PDA

View Full Version : Do you like Super Teams?


MavzMan
04-18-2016, 08:55 AM
I define a super team as one having 3 legit stars on the team that could be or have lead their own team. For example, Cleveland with Lebron, Kyrie, KLove. Sometimes 2 stars might be enough like OKC with Durant and Westbrook. A true non-super team is a team with only one star like the Mavs of 2011.

Try not to get hung up on which are or aren't as my real point is we have a league of haves and have nots because salary cap rules are easily circumvented to form "super teams". This results in truly 3 or 4 teams having a shot at a championship. Everyone else is just regular season and first couple rounds of playoff fodder. Do you like super teams or not?

Underdog
04-18-2016, 09:30 AM
Super teams are great......... in a 10 team league.

Otherwise there aren't enough stars to go around and you end up so top-heavy that most franchises are basically just stealing money from season ticket holders because there's not a chance in hell they'll ever be competetive (and after a few years of that, guys like Anthony Davis will ditch their team to join up with another superstar in LA for NY or whatever).

Just look at the 1st round of the playoffs this season -- it's basically a formality, since none of the lower-seeded teams are even putting up a fight against the top. Like, would anyone be surprised if the home team won every single series this year? We all know there are only 3 teams in the mix for a title, and it's been that way since October... So, what's the point? Might as well watch hockey.

FreshJive
04-18-2016, 10:33 AM
I don't see the problem. Golden State built thier team through the draft. Curry, Thompson, and Green were hardly what you would call mega hyped prospects. San Antonio is a small market franchise with amazing management and coaching that has continually made smart decisions. Oklahoma drafted thier superstars, and even had to let one walk because they couldn't afford them. Cleveland is a case of a player going to his hometown team, and Lebron, Love, and Kyrie is hardly an immovable force. Where is the unfair super team?

Thebo
04-18-2016, 01:03 PM
I voted for the super teams because I like the storylines. It was fun to watch Heat - even being against them.

Whether super teams are bad for the league in general, is totally another topic. The league would have great basketball with 1 true legend per each team. You would go back to good old Iverson era where one guy runs the show and everyone sits in awe hoping to see something great. I guess you have that with Harden at the moment... I still consider Cleveland as one man show, IF LeBra shows up fully engaged.

Also, people here should not be too much against super teams. Some are dreaming of making somehow Conley, Matthews, Parsons, Dirk and D12 happen... Even Dirk + D12 + Parsons + Matthews would be pretty close to a super team in my book.

About playoffs... Well, 1st rounds have sucked for a while now. Easy money for betting dudes out there for picking out winner in x games. Just have to avoid Toronto.

Bryan_Wilson
04-18-2016, 07:08 PM
I wonder if we will start to see FA's go to the eastern conf more. The west just seems too loaded to try and build any sort of "super team". Outside of the aging vet looking to get a ring like David West, I think the top lvl free agents will have to start factoring in the easier path in the East. Even though the East is much better and the West has fallen off the top of the West still looks much much rougher than the East.

EricaLubarsky
04-18-2016, 07:13 PM
I'd probably define superteam differently.

Definition A) Any team who stacked the deck with two or more stars a la Miami

Definition B) Any team who just put together a dominant team through drafting, free agency, and good development.

I like a good superteam like definition B. Dynasties make other teams hungry and make for good TV. Players stacking the deck to buy their own championships? Less so.

mac222b
04-18-2016, 10:34 PM
I'd probably define superteam differently.

Definition A) Any team who stacked the deck with two or more stars a la Miami

Definition B) Any team who just put together a dominant team through drafting, free agency, and good development.

I like a good superteam like definition B. Dynasties make other teams hungry and make for good TV. Players stacking the deck to buy their own championships? Less so.

Could not have said it better.

BPo001
04-18-2016, 10:37 PM
I'd probably define superteam differently.

Definition A) Any team who stacked the deck with two or more stars a la Miami

Definition B) Any team who just put together a dominant team through drafting, free agency, and good development.

I like a good superteam like definition B. Dynasties make other teams hungry and make for good TV. Players stacking the deck to buy their own championships? Less so.

What about a team like the '08 Celtics who traded for their big 3? It's hard not to like a team like definition B. To draft and develop your own players is how it should be done.

Thebo
04-24-2016, 03:09 AM
The problem with the Heat in my opinion was not about Wade-Bosh-LeBron. They had to change and improve their own skills to make it work. It was not simply teaming up. Bosh was the only one who knew this from day 1, I followed the events that summer and Bosh was working out all the time. Perhaps he felt inferior to the other two.

Problems with this kind of super teams arose when you added ring chasers to the mix. I think Shane Battier could have earned more money somewhere else, but once Ray Allen joined the Heat, then it became a bit too much for others to handle.

When it comes to overall balance of teams, I guess the league is simply too big for the talent that is available. Although I feel like the talent is there, something still is missing. For example, Kings have enough talent but still can not compete for a playoff spot.