Don't tell me it's the wrong sport to follow. I've been playing ball and watching the NBA for 2 decades. The fact remains, IN THE MODERN ERA, Celtics are the first team that put together a team of 3 all stars or future hall of famers. Just threw them together to try to win a championship. It doesn't matter how they did it or if the players requested it, it was done. That's all I'm saying. That the Celtics were the first ones to do it in the modern era.
All I'm pointing out is that they were the first ones to do it in the modern era. Shaq and Kobe? Where's the 3rd superstar?
It's pointless talking about Barkely etc because I'm talking about in recent times. I agree that the Heat did it differently by the players pretty much putting it together themselves but it doesn't change the fact that they did it to keep up with the Celtics who were the first ones to do it.
S it takes 3 all stars to guarantee a championship... guess the Kings and Timberwolves didn't get the memo? The third all-star on LA at the time was Van Exel.
I do get what you're saying though, to an extent.
Karl Malone joined them at the end, while he was still considered a "star" playing although clearly on the downside of his career. Media made a big deal about that too, seems forgotten, but it was a big big deal at the time. That instance was even worse then the Celtics and the Heat in my eyes due to Malone taking less money then he could have gotten elsewhere to form the super team.
I have no problems with the Celtics (via trades) or the Heat (via free agency) bundling stars together to create super teams as long as the players are getting paid market value and the trades are on the up and up. Now if the star players are all taking much less money then it gets a little shady, or if the trades are all lopsided towards the super team.
Again that was awhile ago wasn't it? I can't remember. Wasn't Karl Malone all washed up and not even a starter or contributing much? I really can't recall.
On second thought, yeah, it is fun and exciting watching these stars put on a show together. I can concede that much guys. The main point I was making was that in recent times the Celtics were the first ones to do it and force today's teams to try to keep up.
You know what? It seems sometimes posters online keep arguing just cause they don't want to admit they are wrong or just for the sake of arguing. In this instance, I think I can admit that I was wrong in that there's nothing wrong with stars getting together.
S it takes 3 all stars to guarantee a championship... guess the Kings and Timberwolves didn't get the memo? The third all-star on LA at the time was Van Exel.
I do get what you're saying though, to an extent.
Bulls ain't too shabby themselves and they may add Gasol or a Celtic.