While we are sitting here arguing about this do we know that the Suns didn't even entertain the idea of Russell? I mean I don't see him passing on a max deal from the Warriors for the Suns even if he is friends with Booker. The rumors for him going to the Warriors started coming out hours before free agency started from what I remember so it is quite possible that the Suns put out feelers only to find out he was meeting with the Warriors.
Also I see this as an attempt from the team to surround their young core pieces with veteran role players that have all played roles recently for playoff teams. The intent of this is to win a lot more games by having a lot more players that know how to contribute to winning in the NBA and also having these core guys learning in the environment that it creates.
Look through the history of the league and most teams win it all with two stars and a bunch of players that compliment the strengths of the stars.
No. The overwhelming majority of teams that won it all had two things in common. 3 All-Stars or 2 of the Best Players of All Time.
The Warriors had 4 stars and 3 stars and at least 3 of them are going to be HOFers.
The Cavs had LeBron, Kyrie and Love - that was the best player of all time, another All-Star and likely HOFer with Kyrie and another all-star with Love.
The Spurs had Duncan, Kawhi, Tony Parker and Manu - that's one of the best players ever, another ascending generational player and two All-Stars.
The Heat had LeBron, again, the best player in the game, Wade, a consistent all-star and HOFer and Bosh, a consistent HOFer.
The Mavs are one of the exceptions to the rule.
The Lakers had Kobe, as arguably the best player in the game, with Pau, a HOFer, Bynum an All-Star during their run. And again, guys who made big differences on both ends of the court.
The Celtics had KG, Pierce, Allen. Three HOFers.
Back to the Spurs who had Duncan, the best player in the game with Parker another ALL-Star and likely HOFer and Manu, another likely HOFer.
The Pistons are the second exception to the rule.
The Heat were a fluke.
Back to the Lakers and Spurs again. Again, both of which had either THE best player in the game, who could dominate on both ends of the court and a lot of help.
This team isn't set up to do that with 2 stars... neither of which are complete players on both sides of the court. Kobe and Shaq could do it because they were pretty much either the first, second or third best player in the league and in the top 10-15 ALL TIME. They also pulled it off because they both could dominate offensively and defensively. Booker and Ayton have potential, but not that kind of potential.
But even so, you're looking at the last 19 years of NBA champions... 3 fit your criteria of winning a title with Two stars. That's just not how it is in today's league. That's the way it happened with the Rockets, Bulls, Suns, Blazers, Jazz back in the day. But you're talking about a different league 20 years ago. And even those title winning teams with the Bulls and Rockets during that period had Jordan and Pippen - the greatest player of all time and one of the best 2nd bananas EVER and BOTH controlled the game at both ends. Same with Hakeem.
Neither of our stars are even complete players and I don't see that changing. Ayton WILL get better, but lacking a nasty streak, I don't think he ever gets near Hakeem or Shaq level and as great as Booker is offensively, his ceiling is merely okay on D. Thus the reason this team needs one more major piece... an all-star... to ever really contend on a regular basis moving forward.
