The old adage in the NBA is that a team needs a superstar to win a championship. Rare exceptions aside - in other words, the 2004 Detroit Pistons - this has proven to be entirely true. With the emergence of the Oklahoma City Thunder and their trifecta of stars, much talk has shifted to their method of attaining said stars, and how teams can go about emulating that fast track to success. To sum it up; get terrible first, then build up through consecutive high lottery picks, all while not committing to any long term contracts to average players.
While this method is not exactly foolproof, and it's unlikely that anyone will inherit the same kind of draft luck the Thunder have been blessed with, there is a good deal of logic behind the strategy. Another common but true cliche is "the worst place to be in the NBA is the middle", and fans of teams like the Philadelphia 76ers and Atlanta Hawks can attest to this. Given the NBA's history of star-lead title teams, most of whose stars were drafted high in the lottery, it makes sense to want to get as bad as possible first before attempting to build a contender.
However, there are plenty of instances where this may not be the best strategy for a team, for a number of reasons. For one, there may be unintended consequences. A byproduct of those years of necessary tanking that allowed the now Thunder to acquire Kevin Durant was a general public apathy towards the Sonics, a factor which likely contributed to their move. The team had been gutted so much that it became easier for them to sneak out of town with as little fanfare as possible; try doing that to a playoff team. The Bobcats were so bad that they set a record, and now are a recurring punchline amongst NBA fans. Was that deliberate tanking worth an image that will now take years to shed? Not to mention the utter unreliability of the method; for their all-time awfullness, the Bobcats wound up with only the 2nd pick in what was widely declared to be a one-franchise player draft. The Nets similarly were in the running for worst team ever in 2010, and they were rewarded with only the No. 3 pick and such luminaries as Travis Outlaw and Johan Petro in free agency. A billionaire owner and a trendy new city seem to have saved the Nets and their reputation, but most teams won't be so lucky.
While the ultimate goal in the NBA is to win a championship, it's worth acknowledging that this is a very, very tough thing to achieve, especially given the NBA's lack of parity, high sampling rate in both games played and points scored, and over-reliance on superstars relative to other sports. Only the best of the best win it all, meaning most of the time, the best team also contains at least one of the league's best players, very often a generational talent that comes around only once every half decade or so. No matter the method of building a contender, it is an incredibly difficult task. However, many front offices and fanbases will readily admit that winning a championship is not necessarily the only thing that matters, and they're right.
Fans go to games mostly hoping to see the home team win. Many of them do not follow the team on a game-to-game basis; the present game is the only one they care about, not the long-term hopes of the season or the forthcoming couple of years. These fans are not pondering whether the team they're watching will be able to contend for a title someday, they just want to see it compete for a victory that night. And to a certain extent, this type of thinking is not so bad. If winning a championship is so incredibly difficult, you might as well try to as hard as you can to give the fans a good, catchable product, even if the ceiling is not Finals-worthy. Attempt to build smartly and around all-star level talent, but don't sweat whether the team is "settling for mediocrity" as many will decry. After all, NBA games and entertainment first and foremost, and do not take place in a basketball bubble; there are very frequently off-the-court factors to consider relating to the city and its fanbase.
The Indiana Pacers have recently put together a very nice squad, led by recent all-stars in Roy Hibbert and Danny Granger as well as a deep supporting cast. They put up a fight against Miami before ultimately bowing out, but most were satisfied with their performance this last season. However, if we're being completely honest, knowing what we know about what kind of teams win championships, are these Pacers ever winning a title? Probably not, barring Hibbert morphing into Hakeem Olajuwon or a Pistons-type miracle season. But having a top 5 team in the Eastern Conference is not such a bad thing, and given the Pacers' recent post-Brawl years, is actually the best thing for the franchise and its relations with the state of Indiana. The fall-out after that fateful night in Detroit has seen Indiana largely reject the Pacers team they used to love, sinking to the bottom 5 in attendance until even this past season. They were not adorned with such Malace-era questionable characters as Stephen Jackson and Ron Artest when they had grown up loving Rik Smits and Reggie Miller. The state turned its back, for good reason, and the organization had to win them back. Enduring years of tanking would have just prolonged and deepened the divide between organization and fanbase, and even still, no franchise-savior would be guaranteed. Instead the Pacers have opted to build a very good team through smart but not top-5 draft picks, signings that fit the needs of the team, and internal development. They've also put together a very likable team that resonates with fans, one that relies on teamwork and hard work rather than flash and star power. Consecutive playoff appearances and a series win with this crew seems to have at least partly rekindled that Indiana passion for basketball, which bodes well for attendance figures in the coming years.
While the ultimate goal in the NBA is to win a championship, it's worth acknowledging that this is a very, very tough thing to achieve, especially given the NBA's lack of parity, high sampling rate in both games played and points scored, and over-reliance on superstars relative to other sports. Only the best of the best win it all, meaning most of the time, the best team also contains at least one of the league's best players, very often a generational talent that comes around only once every half decade or so. No matter the method of building a contender, it is an incredibly difficult task. However, many front offices and fanbases will readily admit that winning a championship is not necessarily the only thing that matters, and they're right.
