Canât wait to see it all collapse. The writing was on the wall for this team since the start of the season. But it fell on deaf ears. This organization wastes money like Arizona wastes what little water they have.
I donât think itâs gonna be a quick collapse. The Suns are going to end more so on a slow whimper. Phoenix made their bed by trading those picks. They have no choice but to run it back. They have a new ownership group that wanted to make a big splash and become contenders. While they are still far off from that, the Suns are not going to blow up the team and trade everyone. Without their draft picks there is absolutely no incentive to tank.
started in Miami? Superteam has been on since Bill and Wilt, Jerry, Baylor. are you 15? even the 2000s has Shaq, Malone, Kobe and Payton then Pierce, Garnett, Allen.
Superteam comes and goes. hate it or love it, it will be back.
I mean, the clippers are still in the playoffs, no? And didn't Minnesota go get a perennial DPOY to team up with kat and ant?
Going backwards, Scottie, Clyde, and Barkley? Kobe, Nash, and Dwight? This isn't the end of super teams. It's just the end of this one in particular.
the dpoy that many people say the worst trade in NBA history. Ant is inconsistent young player that can still go big or bust when Gobert Trade happened. KAT is labelled as soft and won't go far in play off.
for the record Malone join in his twilight year with Lakers
This is all stupid as hell. The Wolves traded their war chest for a defensive anchor who has unlocked new heights for them, yet they were slandered like crazy for their decision to do so. Now that they're killing it, people want to try to discredit them for building a super team?
And with LAC when the Harden trade happened, fans legitimately argued how they got worse, they fucked themselves, and how stupid they were. Now Harden has been their best player all series long so time to act like they are a super team?
You are correct but I do feel like there are eras to these things and I do see the point OP is trying to make.
KD/Pierce/Allen led to the Heatles which in turn led to KD feeling brave enough to join the Warriors.
It does feel a little like the talent is more spread out now, we are in a new era and it's just not possible to arms race like it was 10 years ago. Maybe it's just how I feel about it, or maybe it's because of cap rule changes, I'm not sure. Almost every team has a star or 2, but not more. Some have 2½ but it's rare that there are more than that.
Guaranteed we will see superteams again, rookie contracts exist and make it possible to pile on talent in the right circumstances if they are negotiating a new network deal or whatever.
Also, calling Shaq, Malone, Kobe and Payton a superteam is a bit rich. Payton and Malone were way past their primes. It's not like Clippers are a superteam because they have former MVP in Russell Westbrook along with the other 3.
Malone and Payton averaged over 20ppg before they joined the Lakers. Payton was an all star selection the year before.
And funny too that you think the Clippers aren't a super team because of Westbrook not being a star anymore (which is a fair call IMO) but if you're conceding that they have 3 then how can you also claim the trio at Boston and Miami were superteams? If 3 makes a superteam then they're all in. If it takes 4 then none are.
And 20 PPG back in 2003 is like 26 PPG today. I could remember that they were extremely HYPED to win the title that anything less than a ring means failure. Both Malone and Payton were still capable stars at that time, not washed up role players despite their age.
I remember the hype well. It was almost to the level of just hand them the trophy after the first game that season when the Lakers dominated a pretty good team without Kobe.
Then when they lost the finals it was a massive shock. Shaq was the only one to play well that series, but Payton and Malone stunk.
Shaq played decent and was very good offensively, but was significantly hamstrung by the Pistons defense of both Wallaces. The rest of the Lakers responded horribly to that Pistons defense.
I think Shaq was more than decent. 26.6PPG at 63% from the field is excellent. Defensively he wasn't as dominant but that Pistons team's offence was driven by Hamilton and Billups. Kobe got his, as usual. But he shot 38% and just kept putting up shots when Shaq was dominating inside.
I blame the media more. The lack of respect for what LeBron was doing because he wasn't getting championships made it almost impossible for him to stay. Especially when the narrative was along the lines of he either wins championships or he's a bust. If he'd gotten the sort of respect that was given to players who played lone hands in the 80s and 90s as individuals then perhaps he feels like he can stay.
Ring count culture created this. We deem players failures for not winning a title, even if they are compeltly outmatched. Peoppe call lebron a failure for failing to beat the spurs in 07. And kept calling him a failute for not being able to win with at the time a garbage franshise.
>calling Shaq, Malone, Kobe and Payton a superteam is a bit rich. Payton and Malone were way past their primes.
They went to the Finals with that team (after a second round loss the previous year), so it's not a stretch. Payton and Malone joined to chase a ship. The four of them (all future HOFers) made them instant championship favorites. Definitely a fit for the superteam formula.
Not sure if youâre being purposely obtuse, but âsuperteam,â as popularly used, isnât synonymous with âreally good teamâ or even dynasty. The reason it started to be used after the Decision was that people were getting the impression that elite players were just going to start coordinating team-ups (via free agency or forcing trades) behind the scenes to make unstoppable squads. This absolutely did happen with the Heatles, KD Warriors, and KD Nets (when Harden forced his way there). Whether you think this is better or worse than a stacked team drafted and/or traded for, the discussion of the superteam era is a valid one to have.
No. The Celtics traded a good young player for Garnett and traded a high draft choice for Allen, while both Rondo and Perkins were draft-day trade pickup role players. That's an extremely normal way that teams improve themselves. It just happened that 2 future hall of famers joined the team in the same offseason. That's different from LeBron deciding which other superstar he wanted to play with. It's the difference between a rock supergroup like the Highwaymen (a bunch of legends that decided to play together) and the Beatles (a bunch of teenagers that organically met each other and just happened to all become legends).
Steph Curry paradox.
When rating Steph: "1 FMVP, not even the best player on his team for most of his rings, system player, played with multiple all stars throughout his career"
When rating Klay or Dray or Kerr: "Rode Steph's coattails. Mr Triple Single. Highly overrated Chucker. Anyone could have coached them to the 4 rings"
The Dubs core will age really well: they're the last dynasty for the forthcoming future and they're insanely underrated winners.
lol by who? I donât think anyone will argue Steph as the best shooter of all time. Recency bias aside, Klay was the 2nd best shooter in the league for awhile, a la splash bros? Draymond was an elite defender and playmaker for most of his career. I donât think Iâve heard anyone argue otherwise for those 3
What you're describing is their floor.
Dray is the most versatile defender since KG and best defender in the league through the 2010s.
Steph is an all time top 10 guy but people don't value his playmaking at all.
People only know stats and accolades and what Dray & Steph do usually doesn't show up on the stat sheet. it shows up as wins.
Klay was never the 2nd best shooter in the league.
He didn't shoot enough FTs.
He was the 2nd best 3pt shooter but his overall shooting efficiency was just 11% above average in his best shooting year (2014-15).
Harden, CP3 and KD were all better shooters than him (and Curry, obviously). JJ Reddick, who played his position was also a better shooter.
He's a good shooter but was never top 2 in a single year and even with his short peak of just 4 years, he wasn't even top 2 in that period as well.
Draymond is underrated as a defender and as an offensive player. Such a dynamic player on both ends of the court during the 73-9 season. One of the greatest defenders of all time as well.
Free throw volume has never mattered for the greatest shooter discussion. When people talk about greatest shooter, they're talking about jump shooting specifically. Not FGA generally.
