and added the warriors to the mix... they were not superfriends ´till now.

Spin it however you want to. You said he had the wrong numbers. He didn't.

You can say that you don't agree with his logic, but the tweet you quoted......nothing was wrong "with the numbers". It was 100% correct.

[K...]

I didn't say those franchises didn't deserve their superteams, just that they did indeed build superteams.

you are just missing the point of the thread. I mean you are right but superteam means a bought team in this thread.

It's obvious that draft supereams generally get the benefit of the doubt.

[Mikeanaro]

Spin it however you want to. You said he had the wrong numbers. He didn't.

You can say that you don't agree with his logic, but the tweet you quoted......nothing was wrong "with the numbers". It was 100% correct.
That Gary Oldman looking dude is a retard, last superfriends team was the CHeat and thats 2010-2014, adding two more years that dont belong to the subject is like saying YES THERE ARE SUPERTEAMS BUT SINCE THE 90s THERE WERE 10 DIFFERENT CHAMPS IN 20 YEARS THATS DIVERSITY... IM SAYING THIS TO ADD MORE JUICE TO MY POINT EVEN IF IT DOESNT HAVE A BIT OF COHESION.

Also it doesnt count because Lebron left the Cheat after 2014, only to be in the finals with Cleveland, how so? the league is watered down and needs competition, not just 3 good teams.

[Silver&Black]

That Gary Oldman looking dude is a retard, last superfriends team was the CHeat and thats 2010-2014, adding two more years that dont belong to the subject is like saying YES THERE ARE SUPERTEAMS BUT SINCE THE 90s THERE WERE 10 DIFFERENT CHAMPS IN 20 YEARS THATS DIVERSITY... IM SAYING THIS TO ADD MORE JUICE TO MY POINT EVEN IF IT DOESNT HAVE A BIT OF COHESION.

Also it doesnt count because Lebron left the Cheat after 2014, only to be in the finals with Cleveland, how so? the league is watered down and needs competition, not just 3 good teams.

How many different teams have won the championship since 2010? The answer is 5 just like Red Dick said. I know what you're trying to say Mike. But, gotdamnit the number is 5.

You disagree with his logic (I'm not saying you're wrong there), but you said his numbers were wrong.......they aren't. No amount of spinning it with change the fact that there has been 5 different champions the last 6 years.

[Mikeanaro]

How many different teams have won the championship since 2010? The answer is 5 just like Red Dick said. I know what you're trying to say Mike. But, gotdamnit the number is 5.

You disagree with his logic (I'm not saying you're wrong there), but you said his numbers were wrong.......they aren't. No amount of spinning it with change the fact that there has been 5 different champions the last 6 years.

I understand, but he is talking about superteams and the last one is from 2010 to 2014, anything else is useless to his point.

As I said before the league needs competition like was 8 years ago not just 3 good teams, last season there were only 4 good teams and now that Skanktula went to GS that leaves us with 3 good teams.
He is just saying that because he plans to jump ship in the future so whats better than cover his own ass, right?

[DMC]

The majority of sports fans and sports media are idiots, tbh..they have short memories, too..

The part I find most laughable is how the media and fans began judging players with a larger emphasis on ring count in the 2000s, yet they get angry and mock players that form "super teams" to increase their number of championships:lol..they created this trend..

If players were judged and ranked appropriately, without having the "need to win or he's a career loser" pressure, you would have far more players staying in their respective situations..

True. Durant is a career loser btw

[DMC]

The question isn't how many different teams have won; it's how many different teams have been competitive. What team has made the Finals in the past 5 years in the East that hasn't been there in a decade?

You have

Heat (Lost to Dallas)
Heat (Beat OKC)
Heat (Beat SA)
Heat (Lost to SA)
Cleveland (Lost to GS)
Cleveland (Beat GS)

That's 6 super teams. Kyrie, Lebron and Love comprise a super team since each was a face of the franchise player already elsewhere. Wade, Bosh, Lebron and Ray Allen are also a super team.

So before that, it was the Lakers who... oh that's right, they were a super team when they were gifted Pau Gasol.

Lakers (Beat Orlando)
Lakers (beat Boston)

And who was before that? Oh that's right, another super team...

Boston (lost to LA)
Boston (beat LA)

Only three non-superteams to win a ring in the past oh... 9 or 10 years...

Mavs, Spurs and Golden State.

The term "super team" is a euphemism for "NBA caliber players instead of scrubs disguised as players"

[ambchang]

The majority of sports fans and sports media are idiots, tbh..they have short memories, too..

