No team is really dominant anymore
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Wino
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 9674
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:04 am    Post subject: No team is really dominant anymore

Have you all noticed how some of the worst teams can destroy some of the best teams on any given night? I don't remember seeing so much of that in previous eras. Dominant teams used to beat who they were supposed to beat, especially the bad teams. I see loads of losses where one of the top 5 teams in the league are losing to teams that have lost way more games than they won. Good teams should rarely lose to really bad teams. I think the rule changes over the past couple of years has evened the playing field. Few teams can really shut down other teams on a consistent basis. The Bucks, Raptors and Warriors are the best teams in the league and the only team that I think has been respectable in this regard has been the Bucks. Considering who is on the Warriors, I am not impressed with some of their stupid losses. I think these teams are all beatable and not dominant.

Now that being said, I think if the NBA would let teams play real defense it would give the better teams a distinct advantage and probably skew the results so they could dominate more than they do now.

Personally, I have seen a lot of NBA basketball and I liked it better when they allowed hand checking more and didn't call every ticky tac call that you see today. I have little doubt that guys like Jordan and Kobe would absolutely destroy this league in their primes. Can you imagine either of them playing in a league that could not impede them???

I prefer the quality of the game from previous generations, to me this is the low point of all eras. Still like the game but find it too watered down. Playing hard and being tough doesn't mean anything anymore. It feels like grade school sports where everyone is a winner and nobody loses.

I would like to see the league go back to what it used to be. I am predicting that eventually the USA is going to start losing in international competition. Not sure how long it will take, but eventually we are going to go two or three generations into the minimum defense era that we promote now. I think too many players will simply never know how to play like they used to play and will not learn how to lock down anyone. We will be vulnerable.
_________________
Never argue with stupid people! They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!! - Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:45 am    Post subject: Re: No team is really dominant anymore

Wino wrote:
Have you all noticed how some of the worst teams can destroy some of the best teams on any given night?



That's always been the case. Whether it happens now more than in the past, I have no idea. I'd have to see actual data to be convinced.

No matter what rules or style of play the NBA puts in place, some fans will love it, some will hate it. Opening up offenses have correlated with increasing popularity for the league so I doubt it will change anytime soon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:02 pm    Post subject:

Team’s style of play has evolved due to management having more tools to assess what works best. Things won’t go back to being less efficient.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:08 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
Team’s style of play has evolved due to management having more tools to assess what works best. Things won’t go back to being less efficient.



Only thing NBA can do is change rules to change the efficiency rates, like moving the 3-point line out. That's unlikely to happen since most fans prefer an open, offensive game rather than "tough," grind-it-out games. The NBA is entertainment and will give fans whatever style of basketball they prefer. Can't argue with that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wino
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 9674
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:08 pm    Post subject:

It just seems like the rule changes have made the two way players less valuable than in the past. That teams with less talent can beat teams with more talent, simply because the rules hold guys back from being able to dominate with their physicality.
_________________
Never argue with stupid people! They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!! - Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38750

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:48 pm    Post subject:

I think Warriors are pacing themselves. They probably will turn it on in the playoffs and then people will wonder if those other teams belong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wino
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 9674
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 1:15 pm    Post subject:

lakersken80 wrote:
I think Warriors are pacing themselves. They probably will turn it on in the playoffs and then people will wonder if those other teams belong.


We'll see, they sure have been beaten by weaker teams even when at full strength. I know that always happens but I seem to be witnessing it more the past year or so, than any other time I can remember.
_________________
Never argue with stupid people! They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!! - Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:04 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
Team’s style of play has evolved due to management having more tools to assess what works best. Things won’t go back to being less efficient.



Only thing NBA can do is change rules to change the efficiency rates, like moving the 3-point line out. That's unlikely to happen since most fans prefer an open, offensive game rather than "tough," grind-it-out games. The NBA is entertainment and will give fans whatever style of basketball they prefer. Can't argue with that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 5:11 pm    Post subject:

Wino wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I think Warriors are pacing themselves. They probably will turn it on in the playoffs and then people will wonder if those other teams belong.


We'll see, they sure have been beaten by weaker teams even when at full strength. I know that always happens but I seem to be witnessing it more the past year or so, than any other time I can remember.


I'm not sure about that. GS is 52-24, and other than a loss to Dallas, I don't believe they've been beaten by a bad team this year. Most of their losses have come against the top teams in the league.

