Given The Choice, Which Would You Rather Have?
by Alex Laugan on Sep 2, 2010 9:17 AM MDT
in Phoenix Suns Commentary
Email
PrintJust roll with me on this for a minute.
I've been struggling in my own mind lately with a notion that I can't seem to articulate very well, so maybe you can either help me out or set me straight.
I am caught up in this notion that I'd rather have a number of PGPFWEs (pretty good players from winning environment) than a single SSFLE (superstar from losing environment).
In order to avoid personal attachments clouding this issue ("but I really LIKE player A so I want him on my team regardless of what you call him!"), I am writing this post without the use of any individual player names.
(Hint: This is a case where the post is intended to instigate discussion more than anything)
Why do I even care about this? I'll tell you.
There's been a lot of comments and posts lately regarding this trade or that trade.
The most heated discussions generally arise from this basic problem.
Some of the BSotS folks would rather have a lot of interchangeable parts, a lot of PGPFWEs, so they can watch Alvin Gentry mix and match to his heart's content. The premise here is that if you have a bunch of smart players, enough difference-making plays will occur during the game that will result in a win.
Other folks would much rather hang their hat on a big name who can make the All-Star team, a guy who can command a double or triple team, a guy who can put the team on his individual shoulders and carry the Suns to the promised land.
Those folks would suggest a trade of 3-4 PGPFWE for a single SSFLE.
Having a superstar is certainly the proven way to go. Of the last 20 championships, 18 of them have been led by a league Top-5 Superstar at the time (Pistons and Celtics the exceptions).
The problem with this latter plan is that those winning superstars are almost never available via trade or free agency at the top of their game. This summer was an exception in Miami, but they haven't proven anything yet. Before that, it was Shaquille O'Neal to LA in the mid 90s, and then the HEAT in 2004. What other SSFWE has been traded or signed in free agency? Let me know if I'm missing something.
So, what kind of superstars ARE readily available via trade, at the peak of their careers? Malcontents already on a max contract. And those whose stats are inflated in a losing environment.
This last group of players I affectionately call the SSFLE (superstar from losing environment).
Lets vote. And talk about it.
(note: saying you'd rather acquire a SSFWE - superstar from winning environment - is NOT an option in this discussion)
139 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It depends to a certain extent, on what you define as 'Superstars'.
We know Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Carmelo, Durant, Nash, and Duncan are superstars – is Amar’e, Bosh, Boozer, or Lee a superstar? Is Horford or Josh Smith a superstar? Does the All-Star game define superstars?
Would JRich be a superstar today if Kobe’s airball had stayed an airball? It’s a fine line.
I will say this – if our 10 or more deep team were to go all the way, our culture would demand at least some of them rising to superstar status – nature abhors a vacuum.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
Shaun Powell, at NBA.com, rates our bench 10th in the league.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
Can't follow the link.
but let me just say WTF!!! tell that to the spurs starting 5
"I’ve been in the league 14 years and I don’t think I’ve been called for a carry yet. It’s news to me," "I’ve never heard anyone complain about me carrying the ball. The best coach in the league Gregg Popovich didn’t have a problem with it last week."
Here's where I think the line is drawn between superstar and star
Amare, Carmelo and Durant are stars, because they are ungodly talents that score a boatload of points, but they aren’t great at anything besides scoring.
Wade, Lebron and Kobe are superstars, because they are ungodly talents that score a boatload of points and are great at other things besides scoring.
With Durant still being a college senior age-wise, he can crack the superstar group eventually. Amare and Carmelo probably never will, something about old dogs and new tricks.
Then there is another group, which doesn’t have an official title. The guys that aren’t superstars, but are the best at their position, and the best at everything that their position entails. Chris Paul, Pau Gasol and Dwight Howard are in this group.
That’s just my humble assertion.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
I pretty much agree with that
and the classic championship team combines one from group 1 and one from group 3 with the few exceptions combining three from your third group…kobe did jack shit without shack or pau lebron was in the same position in cleveland, even though his supporting cast had some solid pieces no way can you argue any of them are the best at their position.
