PDA

View Full Version : Did the Cavs, Mavs loss validify the "2 superstars" theory?



beasted86
05-14-2010, 11:57 AM
Do you really need 2 top 20 players to win in this league? Out of the last 30 years the only teams to win without using this format are the '94 Rockets (not '95), and the '04 Pistons. It's possible just seems really difficult

I think their losses only validify Pat Riley as well as other GMs "2 superstars needed" theory.

Riley's approach has been to build teams with 2 megastars for the Heat. First Mourning/Hardaway, then Wade/Shaq, and soon Wade/??? Many people have readily bashed the Heat for supposedly "wasting Wade's prime", but at the end of the day, he's the only elite player in the NBA with a ring that doesn't play for the Lakers, Celtics, or Spurs. Both the Cavaliers and Mavericks had awesome regular season records and were expected to go deep into the playoffs because of how "stacked" their roster was. But in reality at the end of the day, you only had 1 elite superstar, and a bunch of premier role players. You had to rely on 1 player to make the clutch plays down the stretch.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
05-14-2010, 12:04 PM
Gasol is now all of a sudden a superstar???:confused:

90% of PSD users have alway said that he is soft like a teddy bear

Raph12
05-14-2010, 12:05 PM
Who did as his secondary "superstar" last year? or this year? A great player can win with good/great role players.

Raidaz4Life
05-14-2010, 12:06 PM
Well you just proved that it is possible to do it without having two top 20 superstars so obviously it is just harder to do it without it. And if the Magic do it this year I think that once again proves its possible if you have the right formula.

arkanian215
05-14-2010, 12:06 PM
Gasol is now all of a sudden a superstar???:confused:

90% of PSD users have alway said that he is soft like a teddy bear

Being soft doesn't mean you're not talented.

arkanian215
05-14-2010, 12:08 PM
Well you just proved that it is possible to do it without having two top 20 superstars so obviously it is just harder to do it without it. And if the Magic do it this year I think that once again proves its possible if you have the right formula.

That formula being a dominant bigman and 7+ guys who can shoot the 3 ball well. They're a pretty good defensive team too, but a lot of the credit goes to Dwight.

beasted86
05-14-2010, 12:09 PM
Gasol is now all of a sudden a superstar???:confused:

90% of PSD users have alway said that he is soft like a teddy bear

Notice the "quotations"?

People throw around superstar alot, but either way the point is Kobe & Gasol are both top 20 players as I have clarified.

beasted86
05-14-2010, 12:10 PM
Well you just proved that it is possible to do it without having two top 20 superstars so obviously it is just harder to do it without it. And if the Magic do it this year I think that once again proves its possible if you have the right formula.

Well the Magic would obviously have to win first. Don't jump the gun just yet.

CLASSOF72
05-14-2010, 12:15 PM
I think it's about having a second option not neccessarily a second superstar, but a second option to go to that's in oposision to your first. When you can split the D and keepem guessing you have an upper hand. I think you need atleast one clutch guy to make that one big shot and that doesn't even need to be your super star. It also takes good coaching and team discipline good regular habits and a balanced attack. Teams in post Jordan superstar erra are forgetting that MJ did nothig without Pippen and PJ.

RaiderLakersA's
05-14-2010, 12:18 PM
The term "superstar" has been thrown around so much that I've honestly lost sight of the definition. Really, what do you mean?

Does making the All Star roster count as a being a superstar? If so, LeBron had plenty of superstars in his corner in addition to himself -- and the Celtics are definitely superstar laden, if All Star appearances are the sole criteria -- but it didn't stop the Cavs from losing to the better TEAM. And when I say team, I'm including the head coach.

Raidaz4Life
05-14-2010, 12:19 PM
Well the Magic would obviously have to win first. Don't jump the gun just yet.

Well I wouldn't say the Celtics do either to be honest not anymore

beasted86
05-14-2010, 12:23 PM
Well I wouldn't say the Celtics do either to be honest not anymore

I can't think of more than 18 players better than Pierce & KG.

Anyone can make a strong debate for both in the top 20.

tdunk21
05-14-2010, 12:29 PM
add spurs to that list.....

Raph12
05-14-2010, 12:36 PM
I can't think of more than 18 players better than Pierce & KG.

