2018-19 NBA Off-Season

Minor clarification: Dawkins wasn’t on that team. He was traded to the Nets a week earlier.

 

Yep. They took a swing at a title in the twilight years of their best players. They could’ve not done that, kept winning 50 or fewer games and eventually be built around Cassell and Horry. And all due respect to Cassell, a very nice player for a long time, that team ain’t that good. Horry wasn’t really THAT good the rest of the way.

 

Shoot, was toggling between rosters. M’bad.

 

He went from a team that won 40 and 46 games to one that won 62 and 58.

It seems weird to point out the match and then trade. You’re reminding us a guy couldn’t leave his team in free agency unless the team wanted to let him go (I think it was 1988 when actual unrestricted free agency started). Houston could match Philly’s deal and then leverage that for assets.

Were that in place now, OKC would’ve matched the Warriors’ offer, and that would be that.

 

This argument goes back to 2004 when the Lakers signed Karl Malone and Gary Payton for below market value.

An Oral History of the 2003-04 Los Angeles Lakers, the 1st Super Team

 

My mistake on the free-agency vs. trade point, but a forced trade is not much different from a free-agent signing in the context of the point I'm making.
Further, you're using hindsight to judge the effectiveness of how that Rockets super team assembled and then deciding it is not an apt comparison.
The issue is not whether it worked or not, the issue was perception and sentiment at the time the roster is assembled.

KG, Pierce and Allen era Celtics is a more recent example.

Cousins is attempting to come back from a potentially catastrophic injury, and no one else made him an offer.
Other teams could have tried to sign him. No one did.
A badly injured player who might not play until November, has never won and has a reputation for being difficult - people can stop with the hand wringing on this one.

1. Golden State won a title with three guys they drafted: Thompson, Green and Curry.
2. Plenty of teams had chances at Iguodala.
3. And the 'concern' about KD's legacy is hogwash.

This run is happening because of item 1 on the preceding list. Ws hit in a big way on three draft picks. That takes some skill and a whole lot of luck.
They're doing everything they can to make the most out of that circumstance because it rarely happens.

The bellyaching about it is just annoying.

 

Another great example I've referenced before.
NBA media was breathless and excited about that one.

 

For cripes sake, Karl Malone was 40 years old, after spending 18 seasons in Utah, and that would be the final season of his career. Gary Payton was 35 years old, a washed up shell of his former self, and would spend only one season in LA before being shipped out yet again.

There are some laughably flawed "superteam" analogies for these Warriors being tossed about. Teams that were in NO reasonable way comparable to this Ws group.

 

Right. So the point remains that if winning titles wouldn't dramatically elevate Barkley or Malone, so why would it for KD? He's a top 25 all-time player. Winning a bunch of rings on a team that was already the best in the league when he joined shouldn't move the needle on his career, should it?

 

They lost the year before and he was the best player the next year they won.

 

Maybe it shouldn’t, but for whatever reason, it does.

And more importantly, if he wins three in a row, it’ll stand up better than y’know, not winning rings at all.

 

So the takeaway is, this team is at a level all it’s own. We kind of knew that. We knew it last year. I think they’ve got the record for most wins across a three- and four-year span. And if it breaks up after next year, it’ll be seen as a relatively brief moment.

For as old as they were, Payton and Malone were pretty good. Payton was coming off a year where he averaged 20.4/4.2/8.3. Malone had been at 20.6/7.8/4.7/1.7 steals.