Superstar or No Superstar?

bflewis · Post #1 » by **bflewis** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:56 am

My friend + I have gotten into an argument over the Kings and what they should do to return to greatness. I believe that we need a #1 option (a possible superstar) while he thinks that we are fine with Kevin Martin and we just need players to compliment Kevin. He keeps bringing up that 2004 Pistons didn't need a superstar to be great but what do you think? Any stats or evidence why you believe a team(Kings) needs to have a superstar to win the championship.

Post #2 » by **KingInExile** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:04 am

Kevin Martin is not now and will never be a legitimate #1 "superstar"...and he absolutely should NOT be the guy you try to build around. I'm not saying that Martin shouldn't be a key part to the future. But he should not be looked at as THE guy you build around.

Post #3 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:21 am

bflewis wrote:My friend + I have gotten into an argument over the Kings and what they should do to return to greatness. I believe that we need a #1 option (a possible superstar) while he thinks that we are fine with Kevin Martin and we just need players to compliment Kevin. He keeps bringing up that 2004 Pistons didn't need a superstar to be great but what do you think? Any stats or evidence why you believe a team(Kings) needs to have a superstar to win the championship.

Firstly, it depends on your definition of a superstar, but I think that Kevin certainly isn't one.

I think there are 6 superstars in the league right now--Lebron, Kobe, Wade, Duncan, Paul and Howard, and I think the last two are even a little bit debatable at this point in time. Point being though that I think we should move forward under the assumption that we won't be attaining one. You just have to get too lucky at the right time--and that's not just with draft position. The only two of those players where, going into the draft, everybody knew they were a home run, are Lebron and Duncan. Kobe was a situation that won't be repeated (mostly because he was largely just unknown because he was a high school player, plus nobody is going to say "I won't play anywhere but Sacramento" like Kobe did with LA). Howard was a high risk, high reward guy, and luckily for Orlando, they're getting a high reward. And Paul and Wade were both cases where people thought they would be very good, but not THIS good.

Now under the assumption that we can't get that caliber of a player, the only teams without any of those players (and Shaq, who certainly was that caliber of player) to go all the way in recent history are Boston and Detroit. Boston didn't have any superstars, but KG and Pierce were both pretty damn close. So going off of that model, that's not a terrible way to try to do things. But my point is that they weren't superstars because the team wasn't really built around either one of them, but around all 3 of them. I don't think any one of them right now could be the centerpiece of a champion. Kevin could be the a part of a group like that IMO of "great players, but not superstars", but that's it.

Post #4 » by **ICMTM** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:29 am

KG and Duncan are on the same level IMO, but the rest I agree with.

cdt3 · Post #5 » by **cdt3** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:31 am

KMart is no different than Peja, great for 3 and a hlaf quarters but then starts getting tight when you need a win. I would have traded him in a second for Amare or Bosh.
I have been thinking about whether the Kings need a calm PG (like Curry) or higher energy guy (like Teague) and I think they need a guy who can bring excitement for the team since Martin is so dull. I think Martin a very good player, he is just a little less clutch than Kobe who always chokes in the big playoff game but is clutch during the regular season. I just think Teague brings so much excitement it will take pressure off of JT and KMart much like Bibby did with CWebb, Miller and Peja. I am trying to figure out which of the PG in college are more Bibbyish? Rubio, Teague, Holiday, or Curry.

cdt3 · Post #6 » by **cdt3** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:32 am

KMart is no different than Peja, great for 3 and a hlaf quarters but then starts getting tight when you need a win. I would have traded him in a second for Amare or Bosh.
I have been thinking about whether the Kings need a calm PG (like Curry) or higher energy guy (like Teague) and I think they need a guy who can bring excitement for the team since Martin is so dull. I think Martin a very good player, he is just a little less clutch than Kobe who always chokes in the big playoff game but is clutch during the regular season. I just think Teague brings so much excitement it will take pressure off of JT and KMart much like Bibby did with CWebb, Miller and Peja. I am trying to figure out which of the PG in college are more Bibbyish? Rubio, Teague, Holiday, or Curry.

Website · Post #7 » by **Nicky Nix Nook** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:40 am

ICMTM wrote:KG and Duncan are on the same level IMO, but the rest I agree with.

I like the idea of creating a "big 3" instead of a MASSIVE 1 with 4 role players. Thats the only way we become contenders.

