As Jerami Grant dunked the final nail in the coffin, sending Jerry West’s acclaimed Clippers roster to the graveyard of second-round exits, the takes came in. 

“Kawhi should never be mentioned in the same sentence as LeBron!” 

“Doc Rivers has blown three separate 3-1 leads!”

“The big man is not dead!”

“Why didn’t Doc go small!”

“Playoff P? More like Poo P!”

(I must say, of all the memes that were made about Paul George and the Clippers’ demise, for some reason nothing made me laugh harder than “Poo P!” I mean, I know the reason — I have the sense of humor of a five-year-old. Poo P. See, I just giggled again.)

As always, recency bias and Twitter give way to lots of overreactions. I would not have taken Kawhi over LeBron to win a seven-game series (all else equal) before the Clippers lost, and that has not changed. But I still don’t think I’d take anyone else. I’m not taking James Harden, Giannis, or even Nikola Jokic (though hopefully people are starting to realize he belongs in the conversation) over Kawhi. A healthy KD and Steph are probably the two I would most strongly consider, and that would be a debate. But Kawhi still has a claim to being the second-best player alive. Paul George has his shortcomings, but his defense on Jamal Murray was suffocating for much of the series, and he’s still capable of dropping 30 any night and is a true three-level scorer. 

(Side note: I tweeted this, but it’s fascinating to me whenever I compare the two players in my mind.

Paul George is two inches taller than Jimmy Butler.

Paul George has a longer wingspan than Jimmy Butler.

Paul George is a significantly better shooter than Jimmy Butler.

Paul George is a better athlete than Jimmy Butler.

And yet… I can’t rank PG over Jimmy.) 

But I don’t want to talk about Kawhi or PG’s place among the top players today. I’m not even directly going to talk about the viability of the Clippers’ current team going forward. I want to look at the viability of building a contender with a team’s players coming from free agency vs. via trade. 

Everyone seems to agree that you need multiple stars to win a title. Some champion the homegrown route, drafting well, investing in player development, and building a championship team from within. Some say free agency and trades are the most realistic way to find these pieces. Most agree that free agency is not a viable option for many small market teams, even in the age of cyber influence. Now, whether you get stars from outside or inside, player development and the draft are imperative. If you want to trade for a star, you usually need attractive assets (draft picks or young, promising players on good contracts), and it’s tough for that to be the case if you don’t draft or develop players well.

But once you have some young talent, are you better off trading it all to upgrade to a star and supplement him with someone in free agency (or trade for multiple stars), or using a star to supplement your existing core?

Let’s look at historical NBA finalists prior to this year (we’ll come back to this year, I promise). Before starting this exercise, one caveat: this is an inexact science, as collective bargaining agreements have changed the way teams can retain players or acquire free agents. 

2019: The Toronto Raptors did have Kawhi Leonard, but whether you think it was Kyle Lowry, Fred VanVleet, or Pascal Siakam, their second-best player (and third- and fourth-best) was drafted and developed in Toronto. The Golden State Warriors had Kevin Durant (a free agent signee), but Steph Curry, Draymond Green, and Klay Thompson were all homegrown.

2015-2018: As mentioned above, the Warriors drafted and developed three of their four best players. For the Cleveland Cavaliers, even if we don’t count LeBron as homegrown considering his South Beach detour, Kyrie Irving was homegrown. This is a bit of a special case that I’ll address later. 

2013-2014: The San Antonio Spurs are the gold standard for drafting and player development. I imagine most people reading this article know that Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, and a young Kawhi Leonard were all homegrown. The Miami Heat did have two stars in LeBron James and Chris Bosh who were signed in free agency, but Dwyane Wade, the team’s second-best player, was homegrown.

2012: We covered the Heat above. The Oklahoma City Thunder’s four best players — Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden, and Serge Ibaka — were all homegrown. (Three future MVP’s and a future Defensive Player of the Year… damn.)

2011: Heatles again. The Dallas Mavericks featured Dirk Nowitzki, drafted and developed since 1996, surrounded by complementary veterans.

2010 and 2008: The Los Angeles Lakers were led by Kobe Bryant, who may be the face not just of that era of the Lakers but perhaps for the franchise as a whole. Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom came via free agency, but Andrew Bynum was drafted and developed in LA. The Boston Celtics were the first Big Three of the new age, and while they had to trade for Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo were homegrown.

2009: We discussed the Lakers above. The Orlando Magic were led by Dwight Howard, who was drafted first overall by the team in 2004, but JJ Redick was a key contributor, their best shooter, and drafted and developed in Orlando as well. Hedo Turkoglu and Rashard Lewis should be mentioned as key contributors signed via free agency.