"I’ve been in the league 14 years and I don’t think I’ve been called for a carry yet. It’s news to me," "I’ve never heard anyone complain about me carrying the ball. The best coach in the league Gregg Popovich didn’t have a problem with it last week."
I agree with that in principle
but i’m completely on the durant bandwagon and would call him a superstar and at worst the 5th best player in the league (i’d call Durant, Lebron, Kobe, wade and Howard the NBA’s top 5 players)
by DaveJD on Sep 2, 2010 11:01 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
With his length on the perimeter
There’s no reason why he can’t eventually become one of the best defenders in the league, at which point he will be a suprastar, which is like a whole nother level above super.
However if he doesn’t, he’ll just be a scorer.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
Suprastar?
That’s Air Jordan territory, my friend.
Steve Nash is my mancrush. But Goran Dragic is the 2nd coming of Manu Ginobili, which makes him just as tasty.
You could surely make a case
A superstar is really just a concept, so everyone has their own criteria for it. I don’t include Chris Paul as one, simply because of his position. It is incredibly difficult to win a title with a PG leading the way.
Look at the title teams of the last 15 or so years. Here are some of the starting PGs on those teams:
Ron Harper, Avery Johnson, Jason Williams, Derek Fisher, a young Sam Cassell and Rajon Rondo before he was a stud.
Tony Parker and Chauncey Billups were the only star PGs to be on a title team, but even in those cases they were not the clear #1 guy on the team (Chauncey’s Pistons didn’t have a #1). The last team that was led by a PG to a title was the Bad Boy Pistons with Isiah.
Nash was the exception to this for a few years. He was a definite superstar, but he had two MVPs and did things at the PG position that legitimately changed the entire league, so he got his superstar status by just being ridiculously good.
Other than that, the PG position is better handled by a role player, not a superstar. However in Paul’s case, he just might do the unthinkable and drag some average team all the way to a title. He’s that good. So I’ll leave a superstar spot warm for him, just in case.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
I agree
We are just amazed how good the hornets way back, ahmm 2 years ago? I can’t remember, but i won’t consider him a superstar. I star maybe.
Paul is overrated
His usage is off the charts to get those numbers. He gets all those steals…because he gambles too much. He doesn’t make the non-assist pass. I’m not a fan anymore.
well, I guess a SSFLE
is someone who is good enough to command a many-for-one trade (either many picks, or players or both). So maybe not a superstar “talent”, but rather a talent that demands lots of assets.
Joe Johnson required 2 #1s and Boris Diaw.
David Lee required Anthony Randpolph, Ronny Turiaf and Azubuike
Neither is a superstar, but each required multiple pieces to acquire
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
Remember guys J-Rich was a SSFLE...
by dontTradeAaronNelson! on Sep 2, 2010 10:39 AM MDT reply actions
kinda
I don’t know about the super part…but like alex points out that line can be blury.
"I’ve been in the league 14 years and I don’t think I’ve been called for a carry yet. It’s news to me," "I’ve never heard anyone complain about me carrying the ball. The best coach in the league Gregg Popovich didn’t have a problem with it last week."
wasn't J-rich just a throw in
to that Jared Dudley coup we pulled off?
by DaveJD on Sep 2, 2010 11:02 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
yes
Steve Nash, the league's MVP, is a longhaired Canadian who spoke out against the war in Iraq and reads The Communist Manifesto. Quentin Richardson declared after a game-winning shot that it "was like Hamlet. It was a suspense thriller, and I killed them at the end." Amare Stoudemire, when asked to comment on a 22-point third quarter against the Kings, said, "I've got a tendency to jump over some guys' heads and throw it down."
No such thing as a superstar in a losing environment.
If you’re really a superstar, you make your team win.
Garnett with MN, Ray Allen with Seattle, Paul Pierce with Boston - all losing environments.
Put ’em together, and what do you get?
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
Put Gasol with Memphis in that group as well.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
KG dragged Minny intoto the WCF, kicking and screaming
Gasol put Memphis into the playoffs 3 years in a row.
Pierce and Allen were never superstars, which sort of proves the point.
So Pierce and Allen had nothing to do with 'making their team win'?
