NPZ wrote:loveandbeer wrote:I don’t see it. Neither of Ball/Ingram seem like future stars, much less superstars. A team with PG as the best player is a treadmill IMO.
Damn, within a handful of posts, we get A and B are old rookies and Y and Z aren't future superstars (or even STARS!). This is an example of the youthful skew of RealGM, even if you two aren't young. That's still the kinda stuff you see all the time. So what if a rookie is 22/3 as long as he's good? Rookies were that age on average in my lifetime. Eddie Jones in my avatar was older than Shaq, a 4 year player from Temple (Cosby loved him) and he was an excellent rookie right out of the gate, steal of the lottery after the 3rd pick. So what if every player on your roster isn't a superstar. How many teams are full of those? I flatly disagree with the star diss, too. That's another youthful fan trope: estimating a 1nd and 2nd year player's career arc with total confidence. I could understand if they were Anthony Bennett or Kwame Brown bad or if they were known to be an injury lemon like Greg Oden, but damn. On the one hand, old rookies are dissed, on the other, peach fuzz rooks and sophomores (both LB n BI are 21 next Fall) don't even get 3 years before they're cast off as flubs. Ingram last year averaged about 16/5/4/1/1 and .470 FG and .390 trey despite averaging only 2 attempts a game. Yer telling me he has zero shot of even becoming a star?
You do know what “seem” means yeah? Based on what I’ve seen, neither SEEM like they’re going to be stars (by that I mean level right below superstars/top 5 players).
Of course I could be wrong, just see no evidence given the career arc of superstars or stars in general. Based on the amount of evidence we have, if either of them became superstars they’d be anomalies.