Does it take more than a superstar?

[LarBrd33]

Mark Cuban's definition of superstar is that it's a player who can carry a mediocre roster to 50+ wins and a playoff win.  KG won 50+ games multiple times, but kept getting knocked off in the first round.  He did finally win 58 games and make the WCF, but he had some help that season. 

LeBron, a true superstar, carried a team to 60+ wins with Mo Williams as his 2nd best player.  That team won like 15 games when he left.   

True superstars can do a lot.  Superstars are very rare, though.  Pierce, for instance, was never a superstar.  MJ, Bird, Magic... those guys were superstars.  But yeah, you can't have a complete dumpsterfire of a team around him or they'll struggle... as we saw with KG (borderline Superstar) late in his Minny tenure.  Anthony Davis seems poised to take the Superstar label and his teams have been atrocious.   Even Michael Jordan, the undisputed superstar of superstars, never had an above .500 record without Pippen.  His team finished with losing records his first few seasons before the arrival of Scottie. 

So while teams like Minny and Philly have made the first moves by acquiring players with legit superstar potential (Towns and Embiid), it remains to be seen whether the right mix of talent will be put next to them heading forward to turn the corner.  I will say that looking at both of those rosters and the kind of assets they have, I'll be absolutely shocked if those teams aren't in the playoffs within the next 3 years.  Barring injury, both of those teams should be cranking out 50+ wins shortly.   

[bdm860]

While I am not saying this is completely cut and dry, I do think there really is something to teams with one superstar having a harder go of it than in the past. My hypothesis would be the congregation of superstars on a few top teams and then superior role players also wanting to join those superstar teams leaving the teams with a single superstar in a really bad position.

Then again, this could all just my imagination, not something I feel super strongly on but thought it
was interesting food or thought on a slow day.

I think I'd take the opposite view.  Theoretically, I think it would easier for 1 superstar teams to make the playoffs when super teams are formed.  Durant leaving OKC this year, I would think now the path is easier for Cousins and Davis because now one team in the West got worse (OKC) without adding another new good team.  Again, theoretically, I would have thought the same thing the year before when Aldridge left Portland for San Antonio.  Those super teams forming open up playoff slots for those 1 superstar teams.  It's just too bad for Cousins and Davis that Westbrook and Lillard are superstars in their own right as well.

Though overall I think Paul George and Anthony Davis are bad examples here.

The only year George missed the playoffs he played 6 games (and his team was 5-1 in when he played).  He's on course to make the playoffs again this year.  So he looks like a guy that's in the playoffs every year to me.  Even if he misses it one or two years in the future, then that's not unlike the other superstars I mentioned in the past (Kobe, Iverson, Wade, Pierce).

Now Anthony Davis is still young, he's only 23.  Too early to judge now, and what happened the last couple years may just an aberration like it was for Kobe, Iverson, Wade, Pierce, etc. and we know he was injured last year to boot.  What he does over the next 4-6 years will really show what he's made of.  Way too early to pull his superstar card.

And then there's Cousins.  Now his situation looks bad, but I'd only consider him a star for the last 3 years and is actually on track to make the playoffs this year.  And we all know what a mess Sacramento is.  To me, I really think that's similar to what we saw KG deal with in Minnesota from '05-'07.  Cousins is in much worse position than most other superstars in the past.  He's the only one I'd judge for not making the playoffs as a star, but the Kings are so dysfunctional I can't hold it against him.