And ultimately, what matters is the playoffs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 8:13 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
I'm not sure about that. GS is 52-24, and other than a loss to Dallas, I don't believe they've been beaten by a bad team this year. Most of their losses have come against the top teams in the league.


Well, they lost to us. Seriously, they did lose to the Suns, and they lost back to back against the Heat and the Magic.

More generally, my sense is that there is a higher degree of competitive balance in the league than in the past few years. I think that is what Wino is talking about. At least during the regular season, there is no dominant team this year. The Warriors may turn it on in the playoffs and roll to another title. Just the same, this year's Warriors seem a lot more vulnerable than expected.

Maybe this was true last year, too. The Rockets might have knocked out the Warriors if CP3 hadn't gotten hurt, or if they hadn't turned into brick layers in Game 7. Lebron took the Cavs through the East with strength of will, but they could have lost in the first round to the Pacers. We may look back on this as the beginning of a period that is not dominated by a couple great teams.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wino
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 9674
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:21 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Wino wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I think Warriors are pacing themselves. They probably will turn it on in the playoffs and then people will wonder if those other teams belong.


We'll see, they sure have been beaten by weaker teams even when at full strength. I know that always happens but I seem to be witnessing it more the past year or so, than any other time I can remember.


I'm not sure about that. GS is 52-24, and other than a loss to Dallas, I don't believe they've been beaten by a bad team this year. Most of their losses have come against the top teams in the league.

And ultimately, what matters is the playoffs.


They lost to the Suns and the Heat with a full roster but maybe you are right doesn't look like they lost too many games against really bad teams. Seen a number of games around the league that have surprised me. Philly against the Mavs and Magic come to mind. Toronto's loss to the Cavs is another. Maybe I am just noticing more this year because I am actually watching more games that don't involve the Lakers. LOL.
_________________
Never argue with stupid people! They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!! - Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
danzag
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Apr 2013
Posts: 22244
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:28 am    Post subject:

The Charlotte Bobcats always kicked our arses between 2007-2011
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 9:34 am    Post subject:

there's definitely much more parity in the league but GSW are still at a talent level the league has never seen on one team.
Issue with them is just championship fatigue after having noting else to prove while other teams pull out all stops to try to get a special victory over them during the regular season. And then so much of their teams success is based on shooting lights out from 3 point range on high volume. And no matter how good you are at 3 point shooting having bad shooting nights are unavoidable.
_________________
(bleep) Kawhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 9:58 am    Post subject:

GS still on another level compare to other teams. Still don't see anyone favored going against them in the playoff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:09 pm    Post subject:

Wino wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Wino wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I think Warriors are pacing themselves. They probably will turn it on in the playoffs and then people will wonder if those other teams belong.


We'll see, they sure have been beaten by weaker teams even when at full strength. I know that always happens but I seem to be witnessing it more the past year or so, than any other time I can remember.


I'm not sure about that. GS is 52-24, and other than a loss to Dallas, I don't believe they've been beaten by a bad team this year. Most of their losses have come against the top teams in the league.

And ultimately, what matters is the playoffs.


They lost to the Suns and the Heat with a full roster but maybe you are right doesn't look like they lost too many games against really bad teams. Seen a number of games around the league that have surprised me. Philly against the Mavs and Magic come to mind. Toronto's loss to the Cavs is another. Maybe I am just noticing more this year because I am actually watching more games that don't involve the Lakers. LOL.



I think this is also a function of a 3-point era. Any team on a single night can lose or win because they get hot or cold from long distance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
focus
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2526

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:48 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Team’s style of play has evolved due to management having more tools to assess what works best. Things won’t go back to being less efficient.



Only thing NBA can do is change rules to change the efficiency rates, like moving the 3-point line out. That's unlikely to happen since most fans prefer an open, offensive game rather than "tough," grind-it-out games. The NBA is entertainment and will give fans whatever style of basketball they prefer. Can't argue with that.
It'd be interesting if they could ever magically have enough proper data to assess game flow as a function of 3-pt line distance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
focus
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2526

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:49 pm    Post subject:

Is knowledge of basic inside play also deteriorating with all this emphasis on shooting from AAU on up, I wonder.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Bard207
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:22 pm    Post subject:

The Lakers were able to acquire Kobe and Shaq for relatively modest costs in assets. Duncan had a long productive career with the Spurs.

