I was talking to a friend about the situation with player movement in the NBA and I began to wonder if things will organically shift in a different direction. Going back to LeBron's "Decision" in 2010, it's fair to assume that the relentless pressure and media scrutiny played a major role in him teaming up with Wade & Bosh. The same can be said for Kevin Durant in his move to Golden State.
If the "Superteam" trend continues, I see a possibility of the media (including social media) shifting the narrative back in the favor of "Supserstars" who try to win with their original (or slightly lesser) squad. Westbrook would be the prime example of this. There's no doubt that 90% of NBA fans and critics would view Westbrook as more of a winner than Durant if OKC won a title. This is the #1 reason why I am rooting for OKC in the Western Conference.
I'm not suggesting that players will stop teaming up. I'm just hopeful that we will see an end to 3+ All-NBA players joining forces.
I just don't see much difference in a superteam that is drafted or traded for or one that is created via free agency. Should the 80's Celtics and Lakers teams be treated differently or the Bulls or the Spurs. I mean there are interviews with Magic where he has flat out said he would have gone back to school another year had the Lakers not gotten the 1st pick because he wanted to play with Kareem (and didn't want to go to Chicago). Why is it different that the Celtics drafted Bird, traded for the draft pick that became McHale and got Parish in that trade? That team then added Dennis Johnson and Bill Walton. Why is that any different the modern teams? The Bulls added Dennis Rodman via free agency to a team with the best player in basketball and perhaps the 2nd best player in basketball. The Spurs tanked so they could add Duncan to Robinson and then added Parker and Manu via the draft. They later traded a pick to acquire Leonard. If Leonard doesn't get hurt, maybe big time free agent Aldridge wins a title with that group.
I just don't see the distinction. That said, Durant's problem was he joined a 73 win team that had already won a title with the same core and that beat his team after it choked in the WCF just before the move. That is always going to be treated differently then another type of superteam because Durant joined an already formed "superteam".
You don’t see the distinction?
Magic and Bird were highly touted but they were rookies. Dennis Rodman was a really good player but not an MVP candidate. Parker and Manu weren’t projected to be some world beaters either, nor was Kawhi.
Juxtapose that with KD joining Steph’s Warriors or Wade and Lebron teaming up in Miami. Both cases, 2 legit MVP candidates at the height of their powers teamed up to win a chip. It would’ve been like Bird and Magic teaming up.
The reason there’s a difference in perception lies in the connotation of trades and drafts vs free agency.
In trades, the feeling is that both teams gave up something of value to get another thing of value. Look at the Tatum-Fultz trade. In hindsight, the Sixers got robbed. But on draft night? Not that certain. Look at the Kyrie-IT trade. In hindsight, DA once again came out ahead. But during the trade? Not that certain either.
Same with the draft. You never know what you’re going to get. The hype around guys like Wiggins and Oden was crazy. The hype around Tony Parker? Not much
However, with free agency, you absolutely know what you’re going to get. Mainly because guys are already established when they move teams. Unlike trades, there’s no fair value leaving the team, and unlike the draft, there’s no uncertainty either.