|
|
|
|
#1
11-02-2007, 04:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
btw, let me be clear that I am not saying the article is 100% accurate. I just wanted to discuss the situation of having a few good but not great players and whats the best course of action for a team in that position. The Jazz might have been a poor example due to Boozer/Deron's ability to turn out to be top level players. 102,507 and counting [/ QUOTE ] It really depends on the state of the league. To beat a team like the Spurs you are going to need a guy like KG to shut down Duncan, but say if Phoenix was the team to beat you might need a different player/set of players. You might be able to get away with not having a superstar for the ages. The thing is even if a player is OK, they can become a superstar for the ages if they win enough. Lets say Detroit had won two or three in a row. Who's the superstar on that team? The article guy thought it was Ben Wallace which I thought was pretty laughable. 
|
|
#2
11-02-2007, 04:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] btw, let me be clear that I am not saying the article is 100% accurate. I just wanted to discuss the situation of having a few good but not great players and whats the best course of action for a team in that position. The Jazz might have been a poor example due to Boozer/Deron's ability to turn out to be top level players. 102,507 and counting [/ QUOTE ] It really depends on the state of the league. To beat a team like the Spurs you are going to need a guy like KG to shut down Duncan, but say if Phoenix was the team to beat you might need a different player/set of players. You might be able to get away with not having a superstar for the ages. The thing is even if a player is OK, they can become a superstar for the ages if they win enough. Lets say Detroit had won two or three in a row. Who's the superstar on that team? The article guy thought it was Ben Wallace which I thought was pretty laughable. [/ QUOTE ] the argument against this is that detroit had very little chance of winning multiple championships and was very fortunate to win the first one.
|
|
#3
11-02-2007, 04:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] btw, let me be clear that I am not saying the article is 100% accurate. I just wanted to discuss the situation of having a few good but not great players and whats the best course of action for a team in that position. The Jazz might have been a poor example due to Boozer/Deron's ability to turn out to be top level players. 102,507 and counting [/ QUOTE ] It really depends on the state of the league. To beat a team like the Spurs you are going to need a guy like KG to shut down Duncan, but say if Phoenix was the team to beat you might need a different player/set of players. You might be able to get away with not having a superstar for the ages. The thing is even if a player is OK, they can become a superstar for the ages if they win enough. Lets say Detroit had won two or three in a row. Who's the superstar on that team? The article guy thought it was Ben Wallace which I thought was pretty laughable. [/ QUOTE ] the argument against this is that detroit had very little chance of winning multiple championships and was very fortunate to win the first one. [/ QUOTE ] But again this was due to the state of the league. What if the West was as pathetic as the East? Simmons had an article, and I don't quite remember the details, but I think the gist was Jordan got incredibly lucky in his reign that teams weren't built around a dominant big man like the Lakers of a few years back or Celtics of the 80s.
|
|
#4
11-02-2007, 06:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] btw, let me be clear that I am not saying the article is 100% accurate. I just wanted to discuss the situation of having a few good but not great players and whats the best course of action for a team in that position. The Jazz might have been a poor example due to Boozer/Deron's ability to turn out to be top level players. 102,507 and counting [/ QUOTE ] It really depends on the state of the league. To beat a team like the Spurs you are going to need a guy like KG to shut down Duncan, but say if Phoenix was the team to beat you might need a different player/set of players. You might be able to get away with not having a superstar for the ages. The thing is even if a player is OK, they can become a superstar for the ages if they win enough. Lets say Detroit had won two or three in a row. Who's the superstar on that team? The article guy thought it was Ben Wallace which I thought was pretty laughable. [/ QUOTE ] the argument against this is that detroit had very little chance of winning multiple championships and was very fortunate to win the first one. [/ QUOTE ] But again this was due to the state of the league. What if the West was as pathetic as the East? Simmons had an article, and I don't quite remember the details, but I think the gist was Jordan got incredibly lucky in his reign that teams weren't built around a dominant big man like the Lakers of a few years back or Celtics of the 80s. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, cause Jordan didnt have to go through Patrick Ewing and the Knicks every year in his first 3 year run. And I wouldnt exactly call the Celts of the 80s built around a dominant big man. They had 2 really good big men, but Bird was the heart and soul of that team. Also, I think the really good teams force you to play their style of ball. I dont think teams should be built in response to how the top teams of the time are playing, they should be built to be the best team they can be and dictate the style of ball that is played instead of trying to beat another team at their own game.
