Spurs vs. Heat

[BubbleKnuts 569]

So when it comes to acquiring multiple HOF players, it is all about how you accomplish it? In the old days, you were FORCED to acquire multiple HOF players so it just is not as legit to do the same thing when you have a more free choice of players! When given a free choice, you would choose to have fewer great players?<br /><br />Did MJ refuse to play and demand a trade when Bulls acquired Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant? You know, the guys that helped push the Bulls over the top to start that string of titles. You really think Jordan at that time would have been like "hell nah" if somehow he could have gotten Bird, Barkley or Magic on his side? LOL. C'mon man. Jordan is very competitive and has a lot of pride so that is the response you expect publicly but....really.

<br /><br />Right.. Let's be real for a minute. Haha.<br /><br /><br />Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[BGleas 7,880]

You don't see a difference between Jerry Krause scouting a little known forward out of Central Arkansas (Pippen) and engineering a draft trade for him and then the organization developing him alongside Jordan, as opposed to LeBron, Wade and Bosh spending an entire season figuring out how they can all end up in Miami together? Pat Riley figured out how to make the numbers work, but those guys ending up together was all them. 

 

You don't see a difference between Red Auerbach surrounding Larry Bird with Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Danny Ainge through trades and smart drafting, and LeBron, Bosh and Wade spending the Olympics the year before figuring out how they can all end up on the same team?

 

You can dismiss what Jordan actually said and what actually transpired in real life for what you think he might have been thinking, but Jordan didn't spend the 86 offseason trying to get Isiah, him and Barkley together because they couldn't beat the Celtics by themselves, he spent the offseason figuring out how to beat them.

 

It's not like when Pippen and Grant were drafted everyone said "Now the Bulls are legit, they got a future HOF'er in Scottie Pippen". The Bulls targeted Pippen in the draft and worked a trade for him and then developed him. If we're going to be accurate with history, Jordan was very frustrated with Pippen during their losses to the Pistons in the playoffs, but Jordan didn't bail and go join Ewing in NYC and orchestrate getting Barkley there too, he got in the gym and worked his butt off to beat the Pistons. 

 

There's just a different mentality in basketball these days. Part of it is the AAU scene, these guys grow up buddies instead of competitors, part off it is the media scrutiny when losing and part of it is instant gratification instead of working to defeat your competitors.

 

I prefer the older days instead of all these players figuring out how to get together because building and developing their own teams is too hard.  

 

So when it comes to acquiring multiple HOF players, it is all about how you accomplish it?  In the old days, you were FORCED to acquire multiple HOF players so it just is not as legit to do the same thing when you have a more free choice of players!  When given a free choice, you would choose to have fewer great players?

 

Did MJ refuse to play and demand a trade when Bulls acquired Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant?  You know, the guys that helped push the Bulls over the top to start that string of titles.  You really think Jordan at that time would have been like "hell nah" if somehow he could have gotten Bird, Barkley or Magic on his side?  LOL.  C'mon man.  Jordan is very competitive and has a lot of pride so that is the response you expect publicly but....really. 

[HoosierCoop 3,889]

You don't see a difference between Jerry Krause scouting a little known forward out of Central Arkansas (Pippen) and engineering a draft trade for him and then the organization developing him alongside Jordan, as opposed to LeBron, Wade and Bosh spending an entire season figuring out how they can all end up in Miami together? Pat Riley figured out how to make the numbers work, but those guys ending up together was all them. 

 

You don't see a difference between Red Auerbach surrounding Larry Bird with Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Danny Ainge through trades and smart drafting, and LeBron, Bosh and Wade spending the Olympics the year before figuring out how they can all end up on the same team?

 

You can dismiss what Jordan actually said and what actually transpired in real life for what you think he might have been thinking, but Jordan didn't spend the 86 offseason trying to get Isiah, him and Barkley together because they couldn't beat the Celtics by themselves, he spent the offseason figuring out how to beat them.

 

It's not like when Pippen and Grant were drafted everyone said "Now the Bulls are legit, they got a future HOF'er in Scottie Pippen". The Bulls targeted Pippen in the draft and worked a trade for him and then developed him. If we're going to be accurate with history, Jordan was very frustrated with Pippen during their losses to the Pistons in the playoffs, but Jordan didn't bail and go join Ewing in NYC and orchestrate getting Barkley there too, he got in the gym and worked his butt off to beat the Pistons. 

