Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    505
    vCash
    1500

    Why is it bad for stars to team up?

    I am not a Heat, Lakers, Celtics, or Knick's fan. I am actually from Utah so no Bias here or defending the BIG teams. I read the forum a lot but don't post too much.

    So why is it OK for a GM to orchestrate a championship team????

    But if a players do it it becomes a bad thing???

    I don't understand that logic.

    I mean when The Celtics made the moves they made to get Garnett and Allen everyone was saying how amazing Danny Ainge is.

    But when Lebron, Wade & Bosh do it they are criticized over and over.

    Chris Paul refused to sign with the Hornets and would only sign an extension with certain teams. How is that any different than what the rest of the stars do???

    I just find this very hypocritical. Why would you not want to play with the best players you can.

    Lebron wins a Championship and people say it should have a asterisk next to it.

    But the Lakers or Celtics do and they are praised.........

    If GM's are not getting it done than I think stars have every right to team up with whoever they wish to.

    Unless somebody can tell me what I am missing?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    8,195
    vCash
    1500
    its only bad when they team up on a team other than the celtics and lakers.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Pharcyde of the Moon
    Posts
    10,505
    vCash
    4500
    too much talent on 1 team means less for everybody else and elevates the amount of bad teams and slims down the # of good teams. It polarizes the league and makes it harder to compete for everybody.
    Raptors Franchise Checklist:
    Rebuild with young players [ ]
    Build contending team [ ]
    Host NBA All-Star Weekend [ ]
    Win Championship [ ]

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    27,274
    vCash
    500
    It's only bad if Lebron does it. Because he's THAT good.

    Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, and Colin Kaepernick walk into a bar... To watch Russell Wilson win the Super Bowl.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    8,195
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by baller101200 View Post
    It's only bad if Lebron does it. Because he's THAT good.
    if he went to LA or Boston no one would care i bet, seems like they're the only teams allowed to stack

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    22,341
    vCash
    1500
    i dont know what your reading but paul was very hated when he did that and both the lakers and celtics are are two of the most hated teams in the league.

    its bad because fans say they want competitive balance/a shot a winning and if your not one of the top 3-5 teams filled with all stars than you have virtually no shot.they say(though think they lie)say they want it like baseball where i'm a giants fan lets say, no i dont have trout and albert,but i still walk away with a word series trophy,or a football fan and i can see my team win the super bowl with having an arron rodgers or ap,when the heat formed you can pencil them in for at least 3 championships of the next 6
    Last edited by abe_froman; 12-07-2012 at 07:50 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Chicago IL
    Posts
    18,979
    vCash
    1500
    Basically everyone was butthurt over it. I was to. I realized that I was being stupid LOL. Do I wish LeBron would have came here to Chicago? Absolutely. But now I can honestly say I am ok with it. Wade is aging and Bosh is not that good. James is the best player on the team far and away. I like how **** turned out.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    10,881
    vCash
    1500
    2 words: Competitive Balance

    The NBA is a joke when it comes the number of teams who have a real shot at winning a tittle



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    61,817
    vCash
    500
    Because at a certain point we run out of things to hate people for.
    [IMG]hi[/IMG]

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    4,381
    vCash
    1500
    The problem I have with it is it undermines the competitive balance between teams.

    Most teams have constraints on how to acquire talent. They draft for it, they trade for it, they bid for it in Free Agency, or they convince their own Free Agents to join or stay with them.

    When Players do it, they not only can orchestrate Who they join on their roster, but can decide WHICH team they play on. This severely disadvantages smaller market teams.

    You're Lebron. Your buddy is Wade. You decide you want to play together. What are the odds your short list includes Indiana, Portland or the Raptors?

    It distorts the distribution of talent. Instead of FO's assessing talent, trading picks, making decisions, negotiating with their players (under DEFINED rules), the players completely Bypass the process.

    This is why I have issues with it.

    If a team pulls of loads of Talent like OKC, the Lakers, NYK or Brooklyn.. that's fair. They pay for it, draft for it, bid for it, or negotiate for it. And they have defined rules on when and how they can contact, bid and negotiate with them, as well as advantages to retain Stars on their teams.

    When Lebron, Bosh and Wade did it, suddenly a small number of clubs become the "chosen" clubs and 29 other teams get screwed.

    That's not good for the NBA. Not if you want viable smaller market teams.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    61,817
    vCash
    500
    I think having star studded teams is better for the NBA.
    [IMG]hi[/IMG]

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    4,381
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRamForPrez24 View Post
    I think having star studded teams is better for the NBA.
    I'm fine with star studded rosters, as long as EVERY team is getting talent under the same rules.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,739
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by JWO35 View Post
    2 words: Competitive Balance

    The NBA is a joke when it comes the number of teams who have a real shot at winning a tittle
    In recent years yes, but this year I would consider the Spurs, Heat, OKC, Knicks, both LA teams and Memphis all title contenders. Then you have the other teams like Brooklyn, Boston, and then Chicago once Rose returns.


    Perfection

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    702
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRamForPrez24 View Post
    I think having star studded teams is better for the NBA.
    what makes you say that

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    4,727
    vCash
    1500
    Because PSD is full of 14-18 year old kids who have no concept of the real world. In reality the NBA is a business and sports are for entertainment. Do small market teams get the shaft, absolutely. I'm not a big fan of the situation, but for now it is what it is, and to continue to keep crying over LBJ leaving Cleveland serves no point...Unless your point is displaying ignorance or hurt feelings. Players want to win and they want to be on TV. Unfortunately that's less likely in places like Milwaukee, Cleveland, Toronto, Charlotte, Sacramento...However OKC, Memphis, and of course SA have done quite well. Those teams have to build from the ground up, because let's face it, who in their right mind, let alone an NBA superstar would willingly want to go live in OKC or Cleveland over say NY, LA, Chi, or Mia? As for "Teaming up", well there are examples upon examples of this throughout NBA history. And people who say LBJ should have an asterisk next to his first title are just beyond sense, and should just be ignored.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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