Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgo
I sorta get what you are saying, but your examples don't make much sense.
The Celtics with Pierce/Garnett/Allen were the original "gang up" Big 3 that everyone else started to imitate in the last decade or so. The Lakers trading for Gasol because he wouldn't resign with Memphis is functionally the same as free agency.
|
Nope. No question that Pierce, KG, and Allen were happy to join forces, but they didn't make those trades happen (sure, KG, as a veteran who was under contract had say-so in where he went). Pierce was already a veteran Celtic. Allen was acquired in return for two - at the time - legitimate NBA players, plus Jeff Green, who had just been selected #5 in the draft. Garnett was acquired for several players, including some young prospects and highly-regarded Al Jefferson. This was not at all a case of NBA players choosing to "gang up." Rather, it was shrewd mauevering on the part of Danny Ainge.
The Lakers gave up plenty of assets - including top-prospect Marc Gasol (Pau's brother, who had been playing in Europe) - in order to acquire Pau Gasol. So no gang up there, either. Not the same as free agency because - unlike free agency - the Lakers had to give up a decent haul to get him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgo
The Nets traded for Durant and Harden (which you seem to think is fine). Durant missed an entire season with a torn achilles (obvious risk) and they gave up a ton of assets for Harden. Griffin was obviously ring chasing but isn't really a big factor on the team anyway.
|
Sure, Durant was
technically traded by the Warriors to the Nets. But Durant was a free agent and chose his destination, and the trade was a "sign & trade" to facilitate the transaction... He & Kyrie clearly ganged up. Whether Harden was part of that group ganging up is probably debatable... The point about Griffin wasn't really about him being part of the gang-up; just about when a guy gets bought out, whether he takes the safe route (which Griffin did) or takes a risk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgo
I definitely think very little of an individual player like Durant who went to a team that already won a ring without him since it proves absolutely nothing for him.
|
Totally agree. The bold & confident move would've been to sign with a team that was merely missing a superstar leader, and try to take them to title. Rather than the safe move of going to team whose young and dynamic core 3 had already won a title.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkgo
But I don't really see anything wrong with trying to put good players together on a team however you can, that's the whole point.
|
Well, like I said, I don't begrudge players from wanting to go where they want, team up with the best, etc. I'm just saying that as a fan, I much more respect what it takes to
build a winning team through the kinds of moves that come with risk & chance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilight
Miami traded for both Chris Bosh and LeBron James and drafted Dwyane Wade. None of them were signed as free agents.
|
Sure, technically traded. But there's no question that Wade, James, and Bosh chose to "gang up" and play in Miami. No criticsm of Pat Riley, but he didn't exactly have to make crafty moves to acquire James & Bosh. He did what any GM would do in that situation: Welcome those players with open arms. Nothing close to actual value was given up by Miami to acquire those two guys, both of whom were free agents. (Remember The Decision? That was James telling the world where
he had decided to go. It wasn't as if somebody had to call him to let him know that the Cavs had traded him.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilight
Bill Russell once played on a team with nine Hall of Famers
|
Most of whom were acquired via the draft, and all of whom were acquired via savvy (maybe a few were lucky?) front office moves. None of them chose to "gang up." Of course that was a different era, and without free agency, players had no way to gang up. So that's pretty much irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilight
...but sure, last year's champs that started Javale McGee and Avery Bradley most of the time was a "super team".
|
Not sure of the point here. James and Davis were the ones who chose to "gang up." And, to be sure, both Bradley, McGee and host of other role players chose to gang up with James & Davis.
To be clear, while I do consider James & Davis as a "gang up" I don't really consider the 2020 Lakers a
super team. As far as NBA champs throughout history go, I'd consider the 2020 L's to be among the weakest ever, and while no team can pick the strength or health of their opponents, they certainly benefited from those circumstances (the recently powerhouse Western Conference seeing its power teams revert to ordinary; the Heat being decimated by injuries in the finals). The L's top two players were certainly among the top 5 or so players in the league, but beyond that there was nothing special at all about their roster, and I doubt there are many championship teams from the past 40 years that they could beat. I mean, we'll never know, but I'm having a hard time coming up with a previous champion they could beat. Maybe 2019 Toronto. Maybe one the James' Cavs teams. That's about it.
At any rate, I kinda see it similar to this: Let's say I've got two neighbors, both of whom run successful businesses. The guy on my right worked hard and built his business from scratch. The guy on my left inherited his money, bought an established business and basically just watches the money roll in. Nothing at all wrong with the guy on the left's good fortune, but the guy on my right is the one whose efforts are more impressive, to me.