Allen is one of the best pure shooters to ever play the game – how does that not make him a superstar? I do believe he led Seattle to a few playoff appearances, as well. And Pierce was a great player on a bad team for a lot of years – if Boston hadn’t had such bad luck in the draft, they would have been contenders a lot sooner (Len Bias).
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
Of course they helped their team win
They were even the focal points of the offense at points. But that doesn’t make them superstars. Superstars can elevate a team into the playoffs by themselves.
Allen had help in Seattle when they made the playoffs. When that help went away – Seattle became a cellar dweller, despite Allen’s presence. He’s not a superstar.
Pierce’s Celtics went to the ECF’s early in his career – but he had help on that squad. Pierce as a solo act was a flop. For years, the “Paul Pierce triple-double” was a running NBA gag (its points, assists, TURNOVERS, btw).
By contrast, the 2nd best player on that Grizzlies squad that Gasol lugged into the playoffs thrice – Shane Battier. Not exactly a 2nd option, is he? He’s not even a 3rd option, offensively.
Who did KG have? Sam Cassell? Sam’s a clutch shooter, but at that point of his career the extent of his offense was a nasty up-fake that drew fouls on the perimeter.
Do you see the difference?
You don't get to make your own definitions.
From Merriam-Webster Dictionary
su·per·star (spr-stär)
n.
1. A widely acclaimed star, as in movies or sports, who has great popular appeal.
2. One that is extremely popular or prominent or that is a major attraction.
Kobe, Jordan, Magic, Olajuwon- they all needed help. If your definition of ‘superstar’ is someone who can win by himself, then there are none.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
"There is only one dictionary, and it is god."
By your definition Dennis Rodman was a superstar.
The only way this thread will work is if everyone tries to be understanding of others’ definitions.
In Bayless I trust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Merriam Webster, which art at m-w.com,
hallowed be thy name;
thy defines come;
thy cites be done,
in blogs as it is in reporting.
Give us this day our daily word.
And forgive us our inaccuracies,
as we forgive those that err against us.
And lead us not into misspellings;
but deliver us from typos.
For thine is the online dictionary,
the power, and the glory,
for ever.
Amen.
by waxmonkey on Sep 3, 2010 9:37 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gasol might have put Memphis in the playoffs 3 yrs straight
but they never won a playoff game, can you call a player a (super)star if they can’t win in the playoffs whatever their numbers.
I wouldn't advocate bringing in a SSFLE
Unless said SSFLE is a top-flight PF, of which there are none available right now.
Develop young players, acquire assets, give out average contracts to guys like Frye and Childress, and at some point in the next couple years the big catch will be available and the Suns will have the assets and the flexibility to pounce.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
I agree. It's worth waiting to see what the structure of the new CBA will allow.
Going into an unknown contract situation, I can’t think of a better scenario than having your highest paid players on expiring contracts, a lot of young players on long term reasonably priced contracts, and depth in almost every position. It will leave us with the ability to react quickly, and to take advantage of teams that haven’t prepared themselves as well as we have.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
I'm reminded of 1992 right now.
The Suns were a competitive team of really nice players, but no superstar. Out of nowhere, they use their bevy of young assets to bring in Barkley.
In hindsight, they really just gave up Hornacek, since Tim Perry never panned out and Andrew Lang was Andrew Lang.
Who will be the next Barkley? Who indeed…
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
Well, who are the future superstars? (Or that third category)
Horford is one – I think there’s a consensus around here on that. Marc Gasol is showing promise. Oden would be if he weren’t injured 2/3 of the time (makes you appreciate Shaq playing until he’s 40). Bogut should be in the discussion.
Of course, that list is only dealing with players that are of interest to the Suns (the unlikelyhood of us getting them notwithstanding). There are quite a few future superstars at PG throughout the league, and SF seems to be the sexiest position.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
Of the players you mentioned
I think I would like Bogut the most, as he would be the only one that would compliment Lopez. That would be a hell of a defensive duo, and with Bogut you get the defense plus an all-around offensive arsenal.