|
|
#5
11-02-2007, 06:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] btw, let me be clear that I am not saying the article is 100% accurate. I just wanted to discuss the situation of having a few good but not great players and whats the best course of action for a team in that position. The Jazz might have been a poor example due to Boozer/Deron's ability to turn out to be top level players. 102,507 and counting [/ QUOTE ] It really depends on the state of the league. To beat a team like the Spurs you are going to need a guy like KG to shut down Duncan, but say if Phoenix was the team to beat you might need a different player/set of players. You might be able to get away with not having a superstar for the ages. The thing is even if a player is OK, they can become a superstar for the ages if they win enough. Lets say Detroit had won two or three in a row. Who's the superstar on that team? The article guy thought it was Ben Wallace which I thought was pretty laughable. [/ QUOTE ] the argument against this is that detroit had very little chance of winning multiple championships and was very fortunate to win the first one. [/ QUOTE ] But again this was due to the state of the league. What if the West was as pathetic as the East? Simmons had an article, and I don't quite remember the details, but I think the gist was Jordan got incredibly lucky in his reign that teams weren't built around a dominant big man like the Lakers of a few years back or Celtics of the 80s. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, cause Jordan didnt have to go through Patrick Ewing and the Knicks every year in his first 3 year run. And I wouldnt exactly call the Celts of the 80s built around a dominant big man. They had 2 really good big men, but Bird was the heart and soul of that team. Also, I think the really good teams force you to play their style of ball. I dont think teams should be built in response to how the top teams of the time are playing, they should be built to be the best team they can be and dictate the style of ball that is played instead of trying to beat another team at their own game. [/ QUOTE ] lol at patrick ewing = shaq
|
|
#6
11-02-2007, 06:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
Ewing could have won multiple championships if it wasnt for Jordan imo.
|
|
#7
11-02-2007, 07:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
Ewing could have won multiple championships if it wasnt for Jordan imo. [/ QUOTE ] lol the 2 years jordan was out ewing got pwned by hakeem first and then by rik smits and reggie miller.
|
|
#8
11-02-2007, 06:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
I still don't get this whole self serving knock on the article. Have you guys looked at the actual list in the first article?
I'll now list ALL the Gold and Silver Medal Superstars that currently play GMS Duncan and Shaq (okay they both won championships but would still be up here without them) SMS Garnett- no championship Kobe- piggy backed on shaq (self fufilling prophecy i'll give you guys this one) Iverson- no championship Kidd- no championship Gary Payton- got one championship, but he didn't win the mvp on the Heat team so he got no bonus points for winning Steve Nash- no championship McGrady- no championship Grant Hill- no championship Nowitzki- no championship BMS Mourning- got his with shaq, but along with GP didn't win mvp in the champ series so gained nothing from winning Webber- same scenario as with mourning and payton LeBron James- no championship Ben Wallace- 4 or 5 team DPOY don't think he won mvp on his championship team? I could be wrong here so i'll give you guys self fufilling on this one Jermaine O'Neal- no championship So there you have it. Of all the players currently known as superstars only 3 of them (at most) have probably gotten their rankings by self fufilling prophecies. I would even argue that Kobe always gets MVP votes, 1st team defense, and 1st team all nba votes, so he shouldn't count. So, I would like you guys to explain to me how this is a self fufilling article when only a few people can possibly be pointed to as piggybacking to titles?
|
|
#9
11-02-2007, 06:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
So, I would like you guys to explain to me how this is a self fufilling article when only a few people can possibly be pointed to as piggybacking to titles? [/ QUOTE ] Was Shaq ranked as a GMS in 1999?
|
|
#10
11-02-2007, 04:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NBA: Gold Medal Super Star Theory
[ QUOTE ]
the argument against this is that detroit had very little chance of winning multiple championships and was very fortunate to win the first one. [/ QUOTE ] A team that took the Spurs to Game 7 in the Finals had "very little chance" of winning another championship? Nah. Between the time they traded for Rasheed in 2004 until Ben really started to decline in 2006, that team was incredible. They're underrated by basically everyone, for the most part because they don't fit with people's preconceived notions of what it takes to win an NBA title, so people downgrade those Pistons with revisionist history. I'm tired of the tall tales about how Kobe sabotaged the Lakers when the reality is that those Lakers were a very good team (who would've been considered an all-time great team, had they won those Finals) and the Pistons just came in there and flat-out kicked their asses.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