Anyone can make a strong debate for both in the top 20.

Kobe, Lebron, Dwight, Wade, Durant, Melo, CP3, D-Will, Dirk, Roy, Duncan, Nash, Amare, Gasol, Bosh, Rondo, Boozer, Rose, J-Smoove, West, etc...

I can keep going and with Yao, Big Al, Parker and all those guys healthy, Pierce and KG would be lucky to be Top 30, now Rondo is a completely different story.

tdunk21
05-14-2010, 12:37 PM
post shaq and pre gasol lakers were not the best team...so the lakers have become a contending team after acquiring gasol....so yeah....2 or 3 superstar and 2 role player team or 2 superstar and 3 role player teams can contend

Big Game Son
05-14-2010, 12:45 PM
No. They just validated 'overratedness' of players (Dirk/Mo Williams) and further emphasized that many teams are poor at choosing their starting 5's.

beasted86
05-14-2010, 12:48 PM
Kobe, Lebron, Dwight, Wade, Durant, Melo, CP3, D-Will, Dirk, Roy, Duncan, Nash, Amare, Gasol, Bosh, Rondo, Boozer, Rose, J-Smoove, West, etc...

I can keep going and with Yao, Big Al, Parker and all those guys healthy, Pierce and KG would be lucky to be Top 30, now Rondo is a completely different story.

Don't you think you are fetching. Rose better than Pierce? Since when? What NBA analyst would take Rose over Pierce... be completely honest with me? The same applies with many others... come on, David West over Garnett? What universe is this? Is this some alternate reality I'm living in? :facepalm:

Yao, Big Al, Parker, Rose, J-Smith, West, Boozer, don't even belong on that list... and 90% of NBA fans will call you crazy for even thinking it's debatable they are top 20 players. And I'm sorry but people have jumped too hard on the Rondo bandwagon. He had a great series and was the series MVP, and has now converted Boston to the "big 4"... but there is no intelligent basketball fan who wants Rondo taking the last shot for the Celtics. They want Pierce, Allen or Garnett, and so does Doc Rivers.

RaiderLakersA's
05-14-2010, 12:51 PM
Teams in post Jordan superstar erra are forgetting that MJ did nothig without Pippen and PJ.

I think in general the entire Jordan phenomenon gets blown way out of proportion. There are many who swear that Jordan did it without a center, or without any other clutch shooter on the floor, or all by himself without really needing anything else from teammates other than to carry his jock and spit shine his shoes. No one remembers that Jordan, too, had those 3 scores for 18 shot playoff games, or playoff games where he could manage only 15 points. Sure, he's the GOAT, but even he needed a great team around him.

m26555
05-14-2010, 12:53 PM
No.

See: 2004 Detroit Pistons.

shtimp7
05-14-2010, 12:53 PM
totally irrelevant but i cracked up when i saw the "validify" in the thread title

Raph12
05-14-2010, 12:55 PM
Don't you think you are fetching. Rose better than Pierce? Since when? What NBA analyst would take Rose over Pierce... be completely honest with me? The same applies with many others... come on, David West over Garnett? What universe is this? Is this some alternate reality I'm living in? :facepalm:

Yao, Big Al, Parker, Rose, J-Smith, West, Boozer, don't even belong on that list... and 90% of NBA fans will call you crazy for even thinking it's debatable they are top 20 players. And I'm sorry but people have jumped too hard on the Rondo bandwagon. He had a great series and was the series MVP, and has now converted Boston to the "big 4"... but there is no intelligent basketball fan who wants Rondo taking the last shot for the Celtics. They want Pierce, Allen or Garnett, and so does Doc Rivers.

