Dynasties aren't built on trades!!!

[Neurotic Guy]

Elite Epic Fail by the OP

And the Winner of the 2017 C-Blogy for "Most Easily Refutable Thread Title" is...   

[trickybilly]

We laugh, but OP is Tatum's mom.

[mef730]

We laugh, but OP is Tatum's mom.

TP, that made me laugh.

Mike

[Boris Badenov]

There's one universal truth about is required for a dynasty: a world-class GM.

Oh, and luck. Just a s***-ton of luck.

We've been doing well on both counts so far, I'd say.

[Moranis]

Top 3 players from each title team and method of acquisition

GS - free agent, draft, draft
CLE - free agent, draft, trade
GS - draft, draft, draft
SA - draft day trade, draft, draft
MIA x2 - free agent, draft, free agent
DAL - draft day trade, trade, trade
LA x2 - trade (after draft), trade, trade (assuming Odom over Bynum)
BOS - draft, trade, trade
SA - draft, draft, draft
MIA - draft, trade, ? (Haslem was drafted, Walker/Payton were free agents, Posey was traded)
SA - draft, draft, draft
DET - trade, trade, free agent, trade (since they had a big 4)
SA - draft, draft, draft
LA x3 - free agent, trade (after draft), free agent
SA - draft, draft, draft
CHI x3 - draft, draft day trade, free agent
HOU - draft, trade, draft (Horry - yes he was the 3rd best player on that team)
HOU - draft, trade, trade (the last 2 are Thorpe and Maxwell - man those Rocket teams were bad overall)
CHI x3 - draft, draft day trade, draft

That is probably far enough.  It pretty easily shows that you can build a team using any method of player acquisition but generally most teams employ at least two methods and some like the Cavs have employed all 3.  The Spurs really are the exception building pretty consistently through the draft and only the draft (or trading for a draft pick to acquire Leonard on draft night). 

[coffee425]

[__ramonezy__]

Top 3 players from each title team and method of acquisition

GS - free agent, draft, draft
CLE - free agent, draft, trade
GS - draft, draft, draft
SA - draft day trade, draft, draft
MIA x2 - free agent, draft, free agent
DAL - draft day trade, trade, trade
LA x2 - trade (after draft), trade, trade (assuming Odom over Bynum)
BOS - draft, trade, trade
SA - draft, draft, draft
MIA - draft, trade, ? (Haslem was drafted, Walker/Payton were free agents, Posey was traded)
SA - draft, draft, draft
DET - trade, trade, free agent, trade (since they had a big 4)
SA - draft, draft, draft
LA x3 - free agent, trade (after draft), free agent
SA - draft, draft, draft
CHI x3 - draft, draft day trade, free agent
HOU - draft, trade, draft (Horry - yes he was the 3rd best player on that team)
HOU - draft, trade, trade (the last 2 are Thorpe and Maxwell - man those Rocket teams were bad overall)
CHI x3 - draft, draft day trade, draft

That is probably far enough.  It pretty easily shows that you can build a team using any method of player acquisition but generally most teams employ at least two methods and some like the Cavs have employed all 3.  The Spurs really are the exception building pretty consistently through the draft and only the draft (or trading for a draft pick to acquire Leonard on draft night).

It's funny sometimes how persons are quick to rubbish a chain of thought because it simply doesn't match up with theirs without even looking at facts and properly reading what was stated. There hasn't been a single comment to refute my point yet, because most persons ignored the point before commenting.

The economics of the NBA from the 80s is much different from those that exist now, which I pointed out. So using our trade for Parrish in 1980 when the salary cap was put in place 1985 doesn't refute my point... you're comparing apples and oranges. As a result all examples pre-1985 are simply not applicable as team building mechanics were simply different.

Thanks to Moranis that actually pulled some facts on the composition of the most recent championship teams. I'll stick with his assessment even though I think Bynum was more vital than Odom. He went back 27 seasons of champions and highlighted the method of acquisition of their top 3... that's 81 players in total. Of the 81 members, 50 were acquired through draft... that's 60%. (I specifically mentioned trading for a starter... so draft day trades, if the team used the acquired pick to ultimately select a player I treated that as "draft"). If I include free agents that jumps to 66 out of 81 players, which is over 80%. So of the past 27 years, 80% of the top-3 players on championship teams were acquired by either 'draft' or 'free agency'.

Now bring it to my actual argument, which referred to "DYNASTIES"... aka multiple championships in a 10 year span... this eliminates Detroit (who acquired their top-3 via Trade, Trade, FA), it also eliminates us (Draft, Trade, Trade), it also eliminates Dallas (Draft, Trade, Trade)... realize a pattern? Teams that build with trades for their best players simply don't build dynasties... and that's because trading for a star guts future potential and quality draft picks...

I'm always ready to learn from others, so if anyone has facts that relate to the point being made feel free to share them... 

[Tr1boy]

Can be... Celts almost won 2

Heat won 2

[JBcat]

If the salary cap era started in 1985 let's forget the 80s Celtics and Lakers. The key players were acquired before.

The title clearly states dynasties not just a single championship.

So how many dynasties have there been since say the late 80s?  The Pistons, Bulls, Spurs, Lakers, Heat, Warriors.  You could argue maybe a few more like the Cavs and C's even being in the finals twice but I left them out.

