Goyo
3 years ago10,000+ Views
Atlanta Hawks: Proving You Don't Need a Superstar
Every single team out there is trying to get a superstar. Every team is ripping its team apart in order to get that superstar. How successful has this approach been though? There have been a couple of teams that have been able to poach superstars, but in most cases, it has been nearly impossible. The fact that a superstar would need to leave over 20+ million on the table to join another team makes this a difficult venture. Not to mention, that usually the team trying to poach the star usually has a barebones roster. The Hawks, however, built their team by putting together a lot of good players. The Hawks went for the Larry Brown Pistons approach. And it is working. The problem is that you need, as is stated, a great leader (ie coach) to transform it into a great team. But is it really harder to poach a great coach than it is to poach a great player? Isn't that the real question?
4 comments
The Hawks are not going to win anything though. When they face the Cavs, they gonna get killed
3 years ago·Reply
@samiam why do you think so? This has been done before. Actually it has been proven that the superstar approach is much more likely to fail. Think about all the great teams, and name one where it was basically 1 or 2 stars and scrubs. There is only 1 I can think of, and that is the Lebron-Wade-Bosh Heat. And even they needed a lucky break to win their 1st title, and 3 superstars!
3 years ago·Reply
@Goyo outside of the Pistons, who has won without a superstar? Not gonna happen unless u have that go to guy there
3 years ago·Reply
The problem that the Hawks will face come playoff time is that they don't have the experience to make a deep run. I think they would struggle if a game 6 or 7 was ever on the line because the pressure always rises and the teams with the most leadership and veterans in the playoffs usually thrive
3 years ago·Reply
2
4
1