What if Pau Gasol got hurt, then bam, the Lakers don't win the championship? I mean, how many teams have won titles with one of their main players out due to injury? It doesn't happen. Maybe for a game, but not for the whole playoffs.
It is my unprofessional opinion that everyone who thinks they will "fail" is either in denial or just play ignorant. I think they could easily win 70 plus games.
How bout looking at it this way? The Heat will not "fail." They will merely get beat by the better team: the Blazers.
You eloquently summarized what I was trying to put into words in post #48. So yes, we think alike on that. I believe with one basketball and one individual for a defense to double-team, you really only have value added to a roster in getting a 2nd superstar (ala Kobe/Shaq, MJ/Pippen). Everyone else added becomes an observer because you’re only going to have one mismatch – that being the one with the future hall-of-famer with the ball in his hands while the other four guys are sitting there with their hands on their knees. So Wade and Bosh alone could have competed with Boston and the Lakers (once they gain chemistry in the playoffs to make it through a playoff series). LeBron and Bosh also could have done so as a tandem, and Wade and LeBron could have been the modern version of MJ/Pippen alone. Adding a third doesn’t really add a lot of value, just covers you if you have an injury. Think of it like a strip club with two pole dance floors operating at all times. At pole #1 the ladies are topless and at pole #2 they are fully nude. But then the owner decides to add a third pole, and on this third pole he has the women fully clothed out there. Really, how much extra value was added to the gentlemen with that third pole? The audience was getting everything that provides value out of the first two poles, the third pole only sounds good on paper, but doesn't actually provide value in practice.
You're comparing them from their rookie seasons? Lol that's a joke argument. You can have whatever opinion you want, LeBron won 66-61 games with a trash roster. Keep posting in this upcoming decade this will be fun. Wrong, on a horrific level. There's a very simply way to get around this. Last Year LeBron and Wade had a usage rate over 30, Chris was over 25. Hollinger, the real one, states that if they simply (and most likely) decrease their usage by just 5%, they can all player together at relatively the same level. So instead of having just two of the three like you suggested, at their 66% combined usage rate , you can have three players touching the ball for ~77% of their team's possessions, and Joel Anthony or Mike Miller still have plenty of touches. Basically The trio can generate 29, 26, 23 PER a night and it will not affect their other teammates at all. Also this will help conserve the trio a bit longer. Your views hold no weight, because they simply do not overlap nearly enough. Also Chris Bosh compliments LeBron perfectly, and when Wade gets older and uses less possessions this will make the transition easier. Right now the average team with the best record in the NBA wins 64 games a year I believe, there's no reason for me to predict anything less. The 72 win mark is in reach, if they really care about it at least. I assume they might just take the last couple of weeks easy though.
I believe a third superstar can be close to fully utilized, more so than Minstrel and ESPN HOF are projecting above. First off, players don’t play the entire game, they take breaks and have foul trouble, but with 3 studs in there you can leave two of them in for almost the entire game. Hypothetically, if you played exactly two of them at all times each player would still play 32mpg. There will be long extended minutes where all three of them are not in the game together; teams like the ’96 Bulls had to make do with long stretches where only MJ or only Pippen were in the game. The opponents often had runs during these stretches, but the Bulls would be deadly during the final 6 minutes when they were able to play all of their stars together and close out games. The Miami trio also will benefit from individually exerting less effort on offense while on the floor together. There are times this year when LeBron or Wade would have to initiate the entire offense for many possessions in a row, 10 or more. But in Miami those guys can hold back some energy for the end of the game, or for defense; whereas last year they had to fight so hard to keep their teams in the game during the 2nd and 3rd quarters. Wade was a super sub on the Olympic team that came in and got steals leading to high percentage fast breaks, now Wade can play that type of defense at times and not worry about his team being decimated later on if he can’t carry the majority of the offense. LeBron was a good defender last year, but now he could focus entirely on shutting down a player like Kobe. As others have said these three chose to play together. They want to be a smaller piece of a team, but be part of an elite team. With that attitude I expect them to find effective new ways to contribute compared to being the lone centerpiece of a team.
Ummm.... a basketball team fields FIVE players at once. Don't you want all 5 to be as good as possible? Your argument makes zero sense.
