As GCMD said, we have the best young core without a franchise level player or potential franchise player. the other listed teams all have legitimate all stars and franchie level players like jocik, embiid, KAT, giannis, etc.
That being said, we have the best core to build on because we have the ability to add two franchise level players. for example lbj and kawhi. taken in a vacuum, yeah our guys don't stack up so well. but taken into context? heck yes.
and don't twist my words. giannis is hands down better and more valuable than any player we have on our team. even lonzo. if lonzo head a deadly three point shot and was a good spot up shooter, maybe i'd change my mind, but right now, giannis >>>> everyone else his age and below.
I just believe we have great complementary pieces that will help build a team that contend for the next decade. LBJ + Kawhi + PG13 ---> Kawhi + PG13 + at least one of our guys ---> the rest of our guys + new talent. not only that, our guys have great chemistry. that's undeniable. i'd say we have the best or maybe the second best chemistry amongst these young squads. the kind of chemsitry that guys are willing to take pay cuts for if you know what i mean
Im not sure any young core outside of Philly can say they have either. I'll die on the hill that Kuzma/Ingram as every bit as good as Brown/Tatum. Difference is perception of the Lakers young core and the fact they didn't make the playoffs.
Lakers gift and curse of their young core is that 4 of them were really good but none of them actually stood all the way out from the other. This can be a good or a bad thing. Some see it as all the guys are just ok, some also see it as that the players are good but on the same level.
Kuz popped out the most b/c of his scoring burst. This is why you had people making whispers about him being better than Ingram. Totally different players.
I believe we have the top young core that doesn't have a franchise player or potential franchise player.