2007: The Spurs had the same core mentioned above, though of course Kawhi Leonard hadn’t been drafted yet. The Cavaliers were led by LeBron James, perhaps a little ahead of schedule after a heroic effort by Bron against the Detroit Pistons (seriously, watch that fourth quarter of Game 5 in the Eastern Conference Finals). 

2006: The Miami Heat were led by Dwyane Wade, drafted in 2003 in the Banana Boat class. Shaquille O’Neal should be mentioned as a key trade acquisition, but this was Wade’s team. The Mavericks had Dirk Nowitzki.

2005: We discussed the Spurs above. The Detroit Pistons, nearly always mentioned as a historical anomaly for not having a true “star,” featured a homegrown star drafted second overall in 2003 in Darko Milicic. Kidding, just wanted to make sure you were still paying attention. I actually didn’t realize this until researching for this piece, but Tayshaun Prince was the only member of the Pistons’ lockdown starting five that was drafted by the team. Richard Hamilton was obtained via trade, Ben Wallace bounced around the league before finding a home and exploding in Detroit, Chauncey Billups was signed in free agency after a breakout season as a late bloomer in Minnesota filling in for an injured Terrell Brandon (hear that, Fred VanVleet skeptics?), and Rasheed Wallace was an established but mercurial All-Star who was obtained via trade in 2004. 

Could the Pistons be an exception to the “you must have homegrown stars” rule? They look like a candidate, though it’s worth mentioning Chauncey was still young and developing, Ben Wallace had been a core piece of the Pistons since 2000, and Tayshaun was a key contributor. Moreover, they didn’t have one true star. It would definitely be funny and ironic to make the argument: “See?! You need to sign stars in free agency and trades to win, look at the 2005 Pistons!”

2004: We covered the Pistons. The Lakers featured Kobe Bryant, homegrown as mentioned above, and a starting 5 chock full of future Hall of Famers in Shaquille O’Neal and aging — but still very good — Karl Malone and Gary Payton. And yet, despite having four of the top 30 players of all time, two of whom were in their prime, the Lakers lost in five games. Hmmm.

2003: Ginobili was a rookie playing 20 minutes per game off the bench for the Spurs. Tim Duncan and Tony Parker led the team in scoring, with Stephen Jackson and Bruce Bowen as key role player free agent acquisitions. The New Jersey Nets (who still played in New Jersey) had a clear star in Jason Kidd, who did come via trade. However, OAKAAKs Kenyon Martin and Keith Van Horn, as well as Kerry Kittles, were all drafted and developed in New Jersey. Also, while the Nets should be commended for getting out of the East twice, they were never a serious threat to win the title. The 2002 and 2003 NBA Finals were probably the least entertaining in my lifetime, and were never competitive.

2002: Lakers featured Shaq and Kobe. Shaq was perhaps the biggest free agent acquisition in NBA history up to that point, but Kobe and the Lakers’ third-leading scorer, Derek Fisher, were both drafted by the Lakers in 1996. We discussed the Nets above.

2001: AI! One of the most iconic NBA players ever, Allen Iverson was indeed drafted by the Philadelphia 76ers. AI’s heroics in Game 1 notwithstanding, this series was never really in doubt, and it’s fair to argue the Sixers would have benefited from trading for another star. Having said that, this was clearly AI’s team, and he was a homegrown star. The Lakers were discussed above.

2000: The Lakers were discussed above (do I sound like a broken record yet?). The Pacers were led by homegrown star Reggie Miller, who was drafted by the team, as well as key role players like Rik Smits and Dale Davis, who were drafted and developed by the team. Jalen Rose was the team’s second-leading scorer and spent two seasons in Denver before getting traded to Indiana, but by 2000 he had been with the team so long that he might as well have been homegrown. The bulk of his development happened there. 

1999: The San Antonio Spurs were led by No. 1 pick Tim Duncan, but also featured an aging — but still effective — David Robinson (as in he still averaged 16, 10, and 2.4 blocks per game as Duncan’s sidekick), and homegrown Spur Sean Elliott as a third banana. 

To speed things up, we know the story of the 1990s Bulls, with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen both being drafted and developed. Toni Kukoc would also be a key homegrown player. 

Their opponents Utah (John Stockton and Karl Malone), Seattle (Gary Payton and Shawn Kemp), Phoenix (Kevin Johnson), and Portland (Clyde Drexler) all featured at least one homegrown star. The Houston Rockets, winners of two championships during MJ’s hiatus, were led by former No. 1 pick Hakeem Olajuwon. And the 1980’s were dominated by Magic Johnson and Larry Bird, both of whom were drafted by the Lakers and Celtics, respectively. 

