How the Definition of 'NBA Superteam' Has Changed
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 พ.ค. 2024
- In this clip, JJ Redick goes on a rant about the parity of great teams in the NBA compared to the NFL and discusses with Trey Murphy (New Orleans Pelicans) what makes an NBA 'superteam' in today's league.
Subscribe to The Old Man and The Three podcast w/ JJ Redick (ESPN / First Take) and Tommy Alter TH-cam channel today for more NBA analysis, player interviews and highlights. - กีฬา
![บุกร้านไอศกรีม VJ วุ้นเส้น !!!! [ดูคลิปเต็มหน้าช่อง] #Short | PANG ORNHIRA](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/g549nEhKZdc/mqdefault.jpg)
Been saying it for a couple of years now. The old super team model doesn’t work anymore because the talent level of the average player has increased so much. If you spend all of your money on 3 stars and fill in with minimum guys, those minimum guys are gonna get absolutely torched by the mid to above average role player. Jokic and Murray are more than capable of doing enough against 3 stars that their great role players can be the difference against the minimum guys
Jokic needs mOAr help
🤣🤣
Its not bc the role players got better, its bc the stars got worse. Today everyone is considered a star and most of them have such glaring flaws in their game that its ridiculous, either that, or they are just free throw merchants to begin with
@@nydibsNo, that’s not true whatsoever. We have a good crop of stars right now. The average player has gotten better since the 2000s. Look at the 2009 and 2010 Boston Celtics. Glen Davis was a major contributor. He would be lucky to make a roster now because he wouldn’t be able to switch much on defense, couldn’t shoot the three and wasn’t a good passer. Most role players now can at least do one of those three things at an above average level, if not multiple things.
@@nydibs other than Giannis, Jokic, and Embiid (when healthy), there’s definitely been a bit of a drop off, but not to a crazy degree. The difference is, with the improvement of the average role player, it’s harder for the stars to make the same impact because the competition is stronger. Especially combined with the new CBA going forward, I think we’re going to see a lot fewer 3x+ champs
I still don’t agree with this. You’re telling me that a team with Gianni’s, embiid and luka doesn’t win a ring? Most modern nba “ super teams” like the suns waited too long to acquire their stars. Durant and Beal looked old
Nah the definition has not changed. Being a superteam and having team chemistry are two completely different things. A superteam is a team comprised of many All-Stars as opposed to a team full of role-players. You can easily have a superteam without chemistry, where different All-Star players simply don't work well together.
It's shooting the 3 ball that's changed. If a team gets hot from 3 then they win.
💯
Exactly man. I would add that superteams don’t always look the same but you know them when you see them. A decent example would be if Jokic went to the Celtics and they retain both Tatum and brown
I guess that's what has happened with the Clippers. On paper they're the ultimate super team with PG, Kawai, Harden, and Westbrook but they're not great. Maybe it's the chemistry.
@@christopherpaul7588I think it's mostly about none of these players being as impactful as they seem from their name value alone, for one reason or another
I think the Play-in really helped make the 7th and 8th seeds more competitive. Back before the Play-in, it wasn't unusual to have a team that started strong but ultimately fell apart because of injuries or some other issue still make the playoffs. So they're a top seed at the start of the season but a lottery team at the end of it, but they're still in the playoffs. Those teams get eliminated by the Play-in, so the 1st and 2nd seeds are now playing two teams that have earned their spots through recent play. Nobody backs into those spots anymore. So those top seeds are much more likely to play a team that, at the very least, has its act together and can put up a fight. Closest thing this year seems to be the Pelicans, who lost Zion in the Play-in, and naturally they were swept.
I don't know why you have Lebron and the Heat on the thumbnail. Lebron told me "I've never been on a super team" LOL
Lebron is a clown.
Not 2,3,4 not 5 not 6 not 7 that’s still one of the funniest interviews ever cause he never got close and no ones cares
@@kobewest03i mean, he got close...
People can’t look themselves in the mirror and say they think Wade and Bosh makes a super team 😂
At that time they did stop it@@KaratAllenPoe
I think why the post 2019 "super team" has faded is because the teams called super teams are mismatched rosters with a couple generational players who don't compliment each other like the Suns or they're a glorified retirement home like the Clippers
Crazy how the Wolves have two young number 1 picks who are great players, and that just happened
"That's even more teams in the west that are gonna be good, like, there's gonna be no bad teams."
Blazers: Bet.
JJ, I hate to tell you, there's a ton of parity in the NFL as well . And there are absolutely people who think certain Championships ate fraudulent. It's not as wide spread in the NFL , but it's absolutely there
Lots of people talk about Brady and the patriots having fraudulent runs, I don’t think JJ really is invested enough in NFL culture but I don’t blame him he’s a NBA Analyst
@@fuzespurkz2404no they don’t😂 good try but no one says the pats runs were fraudulent
@@carsonkahla9162 Cap.
