[Semtex]

This is goingto be a rambling post be forewarned, it was a really long article, i skimmed a lot of it. First off, lol at Ben Wallace being the dominant player on that Pistons championship team.

The part where he talked about how the superstar factor affected the notion of basketball as a team sport was off too. This is the NBA, its not basketball. Its becoming more and more about the show, so its only natural that superstars will thrive. The only reason Dwayne Wade is even getting all that attention in his list is because the refs called 617348345 fouls for him in those finals.

But besides getting an inordinate amount of referee assistance, Dallas still helped them enormously. Even with Wade and Shaq Dallas should have won that year. This is I don't think its about the superstar at all, though it can help. Its about the team and the organization first. KG is a silver medalist while Duncan is a gold medalist for one reason only, the organization he ended up with. I have no doubt the Spurs would have been just as dominant with him as without, they are managed and coached too damn well.

This is the problem with his ranking system, he's not rating potential, he's rating results. Should you pass on KG because he's not a gold medal superstar? Seems dumb he easily could have been, given the right set of circumstances. You see what I'm saying? If GMs followed this guy's advice, they would almost always pass on the young up and comer, or the superstar who couldn't quite go the distance, for the proven winner. I'm not sure this is always correct. Shaq wasn't the key to that Miami championship Wade was, and they shouldn't have won anyway and haven't come close since. If you had the choice between Jordan or Bird in '86 who would you have taken? I can see the argument for Bird, but you would have been crucified 5 years later.

Utah is interesting. On paper, AK47 should be the superstar of this team, but for some reason he doesn't fit in. To trade Deron and Boozer at this point would be suicidal, just because in their second year on the team they haven't won 6 championships to become gold medal superstars. The problem is, if Boozer keeps putting up 30/10 for any extended period of time someone is going to offer him a max contract if you don't, and if he does end up being a gold medal superstar, leading some team to a bunch of championships, you are going to be left looking like an idiot for letting him go. The point is you can't tell. Any superstar, gold medal or not, has the potential to become gold medal in the right situation.

Which leads to the conclusion. The difference between gold and silver medalists is not the difference between the players but they respective organizations they ended up on. This is the key. Its about all the pieces, not just one. Coaching and role players are just as key. It should be gold and silver medal organizations. Thats why even if the Jazz got Kobe and built around him, they're still not beating the Spurs. There is nothing they can do. They are the gold medal organization. Its not just coaching and management. Its the players, fans, everything. All the pieces are in place.