Super teams vs winning organically: What should NBA players choose and what is more beneficial to their legacy?
When NBA legend LeBron James signed with the Miami Heat and teamed with perennial All-Stars Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, the criticism was swift. A firestorm erupted across the NBA globe as fans and media reacted to The Decision. Despite the criticism from fans, former players, NBA executives and media, is it in the best interest of players to link up with friends or compatible talents in hopes of winning a championship?
An NBA super team? What exactly is a super team?
Before players were able to dictate where they wanted to play, teams in the NBA were loaded. There wasn't much movement outside of cuts, occasional trades, retirements and the NBA draft. Players prior to NBA free agency played together for at times a decade. Philadelphia 76ers had a super team with Hall of Famers Julius Erving, Moses Malone, Maurice Cheeks and also Hall of Fame worthy Andrew Toney. The Boston Celtics had a super team comprising of Larry Bird, Kevin McHale and Robert Parrish. The Los Angeles Lakers were loaded as well and countered with johnson" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-is-sponsored="false">Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and James Worthy. Michael Jordan's Bulls were a super team, as both Dennis Rodman and Scottie Pippen are also Hall of Fame players.
The difference is, ownership built these teams. The players gave suggestions, yet ultimately it was the team's front office that pulled the trigger.
I find it interesting that some of the aforementioned were critical of LeBron James while they stayed on teams and were unfulfilled professionally. In every league there will be front office ineptitude. Teams will lose or are mediocre for years until they hopefully land that once-in-a-generation player to change the fortunes of the franchise. The contradictions of legends is not a good look, and though I understand the need to beat your friends as if they're your enemies, why not simply join them?
They are your friends right?
The Decision
Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley and Magic Johnson were critical of LeBron James post The Decision. Each spoke about wanting to beat their friends, not join them. It's a new NBA fellas, and players are using their power by moving about the league to maximize their time in the NBA. After all, ownership weilds the same power, correct? Teams cut and trade players without notification in most cases with few exceptions, and it makes sense that the players are doing the same thing. Will this one day lead to a NBA that's competitively balanced? Hopefully.
Legends critical of LeBron James
Michael Jordan's comments on LeBron's decision:
"There's no way, with hindsight, I would've ever called up Larry, called up Magic, and said, 'Hey, look, let's get together and play on one team. But that's...things are different. I can't say that's a bad thing. It's an opportunity these kids have today. In all honesty, I was trying to beat those guys."
Charles Barkley's comments:
“I’m not upset he went to Miami, I’m upset the way he handled it. I think #1, he should’ve called the Cavaliers in advance. And that little ‘Decision’ thing was really silly.”
“LeBron, I think, is the best player and a great kid, I wish he’d have stayed in Cleveland. He could’ve made that city rise up. Cuz he made that city the place to be in the last 7 years, and now, it’s back to being Cleveland.”
Magic Johnson's comments:
“We didn’t think about it cause that’s not what we were about,” said Johnson. “From college, I was trying to figure out how to beat Larry Bird.”
“It was never a question in our mind because nobody has ever done that,” he said.
Were they right?
It depends on your perspective. I personally feel that players of past generations wished they had the power of this generation. This generation is innovative in understanding its value. Ambitions and business dealings off the floor in part determine where they want to play, and since they themselves have been essentially training for the NBA since the age of 7, why shouldn't players move from team to team if they so choose?
As social media exploded, athletes began to interact with fans through their various accounts. Information became available, and an athlete's perceived stress of dealing with an adversarial media at times rectified through social media. Whether it's on Instagram or wherever else, players can reach out to fans any time for whatever reason. There is more. The players smartened up. Having the ability to move to a particular city for say, to be closer to a player's family surely is appropriate. Moving closer to entrepreneurial opportunities is definitely good money. Some will do take advantage of what comes with NBA free agency, and some will trust their front offices to do what it takes to build a winner.
As we saw this past postseason, the Milwaukee Bucks became a present-day NBA anamoly. With Giannis Attentekoumpo the centerpiece, Bucks brass either developed Milwaukee through the draft, or making critical free agent signings. The result was their first NBA championship since 1972.
What will transpire?
I believe in the next collective bargaining agreement, ownership will attempt to either tighten free agency rules or take a hard look at sports agencies like Clutch Sports with a goal to restrict how much power agencies have over free agency. Some players will trust their front offices to be competent, and others will go play where they dream. Spouses matter, so pressure is also on players to maintain a happy household by moving to spots more complimentary to their family unit.
Yet, does it really matter why players want to move throughout the league?
That decision is theirs, so let them be.
Also Read: How much is Larry Bird’s Net Worth in 2021?