Is it easier to trade for a superstar than to draft and keep one long term?

[LooseCannon]

List the superstars in the NBA.  Determine how many were drafted by their current team and how many were acquired via trade.

The actual work is left as an exercise for the reader of this post.

[Celtics18]

List the superstars in the NBA.  Determine how many were drafted by their current team and how many were acquired via trade.

The actual work is left as an exercise for the reader of this post.

Easy:

One drafted by his current team.

One signed with his current team as a free agent. 

[Moranis]

List the superstars in the NBA.  Determine how many were drafted by their current team and how many were acquired via trade.

The actual work is left as an exercise for the reader of this post.

I listed who I thought they were on the Prior page.  I will not put in bold how they were acquired by their current team.  The guys in purple have actually won a title

Superstars in their prime currently (of varying degrees)
Lebron Free Agent
Durant Draft
Paul Trade
Howard Free Agent
George Draft
Anthony Trade
Westbrook Draft

Superstars no longer in their prime (again of varying degrees)
Kobe Draft (basically)
Dirk Draft day trade
Duncan Draft
Garnett Trade
Wade Draft
Pau Trade
Nash (hard to say a 2 time MVP was not a superstar at some point) moved around a lot all via free agency

Guys on the cusp of being a superstar that could get there
Harden Trade
Aldridge Draft
Curry Draft
Love Draft
Griffin Draft

Then you have Rose, who was a superstar pre-injury. Draft

[GreenWarrior]

but he turned the Cavs around, which was the point.  No player wins a title by himself, but the superstars make you relevant and put you in contention.

I guess we have a different definition of success.

[D.o.s.]

but he turned the Cavs around, which was the point.  No player wins a title by himself, but the superstars make you relevant and put you in contention.

I guess we have a different definition of success.

Blah blah blah Titletown?

Please tell me -- what, exactly, were you doing with yourself before 2004? Pining away in silence?

[Smokeeye123]

but he turned the Cavs around, which was the point.  No player wins a title by himself, but the superstars make you relevant and put you in contention.

I guess we have a different definition of success.

Blah blah blah Titletown?

Please tell me -- what, exactly, were you doing with yourself before 2004? Pining away in silence?

I bet he was watching the Patriots and Red Sox like everybody else.

[GreenWarrior]

but he turned the Cavs around, which was the point.  No player wins a title by himself, but the superstars make you relevant and put you in contention.

I guess we have a different definition of success.

Blah blah blah Titletown?

Please tell me -- what, exactly, were you doing with yourself before 2004? Pining away in silence?

I don't get the point of your post.

what does "Blah blah blah Titletown?" mean?

before 2004 as it relates to the Celtics? I was waiting for success.

[Casperian]

There has been a lot of talk about what is the easies way to get a superstar. It has been argued by a very vocal section of this blog that drafting a superstar is the easiest way to get one.

Dunno what you're talking about. I haven't seen anyone, let alone a group of people, claim drafting is the easiest way to get a superstar.

[D.o.s.]

but he turned the Cavs around, which was the point.  No player wins a title by himself, but the superstars make you relevant and put you in contention.

I guess we have a different definition of success.

Blah blah blah Titletown?

Please tell me -- what, exactly, were you doing with yourself before 2004? Pining away in silence?

I don't get the point of your post.

what does "Blah blah blah Titletown?" mean?

before 2004 as it relates to the Celtics? I was waiting for success.

Before 2004 as it relates to the Red Sox: The whole "we only measure success by the banners you put up" Boston schtick is dumb, and brutally common to people who conveniently forget the decade + change of straight up awful that was #BostonSports.

http://nesn.com/2013/10/boston-runs-away-with-title-town-moniker-with-eighth-title-since-2001-chart/

[GreenWarrior]

but he turned the Cavs around, which was the point.  No player wins a title by himself, but the superstars make you relevant and put you in contention.

I guess we have a different definition of success.

Blah blah blah Titletown?

Please tell me -- what, exactly, were you doing with yourself before 2004? Pining away in silence?

I don't get the point of your post.

what does "Blah blah blah Titletown?" mean?

before 2004 as it relates to the Celtics? I was waiting for success.

Before 2004 as it relates to the Red Sox: The whole "we only measure success by the banners you put up" Boston schtick is dumb, and brutally common to people who conveniently forget the decade + change of straight up awful that was #BostonSports.

http://nesn.com/2013/10/boston-runs-away-with-title-town-moniker-with-eighth-title-since-2001-chart/

well i'm not a big baseball fan actually. I do watch some games though.

anyway championships are the goal imo. only one team has a winning season.

now if you're a young team and you make the playoffs for the 1st time in yrs. I would be encouraged as a fan and consider it good yr.