Phew! That’s a lot. What did we learn? With the exception of the 1983 76ers and the 2004 Pistons, every single NBA Finals team in the past 40 years had at least one star player who was drafted and developed by the team. The Pistons had no true star player — Tayshaun was a team-drafted player who was a major contributor, and while Ben Wallace was undrafted and slightly broke out with the Orlando Magic, he was a core piece for the Pistons for a few years before they won the title. The 76ers won 37 years ago, and while I feel that that should be enough to make my point, I’ll also add that Moses Malone was in his prime and is one of the top 15 players ever, so not your standard “star” acquisition (neither was Julius Erving, for that matter). 

Are there fringe cases? The Heatles did have a homegrown star, but it’s fair to argue that adding two max contract free agents dilutes that effect a little bit. A similar argument could be made for the 2015 Cavaliers. 

I’d respond with two points:

1. In both of these cases, one of the free agents added was arguably the second-best player of all time. 

2. Considering the talent on these teams (the Heat had three top-10 players, including two of the top three players in the NBA, while the Cavaliers had three top-15 players) they didn’t quite dominate as much as you’d expect. Sure, the Cavs made the Finals four times and the Warriors with KD were an absolute juggernaut; is it fair to ask how much better those Warriors teams were made because three of their four stars were homegrown, though? Did that contribute to the domination we witnessed? Maybe not as much as the talent gap, but I’d argue it mattered. 

That brings us back to this year. Of the four Conference Finals teams, the Celtics (Jayson Tatum, Jaylen Brown), Heat (Bam Adebayo), and Nuggets (Nikola Jokic, Jamal Murray) all have at least one homegrown star player. I’m not saying the reason the Nuggets beat the Clippers was because Kawhi and PG were acquired via trade and free agency while Murray and Jokic were homegrown, but considering how much the Clippers themselves mentioned team chemistry as an issue, it’s fair to say that the continuity the Nuggets had in slowly building their core from the inside out was an advantage. 

Of course, there is one team that is thriving after acquiring one star in free agency and another via trade, and they are your new NBA champion Los Angeles Lakers. As mentioned above, it helps that one of the two players in question is LeBron James, arguably the second-best player of all time.

There are a few reasons why teams with a homegrown star are more likely to have championship-level success. First and perhaps most salient in the current environment: young, talented players on rookie contracts provide outsized value and allow you flexibility to spend big on free agents. Second, as these players get older, they provide continuity, alignment with the front office and team philosophy, and experience. There is also probably some two-way causality here, as if a star player has stuck around with a team for a long time it likely indicates a very competent front office, coaching staff, and probably an attractive team for other free agents. 

Lastly, given incentives to keep players such as Bird rights, restricted free agency, and the super max, there are many advantages to teams that are able to develop drafted talent. Most of these incentives were a reaction to the trend towards player movement, but the result is that teams who are able to develop and retain young players are also able to attract the best free agents. 

Now, you might say, “Stacy, this has been a lot of information, but what does this have to do with the Knicks?” Well, we just went through an offseason where the Knicks had traded a homegrown star to open up cap space to sign two external free agents. The main target was, indeed, perhaps one of the 20 best players ever. But even if New York signed KD and, say, Kyrie Irving, without entrenched home-developed players and some continuity (a big part of what we can call “culture”), would it have led to a title? History is skeptical on that. (Related note: I’d think twice if I were the Nets about getting rid of players like Spencer Dinwiddie and Caris LeVert, who have developed into borderline stars in Brooklyn and are integral parts of the team for the reasons mentioned in this article). 

It applies to the team now as well. Am I saying the Knicks should absolutely not trade RJ Barrett or Mitchell Robinson? No. Am I saying one of those guys will be the homegrown star that is a necessary requirement to win a championship? No, and meeting that requirement is not sufficient. For example, the Minnesota Timberwolves drafted one of the most talented draft prospects of this decade in Karl-Anthony Towns, traded for Andrew Wiggins right after the draft, and supplemented them with a star free agent in Jimmy Butler. Obviously this group didn’t live up to expectations.

But what I am saying is that, at some point, the Knicks will likely have to draft and develop a star player to win a championship. They will also probably have to find another star player via free agency or trade to pair with him, but we are unlikely to get out of that first requirement, barring the ability to trade for or sign a truly historical talent (and no, I don’t think Giannis qualifies yet, he’s not on the level of a Moses Malone or LeBron James). 

So the next time you open up the trade machine, keep that in mind. If you want to send away future first rounders and players like RJ Barrett or Mitchell Robinson for say, Donovan Mitchell or Victor Oladipo (who are also not LeBron or Moses Malone), remind yourself that the Knicks will still have to develop a star themselves at some point. That’s something you just can’t shortcut.