It’s just loser fans who have to call any chip their team didn’t win “fraudulent”
Qhen same teams play in SB year after year it makes it seem there isnt parity. Cheifs, 49rs, Eagles, Bills have been top teams. And patriots won a lot
Oi JJ, are you leaving us for the lakers?
The difference between the NBA and the NFL is that the NFL only has one game to determine the winner. The NBA is a truer measure of which team is better by having a seven game series. The best team on the football field doesn’t always win that game, but the better team usually wins a series in the playoffs in the NBA. I do enjoy both very much but they are just different measures of success.
the real difference is that only american people care about the NFL and american football in general
@@VeejayRampayGo watch your goofy kickball, foreigner. America runs you
Then what's the MLB 🥲😂🤣💀
@@russellchung3119Americas old pastime, now it’s Football
The KD, Harden, and Kyrie Nets were the last superteam Fr
✅
And the few games we saw them healthy and vibing, they looked really good
The Suns this year were technically a superteam
The clippers aren’t?
The timberwolves have 4 all stars.
I think it’ll be more about being a well-oiled machine, where your role and bench players are perfect for the way they gel together and things like that.
Half as many regular season games and best of 5 playoffs would make the NBA a lot more interesting to watch.
Nuggets run last year was actually historically difficult from a different perspective. They beat Ant one year before he became a top 3 playoff player along with a perennial all star and 3x dpoy in first round. They beat two all nba team players in second round. They beat another two all nba players/HOFers in WCF. They beat another two all nba team players in the finals. And finally nuggets only had one all star to this day.
Murray is the other star, but I get your point.
Also AG is there, but again, there’s a difference between them and the other teams
@@Jonathan-A.C. murray is no all star tho. its kind of a crude point because he definitely plays (or rather played, not so much this year) on an all star if not all nba level in the playoffs, but technically he has never made an all star or even all nba team.
@@Florian-yk8vg
In the Playoffs he’s been one of the best players and one that level, so I’d say he’s there, but you’re right that in the RS he’s just not, and I agree with your point. Same with Jimmy Butler
Murray is an above average Role Player
jj the reason people keep bringing up the nuggets having an "easy" championship run (whether thats wrong or right doesn't matter) is because their championship run kept getting labeled as "historic" when really it wasn't so people had to point out it wasn't that good
The Nuggets defeated
1. The up-and-coming Timberwolves
2. KD and the Suns
3. Lebron and the Lakers
4. Playoff Jimmy and the Heat who just defeated all the favorites in the east: Bucks, Celtics, etc.
Pretty historic, imo.
@@JesusSavedtheEntireWorld beating a team that had a historic run doesn't transfer that historicness to your run. don't let the timberwolves this year fool you into thinking the timberwolves last year were any amount of a real threat. KD and the suns and lebron and the lakers aren't anything special either. a historic run for example would be the 2017 warriors or the 2001 lakers who both went 16-1 in the playoffs, the term "historic" has been way too diluted
@@JesusSavedtheEntireWorld The Timberwolves last year were injury riddled and a dysfunctional mess. The series started a week after Game 82, were the Timberwolves had Jaden McDaniels punch a wall, breaking his hand, and Rudy Gobert and Kyle Anderson throw punches at each other. Naz Reid had been out for a month with a broken hand. KAT had barley returned from a 4 month injury and was still trying to gel with Gobert. The fact that the Timberwolves kept the series close is incredible, which actually worried Nuggets players as they remarked after winning the Championship that the Timberwolves were the toughest opponent they faced on their run.
The series may have ended in a "Gentleman's sweep" much like the first round this year between the Nuggets and the Lakers, but the Lakers weren't missing any players, they weren't trying to figure out how to play with a new key player, and they aren't a young, inexperienced team. The Timberwolves were all of those things last year, which rightfully caused the nervousness the Nuggets had about facing the team the next year.
You would think JJ has enough scratch to get a quality table so the mic’s aren’t bouncing all around.
3:55 tellin no lies😂
What was the contract situation for Boston when they had Garnett, Pierce, Allen?
No, no, no, dont do this guys. The term superteam is used for teams that have way more TALENT on their roster than any/almost all other team. This is not about how well they play together, team chemistry or anything else. I know that players from this era dont like that assessment cos it brings up recent examples where teams of that caliber have underperformed and that has negatively impacted those players resume and created unfavorable narratives.
The lines we choose to draw between a "superteam" and an "organic" or "normal" team are really, really thin, cobweb thin. And imo, that line is pretty nonsensical as well.