We’d be blinding to look at with Robin, Dragon and Bogut, but damn that would just be all kinds of sweetness.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
+1 to Bogut, want to hear more on that
SSFLE or SSFME—losing, mediocre, whatever, as long as the guy is available and a chemistry plus
Just a quick follow-up to JSmith. Sarver will have to pay Dragic and Lopez in 2011 and w/JRich it’s too early to tell. Does Sarver pony up to keep Dudley? If the Kerr and Lou situations are any indication Sarver will lowball even those w/proven track records. If not exactly "cheap" he now prioritizes a lean payroll and flexibility. Sarver showed vision this summer and it appears Dudley does not figure prominently. Recall Dudley’s tweet after the JChill signing? Hope Dudley stays for yrs. but Sarver doesn’t seem exactly committed.
If JRich and Dudley together take like 16M/yr. beyond 2011 a young JSmith begins to look like a small bargain, esp. w/JChill, Hedo, Hakim and Lawal (this guy could be the X factor in like 2012) sharing the 3/4 duties over the next 3-4 yrs. Horford seems content in ATL, just concerned abt. always playing the 5. It’s a stretch to think he signs w/PHX. The stats breaking down JSmith’s apparently overrated defensive game left me kinda hesitant. But Gentry isn’t Woodson. If Lopez bulks up and embraces the enforcer role JSmith is the perfect rebounding complement, right? Like another athletic freak when he was 24, JSmith has to develop a mid-range game on offense. The results thus far aren’t encouraging but at least he’s not jacking up 3s anymore. In a good system, with much better coaching….
by ninecharacters on Sep 2, 2010 1:09 PM MDT up reply actions
For what it's worth
Sarver actually mentioned Dudley specifically when discussing the future of the team. I’m paraphrasing, but he said that Childress and Dudley will take over the SF spot when Grant retires.
I would expect Dudley to get less than what Childress got, but then I wouldn’t have figured Frye to get what he ended up getting, so who knows.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
I like Josh Smith
on this team, next to Lopez. I really like that combo.
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
Andrew Lang
Do you know much about Lang?—I don’t. I never saw him on the Suns, because I became a fan in 1993. I’ve read that Lang was a good shot-blocker but an offensive liability. Sounds sort of like Dwayne Jones.
Dwayne Jones was pretty good offensively in the D-League.
Of course, he hasn’t proven anything at the NBA level, but he’s hardly an ‘offensive liability’. He shoots almost 60%.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
Lang was JABG
(Just Another Big Guy)
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
Lang played 12 seasons in the NBA and started 380 games
You can call him a stiff, but he was a useful stiff. Not in any way saying that Andrew Lang was anything special, but he was in teams’ rotations for 10+ years, not a guy trying to hang on at the end of the bench like Dwayne Jones.
I think I need to write a post about big man stiffs in Suns history
We have certainly had enough of them!
Lang was a huge disappointment
at 7’1" and something like 280 lbs of mostly muscle, with big soft hands, he should have had the tools to run roughshod over guys.
Instead, he was timid in the paint, and had possibly the worst footwork anyone’s ever seen. He could really throwdown on an open rim, though. A “Lang Bang.”
He’s sort of like Eddie Curry, without the offcourt issues.
He was a 6'11, 245LB 2nd round pick
Who ended up playing in 737 NBA games, and starting about half of those. Nothing great, but not exactly a huge disappointment. He was a solid player, good interior defender and very good shot blocker (ranks 55th on all-time blocks list). I’d compare him more to a slightly downgraded Kurt Thomas in his prime.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/langan01.html
by East Bay Ray on Sep 2, 2010 5:30 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hahaha. Well, I was in my late teens, early 20s, so my memories of Lang are more accurate
RMason said it about right, that he was “just a guy”. But, hey, he was a second round pick who became a nice role player for us, and then he was part of the package to get us Barkley. How can you not have a soft spot for the guy? It was a win all around for us.
I remember him and Mark West being pretty much interchangeable in skill sets, although Lang was more athletic while West was steadier and smarter. They were about equally incompetent on the offensive end, but each could throw down a dunk after KJ broke down the D and dished to them for a wide open look underneath the basket!!
And, suns68, his weight was from basketball-reference.com. You can click the link I included.