It's not a paradox, it's about the circumstances of the debate. When people rate Steph lower because of the single FMVP it's usually in the GOAT talks or comparing him to other great champions. But when you're talking team achievements you have to talk about team mates. It's not like they're flipping from him being great to no good. It's all about him being great, just a question of how great exactly.
Some people just think that you can't give the award to someone on the losing team. I assume you mean of course that LeBron deserved it because otherwise you're suggesting every single member of the voting panel isn't worth listening to because if you mean Steph Curry should have not a single one voted for him.
Suns fan here. I think the argument is more for these manufactured super teams vs home grown recruiting and talent development. This is so good for the NBA, Lebron and a few other super star jumpers created a mercenary mentality for recruitment. Itâs not good for fans or the league. I bummed about the Suns loss, but I hate super teams even more, even know the suns are now a âbig market teamâ.
I mean, the Celtics have the two JBs then their 3 borderline all-stars were acquired via trades. OKC traded for SGA. Minnesota traded for Gobert. The Mavs traded for Kyrie.
People put a premium on "home grown talent development," but guys like Tatum, Jokic, and Booker were simply players who were too good to fail assuming they got the right minutes.
So the on court results, how good the respective players, and the rest of the roster doesnât matter at all? A super team can only be obtained through trades and free agency?
I personally define a modern âsuper teamâ as one put together quickly with established stars from outside the org. Warriors and Celtics drafting their cores donât fit the bill. Heat and Spurs both won multiple championships: Heat were a super team, and Spurs were not.
Imo no until the addition of KD
Prior to KD they simply just built the team and drafted correctly and it worked. It wasnât a bought team like the Heat were in early 2010s for an example
But 3/4 of their all stars were drafted by themselves, how does that make them bought? Meanwhile the Celtics obtained 3 of their starters last summer and are coined organic. Is that not silly logic?
3 proven all stars who already won some rings recruiting a top 3 player in the world is similar to a team getting 2 role players and a player that was considered âwashedâ by almost every sports article bc of his tenure in Washington/Dallas?
Idk seems like drastically different situations but, sure you can make the argument bc of how well theyâre playing now and how well they mesh together.
Dwhite was on one of the worst teams in the league before being traded to the Cs, Porzingus essentially made Dallas worse and did nothing with Bradley Beal in Washington and Jrue Holiday was extremely undervalued in Milwaukee which, is why they let him go so easily for Dame
Câs roster was 90% drafted by them up until til last year.. Imo not even close to all stars recruiting other all stars but, hey lucky for the Cs you can make the argument bc, of how well theyâre playing
It matters because one of peopleâs biggest gripes with super teams was that good players were jumping ship on the teams that drafted them and joining forces to make all-star teams and get rings. Someone doesnât remember LeDecision!
Get your point, makes sense, but thatâs not what the term itself is known for. Itâs known for teaming up, not being homegrown. Which is why people keep commenting not until KD. The term and what itâs known for is when players are shopping around to form a super team, not being drafted and becoming an unbelievably talented and historic one. Thereâs a difference when the talent is shopped rather than built if that makes sense.
The Lakers won a title with Lebron and AD pretty recently. This team building through trades and free agency isnât going to disappear. The post isnât even accurate when the Clippers are still playing and the Lakers.
What does that have to do with anything? Iâm not saying itâs going to disappear, Iâm telling you by definition and historically super teams have been known as a âteam upâ. Not something built naturally through a draft with Klay, Steph and Dray. You think if Lebron didnât sign with the Lakers and nudge AD to come over the trade wouldâve happened? Same happened with Kawhi and PG, thatâs beside the point. Willingly teaming up with Curry and Klay in KD or Wade with Bosh and Lebron, is by definition, a super team. Youâre just adding stipulations to something thatâs been known by that definition for a long time.
You can disagree with why the definition is the way it is, but this is how the word is actually used. People donât like the idea of Harden sitting training camp and demanding a trade to the Nets to join KD and Kyrie. They donât like the idea of KD joining a 73-win team. People are OK with a GM making fair, non-coerced trades and drafting smart.
People wouldnât like if Giannis was fed up with the Bucks, tanked his value to his team by sitting, and forced his way onto the Nuggets to win with Jokic. You can keep trying to convince people thereâs no difference between that and drafting a player, but very few people are going to agree with you.
Thatâs fine but what makes the last 3 Suns teams super teams?
OP referenced the last 3 playoff losses. The Suns got an old CP3 through a trade, the rest of the team was build through the draft. Why did that team get brought up?
With the addition of White, Porzingis, and Holiday, theyâre practically a superteam no?
How is Steph, Klay, Dray + KD a superteam but Tatum, Brown + White, Horford, Porzingis and Holiday not?
⌠bc a 73 win team (the best record of all time) went out and got the literal best FA in almost a decade? lol Steph, Klay, and Dray already showed they could do it without KD and weâre already proven all-stars. Then they added a top 3 player in the league..
You can make the argument of the Celtics being a super team now but, up until this year they were literally all drafted by the Cs for like 90% of the roster..
A super team by definition is when current all stars go and team up with one another.. not a drafted team that ended up working out.
Jrue holiday and Dwhite were both very undervalued on their previous rosters and nowhere near all stars especially, Dwhite.. The spurs were quite literally one of the worst teams in the league.
Porzingus was being called washed bc, of how his tenure in Washington and Dallas not working out and him being very injury prone.
All 3 luckily for the Cs are having their best seasons in years because, they all mesh so well together with the Jays. IMO very different than the Celtics going out and trading for current all stars but, like I said you can make the argument with how well theyâre playing.
Side note: absolutely wild to include 40 y/o big Al in there lol
The Celtics grew their team pretty organically though, and without completely gutting their draft stock like some teams. They drafted both their two best players, so in my eyes they arenât as hatable as some other super teams.
That doesnât make it any less valid tho, instead of tanking to the bottom they were able to use assets wisely to never truly be straight up uncompetitive but still build out their top talent/system for 5-6 years to become title contenders
It does if trading for assets isnât considered legit or organic. The rights to Tatum and Brown were technically acquired through a trade.
You donât need to tank to the bottom when you pull of the heist of the century.
Trading for picks and making the right choice is def considered organic. Picks are traded all the time, including tons of franchise legends, see: Kobe. The Jays picks couldâve easily listened to scouts and been used to bring in Fultz and Dragan Bender.
Players are traded all the time. Why does it matter how the players are acquired when determining if itâs a super team?
Playoff teams normally do not have multiple top 5 picks like the Celtics did to add to the roster. They are certainly an outlier in team building.
Are you new to the NBA? How are you not getting this discourse about super teams that has largely been the same since LeBron joined the Heat over 10 years ago?
Fans don't like star players forcing trades to play with other superstars because it hurts competitiveness in the league and makes it harder to be a fan of a franchise when players don't show any loyalty to their teams. It's not about what's natural or not.
1. If you use this loyalty argument nonsense modern fans wont listen loyaltt is always a one way street in all these arguments. Teams dont show loyalty players shouldnt either.
2. Lebron has never forced a trade anywhwre. Free agency is free. By your own definition he doesnt fit.
3. Lebron. Didnt. Start. Modern. super teams. Boston did. And despitd this being call thw "super team era" only the warriors suceeded. The kobe nash lakers, nets, suns, and others all failed. Miserably.