The borderline between a superteam and an organic is crystal clear. Like you said, an organic team has all-star players who are homegrown. A superteam has acquired some of them via trade.
Completely agree, it's kinda silly. Like at the end of the day it's basically a similar result. We cant give credit to the people who made smart trades to get players that fit their team really well? If the other team is silly enough or desperate enough to trade their superstar player then that's their fault. It's the same or similar luck to drafting your players and hoping that they'll pay off eventually.
A superteam usually has one of the players pulling the strings. You notice since Miami the only superteams have popped up in places with weak/nonexistent ownership (Brooklyn, Clippers, Lakers, Phoenix) and a star player can bully the front office into doing what they want
What is that hat? Is that a Trey Murphey III logo?
Bro You got a BMW sponsorship? Damn.
The new salary cap rules are too strict. It makes it so that players like Trey Murphy and Lou Dort might not get maximum demand for their services on teams that could maximize them and have to either leave the team that developed them because they have committed money to potentially good players like Zion and Giddy or take less money to fit in under the apron where the team can still make one or 2 more moves
I don’t think the definition has changed, we just haven’t actually seen a super team in a while.
We've seen superteams, but they haven't been winning, mostly due to injuries.
suns, nets, lakers, were all superteams
@tylerholt6828 The KG-Pierce-Allen-Rondo are another example who won.
The KD-Warriors might not be a superteam by definition, but I'd count them in. The Drexler-Rockets were a similar case.
The '81 Celtics had Tiny Archibald acquired from NY in '78, and Parish joined the team in '80. They were a superteam winning a chip.
@tylerholt6828 Superteams are created only by player movement. The Celtics won the '81 and '08 titles with superteams created by trades.
Bill russell played with 6 hall of famers and a goat coach and he played in a time of 8 teams. Magic and bird had super teams too. Jordan didn’t win until he added pippen.
Shaq didn’t win until he had Kobe. Same for Kobe and add Pau. KG didn’t win until he went with some other all stars.
Exactly. Superteams have existed in the NBA forever. The older generation teams always get passes for it because of more restrictions with player movement.
Super teams exist today. They're just not winning now for several reasons.
It’s you can’t trade for 3 superstar teams anymore because of the rules they literally built in the rules to stop it because that’s hard to beat
It hasn't changed; it's a general agreement that you must have at least 2 superstars and 3 all-stars, a top-two coach or the best coach, and a deep bench. That's it.
The NBA has progressed to a point where teams can't just rely on a single player and win. You need complementary players and a system that works to win it all. Even heliocentric teams like the Knicks don't win without strong team chemistry. The age of big markets buying huge contracts is done for now.
In case you didn’t know , Jokic was a second round draft pick. #41. Unbelievable
it took him a DECADE to get where he is now
The narrative will probably change though once society fully grasps the NFL postseason allowing more teams in. The NBA play-in adds postseason opportunities for a playoff bracket that will already feature 16 teams. That's slightly more than half of the league clinching a postseason berth! There is parity but there will always be a knock when the majority of teams in a league can reach the postseason.
Even on the super teams you need the role players to player their role. If you have a bunch of guys who don’t cover the weaknesses of the best players on the team, the super team won’t work.
We need to rethink the whole ‘Superteam’ name. I always thought you had to win a chip and have at least 3 all-nba guys to be a superteam. Also the only 2 teams that I can think of that fit that bill and we’re not primarily built through the draft were 08 Boston and the Heatles. Every other team that attempted 0:01 this failed in gloriously embarrassing fashion. The rest of the super teams were built primarily through the draft, well heck the foundation for most championships is through the draft.
The context makes the difference. A super team which stacks superstar talent is not given the same respect as a team that is built ground up into a super team. It's the process of building a team into a super team vs trading your way to building a superteam. Imho
A super team is when Wemby, Ant and Tatum decide that they are going to go play together in LA or Phoenix or something.
A good home-cooked team is like Denver. You don't hear Jokic bitching that he needs mOAr hALp because he doesn't have another All-Star starter playing beside him
I stopped watching the NBA after Durant went to the Warriors. Now I am watching again.
I need everyone to stop trying to be the first to label stuff that has existed for 50+ years. This new "superteam" is just a really good team built through the draft and smart trades that worked, as it was before Ray Allen and KG went to Boston.
If they just have chemistry and are good then they aren’t a super team
No. A SUPERTEAM is when a top 5/MVP caliber player joins 2 other PERINEAL All-Stars from 2 other franchises or when a top 5/MVP caliber player joins another MVP caliber player from another franchise.
You can't draft a Superteam. That's just developing talent. Every team. can do that.
