Whether or not we win a title all comes down to JT and JB right?

[Moranis]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

[jmen788]

The combination of drafting and team building by Ainge and Brad have helped the Celtics out together the best roster top to to bottom in the league.  Great offense, great defense.  Not a single soft spot defensively among any of the regulars.  This has made the celtics the favorite to win the title the past two years, yet there has been no joy to end the season.

The reason?  At the end of the day, super stars win championships.  Super stars BREAK the models and lift one team over another when it matters the most.  Curry did it to us two years ago and we watched Jokic do it last year.  Super stars make regular guys play above their heads.

Obviously brad needs to continue to tweak the roster to get a title but the pieces except for the very top are already there.  It won't happen unless the stars take us there.  And I know that threw JB in the title but it really comes down to JT.  He has to elevate his game to dominate every playoff series.  As for JB, he needs to become a great second option, which isn't the case right now.

Comes down to the officiating lol

[Goldstar88]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

Don’t forget the Mavericks…

[Moranis]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

Don’t forget the Mavericks…

Dirk was a top 5 player that year.

[Goldstar88]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

Don’t forget the Mavericks…

Dirk was a top 5 player that year.

Nope. His MVP season was back in 2007. Mavs won in 2011. He wasn’t at that level anymore. Still elite; but not top 5. Derrick Rose won MVP that year, Dwight was runner up and then you still had Kobe, Lebron, KD, and Wade.

[Who]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

Don’t forget the Mavericks…

Dirk was a top 5 player that year.

Nope. His MVP season was back in 2007. Mavs won in 2011. He wasn’t at that level anymore. Still elite; but not top 5. Derrick Rose won MVP that year, Dwight was runner up and then you still had Kobe, Lebron, KD, and Wade.

And Dirk outplayed all those guys on his way to the title. He outplayed Kobe in the 2nd round to beat LAL. He outplayed Durant in the Conference Finals to get to the Finals. And then Dirk outplayed both LeBron and Wade in the Finals to win the title.

[LilRip]

Dirk had the glow. What a joy to watch their run in the playoffs

That said, talent is key. And you need that talent to be healthy. Finally, you need a bit of luck. A bad call, a bad turnover, a missed shot from a good look, etc. These add up and can be the difference between a win and a loss, especially against 2 evenly matched teams

[Moranis]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

Don’t forget the Mavericks…

Dirk was a top 5 player that year.

Nope. His MVP season was back in 2007. Mavs won in 2011. He wasn’t at that level anymore. Still elite; but not top 5. Derrick Rose won MVP that year, Dwight was runner up and then you still had Kobe, Lebron, KD, and Wade.

And Dirk outplayed all those guys on his way to the title. He outplayed Kobe in the 2nd round to beat LAL. He outplayed Durant in the Conference Finals to get to the Finals. And then Dirk outplayed both LeBron and Wade in the Finals to win the title.

Dirk was clearly better than Rose and he was better than Wade. Thus, top 5.

[RodyTur10]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

Don’t forget the Mavericks…

Dirk was a top 5 player that year.

Nope. His MVP season was back in 2007. Mavs won in 2011. He wasn’t at that level anymore. Still elite; but not top 5. Derrick Rose won MVP that year, Dwight was runner up and then you still had Kobe, Lebron, KD, and Wade.

And Dirk outplayed all those guys on his way to the title. He outplayed Kobe in the 2nd round to beat LAL. He outplayed Durant in the Conference Finals to get to the Finals. And then Dirk outplayed both LeBron and Wade in the Finals to win the title.

Even though Nowitzki outplayed these fellow stars in a series doesn't automatically make him a better player. For instance Tatum has outplayed Embiid in a series, but few people would argue that Tatum is on the same level. Butler has had multiple dominant playoff-runs and still he's never in the discussion for MVP. Sometimes it's also about match-ups. Leonard always was a burden to LeBron James. There's no argument that he was ever on par with prime LeBron.

No, I think Moranis has to give in here. I would argue that Curry last year also wasn't necessarily a top 5 player anymore (8th in MVP-voting for instance). Top 5 is of course an arbitrary number. Broaden that to a category of legit MVP-candidates (type A) and franchise players (still All NBA-level) with a lot of playoff-experience (type B) and it makes the underlying argument for Moranis stronger.

We can classify Jokic and Embiid as type A. In my opinion Doncic is also a type A, but the Dallas roster is pretty bad. And you have Antetokounmpo who's probably still a type A, but certainly factors as a type B.

