2021 NBA Season Thread aka The James “Corona Club” Harden Victory Tour

This is the first you've explained your opinion and I agree it's not hard to comprehend.

I don't think you understand my question. I'm not asking what it is, I'm asking why the player driven part factors? You guys are just repeating that it does without explaining why.

I just think it's weird to call the current Lakers a super team but not the KG, Pierce, Allen Celtics because the C's weren't player driven. The Celtics were more super.

And Giannis didn't join a super team. The super team came to him.
The Bucks aren't a "super team"
 
Fair enough, but he forced his way out as I recall. I don't recall the options he gave them, but I perceive that LAL with LBJ was top of the list. My memory isn't quite as good on this stuff, so I may fall victim to narratives that aren't completely valid.

IIRC, it was NY, CHI, LAL, and his Dad specifically said not Boston and dragged their front office.
 
I get what you’re saying but you’re the only person who views it that way. I believe that’s when the term was introduced, in Miami, in the biggest moment of player led collusion the league has seen and will never be the same.

Guys have demanded trades before but not to specific destinations. Sat out to ensure a trade, etc.

As for Giannis, the “super team” didn’t come to him. Him and Kris Middleton worked their ass off for years. When the two of them were ready, the FO made a move to bring in Jrue Holiday, who I like a lot but isn’t a “star” by any means, via trade that Jrue wasn’t demanding.

Jrue's the best defensive guard in the league the last two years, and he's good on O. It's a sad statement about how we value defense if that's not a "star".
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Dog
My buddy is saying his version of super-team is it has to be comprised of guys who are stars on/off the court. Like do you have widespread name recognition? And he disqualifies both Jrue and Middleton, which seems crazy, but this is all a matter of opinion.

So I'm just looking at it like "how good are the parts?" and it seems I'm the only one.
 
My buddy is saying his version of super-team is it has to be comprised of guys who are stars on/off the court. Like do you have widespread name recognition? And he disqualifies both Jrue and Middleton, which seems crazy, but this is all a matter of opinion.

So I'm just looking at it like "how good are the parts?" and it seems I'm the only one.

Any team that wins the championship is pretty super. The parts, by the inherent nature of winning it all, must be good.

If it makes it better for you, small market team won - it's nice as a fan of a small market team. They don't have the "luxury" of building through player and agent led roster building unless there is a unique circumstance (hometown).
 
  • Like
Reactions: TBrown
My buddy is saying his version of super-team is it has to be comprised of guys who are stars on/off the court. Like do you have widespread name recognition? And he disqualifies both Jrue and Middleton, which seems crazy, but this is all a matter of opinion.

So I'm just looking at it like "how good are the parts?" and it seems I'm the only one.
Cmon huff


You don’t have buddies
 
Any team that wins the championship is pretty super. The parts, by the inherent nature of winning it all, must be good.

If it makes it better for you, small market team won - it's nice as a fan of a small market team. They don't have the "luxury" of building through player and agent led roster building unless there is a unique circumstance (hometown).

I misspoke. I'm not talking about all the parts. I'm talking about the top parts that combined powers. It's a league dominated by stars. If you have the best player in a series, you usually win. If you have 3 of the 4 best players in the series, you're really likely to win. The Bucks depth is doodoo but they had the best player and best 3 players (cause the Nets got injured) in every series they played in.
 
I define a “super” team as multiple All-NBA caliber players either colluding or planning to join a team that they were not originally a part of. For example, I consider the Lakers and Clippers super teams. That was all planned.

Considering Giannis was a #15 pick and Middleton was a thrown for a PG swap…Sure they traded for Jrue but everything else was pretty organic.
 
I just assumed the term "super" was trying to describe how good the 3 to 4 guys joining forces are. Turns out it can be two guys if they simply angled to get together. I don't even find the term useful if that's what it is.

So people say "player driven super team" and that's redundant, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KoachKrab127
I just assumed the term "super" was trying to describe how good the 3 to 4 guys joining forces are. Turns out it can be two guys if they simply angled to get together. I don't even find the term useful if that's what it is.

So people say "player driven super team" and that's redundant, right?

GSW is the toughest analysis. Won a championship with their 3 drafted stars but then added KD (and Boogie) to the mix to keep it going. They don’t fit the definition of player driven very well.
 
GSW is the toughest analysis. Won a championship with their 3 drafted stars but then added KD (and Boogie) to the mix to keep it going. They don’t fit the definition of player driven very well.

Yeah, the Boogie thing doesn't even factor to me but KD definitely made them a super team, IMO.
 
I define a “super” team as multiple All-NBA caliber players either colluding or planning to join a team that they were not originally a part of. For example, I consider the Lakers and Clippers super teams. That was all planned.

Considering Giannis was a #15 pick and Middleton was a thrown for a PG swap…Sure they traded for Jrue but everything else was pretty organic.
I think that's fair.

This "new way" (allegedly) of winning NBA titles isn't as new or different as its detractors think. Championships going back decades have usually been won by "superteams," however you define it. The difference is how they were assembled; a LeBron hater, for example, hates the fact that he and at least one other great player come up with a plan to leave their current team(s) and join another one. Jordan's Bulls were superteams, but I suppose the pieces were added over time and they all stayed with the same team once they were there. Jordan didn't leave the Bulls and Karl Malone didn't leave the Jazz to both go to Houston and win a title with the Rockets, for example.
 
I think that's fair.

This "new way" (allegedly) of winning NBA titles isn't as new or different as its detractors think. Championships going back decades have usually been won by "superteams," however you define it. The difference is how they were assembled; a LeBron hater, for example, hates the fact that he and at least one other great player come up with a plan to leave their current team(s) and join another one. Jordan's Bulls were superteams, but I suppose the pieces were added over time and they all stayed with the same team once they were there. Jordan didn't leave the Bulls and Karl Malone didn't leave the Jazz to both go to Houston and win a title with the Rockets, for example.

Yeah, whatever you want to call it, the 2017-19 Warriors had a major personnel advantage with their big 3. So did the 1991-93 and the 1996-98 Bulls. So did the showtime Lakers. So did Bird's Celtics. So did the 2000's Spurs. And so on.

I think the Shaq/Kobe Lakers are the only dynasty of my lifetime that didn't have at least a big 3, but I think that was also a weak stretch for the league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 05_never_again

VN Store



Back
Top