Fans go to games mostly hoping to see the home team win. Many of them do not follow the team on a game-to-game basis; the present game is the only one they care about, not the long-term hopes of the season or the forthcoming couple of years. These fans are not pondering whether the team they're watching will be able to contend for a title someday, they just want to see it compete for a victory that night. And to a certain extent, this type of thinking is not so bad. If winning a championship is so incredibly difficult, you might as well try to as hard as you can to give the fans a good, catchable product, even if the ceiling is not Finals-worthy. Attempt to build smartly and around all-star level talent, but don't sweat whether the team is "settling for mediocrity" as many will decry. After all, NBA games and entertainment first and foremost, and do not take place in a basketball bubble; there are very frequently off-the-court factors to consider relating to the city and its fanbase.
The Indiana Pacers have recently put together a very nice squad, led by recent all-stars in Roy Hibbert and Danny Granger as well as a deep supporting cast. They put up a fight against Miami before ultimately bowing out, but most were satisfied with their performance this last season. However, if we're being completely honest, knowing what we know about what kind of teams win championships, are these Pacers ever winning a title? Probably not, barring Hibbert morphing into Hakeem Olajuwon or a Pistons-type miracle season. But having a top 5 team in the Eastern Conference is not such a bad thing, and given the Pacers' recent post-Brawl years, is actually the best thing for the franchise and its relations with the state of Indiana. The fall-out after that fateful night in Detroit has seen Indiana largely reject the Pacers team they used to love, sinking to the bottom 5 in attendance until even this past season. They were not adorned with such Malace-era questionable characters as Stephen Jackson and Ron Artest when they had grown up loving Rik Smits and Reggie Miller. The state turned its back, for good reason, and the organization had to win them back. Enduring years of tanking would have just prolonged and deepened the divide between organization and fanbase, and even still, no franchise-savior would be guaranteed. Instead the Pacers have opted to build a very good team through smart but not top-5 draft picks, signings that fit the needs of the team, and internal development. They've also put together a very likable team that resonates with fans, one that relies on teamwork and hard work rather than flash and star power. Consecutive playoff appearances and a series win with this crew seems to have at least partly rekindled that Indiana passion for basketball, which bodes well for attendance figures in the coming years.
Similar situations can be observed in Washington and New Orleans. Both were fortunate enough to win a number one pick, but both are not guaranteed that their pick will become a transformative player. With Washington, John Wall appears to have much more to go to becoming a top-tier point guard, but rather than attempt to put together more terrible, top 5 pick seasons as the Thunder they did, the Wizards have instead opted to aim for a low playoff seed. The thought is that the hanger-ons from the Gilbert Arenas years, the "knuckleheads" were poisoning Wall's development, which they are entirely dependent on. Trading Javale McGee for Nenê gives them a veteran presence, Trevor Ariza makes them more well-rounded on defense, and amnestying Andray Blatche is just addition by subtraction. The franchise also has a poor reputation to erase, one of clown characters and terrible decision-making. They aim for respectability now rather than an unforeseen amount of lottery seasons, and it's hard to fault them for that.
With New Orleans, they could have opted to not surround Anthony Davis with much help in hopes of getting another top 3 pick, but have instead done a quietly solid job of acquiring talent. Maintaing Eric Gordon was always entirely up to the Hornets, but letting him go would have undoubtedly helped their consecutive tanking cause, which they obviously chose not to do. They acquired Ryan Anderson and Robin Lopez in sign-and-trades, giving them a decent frontline to reinforce The Unibrow. Suddenly the Hornets look like a young team to watch in the West, and while they still probably won't contend for a playoff spot just yet, by looking to compete as soon as possible they've sent a message to their fans that they're all in on the city of New Orleans.
The "championship or bust" or "count the rings" way of thinking is very prevalent amongst both NBA fans and analysts, often to a obnoxious degree that loses sight of the big picture. With 30 teams in the NBA and only one champion every year, winning a title is clearly a very difficult task that is not as simple as most would like to believe. While there certainly are a number of teams aimlessly stringing together okay rosters without a plan in sight, there is something to be said for trying to be as good as possible even if it goes against most accepted rules of building a contender. The 2004 Pistons gave us the "you never know" branch of hope to hang onto, but even if that coveted title never comes, teams like the Wizards, Hornets and Pacers can take solace in the fact they did their best to put a competitive team on the floor that their fans can support.
With New Orleans, they could have opted to not surround Anthony Davis with much help in hopes of getting another top 3 pick, but have instead done a quietly solid job of acquiring talent. Maintaing Eric Gordon was always entirely up to the Hornets, but letting him go would have undoubtedly helped their consecutive tanking cause, which they obviously chose not to do. They acquired Ryan Anderson and Robin Lopez in sign-and-trades, giving them a decent frontline to reinforce The Unibrow. Suddenly the Hornets look like a young team to watch in the West, and while they still probably won't contend for a playoff spot just yet, by looking to compete as soon as possible they've sent a message to their fans that they're all in on the city of New Orleans.
The "championship or bust" or "count the rings" way of thinking is very prevalent amongst both NBA fans and analysts, often to a obnoxious degree that loses sight of the big picture. With 30 teams in the NBA and only one champion every year, winning a title is clearly a very difficult task that is not as simple as most would like to believe. While there certainly are a number of teams aimlessly stringing together okay rosters without a plan in sight, there is something to be said for trying to be as good as possible even if it goes against most accepted rules of building a contender. The 2004 Pistons gave us the "you never know" branch of hope to hang onto, but even if that coveted title never comes, teams like the Wizards, Hornets and Pacers can take solace in the fact they did their best to put a competitive team on the floor that their fans can support.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Please be courteous to others when discussing your opinions. Swearing will not be tolerated.