In more modern times, Miami sent out assets in sign and trades for LeBron and Bosh, so that limited/capped how long they could survive at the top with limited quality depth.

Cleveland had multiple high picks while LeBron was away, but they struggled with both drafting and player development. When LeBron came back, they sent out some assets because of a shift to a win now philosophy.

Golden State had to send out draft picks to dump salary and bring Iggy in. Similar to Miami in that drafting late and lacking some picks eventually hurts depth. If they weren't able to acquire Durant through some unique (fluke) things, the league would have already caught up to them.

Boston has accumulated multiple draft picks from other teams, but Ainge is pedestrian at best when actually using the picks in drafts. So they probably won't stay long at the top if they ever get there.

Overall, my POV is that thin depth for the top teams makes it difficult to play at a high level for all 82 games.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wino
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 9674
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:28 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Wino wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Wino wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I think Warriors are pacing themselves. They probably will turn it on in the playoffs and then people will wonder if those other teams belong.


We'll see, they sure have been beaten by weaker teams even when at full strength. I know that always happens but I seem to be witnessing it more the past year or so, than any other time I can remember.


I'm not sure about that. GS is 52-24, and other than a loss to Dallas, I don't believe they've been beaten by a bad team this year. Most of their losses have come against the top teams in the league.

And ultimately, what matters is the playoffs.


They lost to the Suns and the Heat with a full roster but maybe you are right doesn't look like they lost too many games against really bad teams. Seen a number of games around the league that have surprised me. Philly against the Mavs and Magic come to mind. Toronto's loss to the Cavs is another. Maybe I am just noticing more this year because I am actually watching more games that don't involve the Lakers. LOL.



I think this is also a function of a 3-point era. Any team on a single night can lose or win because they get hot or cold from long distance.


Kind of what I was hoping this would get at. The 3 point shot and not allowing any hand checking on the outside. Then it is just a matter of who is hot or cold. That is why you will see a bad team beat a good team by 20 points. In the old days, if a good team was having a bad shooting night, they would simply play lock down defense and win by 5 point instead of 25 points.
_________________
Never argue with stupid people! They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!! - Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wino
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 9674
Location: San Diego

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:50 pm    Post subject:

Bard207 wrote:
The Lakers were able to acquire Kobe and Shaq for relatively modest costs in assets. Duncan had a long productive career with the Spurs.

In more modern times, Miami sent out assets in sign and trades for LeBron and Bosh, so that limited/capped how long they could survive at the top with limited quality depth.

Cleveland had multiple high picks while LeBron was away, but they struggled with both drafting and player development. When LeBron came back, they sent out some assets because of a shift to a win now philosophy.

Golden State had to send out draft picks to dump salary and bring Iggy in. Similar to Miami in that drafting late and lacking some picks eventually hurts depth. If they weren't able to acquire Durant through some unique (fluke) things, the league would have already caught up to them.

Boston has accumulated multiple draft picks from other teams, but Ainge is pedestrian at best when actually using the picks in drafts. So they probably won't stay long at the top if they ever get there.

Overall, my POV is that thin depth for the top teams makes it difficult to play at a high level for all 82 games.


Which may be what the league wants, checks and balances that don't allow any one team to stay at the top for long. Once you build a team that wins, your ability to maintain that is very limited. Eventually your guys get old and lose their edge, you don't have the draft picks until they are done and then it takes you a number of years to rebuild.

Not sure I love the system while being an LA fan, but when you are fans of other teams, it ain't all bad. LA is pretty spoiled and the fans want winners at all cost. Yet the systems in all sports don't want that and do what they can to manipulate the system to spread the championships around. Other places that have not been as spoiled as LA has been tend to be happy just to have good teams, but in LA just being good, is not enough.
_________________
Never argue with stupid people! They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!! - Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 2:46 pm    Post subject:

focus wrote:
Is knowledge of basic inside play also deteriorating with all this emphasis on shooting from AAU on up, I wonder.


Yes, without a doubt. By the time kids get to the NBA, they are catching up. But a lot of them need to be taught at the NBA level. I don’t mean to overstate the matter, because there are kids who learn the inside game just like the old days. But I don’t think it is a coincidence that big men from Europe often start with better interior skills than comparable American players. That’s my impression, anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 3:46 pm    Post subject:

Bard207 wrote:
The Lakers were able to acquire Kobe and Shaq for relatively modest costs in assets. Duncan had a long productive career with the Spurs.