Now with Martin at 26 I would say we have about 5 years to put together a big three with him. I would be really interested to see how we'd do that. That would mean we need an allstar or damn near at either the 1 or 3, and a defensive minded player at the 1 or 3 (based on where the allstar is) and either Hawes or Thompson to be one of the best big men in the league in 5-6 years. Throw in role players like Cisco and Nocioni and you have a very nice team.

defensive PG
Martin
Borderline Allstar
Thompson-allstar if not hawes
Hawes- allstat if not thompson

Borderline Allstar
Martin
defensive SF
Thompson -allstar if not hawes
Hawes - allstar if not thompson

Post #8 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:42 am

ICMTM wrote:KG and Duncan are on the same level IMO, but the rest I agree with.

Nah, you really can't build a champion around KG offensively--at least not at this point in his career.

BMiller52 · Post #9 » by **BMiller52** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:15 am

I think it depends on the supporting cast. If we get a team where everyone plays defense and we have our offense that has a system, then we probably don't need a guy that averages 25-30 PPG. Would it help? Yeah obviously. But Thompson and Hawes look like they'll be a pretty good frontcourt defensively in the future. Hawes is a good shotblocker and Thompson's a good post defender and rebounder. They're both pretty good offensively and only in their first 2 years in the league, so we don't know if they'll be stars or not yet. Martin's a good #2, and as a #1 he's a lot like Reggie Miller. Nocioni is probably in our future just because of his contract and not having a lot of miles on him yet(only played 4 years in the NBA), he's a good defender, hustler, and shooter. We don't know who our future PG is. If possible, you definitely want a superstar there. But if not, you could probably get by with a guy like NY's Chris Duhon or Indiana's Jarrett Jack who shoots well and plays D. If you can get a guarenteed superstar PG in the draft, you go for it though.

On the other hand, if you get a superstar then it makes everyone else on your team better and it makes their jobs easier. So if you can trade the draft pick for a superstar at the 1 or 3 then you do it.

Joseph17 · Post #10 » by **Joseph17** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:46 am

I don't think the Kings need another superstar, but I do think that the Kings need another star. Kev is definitely a good enough scorer to be a number 1 option on a championship team. He's a better scorer than anyone on Detroit's championship team. The problem is that the Kings don't have any number 2 options or number 3 options for that matter. Think about this lineup:
Rasheed
Garnett
Marion
Martin
Derrick Rose

This is a championship team and Martin would probably be the team's leading scorer. There aren't any superstars on this team either.

Post #11 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:54 am

joeyyowee wrote:I don't think the Kings need another superstar, but I do think that the Kings need another star. Kev is definitely a good enough scorer to be a number 1 option on a championship team. He's a better scorer than anyone on Detroit's championship team. The problem is that the Kings don't have any number 2 options or number 3 options for that matter. Think about this lineup:
Rasheed
Garnett
Marion
Martin
Derrick Rose

This is a championship team and Martin would probably be the team's leading scorer. There aren't any superstars on this team either.

"Leading scorer" and #1 option are kind of different things. As far as pure output, yeah, if you have a guy that scores as efficiently and proficiently as Kevin, he can be your number 1 option. But the point is that you need somebody that you can give it to near the end of games that can either make a play for others or score. So far, Kevin has more often than not tried and failed to draw a foul when given the ball at the end of games.

HUBlackstar83 · Post #12 » by **HUBlackstar83** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:06 am

I really think we should draft Brandon Jennings. I just think this kid has swagger and some serious star potential. He's very exciting as well and can put some behinds in the seats. Aside from JT and Donte this team is in serious need of some personality. I love K-Mart but the guy has no excitement what so ever, show a little freaking emotion every once in a while. Dunk on somebody or something lol.

Joseph17 · Post #13 » by **Joseph17** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:10 am

mitchweber wrote:
joeyyowee wrote:I don't think the Kings need another superstar, but I do think that the Kings need another star. Kev is definitely a good enough scorer to be a number 1 option on a championship team. He's a better scorer than anyone on Detroit's championship team. The problem is that the Kings don't have any number 2 options or number 3 options for that matter. Think about this lineup:
Rasheed
Garnett
Marion
Martin
Derrick Rose

This is a championship team and Martin would probably be the team's leading scorer. There aren't any superstars on this team either.

"Leading scorer" and #1 option are kind of different things. As far as pure output, yeah, if you have a guy that scores as efficiently and proficiently as Kevin, he can be your number 1 option. But the point is that you need somebody that you can give it to near the end of games that can either make a play for others or score. So far, Kevin has more often than not tried and failed to draw a foul when given the ball at the end of games.