Taking the best players off 2 other franchises and pairing them with another Superstar not only increases the talent of 1 team significantly, but you also eliminate competition because the teams that lose their best player are out of contention for at least 3 years.
Developing your talent doesn't hurt anyone. Taking their best player does hurt other teams. Ask OKC when they lost KD, Cleveland when they lost LeBron, Minnesota, Toronto, Miami, Houston when they lost Harden, New Orleans when they lost AD...etc.
The 90s 8th seed sucked?
that may be true or not depending on your opinion
but isn't the Nuggets the 1st ever 8th seed to win a series and Knicks 1st ever 8th seed to make the finals both in the 90s
People watch the NFL more because it's more exciting. That's all JJ
Football has 20 seconds of action and then a bunch of fluff
Dude just doesn’t believe in the 17 game NFL season 😭😭😭
I never understood the concept of NBA "superteams" - or even the "big three". Sure, a club could ADD three or more perennial All-Stars or All-NBA talent, but soon a "Big Two" - often a guard and a forward/center - emerges as the team's fulcrum: Duncan and Parker (Spurs), Garnet and Pierce (Celtics), and LeBron and Wade (Heat). Better to build a team around a dominant big and sharp-shooting ball-handler.
I think in football you have such few games so when that 0-12 team beats the 11-1 team, you're stunned and feel like it's more momentous. You get a week buildup to every single game. You focus matchups, disadvantages, whatever for 7 days. In basketball, even your own people like Shaq say "regular season doesn't matter." Every loss is "yeah, but I expect them to get back on top next game."
In football you're thinking if they're found out. Is a player injured? Is your run defense exposed? Oh, this is what just happens if you are playing from behind and team actually just runs the damn ball more than twice in a game.
In the NBA, 40% on wide open shots is damn near all time performance. It's a crap shoot. Great scorers get hot or cold constantly. Even within the course of a game. How did you find the rhythm 10 minutes ago but now can't even hit the rim? It feels like a heavily luck based game.
I’m convinced JJ Redick doesn’t know what the definition of parody is.
I dunno... the difference between the quality of teams in the East vs West doesn't really give me the sense of parity. Not that it might not have been even worse in the 90s, but this still feels like a have/have not league. And so many of those have nots are stuck there.
I think having borderline or undeniable dynasties is just better for any league because it's ratings all day, every day, to watch them go down. You lose me when the dynasties are the KD Warriors or Lebron Heat, which were built off fabricated BS. If the Warriors continued to win chips without KD, then those are the types of dynasties I want to watch night in and night out, even cheer for like I want to see the Nuggets repeat. Celebrating greatness from developed players that were together from a young age, great coaching, front office, etc.
It’s cuz NBA media be lying and fans don’t know wtf they’re talking about cuz they haven’t studied NBA history
The definition has not changed. Super teams should still be considered super teams and non super teams as such. We just haven’t had a successful super team since the KD Warriors ended
people only use the phrase super team now when they want to discredit a player that they don’t like
Yea but the whole league is missing traditional centers. Fast and strong.
JJ is trolling with the bad team statement, its always avout RELATIVE TO COMPETITION. SO if you dont perform well, your bad.
If the seeds you play are lower tiered, or injury riddle teams, while you still HAVE to beat the teams in front of you, it means the road is EASIER.
These concepts are difficult to parse
No he's not. That would make more sense in the nfl or something where it's only one game and at any time any team can beat another team. But in a 7 game series the better team is gonna come out on top. Those lower seeded teams beat the higher ones. They were better. The higher seeded teams wouldve gotten beat even harder than the ones that made it through.
There's no parody in football. It's the same 5 teams winning every year
Why don’t 4 Team USA players strategize this summer to form a Superteam down the the road where they all make $30 million each? They would be well below the Luxury Tax and still have enough money for role players. 🏀
cz they wanna make 50 million in a max contrac.t kinda hard to just pass on 15-20 million a year if oyu have the choice. also it still would be seen as kind of tampering or at least weak if stars in their prime all for no apparent reason decided to get paid less just to win more easily.
@@Florian-yk8vg LeBron, Bosh & Wade did it back in 2010
@@JDRusse11 while agreeing to get less money? cba works different today than 15 years ago
For the record the conversation around super teams are boring...
BTW, isn't Boston a super team right now? Jrue and Derick White have team USA experience and considered all star level talent. Tatum not yet earning his max dollar worth. Brown has the biggest NBA contract on record so far. Porzingus earns a lot too.
Denver has 3 all star level equivilent starters and MPJ and KCP are valued by any other team as well. Bucks have 3 big money players but have too many injuries.