Rondo is easily the best Celtics player right now, he'll be tested with a better PG on him (Jameer) and a real big man down low to contest his layups/floaters (Dwight), but he's still the best player wearing a Celtics uniform right now. Pierce and KG aren't who they used to be, they've both lost a step, Tony Allen did a better job of guarding Lebron and KG was never challenged on either end. I had the Celts on my league pass all year and I know what I'm talking about when I say, Rondo is the only Top 20 player left on the Celtics.

m26555
05-14-2010, 12:57 PM
Rondo is easily the best Celtics player right now, he'll be tested with a better PG on him (Jameer) and a real big man down low to contest his layups/floaters (Dwight), but he's still the best player wearing a Celtics uniform right now. Pierce and KG aren't who they used to be, they've both lost a step, Tony Allen did a better job of guarding Lebron and KG was never challenged on either end. I had the Celts on my league pass all year and I know what I'm talking about when I say, Rondo is the only Top 20 player left on the Celtics.
The playoffs are an entirely different animal. I think it's pretty clear that Garnett was saving energy for the playoffs during the regular season. He is still, in my opinion, Boston's best player. Yes, Rondo was phenomenal this series, but Garnett controlled both ends of the floor.

sventhedog
05-14-2010, 12:59 PM
this will be a debate of who are superstars or not. aside from the clear-cut superstars like kobe lebron wade howard etc, it will be an argument of what it takes to be considered to be a superstar.

Raph12
05-14-2010, 01:08 PM
The playoffs are an entirely different animal. I think it's pretty clear that Garnett was saving energy for the playoffs during the regular season. He is still, in my opinion, Boston's best player. Yes, Rondo was phenomenal this series, but Garnett controlled both ends of the floor.

Garnett was playing Jamison and Shaq... In this series, he'll be played by Shard (bigger [230lbs], taller [6'10"], longer and a better much shooter than Jamison) and by Dwight (self-explanatory).

This series will be very telling of how much the "Big 3" have left.

xbrackattackx
05-14-2010, 01:09 PM
And if the Magic do it this year I think that once again proves its possible if you have the right formula.

Dwight/Carter?

Even nelson is a star Point Guard.

And Lewis isn't a bum.

Raph12
05-14-2010, 01:11 PM
Dwight/Carter?

Even nelson is a star Point Guard.

And Lewis isn't a bum.

Yes but besides Dwight, none of them are Top 20 players AKA "superstars"

Raidaz4Life
05-14-2010, 01:14 PM
Dwight/Carter?

Even nelson is a star Point Guard.

And Lewis isn't a bum.

The thread is about how necessary it is to have two superstars to win a championship. Carter is not a superstar at this point. He would be the equivalent to Glen Rice in 2000 for the Lakers.

xbrackattackx
05-14-2010, 01:15 PM
The thread is about how necessary it is to have superstars to win a championship. Carter is not a superstar at this point. He would be the equivalent to Glen Rice in 2000 for the Lakers.

K got what you mean now.

montybeasty
05-14-2010, 01:19 PM
I say dallas need to S&T for LBJ then. I think with the dust chip this is a good possibility . I meen he is a cowboy fan after all

tdunk21
05-14-2010, 01:22 PM
I say dallas need to S&T for LBJ then. I think with the dust chip this is a good possibility . I meen he is a cowboy fan after all

he is a browns fan

JordansBulls
05-14-2010, 01:24 PM
Do you really need 2 top 20 players to win in this league? Out of the last 30 years the only teams to win without using this format are the '94 Rockets (not '95), and the '04 Pistons. It's possible just seems really difficult

I think their losses only validify Pat Riley as well as other GMs "2 superstars needed" theory.

Riley's approach has been to build teams with 2 megastars for the Heat. First Mourning/Hardaway, then Wade/Shaq, and soon Wade/??? Many people have readily bashed the Heat for supposedly "wasting Wade's prime", but at the end of the day, he's the only elite player in the NBA with a ring that doesn't play for the Lakers, Celtics, or Spurs. Both the Cavaliers and Mavericks had awesome regular season records and were expected to go deep into the playoffs because of how "stacked" their roster was. But in reality at the end of the day, you only had 1 elite superstar, and a bunch of premier role players. You had to rely on 1 player to make the clutch plays down the stretch.

Pippen in 1991 and 1998 wasn't even an allstar.

BOSTON617
05-14-2010, 01:24 PM
cavs did mavs did not

GoatMilk
05-14-2010, 01:25 PM
he is a browns fan

nope, he's a Cowboys fan

he went to a game in Cleveland a while back, Browns vs Cowboys, and was wearing a Cowboys shirt

and here's a quote from February

"It's going to be fun," said James, a Cowboys fan who attended the first regular-season game at the stadium in September. "The home of the Cowboys makes it a lot more special to me because of how much I love and watch those guys every year. It's going to be fun."

beasted86
05-14-2010, 01:27 PM
Pippen in 1991 and 1998 wasn't even an allstar.

