[Semtex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
btw, let me be clear that I am not saying the article is 100% accurate. I just wanted to discuss the situation of having a few good but not great players and whats the best course of action for a team in that position. The Jazz might have been a poor example due to Boozer/Deron's ability to turn out to be top level players.

102,507 and counting

[/ QUOTE ]
It really depends on the state of the league. To beat a team like the Spurs you are going to need a guy like KG to shut down Duncan, but say if Phoenix was the team to beat you might need a different player/set of players. You might be able to get away with not having a superstar for the ages. The thing is even if a player is OK, they can become a superstar for the ages if they win enough. Lets say Detroit had won two or three in a row. Who's the superstar on that team? The article guy thought it was Ben Wallace which I thought was pretty laughable.

[/ QUOTE ]

the argument against this is that detroit had very little chance of winning multiple championships and was very fortunate to win the first one.

[/ QUOTE ]
But again this was due to the state of the league. What if the West was as pathetic as the East? Simmons had an article, and I don't quite remember the details, but I think the gist was Jordan got incredibly lucky in his reign that teams weren't built around a dominant big man like the Lakers of a few years back or Celtics of the 80s.