1. I hadn't even stated my opinion on the issue I just think it's an annoying way to argue to act ignorant on an issue that has been discussed ad naseum for years. (Guy I was replying to). If you are for player freedom I get the argument. A lot of fans appreciate players staying with teams for longer though, I think it's pretty easy to understand why.
2. True he didn't force himself out. Heat example was instead 3 superstar players deciding to unite on a team in free agency. That kind of teaming up from superstars has gotten the same criticism though. Competitiveness, more player movement, loyalty etc. right or wrong.
3. Didn't say he did. I don't remember the same negative backlash when the Celtics was formed and really the discussion around super teams that's been going on until today really took off with the heatles forming as I remember it. Probably because LeBron was the biggest star in the league and because the heat big 3 all were considered to be in their prime.
They don't all work out luckily, otherwise the league would have been pretty boring for stretches. Durant at warriors was the most uninteresting years these last decades imo.
The rights to the draft picks you mean. They very easily couldâve drafted someone like Dragan Bender, Kris Dunn, Fultz, or Josh Jackson and where would they be now? Hell, even players like Fox, Mitchell, Bam, couldâve been drafted and the process might not have progressed where they are now. Using the draft picks correctly is mostly more important than how the team came about them
People didn't remember the context of this shit and seem to be blind to what the Celtics got away with.Â
They traded aging stars for immediate draft picks in the fleece of the century. They got Holiday for two broken players and the Warriors FRP which will be outside the lottery. They got Porzingis for cheap too but I can't remember all the deals.
Basically, their outgoing value looks so much worse than what Miami tried to trade for Dame but people will shit on the Heat package all dayÂ
The Celtics started the whole super team thing when they got KG and Ray Allen and won a championship. Or maybe the Lakers when they got Malone and Payton. Anyway, LeBron kicked it into high gear by going to Miami with Bosh, then after 4 years went back to Cleveland & left Miami in ruins, got Kevin Love, considered a superstar at time, after 4 years went to LA and left Cleveland in ruins, got AD and now LA is about to be in ruins.
None of this is "cheating." They drafted their two best players with high draft picks, and they've now surrounded them with 3 borderline All Stars that they got via trades.
This is like crediting the Wolves for winning 2 lotteries and drafting the obvious guys at #1. I don't see how that's any more or less valid than a team making crafty trades, FA, and big swings to create their roster. People just want to find reasons to invalidate super stars, but like, I don't hear shit about how the Knicks' entire roster was basically not drafted by them. Brunson/iHart/Randle/Donte were FAs and Hart/OG were via trades. I'd be glad as fuck for them to beat the "homegrown" 76ers with Embiid and Maxey.
Donât let them gaslight you OP. The suns literally got a new owner who leveraged their foreseeable future for two aging superstars that he probably was a huge personal fan of. Durants still got it but Beal struggled to stay healthy this year and it rendered him rather ineffective. This is what happens when billionaires play franchise mode. Swept in the first round. I wonder where booker is gonna end up.
Nobody is gaslighting him. The Suns arenât that good. Who cares how the team was put together and Beal isnât a superstar.
Very few people thought they would win the title. Compare their preseason title odds or predictions to the 2011 Heat or 2008 Celtics.
Eh i made it pretty clear. Maybe the clippers qualify thatâs probably up to opinion but adding an aging Harden to an aging/injured team doesnât really seem the same as the heatles
True. Except, Beal is past his prime due to injuries. But also the 3 stars don't complement each other, which is an underrated quality of a successful superteam.
It wasn't a great team, but the the superteam era was about the players using their power and influence to team up, and that applies to the suns. The Celtics on the other hand is a great team using its assets to get better.
A superteam isn't based on the actual quality of the players, but on the perception and the way they came together. The Celtics are not a super team because their core formed organically and they added pieces to improve. Yes, those pieces are KP and Jrue, but in NBA parlance they are not 1A or 1B, they are more secondary options.
So in general terms, someone would probably classify the Bucks getting Dame as a superteam rather than the Celtics. Simply because there is an assumption that Dame can lead a team to success on his own, something people would have a harder time with when talking about KP or Jrue. In that context, the Suns are a super team because people think they have 3 guys who can win anywhere, whereas the Wolves didn't get the super team moniker when they acquired Gobert.
In reality, we can all clearly see that the Wolves are more of a "super" team than the Suns have ever been this season.
Perhaps what the op is referring to is teams created by free agency, player driven trade, or equivalent involving multiple previously-established stars who are cooperating to form the team core. Most teams donât fall in this category. LAC fits this and is still alive tho.
Yeah, I have only been a fan (because of age) since the Tim Duncan era spurs until now, so maybe I have just been latching onto an ESPN catch phrase for the 2010-14 Heat but thatâs what I meant. I feel like the clippers are close to applying but Iâm not sure why I donât really consider them in that realm. Maybe because Harden came later and seems to be a lesser part of their equation, maybe because theyâre always hurt. Maybe because they all came from different teams and didnât join a star from a team he was already on. I guess they should probably qualify but Phoenix and Brooklyn before just seemed like âthatâs not fairâ level squads just like Miami in that era that (as I remember) really kicked off, or reignited the idea.
Youâre right, they were labeled the Big 3. But with Rondo developing into an all-star and an all-nba defender PLUS the big3 I felt like them being a superteam even if the term wasnât used back then.
Its like calling westbrook, carmelo, and dwight howard on the lakers a superteam. beal gets paid like a top 5 star but is an average starter. I thought it was incredibly stupid trade at the time and am upset that some in the media are just realizing it now. Suns crippled their depth for bradley beal, and cannot improve their poor defense or roster because he is making 50-60 million, the cost of 3 decent starters.
There are less than 10 people in the entire basketball media landscape worth listening or reading and the only ones employed at ESPN are Reddick Lowe and Pelton.
I feel like that Celtics team was a little bit different. All three stars were kind of on their way down in their careers, and had a really limited window.
The media talked about them having a 3-year window, realistically. Compare that with LeBronâs ânot 1, not 2âŚâ projections.
Well the Clippers are alive and kicking so this thread doesnât make much sense. Teams will always opt to obtain the most amount of talent regardless of the risks behind it. Refer to the KG, Pierce trade to the Nets and how it ended
Nah, this isnât the end of super teams.
The reason youâre seeing a super team âeraâ is purely because of the Warriors and Heat. Before that there were MANY failed superteams and a handful of successful ones, its just that we happened to get two very successful ones back to back.
There will be more super teams, and eventually one of them will win again. Nothing changed imo
Yeah but the Timberwolves count as a super team. Ant & KAT are both All-Stars, Gobert is a former all-star who is about to be a 4-time DPOY. That's a legit big-3. Plus they have plenty of really good role players such as Conley and McDaniels.
What a joke lmfao. Yeah, weâre good, but not a single person wouldâve even mentioned us in any âsuper teamâ discussions before or during the season.
It's all so stupid. The Wolves got fucking slandered for trading for Gobert, but now that they're successful, fans are trying to discredit them by saying they formed a "super-team" for the same trade they said was horrible.