Fun facts about Andrew Lang
Just did a quick and dirty web search on our old pal Andrew.
Highlights:
1) If you just Google his name, he doesn’t appear until after about 50 hits on some Scotsman who wrote “The Blue Fairy Stories.”
2) Philly fans think swapping Barkley for him, Perry and Hornacek was one of the worst trades ever.
3) When asked what he thought about allowing women to referee in the NBA, he said: “I married a female. I think they’re good people.”
For some strange reason, this makes me like him better.
And Ray, I’m not arguing with you. Just saying he may have, shall we say, bulked up a bit from that 245, which he might have been as a rookie. Check out his Milwaukee card on sportsmemorabilia.com. Dude looked like Godzilla in that green uniform.
by suns68 on Sep 2, 2010 10:43 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
“When asked what he thought about allowing women to referee in the NBA, he said: "I married a female. I think they’re good people.”
He said that? What a cretin.
He may have meant well by that comment. It sounds more like a tongue-in-cheek support for gender equality to me.
Yeah, I don't see anything sinister in that quote
Especially without the context. You can’t even tell what his position is by that short quote.
But, I prefer these quotes from the “other” Andrew Lang.
“He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp posts – for support rather than for illumination.”
“Life’s more amusing than we thought.”
“He missed an invaluable opportunity to hold his tongue.”
by East Bay Ray on Sep 3, 2010 11:32 AM MDT up reply actions
245 when and on whose scale?
I saw that dude play in person and he looked quite a bit larger than that.
by suns68 on Sep 2, 2010 8:13 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
if you don't know the answer already, then you will never get it.
"True glory consists of doing what deserves to be written, and writing what deserves to be read".
by Pliny the Elder on Sep 2, 2010 12:03 PM MDT reply actions
I know MY answer
but does that agree with yours?
that’s the question, and why I posted this for discussion
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
If we could get a superstar than great! If not and we get an all star like Amare, Carmelo, Bosh, JJ… than NO!
Lets win a championship a different way. The harder way. Without superstars. Let’s win a Championship through chemistry and team play like the Pistons of 04 because that’s likely the only way it will happen within the next two years.
Don't trade Dudley!
I agree
Our best chance of winning going forward is the human wave. Just keep running the fresh legs in and out until we wear down the other side’s superstars. Fortunately, we seem to have the depth to do that.
I’m worried about scoring, though. It seems like everyone’s taking that for granted because we’re the Suns and we always do that.
Agreed.
But notice that the 04 Pistons and the 08 Celtics are 2 very good defensive squads. The teams that won with superstars combined very good offense with average/above average defense.
Our team isn’t the best defensive squad but we do have the best offense in the NBA. Heading into this season, our team looks better defensively while still maintaining the best offense in the NBA. I truly think we have a shot.
Steve Nash is my mancrush. But Goran Dragic is the 2nd coming of Manu Ginobili, which makes him just as tasty.
Whether we still have the best offense
Remains to be seen. I hope we do, but we gave up a lot of easy points when Amare went away.
This could be the best perimeter shooting team that the Suns have ever had...
Which is saying an awful lot.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
Interesting thing. Last year I believe we were ranked 4rth in pace and you know how pace influences stats? Well, it turns out that just because you score the most points doesn’t mean your the best offensive team in the league. Believe it or not, but the Blazers(who had the slowest pace was ranked 4rth in offense. We were still #1. The Warriors who had the fastest pace and scored the most points were ranked 16th in offense.
Don't trade Dudley!
I’m guessing our offense will be similar to the 05-06 team only we have more depth. I find it funny how no one has compared our 05-06 team to this current team right now. What I mean is right a detailed, informational and organized post on it. I would, but to be honest I wasn’t able to watch much of the 05-06 season. I saw a lot of the playoffs and some season games here and there, but not enough that I really remember how that team played.
Don't trade Dudley!
actually (cough, cough)
I’ve been working on one. Because I think the same as you – that this team compares most favorably to that team in terms of makeup. Except this 2010-2011 team is bigger and deeper and better.
