The Superstar Theory

Moderators: Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285

Bank Shot
RealGM
Posts: 16,261
And1: 11,998
Joined: Jun 24, 2007

Re: The Superstar Theory 

Post#21 » by Bank Shot » Wed Aug 6, 2008 11:33 pm

I've always liked this argument. I really think Detroit screwed up the mindset of some around the league. The way they were able to build a Championship team was more the exception then the rule. Its definately not flawless but when you look at where most players ended up being grouped it seems pretty solid. The PGs are a good example. After Magic, its pretty difficult to rank the PGs so its no suprise that outside of Isiah, all the candidates for the next few spots ended up in the same grouping.

Although this wasn't made to rank players, it really shows how impressive a prime-Walton was. I would have loved to be around when he was at his peak.
tsherkin
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 92,237
And1: 31,828
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: The Superstar Theory 

Post#22 » by tsherkin » Wed Aug 6, 2008 11:35 pm

NO-KG-AI wrote:I think it's funny how close D-Rob and Hakeem ended up being on this list, considering most people pretend that Hakeem was some entirely different level as a player now(which is more disrespect to D-Rob than praise for Hakeem).


The big deal was obviously Hakeem's prime versus D-Rob... any time. Peak Hakeem was quite handily better than anything Robinson ever displayed at any point in his career. His ability to score with his back to the basket was better than Robinson's face-up game (more valuable for a host of reasons) and his postseason performances were generally better than Robinson's, a truth that holds pretty much from rookie Hakeem through his prime; he had more balls and his game translated to the postseason more effectively.

Anyway, the point is that they were comparably decorated and, during their own times, largely respected to a similar degree. Olajuwon's actually BEHIND Robinson on this list because he has more years that qualify and the overall point totals bring him down because they encompass portions of MJ's career during the second three-peat and his time with Barkley and Drexler (and, briefly, Pippen), which depressed his stats and his various accolade considerations.

I think a little more weight should have been paid to the number of years a player qualifies, perhaps a small bonus for each year in excess of 10, for example, something like that. Some of the guys who were this elite for that long, that deserves a little extra mention. But that's nit-picking, mostly, and again more pertaining to the details of the arrangement of players individually than their overall grouping, which is the important thing.

This is not a ranking system for individuals, but of groups, as has been repeated ad nauseum, so such things aren't so important.
User avatar
Ortho Stice
Veteran
Posts: 2,889
And1: 76
Joined: Mar 11, 2003

Re: The Superstar Theory 

Post#23 » by Ortho Stice » Thu Aug 7, 2008 12:20 am

realball wrote:I just think that the whole idea is so obvious. Obviously you want the best players in the league to be on your team.



In other news, a researcher grabs a hold on the once enigmatic nature of losing teams: says lead researcher, Professor Hoopsberry, "teams that finish with the worst record, generally, tend to be mainly comprised of players who are, so to speak, bottom of the barrel."

Return to The General Board