Why is playing 82 games impossible again?
i think, jj, that the hyperbole is on both sides of the "fraud" debate - n it prob does have to do w ppl loving the goat/legacy convos. which i dont talk down on bc its what drove a lot of our favorites like kobe n shaq.
but as far as the nuggets are a fraud thing goes - there are as many ppl calling them frauds as there are ppl that think the nuggets are "a top 5 team all-time" or "top 3 offense all-time." (so the legacy point you made again was spot on). so if theses are the narratives being established in the media then its kinda fair to call them "frauds" bc in most ways they dont measure up to the any of the true dynasties in nba history. on the flipside we saw 3mpvs for jokic in 4 yrs. they had a v dominant run last yr which makes ppl project out for legacy - which is understandable. so both sides have something to stand on but also the nuggets are a great team! n if jokic retired tm he would not go down better than shaq!
the real issue, imo, is that that ppl let the debates get charged n then the hyperbole grows. some of that hyperbole is just fandom. some of it is sensationalism to sell the the league. some of it is ppls egos. they want to think they "know ball." n if im rly being honest this thing is DEF racially charged. its just the history of this country n how we grew up (and history of the jokic debate on espn). i think consciously or not many ppl want to see jokic succeed or fail bc of that piece.
basically both sides are right n both sides are wrong n forcing it. im somewhere in between. its funny bc now moderates on both sides of this debate feel the need to defend their position against the ones who force it. but when i actually have the debate we usually agree. our opinions just use different sides of the hyperbole as a reference point which shapes how we feel. in reality theres less disagreement than arguing lol
i picked wolves in 7 going in. thought both teams were pretty evenly matched but end of the day i bet that 1. the wolves would hit enough shots to allow kat and ant man to attack mismatches and attack the rim w relatively little resistance and 2. denvers two non shooters on the court would make things v difficult v a team w a 3-center core who are dangerous as help defenders
did the nuggets deserve to be favorites all yr? yes. but was min clearly a great team all yr? yes. it was crazy how lopsided the predictions were heading into that series. def some group think going on. s/o bontems n the straw poll for enhancing that dynamic.
i think jokic n nuggets have earned every accomplishment. however, in the context of ppl thinking den is historically great or unbeatable this yr, nuggets did have an easy path last yr. thats not to call them frauds or not frauds. but it is to say we dont have enough evidence to call crown them historically great world beaters yet
there were almost zero references to nuggets easy path last yr until they go down 0-2 at home in the second rd. now every1 wants to point that out....pardon the analogy but thats like the hotel that had that diddy/cassie footage trying to make a statement against domestic violence ... its like we dont believe you bc you had the footage for 8 yrs n didnt do anything abt it. im like how did you feel the nuggets were vulnerable but on tv say they werent all yr? either you arent being totally forthcoming now or werent then.
so frauds? NO! overrated? YES!
and to be fair the celtics have an easy path this yr too. n im a celtics fan. if they win they will have beaten at least 1 good team but its def an easy path. if that happens it wont make Cs frauds, but it def doesnt stamp their historical significance either despite the point diff etc. it makes them legit champs w an opportunity to become a truly special unit
So by his logic the Tim Duncan Spurs was a super team
Its impossible to play 82 games?
Calling cap
It as hard to tell how good teams are when guys are resting and misdiagnosing 20 guys.
You saying the 8th seed suck when in todays game the 6 seed might should be the 8th seed but the teams below them over rested guys
“Superteam”: a term for casual fans created by toxic hype media.
The term “Big 3” became “Superteam” in 2010 because LeBron’s name carries so much weight and hype.
A “Big 3” is any 3 all-star caliber players who’ve either teamed up via trade, free agency or naturally developed. That doesn’t make them a “Superteam”. That’s all hype.
If anything a “Superteam” should be the “Superior team” in the league. Meaning all other teams are inferior. 73 win Warriors with KD. All teams and players knew they were inferior to them. Same with MJ’s and Pippen’s Bulls, and the old Celtics and Lakers for spurts throughout history.
Would you consider the current Celtics a superteam?
@@GG-fy2bm Are they the Superior team in the league? No! Are there 5/6 legit teams that could win a championship this year? Yes! So they are not the SUPERIOR team. You can’t be SUPER/SUPERIOR on paper. As a competitor, the term is for casual fans and it doesn’t mean anything.
The Warriors with KD were the SUPERIOR team on paper and in real life because they had a proven system that he seamlessly fit right in to and the entire league knew it.
@@GG-fy2bm Were the 2011 Celtics a “Superteam”? They had 4 All-Stars. Were the 2015 Hawks a “Superteam”? They and 4 All-Stars. No to both. “Super” doesn’t mean anything just because you have a certain number of all-star caliber players, especially when they aren’t significantly better than every other team in the league. The term sucks and it’s been misused since 2010. It’s weird and has nothing to do with competition.
There has always been super teams since the 1970s.
