Woj: "Rudy Gay trade shows LeBron James the future: Super team era ending"

[gilalizard]

Don't know about the "super team era" thing.

Current Celtics in the championship year? Maybe.
Lakers in their two? That's more of a stretch. They had an undeniable amount of talent. But hardly "super team" worthy.

Only the Heat really count as a "super team". And they needed farcical amounts of ref favoritism to "win" their championship.

[longtime lurker]

I think what the author is trying to get at is that if Lebron wants to leave in 2014 don't expect to form a super team because of the harsher luxury tax penalties. That's why he brought up Irving and the Cavs. Why does he think Lebron will leave for a only a super team? Because he's left a team to form one. Then again he could always just stay with the Heat which is what I hope he does.

[InfiniteBaskets]

You guys aren't thinking of parity the way the owners do. They want FINANCIAL parity and you want COMPETITIVE parity. They care about making a profit not winning and this repeater tax means more money for them due to wealth distribution. So the CBA hurts title chances but improves the bottom line. Never forget this is a business.

Do all owners want financial parity though? What about the owners in advantaged geographical cities? Or the owners that invest much more in team management and scouting?

Do you think Micky Arison truly cares about how much money MJ keeps at the end of the season? It's a business for the owners on top as well and they'll only agree to the CBA so long as they keep their competitive advantage and make that money back through playoffs or team branding.

[KyrieTheFuture]

Do all owners want financial parity though? What about the owners in advantaged geographical cities? Or the owners that invest much more in team management and scouting?

Do you think Micky Arison truly cares about how much money MJ keeps at the end of the season? It's a business for the owners on top as well and they'll only agree to the CBA so long as they keep their competitive advantage and make that money back through playoffs or team branding.

I think Micky Arison took the deal because he can still afford to compete and I think MJ took the deal because he can still make money. Think about it, without a hard cap the Lakers and Heat of the NBA will always outspend the other teams no matter what. This way the other teams don't lose games AND money. They cry all the way to bank. I am sure there are plenty of owners (Grizzlies/Toronto) who are perfectly content not being good and making money. Does this make sense Idk if my argument flows kinda just stream of consciousness.