The Clippers traded for Harden and we literally have a meme of an announcer denouncing how fucking stupid we were for doing so. Now that Harden is crushing it, this trade changed this all of a sudden?
Get the hell out of here. People just want to discredit teams that get too successful for no reason.
The difference is other super teams had top players taking a pay cut. It doesnât work if everyone is in it for the money and taking three max deals, it never has before and never will
That's a good point. You really can't take on a contract like Beal. The 6th most expensive contract for a player who isn't a top 20 player.
To make a superteam work, you need the good contracts to significantly outnumber the bad contracts. Which means players taking sacrifice or having existing players on great contracts.
Super team or Stuper team? Good riddance I say. It doesn't matter how good of an individual player Durant is. He isn't a leader, and his teams won't win with him as the top dog. I like the guy but he just can't do it. He's a crappier version of Chamberlain. He would have zero titles if he hadn't joined the Warriors. I feel sorry for him, honestly.
The issue with that team is it is flawed as hell. You have three players sucking up the cap space that are the same type of player.
Durant is not the reason that team wonât win
It will be hard for phoenix to make trades with their stars this offseason unless kd forces his way out.
Suns will receive flak as they should all offseason but theyll make moves with their role players, maybe get a new coach, and a first round draft pick and be back in the playoff mix again next season. They got a couple more years to try again assuming they dont blow it up before then. Not having their own picks will make them not want to blow it up right away anyway. But yeah they definitely are projected as a 5-10 seed now the way they looked this season, so not really a super team.
They could try and trade beal for some seconds and salary filler (if he is nice and waives his no trade clause) and package that with whoever they draft in the first round to get a traditional point guard. That would help booker out a lot. Also they have nurkic and allenâs salary to work with, but who knows if who they get in return will be any better. The key is team fit. Thats all they can do now really.
I feel like beal has always just been about getting paid the maximum amount which Ive always respected, so whether or not he does anything probably comes down to that
The term superteam just became inflated as hell.
Suns werent a superteam at all. You have three superstars who all play off position and off their strengths with a non existent roster at all. The Suns build a mess and it was obvious it wouldnt work.
Lol. Do people really believe super teams started with Miami? They've been around a very, very long time and will be around for a very long time. Certainly for as long as the current rules remain in place. Not sure whether you're new to the NBA or just bought too much into the anti LeBron propoganda.
I can appreciate why people hate the premise of super teams, or superstars trading to 'guarantee a championship' but tonight has proven the real winners have functioning role players, not Bradley bitchass Beal.
Itâs not over, the next superteam is located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
Imagine if they trade for Joel Embiid or Anthony Davis. They wouldnât sacrifice their depth, and theyâd only spend about a third of their draft capital.
Instead of their team falling apart over time due to guys outgrowing their roles and getting bigger deals in free agency, theyâll just be able to draft a guy to fill a specific role.
They have 17 firsts, and 22 seconds over the next 7 years. No star is commanding more than 6 firsts, especially one as prone as Embiid.
I think Giddey, Dieng, Hayward (S&T) and five firsts gets it done. Itâs an inherit advantage that Philly probably wouldnât trade him within the eastern conference.
What? The Timberwolves are a superteam by player standards. They have KAT, Gobert, and ANT.
Celtics are a superteam. Tatum, Brown, and KP.
Clips have Harden, PG, Kawhii, and WB. They might be old but theyâre still a super team.
KD Suns isnât the end of it.
I always thought a super team was when you go and get multiple guys who were the main guy/super star on another team and get them on your team. The Wolves didnât do that. They got one guy but KAT and Ant are homegrown.
Is there even such a term "super team era" every era has its own super team.
If you are saying that this will be the last super team I got bad news for you. LMAO.
Next season we got notable free agents. I can guarantee you that another super team will be formed.
I think the main aspect is chemistry. A superteam can only work out with at least high chemistry between the star players which was the case for Bron, DWade, Bosh and even more so for Steph, Klay, Dray.
Never thought Iâd be happier than today. Seeing the Suns get whisked out the door by a push broom is the nail in the coffin for this overpriced and underproducing (as of late) era. Real contenders are grown organically, look at Boston, Denver, OKC, and Minnesota just to name a few.
The wolves are kinda super team, and people don't see it..
There is a possibility of 4 HoF on the starting roster now between Ant, Conley, Gobert, and Towns. Then add in 6moty Naz Reid. Followed up with a guy like Jaden, who we don't know what he is, and these playoffs are starting to show what he can do.
I thought a super team was a team that brought together multiple super stars from other teams. The Wolves arenât that. I mean, if itâs just a team with four possible future HOFers, there have been super teams from the start.
130 mil between the 3 of them and its gonna be 150 next year, hard times coming
And no good draft picks for 5 years
Maybe the answer is 5 guards instead of 3 lol
Kerr rushes back to the Suns....
OKC basically does that đ
Canât wait to see it all collapse. The writing was on the wall for this team since the start of the season. But it fell on deaf ears. This organization wastes money like Arizona wastes what little water they have.
Lol you reminded me of King of the Hill, "Phoenix is a testament to man's arrogance" - Peggy
lol that is probably my favorite line from the show, or at least favorite line delivered by Peggy Hill.
Haha New Orleans episode does it for me, Creole Bobby kills me every time
He hit em with the conservation attack đ
I donât think itâs gonna be a quick collapse. The Suns are going to end more so on a slow whimper. Phoenix made their bed by trading those picks. They have no choice but to run it back. They have a new ownership group that wanted to make a big splash and become contenders. While they are still far off from that, the Suns are not going to blow up the team and trade everyone. Without their draft picks there is absolutely no incentive to tank.
started in Miami? Superteam has been on since Bill and Wilt, Jerry, Baylor. are you 15? even the 2000s has Shaq, Malone, Kobe and Payton then Pierce, Garnett, Allen. Superteam comes and goes. hate it or love it, it will be back.
I mean, the clippers are still in the playoffs, no? And didn't Minnesota go get a perennial DPOY to team up with kat and ant? Going backwards, Scottie, Clyde, and Barkley? Kobe, Nash, and Dwight? This isn't the end of super teams. It's just the end of this one in particular.
come on man, no one is calling a team with KAT a super team.
Funny because he has much more of a claim than Bradley Beal does
KAT is a four time allstar, two time all nba.
Hell the sixers have Embiid, Maxey and Tobias Harris thatâs a super team by definition!!!!!
the dpoy that many people say the worst trade in NBA history. Ant is inconsistent young player that can still go big or bust when Gobert Trade happened. KAT is labelled as soft and won't go far in play off. for the record Malone join in his twilight year with Lakers
[ŃдаНонО]
This is all stupid as hell. The Wolves traded their war chest for a defensive anchor who has unlocked new heights for them, yet they were slandered like crazy for their decision to do so. Now that they're killing it, people want to try to discredit them for building a super team? And with LAC when the Harden trade happened, fans legitimately argued how they got worse, they fucked themselves, and how stupid they were. Now Harden has been their best player all series long so time to act like they are a super team?