You are off your rocker if you don't think Pippen was a top 20 player. :facepalm:

tdunk21
05-14-2010, 01:30 PM
nope, he's a Cowboys fan

he went to a game in Cleveland a while back, Browns vs Cowboys, and was wearing a Cowboys shirt

and here's a quote from February

"It's going to be fun," said James, a Cowboys fan who attended the first regular-season game at the stadium in September. "The home of the Cowboys makes it a lot more special to me because of how much I love and watch those guys every year. It's going to be fun."

i stand corrected

CLASSOF72
05-14-2010, 01:31 PM
I think in general the entire Jordan phenomenon gets blown way out of proportion. There are many who swear that Jordan did it without a center, or without any other clutch shooter on the floor, or all by himself without really needing anything else from teammates other than to carry his jock and spit shine his shoes. No one remembers that Jordan, too, had those 3 scores for 18 shot playoff games, or playoff games where he could manage only 15 points. Sure, he's the GOAT, but even he needed a great team around him.

Right, and until MJ learned A) He was human and B) Noone could go in and get it alone he didn't win a thing. The atributes I loved about Jordan was his ability to run the team and juice it when he needed to.

Jahari Kavi
05-14-2010, 01:36 PM
Gasol is now all of a sudden a superstar???:confused:

90% of PSD users have alway said that he is soft like a teddy bear

he is, but he's a very talented softy....that means something....

JordansBulls
05-14-2010, 01:38 PM
You are off your rocker if you don't think Pippen was a top 20 player. :facepalm:

And Shaq is a top 10 player all time. 1x league mvp and 3 finals mvp's.

Miltown34
05-14-2010, 01:40 PM
Do you really need 2 top 20 players to win in this league? Out of the last 30 years the only teams to win without using this format are the '94 Rockets (not '95), and the '04 Pistons. It's possible just seems really difficult

I think their losses only validify Pat Riley as well as other GMs "2 superstars needed" theory.

Riley's approach has been to build teams with 2 megastars for the Heat. First Mourning/Hardaway, then Wade/Shaq, and soon Wade/??? Many people have readily bashed the Heat for supposedly "wasting Wade's prime", but at the end of the day, he's the only elite player in the NBA with a ring that doesn't play for the Lakers, Celtics, or Spurs. Both the Cavaliers and Mavericks had awesome regular season records and were expected to go deep into the playoffs because of how "stacked" their roster was. But in reality at the end of the day, you only had 1 elite superstar, and a bunch of premier role players. You had to rely on 1 player to make the clutch plays down the stretch.

yea, look at all the teams that won championships...Even the pistons had like top 5-10 players at almost every position....Mo Williams to me is not a legit all-star Jamison is more a stat guy....I consider an all-star a guy who could make it every year or has had that type of career....everyone needs to be on a team that has another player who can take over...It's going to happen, the thing that makes the Lakers so good is Kobe can score 20 pts and they may still get the victory...LBJ could go for 35 and they might lose....u need help, cus 1 man is never going to win a championship by himself...ask Jordan that

Miltown34
05-14-2010, 01:42 PM
Paul Gasol is not a superstar, if you can't be the best player on a team to win a championship ur not a superstar( you have 2 have the ability to do it), cus I can't see Pau Gasol actually leading a team to the finals...there's only a handful of those players....Paul Gasol is a really good 2nd option he's a all-star player

footballer2369
05-14-2010, 01:46 PM
Kobe, Lebron, Dwight, Wade, Durant, Melo, CP3, D-Will, Dirk, Roy, Duncan, Nash, Amare, Gasol, Bosh, Rondo, Boozer, Rose, J-Smoove, West, etc...

I can keep going and with Yao, Big Al, Parker and all those guys healthy, Pierce and KG would be lucky to be Top 30, now Rondo is a completely different story.

