It's an interesting question. I think it could be interesting to analyze what's happened with other post rebuild teams......
[snip]
Or they just have a different view of what core means
Thanks for all the replies so far. Lots of good ideas out there.
I think that is the real difference I see so far even just in this thread.
Perhaps its the difference from franchise players and core players to me as I would include many of the "long term complimentary players" as core players but only the core players you listed as franchise players.
Sometimes those core players are lost or replaced during a run due to injury, regression or FA, but are rarely traded away. (Chicago, Pittsburgh)
Sometimes it is a philosophy of what type of player a team needs rather than the specific player. (Boston)
I think the salary cap has definitely changed how teams build a core, and that most teams build more for windows of opportunity and that great teams can extend the window through shrewd drafting, trading, and signings when core guys leave or diminish in skill.