With one ball there is a chance for diminishing returns for each high-usage player you add to the mix. Yes, you want the five best players you can get, but if they all need the ball to be effective, you're looking at less effectiveness per game for each. That said, if they go into each game like that Blazers, and kind of carve out a quarter for each player to be dominant, then they're much more dangerous as a team, because during that quarter, the showcase player is at full efficiency instead of some fraction. Miami's going to be a beast; if they get their act together chemistry-wise over the season, they will not be stopped in the Weak-ass East.
Like BlazerCaravan said, there is only one ball and only one scorer that can make a play on any given possession, so there are diminishing returns. And I'm not saying you don't WANT five players to be as good as possible, I'm just saying to 5 all-stars are still not much better than 2 all-stars and then specialist at the other 3 positions. Using your logic, if an NHL team goes out and signs 4 of the top 10 goalies in the NHL are they suddenly the greatest hockey team because they have 4 future hall of fame goalies on their roster? What value will the other three goalies be if you can only have one defending the net at any moment? Your logic works for Dodgeball where fielding 5 great Dodgeball players is better than 3 great players and 2 role-players, or 3 of the best will do better than a team that has 2 of the best. But in the NBA, it is like Curling. If you go out and get three of the best "sweepers" in the world on your team, and really only two guys on the team sweep, what value is having three? You'd be better to get a great "sweeper" and a great "skip" and a great "stone thrower" so you've covered all of the aspect to have a complete team. Having Wade, LeBron and Bosh isn't much better than having Kobe, Pau and Artest. Both LA and Miami can put the ball in the hands of an incredible scoring threat on about 70 of 80 offensive possessions (with Kobe having all of the offensive touches for LA). And on the defensive side of the ball, LA can field two of the premier perimeter defenders in the of the three mentioned while Miami can't. So having three clearly bigger "stars" as far as being great overall basketball players and great scoring threats, still would lose 4 out of 5 times to a team that can still have a hall-of-fame scorer running the offense on one end and taking over and scoring pts when pts need to be scored, while also fielding all-star defenders for the other 50% of the game.
Nice post. We've got a very good bench, so I'm less worried about Portland. But when a team like the Lakers have to rest Kobe and/or Gasol, or Orlando rests Howard, it's going to be pretty tough going for those squads. I can see the Heat just kind of biding their time, keeping it competitive with the starters, and then run up leads when subs come in. Then if it's still competitive in the fourth quarter, Wade and LeBron get down to business and put the game away. Say that all superstars play 36 mpg (for the sake of simplicity.) The Heat get 108 minutes of superstar play (36x3) for them to use how they see fit. Every other team in the league except LA gets 36 minutes or less. (LA gets 72 for Gasol/Bryant.) A lot get 0--no superstars at all. Now, that 108 minutes may only translate to 96 minutes of true superstar productivity. But that's still 24 minutes more than the next best team. In a superstar-oriented game often decided by a single shot, that's a massive disparity.
Just to add to my point--that's kind of what the Spurs did for their Ginobili/Parker/Duncan championships. They got 80+ mpg of superstar/near-superstar play out of those three guys. (Duncan 34 MPG, Parker 32 MPG, Ginobili 27 mpg added up to 93 minutes. But some of that time all three were on the court, negating some of that value.) People don't think of Ginobili as a superstar because it's hard to earn that label playing 27 mpg, but in their last championship run he had a PER of 24. It's probably a little more arguable that Parker was a superstar. But I think his PER was restrained some by so much of the offense going through the other two guys. Much like Bosh will in Miami.
I have a feeling this is incorrect since I don't honestly believe Nate's style of offense is effective against any team in the long run. Perhaps during the regular season, when Miami doesn't really have time to prepare to stop Portland, Nate's offense will be effective. In a 7 game series (on the decidedly off chance Portland gets to the finals) where a team has time to prepare, Nate's offense has turned out to be almost trivial to stop. I can't imagine that Miami wouldn't be able to figure out that if you deny Roy the ball the rest of the team is incapable of picking up the slack.
No doubt. When Brandon Roy has a PER of 4.5 in the playoffs, there's nothing Nate (or anybody else on the team) can do.
Yep. Over three games: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/roybr01.html When you look back, it's amazing we took the Suns to 6 games. They had a healthy Nash, Richardson and Amare, and we had Roy and Batum limping around next to Miller and Aldridge.
Oden was 70% and he was a horrible match-up with Yao (aside from the fact that Houston was the 2nd best team in the west). Add to that our inexperience in the playoffs and not having a veteral PG like Miller, we were doomed for failure in that series. Likely won't happen again.