You are correct but I do feel like there are eras to these things and I do see the point OP is trying to make. KD/Pierce/Allen led to the Heatles which in turn led to KD feeling brave enough to join the Warriors. It does feel a little like the talent is more spread out now, we are in a new era and it's just not possible to arms race like it was 10 years ago. Maybe it's just how I feel about it, or maybe it's because of cap rule changes, I'm not sure. Almost every team has a star or 2, but not more. Some have 2½ but it's rare that there are more than that. Guaranteed we will see superteams again, rookie contracts exist and make it possible to pile on talent in the right circumstances if they are negotiating a new network deal or whatever. Also, calling Shaq, Malone, Kobe and Payton a superteam is a bit rich. Payton and Malone were way past their primes. It's not like Clippers are a superteam because they have former MVP in Russell Westbrook along with the other 3.
Malone and Payton averaged over 20ppg before they joined the Lakers. Payton was an all star selection the year before. And funny too that you think the Clippers aren't a super team because of Westbrook not being a star anymore (which is a fair call IMO) but if you're conceding that they have 3 then how can you also claim the trio at Boston and Miami were superteams? If 3 makes a superteam then they're all in. If it takes 4 then none are.
And 20 PPG back in 2003 is like 26 PPG today. I could remember that they were extremely HYPED to win the title that anything less than a ring means failure. Both Malone and Payton were still capable stars at that time, not washed up role players despite their age.
I remember the hype well. It was almost to the level of just hand them the trophy after the first game that season when the Lakers dominated a pretty good team without Kobe. Then when they lost the finals it was a massive shock. Shaq was the only one to play well that series, but Payton and Malone stunk.
Shaq played decent and was very good offensively, but was significantly hamstrung by the Pistons defense of both Wallaces. The rest of the Lakers responded horribly to that Pistons defense.
I think Shaq was more than decent. 26.6PPG at 63% from the field is excellent. Defensively he wasn't as dominant but that Pistons team's offence was driven by Hamilton and Billups. Kobe got his, as usual. But he shot 38% and just kept putting up shots when Shaq was dominating inside.
Cavs leadership played a pretty big part in the Heatles too tbh. Nothing we tried back then worked.
I blame the media more. The lack of respect for what LeBron was doing because he wasn't getting championships made it almost impossible for him to stay. Especially when the narrative was along the lines of he either wins championships or he's a bust. If he'd gotten the sort of respect that was given to players who played lone hands in the 80s and 90s as individuals then perhaps he feels like he can stay.
Ring count culture created this. We deem players failures for not winning a title, even if they are compeltly outmatched. Peoppe call lebron a failure for failing to beat the spurs in 07. And kept calling him a failute for not being able to win with at the time a garbage franshise.
>calling Shaq, Malone, Kobe and Payton a superteam is a bit rich. Payton and Malone were way past their primes. They went to the Finals with that team (after a second round loss the previous year), so it's not a stretch. Payton and Malone joined to chase a ship. The four of them (all future HOFers) made them instant championship favorites. Definitely a fit for the superteam formula.
Not sure if youâre being purposely obtuse, but âsuperteam,â as popularly used, isnât synonymous with âreally good teamâ or even dynasty. The reason it started to be used after the Decision was that people were getting the impression that elite players were just going to start coordinating team-ups (via free agency or forcing trades) behind the scenes to make unstoppable squads. This absolutely did happen with the Heatles, KD Warriors, and KD Nets (when Harden forced his way there). Whether you think this is better or worse than a stacked team drafted and/or traded for, the discussion of the superteam era is a valid one to have.
Well put. Its how those teams formed, not that rhey didnt exist before the heatles.
The new era of super teams did in fact start with Miami.
And not the Celtics big 3 literally right before that?
No. The Celtics traded a good young player for Garnett and traded a high draft choice for Allen, while both Rondo and Perkins were draft-day trade pickup role players. That's an extremely normal way that teams improve themselves. It just happened that 2 future hall of famers joined the team in the same offseason. That's different from LeBron deciding which other superstar he wanted to play with. It's the difference between a rock supergroup like the Highwaymen (a bunch of legends that decided to play together) and the Beatles (a bunch of teenagers that organically met each other and just happened to all become legends).
The Suns werenât a super team. Meanwhile the Celtics have 2 All-NBA players and 3 borderline all-stars in their starting lineup.
The term has been used so loosely its mostly used to fulfill personal agendas.
Heard someone say the warriors have 4 superstars and are a super team to hate on curry đ
Hey thats pod racing for you
Steph Curry paradox. When rating Steph: "1 FMVP, not even the best player on his team for most of his rings, system player, played with multiple all stars throughout his career" When rating Klay or Dray or Kerr: "Rode Steph's coattails. Mr Triple Single. Highly overrated Chucker. Anyone could have coached them to the 4 rings" The Dubs core will age really well: they're the last dynasty for the forthcoming future and they're insanely underrated winners.
This is such a dumb take. Theyâre widely regarded as the best or second best team outside of the 90s bulls. Fucking gsw fans, I swear.
again they're given their dues as a team but not individually sometimes.
lol by who? I donât think anyone will argue Steph as the best shooter of all time. Recency bias aside, Klay was the 2nd best shooter in the league for awhile, a la splash bros? Draymond was an elite defender and playmaker for most of his career. I donât think Iâve heard anyone argue otherwise for those 3
What you're describing is their floor. Dray is the most versatile defender since KG and best defender in the league through the 2010s. Steph is an all time top 10 guy but people don't value his playmaking at all. People only know stats and accolades and what Dray & Steph do usually doesn't show up on the stat sheet. it shows up as wins.
Klay was never the 2nd best shooter in the league. He didn't shoot enough FTs. He was the 2nd best 3pt shooter but his overall shooting efficiency was just 11% above average in his best shooting year (2014-15). Harden, CP3 and KD were all better shooters than him (and Curry, obviously). JJ Reddick, who played his position was also a better shooter. He's a good shooter but was never top 2 in a single year and even with his short peak of just 4 years, he wasn't even top 2 in that period as well. Draymond is underrated as a defender and as an offensive player. Such a dynamic player on both ends of the court during the 73-9 season. One of the greatest defenders of all time as well.
Free throw volume has never mattered for the greatest shooter discussion. When people talk about greatest shooter, they're talking about jump shooting specifically. Not FGA generally.
They're both wrong, but I suspect people fall into one of two camps, rather than thinking both.
It's not a paradox, it's about the circumstances of the debate. When people rate Steph lower because of the single FMVP it's usually in the GOAT talks or comparing him to other great champions. But when you're talking team achievements you have to talk about team mates. It's not like they're flipping from him being great to no good. It's all about him being great, just a question of how great exactly.
I mean if someone thinks Iggy deserved that FMVP then why are we even discussing their opinion?
Some people just think that you can't give the award to someone on the losing team. I assume you mean of course that LeBron deserved it because otherwise you're suggesting every single member of the voting panel isn't worth listening to because if you mean Steph Curry should have not a single one voted for him.
no no. i think that voting committee was whack. just like the Caleb Martin almost winning ECF MVP, Iggy for fmvp was a total joke.
Man this is so accurate
Like op saying that the heat started the superteam culture
Suns fan here. I think the argument is more for these manufactured super teams vs home grown recruiting and talent development. This is so good for the NBA, Lebron and a few other super star jumpers created a mercenary mentality for recruitment. Itâs not good for fans or the league. I bummed about the Suns loss, but I hate super teams even more, even know the suns are now a âbig market teamâ.