The Pistons top 2 players were Dumars and Thomas both homegrown as were many of their players. Same for Pippen and Jordan. Kobe was drafted and Shaq a FA. The Spurs major pieces were drafted.  Heat is different with only Wade, but that was almost once in a lifetime thing. 3 out of the 4 Warriors players are homegrown.

What the OP makes sense. Generally if you draft multiple stars at a young age you can have sustained success with a possible dynasty.

Trading for stars as they get older most likely you will have short lived success, a 1 championship and done kind of thing.  I can see what he is trying to say.

[gift]

OP says dynasties can't be built through trades. Colin Cowherd says dynasties can't be built through the draft. I guess that means dynasties can only be built via free agency. Except that there's often a large gray area overlap between free agency and trades (see Chris Paul for most recent example). Plus there's a huge opportunity cost to signing expensive free agents. So dynasties probably can't be built through free agency either.

Guys, I think dynasties just can't be built.

[clevelandceltic]

If the salary cap era started in 1985 let's forget the 80s Celtics and Lakers. The key players were acquired before.

The title clearly states dynasties not just a single championship.

So how many dynasties have there been since say the late 80s?  The Pistons, Bulls, Spurs, Lakers, Heat, Warriors.  You could argue maybe a few more like the Cavs and C's even being in the finals twice but I left them out.

The Pistons top 2 players were Dumars and Thomas both homegrown as were many of their players. Same for Pippen and Jordan. Kobe was drafted and Shaq a FA. The Spurs major pieces were drafted.  Heat is different with only Wade, but that was almost once in a lifetime thing. 3 out of the 4 Warriors players are homegrown.

What the OP makes sense. Generally if you draft multiple stars at a young age you can have sustained success with a possible dynasty.

Trading for stars as they get older most likely you will have short lived success, a 1 championship and done kind of thing.  I can see what he is trying to say.

If you just looked at the last 10 years the OP would be wrong.

Current Cavs top 4 players are trade, draft, draft, FA.
Warriors top 4 draft, draft, draft, trade(1st title) FA(2nd title)
Heat top 4 trade, FA, draft, FA(the last 2 title runs) (1st title run no clear 4th player)

Im not going to keep going back because that has been covered already but the more accurate thing to say would be you have to draft at least one top 10 player in the process and then fill it in however.

[Moranis]

If the salary cap era started in 1985 let's forget the 80s Celtics and Lakers. The key players were acquired before.

The title clearly states dynasties not just a single championship.

So how many dynasties have there been since say the late 80s?  The Pistons, Bulls, Spurs, Lakers, Heat, Warriors.  You could argue maybe a few more like the Cavs and C's even being in the finals twice but I left them out.

The Pistons top 2 players were Dumars and Thomas both homegrown as were many of their players. Same for Pippen and Jordan. Kobe was drafted and Shaq a FA. The Spurs major pieces were drafted.  Heat is different with only Wade, but that was almost once in a lifetime thing. 3 out of the 4 Warriors players are homegrown.

What the OP makes sense. Generally if you draft multiple stars at a young age you can have sustained success with a possible dynasty.

Trading for stars as they get older most likely you will have short lived success, a 1 championship and done kind of thing.  I can see what he is trying to say.

The Lakers did not draft Kobe.  he was acquired like a month after the draft well into free agency season.  He never played a game for the Hornets, but he wasn't a draft day trade, he was acquired via an actual trade.  Pretty similar to how the Wolves acquired Wiggins.

[tstorey_97]

Dynasties in the NBA.

Splitting the league into Pre free agency and post. This is reasonable, however, should the debate remain from the broadest perspective "about the NBA" then, let's chuck the qualifiers shall we? The NBA throughout it's history potentially illustrates:

"You can build a dynasty more efficiently by drafting players"

"You should refrain from trades as they stand in the way of actually building a dynasty"

This is a good example of duality (there is two of everything...sort of)

Now Ainge traded himself to one title.
Red traded & drafted to more titles than any other GM (I think in North American professional sports history).

A franchise, sir, has options based on their leadership as to trade or draft their way to immortality.

All of this yack is based on another word that ends with "CK" and that is luck. Talk to the 76'ers. Fultz will be on the IR by February with that team's luck won't he?

Red doesn't like Cousy, he's small and chippy and Red can do better....oops! HOF...luck.

Ping pong balls flop around and the team builds around Duncan and your argument is supported but, they flopped around didn't they? It wasn't about one or the other, it was about luck.

Ainge having learned at the feet of the above mentioned doesn't care how it gets done as the goal is "title". We observe him now as he builds his young guys in support of your "dynasty through draft" concept and simultaneously, he trades his Mormon butt off trying to disprove you, sir.

Spurs or 76'ers...luck vs no luck

Good execs and freakin' the Nix Isaiah. Many moving parts in the NBA title hunt and, if you espouse one "method" over the other long enough it will all come back to bite ya.

Bill Belichick will somehow be called a "genius" for first picking...

Adrian Klem
JR Redmond
Greg Randall
Dave Stachelski
Jeff Marriott
Antwan Harris
Before selecting his seventh choice of the 2000 nfl draft...Tom Brady

I ask you this, is hoodie immeasurably brilliant or, should he have been fired for grabbing Stachelski, Marriott and Harris before the greatest quarterback of all time?

It's luck and some franchises have more than others.

[Roy H.]

Teams that win two titles in a 10 year span are now considered dynasties?

[Donoghus]

Teams that win two titles in a 10 year span are now considered dynasties?

They sure as heck shouldn't be, IMO.