David West, Josh Smith, Tony Parker?????? :speechless::speechless: Duncan is seriously declining so I'm not sure even he is surely better than Pierce/KG. I mean Smith is obviously efficient and a good defender (good player statistically) but he's not really on that level. He can't take over a game like they can.

You're reaching...

I even take them over Boozer as well and maybe Rose, although he has shown the ability to lead a team this year as the star (but doesn't play defense or distribute as a pure point)...

And Yao is a non-entity as many have said before me....

So I count 15 players that are inarguably better, which would make him right in saying they're arguably top 20....

hugepatsfan
05-14-2010, 01:47 PM
Top 20 is hard to say. Opinions vary in the top 10. By the time you get down to 20, there is no clear answer.

Hawkeye15
05-14-2010, 02:05 PM
The 2004 Pistons played a Laker team that just didn't match up to them. Other than that, yes, its fairly clear you need a couple of players who can take over games.

Hawkeye15
05-14-2010, 02:06 PM
Pippen in 1991 and 1998 wasn't even an allstar.

I understand where you are going here, but Pippen/Phil are exponentially better than Mo/Brown.

JordansBulls
05-14-2010, 02:14 PM
I understand where you are going here, but Pippen/Phil are exponentially better than Mo/Brown.

Phil wasn't proven in 1991 nor was Pippen.

Shaq was a proven player and Jamison was already a 2x allstar.

It is always an excuse for Lebron. He had the best record both years. Don't give me he doesn't have a number 2. Dirk is a guy who doesn't have a number 2, but how often does he get excuses made for him?

The fact of the matter is Lebron pretty much got Jamison for free as Big Z came back to the team and then he added Shaq (1x league mvp and 3 finals mvp's) without giving up anything really.
Jamison a career 20 and 8 player and was getting that this season on the Wizards. Shaq last year a 17 and 7 player and Mo was a 17 and 6 player before playing with Lebron.

No excuses, the Cavs were heavily favorite both years.



Eastern Conference for 2009-2010


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastStandings

#1 Cavs 61-21
#2 Boston 57-25
#3 Orlando 56-26



http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastChamps

Cavs - 32 Votes
Celtics - 13 votes
Orlando - 8 votes



NBA Champion for 2009-2010

LOS ANGELES LAKERS

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-NBAChamps

Lakers - 19 votes
Cavs - 18 votes
Spurs - 8 votes
Celtics - 5 votes
Orlando - 3 votes


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Cavaliers



Last year's collapse in the Eastern Conference finals only made LeBron hungrier and more willing to expand his game. Now, opponents can expect to see him in the post more. Scary. And look for a resurgence from a truly motivated Shaq.




The Cavs were the best team in the East before collapsing against the Magic, and they've gotten even stronger in the offseason. Shaq and Anthony Parker should help shore up their bench. Still, they lack the athletic bigs to match up with the Magic in a seven-game series.




http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o165/JordansBulls/CavsvsCeltics2010Playoffs.jpg

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2010/matchup/_/teams/celtics-cavaliers



Cavs won 61 games and were the only 60+ win team on the season. Celtics won 50 games this season.

Hawkeye15
05-14-2010, 02:16 PM
Phil wasn't proven in 1991 nor was Pippen.

Shaq was a proven player and Jamison was already a 2x allstar.

It is always an excuse for Lebron. He had the best record both years. Don't give me he doesn't have a number 2. Dirk is a guy who doesn't have a number 2, but how often does he get excuses made for him?

The fact of the matter is Lebron pretty much got Jamison for free as Big Z came back to the team and then he added Shaq (1x league mvp and 3 finals mvp's) without giving up anything really.
Jamison a career 20 and 8 player and was getting that this season on the Wizards. Shaq last year a 17 and 7 player and Mo was a 17 and 6 player before playing with Lebron.

No excuses, the Cavs were heavily favorite both years.



Eastern Conference for 2009-2010


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastStandings

#1 Cavs 61-21
#2 Boston 57-25
#3 Orlando 56-26



http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-EastChamps

Cavs - 32 Votes
Celtics - 13 votes
Orlando - 8 votes



NBA Champion for 2009-2010

LOS ANGELES LAKERS

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=OffseasonPredictions09-NBAChamps

Lakers - 19 votes
Cavs - 18 votes
Spurs - 8 votes
Celtics - 5 votes
Orlando - 3 votes


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Cavaliers







http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o165/JordansBulls/CavsvsCeltics2010Playoffs.jpg

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2010/matchup/_/teams/celtics-cavaliers



Cavs won 61 games and were the only 60+ win team on the season. Celtics won 50 games this season.


I came in late here and didn't read anything. I was basically comparing the support LeBron has to what MJ had. Not sure what all the numbers, and statements in your post are for. Don't really care to read 3 pages of this thread. You can either brief me, or ignore me haha

JordansBulls
05-14-2010, 02:21 PM
I came in late here and didn't read anything. I was basically comparing the support LeBron has to what MJ had. Not sure what all the numbers, and statements in your post are for. Don't really care to read 3 pages of this thread. You can either brief me, or ignore me haha

Lebron had better support from 3-12. MJ had a better 2nd option though.

mavwar53
05-14-2010, 02:33 PM
So what were the pistons when they won it?

No one was a star on their team, lucky if any of them were considered a top 40 maybe even top 50 players.

ballpd05
05-14-2010, 02:37 PM
Gasol is now all of a sudden a superstar???:confused:

90% of PSD users have alway said that he is soft like a teddy bear

Gasol is a superstar. He was a consistent 20/10 guy in Memphis and is one of the most offensively skilled big men in the NBA right now.

Lo Porto
05-14-2010, 02:56 PM
Gasol is not a superstar, but he is one of the best 20 players in the league

JordansBulls
05-14-2010, 02:59 PM
Gasol is not a superstar, but he is one of the best 20 players in the league

You do realize that he led the Lakers in both PER and Win Shares in the Season this year and is doing so in the Playoffs as well.

Lo Porto
05-14-2010, 03:01 PM
The only reason he's not a "superstar" is because he plays with Kobe. He should be a superstar.

JordansBulls
05-14-2010, 03:03 PM
The only reason he's not a "superstar" is because he plays with Kobe. He should be a superstar.

I understand that, but his production he is considered a superstar. How can you be on an elite team with another top 3 player in the NBA and lead the team in both PER and Win Shares for an entire season and doing so in the playoffs and not be considered a superstar?

Now he may not be a superstar as far as marketing is concerned but production wise, he is.

CLASSOF72
05-14-2010, 03:08 PM
I understand that, but his production he is considered a superstar. How can you be on an elite team with another top 3 player in the NBA and lead the team in both PER and Win Shares for an entire season and doing so in the playoffs and not be considered a superstar?

Now he may not be a superstar as far as marketing is concerned but production wise, he is.

That's probably the most intelligent thing I've read in here in days.

Lo Porto
05-14-2010, 03:10 PM
That's what I was saying JB. He's a superstar without the marketing machine. For crying out loud, he's the modern day Scottie Pippen.

Hawkeye15
05-14-2010, 03:13 PM
Lebron had better support from 3-12. MJ had a better 2nd option though.

eh, not so sure I agree down the line like that. On top of that, Mike Brown is a joke compared to Phil Jackson.

RaiderLakersA's
05-14-2010, 03:14 PM
Gasol is not a superstar, but he is one of the best 20 players in the league

I don't agree with Charles Barkley often, but I agree with his opinion where Elite Players vs. superstars are concerned. Paraphrased, Charles believes there are really only about 4 or 5 people in the league that are worth Max Contracts; hence, there are only really 4-5 truly Elite Players in this league. As such there is not only a difference between an Elite Player and a superstar, but an obvious divide between both.

Gasol is a superstar in this league. His numbers bear it out. But he may not be considered an Elite Player in the eyes of most. Not yet.

A team comprised of two or more Elite Players usually wins a title (see Wade and Shaq on the Heat). A team comprised of one Elite Player and a few superstars can also win a title (see Hakeem and the Houston Rockets, or Jordan's Bull teams). Finally, a team comprised of multiple superstars at just about every position -- but no single Elite Player -- can also win a title, if they execute as a team and are well-coached (see Rip, Billups and the Detroit Pistons).

Lo Porto
05-14-2010, 03:17 PM
eh, not so sure I agree down the line like that. On top of that, Mike Brown is a joke compared to Phil Jackson.