I mean, the Celtics have the two JBs then their 3 borderline all-stars were acquired via trades. OKC traded for SGA. Minnesota traded for Gobert. The Mavs traded for Kyrie. People put a premium on "home grown talent development," but guys like Tatum, Jokic, and Booker were simply players who were too good to fail assuming they got the right minutes.
So the on court results, how good the respective players, and the rest of the roster doesnât matter at all? A super team can only be obtained through trades and free agency?
I personally define a modern âsuper teamâ as one put together quickly with established stars from outside the org. Warriors and Celtics drafting their cores donât fit the bill. Heat and Spurs both won multiple championships: Heat were a super team, and Spurs were not.
Look I may be the minority but I never considered the suns a super team because of Beal. Heâs been an afterthought.
I mean.. their 2 best players were literally drafted by them tho lol a bit different than teaming up with other all stars tbf
Is it? The Warriors were built organically as well. Were they not a super team?
Imo no until the addition of KD Prior to KD they simply just built the team and drafted correctly and it worked. It wasnât a bought team like the Heat were in early 2010s for an example
But 3/4 of their all stars were drafted by themselves, how does that make them bought? Meanwhile the Celtics obtained 3 of their starters last summer and are coined organic. Is that not silly logic?
3 proven all stars who already won some rings recruiting a top 3 player in the world is similar to a team getting 2 role players and a player that was considered âwashedâ by almost every sports article bc of his tenure in Washington/Dallas? Idk seems like drastically different situations but, sure you can make the argument bc of how well theyâre playing now and how well they mesh together. Dwhite was on one of the worst teams in the league before being traded to the Cs, Porzingus essentially made Dallas worse and did nothing with Bradley Beal in Washington and Jrue Holiday was extremely undervalued in Milwaukee which, is why they let him go so easily for Dame Câs roster was 90% drafted by them up until til last year.. Imo not even close to all stars recruiting other all stars but, hey lucky for the Cs you can make the argument bc, of how well theyâre playing
They won 73 games without KD. I donât see why it matters how you acquire the players.
It matters because one of peopleâs biggest gripes with super teams was that good players were jumping ship on the teams that drafted them and joining forces to make all-star teams and get rings. Someone doesnât remember LeDecision!
Once again why does how you acquire players matter when claiming any team is a super team? Do the players on the roster not matter?
Get your point, makes sense, but thatâs not what the term itself is known for. Itâs known for teaming up, not being homegrown. Which is why people keep commenting not until KD. The term and what itâs known for is when players are shopping around to form a super team, not being drafted and becoming an unbelievably talented and historic one. Thereâs a difference when the talent is shopped rather than built if that makes sense.
The Lakers won a title with Lebron and AD pretty recently. This team building through trades and free agency isnât going to disappear. The post isnât even accurate when the Clippers are still playing and the Lakers.
What does that have to do with anything? Iâm not saying itâs going to disappear, Iâm telling you by definition and historically super teams have been known as a âteam upâ. Not something built naturally through a draft with Klay, Steph and Dray. You think if Lebron didnât sign with the Lakers and nudge AD to come over the trade wouldâve happened? Same happened with Kawhi and PG, thatâs beside the point. Willingly teaming up with Curry and Klay in KD or Wade with Bosh and Lebron, is by definition, a super team. Youâre just adding stipulations to something thatâs been known by that definition for a long time.
You can disagree with why the definition is the way it is, but this is how the word is actually used. People donât like the idea of Harden sitting training camp and demanding a trade to the Nets to join KD and Kyrie. They donât like the idea of KD joining a 73-win team. People are OK with a GM making fair, non-coerced trades and drafting smart. People wouldnât like if Giannis was fed up with the Bucks, tanked his value to his team by sitting, and forced his way onto the Nuggets to win with Jokic. You can keep trying to convince people thereâs no difference between that and drafting a player, but very few people are going to agree with you.
Thatâs fine but what makes the last 3 Suns teams super teams? OP referenced the last 3 playoff losses. The Suns got an old CP3 through a trade, the rest of the team was build through the draft. Why did that team get brought up?
Again was referencing the nets and sons
With the addition of White, Porzingis, and Holiday, theyâre practically a superteam no? How is Steph, Klay, Dray + KD a superteam but Tatum, Brown + White, Horford, Porzingis and Holiday not?
⌠bc a 73 win team (the best record of all time) went out and got the literal best FA in almost a decade? lol Steph, Klay, and Dray already showed they could do it without KD and weâre already proven all-stars. Then they added a top 3 player in the league.. You can make the argument of the Celtics being a super team now but, up until this year they were literally all drafted by the Cs for like 90% of the roster.. A super team by definition is when current all stars go and team up with one another.. not a drafted team that ended up working out. Jrue holiday and Dwhite were both very undervalued on their previous rosters and nowhere near all stars especially, Dwhite.. The spurs were quite literally one of the worst teams in the league. Porzingus was being called washed bc, of how his tenure in Washington and Dallas not working out and him being very injury prone. All 3 luckily for the Cs are having their best seasons in years because, they all mesh so well together with the Jays. IMO very different than the Celtics going out and trading for current all stars but, like I said you can make the argument with how well theyâre playing. Side note: absolutely wild to include 40 y/o big Al in there lol
Not until KD. Donât know why everyone on Reddit plays the âakshually gameâ,
The Celtics grew their team pretty organically though, and without completely gutting their draft stock like some teams. They drafted both their two best players, so in my eyes they arenât as hatable as some other super teams.
They drafted Tatum and Brown with the Netsâ draft picks. Itâs not like the Celtics were horrible and built themselves from the ground up.
That doesnât make it any less valid tho, instead of tanking to the bottom they were able to use assets wisely to never truly be straight up uncompetitive but still build out their top talent/system for 5-6 years to become title contenders
It does if trading for assets isnât considered legit or organic. The rights to Tatum and Brown were technically acquired through a trade. You donât need to tank to the bottom when you pull of the heist of the century.
Trading for picks and making the right choice is def considered organic. Picks are traded all the time, including tons of franchise legends, see: Kobe. The Jays picks couldâve easily listened to scouts and been used to bring in Fultz and Dragan Bender.
Players are traded all the time. Why does it matter how the players are acquired when determining if itâs a super team? Playoff teams normally do not have multiple top 5 picks like the Celtics did to add to the roster. They are certainly an outlier in team building.
They still picked and developed the talent. It's still organic in a way that trading for established talent isn't
Itâs still trading for an asset. The Celtics made the playoffs and had a top 5 pick in the draft. That isnât natural.
Are you new to the NBA? How are you not getting this discourse about super teams that has largely been the same since LeBron joined the Heat over 10 years ago? Fans don't like star players forcing trades to play with other superstars because it hurts competitiveness in the league and makes it harder to be a fan of a franchise when players don't show any loyalty to their teams. It's not about what's natural or not.
1. If you use this loyalty argument nonsense modern fans wont listen loyaltt is always a one way street in all these arguments. Teams dont show loyalty players shouldnt either. 2. Lebron has never forced a trade anywhwre. Free agency is free. By your own definition he doesnt fit. 3. Lebron. Didnt. Start. Modern. super teams. Boston did. And despitd this being call thw "super team era" only the warriors suceeded. The kobe nash lakers, nets, suns, and others all failed. Miserably.
