2010-11 NBA Season

[Lights Out]

No, I'm complaining about the minimal effort it takes the top tier of the NBA to build a Big Three. I mean, all the superstars in the league are going to the same five cities. That prevents any other team from growing with experience and actually working towards a title like teams can do in football and even baseball.

I guess what I'm trying to say (and confusing everyone while doing it) is that there needs to be more parity in the NBA.

[IceCap]

No, I'm complaining about the minimal effort it takes the top tier of the NBA to build a Big Three. I mean, all the superstars in the league are going to the same five cities. That prevents any other team from growing with experience and actually working towards a title like teams can do in football and even baseball.

May I direct your attention to Yankees, New York?

[Lights Out]

Their massive payroll gives them a head start over the field, for sure, but we've seen several times in the last decade that teams with far-smaller payrolls can still beat them in the playoffs and either win or come close to a title (Diamondbacks, Marlins, Rangers). Compare that to the NBA, where only eight franchises out of a 30-team league have won a title since the mid-'80s.

[cameroncrazie07]

No, I'm complaining about the minimal effort it takes the top tier of the NBA to build a Big Three. I mean, all the superstars in the league are going to the same five cities. That prevents any other team from growing with experience and actually working towards a title like teams can do in football and even baseball.

May I direct your attention to Yankees, New York?

Yeah, but in baseball you can't dominate with buying the best players. The Yankees have been doing it for the last decade and they've won twice.

[rams80]

No, I'm complaining about the minimal effort it takes the top tier of the NBA to build a Big Three. I mean, all the superstars in the league are going to the same five cities. That prevents any other team from growing with experience and actually working towards a title like teams can do in football and even baseball.

May I direct your attention to Yankees, New York?

Yeah, but in baseball you can't dominate with buying the best players. The Yankees have been doing it for the last decade and they've won twice.

The playoffs are a crapshoot. Please note that the Yankees have made them 9 out of the last 10 seasons, which increases the chance they could win the crapshoot.

[srj34]

FWIW, Last 30 seasons:

NBA: 8 franchises won championships

NFL: 15 franchises won

MLB: 19 franchises won

[loogodude90]

FWIW, Last 30 seasons:

NBA: 8 franchises won championships

NFL: 15 franchises won

MLB: 19 franchises won

I don't know how meaningful those stats are.

The Celtics and Pistons championships were almost entire generations apart. I don't see how the Celtics winning in 1986 and then not winning until 2008 really proves anything. I think it's more of a coincidence than anything.

Same with the Lakers dynasties. Their dynasties had a lot of gaps. They won in 1988 and then didn't win again until 2000. I feel like that's, again, somewhat of a coincidence.

[cameroncrazie07]

No, I'm complaining about the minimal effort it takes the top tier of the NBA to build a Big Three. I mean, all the superstars in the league are going to the same five cities. That prevents any other team from growing with experience and actually working towards a title like teams can do in football and even baseball.

May I direct your attention to Yankees, New York?

Yeah, but in baseball you can't dominate with buying the best players. The Yankees have been doing it for the last decade and they've won twice.

The playoffs are a crapshoot. Please note that the Yankees have made them 9 out of the last 10 seasons, which increases the chance they could win the crapshoot.

But they won only once, to be honest you could say that about any playoffs. Getting stars doesn't guarantee you a title.

[srj34]

I don't know how meaningful those stats are

FWIW = For What It's Worth, ie, it's not worth anything more than what it is. There could be a zillion reasons why the championships went the way they did.

[NJTank]

I think its the nature of the beast with the NBA one superstar can make the difference and if you have a robin for batman you can be a dynasty. A hard cap actually helps keeps these teams in place.

[cameroncrazie07]

I think its the nature of the beast with the NBA one superstar can make the difference and if you have a robin for batman you can be a dynasty. A hard cap actually helps keeps these teams in place.

It is bad, but I think the players should still have the right. If they let Lebron/Melo do it, they can't stop others.

