But in all seriousness, the 'Big Three' style of roster building- like it or not- has become the latest fad... but like all fads it has several glaring flaws. You probably already know about the depth chart issues- though that can be overcome with the right selections- but the biggest issue is this;
Your Big Three must compliment each other.
Boston had a 'Big Three' in the 2007/08 season, no matter how much you want to claim Garnett, Pierce, and Allen were no longer elite. But it wasn't just three stars meshing- you had an elite frontcourt defender in Garnett who could work the high post/low post and nab rebounds. You had the traditional slasher/driver in Pierce who could go in for layups and dunks and his some midrange shots. Then you had Allen who has made his reputation on his perimeter shooting.
Even better, all three were wired PERFECTLY to play the 'Trio' role- three guys who spent too many years as the lone guy uniting and taking the pressure off each other. A lot of the 'quirks' and holes in each player's game when they were the top dog could be countered by one of the others.
THAT'S how you build a Championship Trio. Three Guys who compliment and balance each other out. Even better if their intangibles are off the charts.
As for Small-Market teams, well what's different?
You really think D-Will wasn't gonna leave anyway, 'Big Three' fad or not? Would the lack of a 'Big Three' fad have convinced Carmelo to remain in Denver? Is the Fad convincing players like Tim Duncan and Steve Nash to move on to Near-Elite clubs that desperately need their skills?
Fact is, the Small Markets are always gonna get ravaged by the Big Markets- that's human nature in store. And stuff like the Salary Cap and the Draft? It's good for parity and keeps a league competitive, but you have to admit it's Communist in nature. A comparative Capitalist-style sport is Baseball, and look how often the Small Markets get [BLEEP]ed year after year after year!