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
Don’t forget about Marion though. Many people are going to bring him up and the fact that this team doesn’t have a player like that. 05-06 was Marion’s best season.
Don't trade Dudley!
We'll just chalk his scoring that season to the Nash factor.
Other than that, he came up huge in the rebounding and shot blocking department.
Steve Nash is my mancrush. But Goran Dragic is the 2nd coming of Manu Ginobili, which makes him just as tasty.
Post-Nash
He hasn’t averaged more than 15 ppg.
Steve Nash is my mancrush. But Goran Dragic is the 2nd coming of Manu Ginobili, which makes him just as tasty.
well, 3 teams actually
since he left Nash, he’s been on 3 different teams (Mia with Wade, Tor with Bosh and Calderon, Dal with Kidd and Nowitzki)
So maybe just age…
and the inability to create his own shot without having more leaping ability than the rest of the league.
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
POOR MARION.
Whom ever was talking in his ear about him being dissed with the Suns,(i.e. that he shouldn’t have to be the third option and the like) Sure did him and the Suns a disservice. They should have told him that he was their first and that the Suns got Nash, Amare, and the others to compliment him. In essence that that team was built around him and he should remember that fact with pride.
I don’t know yet. We have to wait and see what Hedo, Josh and Warrick bring to the team. If Hedo can be like Diaw of 06 and if Josh could be a defensive stopper than we should have a shot. Nash and Hill have to keep going as well. Dragic, Fyre and Lopez need to improve. Dudley and J-Rich just need to do what they do. Warrick just needs to be consistent with what it is he does. If not than I can see him being bench in place of Lawal, Clark or Jones for more muscle.
Don't trade Dudley!
I voted for the first option.
But just for discussion purposes, I guess I’ll say which players I think fall under the SSFLE category. Note that I’m following Alex’s description of a “SSFLE”: a talent that requires a many-for-one trade.
Because most of the league’s best big men are on winning teams, there are only a few good big men I can think of from losing teams that I’d want here: David Lee, Brook Lopez, and possibly Blake Griffin.
I know Griffin was one hell of a college player but I’d like to see how he plays at an NBA level first before judging. But as of right now, I think David Lee and Brook Lopez are the only respectable big men on losing teams.
I didn’t mention Amar’e for obvious reasons.
Steve Nash is my mancrush. But Goran Dragic is the 2nd coming of Manu Ginobili, which makes him just as tasty.
What was the question again?
I just dozed off daydreaming about Marbury, Marion and Stoudemire bringing us a championship. I really need to get a new version of EA Sports NBA for the Playstation.
This offseason is long.............
I want to see Suns Basketball !!!
I’ll say PGPFWEs.
If at first you don't succeed, try left field.
Dude, when you can get a one hour show in order to say one word, or get paid $100 million dollars to wear a shoe,
you are a superstar. You may not like it, but there it is.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
I don't like Lebron
but the dude averaged nearly 30-8-8 this past season on nearly 50% shooting. Compare that to Durant who was probably his closest statistical equal at SF who “only” averaged 30—8-3 and its hard to argue lebrons not a superstar.
Why not?
Steve Nash, the league's MVP, is a longhaired Canadian who spoke out against the war in Iraq and reads The Communist Manifesto. Quentin Richardson declared after a game-winning shot that it "was like Hamlet. It was a suspense thriller, and I killed them at the end." Amare Stoudemire, when asked to comment on a 22-point third quarter against the Kings, said, "I've got a tendency to jump over some guys' heads and throw it down."
Beavis wins.
He isn’t.
I don’t agree with him, but how can you argue with that?
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
I don't think he is arguing that Lebron is the most talented player in the NBA
Because that is obvious. I think he is implying that to be a “Superstar” it takes a different level of approaching the game mentally. We’ve all seen Lebron give up multiple times in the playoffs over the last few seasons. And now we see him fleeing to Wade. This doesn’t smell like a superstar. I think Lebron is legitimately depressed about leaving Cleavland and what he did. Which kinda further confirms he doesn’t have “it” in him, but desperately wants to win.
hey I'm not sure this is true, is it?