[knnhrvy16]

Man, no matter how this game turns out, I can't believe how well and how hard the Jazz have been playing against the Celtics tonight. They're just hanging in there and not letting anything stop them. I didn't expect them to keep the entire game this close! The Jazz are making real strides, and it's showing. Ty Corbin has these guys playing the hardest they've played in a long while, and Harris and Favors are fitting in and playing VERY well too....I've got alot of faith in these guys!

EDIT: Darn it, Celtics win 107-102 in SLC. I can't say I'm dissapointed though, one HELL of a performance by the Jazz tonight, especially considering thier recent circumstances. Couldn't be prouder of thier fight to the end. The one thing I will say about the game though, was that all the Celtics fans there were annoying as hell....a good 97% of them likely Utah residents who are anti-Jazz bandwagoners for the fun of it (believe me, there are LOTS of them here). Oh well, as stated, the Jazz played extremely hard tonight, no reason to hang thier heads down.

[rams80]

No, I'm complaining about the minimal effort it takes the top tier of the NBA to build a Big Three. I mean, all the superstars in the league are going to the same five cities. That prevents any other team from growing with experience and actually working towards a title like teams can do in football and even baseball.

May I direct your attention to Yankees, New York?

Yeah, but in baseball you can't dominate with buying the best players. The Yankees have been doing it for the last decade and they've won twice.

The playoffs are a crapshoot. Please note that the Yankees have made them 9 out of the last 10 seasons, which increases the chance they could win the crapshoot.

But they won only once, to be honest you could say that about any playoffs. Getting stars doesn't guarantee you a title.

But it does guarantee you a shot at the title. Which is more than what the Royals, Nationals, or Pirates can say.

[infrared41]

Well, maybe the Blazers/Nuggets/Rockets/Suns/Bobcats/Hawks/etc. should put together a big three and compete. You can't blame the league for players wanting to win games. That's the objective of competition: To win. You're just mad the Clippers aren't one of those super-teams. It's called building a good team. The teams that have good players usually end up winning games. Why would they stop trying to compete?

And by the way, It's great to be a fan of one of those teams. You should try it.

Does that mean I'm allowed to pick up where I left off with the Lakers in 1991 without being called a frontrunner?

While we're on the subject, I'm looking for a team to "call my own" and it would seem the Lakers have to be in the running. Allow me to present my case (or dilemma I guess) with the Lakers.

I became a Lakers fan in 1975 when Kareem was traded there. (I was a Bucks fan before that) For the next 16 years I was a diehard Lakers fan. After Magic retired in 1991 I drifted away from following the NBA closely enough to really claim a "favorite" team. Buy the mid 90's I was paying no attention to the NBA. Last season I started following the NBA again but I am now a fan without a team. I'd like to "have a team" again. Since I already have in 16 years with the Lakers, I suppose it makes the most sense to just pick up where I left off. Despite the fact that I've probably got in more time as a Lakers fan than most of the current Lakers fans around here, I'm not crazy about the idea of "becoming a fan" of the back to back NBA champions. No one wants to be labeled a front runner. (just ask Drakonius )

Since rejoining the Lakers will likely be considered front running, I've been looking at some other teams too.

The Knicks: I think it would be cool to be a Knicks fan. I've always liked their uniforms (the traditional ones), I owned a pair of Puma "Clydes" when I was a kid (Walt Frazier's shoes for those of you too young to know what i'm talking about), and I did live in the state of New York (Syracuse) for seven years.

The Bulls: I really enjoyed watching the Bulls when they played Miami the other night, I really got a kick out of that Noah kid, and they have great uniforms.

So those are the three teams I'm interested in. I'll gladly entertain offers from other fan bases. (Except the Celtics. Even though I may not end up back with the Lakers, I still have to honor the fact that I hated the Celtics with an irrational passion for the entire decade of the 80's.)

Odds are that, since I'm from Ohio, someone is going to bring up the Cavs. Here's the thing, even though I'm from Ohio, I've never been interested in being a Cavs fan. After that pathetic display in July there's simply no way in Hell I'm aligning myself with that group. Being a Browns fan is bad enough.

Judges?

[Drakonius26]

Well, maybe the Blazers/Nuggets/Rockets/Suns/Bobcats/Hawks/etc. should put together a big three and compete. You can't blame the league for players wanting to win games. That's the objective of competition: To win. You're just mad the Clippers aren't one of those super-teams. It's called building a good team. The teams that have good players usually end up winning games. Why would they stop trying to compete?

And by the way, It's great to be a fan of one of those teams. You should try it.

Does that mean I'm allowed to pick up where I left off with the Lakers in 1991 without being called a frontrunner?

While we're on the subject, I'm looking for a team to "call my own" and it would seem the Lakers have to be in the running. Allow me to present my case (or dilemma I guess) with the Lakers.

I became a Lakers fan in 1975 when Kareem was traded there. (I was a Bucks fan before that) For the next 16 years I was a diehard Lakers fan. After Magic retired in 1991 I drifted away from following the NBA closely enough to really claim a "favorite" team. Buy the mid 90's I was paying no attention to the NBA. Last season I started following the NBA again but I am now a fan without a team. I'd like to "have a team" again. Since I already have in 16 years with the Lakers, I suppose it makes the most sense to just pick up where I left off. Despite the fact that I've probably got in more time as a Lakers fan than most of the current Lakers fans around here, I'm not crazy about the idea of "becoming a fan" of the back to back NBA champions. No one wants to be labeled a front runner. (just ask Drakonius )

Since rejoining the Lakers will likely be considered front running, I've been looking at some other teams too.

The Knicks: I think it would be cool to be a Knicks fan. I've always liked their uniforms (the traditional ones), I owned a pair of Puma "Clydes" when I was a kid (Walt Frazier's shoes for those of you too young to know what i'm talking about), and I did live in the state of New York (Syracuse) for seven years.

The Bulls: I really enjoyed watching the Bulls when they played Miami the other night, I really got a kick out of that Noah kid, and they have great uniforms.

So those are the three teams I'm interested in. I'll gladly entertain offers from other fan bases. (Except the Celtics. Even though I may not end up back with the Lakers, I still have to honor the fact that I hated the Celtics with an irrational passion for the entire decade of the 80's.)

Odds are that, since I'm from Ohio, someone is going to bring up the Cavs. Here's the thing, even though I'm from Ohio, I've never been interested in being a Cavs fan. After that pathetic display in July there's simply no way in Hell I'm aligning myself with that group. Being a Browns fan is bad enough.

Judges?

Really? Coming from the fan who has 22 favorite teams, and wants to become a Laker fan now? That being said, you are from Ohio, and I can understand the idea that you'd want to be a fan of a team that actually, you know... wins.

Nah, just become a fan of all three... push your total to 25. You can do it, Infrared. I believe in you.

[HedleyLamarr]

[Drakonius26]

Because as we all know, there's no one who loves bla... African-Americans more than Donald Sterling. Even if said celebration comes two days after said month.

[mania]

Hey, Donald Sterling pays a lot of money for those poor black kids.

[Saintsfan]

The point in the NBA is that a fanchise tag keeps a player on a roster with an over inflated value, the Cavs might have slapped a franchise tag on Lebron, but what would that do? Keep him in Cleveland one more year? For what end? In basketball you have a tiny roster, so often a team would think 'no point paying over the odds gor one guy, for one year'. Plus you have an unhappy player. Also take it puts a premium on the best players, so they will still end up in the biggest markets/best funded teams. To give small markets a chance you have to LOWER the highest wages, but there is no way the union would go for that.

On A comparrison to baseball, it really is apples and oranges. But anyway does it do a league any good for it to appear that anyone can win the league? Personally I think it makes a more sellable commodity to have big teams, who are the most likely winners.

[slightly shotgunned]

It's called building a good team.

Problem is, in today's NBA, building a good team won't win you any championships. You need multiple superstars, and only a select few teams can do that.

Before I start ranting about how much I hate hearing/reading statements like this, what do you mean by "today's NBA?" If today's NBA is all of the 2000s, the 02-03, 04-05, 06-07 Spurs and the 03-04 Pistons might beg to differ. If you're talking this year, nobody's won anything yet so slow down. If you mean since 2007...well then you might have a point