I agree but I think that could easily be corrected. They could just tell him to stop trying to draw fouls when the game is on the line. It's not like he's not clutch. He has hit clutch shots and game winning shots in the past. He did a good job of taking over in the 4th tonight.

Post #14 » by **KF10** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:11 am

Yeah, Martin isn't a flashy guy. But that is the good part about him. He gets his points at an efficient rate though. I think that's good enough. Look at Roy, he isn't flashy but he is regarded to be one of the best SGs in this league. Arguably only behind Kobe and Wade.

But once in a while, I just want to see Martin throw down a nasty tomahawk or windmill. ahaha

Post #15 » by **ICMTM** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:13 am

mitchweber wrote:
ICMTM wrote:KG and Duncan are on the same level IMO, but the rest I agree with.

Nah, you really can't build a champion around KG offensively--at least not at this point in his career.

Because Parker and Ginobli are so inept at scoring the basketball....

People were outraged Ginobli didn't win the Finals MVP in O7, and I don't think Tim Duncan would have been a four time champion without his supporting casts either. Duncan is a better offensive player, but I'm talking about in terms of impact.

[edit]
Why does a superstar have to be an elite scorer?

BMiller52 · Post #16 » by **BMiller52** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 7:03 am

joeyyowee wrote:I don't think the Kings need another superstar, but I do think that the Kings need another star. Kev is definitely a good enough scorer to be a number 1 option on a championship team. He's a better scorer than anyone on Detroit's championship team. The problem is that the Kings don't have any number 2 options or number 3 options for that matter. Think about this lineup:
Rasheed
Garnett
Marion
Martin
Derrick Rose

This is a championship team and Martin would probably be the team's leading scorer. There aren't any superstars on this team either.

I agree. I think this is probably right. If we could get 1-2 more guys who are 20 PPG guys, and they play D and are all around players, we can get the championship. It's like Ray Ray in Seattle without Pierce and Garnett. The true superstars are the guys like LeBron who don't need another star on the team. But you never get those guys unless you get ridiculously lucky.

Post #17 » by **pillwenney** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:36 am

ICMTM wrote:Because Parker and Ginobli are so inept at scoring the basketball....

People were outraged Ginobli didn't win the Finals MVP in O7, and I don't think Tim Duncan would have been a four time champion without his supporting casts either. Duncan is a better offensive player, but I'm talking about in terms of impact.

[edit]
Why does a superstar have to be an elite scorer?

Of course, and a good chunk of why Duncan has been more successful with wins is his supporting cast, but only to a certain degree. Duncan has a stronger post game, and is just over all more consistent offensively--particularly at this point in their careers. KG isn't the MVP he was in 04 right now, nor was he last year. Still a phenomenal player--just not a superstar, and not someone who, by himself can be the main centerpiece to a champion. I think Duncan can be, and really still is in San Antonio. Parker and Ginobili are great, but we've never seen them play without Timmy. We've seen Timmy play without them. He won one ring without them, and another when they weren't nearly the players they would eventually become.

And a superstar doesn't necessarily have to be an elite scorer, really. But they have to be an elite playmaker--whether that involves scoring or making the right play. But if they're not a great scorer, they really need teammates that can make shots--more so than one who is.

_SRV_ · Post #18 » by **_SRV_** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:40 am

The only championship team in the last million tears to win w/o a superstar was Detroit, but superstars aren't passed around like other players, the only 2 were Shaq with Orlando, or aging Shaq/KG.
I guess what I'm saying is, you can't build on the idea of being able to obtain a superstar, you either luck into one or not, you should build a competitive balanced team, talent and salary wise, maintain a position of being able to acquire a superstar if the opportunity rises.

Smills91 · Post #19 » by **Smills91** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:29 pm

So this begs the questions. We were right there prime for a championship until 3 zebras got in the way...was Chris Webber considered a 'Superstar' when he was a King?

kevin44 · Post #20 » by **kevin44** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:52 pm

Most wont consider Webber a superstar, but anyone who avg 20+ pts, 10+ rebs, and 5 assists a game is a pretty special player. I really believe the Kings need a superstar or two very good players to get out of this hole. Due to their bad roster they will be forced to find help with the draft because they don't have anything worth trading for plus the Maloofs aren't going to spend money on free agents.