 

There's just a different mentality in basketball these days. Part of it is the AAU scene, these guys grow up buddies instead of competitors, part off it is the media scrutiny when losing and part of it is instant gratification instead of working to defeat your competitors.

 

I prefer the older days instead of all these players figuring out how to get together because building and developing their own teams is too hard.  

Good point Gleas!

 

This starts on the AAU level, carries up through the NCAA ranks (ref. UK), and peters out in the NBA.

 

I still love the game but I feel money/entitlement/early established agreements have garnished the competitiveness that we all cherish.

[bronkonagurski 894]

You don't see a difference between Jerry Krause scouting a little known forward out of Central Arkansas (Pippen) and engineering a draft trade for him and then the organization developing him alongside Jordan, as opposed to LeBron, Wade and Bosh spending an entire season figuring out how they can all end up in Miami together? Pat Riley figured out how to make the numbers work, but those guys ending up together was all them. 

 

You don't see a difference between Red Auerbach surrounding Larry Bird with Kevin McHale, Robert Parish and Danny Ainge through trades and smart drafting, and LeBron, Bosh and Wade spending the Olympics the year before figuring out how they can all end up on the same team?

 

You can dismiss what Jordan actually said and what actually transpired in real life for what you think he might have been thinking, but Jordan didn't spend the 86 offseason trying to get Isiah, him and Barkley together because they couldn't beat the Celtics by themselves, he spent the offseason figuring out how to beat them.

 

It's not like when Pippen and Grant were drafted everyone said "Now the Bulls are legit, they got a future HOF'er in Scottie Pippen". The Bulls targeted Pippen in the draft and worked a trade for him and then developed him. If we're going to be accurate with history, Jordan was very frustrated with Pippen during their losses to the Pistons in the playoffs, but Jordan didn't bail and go join Ewing in NYC and orchestrate getting Barkley there too, he got in the gym and worked his butt off to beat the Pistons. 

 

There's just a different mentality in basketball these days. Part of it is the AAU scene, these guys grow up buddies instead of competitors, part off it is the media scrutiny when losing and part of it is instant gratification instead of working to defeat your competitors.

 

I prefer the older days instead of all these players figuring out how to get together because building and developing their own teams is too hard.  

 

I know the teams were built differently but I'm looking at the outcome.  For whatever reasons (not sure how those old labor agreements worked) back in the 80's teams were primarily built through the draft and trades.  Free agency wasn't much of a viable option back then.  I was doing some reading today and I guess in 1988 Tom Chambers was the first unrestricted FA in NBA history to actually sign with a new team.  The attitudes of that era compared with now are very different, I'm not really disagreeing with much of anything you have said here.  My main point is I don't think what Miami has done is having any strong negative effect on competitive balance.  There always have been and always will be some dominant teams out there, no matter how they were put together.  I think what hurts competitive balance the most right now is the discrepancy between the Eastern and Western conferences.  Miami has ruled the roost in a watered down East while the West feeds on itself and you have many good/great teams that would probably be top dog on the other conference.  Miami would be just another team in the mix in the West. 

 

I must say I've enjoyed the conversation.  :)

[BGleas 7,880]

I don't know that the balance of power is much of an issue though, because if you've noticed I haven't discussed the 80's Lakers too much, part of that is I followed the Eastern Conference more as a kid, but the other reason is the West wasn't nearly as deep as the East in the 80's. Those things are just cyclical.

Agree, regardless of the era and how they're constructed, there will always be "super" teams. Luckily there's options for everybody. In the 80's you could pick between the Showtime Lakers and the more Blue Collar Celtics. Now you can pick between the "built from scratch" Spurs and the Heat.

I could talk the history of basketball all day, definitely enjoy this topic and discussion as well!

