Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 47
  1. #31
    Down with GLOBALISM poido123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    15,576

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by coin24
    The leagues turned into a joke now, it really will be just the cavs and warriors next season..
    I'd rather see one star player per team, this teaming up bullshit is ruining the league..

    This years playoffs were some of the worst I've ever seen

    I would be happy with that. One star player on one max contract per team. One salary cap amount that CANNOT be breached, no luxury taxes etc.

    Let's also make the draft incentive based, now that there's an even playing field for all teams with cap limitations.

  2. #32
    Local High School Star Goldrush25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,534

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Most championship teams throughout history are super teams. This isn't some new thing, those Celtic teams that dominated the 60s, that's about as super a team as you'll find. You have odd years when a Pistons team wins but those years are rare.

    There is a healthy amount of competition in the league right now. 4 different champions in the past 4 years. What more do people want?

    People think they want parity but no one here is watching if the NBA Finals is the Milwaukee Bucks vs the Utah Jazz.

  3. #33
    NBA Finals MVP Haymaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    6,527

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    I'm not against Superteams but too many of them at the same time would definitely water down the league.

  4. #34
    Maeru Perinawa Achali TaLvsCuaL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    3,670

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    The star system is the real problem. Phantom calls, favorable refs, untouchable status, inflated stats, etc.

    In such a system, team ball is punished, or at least, is not benefited. Ergo, most teams want to have as much stars (or fake stars) as they can. That's the easy way to success in this fraudulent system.

  5. #35
    3-time NBA All-Star Lakers Legend#32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Low Rent Dist of Raider Nation
    Posts
    10,029

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Not when it f#cks over OKC.

  6. #36
    Reds/Bengals/Cavs mlh1981's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    12,668

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Yes and no. There is added intrigue and I'm sure ratings will soar through the roof for their games, but it feels like some NBA franchises only exist because the superstars of the game have to place other teams besides one another.

  7. #37
    NBA Legend Hey Yo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    17,676

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by francesco totti
    Superteams arent bad for short period of time, but not long.
    Something like Miami Heat was good for league, for 4 years. But not extended period of 7 - 8 years.. Same team winning.

    I think the league is in good position. Since 2010, 7 championships 6 teams different won.
    Ya really can't call a 24 loss 2 seed a super team like the 2011 Heat were.

  8. #38
    Local High School Star Goldrush25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,534

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by mlh1981
    Yes and no. There is added intrigue and I'm sure ratings will soar through the roof for their games, but it feels like some NBA franchises only exist because the superstars of the game have to place other teams besides one another.
    Well, just the same, every team out there isn't even trying to win an NBA championship. Donald Sterling owned the Clippers for years only concerned with turning a profit. He isn't the only one.

    I'm sure all of them would say on the record that they want to win a championship but how many are willing to pay exorbitant luxury tax to get the players you need to do it?

    The system isn't perfect but it adequate. Owners shouldn't be able to squeeze every last nickel out of their franchise and be in position to win a championship. Winning comes at a cost.
    Last edited by Goldrush25; 07-13-2016 at 04:57 PM.

  9. #39
    ... on a leash ArbitraryWater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    I walk a higher path, son
    Posts
    46,635

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Solefade
    Bird's celtics weren't a super team?
    the show time lakers weren't a super team?
    MJ's bulls weren't a super team?

    i'm not debating if KD's move was a bitch move because that's pretty obvious
    You dont understand.... the Warriors were ALREADY a super team. But that was fine. It made things interesting....

    but to have a super team, ADD ANOTHER top 3 player?

    THATS the unprecedented thing... the term super team doesnt even do them justice anymore. Its an UBER super team.

  10. #40
    ... on a leash ArbitraryWater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    I walk a higher path, son
    Posts
    46,635

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Doranku
    It's more than just a high chance. Both the Cavs and Warriors could lose their best player and still be the heavy favorites to win their respective conferences.

    The league is a joke right now.
    Cavs favorites without LeBron? What fantasy world are you living in

  11. #41
    Playoff Rondo Doranku's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    10,659

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by ArbitraryWater
    Cavs favorites without LeBron? What fantasy world are you living in
    Who's gonna beat a Kyrie/Love/TT core in the East?

    The trash bros? The Dwight Howard-led Hawks? Maybe the Celtics if Olynyk decides to rip KLove's arm out of its socket again.

    Kyrie just showed what he's capable of doing in the playoffs. Love in a second option role would be a much better fit for him.

    It's not as set in stone as it'd be for the Warriors obviously, but they could easily compete with any other team in the East. You guys are sleeping on Kyrie, honestly.

  12. #42
    ... on a leash ArbitraryWater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    I walk a higher path, son
    Posts
    46,635

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Doranku
    Who's gonna beat a Kyrie/Love/TT core in the East?

    The trash bros? The Dwight Howard-led Hawks? Maybe the Celtics if Olynyk decides to rip KLove's arm out of its socket again.

    Kyrie just showed what he's capable of doing in the playoffs. Love in a second option role would be a much better fit for him.

    It's not as set in stone as it'd be for the Warriors obviously, but they could easily compete with any other team in the East. You guys are sleeping on Kyrie, honestly.
    They always go to shit without LeBron's presence on the court....

    thats why this team is 4-16 without LeBron the last two years.

    Love is a glorified Kyle Korver at this point. TT is like an equal to Biyombo. Damn right Im taking the Raps, Hawks, C's, Pistons... CHI with Wade/Butler, NY, and IND would be close, too.

  13. #43
    "3 is greater than 2" CuterThanRubio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Ricky's manbun
    Posts
    1,647

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Super teams have always controlled the NBA, the main difference is that before free agency existed there was no chance for those who didn't luck into drafting the best players.

    The Celtics won EIGHT titles consecutively, yet people are going to cry foul because LeBron joined Miami and won TWO, or even worse you have people losing their minds over Durant and he hasn't even played a single game with Golden State, its a joke!


    The 80s were extremely top heavy, did I really see a certain Jordan stan bring up the Hawks like they were a force, lmao, please stop the madness!


    The NBA is better than ever from all sides, the game itself and popularity wise, hate it or love it, Adam Silver is making things happen!

  14. #44
    Since 1974 smoovegittar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,251

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Weak Era

  15. #45
    Local High School Star houston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,400

    Default Re: Lets discuss: Are super teams really bad for the NBA?

    Quote Originally Posted by CuterThanRubio
    Super teams have always controlled the NBA, the main difference is that before free agency existed there was no chance for those who didn't luck into drafting the best players.

    The Celtics won EIGHT titles consecutively, yet people are going to cry foul because LeBron joined Miami and won TWO, or even worse you have people losing their minds over Durant and he hasn't even played a single game with Golden State, its a joke!


    The 80s were extremely top heavy, did I really see a certain Jordan stan bring up the Hawks like they were a force, lmao, please stop the madness!


    The NBA is better than ever from all sides, the game itself and popularity wise, hate it or love it, Adam Silver is making things happen!

    yup this what it is all about good post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •