if a person is a great player or "the best player in the league" that his talent, greatness, and personal expectations doesn't always translate to his team? Personally I think it's weird that the best players in the L are in mediocre teams usually missing the playoffs or getting knocked out in the 1st round while garnering all the praise and MVP votes from the NBA world... while the best players, who are considered a notch below them, are in title contenders leading their teams deep into the playoffs. I've always believed that the best players can make their teams just as good as they are. Discuss!
Hmm, maybe because the teams that have a bunch of good players that play well as a team make it to the title, while teams that have just one really great player dont make it. It could also be that the player is a ballhog, but im not sure. Like think of Michael Jordan, he was a great player, but he also had a great team that worked together well and a great coach, much like the current Miami Heat. And they cant make their team as good as them because thats not how it works, one player cant change the whole thing, the team has to try as hard and maybe their work ethic isnt as great.
<div class="quote_poster">CPaulDWade#3 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Hmm, maybe because the teams that have a bunch of good players that play well as a team make it to the title, while teams that have just one really great player dont make it. It could also be that the player is a ballhog, but im not sure. Like think of Michael Jordan, he was a great player, but he also had a great team that worked together well and a great coach, much like the current Miami Heat.</div>Yeah they have good teams but that theory of switching similar players and expecting the same results is bogus. I hear it all the time and most of the scenarios aren't too well thought out. MJ made his teammates great, he gave his team an aura of invincibility, he created the easiest plays for his team which got guys layups/dunks and shared the glory by trusting them to hit the big shots. Let's use this for an example: do the Heat win the title last year with LeBron instead of Wade?
<div class="quote_poster">Heat4Life Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">if a person is a great player or "the best player in the league" that his talent, greatness, and personal expectations doesn't always translate to his team? Personally I think it's weird that the best players in the L are in mediocre teams usually missing the playoffs or getting knocked out in the 1st round while garnering all the praise and MVP votes from the NBA world... while the best players, who are considered a notch below them, are in title contenders leading their teams deep into the playoffs. I've always believed that the best players can make their teams just as good as they are. Discuss!</div> IMO it's all chemistry. That's why the pistons beat the lakers. It has nothing to do with talent, it's how cohesive the team is. How they mesh together and compliment each other. Thats why the knicks failed last year with so much talent.
<div class="quote_poster">rafy Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">IMO it's all chemistry. That's why the pistons beat the lakers. It has nothing to do with talent, it's how cohesive the team is. How they mesh together and compliment each other. Thats why the knicks failed last year with so much talent.</div> Yeah, i agree, it the team chemistry and it doesnt depend on how good the players are, its how well they work together.
The idea that having a great superstar translates into success was brought to this league by David Stern. In the 80's you had guys like Michael Jordan and Larry Bird who could single handily win games. In today's NBA, the team concept is returning and in the past years the championship teams haven't been led by superstars (Spurs, Pistons, etc.) Meanwhile, the superstar players are either missing the playoffs (Kevin Garnett) or getting eliminating very early (Kobe Bryant, Allen Iverson, Paul Pierce, Tracy McGrady, etc.) I think teams are starting to learn that superstars can be locked down and you can't rely so much on one player if you want to succeed. Teams like the Spurs and Pistons who stress a team game and understand the importance of chemistry and defense are the ones who are doing great. The Heat were the huge exception to this rule because for more than half of the season they lacked chemistry but finally picked it up in the playoffs. You could also argue that they were led by a superstar in Dwyane Wade but their attack was pretty much two headed (Wade and Shaq). The two headed attack is similar to what the Lakers had with Kobe and Shaq during their threepeat and some teams try to duplicate this today (like McGrady and Yao).
Sometimes players who are perceived to be the best players really aren't. Basketball is a team game ... what wins at the team level isn't always obvious to people who are focusing on individuality (which is what the NBA markets). Great players tend to have a me-first attitude, and that cqn hurt the success of their team. If their contract is too much, that makes it more difficult for the team to find pieces to put around them. If they feel they need to get certain numbers, that would limit how they are willing to interact with other players on the court. I think sometimes coaches defer too much to the star players and that could screw up the balance of the team. San Antonio should serve as a model for how to take a superstar talent and still be successful. Duncan has no ego, he's basically the ideal teammate, and his skills and attitude allow the organization great flexibility in the pieces they can put around him.
<div class="quote_poster">durvasa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Sometimes players who are perceived to be the best players really aren't. Basketball is a team game ... what wins at the team level isn't always obvious to people who are focusing on individuality (which is what the NBA markets). Great players tend to have a me-first attitude, and that cqn hurt the success of their team. If their contract is too much, that makes it more difficult for the team to find pieces to put around them. If they feel they need to get certain numbers, that would limit how they are willing to interact with other players on the court. I think sometimes coaches defer too much to the star players and that could screw up the balance of the team. San Antonio should serve as a model for how to take a superstar talent and still be successful. Duncan has no ego, he's basically the ideal teammate, and his skills and attitude allow the organization great flexibility in the pieces they can put around him.</div> I totally agree, with everything you said.
I agree with durvasa. But what about KG. He has always been a team first guy. Everything he does is to help the team win. Whether it is a pay cut, passing more, shooting more, rebounding, playing defense, playing every position, or hustling every single play it is for the good of the team. I think that a lot of great talents just can't translate into team success like Ray Allen and Stephon Marbury.
<div class="quote_poster">TheFreshPrince Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I agree with durvasa. But what about KG. He has always been a team first guy. Everything he does is to help the team win. Whether it is a pay cut, passing more, shooting more, rebounding, playing defense, playing every position, or hustling every single play it is for the good of the team. I think that a lot of great talents just can't translate into team success like Ray Allen and Stephon Marbury.</div> Kevin Garnett also has a huge contract that takes up a lot of the Timberwolves salary cap like durvasa mentioned most superstars do.
<div class="quote_poster">Swish15 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Kevin Garnett also has a huge contract that takes up a lot of the Timberwolves salary cap like durvasa mentioned most superstars do.</div> He took a pay cut to help out our team. And you can pay the luxary tax and have enough money for whoever you want. Look at the knicks pay roll.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Swish15:</div><div class="quote_post">In today's NBA, the team concept is returning and in the past years the championship teams haven't been led by superstars (Spurs, Pistons, etc.)</div> Tim Duncan is a superstar.
<div class="quote_poster">rafy Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">IMO it's all chemistry. That's why the pistons beat the lakers. It has nothing to do with talent, it's how cohesive the team is. How they mesh together and compliment each other. Thats why the knicks failed last year with so much talent.</div>And that's why the Lakers didn't win any championships on the first seasons when Kobe and Shaq got together. Superstars beefs inside a team are baaad.
