PDA

View Full Version : Has teams conceded in the NBA???


TheKid
06-29-2001, 05:38 PM
I don't know if anyone else has been thinking this or is this just something that I'm thinking of. However I've been paying attention to a lot of what's been going on. The majority of the teams in the NBA are trying to get younger anyway possible. There are very few teams who aren't trying to do that and that's the Knicks, Miami, Utah and Spurs.

It's almost as if every team is saying, OK, the Lakers have two young guys who are going to be the focus of them winning championships for the next several years. They can add or take away each year, but keep Shaq and Kobe in place. So it's almost like the majority of other teams are just gearing their teams up with young talent to learn, and to get better for four or five years down the road when either Shaq or Kobe will be old (by the NEW NBA standards 26 and 32)and they will have young experienced talent.

Look at what Phoenix has done, they've let go Jason Kidd and Robinson. Both of these guys are VERY productive and they've decided to build around young up and coming stars in Marbury and Marion. Both who will more than likely be around for 6 to 7 more years which Kidd and Robinson probably won't. Or if they will chances are they won't be as productive. Look at the Bulls who traded Brand, a proven player in the NBA, whose not old, but no superstar either for the potential of two 18 year olds. Chances are these two if they turn out to be just solid will last in the NBA for another 11-12 years. (Which is scary when you think about it because if the Bulls suck again this year and get the #1 pick next year and take Jason Williams, that team could be dangerous, but that's a whole nother topic.)

My question is, are teams conceding to the fact that the Lakers are just too dominant right now and they can't compete so teams are building for the future so they don't become the next Utah, Miami and Knicks, of always being good enough to challenge but never getting over the hill?

Think about the Jazz, Knicks and Miami. Those teams were good, but just at the wrong times! Then all seemed to hang on to their stars out of respect purposes for far too long. That's why it seems like the Jazz won't be winning any championships anytime soon, nor the Knicks nor Miami. So is the best solution to move towards the youth movement or build around what you have now to compete now? Is this what the Mavs should do? Should we build around what we have now and try to get to the ultimate level now or should we follow the youth movement also?

Flying Tiger
06-29-2001, 11:41 PM
Good call...TheKid. I never really saw any logic in why all the teams were going so young. But I still don't think that's the way to go. I think that you take your experienced team into L.A. every year and wait for the Lakes to self-destruct.

MFFL
06-30-2001, 12:50 AM
I think a lot of it has to do with the luxury tax. Nellie and Cuban both have stated many times that most teams are not willing to pay a luxury tax. The kids work cheap for 4 years.

reeds
06-30-2001, 03:30 PM
I think your right. The Clippers had that logic the last few years, this year I think they made a smart move though. Elton Brand is young, but he is not a high-schooler. I think he cant help right away, and with that young team already, makes that a good move...

I keep thinking someday soon, college basketball will be just average Joes. All the stars will leave right out of high-school?! Man, as long as someone can play so I can still place a bet or two!lol

Flying Tiger
07-01-2001, 12:26 PM
I dissagree...I don't see how any 20/10 can go to a team and not help. What makes you think that he couldn't contribute right away?

reeds
07-01-2001, 04:21 PM
My mistake- I should have proof read my take. I think Brand CAN help right away!!! The Clippers made a great move

Flying Tiger
07-01-2001, 10:41 PM
I figured that's what you meant...but for some reason I just felt like going psycho on you.

reeds
07-02-2001, 07:44 PM
Must be related to Murph...

Flying Tiger
07-02-2001, 10:17 PM
Now you've gone too far.

MFFL
07-03-2001, 12:43 AM
At least reeds didn't say you were related to LAM! i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Flying Tiger
07-03-2001, 12:08 PM
He did didn't he?...I think that alter egos count as the same person.