What it all means:
Suffice to say, this entire situation will function as a harbinger of the new NBA. Granted there are only so many stars who teams consider generational talents. But, if Davis does end up in LA (and worse Kyrie Irving follows) with the Lakers and LeBron being allowed to blatantly function in this way I tend to agree with Charles Barkley – why bother even trying to contend?
Why not just form two super teams and the other 28 teams can just accept the fact they’re shot at winning is one in a million barring copious injuries to these super teams.
If it seems I’m making this situation out to be a big deal – that’s because in my humble opinion it is. There is a reason pundits, players and fans were shocked Paul George stayed in OKC because it simply isn’t the norm. And, for the OKC Thunder to keep George and retain a talent like Russell Westbrook on their roster ownership is strapped with a huge luxury tax bill.
And still, the Warriors have more talent while the Lakers are pushing to join them via adding by all accounts a minimum of two top five stars while seeking to add a third, top 10 star. And then fill out their rosters with the veterans who’ll sign minimum deals to capture a ring and live in one of the big media markets. The whole situation feels to have been planned out with an orchestrated intention (and again, in my opinion) is very shady and clearly falls in the tampering and collusion category.
Why this is bad for the NBA on a whole:
If the Lakers and LeBron are allowed to function in this manner – blatantly recruiting and dictating how teams are formed I feel it hurts the overall health of the NBA. As it is, fans are exposed to a never ending nationally televised menu of Lakers and Knicks games and have been for years in spite of their recent abysmal records.
The one question I would ask Adam Silver is how it would affect the overall health of his league if only two or three teams enter the season with a chance to win the title every season. Why would the other 27 teams bother to spend above the bare minimum and why would fans bother to attend games knowing their teams have a minimal shot of winning a title? Why not just put the 10 best NBA players in a room to decide which of the two or three teams they’ll play for and televise the proceedings much like the All-Star teams will be selected since that is precisely the direction the NBA seems headed if this is allowed to occur without consequence.
Sure, every club can sell out games on the one to two occasions those two or three super teams visit, or to witness a generational talent in action but what about the other 70 plus games each season?
Parity is more appealing than super teams:
In case you question this stance, last year several friends told me they didn’t even bother watching games the past two seasons since it was inevitable the Warriors and Cavaliers would meet in the finals so none of the regular season or other 28 teams mattered.
Is Silver selling a league where fans should be excited knowing they might be able to finish fourth yearly but has no shot of winning because those two or three super teams are the only ones who’ll ever truly be in the mix? Maybe I’m playing the part of the alarmist, but I honestly can’t see how any of this is good for the National Basketball Association.