We’ve all seen Lebron give up multiple times in the playoffs over the last few seasons
Sure he seemed to do it this year, but before that? Before 2009, he was widely credited with carrying a less-talented Cavs team further each year than they deserved.
And even last year I think I remember he played very well against the Magic but just missed some free throws that would have been the difference in one game. Yet he hit a game-winner or 2 as well. I don’t remember giving up. I remember just coming up short (and by the way, his Cavs team did NOT help him against the Magic in 2009 or this year. At all.)
Of course, the 2010 playoffs are now his calling card. And he DID give up, IMO. Its like he pouted. Was tired of carrying his team and wanted to see if they’d come through for him, or something.
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
Before 2009, he was widely credited with carrying a less-talented Cavs team further each year than they deserved
The thing you seem to miss is that it’s not that big of a deal because the East had only like two good teams ahead of the Cavs. The Pistons and the Heat/Celtics. Jason Kidd did the exact same thing as Lebron, but if they play in the West they’re a bottom feeder. Anybody could do that is what I’m saying.
Don't trade Dudley!
if
it’s not that big of a deal
and
Anybody could do that is what I’m saying.
then why didn’t anyone else in the East do it? Please. That’s a terrible argument. Really terrible.
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
To me (if anyone cares)
a superstar is a HOR candidate. If you are not that, then you are no superstar. And to clarify I don’t think Gasol is HOF worthy right now, although that may change.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
To us winning is a tradition. We are victors and need not explain. You may hate us, but your girlfriends love us. - BC
One more than Shaq. - Kobe answering how it felt to win Championship number 5
in Gasol's case though
the stupid Basketball HOF considers all basketball-related experience, not just NBA. So I agree with you that his NBA career is not HOF-worthy, he has also won World Championships and a plethora of awards for Spain. In that respect, with the way the Basketball HOF works, he’s almost a shoe-in, I think.
Blogging Suns Basketball at Bright Side of the Sun
Would you agree that Gasol is the best PF in the NBA right now?
i don’t like it but i think that might be the case.
To me it's no contest.
Gasol is great at everything. He’s an excellent passer and scorer from the high post and the low post. Solid defense, long frame, excellent hands and a very high BBIQ. Damn I wish he wasn’t a Laker.
"We didn’t go for coffee and this kind of stuff."
-El Dragon on his relationship with Sasha Vujacic
2 years ago and I would have said Gasol wasn’t a Superstar and I’d be right. Now I can call him a superstar and am right. Some how, some way, he fixed all of the problems that kept him from being a superstar. Remember when he used to be, “Paul Gasoft”? The guy changed. The Lakers now have two superstars.
Don't trade Dudley!
He's great at everything as long as Bynum is in the lineup.
When he’s the big man, some of his weaknesses are exposed.
He’s one of the best PF’s in one of the best situations, though.
Auntie Em: Hate you, hate Kansas, taking the dog.
Dorothy
I was just going to say that haremoor
Its easy to not look soft when you have a 7’3 monster in the paint behind you. He’s still soft but he’s hidden with either Bynum or Odom primarily guarding the more talented big.
Bleacher report's
rankings at power forward:
1. Amare
2. Dirk
3. Gasol
4. Duncan
I concur, although I’d be tempted to put Duncan ahead of Gasol.
by suns68 on Sep 2, 2010 7:53 PM MDT via mobile reply actions
Are they talking about scoring PFs only? If not...
Where is Chris Bosh? He and Pau are probably the 2 best PFs in the league.
Bosh ranked No. 5.
Maybe because he plays in the eastern conference. Excellent, but up against lesser competition at his position night to night.
by suns68 on Sep 2, 2010 10:58 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
i think it was based on statistical predictions for this upcoming season
bosh is the third option on his team behind 2 high usage players so theres no chance he averages nearly as many points as he did last year.
I picked the first option.
I think that would leave you with a pretty talented team, if not better. Talented and deep is always a nice option, instead of very talented at one and o.k. at all of the rest. Teams win, individual superstars without enough support just get some nice stats….no rings.
I also say
watch out for Lawal. I think we may have gotten a steal there!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Friend Us On Facebook
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Follow us on Twitter
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
