1 Guaranteed Championship or Several Years of Good Basketball?

There is never a guarantee of a championship so there is only one option.

 

Chip every time

 

If you could guarantee a championship then everyone would pick one. And btw Charles and Scottie didn't bring us a championship.


How drunk are you right now?

 

Every single good team is constantly trying to balance two things:

1) how wide the window is
2) and how deep the window is - with this being how much of a contender we actually ARE in that championship window.

It's not an easy balance at all. Unless you're a team like Dallas that has barely any time left with Dirk - they are trying to make their window as deep as possible, even if it isn't wide at all.

And look at their record, their window really isn't deep at all.

 

Where is the option where we win the chip every year?

 

A championship would takes several deep playoff runs to achieve. They are not the opposite of each other!

 

Ah, yes. I still get misty-eyed every time I think of that championship Barkley and Pippen brought us.

 

.......
.......
.......

 

I mean if there was at least a *chance* of a championship in those 8 years, that would be the obvious answer.

10 competitive years with even a 1-5% chance of a chip each year is WAY better than one 100% guaranteed title followed by eight losing seasons.

... But if you're talking about how we'd feel after the fact? Yeah, looking back, it's always nice to see a title.

 

Very rarely does a team assemble itself for one championship year, and then immediately fall apart. Typically, you've had a few good years of runs leading UP to the championship, so the two certainly aren't mutually exclusive. However, this is almost a complete no-brainer considering that there is NEVER a guarantee that you'll win the championship even if you've stacked the majority of chips in your favor. Therefore, if you're GUARANTEEING a championship, you have to pick that option every single time.

 

I love goooooooooold.

 

I'd rather be a good team for a decade than a great team for one year and a terrible one for 9. That's if there are no guarantees. Great teams lose titles all the time. Good ones win them occasionally.

If you are putting up a guarantee of one title in ten years versus a guarantee NOT to win a title in 10 years, then yes, I'll take the title.

 

easy.. take the championship and run.

 

Nobody will ever say "That team was a dynasty! Sure they never won one, but man, they made it deep into the playoffs EVERY YEAR!" Nobody cares about 2nd place.

 

Nothing is guaranteed. Nothing.

 

Do you guarantee that?

 

Want the championship. That's the ultimate goal of an NBA team.

Would you rather achieve your goal for a year, and then not achieve it for the next 8?

or

Would you rather come awfully close to achieving your goal for 8 years, but never get there?

Easy answer.

 

Flags fly forever. Give me the 'ship.

 

True, but the catch is that no matter how many superstars you bring in, there is never a GUARANTEE of a championship. It's still a crap shoot, but now you're playing with better odds.

The poll should have two choices:

1) Trade your future assets to bring in stars and give you the best odds of winning a title this year, with those odds falling every year for the next decade.

2) Continue to add important pieces without mortgaging your team's future.

Guarantees in sports are for dreamers.