If the league only had, say, between 10 and 20 teams, with current cap rules, there might be more parity and unpredictability. The league is probably about 30-40 deep in stars, and another 100 or so players deep in good to very good players. The rest of the league is basically filler. If every team had at least 1 top 20 players and 1 top 40 player, and then 5-6 other really good players, the quality of NBA basketball would be awesome. Even the teams that don’t win the championship would be more fun to watch. Sort of like the Knicks now compared to the Knicks during our 1-9 stretch earlier in the season, when TD, Walker and Bibby were getting significant minutes. Every team has guys like that, and some have them in their starting lineups. Even if the league contracted by 5 teams, I think it would be better for the league overall.

Juany8: Or even Greg Oden and Brandon Roy…

Or Sam Bowie. Portland has only itself to blame for not drafting Jordan and Durant. (though there was nothing wrong with the Roy pick – didn’t they draft and trade Foye for Roy?)

Was Brandon Roy’s retirement avoidable? As I remember it, he was heavily injured in a (meaningless) Game 3/4 of a 1st round series. It’s a horrible idea to try to force yourself to play if it’s any game that’s not Game 7 of the Finals. I’m just wondering if whether he played or not, if the knee would have taken him out by now anyway.

Count de Pennies:
@31

Much as NBA teams today need a superstar to win, the recent rules changes in the NFL (which heavily favor the passing game) mean it’s no longer possible for teams to win a Super Bowl without an elite QB.

disagree with this too, the Niners or Ravens easily could have won it all this year, both conference championship games were essentially coin flips.

Count de Pennies: In today’s NBA, there’s almost no point in being a good team that lacks a “superstar.” That’s the limbo in which teams like Portland perpetually seem to dwell in. Good enough for a 4-8 seed and maybe even a first round series win but never quite good enough to win it all. In many ways, they’d be better off blowing shit up entirely, and sucking year after year in the hopes of one day landing the NBA’s next big thing in the lottery.

Or you can pick Greg Oden in the lottery.

Much as NBA teams today need a superstar to win, the recent rules changes in the NFL (which heavily favor the passing game) mean it’s no longer possible for teams to win a Super Bowl without an elite QB.

For most of this year, not many took the Giants seriously because very few people considered Eli Manning an elite QB. Of course, if anyone had paid attention to the first 14 games, they would have noticed that without Eli, the Giants would likely have been 2-12 instead of 7-7. In at least five games, he singlehandedly carried the team on his shoulders. In other words, an elite QB.

Teams that do not possess one of the league sanctioned superstars (i.e. one who will almost certainly get the lion’s share of favorable calls in a short series) have virtually no shot of winning a title (the aforementioned ’04 Pistons being one of the rare exceptions)

The number of superstars in the NBA is very small. Most teams don’t have one on the roster. Consequently, those teams can be eliminated from consideration when handicapping prospective champions.

In today’s NBA, there’s almost no point in being a good team that lacks a “superstar.” That’s the limbo in which teams like Portland perpetually seem to dwell in. Good enough for a 4-8 seed and maybe even a first round series win but never quite good enough to win it all. In many ways, they’d be better off blowing shit up entirely, and sucking year after year in the hopes of one day landing the NBA’s next big thing in the lottery.