Reply With Quote
See you're having problems with that tweet.....
tbh...
Red nailed it...
See you're having problems with that tweet.....
tbh...
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..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..
Most of the compe ive 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
Yes, that's the tweet. Thanks.
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.
I was pissed when Boston did it, as well. The Spurs are always on the receiving end of this superteam bull coming off a le ('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
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.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
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..
Stern
And yet Curry lost.I was pissed when Boston did it, as well. The Spurs are always on the receiving end of this superteam bull coming off a le ('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
They weren't a superteam. Built on the draft. The Cavs were actually more of a superteam construction-wise.
You read like marketing hype.
The Warriors never drafted higher than 5.
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.
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.
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
Nothing trumps your '13. They were selling your 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...
How? I can't stand them, but all of their core players were mid-lottery picks and 2nd rounders.
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...
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.
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. , 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.
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?
Red has wrong numbers, the Superteam lasted form ´10 to ´14 with they winning 2 rings out of 4.
those 2 rings belonged to the Spurs and maybe OKC had Lebron stayed in Cleveland.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
