Last week's best joke sparked thinking about who is the NBA super team.

Ross said this in an interview with Ron Whitaker, a reporter from NBA official website:

"We have high expectations for this Knicks. I talked to players from other teams, and they all said that we are a super league team like Golden State Warriors ... "

What? Super team? Knicks? Everyone's reaction is, Ross, will you stop it? Many people made up new jokes based on this joke. Frank Izzola of new york Daily News said: "So far, there are two people on earth who think the Knicks are super teams: Ross and Berman (New York Post reporter, super Knicks fans)." Others said, "The Knicks are really a super team ... if it is 20 1 1." There are also many Knicks fans calling for: Don't make fun of our team, okay? !

Obviously, the Knicks are not a super team. Even if there are five super teams in the NBA now, it's not their turn. So, what kind of team can afford the word "super"?

Standard 1: must-have superstar

I have expressed this view many times in my commentary: among all the team events, only basketball can let a player control a game, a series or even a season with his own will. There is a simple reason. The basketball court is small, and there are few players.

Therefore, the most direct and effective way for a team to get close to the championship and become a super team is to get a superstar. Use his ability and will to decide the direction of the game and the team. At that time, George Karl claimed to build a champion team without all-stars in Denver, but now it looks like daydreaming.

How to get a superstar? There are three ways: draft, free agent signing or trading. For those small and medium-sized market teams, the possibility of signing or trading superstars directly is not particularly great, so the draft is particularly important. This is why I often say that in the NBA, the most embarrassing thing is the team that enters the playoffs every year, but stops in the first round every year. If such a team is still in a small and medium-sized city, it will be even more tragic-you have to keep the core members of the team with a relatively high salary, even though you know that these players can't upgrade the team for you, and at the same time, you will never get the top draft, that is, you will never get the chance to become a superstar.

In the past few years, the eagle is the most outstanding representative of this team. Joe Johnson-Josh Smith era, they are like this, to Horford-millsap era, the team's record has improved, but still can't touch the highest honor. So, this summer, Buden holzer released Teague, and now he has released the news that he can trade millsap. It's really a sense of reconstruction

What is the standard of superstar? Ma Zhongyang Ma Daochang, my commentary partner in Beijing TV Station, once made a classic judgment: "chris paul is a superstar." Isn't this nonsense? Paul is of course a super giant! But Ma Daochang hasn't finished yet: "If you are worse than Paul, can you still be called a superstar?" This argument has caused a lot of controversy. In fact, what Ma Daochang wants to say is that there are only a few real superstars, one, two, three, four and five, all of which are counted by one hand. Further down, it can't be called a super giant.

So, look at the raptors. They have two all-stars, and Lori has been an all-star starter for two years in a row. But do Raptors have superstars? Can they call a super team? Sorry, I really can't.

Standard 2: There must be three star players.

It's good to have a superstar, but you just took the first step. Next, you need to use this superstar to lure other star players to join your team. The general managers of NBA have long understood this truth. Morey said a few years ago that if you want to win the championship in the current NBA, you must have at least two stars, preferably three.

Our article today is about super teams, and the standards of super teams are actually different from the championship. For example, 20 1 1 Mavericks won the championship, but no one thought they were a super team. They had a superstar, Nowitzki, but the Mavericks didn't have any other all-stars except Dirk that year.

It was hot that year. They are not champions, but they are more in line with the standards of super teams. James and Wade, obviously superstars, plus a Bosh, the super team is up to standard. The Big Three of the Heat entered the finals in four years and won the championship twice. James wasn't blamed, and Wade and Bosh didn't die in vain.

According to the standard of three stars, many teams have been brushed off. For example, Thunder and Du are both superstars in recent years, but Ibaka, who ranks third in the team, has never been a star. The speedboat, Paul and Griffin are all qualified, but apart from the chemical reaction, Jordan Jr. is really not the third star.

Furthermore, the Lakers, who have won two championships, are also super strong teams. They have two giants, Kobe Bryant and Gasol. Bynum and Odom also meet the standards of stars. The Celtics in the 2007-08 season were also super teams at that time. They have Garnett and Pierce, and Ray Allen is obviously an All-Star. They won the championship in the first season, which was later failed by the Heat and Cavaliers.

When we talk about the super teams in the past decade, the Spurs can't avoid it. Although GDP, especially Parker and Ginobili, have no reputation as superstars, it is because they are interdependent and have made great sacrifices for the team. In Parker's words, "If we do these things in San Antonio, new york, then we are the biggest stars in sports."

Since 2 1 century, the only super team that does not meet the "Samsung standard" of super teams is the Lakers at the beginning of the century. They only have two superstars, OK, but I think it belongs to a special case: First, OK's personal ability is so outstanding that it can even be said that it is the product of the combination of two eras.

Standard 3: Strong deterrence

As I said just now, a super team is not necessarily a championship, and a championship is not necessarily a super team. Like the Pistons in 2004, the Mavericks in 20 1 1, and even the Cavaliers this year, they are all champions, but they are not super teams, because no one is afraid of them in the season and there is no great deterrent.

On the contrary, like the Warriors of last season, although they lost the finals 3-4 in the end, they established a great reputation in the long regular season, and many teams were simply scared. They have a player like Curry, who played a historical season, contributed three All-Stars, and scored a record-breaking 73 wins in the regular season. Obviously, they are a super team.

The same standard applies to the Lakers in 2004. They all have OK groups that are about to disintegrate. Malone and Peyton, two old stars, voted at a reduced price, and also played the second place in the West in the regular season (everyone thought they were killed in the regular season). But in the 20 12- 13 season, the Lakers with the new F4 can't be called a super team, because they started with 1 win and 4 losses, and fired their coach after five games. Who's afraid of you?

Why do some teams have stars but no deterrent? The reasons are complicated, but old age is often the same feature. Like the Lakers in the 20 12- 13 season, they are all famous for their old slow fever, while Houston, which updated two versions of the rocket, is also because the superstar is old, not only has a declining ability, but also will fight together, so although it has a super name, it has no super deterrent.

Including Ross's super team and next season's Knicks, it seems that their lineup is really luxurious, but whether Ross and Noah can return to 80% is a huge question mark, and there is only one goal. Is the old star enough?