Lakers
Celtics
76ers
Bulls
Celtics
Heat
Cavs
GSW
And lots of failed super teams like the
Bron Lakers
KD Nets
KD Suns
Rockets with Charles
Lakers with Payton/Malone
Current Clippers
Current Bucks
Get some rest J.J. :D
there are as many ppl calling the nuggets a dynasty as ppl calling them frauds. basically both sides are right in some aspects and both sides are wrong n forcing it in others. im somewhere in between. its funny bc now moderates on both sides of this debate feel the need to defend their position against the ones who force it. but when i actually have the debate we usually agree. our opinions just use different sides of the hyperbolic narratives as a reference point which shapes how we feel. in reality theres less disagreement than arguing lol
JJ simping hard for that LAL coaching spot
Max salary player does not mean he is a necessarily star. Tobias Harris and DeAndre Ayton to me are not stars.
If either Lebron or Jordan never played basketball discourse would be so much better.
It hasnt changed just because there isnt any superteam now. I would still say the celtics are a superteam because they have 4 all stars in the team
I think, at the moment,
if it wasn't for the NBA ... america would have nothing going for it at all
“Im still in the west now” Sorry Trey, but NOP havent made it to the WCF. The West doesnt run through you. 😂
Isn't JJ overestimating the talent a little bit here? There were a lot of dogshit teams this season and I wouldn't call the Hawks, Nets and Bulls for example any better than 9-11 seeds in the past
What they are describing is team building through drafting and developing. That’s literally the opposite of a “superteam”. The superteam is dead, it’s okay to say it you guys.
i dont agree w acting like the lakers an warrirors were as good as every1 else in the west...basketball is a relative sport. they dont score the game like tennis - first to a certain score wins. its who has MORE points at the end of the game. its relative.are lakers better than previous 8th seeds? sure but relative to the rest of this yr's western conference the warrors n lakers werent real contenders. n its ok to point that out!!!
i love basketball too jj. n this is totally unrelated to a goat debate. the lakers n warriors had clear basketball flaws. are you trying to say that fans shouldnt have the audacity to point out what they see from a basketball perspective?! that's somehow thats toxic?? or are you just riled up bc you disagree?
do you think the lakers were as good as the wolves for instance? bc id love to hear logic that makes that make sense - in a healthy basketball discourse kind of way. i think its ok for ppl to agree to disagree too. but i like to check ppls temp re how they feel abt certain teams or players n i like to get feedback on my own thoughts so thats why im in the comments like this lol its not all hate n negativity. its not all top5 debates. jus saying!
"This is the best the league has ever been" 🙄 turns off podcast.
When you’re explaining, you’re losing… nonsense convo sponsored by Clutch Sports.
THIS IS WHY LECRY IS THE goat. MJ ERA IS LIKE, nba g league now = nba players back then. btw westbrick is my GOAT
Super teams are a combination of 3 or more perennial all stars.
08 celtics
11 heat
16 warriors
04 lakers (although they were old af)
15 Cavs
We now have multiple teams with all star duo's.
I believe multiple all stars on a team =/= a super team. Currant celtics is not a super team etc.
Superteams are formed via trade.
The Celtics acquired Porzingis and Holiday via trades this season, which is a clear sign of a superteam. And the Celtics acquired Derrick White and Horford three years ago via trade. That's less of a sign of a superteam, because White and Horford weren't all-stars, and Horford has played for the Celtics before.
The Celtics have 5 all-star caliber players, and 3 of those have been acquired via recent trades. The Celtics are a superteam.
Nah. Not impossible. Not literally impossible. Not Nobody. Not Nobody and more. /
How is playing 82 games “impossible” JJ? There players that were able to do it in the past and even some that still do it now. Calling it “impossible” is just your way to scapegoat Lebron taking all those days off.
The more JJ talks, the more stupid he sounds. He gets so caught up in numbers, he doesn't stop to see what factors into those numbers.
so if the 8th seed dont suck now then why did the Pelicans get swept this year
Are you dense? They are without zion, it doesn’t take critical thinking to understand that.
Pelicans would’ve been the 3rd seed in the east 😂
@@DMkizzy oh i understand it but did they get swept or not? i'll answer that for you YES they did. Zion was hurt when they drafted him, that's who he is
@@Logan2PS3 Zion is 14 months older than ANT and just played 70 games and outplayed Lebron and AD in a playoff esque game to end his season, they will be just fine for years to come. Acting like the man isn’t only 23 and has just got his mental side of the game adequate.
@@Logan2PS3 And when your first option such as BI is averaging 14 in a series you will get swept, does not mean the team sucks you can’t suck and win 49 games those two things don’t go hand and hand.