In more modern times, Miami sent out assets in sign and trades for LeBron and Bosh, so that limited/capped how long they could survive at the top with limited quality depth.

Cleveland had multiple high picks while LeBron was away, but they struggled with both drafting and player development. When LeBron came back, they sent out some assets because of a shift to a win now philosophy.

Golden State had to send out draft picks to dump salary and bring Iggy in. Similar to Miami in that drafting late and lacking some picks eventually hurts depth. If they weren't able to acquire Durant through some unique (fluke) things, the league would have already caught up to them.

Boston has accumulated multiple draft picks from other teams, but Ainge is pedestrian at best when actually using the picks in drafts. So they probably won't stay long at the top if they ever get there.

Overall, my POV is that thin depth for the top teams makes it difficult to play at a high level for all 82 games.



I think you're talking about a number of things, some of which contradict your point.

There is more player mobility than in the past. However, I would argue that makes it easier, rather than harder, to build dominant teams.

A Durant or Lebron is far more willing to go where the grass is greener -- and the current CBA places less restrictions on them for doing so. As a result, Miami went instantly from a terrible team to a championship team.

The 2000s Lakers really didn't do anything different than teams dio today. We basically dumped a lot of players (depth) to create cap space to sign a top free agent. And then we got lucky because Kobe turned out to be a GOAT level player. But remember our nickname was Shaq, Kobe and the merry minimums.

You really need to go back to the 1980s when the rules made it easier to built deeply stacked teams. That was an era of superteams. You had a few haves and lots of have-nots.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Bard207
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:31 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
The Lakers were able to acquire Kobe and Shaq for relatively modest costs in assets. Duncan had a long productive career with the Spurs.

In more modern times, Miami sent out assets in sign and trades for LeBron and Bosh, so that limited/capped how long they could survive at the top with limited quality depth.

Cleveland had multiple high picks while LeBron was away, but they struggled with both drafting and player development. When LeBron came back, they sent out some assets because of a shift to a win now philosophy.

Golden State had to send out draft picks to dump salary and bring Iggy in. Similar to Miami in that drafting late and lacking some picks eventually hurts depth. If they weren't able to acquire Durant through some unique (fluke) things, the league would have already caught up to them.

Boston has accumulated multiple draft picks from other teams, but Ainge is pedestrian at best when actually using the picks in drafts. So they probably won't stay long at the top if they ever get there.

Overall, my POV is that thin depth for the top teams makes it difficult to play at a high level for all 82 games.



I think you're talking about a number of things, some of which contradict your point.

There is more player mobility than in the past. However, I would argue that makes it easier, rather than harder, to build dominant teams.

A Durant or Lebron is far more willing to go where the grass is greener -- and the current CBA places less restrictions on them for doing so. As a result, Miami went instantly from a terrible team to a championship team.

The 2000s Lakers really didn't do anything different than teams dio today. We basically dumped a lot of players (depth) to create cap space to sign a top free agent. And then we got lucky because Kobe turned out to be a GOAT level player. But remember our nickname was Shaq, Kobe and the merry minimums.

You really need to go back to the 1980s when the rules made it easier to built deeply stacked teams. That was an era of superteams. You had a few haves and lots of have-nots.



Durant joining Golden State was something way outside of the norm because his free agency coincided with a huge jump in the salary cap. Even with that advantage/edge, they don't have the same dominance that they did in the past because they are either drafting late or lacked a first round pick. The increased pace that the league is playing at makes it more difficult to have fresh legs for every game of the season.

Yes there was luck - good fortune in getting Kobe for the relatively low cost of Vlade. That was over two decades ago and they have been unable to duplicate that success. There is more information and videos available now than when Kobe was drafted. West was able to take advantage of the limited information available at the time and being able to draft talent directly out of high school. The change in draft eligibility rules and the abundance of information makes it much more difficult to almost impossible to sneak up on the league like it was done with Kobe.

Shaq was in his mid 20's when he came to LA while things have shifted with the max level players now in the 27 - 28 age group when changing teams via free agency. If Shaq would have been 27 - 28 when he came to LA, winning championships would still be likely. The return on him in a trade would likely be less since he would be older than when he was traded to Miami.