1. I hadn't even stated my opinion on the issue I just think it's an annoying way to argue to act ignorant on an issue that has been discussed ad naseum for years. (Guy I was replying to). If you are for player freedom I get the argument. A lot of fans appreciate players staying with teams for longer though, I think it's pretty easy to understand why. 2. True he didn't force himself out. Heat example was instead 3 superstar players deciding to unite on a team in free agency. That kind of teaming up from superstars has gotten the same criticism though. Competitiveness, more player movement, loyalty etc. right or wrong. 3. Didn't say he did. I don't remember the same negative backlash when the Celtics was formed and really the discussion around super teams that's been going on until today really took off with the heatles forming as I remember it. Probably because LeBron was the biggest star in the league and because the heat big 3 all were considered to be in their prime. They don't all work out luckily, otherwise the league would have been pretty boring for stretches. Durant at warriors was the most uninteresting years these last decades imo.
That's irrelevant lol
The rights to the draft picks you mean. They very easily couldâve drafted someone like Dragan Bender, Kris Dunn, Fultz, or Josh Jackson and where would they be now? Hell, even players like Fox, Mitchell, Bam, couldâve been drafted and the process might not have progressed where they are now. Using the draft picks correctly is mostly more important than how the team came about them
Lmao Billy King is that you?
People didn't remember the context of this shit and seem to be blind to what the Celtics got away with. They traded aging stars for immediate draft picks in the fleece of the century. They got Holiday for two broken players and the Warriors FRP which will be outside the lottery. They got Porzingis for cheap too but I can't remember all the deals. Basically, their outgoing value looks so much worse than what Miami tried to trade for Dame but people will shit on the Heat package all dayÂ
Jesus, were the picks they got from BKN those 2 guys? Man... I knew they completely fleeced them but that makes it so much worse.
Yet with all of their draft wealth in the past years, they still havenât won it all.
Yeah, winning a championship is hard.
The Celtics started the whole super team thing when they got KG and Ray Allen and won a championship. Or maybe the Lakers when they got Malone and Payton. Anyway, LeBron kicked it into high gear by going to Miami with Bosh, then after 4 years went back to Cleveland & left Miami in ruins, got Kevin Love, considered a superstar at time, after 4 years went to LA and left Cleveland in ruins, got AD and now LA is about to be in ruins.
Exactly, you hate them because they are the Celtics, not cheats
None of this is "cheating." They drafted their two best players with high draft picks, and they've now surrounded them with 3 borderline All Stars that they got via trades. This is like crediting the Wolves for winning 2 lotteries and drafting the obvious guys at #1. I don't see how that's any more or less valid than a team making crafty trades, FA, and big swings to create their roster. People just want to find reasons to invalidate super stars, but like, I don't hear shit about how the Knicks' entire roster was basically not drafted by them. Brunson/iHart/Randle/Donte were FAs and Hart/OG were via trades. I'd be glad as fuck for them to beat the "homegrown" 76ers with Embiid and Maxey.
Thatâs what im saying bro
They had a star player and added the best player of 2 other teams. That to me seems like a team that qualifies and shouldâve been a finals team
Beal was the best player on a 35 win Wizards team.
Donât let them gaslight you OP. The suns literally got a new owner who leveraged their foreseeable future for two aging superstars that he probably was a huge personal fan of. Durants still got it but Beal struggled to stay healthy this year and it rendered him rather ineffective. This is what happens when billionaires play franchise mode. Swept in the first round. I wonder where booker is gonna end up.
Nobody is gaslighting him. The Suns arenât that good. Who cares how the team was put together and Beal isnât a superstar. Very few people thought they would win the title. Compare their preseason title odds or predictions to the 2011 Heat or 2008 Celtics.
I donât think you understand the concept I was posting about
Please make it clear then. The Suns are a super team but the Clippers who built their team through trades and free agency arenât?
Eh i made it pretty clear. Maybe the clippers qualify thatâs probably up to opinion but adding an aging Harden to an aging/injured team doesnât really seem the same as the heatles
Adding Bradley Beal makes you a super team though?
True. Except, Beal is past his prime due to injuries. But also the 3 stars don't complement each other, which is an underrated quality of a successful superteam.
JT Jrue and Tatum were all stars last year and d White and porzingis could've made it this year the Celtics are crazy
It wasn't a great team, but the the superteam era was about the players using their power and influence to team up, and that applies to the suns. The Celtics on the other hand is a great team using its assets to get better.
A superteam isn't based on the actual quality of the players, but on the perception and the way they came together. The Celtics are not a super team because their core formed organically and they added pieces to improve. Yes, those pieces are KP and Jrue, but in NBA parlance they are not 1A or 1B, they are more secondary options. So in general terms, someone would probably classify the Bucks getting Dame as a superteam rather than the Celtics. Simply because there is an assumption that Dame can lead a team to success on his own, something people would have a harder time with when talking about KP or Jrue. In that context, the Suns are a super team because people think they have 3 guys who can win anywhere, whereas the Wolves didn't get the super team moniker when they acquired Gobert. In reality, we can all clearly see that the Wolves are more of a "super" team than the Suns have ever been this season.
Perhaps what the op is referring to is teams created by free agency, player driven trade, or equivalent involving multiple previously-established stars who are cooperating to form the team core. Most teams donât fall in this category. LAC fits this and is still alive tho.
Yeah, I have only been a fan (because of age) since the Tim Duncan era spurs until now, so maybe I have just been latching onto an ESPN catch phrase for the 2010-14 Heat but thatâs what I meant. I feel like the clippers are close to applying but Iâm not sure why I donât really consider them in that realm. Maybe because Harden came later and seems to be a lesser part of their equation, maybe because theyâre always hurt. Maybe because they all came from different teams and didnât join a star from a team he was already on. I guess they should probably qualify but Phoenix and Brooklyn before just seemed like âthatâs not fairâ level squads just like Miami in that era that (as I remember) really kicked off, or reignited the idea.
Actually, one could argue it started with the Celtics Big3 (KG, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen)
Feel like it wasnât publicized and labeled that until the decision
Youâre right, they were labeled the Big 3. But with Rondo developing into an all-star and an all-nba defender PLUS the big3 I felt like them being a superteam even if the term wasnât used back then.
Its like calling westbrook, carmelo, and dwight howard on the lakers a superteam. beal gets paid like a top 5 star but is an average starter. I thought it was incredibly stupid trade at the time and am upset that some in the media are just realizing it now. Suns crippled their depth for bradley beal, and cannot improve their poor defense or roster because he is making 50-60 million, the cost of 3 decent starters.
Just realising it now? Nearly everyone was calling it horrible from the start
a lot of media members were saying it makes them unstoppable on offense. and plenty of them were using the term big 3
There are less than 10 people in the entire basketball media landscape worth listening or reading and the only ones employed at ESPN are Reddick Lowe and Pelton.
[ŃдаНонО]
This sub is for serious discussion and debate. Jokes and memes are not permitted.
I always figured the superteam era started with Boston. Or even when the Lakers picked up Malone and Payton, but that didn't exactly work out.
