A lot has been made of the issues in the NBA this season, namely with the movement of star players locating themselves on superteams. Having LeBron James go on television and say that he was going to "take his talents" to Miami to play with Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade definitely did leave a sour taste in the mouths of a lot of NBA fans. Having Carmelo Anthony not only demand a trade to the Knicks, but then get his way and actually go to New York was just another step for the players of the NBA having way too much power and making the game a little bit of a sideshow. There are definite drawbacks to having these superteams form. In a sense, the NBA then has just a strong upper crust of teams and then the rest of the league is schedule of fillers. If you live in one of those cities with the pleasure of having a superteam, its a great setup, but for the rest of us, or just the casual NBA fan who wants highly competitive basketball, its a pretty weak setup. One of the things that people really like about the NFL is the "parity" that it has, well with just some elite teams at the top, its clear the NBA lacks that kind of parity that endears people to the NFL. This all goes against what I wanted to write this post about though. What I want to say is that despite this issue I've described, the NBA is still a fantastic sport to watch and really isn't as bad off as most people would let on at least in terms of this superteams issue. In reality, I don't find it to be that big of a deal. Here's why:
Looking at this year's NBA playoffs, I think you could make a legitimate argument for 8 teams that could win the NBA finals. San Antonio, the Lakers, Dallas, Oklahoma City, Chicago, Miami, Boston, and Orlando all have a true chance at the championship in my opinion. That's 8 teams out of a total of 30, 26.6 %, or over a quarter or the league with a conceivable chance to win the title.
Now let's compare that number to the NFL this past season. Of the playoff teams from this past season in the NFL, I think very few people expected the Kansas City Chiefs, or Seattle Seahawks would win the Super Bowl. So there were 10 out of 32 teams that were conceivable title contenders, that's 31.3%. The numbers lead to a 4.7% difference between the two leagues, which seems pretty small when you consider how people rave about the parity of the National Football League.
On the other hand, the MLB allows 8 of 30 teams in the playoffs, and the beauty of the MLB playoffs tends to be that all the teams in the playoffs have a true chance. That's the same 26.6% of teams that the NBA has. So in theory, as far as competitivity (if that's a word) the NBA is just as strong as the MLB, and people don't tend to complain about the number of teams with a chance to win it in baseball, more so why the teams at the top are the ones they are (a lack of salary cap and such).
There's something else to keep in mind though. There will always be some power mobility of NBA teams as time goes on. As the Boston Celtics age for instance, their run of title chases will come to an end, and other franchises then can step in and fill that power vacuum. You could see teams like the Knicks, the Clippers, and maybe a team or two that does well in the draft the next couple of years that could ascend to the top to replace teams like the Celtics, Spurs, and Lakers that are aging, or at least have aging stars. Those superteams are only strong due to their stars, so when those players get old, they no longer have a leg to stand on.
The draft is an important component too. Teams that do well in the draft automatically get their own star and could create their own superteams, or at least join role players together to compete, which is what the Thunder are currently doing and the Clippers could do since attaining Blake Griffin. Poor performing teams still can gain players and wins in future seasons by successfully utilizing the draft, as long as that privilege isn't taken away from such teams they will have a chance.
Lastly, I'd like to mention that to only have a few quality teams at the top of the league is simply the way the NBA has always really worked. This is illustrated by the idea that over the last 30 years 8 NBA franchises have won NBA titles. Essentially, the modern NBA has been defined by teams being strong at the top. Teams like Magic's Lakers, Larry Bird's Celtics, Michael Jordan's Bulls, and Tim Duncan's Spurs are the way of the NBA world. Further, in those same 30 years none of those NBA championship teams had less than 2 players that were All-Stars in their career. Most of the teams had multiple Hall of Famers/future Hall of Famers. So to say that having especially elite teams at the top of the league in the NBA is a new phenomenon would be a complete false truth.
Rather, this is the way the NBA works, its how the game is played. There are elite teams. They are either in their prime, rising, or falling as they age, and the cycle goes on. This isn't a new trend in the NBA, and its not one that really doesn't provide hope for those that don't have the power of superior talent in the NBA right now. I just don't think this situation of how the NBA works hit NBA fans in the face until a certain egomaniac went on television and made an infamous decision. Guess what LeBron, you didn't hit on some great new concept by going to Miami, in fact, its kind of old hat.
What's the baseline?
The NBA is still the same league it has always been, at least as long as its been under David Stern (1984). Don't get discouraged if you're living in a city with a poorly performing NBA team right now, not only do I expect the next Collective Bargaining Agreement to do something about this superteam thing at least in a sense, but if you're team drafts well, anything is possible anyway. Oklahoma City and San Antonio are strong teams, and those are small markets, so small markets definitely can survive in this NBA as well. Further, the NBA has arguably just as much parity as the MLB, and only a little less than the NFL by the numbers. So really complaints about the NBA are more just knee-jerk reactions to the visibility of player changes in very recent history.
No comments:
Post a Comment