What's new
By:

But...like really.....how the **** are we gonna get a star?

NUMBERICA said:
Lebron and Durant are in their own category. They own the 1st tier, no one else is in it. Then you get into Chris Paul (here because of health problems and that he's a sieve defensively), Curry (no defense), Harden (no defense) territory which is where George exists and yes, defense is a HUGE part of that (IT'S HALF OF THE GAME OF BASKETBALL, after all).

Players like George are rarer than a scorer that only plays on that side of the floor.
Click to expand...


Harden is not on the same tier as Curry IMO. Curry isn't a 'scorer that only plays on that side of the floor'. Neither is someone like Kevin Love.
 
dalamon said:
If I'm building a team I want to win championships with, I'm either going to choose one of the most offensively capable players in all of basketball, or an elite defensive player-- preferably a PF or C-- in order for him to mask the defensive inefficiencies of other players better than a wing-defender could.

We simply must have differing definitions of 'superstar', I guess. To me, superstar is the elite class of players that can single-handedly turn a franchise around.

You're kidding yourself if you think Paul George fits that label.
Click to expand...

It depends on what your definition of a superstar is. I think that generally is very specific to elite offensive players and defense is something that gets ignored in the title. So, I don't know if Paul George is a superstar or not, that's very subjective. But would he be in the top-10 of players I'd take in the NBA? Yes.
 
dalamon said:
If I'm building a team I want to win championships with, I'm either going to choose one of the most offensively capable players in all of basketball, or an elite defensive player-- preferably a PF or C-- in order for him to mask the defensive inefficiencies of other players better than a wing-defender could.

We simply must have differing definitions of 'superstar', I guess. To me, superstar is the elite class of players that can single-handedly turn a franchise around.

You're kidding yourself if you think Paul George fits that label.
Click to expand...

A superstar to me isn't someone who can simply "turn a franchise around", it's someone who you gives you the best chance of building a championship team around.

For example, Chris Paul or Steph Curry might be more capable of instantly making a ****ty team decent, but I think you would be hard pressed to ever build a true title contender with them as the main piece. George on the other hand is the main piece on a true title contender right now.



#nTn
 
dalamon said:
If I'm building a team I want to win championships with, I'm either going to choose one of the most offensively capable players in all of basketball, or an elite defensive player-- preferably a PF or C-- in order for him to mask the defensive inefficiencies of other players better than a wing-defender could.

We simply must have differing definitions of 'superstar', I guess. To me, superstar is the elite class of players that can single-handedly turn a franchise around.

You're kidding yourself if you think Paul George fits that label.
Click to expand...

George can turn a franchise around. He is the most responsible for the Pacer's turn around.

Drafted: They become a decent team in the East.

2nd year: Becomes starter, they become a playoff team

3rd year: Starter with biggest role on the team. They almost beat the Heat.

4th year: Starter and confirmed super-star by everyone in the league except Dalamon. Defenses plan for him. Best team in the East, better record than Heat.

Each year George has increased his workload, the Pacers have gotten better.
 
UGLI baby said:
A superstar to me isn't someone who can simply "turn a franchise around", it's someone who you gives you the best chance of building a championship team around.
Click to expand...


Srs? Tyson Chandler is a superstar then? Ben Wallace? Who was the 'superstar' on the 2004 Pistons? To me, the Pacers are quite representative of that.

For example, Chris Paul or Steph Curry might be more capable of instantly making a ****ty team decent, but I think you would be hard pressed to ever build a true title contender with them as the main piece. George on the other hand is the main piece on a true title contender right now.
Click to expand...

And I'd argue that Hibbert is the main-piece of that Indiana team right now. Both George and Hibbert are maxed-- but I'd bet my left-nut that the Pacers beating the Heat will come down to Hibbert, and not to George.

If I'm building a championship team, I take Hibbert over Paul George w/o thinking twice.
 
dalamon said:
Harden is not on the same tier as Curry IMO. Curry isn't a 'scorer that only plays on that side of the floor'. Neither is someone like Kevin Love.
Click to expand...

Curry plays 1 side of the court and turns the ball over a ton. Top-10 for sure this year, he is a player I see who will drift in and out of the top-10 year to year.

PG is going to be a mainstay as top 10 for years to come, if not top 5.
 
UGLI baby said:
A superstar to me isn't someone who can simply "turn a franchise around", it's someone who you gives you the best chance of building a championship team around.

For example, Chris Paul or Steph Curry might be more capable of instantly making a ****ty team decent, but I think you would be hard pressed to ever build a true title contender with them as the main piece. George on the other hand is the main piece on a true title contender right now.