I know the teams were built differently but I'm looking at the outcome.  For whatever reasons (not sure how those old labor agreements worked) back in the 80's teams were primarily built through the draft and trades.  Free agency wasn't much of a viable option back then.  I was doing some reading today and I guess in 1988 Tom Chambers was the first unrestricted FA in NBA history to actually sign with a new team.  The attitudes of that era compared with now are very different, I'm not really disagreeing with much of anything you have said here.  My main point is I don't think what Miami has done is having any strong negative effect on competitive balance.  There always have been and always will be some dominant teams out there, no matter how they were put together.  I think what hurts competitive balance the most right now is the discrepancy between the Eastern and Western conferences.  Miami has ruled the roost in a watered down East while the West feeds on itself and you have many good/great teams that would probably be top dog on the other conference.  Miami would be just another team in the mix in the West. 
 
I must say I've enjoyed the conversation.  :)

[bronkonagurski 894]

I don't know that the balance of power is much of an issue though, because if you've noticed I haven't discussed the 80's Lakers too much, part of that is I followed the Eastern Conference more as a kid, but the other reason is the West wasn't nearly as deep as the East in the 80's. Those things are just cyclical.

Agree, regardless of the era and how they're constructed, there will always be "super" teams. Luckily there's options for everybody. In the 80's you could pick between the Showtime Lakers and the more Blue Collar Celtics. Now you can pick between the "built from scratch" Spurs and the Heat.

I could talk the history of basketball all day, definitely enjoy this topic and discussion as well!
 

 

Granted I was a kid back then but I don't remember the conferences being out of balance to the degree they are right now.  The East wasn't a picnic back then.  In the mid-to-late 80's the Celtics had to deal with the Hawks, Bucks, Pistons...those are the main teams I remember them playing in the East.  That and the Bulls in '86 which was a sweep but the Bulls put up a fight.  I remember the Lakers having to at least face a bit of combat too.  Utah was tough.  Dallas had a pretty good team with Ron Harper, Rolando Blackmon and Roy Tarpley.  The Rockets were pretty good too. 

 

In terms of the Jordan era of dominance, I still feel like both conferences were pretty good.  It was just that the Bulls were that much better than everyone else.  I remember the West as having quite a few very good teams during that timespan.  Seattle, Houston, Portland, Utah, San Antonio, Phoenix...I actually think the West had better depth at that time but it didn't matter.  The Bulls only had to beat one of those teams and they were just better.  The East wasn't exactly a picnic (Knicks, Cavs, Pacers in '98) but...really nobody in either conference pushed the MJ Bulls too much.  The Pacers were the only team to actually make them play a Game 7 during MJ's title runs.  That speaks to the level of dominance they held.  

[TheWatShot 13,677]

I've never been able to put a finger on why the East has been so inferior to the West for so long. My best guess is that a bunch of East teams have lousy GM's who keep getting high draft picks because they keep screwing up by taking kids based on "potential" only to have them flame out, and the cycle repeats itself. 

[bronkonagurski 894]

I've never been able to put a finger on why the East has been so inferior to the West for so long. My best guess is that a bunch of East teams have lousy GM's who keep getting high draft picks because they keep screwing up by taking kids based on "potential" only to have them flame out, and the cycle repeats itself. 

 

Is there some geographic advantage in terms of having more warm weather cities or something?  Just a random thought I had...so much of the East is contained in the Midwest and the East Coast. 

[BGleas 7,880]

By the way, Bronk, not that it's probably even on the table. But, I reserve the right to completely jump ship and reverse my stance on this issue should the Celtics somehow be able to land Kevin Love, dump enough salary, and convince LeBron James to come to Boston to join Rondo and Love.  :biggrin:

 

I know the teams were built differently but I'm looking at the outcome.  For whatever reasons (not sure how those old labor agreements worked) back in the 80's teams were primarily built through the draft and trades.  Free agency wasn't much of a viable option back then.  I was doing some reading today and I guess in 1988 Tom Chambers was the first unrestricted FA in NBA history to actually sign with a new team.  The attitudes of that era compared with now are very different, I'm not really disagreeing with much of anything you have said here.  My main point is I don't think what Miami has done is having any strong negative effect on competitive balance.  There always have been and always will be some dominant teams out there, no matter how they were put together.  I think what hurts competitive balance the most right now is the discrepancy between the Eastern and Western conferences.  Miami has ruled the roost in a watered down East while the West feeds on itself and you have many good/great teams that would probably be top dog on the other conference.  Miami would be just another team in the mix in the West. 

 

I must say I've enjoyed the conversation.  :)