The part I find most laughable is how the media and fans began judging players with a larger emphasis on ring count in the 2000s, yet they get angry and mock players that form "super teams" to increase their number of championships:lol..they created this trend..

If players were judged and ranked appropriately, without having the "need to win or he's a career loser" pressure, you would have far more players staying in their respective situations..

Agreed for the most part, but that trend didn't start in the 2000s, it was there since the 80s, as far back as I can remember. The first thing people talk about when talking about NBA players is how many rings he won, and it's been like that for decades.

The thing is, the current economic environment is different. In the 80s, you are talking a max player making $2M, and some end of the bench guy making $200K or whatever. For a career that lasts maybe 10 to 12 years for a superstar, you want to get as many of those $2M contracts as you possibly can, because as much as a $20M career earning was, it can't sustain the lifestyles some of these guys wanted, so nobody would take less $ and make these super teams. Not to mention that only a handful few of these athletes were making substantial $ to market products back then.

This continued until it came to a point where a top flight superstar makes $20M a year, and the cap allows multiple superstars to make $18M instead of $24M a year for a couple of years, and then there are dozens of NBA players pulling in major ad $s where a few million of lost earnings for a couple of years isn't going to severely impact the lifestyles of these superstars, and they started to willingly take less $ to win a ring.

Then of course, players are much more connected in today's world. They socialize so much more and are friends off the court. If it wasn't for converse, Magic and Bird would still have hated each other.

Finally, social values are different as well. We talk more about this huggy feely thing now, and how no kids will fail grade school, and how everybody should be concerned for other people's well being and point of view (which really is to the benefit of society), we are missing these psycopaths in sports where they want to rip your lungs out and eat your children. So players nowadays are much more willing to team up together than to try and kill each other.

[Fabbs]

Hope Lebron signs for one year only with Cleveland.

Keep his options open for 2017-18.

[Kidd K]

Reddick's point is actually shitty. It's just a strawman argument. Who the fuck was happy with the Celtics superteam? Or LeBron going to Miami? No one but fans of those teams. He's making up a shitty argument to make a point, which doesn't work. No one made that point. This Durant thing is even worse, of course people are gonna find it pussy because it is.

Most non-Celtics fans thought that was bs too. But yes it got less flak because it partly happened via trade. Other teams had to let it happen and got something out of it. It isn't that easy to do. GSW just won 73 and straight up added a top 3-5 player onto it via free agency. Of course it's going to annoy people and get comments about how they're pussies for team stacking.

Yet another upcoming season of posts from beta bandwagon fans cocksucking the obvious favorite and defending the move so they can cocksuck in peace. :lmao

[Thebesteva]

My only issue with it is there isnt much talent in the NBA anymore so it makes the NBA seem very boring outside of 2 teams. Its always been 2 great teams each season but the other teams have still been good and worth watching. Right now, outside of GS and Cleveland the other teams are not serious title contenders unless injury takes place.

[Clipper Nation]

My only issue with it is there isnt much talent in the NBA anymore so it makes the NBA seem very boring outside of 2 teams. Its always been 2 great teams each season but the other teams have still been good and worth watching. Right now, outside of GS and Cleveland the other teams are not serious title contenders unless injury takes place.

Laker fans complaining about parity is rich :lol

[Thebesteva]

Laker fans complaining about parity is rich :lol

Did you even read what I wrote? I dont take issue with super teams I just dislike the lack of talent in the league right now

[Phillip]

Anyone who says there isn't much talent in the league is stupid beyond belief. There is as much, if not more talent than there ever has been. The difference is that there are way more teams than before. 30 years ago, in the mid-80s, there were 23 teams. Now, there are 30 teams, and still talk of adding more. It's becoming more and more difficult to build a championship core through the draft. It's almost a necessity to build a championship core through free agency / trades now. I mean, just look over the past 16 years. The 5 championships the Lakers got, had a core that was 50% built through free agency / trade (Shaq and Pau/Kobe). The Celtics core were 66% built through free agency / trade (KG, Ray). Aside from Dirk, the entire Mavs team was built through free agency / trade. 66% of Miami's core was built through free agency. 100% of Detroit's core was not drafted (Billups, Rip, Sheed, Ben). The only teams that won a championship and built most of their core through the draft were the Spurs and the Warriors, and the Spurs decided to completely tank a season away in order to get their centerpiece, while the Warriors just got upset by a team with a core built through free agency / trades.

The league being diluted with more teams is the problem, NOT the talent level.