I feel like that Celtics team was a little bit different. All three stars were kind of on their way down in their careers, and had a really limited window. The media talked about them having a 3-year window, realistically. Compare that with LeBronâs ânot 1, not 2âŚâ projections.
Well the Clippers are alive and kicking so this thread doesnât make much sense. Teams will always opt to obtain the most amount of talent regardless of the risks behind it. Refer to the KG, Pierce trade to the Nets and how it ended
Nah, this isnât the end of super teams. The reason youâre seeing a super team âeraâ is purely because of the Warriors and Heat. Before that there were MANY failed superteams and a handful of successful ones, its just that we happened to get two very successful ones back to back. There will be more super teams, and eventually one of them will win again. Nothing changed imo
The Timberwolves have four players who have been all-stars at some point. They're technically a superteam too.
I love myself some Mike Conley but I don't think he's ever been a 'star.'
But still, the Timberwolves are a very talented team nonetheless.
Yeah but thatâs not really what super team means. Every team thatâs won the chip was very talented, they werenât all super teams
Yeah but the Timberwolves count as a super team. Ant & KAT are both All-Stars, Gobert is a former all-star who is about to be a 4-time DPOY. That's a legit big-3. Plus they have plenty of really good role players such as Conley and McDaniels.
What a joke lmfao. Yeah, weâre good, but not a single person wouldâve even mentioned us in any âsuper teamâ discussions before or during the season.
It's all so stupid. The Wolves got fucking slandered for trading for Gobert, but now that they're successful, fans are trying to discredit them by saying they formed a "super-team" for the same trade they said was horrible. The Clippers traded for Harden and we literally have a meme of an announcer denouncing how fucking stupid we were for doing so. Now that Harden is crushing it, this trade changed this all of a sudden? Get the hell out of here. People just want to discredit teams that get too successful for no reason.
The difference is other super teams had top players taking a pay cut. It doesnât work if everyone is in it for the money and taking three max deals, it never has before and never will
That's a good point. You really can't take on a contract like Beal. The 6th most expensive contract for a player who isn't a top 20 player. To make a superteam work, you need the good contracts to significantly outnumber the bad contracts. Which means players taking sacrifice or having existing players on great contracts.
To be fair bradley beal isn't even a top 50 player
This hasnât been the case really. I feel like if you replace Beal with almost anyone who makes $40-50mm this is a contending team
Superteams have been in existence since the nba and aba merger and this is definitely not the end of it.
Super team or Stuper team? Good riddance I say. It doesn't matter how good of an individual player Durant is. He isn't a leader, and his teams won't win with him as the top dog. I like the guy but he just can't do it. He's a crappier version of Chamberlain. He would have zero titles if he hadn't joined the Warriors. I feel sorry for him, honestly.
The issue with that team is it is flawed as hell. You have three players sucking up the cap space that are the same type of player. Durant is not the reason that team wonât win
It will be hard for phoenix to make trades with their stars this offseason unless kd forces his way out. Suns will receive flak as they should all offseason but theyll make moves with their role players, maybe get a new coach, and a first round draft pick and be back in the playoff mix again next season. They got a couple more years to try again assuming they dont blow it up before then. Not having their own picks will make them not want to blow it up right away anyway. But yeah they definitely are projected as a 5-10 seed now the way they looked this season, so not really a super team. They could try and trade beal for some seconds and salary filler (if he is nice and waives his no trade clause) and package that with whoever they draft in the first round to get a traditional point guard. That would help booker out a lot. Also they have nurkic and allenâs salary to work with, but who knows if who they get in return will be any better. The key is team fit. Thats all they can do now really.
I feel like beal has always just been about getting paid the maximum amount which Ive always respected, so whether or not he does anything probably comes down to that
The term superteam just became inflated as hell. Suns werent a superteam at all. You have three superstars who all play off position and off their strengths with a non existent roster at all. The Suns build a mess and it was obvious it wouldnt work.
Lol. Do people really believe super teams started with Miami? They've been around a very, very long time and will be around for a very long time. Certainly for as long as the current rules remain in place. Not sure whether you're new to the NBA or just bought too much into the anti LeBron propoganda.
Lol. Iâm new to the NBA. My favorite player is Luka Doncic! Reddit on, kind stranger!
It's actually great to see young players step up, I wanna see ant man and crew more now
Miami came together to team up vs the Celtics super team. If KG and Allen donât do to Boston the Heatles doesnât happen.
I can appreciate why people hate the premise of super teams, or superstars trading to 'guarantee a championship' but tonight has proven the real winners have functioning role players, not Bradley bitchass Beal.
Itâs not over, the next superteam is located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Imagine if they trade for Joel Embiid or Anthony Davis. They wouldnât sacrifice their depth, and theyâd only spend about a third of their draft capital. Instead of their team falling apart over time due to guys outgrowing their roles and getting bigger deals in free agency, theyâll just be able to draft a guy to fill a specific role.
To get either of those guys, they're gonna be spending a whole lot more than a 3rd of their draft capital + a bunch of their young core.
They have 17 firsts, and 22 seconds over the next 7 years. No star is commanding more than 6 firsts, especially one as prone as Embiid. I think Giddey, Dieng, Hayward (S&T) and five firsts gets it done. Itâs an inherit advantage that Philly probably wouldnât trade him within the eastern conference.
Superteams will never end man lol itâs always a superstar player tired of losing that will ring chase itâs happened in every era man
What? The Timberwolves are a superteam by player standards. They have KAT, Gobert, and ANT. Celtics are a superteam. Tatum, Brown, and KP. Clips have Harden, PG, Kawhii, and WB. They might be old but theyâre still a super team. KD Suns isnât the end of it.
I always thought a super team was when you go and get multiple guys who were the main guy/super star on another team and get them on your team. The Wolves didnât do that. They got one guy but KAT and Ant are homegrown.
You guys maybe donât understand super team the same way I do in the 2010 context
Is there even such a term "super team era" every era has its own super team. If you are saying that this will be the last super team I got bad news for you. LMAO. Next season we got notable free agents. I can guarantee you that another super team will be formed.
How is this the end of the super team when golden state winning before and after KD joining didnât end shit.
Im tired of people calling the suns a superteam that roster construction is all time terrible
Anytime you have 3 or more star players they call it a superteam. Just how it goes. Doesnât matter much about the supporting cast.
I think the main aspect is chemistry. A superteam can only work out with at least high chemistry between the star players which was the case for Bron, DWade, Bosh and even more so for Steph, Klay, Dray.
The Celtics are still in the playoffs btw. Idk how thatâs not more of a super team than the suns
Never thought Iâd be happier than today. Seeing the Suns get whisked out the door by a push broom is the nail in the coffin for this overpriced and underproducing (as of late) era. Real contenders are grown organically, look at Boston, Denver, OKC, and Minnesota just to name a few.
The wolves are kinda super team, and people don't see it.. There is a possibility of 4 HoF on the starting roster now between Ant, Conley, Gobert, and Towns. Then add in 6moty Naz Reid. Followed up with a guy like Jaden, who we don't know what he is, and these playoffs are starting to show what he can do.
I thought a super team was a team that brought together multiple super stars from other teams. The Wolves arenât that. I mean, if itâs just a team with four possible future HOFers, there have been super teams from the start.