Define Generational Talent

[BarbaGrizz]

For Generational talent is the best player in a generation. Not the 2-3 best players. Not someone who changed the game. Not someone who was dominant for 3 years.

Clearly we can divide the NBA in 4 generations:

50-60: Wilt
70- early 80: KAJ
late 80-00: MJ
00-present: LeBron

[Ill News]

Well I could definitely agree then with the idea of a potentially generational prospect and if that's what we're talking about then I could change my stance but when I looked at the list I saw allot of proven players so I thought that's where the discussion was going. If not then there's a whole lot more we'd have to add to this list and IDK if pandoras box is ready to be opened.

But one of these players stand out and it's Luka

I was having doubts about Kobe being a generational player as well, which is why I listed him second to last. But bringing up his pre-Pau and Bynum days doesn't work, considering he led that sorry-ass Lakers team to the playoffs. Without him, that team probably wins 10-15 games. Him being on the team added like 25+ wins to their record. They didn't get far, but he still proved he can carry a team on his own.

Well.... then throw him back in there. My memory failed me. I remember how sorry that team was, I didn't think they made it. Who were his best supporting players, wasn't it Smush Parker and Kwame Brown? Sheesh

Kobe had scrubs like Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm, and Brian Cook playing 25+ mins because of how terrible their depth chart was. The only reliable player he had was Odom. Yet that team won 45 games.

[MMyhre]

Wade generational? I claim that's not defensible. There is no way anyone can defend opinion that Wade is a generational player without losing every shred of consistency. y[/spoiler]

Watch on YouTube

Wade the non generational player, vs a generational player. Best player in the league by his third and fourth year, arguably in his sixth, and a clutch playoff performer already as a rookie. Averaged an efficent 40 points in a 4 games finals comeback, literally without any good to decent scoring options besides him (And don't fking say Shaq with 13 pts on 53 % TS, which you probably would have, seeing as you seem like a Wade hater with your weird focus on exactly him for some reason).

I can easily agree on Wade not having a generational career, but he was definitely a generational talent. What hindered him from truly becoming greater was injuries, which lost him several shots at MVP's, All NBA's, Rings etc as the best player on a team, as well as longevity and MVP votes. Wade lost in the 05 and 09 playoffs due to injuries (had back problems vs the Hawks in 09, this one even I didn't know about before). What did he do versus the far superior and great defensive Celtics when healthy in the 2010 playoffs (with a crap supporting cast too)? 33,2 pts on 65 % TS, 29,4 PER, 5,6 rebs, 6.8 ast, 1,6 steals and 1,6 blocks over 5 games. And im pretty sure the +/- or whatever are pretty damned good as well. One thing that irritated me was how you used Wade as your example, over Pippen. Like Pippen would ever get close to scoring and producing like that, EVER. Pippen is a great second or third fiddle, Wade was a superstar 1st option that was compared to Jordan pre-injuries. The only advantage Pippen has is length and being the more complete defender, but Wade was a monster help defender and a decent man-to-man defender himself, fully utilizing his 6-11 wingspan and great defensive instincts.

Stop putting them in the same category as "talents", because there is a big gap if you actually enlighten yourself and learn the history. No worries though, I am here to help.