#nTn
Click to expand...

Great post right here.

I think love, curry, harden, hell even a guy like aldridge would make the jazz better than george would...... especially since hayward kinda does alot of what george does already.

Which i why im not as high on him as some of you.

Plus it seems like he has not improved much at all offensively from last year and the games i have seen him in (admittedly only a couple) he has not looked like the type of player who could put a team on his back for long stretches of games.

To me that is the best indicator of superstar..... a superstar should be able to just take over games and and put the team on his back and carry them to victory when everyone else on his team is struggling.
I dont see george being able to do that consistently
 
This is a riveting discussion, and I've kind of missed it. But I probably need to get back to wasting less time and energy thinking about how to get a ball in one hoop more than that same ball in the other.
 
dalamon said:
Srs? Tyson Chandler is a superstar then? Ben Wallace? Who was the 'superstar' on the 2004 Pistons? To me, the Pacers are quite representative of that.



And I'd argue that Hibbert is the main-piece of that Indiana team right now. Both George and Hibbert are maxed-- but I'd bet my left-nut that the Pacers beating the Heat will come down to Hibbert, and not to George.

If I'm building a championship team, I take Hibbert over Paul George w/o thinking twice.
Click to expand...


Why I love drafting w/ Dalamon in fantasy basketball.

Dat Joe Johnson 1st round logic.
 
NUMBERICA said:
It depends on what your definition of a superstar is. I think that generally is very specific to elite offensive players and defense is something that gets ignored in the title. So, I don't know if Paul George is a superstar or not, that's very subjective. But would he be in the top-10 of players I'd take in the NBA? Yes.
Click to expand...

And I agree with you here-- very subjective. Top 10? I'd have to make a list. But to me, 'superstar' is more exclusive than top ten.

NUMBERICA said:
Are you joking? Love and Curry have 0 defensive impact.
Click to expand...


You mentioned scorer. Both players I mentioned aren't scorers. I didn't comment on their defense-- rather, I said they do much more than just score, offensively. Much, much more than George, in fact. That's why both of their teams have top ten offenses.
 
1. Lebron
2. Durant


3-9 in some order:
Chris Paul
Hibbert
Marc Gasol
Harden
Duncan
Curry
Paul George
 
dalamon said:
Srs? Tyson Chandler is a superstar then? Ben Wallace? Who was the 'superstar' on the 2004 Pistons? To me, the Pacers are quite representative of that.



And I'd argue that Hibbert is the main-piece of that Indiana team right now. Both George and Hibbert are maxed-- but I'd bet my left-nut that the Pacers beating the Heat will come down to Hibbert, and not to George.

If I'm building a championship team, I take Hibbert over Paul George w/o thinking twice.
Click to expand...

Dude. Bro.

Tyson Chandler was not the main piece on a title team. He was the final piece of the puzzle, not the main piece.

Dirk Mother ****ing Nowitzki.

You take away Dirk and is that Mavs team even a top 6 seed in the West? Do they make playoffs?





#nTn
 
NUMBERICA said:
Are you joking? Love and Curry have 0 defensive impact.
Click to expand...

Could make an argument for Love because of rebounding impact. You have to rebound to finish defensive possessions, so having a elite rebounder does help defensively. He sucks *** at every other defensive aspect though.
 
dalamon said:
You mentioned scorer. Both players I mentioned aren't scorers. I didn't comment on their defense-- rather, I said they do much more than just score, offensively. Much, much more than George, in fact. That's why both of their teams have top ten offenses.
Click to expand...

Which is why I took care to say "one side of the floor" and not JUST scoring. Certainly, they do more than just score. But they are simply awful defensive players and that's huge.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Curry plays 1 side of the court and turns the ball over a ton. Top-10 for sure this year, he is a player I see who will drift in and out of the top-10 year to year.

PG is going to be a mainstay as top 10 for years to come, if not top 5.
Click to expand...

So that speaks to the lack of talent at SG then, and to Curry's injury problems. The Curry of this season is more of a superstar than George, plain and simple. Teams have to plan for Curry way more than George. Curry changes the GS team more than George changes the Pacers. Plain and simple.

Imagine the Jazz playing the Pacers without George. We'd still lose.


Now imagine playing the Warriors without Curry.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Which is why I took care to say "one side of the floor" and not JUST scoring. Certainly, they do more than just score. But they are simply awful defensive players and that's huge.
Click to expand...

It is huge-- but keep in mind, Nowitzki (not the greatest defender) had a brilliant title-run, as long as he was complemented by an elite defensive big.

Similarly, defensive stalwarts at PG are not necessary to win championships.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top