Besides them, the current NBA-situation is very interesting because there are a lot of older legends who deserve the status of franchise player. Although there are question marks about decline, health and supporting casts I would add this list as type B candidates (Curry, Durant, Butler, Leonard, Lillard, Davis, James, Harden). I scratch Harden and James. But can Leonard or Davis ever stay healthy? What team will Lillard be on? It's a tough group to judge. 

On the other side you have a new generation which is still in a team building process and not quite MVP-caliber (SGA, Morant, Williamson, Haliburton), but under the radar SGA is close. The generally often overlooked middle group is quite small: Tatum, Booker, Mitchell, Sabonis, Young, Towns. With the emphasis on the combination of quality of a franchise player (or All NBA) and playoff experience I'd have to dismiss Sabonis, Young and Towns.

And that leaves Tatum, Booker and Mitchell as to be added as type B guys. The term franchise player is perhaps too vague here, so clear All NBA-level as a judgment will suffice and all three have lots of impressive individual playoff performances in their bag and they have strong supporting casts. Both in support and consistency Mitchell is on the edge.

In the strict sense of Moranis' claim that you need a definite top 5 player to win (and obviously some decent help) it would make the Nuggets the title favorite again with the Bucks and the 76ers as only legit contenders. That's a pretty bold statement. By using my criteria you can add teams like the Suns and Celtics without having to do some retrospective discussion on Tatum, Booker or Durant in case they win the title.
 
My overview

Favorite: Denver Nuggets (Jokic-A)

Contenders: Phoenix Suns (Booker-B, Durant-B), Boston Celtics (Tatum-B), Milwaukee Bucks (Antetokounmpo-A), Philadelphia 76ers (Embiid-A)

Outsiders: Miami Heat (Butler-B), Golden State Warriors (Curry-B), LA Clippers (Leonard-B), LA Lakers (Davis-B), Cleveland Cavaliers (Mitchell-B)


Note: Portland, Dallas and Oklahoma City are excluded, because it's unlikely for Lillard to stay and these teams probably lack the supporting casts to compete, but Doncic (A), Gilgeous-Alexander (potentially A) and Lillard (B) in a different setting theoretically could lead a team. As I said I excluded James and Harden from that guaranteed All NBA level and therefore not classified as a type B, thus not a potential best player on a championship team.

[Vermont Green]

Even though Nowitzki outplayed these fellow stars in a series doesn't automatically make him a better player. For instance Tatum has outplayed Embiid in a series, but few people would argue that Tatum is on the same level. Butler has had multiple dominant playoff-runs and still he's never in the discussion for MVP. Sometimes it's also about match-ups. Leonard always was a burden to LeBron James. There's no argument that he was ever on par with prime LeBron.

No, I think Moranis has to give in here. I would argue that Curry last year also wasn't necessarily a top 5 player anymore (8th in MVP-voting for instance). Top 5 is of course an arbitrary number. Broaden that to a category of legit MVP-candidates (type A) and franchise players (still All Star-level) with a lot of playoff-experience (type B) and it makes the underlying argument for Moranis stronger.

We can classify Jokic and Embiid as type A. In my opinion Doncic is also a type A, but the Dallas roster is pretty bad. And you have Antetokounmpo who's probably still a type A, but certainly factors as a type B.

Besides them, the current NBA-situation is very interesting because there are a lot of older legends who deserve the status of franchise player. Although there are question marks about decline, health and supporting casts I would add this list as type B candidates (Curry, Durant, Butler, Leonard, Lillard, Davis, James, Harden). I scratch Harden and James. But can Leonard or Davis ever stay healthy? What team will Lillard be on? It's a tough group to judge. 

On the other side you have a new generation which is still in a team building process and not quite MVP-caliber (SGA, Morant, Williamson, Haliburton), but under the radar SGA is close. The generally often overlooked middle group is quite small: Tatum, Booker, Mitchell, Sabonis, Young, Towns. With the emphasis on the combination of quality of a franchise player (or perennial All Star) and playoff experience I'd have to dismiss Sabonis, Young and Towns.

And that leaves Tatum, Booker and Mitchell as to be added as type B guys. The term franchise player is perhaps too vague here, so perennial All Star as a judgment will suffice and all three have lots of impressive individual playoff performances in their bag and they have strong supporting casts. Both in support and consistency Mitchell is on the edge.

In the strict sense of Moranis' claim that you need a definite top 5 player to win (and obviously some decent help) it would make the Nuggets the title favorite again with the Bucks and the 76ers as only legit contenders. That's a pretty bold statement. By using my criteria you can add teams like the Suns and Celtics without having to do some retrospective discussion on Tatum, Booker or Durant in case they win the title.
 