The inside story: How the Magic let the Lakers steal Shaquille O'Neal

Quote:

As soon as the trade sending Lynch and Peeler to Vancouver went through, West immediately upped the Lakers' offer to $120 million over seven years with an opt-out after the third year. After hearing this, Orlando tried at the last minute to sweeten its offer with better cash flow, but they had lost whatever leverage they had to begin with, which wasn't as much as they apparently thought, certainly not after the rules of free agency had unexpectedly changed after O'Neal signed his seven-year, $39.9 million rookie contract in August of 1992.

See, prior to 1995, two completed contracts and a minimum of four years of service were required for a free agent to be deemed unrestricted, and thus be able to sign with any team he wanted without the incumbent team having the ability to match any offer. The CBA that resulted from the 1995 lockout, however, eliminated restricted free agency for the first and only time in the salary cap era.

After the 1998 work stoppage, the CBA returned to its original rules regarding free agency, but during this one three-year window, and only during this three-year window, every free agent was unrestricted.

In other words, had Shaq, with just four years and one completed contract under his belt, been a free agent in this year's class, or in 1994, or 1998, or 1999, or 2000, or at any other time in free agent history other than that one three-year window, the Magic would've had the ability to match L.A.'s offer of $120 million over seven, which, for all their missteps, they surely would have done.

But in 1996, they didn't have this luxury. If Shaq wanted to take the Lakers' deal, there was nothing Orlando could do about it. Armato personally went to Atlanta to discuss the offers with Shaq.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Bard207
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:42 pm    Post subject:

Wino wrote:
Bard207 wrote:
The Lakers were able to acquire Kobe and Shaq for relatively modest costs in assets. Duncan had a long productive career with the Spurs.

In more modern times, Miami sent out assets in sign and trades for LeBron and Bosh, so that limited/capped how long they could survive at the top with limited quality depth.

Cleveland had multiple high picks while LeBron was away, but they struggled with both drafting and player development. When LeBron came back, they sent out some assets because of a shift to a win now philosophy.

Golden State had to send out draft picks to dump salary and bring Iggy in. Similar to Miami in that drafting late and lacking some picks eventually hurts depth. If they weren't able to acquire Durant through some unique (fluke) things, the league would have already caught up to them.

Boston has accumulated multiple draft picks from other teams, but Ainge is pedestrian at best when actually using the picks in drafts. So they probably won't stay long at the top if they ever get there.

Overall, my POV is that thin depth for the top teams makes it difficult to play at a high level for all 82 games.


Which may be what the league wants, checks and balances that don't allow any one team to stay at the top for long. Once you build a team that wins, your ability to maintain that is very limited. Eventually your guys get old and lose their edge, you don't have the draft picks until they are done and then it takes you a number of years to rebuild.

Not sure I love the system while being an LA fan, but when you are fans of other teams, it ain't all bad. LA is pretty spoiled and the fans want winners at all cost. Yet the systems in all sports don't want that and do what they can to manipulate the system to spread the championships around. Other places that have not been as spoiled as LA has been tend to be happy just to have good teams, but in LA just being good, is not enough.



Much has changed since the Magic - KAJ - Worthy teams. Currently, there are two second round picks owed and no picks incoming. To get the #1 picks to draft the equivalent of Magic and Worthy, the Lakers will have to take the beatings (losses) themselves rather than have the equivalent of New Orleans and Cleveland take them.

Changes in the CBA, draft rules, technology etc make it much more difficult to assemble the equivalent of Kobe and Shaq as was done decades ago.

If you still have expectations of championships at the same frequency as in the past, I think that you will be disappointed since the team lacks the edges/advantages of the past.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 8:17 pm    Post subject:

Bard207 wrote:
Durant joining Golden State was something way outside of the norm because his free agency coincided with a huge jump in the salary cap. Even with that advantage/edge, they don't have the same dominance that they did in the past because they are either drafting late or lacked a first round pick.


Durant joined the Warriors two years ago, and they've won two rings and 75% of their games. And of course they've won 3 of the last 4 (and the one they didn't win they set the record for most wins.) That sure seems like dominance to me.

I am puzzled why you seem to think the Laker three-peat team was more dominant than the Warriors have been.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB