PDA

View Full Version : Were non superstar players of previous era overrated?



Clippersfan86
07-29-2015, 11:10 PM
Guys like Sprewell, T Hardaway, Eddie Jones, Vince Carter, Jamal Mashburn, Baron Davis, Steve Francis and many more who were considered stars at one point, or great players. Yet as I go over their metrics I notice that they are basically on par with a solid role player in this current era. Most of them have 1 or 2 years at most that are anywhere near star worthy in terms of pure metrics.

Basically are non superstars from all previous eras, inferior to the current depth of the league? I truly think we are witnessing the most top to bottom talent ever by quite a margin. At the top I don't see disparity really, but when you get out of the top 10 or 15 players, the gap seems pretty huge between eras.

Clippersfan86
07-29-2015, 11:13 PM
PS... I know I'm not the best with stats, so if someone like Chronz or Tredigs feels I'm off in this, I welcome any sort of correction. The stats I was looking at were mostly WS/48, ORTG, RPM, DRTG, PER etc.

GunFactor187
07-29-2015, 11:22 PM
Those guys you listed were considered widely by many in the league and out as some of the most intelligent players to have played. Even though metrics didn't show it, some of the other stuff they did were of great value to their respective teams that they played for. They were probably underrated for that matter, more than likely for all the negatives that happened.

IndyRealist
07-29-2015, 11:43 PM
What do all those guys have in common? They all put up lots of points, or points/assists in the case of lead guards. That plus flashy highlights is just about all you needed to be considered a star back in the day. It's funny how much player evaluation has changed in the last decade, at least for the teams. I wonder if Timmy Hardaway still holds the record for worst shooting game ever (0-17)? Wonder how that would fly in the age of TS% and PPP? Fan evaluations are still another matter entirely.

What else do those guys have in common? They all tied up a crap ton of money compared to their production, and didn't win rings. Correlation? Causation?

Clippersfan86
07-29-2015, 11:56 PM
What do all those guys have in common? They all put up lots of points, or points/assists in the case of lead guards. That plus flashy highlights is just about all you needed to be considered a star back in the day. It's funny how much player evaluation has changed in the last decade, at least for the teams. I wonder if Timmy Hardaway still holds the record for worst shooting game ever (0-17)? Wonder how that would fly in the age of TS% and PPP? Fan evaluations are still another matter entirely.

What else do those guys have in common? They all tied up a crap ton of money compared to their production, and didn't win rings. Correlation? Causation?

I noticed most of the ones I saw this with trend were volume guys, high usage, flashy, not particularly efficient guys. But yea, high paid too.

ewing
07-30-2015, 12:10 AM
Guys like Sprewell, T Hardaway, Eddie Jones, Vince Carter, Jamal Mashburn, Baron Davis, Steve Francis and many more who were considered stars at one point, or great players. Yet as I go over their metrics I notice that they are basically on par with a solid role player in this current era. Most of them have 1 or 2 years at most that are anywhere near star worthy in terms of pure metrics.

Basically are non superstars from all previous eras, inferior to the current depth of the league? I truly think we are witnessing the most top to bottom talent ever by quite a margin. At the top I don't see disparity really, but when you get out of the top 10 or 15 players, the gap seems pretty huge between eras.


these players have very little in common other then that you decided to group them. Spreewell was a beast on the defensive end, created tempo, and made defensive collapse. He was better then his numbers. Davis was an overrated but super good passer who could break down defensive and was a terror when he actually hit jump shots. Stevie could get to the hole at will but was a ball dominate shoot first guard with little J. He was overrated. VC had one of the best skill set ever. in short you are reaching.

Scoots
07-30-2015, 12:17 AM
Hardaway and Sprewell were very good players, but they were not ever really star players. They were the both one of the best players on bad teams that played at a fast pace. That leads to numbers and a good show. And I was a fan of both. Sprewell could have been a good defender but he gave up on D early in his career, and Hardaway had a tendency to be chuck when he was tired on offense and lazy on defense.

That said there have been some recent players in the all-star game that don't measure up to greatness either:
Mo Williams
Jrue Holliday
Brook Lopez
Joakim Noah
Tyson Chandler
Rajon Rondo 4 times!
David Lee 2 times
Luol Deng 2 times
Roy Hibbert
Andre Iguodala
Deron Williams
Andrew Bynum

They are not BAD players, but they are not particularly great either. They had some good play around some very good statistics and that's enough to get famous enough to become a "star".

And that's just the ones I could think of from the last few all-star games.

So no, I don't really think things have changed that much. Players are not much more aware of their advanced stats, but I don't doubt that some of those players from the past would have put up better metrics if the league cared about them when they played too.

slashsnake
07-30-2015, 01:55 AM
What do all those guys have in common? They all put up lots of points, or points/assists in the case of lead guards. That plus flashy highlights is just about all you needed to be considered a star back in the day. It's funny how much player evaluation has changed in the last decade, at least for the teams. I wonder if Timmy Hardaway still holds the record for worst shooting game ever (0-17)? Wonder how that would fly in the age of TS% and PPP? Fan evaluations are still another matter entirely.

What else do those guys have in common? They all tied up a crap ton of money compared to their production, and didn't win rings. Correlation? Causation?

Depends though... in 20 years will we say that exact same thing about CP3? That he was Tim Hardaway without a major knee injury?

Look at the great distributors of the past 10 years...
You've got Parker, who's on a more team ball movement system, Rondo who won one before he was great, Kidd who won one after he was great, Billups who was a big part, but interior D was the name of that team. None of those guys are on the same level as prime CP3, prime Kidd, prime Nash, prime Westbrook, prime Deron Williams, prime Baron Davis....


I think we see the same thing. Maybe a bit of a trend toward guards/wing guys than bigs... but go back 20 years.

Your stars were Jordan, Ewing, Karl, Stockton, Robinson, Olajuwon, Barkley, Reggie Miller, Payton, Pippen, Shaq... Not any worse IMO than today.

20 years ago your NBA 3rd team was Barkley, Shaq, Reggie, Juwan Howard, and Mitch Richmond

Now it is Duncan, Irving, DeAndre Jordan, Klay, and Blake Griffin.

slashsnake
07-30-2015, 02:03 AM
Just saying I think we always overrate these guys when they are playing well. In 10 years are we going to be saying the same thing about Rose, Rondo, Deron, Hibbert, Klay, Paul George, Arenas, David Lee, etc and going those stars weren't all that great.

Are we going to look at a 10 time all star, 2nd runner up one year for MVP like Carmelo Anthony and say what the heck were we thinking proclaiming him a superstar?

It seems every few years we replace a lot of names. Bird was the greatest shooter of all time.. .Wait no Reggie is... No it's Ray Allen, wait, its Steph Curry.

PowerHouse
07-30-2015, 02:09 AM
I think every era has some 3rd tier players who do make an all-star game or two. Happens all the time.

Vince Carter and Tim Hardaway I think were deserving of their ratings, the others listed IMO dont qualify because I didnt hear about them that often. Marbury and Kenyon Martin are two guys who were overrated I think.

slashsnake
07-30-2015, 02:32 AM
I think every era has some 3rd tier players who do make an all-star game or two. Happens all the time.

Vince Carter and Tim Hardaway I think were deserving of their ratings, the others listed IMO dont qualify because I didnt hear about them that often. Marbury and Kenyon Martin are two guys who were overrated I think.

I liked Kmart before his knee injury. But even still we are looking at a 1 time all-star there... Nuggets were desperate to not be awful and overpaid for him and his knee injuries ruined him, but I don't think he was considered a top 10-15 player ever really.

Same with Marbury... made a couple all star games... He's in that same group... Overpaid sure, but not really overrated.

Joe Johnson? Millsap, Wesley Matthews, Gordon, Hibbert... David Lee... In 10 years will they look any different?

nycericanguy
07-30-2015, 08:29 AM
Don't advanced metrics favor today's players much more? because of the 3 ball?

Guys back then didn't shoot many 3's... but teams still scored more overall back because of more team play.

Clippersfan86
07-30-2015, 09:34 AM
Ewing I never said they had similar games. I watched them all enough to know that.

MonroeFAN
07-30-2015, 09:43 AM
Man I remember B Diddy being this unstoppable force. Turns out my memory is completely blasted.

c.c.
07-30-2015, 10:41 AM
Steve Francis?!

Hawkeye15
07-30-2015, 11:53 AM
Don't advanced metrics favor today's players much more? because of the 3 ball?

Guys back then didn't shoot many 3's... but teams still scored more overall back because of more team play.

They scored more due to pace and defensive rules. In the 80's and 90's, zone was not allowed at all, so the paint was wide open compared to today. Now, they also had hard fouls and hand checking back then, but rim attacks and post play were easier.

Yeah, advanced metrics has changed the game for sure. But, the players from yesterday would have adjusted if given the same information.

2nd, 3rd, and 4th tier stars (guys who make an all star game or 2), are always going to be on similar levels.

nickdymez
07-30-2015, 12:36 PM
THe responses in this thread is prime example of why Stats alone is no way to judge player talent.

Scoots
07-30-2015, 01:24 PM
THe responses in this thread is prime example of why Stats alone is no way to judge player talent.

Not attacking, just asking ... has anybody ever said that stats alone is a way to judge talent?

rhino17
07-30-2015, 01:27 PM
Vince Carter was in a totally different league than the guys you listed. He was a legit superstar. The other guys were just occasional all stars. Same as the ones today

nickdymez
07-30-2015, 01:30 PM
Not attacking, just asking ... has anybody ever said that stats alone is a way to judge talent?
No attack taken. Lol. On PSD, absolutely.

Scoots
07-30-2015, 02:00 PM
No attack taken. Lol. On PSD, absolutely.

I think I saw Guppy walk right up to that line, but I don't think I ever saw him say it outright. :)

Draymond Green just looks like a defensive player if you look at the stats ... but if you watch the game you realize that he makes the Warriors go almost as much as Curry does.

nickdymez
07-30-2015, 02:08 PM
I think I saw Guppy walk right up to that line, but I don't think I ever saw him say it outright. :)

Draymond Green just looks like a defensive player if you look at the stats ... but if you watch the game you realize that he makes the Warriors go almost as much as Curry does.
Agreed. So many people around just throw numbers out with absolutely no context at all.

Hawkeye15
07-30-2015, 02:59 PM
I think I saw Guppy walk right up to that line, but I don't think I ever saw him say it outright. :)

Draymond Green just looks like a defensive player if you look at the stats ... but if you watch the game you realize that he makes the Warriors go almost as much as Curry does.

stats are very useful to use in relating what your eyes see to results. But like nickdymez said, the makeup of the team, style, and context all need to be used. Like, put Melo and Nique next to each other, and you can tell by watching them, then also looking at the numbers, that they have the exact same role and impact in winning a basketball game.

JasonJohnHorn
08-01-2015, 08:25 PM
It's hard to compare era. Looking at the 80's, for instance, the 3-point line just came in. Not a lot of coaches took advantage of it, and not a lot of players had been brought up shooting that shot and practicing it, so it wasn't utilized the first few seasons, and when the 90's rolled around, it started to be used a little more frequently. However, that era saw some of the best big men to every play the game, and most of them the amazing 2-way players. Hakeem. Robinson. Shaq. Mourning. Ewing. Then you had amazing defensive guys like Mutumbo. Not to mention the power forwards like Barkley and Malone. And players were allowed to back up to the basket then, so those shots were higher percentage, the drew the double team when they got deep, and opened things up for the guards slashing in or hanging out on the wing.

By the late 90's, the 3-point shot was being used very well. Looking at the Bulls, they had sharp shooters on the court. Guys like Kerr, but they didn't always have them on; just for running certain plays.

Now are brought up shooting 3's. They know if they can play solid defense and hit 3's, they'll be in the league for a long time. Coaches have realized the value of the three and design more plays for it, GM's are hyper aware of analytics.

If the guys who were stars in the 90's were brought up in the late 90's, their games would be different. Jordan would have been a better 3-point shooter. Barkley would have had to let go of his back-to-the-basket game because he always needed a little more time to work his @$$ in there. Guys like Malone would still look good because they could hit 15-footers. Most of the starting C's in the league today would have been starters back then, but they'd be niche players, and not likely All-Stars. DaJ would be like a Rodman type because teams always wanted big rebounding numbers, and Chandler would get paid for his defense. I mean, Chris Dudley got paid 3+ million a year, which was a lot at the time, and then was earning 7 million a year in NY, and that guy would struggle to even make a team these days (that might be a little too harsh).

But yeah... if guys like Mark Aguire and Adrian Dantley grew up in this generation, they'd still be pretty amazing players; they'd have just trained for a slightly different skill set.

And this might be my faulty memory, but I remember watching guys in the late 80's, and guy could hit long jump shots so much better than a lot of guys now. It was a skill they needed so they developed it.... now you look at guys (and LBJ is a great example), they are GREAT from long range, they are amazing up close, but mid-range, they are meh..... that's the one thing Kobe has on LBJ: a much better mid-range jumper. Though I take LBJ up close and from far over Kobe any day of the week.

basch152
08-01-2015, 10:49 PM
It's hard to compare era. Looking at the 80's, for instance, the 3-point line just came in. Not a lot of coaches took advantage of it, and not a lot of players had been brought up shooting that shot and practicing it, so it wasn't utilized the first few seasons, and when the 90's rolled around, it started to be used a little more frequently. However, that era saw some of the best big men to every play the game, and most of them the amazing 2-way players. Hakeem. Robinson. Shaq. Mourning. Ewing. Then you had amazing defensive guys like Mutumbo. Not to mention the power forwards like Barkley and Malone. And players were allowed to back up to the basket then, so those shots were higher percentage, the drew the double team when they got deep, and opened things up for the guards slashing in or hanging out on the wing.

By the late 90's, the 3-point shot was being used very well. Looking at the Bulls, they had sharp shooters on the court. Guys like Kerr, but they didn't always have them on; just for running certain plays.

Now are brought up shooting 3's. They know if they can play solid defense and hit 3's, they'll be in the league for a long time. Coaches have realized the value of the three and design more plays for it, GM's are hyper aware of analytics.

If the guys who were stars in the 90's were brought up in the late 90's, their games would be different. Jordan would have been a better 3-point shooter. Barkley would have had to let go of his back-to-the-basket game because he always needed a little more time to work his @$$ in there. Guys like Malone would still look good because they could hit 15-footers. Most of the starting C's in the league today would have been starters back then, but they'd be niche players, and not likely All-Stars. DaJ would be like a Rodman type because teams always wanted big rebounding numbers, and Chandler would get paid for his defense. I mean, Chris Dudley got paid 3+ million a year, which was a lot at the time, and then was earning 7 million a year in NY, and that guy would struggle to even make a team these days (that might be a little too harsh).

But yeah... if guys like Mark Aguire and Adrian Dantley grew up in this generation, they'd still be pretty amazing players; they'd have just trained for a slightly different skill set.

And this might be my faulty memory, but I remember watching guys in the late 80's, and guy could hit long jump shots so much better than a lot of guys now. It was a skill they needed so they developed it.... now you look at guys (and LBJ is a great example), they are GREAT from long range, they are amazing up close, but mid-range, they are meh..... that's the one thing Kobe has on LBJ: a much better mid-range jumper. Though I take LBJ up close and from far over Kobe any day of the week.

A lot of lebron fanboys dont like to listen to this, but before lebron went to miami his game was horribly underdeveloped. His post up game and mid range shot were pretty bad. His stats other than FG% might not show it, but lebron drastically improved as a player his first two years in miami.

He has a much better post and mid range game specifically now.

slashsnake
08-02-2015, 04:13 AM
A lot of lebron fanboys dont like to listen to this, but before lebron went to miami his game was horribly underdeveloped. His post up game and mid range shot were pretty bad. His stats other than FG% might not show it, but lebron drastically improved as a player his first two years in miami.

He has a much better post and mid range game specifically now.

Fully agree, kind of similar to a lot of elite athletes that became amazing NBA players. Some people think Jordan always had that fadeaway in the post... but that was more of a 2nd threepeat thing. His jumper was very up and down early in his career, kind of lived on getting to the basket... but evolved there as well. Growing further and further away with his jumper.

The specialization of the 3pt line and shooters is amazing though.

We think of Kerr as this 3pt ace... which he was, but even then in Chicago, only 38% of his shots were from 3. Today Lilliard, Harden, and Ginobili take a higher percentage of their shots from beyond the arc than Steve Kerr did with Chicago.

Dale Ellis took 3's at about the same rate of his overall shots as Kevin Durant.

Lebron takes a higher percentage of his shots from beyond the arc than John Paxson ever did.

It's insane how the mid-range has gone away as a result of the inefficiencies of it.

Like you said.. Kobe has a great midrange. He shoots about 44% from 10-16 feet and doesn't draw many fouls there. So in 100 shots you could say he will get you 88 points. Lebron shoots 35% from 3, so in 100 shots there he gets 105 points. He'd have to start shooting over 50% from 10-16 foot (which is insanely high) to get the same value off that shot.

I think that is more why the midrange has dried up. Why it's not so much of a focus. On D you collapse on the interior, and play the 3 pt line. Midrange has become the shot if you are going to give something up, that you give up.

basch152
08-02-2015, 04:29 AM
It's probably most popular with players like duncan these days. If your low post player can step out and force the opposing big man step out with him it can open up a lot of things for your offense.

Jamiecballer
08-02-2015, 09:25 AM
This is not an uncommon phenomenon.

Across all major sports peoples eyes have been opened to wide discrepancies between perception and value. the landslide of data we have provides an effective counter against the tide of public opinion, something that did not exist even 10 years ago.

MTar786
08-02-2015, 06:16 PM
lol its actually sad that people think this. the 00's talent is way better than todays.. thats for sure. top heavy and depth wise. the only difference is that todays league is flooded with mostly pg's and the early to mid 00's was flooded with mostly pf's. with that said 00's was by far a much better time imo than today

JasonJohnHorn
08-02-2015, 08:40 PM
A lot of lebron fanboys dont like to listen to this, but before lebron went to miami his game was horribly underdeveloped. His post up game and mid range shot were pretty bad. His stats other than FG% might not show it, but lebron drastically improved as a player his first two years in miami.

He has a much better post and mid range game specifically now.

I think that's a fair assessment. I'd have to see the stats on the mid-range jumpers, but he uses his post game a lot more. I think it is just something he became more comfortable with and that the coach gave him more time with because Wade could spread defenders out. I remember him having some pretty impressive moves in the post in his first stint in Cleveland though. But I can't say I remember him using them as much.

Hawkeye15
08-02-2015, 09:15 PM
A lot of lebron fanboys dont like to listen to this, but before lebron went to miami his game was horribly underdeveloped. His post up game and mid range shot were pretty bad. His stats other than FG% might not show it, but lebron drastically improved as a player his first two years in miami.

He has a much better post and mid range game specifically now.

his game did get better. The reason LeBron was so good his first 7 years, is he was just the biggest, strongest ball handling attacker the game has ever seen. It didn't matter that his jumper wasn't there yet, you simply couldn't stop his drives. He realized that wouldn't last forever, and how much more open the game was when he developed a jumper.

YAALREADYKNO
08-03-2015, 10:35 PM
Hardaway and Sprewell were very good players, but they were not ever really star players. They were the both one of the best players on bad teams that played at a fast pace. That leads to numbers and a good show. And I was a fan of both. Sprewell could have been a good defender but he gave up on D early in his career, and Hardaway had a tendency to be chuck when he was tired on offense and lazy on defense.

That said there have been some recent players in the all-star game that don't measure up to greatness either:
Mo Williams
Jrue Holliday
Brook Lopez
Joakim Noah
Tyson Chandler
Rajon Rondo 4 times!
David Lee 2 times
Luol Deng 2 times
Roy Hibbert
Andre Iguodala
Deron Williams
Andrew Bynum

They are not BAD players, but they are not particularly great either. They had some good play around some very good statistics and that's enough to get famous enough to become a "star".

And that's just the ones I could think of from the last few all-star games.

So no, I don't really think things have changed that much. Players are not much more aware of their advanced stats, but I don't doubt that some of those players from the past would have put up better metrics if the league cared about them when they played too.

Deron Williams was a beast in his prime. He was considered to be neck and neck with cp3 as the best PG in the NBA for a few yrs. idk what happened to him injuries probably played a factor but a lot of people forget that he actually led the Jazz to the WCF in 07.

Scoots
08-04-2015, 11:36 AM
Deron Williams was a beast in his prime. He was considered to be neck and neck with cp3 as the best PG in the NBA for a few yrs. idk what happened to him injuries probably played a factor but a lot of people forget that he actually led the Jazz to the WCF in 07.

I think some people remember it as Jerry Sloan leading the Jazz to the WCF despite D-Will :) Apparently as soon as he was away from Sloan he stopped developing and nobody has been able to maximize his talents since.

Hawkeye15
08-04-2015, 11:58 AM
Deron Williams was a beast in his prime. He was considered to be neck and neck with cp3 as the best PG in the NBA for a few yrs. idk what happened to him injuries probably played a factor but a lot of people forget that he actually led the Jazz to the WCF in 07.

he was considered by some, but he wasn't with CP3 at any point. He was an elite player though under Sloan. But his style of ball was bound to regress, and he basically was maximized by Sloan, and exposed when he left. Then injuries set in.

Vinylman
08-06-2015, 05:59 PM
You have to look at each group of players after they retire ... guys currently playing will always have better numbers because they haven't gone through the last couple of years of their careers when their numbers tank...

ewing
08-08-2015, 06:47 AM
he was considered by some, but he wasn't with CP3 at any point. He was an elite player though under Sloan. But his style of ball was bound to regress, and he basically was maximized by Sloan, and exposed when he left. Then injuries set in.


he played 55 games his first yr in jersey and was never the same player. your memory is selective

Chronz
08-08-2015, 10:09 AM
he played 55 games his first yr in jersey and was never the same player. your memory is selective
Elaborate

ewing
08-08-2015, 10:57 AM
Elaborate


he didn't go down hill and then start breaking down. He started breaking down and then went down hill. He was a hell of a pick and roll point guard with a lethal J and knack for hitting big shots before NJ. Sloan was a good coach but acting like he made Williams good is silly. Fact is he couldn't make the same plays in NJ that he consistently made in Utah. Dude used to be able to pull up and square in the air from anywhere.

Chronz
08-08-2015, 11:44 AM
he didn't go down hill and then start breaking down. He started breaking down and then went down hill. He was a hell of a pick and roll point guard with a lethal J and knack for hitting big shots before NJ. Sloan was a good coach but acting like he made Williams good is silly. Fact is he couldn't make the same plays in NJ that he consistently made in Utah. Dude used to be able to pull up and square in the air from anywhere.
I felt the same way too, but I remember seeing some numbers that pointed out how Utah actually ran less PnR than league average. He was basically operating in selective system that ran more flex than the rest of the league. True or not, he could pick his spots alot better in Utah's flex than he could in NJ. In NJ he was unable to adapt to a post players presence, I dont know if its true but I always felt the he was at his best when Brooke was injured. He was a beast, but definitely overrated IMO.

Whats funny is one of the reasons people praised his game was because of his size and how that doesn't deteriorate the way quickness and change of pace does (with CP3) yet here we are, the diminutive PG is STILL running top notch offenses and the taller player looks like a shadow of his former self. He relied on his crossover way too much so while he may have been able to square up whenever he wanted, it also led to plenty of turnovers and it was based entirely on being an overpowering player more than a skilled one. Was only a fan of his his first few years, then people actually thought he was on CP3's level for a few years and I was done. Im pretty sketchy that way, sometimes I let fans of players get to me more than i should. Its like I dont appreciate what Im watching because of that. I miss vintage Deron, heres hoping Dirk can bring out the best in him but if it does, it only goes to show how system dependent he is. Some players ARE the system, others only thrive in certain situations.

Shlumpledink
08-08-2015, 11:59 AM
Yes. Happens in baseball too. Possibly football/tennis. Pretty much every sport

ewing
08-08-2015, 12:19 PM
I felt the same way too, but I remember seeing some numbers that pointed out how Utah actually ran less PnR than league average. He was basically operating in selective system that ran more flex than the rest of the league. True or not, he could pick his spots alot better in Utah's flex than he could in NJ. In NJ he was unable to adapt to a post players presence, I dont know if its true but I always felt the he was at his best when Brooke was injured. He was a beast, but definitely overrated IMO.

Whats funny is one of the reasons people praised his game was because of his size and how that doesn't deteriorate the way quickness and change of pace does (with CP3) yet here we are, the diminutive PG is STILL running top notch offenses and the taller player looks like a shadow of his former self. He relied on his crossover way too much so while he may have been able to square up whenever he wanted, it also led to plenty of turnovers and it was based entirely on being an overpowering player more than a skilled one. Was only a fan of his his first few years, then people actually thought he was on CP3's level for a few years and I was done. Im pretty sketchy that way, sometimes I let fans of players get to me more than i should. Its like I dont appreciate what Im watching because of that. I miss vintage Deron, heres hoping Dirk can bring out the best in him but if it does, it only goes to show how system dependent he is. Some players ARE the system, others only thrive in certain situations.


i watched him a good bit in NJ and his biggest issue is that he can't hit the same shots anymore. Sure he'll have a 8 three game every once in a while but he just ins't the same as shot maker with the ankle issues. He still is very dependent on that cross its just he can't finish as well and can pull up on the move at near the same level. i'd bet even his stand still shooting has taken a hit. you are right about Cp3 maintaining and Williams going down hill. I think it goes to show how basketball fans see atheism and vertical/end to end speed the only type of athleticism. Cp3 was a speedster but was/is more skilled like you, less of a bully, and he wasn't adjusting in air/falling away.