Absolutely right.

You can't compare MJ's teams to LeBron's. It's not fair. Scottie Pippen is one of the best 50 players of all time. Jackson called him the best defender he's ever seen. Horace Grant was a great PF during the first run and Rodman was the PF stud the 2nd run. Kukoc was the best Euro of the day. Paxson was a great facilitating PG the first run and Harper was great for the 2nd run. And the Bulls were filled with specialists that knew their role perfectly. Guys like Craig Hodges, Scott Williams, Steve Kerr, Luc Longley, Bill Cartwright, etc., etc.

Lo Porto
05-14-2010, 03:22 PM
I don't agree with Charles Barkley often, but I agree with his opinion where Elite Players vs. superstars are concerned. Paraphrased, Charles believes there are really only about 4 or 5 people in the league that are worth Max Contracts; hence, there are only really 4-5 truly Elite Players in this league. As such there is not only a difference between an Elite Player and a superstar, but an obvious divide between both.

Gasol is a superstar in this league. His numbers bear it out. But he may not be considered an Elite Player in the eyes of most. Not yet.

A team comprised of two or more Elite Players usually wins a title (see Wade and Shaq on the Heat). A team comprised of one Elite Player and a few superstars can also win a title (see Hakeem and the Houston Rockets, or Jordan's Bull teams). Finally, a team comprised of multiple superstars at just about every position -- but no single Elite Player -- can also win a title, if they execute as a team and are well-coached (see Rip, Billups and the Detroit Pistons).

I agree completely. In my mind, there are less than 10 players in the league who deserve a max contract. And if the cap is at around the mid $50's this year, then there shouldn't be that many guys in the league even making over $10 million a year.

And for the record, Jordan had an elite player playing with him. Pippen doesn't get enough credit just like Gasol doesn't get enough credit. The Lakers weren't even Western Conference champs before they got Gasol.

GSPftw
05-14-2010, 03:25 PM
Yao, Big Al, Parker, Rose, J-Smith, West, Boozer, don't even belong on that list...

Really? A guy who averages 20 and 10 for his entire career doesn't belong in the 20 best players in the league?
There are hardly 20 players in HISTORY to do that.....

JordansBulls
05-14-2010, 03:48 PM
eh, not so sure I agree down the line like that. On top of that, Mike Brown is a joke compared to Phil Jackson.

Again if you looking at Phil's resume in 1998 or with the Lakers yes it is a joke, but if you are looking at when the Bulls won their first title it is not a joke at all.

Phil came to the Bulls like Avery came to the Mavericks. Simply no head coaching experience whatsoever.

RaiderLakersA's
05-14-2010, 04:05 PM
And for the record, Jordan had an elite player playing with him. Pippen doesn't get enough credit just like Gasol doesn't get enough credit.

I would separate Pippen from the "Elite Player" status in the sense that I don't believe he could command a Max Contract Salary (e.g., $30M a season) from any team. Yes, he was a great player, and yes, when Jordan retired the first time Pippen helped keep that team competitive, but I don't see him in the, pardon the pun, rare air of Elite status. Top 50 player (which I suspect was more of a recent-memory beauty contest than anything) or not.

ccugrad1
05-14-2010, 04:08 PM
The Problem with the Dallas Mavericks has not been talent. They have had more talent on that team than you can shake a stick at. The Mavericks problem is they can't spell defense let alone play it. If you look at the Phoenix Suns, they are starting to play some defense and are going deep in this post-season.

albertc86
05-14-2010, 04:13 PM
Two superstar theory? What? Detroit didn't have two superstars. By most accounts, the Spurs didn't have two superstars --- neither Parker or Ginobili gained that much respect, idk why. The Heat didn't have two superstars either --- Shaq wasn't Shaq anymore. Check your "theory" again. However, going back to the early 90's is a bad place to start. The NBA has more teams now so it's more 'diluted'.

beasted86
05-14-2010, 07:25 PM
Really? A guy who averages 20 and 10 for his entire career doesn't belong in the 20 best players in the league?
There are hardly 20 players in HISTORY to do that.....

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

When did you start watching basketball?

Anyway, Yao is irrelevant. If he is top 20, so is McGrady & Iverson.