My overview

Favorite: Denver Nuggets (Jokic-A)

Contenders: Phoenix Suns (Booker-B, Durant-B), Boston Celtics (Tatum-B), Milwaukee Bucks (Antetokounmpo-A), Philadelphia 76ers (Embiid-A)

Outsiders: Miami Heat (Butler-B), Golden State Warriors (Curry-B), LA Clippers (Leonard-B), LA Lakers (Davis-B), Cleveland Cavaliers (Mitchell-B)


Note: Portland, Dallas and Oklahoma City are excluded, because it's unlikely for Lillard to stay and these teams probably lack the supporting casts to compete, but Doncic (A), Gilgeous-Alexander (potentially A) and Lillard (B) in a different setting theoretically could lead a team. As I said I excluded James and Harden from that guaranteed All Star/All NBA level and therefore not classified as a type B, thus not a potential best player on a championship team.

This is good stuff.  I think there is a difference between a player that can lead a title contending team repeatedly, like LeBron and Jordan and Magic and Bird, and a player that can lead a title contending team if everything else goes right for the team including a strong supporting cast.  I think SAN was that type of team during their run.  Nowitzki and DAL had that kind of season.  I actually think Curry and the GSW title in 2022 was that type of year.  Curry was good, but not dominant good.

So the Celtics could win a title if Tatum emerges as a top 5 dominant player, but they could win it the other way too.  They have come close the last two seasons.  They have been right there.  If something had gone right for them or something gone wrong for another team, it wouldn't have taken much to tip the scales in either of the last two seasons.

With the add of Porzingis, I feel this is their best roster yet.  They still need several things to break in their favor to win a title, but I expect they are going to be right there.  I also think Tatum is going to continue to get better, get more mature as a player.

[Moranis]

History is history.  The fact remains, 95% of the champions in the history of the league have had a top 5 player on their team.  Sure there is a bit of subjectivity on whether a certain player is a top 5 player and sometimes the winning establishes a guy in that tier that was close (i.e. Tatum might be currently considered a top 5 player, had the C's won the title), but you can't argue against the simple reality that NBA champions have top 5 players on their team.  That is the historical reality.  And the very few times it has happened without a top 5 player, the teams won just 1 title and often were only competing for titles for 2 or 3 seasons.  You need the top end talent and always have to win.  And to win a lot, you need the really special talents, you know the top 25 on history type players.  I mean since the Sonics title in 79, the only 2 (or 4) champions without a top 25 player are Kawhi's Raptors, Wallace's Pistons, and arguably the 2 Thomas' Pistons.  And of those 4, Thomas is close to top 25 all time if not in it and Kawhi was certainly on that path before injuries (I'm counting Jokic though he may still not be quite that high, I am just projecting him to get there).

So it isn't even just a top 5 player in the league, it is almost always one of the very best players in the history of the league.

[Vermont Green]

History is history.  The fact remains, 95% of the champions in the history of the league have had a top 5 player on their team.  Sure there is a bit of subjectivity on whether a certain player is a top 5 player and sometimes the winning establishes a guy in that tier that was close (i.e. Tatum might be currently considered a top 5 player, had the C's won the title), but you can't argue against the simple reality that NBA champions have top 5 players on their team.  That is the historical reality.  And the very few times it has happened without a top 5 player, the teams won just 1 title and often were only competing for titles for 2 or 3 seasons.  You need the top end talent and always have to win.  And to win a lot, you need the really special talents, you know the top 25 on history type players.  I mean since the Sonics title in 79, the only 2 (or 4) champions without a top 25 player are Kawhi's Raptors, Wallace's Pistons, and arguably the 2 Thomas' Pistons.  And of those 4, Thomas is close to top 25 all time if not in it and Kawhi was certainly on that path before injuries (I'm counting Jokic though he may still not be quite that high, I am just projecting him to get there).

So it isn't even just a top 5 player in the league, it is almost always one of the very best players in the history of the league.

I think you just agreed with the argument that others are making.  Sure, often teams win titles with dominant single players leading the way.  Current top 5; all-time top 25, however you want to define "dominant single players".  But that is not the only way.  As I said, I don't think that Curry was playing at a "dominant" level in 2022.  He may go down as a top 25 all-time player based on his body of work, but I did not see him play at that level in 2022.  He certainly played at a very high level, the "B" level as was described above, but he did not play at that "A" level of dominance, in my view.  Jokic was certainly dominant for DEN in 2023.