This jj Reddick really loves Lebronze really loves Lebronze.
???
Of all time is just 20 year old’s too dumb to say “in recent memory”
Should we call the Boston Celtic this year a super team - two super star in Tatum, brown, two all stars in porzingis and jrue holiday. Then an all star coming up in Derrick white. This is a super team even if you compare to the Heat or even that expensive Jordan team. Only difference is they traded for threee all stars versus hiring a couple super star max guys
don't worry in 5 years globa
Super teams have always started in the draft. LBJ and his way is the anomaly.
Your own media says about Jokic being a fraud while his team shoots 30% for the game. Your media wants to discredit Gobert who THEY JUST AWARDED as DPOY. That's a you problem, not an us problem. We don't have NFL media calling every receiver trash because they had 2 targets for 1 catch and -2 yards. Maybe this game he did his job and another receiver popped off for their typical production since defense didn't shy away from their double team commitment.
In NBA, you just don't have that dog in you. Or maybe you're just plainly not black enough to play basketball.
There was never any such thing a superteam really. Only a top heavy team. Everyone gets the same cap space. The free agents are available to everyone and anyone can make a trade. Everyone is playing by the same rules. If you want to use all your cap space up on three guys then more power to you. But that's not the best way to win, people just think it is because Lebron won in Miami and Cleveland doing that but he was prime Lebron. Most "superteams" lose. We have The Clippers and The Suns both doing that right now and both of them went out in the first round. The best way to win has always been to have a tier 1 superstar player, a complimentary star and great role players. That's the real super team. When Lebron and AD were star 1 and star 2 and they had great role players around them they dominated. When they traded those role players for a third star and became a "superteam" they were awful. So which was the true super team?
true its all about balance in one sentence
Stop making excuses
@@saraxiong For what exactly? 😂
Ever heard of the 17 warriors
I hope you don't take the Lakers job fans ain't tryna go threw this bullshit again mayne
NBA has an IN-SEASON Tournament because viewership dropped!! The LAKERS need to break up their team getting help for AD, Reeves, and Rui ....use LaBroom $ 50 million for two young talented players ...
Teams are only good in the West, all the bottom teams in the East suck too
But it’s all rigged though… What I don’t understand is why people who believe in the rigging conspiracy don’t predict the outcomes of future seasons. If it’s all rigged and you know it, then you should be able to predict it.
Lebron James is 39
The definition changes year to year so a super team doesn’t really mean anything anymore just like when we call guys all star caliber…like if you didn’t make an all star team at any point, you are not all star caliber by definition.
A super team really should be a team that plays well together, that has some level of cohesion for a 2-5 years and not only wins in the regular season but has at least a few deep playoff runs…anything short of that is just a decent team. I don’t care if you have 4 all stars and former MVPs like the Clippers or Suns or aging Warriors…
The superteam's definition hasn't changed in 20 years. An organic team has all-star players who are homegrown. A superteam has three all-star caliber players, mostly acquired via trade.
@@penkima4923 so if a team wins a title or has deep playoff runs they wouldn’t be considered a super team if the team was built organically? And vice versa? Also what does all-star caliber even mean? Either the players you trade for were at one point all-stars or not, what exactly is the criteria for “all-star caliber” it seems to me that the definition varies year to year largely due to media narratives surrounding particular players…
@@SullyAfgarshe "so if a team wins a title or has deep playoff runs they wouldn’t be considered a super team if the team was built organically? And vice versa?"
Playoff success isn't part of the superteam's definition.
"Also what does all-star caliber even mean?"
An all-star caliber player is somebody who would be selected on the all-star team, if he was playing on an average NBA team, that's not stacked with stars.
Superteams are so stacked with all-star caliber players, not everyone get to play the minutes or get the touches required for the all-star selection.
By example, Jrue Holiday made the all-star team last season as a Buck, but not this season as a Celtic. He didn't forget how to play basketball during the summer as he was traded. He's still an all-star caliber player, but there's too many stars on the Celtics team and only one basketball.
The Celtics also have Porzingis, who had better stats than Tatum in the regular season, but was injured for 8 too many games to be eligible for the all-star ballot. And Derrick White, who was the best Celtic in the first round, but wasn't selected on the all-star team. Both are all-star caliber players.
@@penkima4923 so all-star caliber is just a former all-star. That’s the distinction I wanted you to be specific about because there are a crop of players that never make any all-stars because of timing or position they play, the all-star selection itself is flawed and unfair because it doesn’t prioritize advanced stats and relies on outdated ideas about positions when the league is increasingly positionless
Also I wholeheartedly disagree with you on playoff success being a non factor in determining what a super team is.
What’s the point of creating a super team if you never win? That is meant to be rhetorical 😂
@@SullyAfgarshe "so all-star caliber is just a former all-star."
