The 2008 Boston Celtics have inspired a trend that will have a profound impact on the future of the NBA. Superstar players have now discovered the power they have over their organization's front-offices and are shaping their own destiny.
Summer 2007: The Minnesota Timberwolves and their frustrated franchise player, Kevin Garnett decided to part ways after getting his best seasons. He was traded to Boston where he joined their new acquisition Ray Allen and long-time franchise player Paul Pierce. This union resulted in the greatest turnaround in NBA history (28-54 to 66-16) and an NBA championship. The conception of the Boston 3 Party has made Ray Allen a surefire hall of famer, elevated Pierce's super-stardom and validated the career of one of the 20 greatest players of all time, Kevin Garnett. Since then the Celtics have had 1 other Finals appearance, a probable Finals appearance marred by a Garnett injury in 2009 and they are currently on pace for their third 60-win season.
Winter 2011: Carmelo Anthony bitched and moaned his way into being traded to the Knicks and Amare Stoudemire with Chauncey Billups disrespected as a throw in. New York now waits patiently for Chris Paul or Deron Williams to make yet another big 3 and end New York's nearly 40 year title drought.
After looking at this series of events it is clear that the players have finally figured out how to work the system and put themselves in the best possible situation to win a championship. With 4 small market franchises loosing their franchise players and more to come. I discussed this issue on Asti's radio blog, The Howitzer and Buzzsaw Show. Mike asked if I thought this was good or bad for the NBA
My answer: I like it, I think it's good.
It will hurt the league in terms of overall depth. Most of the small market teams will likely take a huge hit. I personally don't care about professional basketball in Memphis, Toronto, or Cleveland and not many do. Even when the small-market teams do well it's not good for the league. Take the San Antonio Spurs, for example. Despite winning 4 titles, having a player that is in one of the most popular celebrity/athlete marriages, and one of the 10 greatest players in NBA history, the Spurs are a ratings nightmare. Their last Finals appearance in 2007 against Cleveland was one of the lowest rated ever.
It's the marquee teams like the Knicks, Celtics and Lakers that make the NBA.
Last years Finals series was the highest rated since Michael Jordan's last Finals appearance in 1998. Even though everyone hates Miami now, it's great for the league. You need a the villains to compliment the heroes (See also, 80's Pistons).
So what if there are 6 or 7 powerhouse teams and the rest are sub-par? It's not like the NBA has been super competitive in terms of championships. In the post-Jordan Era the the Spurs and Lakers have combined for 11 of the last 12 Finals apperances, winning 9 total (Spurs 4, L.A. 5). The 90's saw Jordan's Bulls win 6 championships, the Rocket's winning two in his hiatus and the Spurs beginning their dynasty after his retirement. In the preceding decade Larry Bird and Magic Johnson appeared in every single Finals from 80-89'. The 70's were sort of wide open but the 50's and 60's were dominated by the Minneapolis Lakers and Russell's Celtics. On top of all of that, the Celtics and Lakers combined for more than half of the total championships won. So if there are 6 and 7 serious contenders that alternate Finals appearances in the next decade, the league won't be as competitive overall, but the title hunt will more competitive than it has ever been.
It's good for the players too. I'll admit, I was quick to condemn LeBron, but maybe I shouldn't have. Charles Barkley shouldn't have either. Did Sir Charles forget that he joined Hakeem Olajuwon and Clyde Drexler to form a big three in an unsuccessful title chase in the latter part of his career? Magic Johnson was drafted to the Lakers that happened to have Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, arguably the greatest player of all time at that point. Larry Bird was complemented by 3 other hall of famers in Boston.
The way LeBron and Carmelo handled their situation was shameful, but you can't scrutinize them for wanting to play with other superstars. The players have finally decided to place themselves in the best possible situation in order to win a title. Were Magic Johnson and Larry Bird are more honorable because they were drafted to large-market teams and it was their front offices who built these juggernaut teams rather than themselves? Bullshit. Why should 'Melo and LeBron's title hopes be encumbered by crappy management? Sure, a pretentious ESPN special and bitching and moaning all season to be traded back to your hometown isn't admirable and they could have went about it with a little more discretion but ultimately the move had to happen. Otherwise they risk being included in the same category of Barkley, Stockton and Malone as the best players to never win it.
I cannot believe I just stuck up for LeBron. I need a shower.
As I stated many times including in our convo on my show, every NBA champion in history, excluding the 2004 Detroit Pistons, has had multiple star players, sometimes 3 but 2 at the minimum. It is also important to note that even the almighty MJ won all 6 of his titles while playing alongside a top 50 all-time guy in Scottie Pippen. MJ didn't force this partnership or vice versa but they still were teammates. It could even be argued that the second Bulls threepeat was headlined by a big 3 not just big 2, Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman (a should be hall of famer).
ReplyDelete