And I also agree that in general, teams are not going to have extended title runs without that one dominant, A level player, although I think SAN in the Duncan years is an exception to this.  Tim Duncan was not a level A, dominant player.  He was really good, a top player, but there was much more to them winning than him dominating.  They had the coach, they had a strong core unit that was together along time.

Tatum has not so far played at that A level of dominance.  He may get there, he may not.  But I think the Celtics could win a title even if he doesn't.  They probably won't be able to sustain a "dynasty" of winning without Tatum reaching that level.  But they could win a title or more over Tatum's career even if Tatum only gets to the B level of dominance (which I think he is already at).

[Celtics2021]

History is history.  The fact remains, 95% of the champions in the history of the league have had a top 5 player on their team.  Sure there is a bit of subjectivity on whether a certain player is a top 5 player and sometimes the winning establishes a guy in that tier that was close (i.e. Tatum might be currently considered a top 5 player, had the C's won the title), but you can't argue against the simple reality that NBA champions have top 5 players on their team.  That is the historical reality.  And the very few times it has happened without a top 5 player, the teams won just 1 title and often were only competing for titles for 2 or 3 seasons.  You need the top end talent and always have to win.  And to win a lot, you need the really special talents, you know the top 25 on history type players.  I mean since the Sonics title in 79, the only 2 (or 4) champions without a top 25 player are Kawhi's Raptors, Wallace's Pistons, and arguably the 2 Thomas' Pistons.  And of those 4, Thomas is close to top 25 all time if not in it and Kawhi was certainly on that path before injuries (I'm counting Jokic though he may still not be quite that high, I am just projecting him to get there).

So it isn't even just a top 5 player in the league, it is almost always one of the very best players in the history of the league.

This is a load of BS.  For one, there’s no objective measure of what a top 5 player is.  For two, history before the merger is pretty irrelevant.  I’m not sure what it means to say champions have a top 5 player when there are only 10 teams in the league.  For three, opinions of player quality normally increase after titles are won.  Entering the 05-06 season, I can imagine anyone had Dwayne Wade as a Top 5 player, for example, while Shaq was no longer one.

[green_bballers13]

History is history.  The fact remains, 95% of the champions in the history of the league have had a top 5 player on their team.  Sure there is a bit of subjectivity on whether a certain player is a top 5 player and sometimes the winning establishes a guy in that tier that was close (i.e. Tatum might be currently considered a top 5 player, had the C's won the title), but you can't argue against the simple reality that NBA champions have top 5 players on their team.  That is the historical reality.  And the very few times it has happened without a top 5 player, the teams won just 1 title and often were only competing for titles for 2 or 3 seasons.  You need the top end talent and always have to win.  And to win a lot, you need the really special talents, you know the top 25 on history type players.  I mean since the Sonics title in 79, the only 2 (or 4) champions without a top 25 player are Kawhi's Raptors, Wallace's Pistons, and arguably the 2 Thomas' Pistons.  And of those 4, Thomas is close to top 25 all time if not in it and Kawhi was certainly on that path before injuries (I'm counting Jokic though he may still not be quite that high, I am just projecting him to get there).

So it isn't even just a top 5 player in the league, it is almost always one of the very best players in the history of the league.

I'd try to follow your made up theory if I looked at your player rankings and agreed. Unfortunately, you applaud guys that play close to no defense like Luka Doncic and Trae Young.

How does your system work if the players are improperly ranked? I'm guessing it doesn't.

[Goldstar88]

I always just come back to history on this one. 

The last time a team won the championship without a top 5 player, was the 2014 Spurs and they had 4 HOFers and the core had won multiple championships.

Before the Spurs, it was the 2004 Pistons.  Before that you are back in the 70's with the Sonics and arguably the Bullets (Hayes was close if he wasn't one). 

Historically you just don't win a championship unless you are anchored by a top 5 player.  Tatum is a not a top 5 player, so it shouldn't be a surprise Boston hasn't won the title.

Don’t forget the Mavericks…

Dirk was a top 5 player that year.

Nope. His MVP season was back in 2007. Mavs won in 2011. He wasn’t at that level anymore. Still elite; but not top 5. Derrick Rose won MVP that year, Dwight was runner up and then you still had Kobe, Lebron, KD, and Wade.

And Dirk outplayed all those guys on his way to the title. He outplayed Kobe in the 2nd round to beat LAL. He outplayed Durant in the Conference Finals to get to the Finals. And then Dirk outplayed both LeBron and Wade in the Finals to win the title.

Last time I checked, basketball is a team sport. The Mav’s had a very good roster that year and they played excellent defense. Dirk was the best player they had, but let’s not discount how good that team was as a whole.