Derrick White is an all-star caliber player, who has never made the all-star team. Jamal Murray is another example. Hence the definition: An all-star caliber player is somebody who would be selected on the all-star team, if he was playing on an average NBA team, that's not stacked with stars.
"Also I wholeheartedly disagree with you on playoff success being a non factor in determining what a super team is."
The KD-Nets were a superteam, even though they never made a deep playoff run. The KD-Harden-Kyrie Nets played only 16 games together healthy. They won over 75 % of those games. They were eliminated by the Bucks, as Giannis had to put Kyrie on the injury list to stop them.
"What’s the point of creating a super team if you never win? That is meant to be rhetorical"
I'll reply to you anyway. I believe KD tried to recreate the Nets superteam again at PHX. The problem is, Booker isn't the playmaker Harden is, so the Suns' team-composition is trash.
Denver isn’t a super team lol
like the content, but why all this swearing, it’s so soo unattractive to listen to/ watch to
Jj nfl is just better
Each nfl game actually matters in that moment. In the nba, we gotta look back on the season like “damn if they won these 6-7 games things would be different.”
Never even heard the term until KD joined the Warriors. Before I only ever heard about big 3s so it seems like revisionist history going and calling old teams like the Heat and Celtics a super team
New terms can be applied to old things. This isn't what revisionist history means.
The Heat was definitely the first superteam i heard of. And with LeBron, Kyrie and Love, they were also calling it a superteam.
@@jakehoover6655 True. Magic Johnson wasn't a point guard, but a small forward. A point forward.
@@jakehoover6655 yeah you’re right for sure cause going back then we can all agree that those 80s lakers and Celtics were super teams they had like 4-5 hofers on the team at a time 😭
Celtics is a superteam Jrue KP Tatum Brown all current or ex all stars in their primes
when they made the trades in the summer boston got laughed at for trading core pieces in exchange for old, washed injury prone guys. but the team works well together so now they’re a superteam lol
@@djRUNT Literally only Brogdon could've been considered worth anything at all and you got one of the best two-way PG in the league - and has been for like almost a decade - in Jrue Holiday in return. Smart never even posted a league average PER in his entire career. Idk what scrub else you think was a core piece?
@@djRUNTthe amount of all stars they have is crazy
And the Wolves (ANT Top 5 player, Gobert 4x DPOY, KAT ALL STAR, Naz Reid 6MOTY), Clippers (Kawhi Top 5 when healthy, Harden and PG ALL STAR, and Powell and Russ were in the race for 6MOTY), BUCKS (Giannis Top 5, Dame Top 15/ALL STAR, Brook Lopez 2nd in DPOY voting last season and Middleton former ALL STAR) … They are all superteam, even the CAVS had 4 ALL STARS last season… But it’s only a superteam if Lebron play in it…
@@Anthonydu01630T-Wolves aren’t a super team. Clippers I never counted as a super team because all of their stars are out of their prime. Bucks aren’t a super team either imo.
The definition is always the same. Player formed teams with three or more all stars in or near their prime.
Miami Heat 2011-2014 (LeBron, Wade, Bosh)
Cleveland Cavaliers 2014-2017 (LeBron, Kyrie, Love)
Golden State 2016-2019 (KD, Steph, Klay, Draymond)
Those are the only three in NBA history to exist.
Steph, Klay and Draymond are all homegrown players. KD joining that team doesn't make it a superteam.
KG and Ray Allen joining Paul Pierce and Rondo at BOS formed a superteam.
@@penkima4923 they recruited KD to join them and they were all in their prime
Boston was created through trades and those players were all old, leaving their prime
Kevin Love was traded to the Cavs. That doesnt make them not a superteam thkugh. Just like the KD, Kyrie and Harden Nets were most definjtely a superteam. The 08 Celtics 100% a superteam. They can acquire the player through free agency or trades. It's just the home grown teams that arent technically considered superteams. Even the Suns this year were technically a superteam, they just didn't perform like one
@@peacemaker4829 love was traded to the cavs at the behest of LeBron. He made it known to management that he would not come to them if they didn't do that.
That was a player move
@@peacemaker4829 the 08 Celtics were no more of a super team than any other created through organizational trades. None of those players had control over those moves with the Celtics.
That was Danny ainge.
As for Bradley Beal and the suns, he hasn't been in his prime or an all star in years. The suns were not a super team
JJ DOESNT NO A LICK ABOUT FOOTBALL AND MATCHUPS😭😭😭
How
@@octaviuscurry3818 because he’s comparing one game playoffs and super teams to basketball football is the ultimate team game it’s so many nuances to football that I just can’t explain in short time just know JJ be disengenous