The Have and the Have Nots

Doug DonofrioCorrespondent IFebruary 25, 2009

The elite and the poor of the NBA. Is there an in-between? Lakers, Magic, Cavaliers, Celtics, and San Antonio are considered the elite, right?

What do those teams all have in common? They have elite players that are dominating this league up and down and all around. Bryant, Howard, James, Garnett, Pierce, Duncan, and Parker are representing those teams as the elite.

What about all the other teams in the NBA? It seems without that dominating player there is a minimal chance to remotely win in this league. Let us be frank here. Many of the teams in the NBA do not have that first level tier player who can take over a game.

Granted there are second tier players on the majority of these teams but that is it from a talent standpoint. The rich and the elite are getting richer and the poor are remaining poor much like our society.

How can it possibly be year after year that the lottery teams are still at the bottom of the league's won loss percentage. Can somebody please explain how this is continually perpetuating itself from year to year?

What about the teams that have been winning and have been successful; how do they continue to win year in and year out without top draft picks?

One would think with all the trading that goes on in the NBA coupled with a salary cap and luxury tax there should be an equity or parody, but that is not the case.

Boston makes a stunning trade and wins a world championship a year after they had become a laughingstock. How did Ainge pull this off while everyone else stood on the sidelines and did nothing.

Seems to me unless one can acquire a first tier elite player either through trade or free agency there is little chance to become an elite team. How often does a LeBron James or Kobe Bryant come along?

The rich will remain rich and the poor will remain poor-the state of our economy.