*NBA THREAD* Abe will be missed (2 Viewers)

[Frostillicus]

I have a $10 bet with a co-worker that the Wolves win more games this year than last (40). I'm pretty confident. With Rubio at the helm and the Adelman hatred gone, I think the makeup of this team is much, much better. Rubio was never a good pairing with Love as the primary option. Love's a great player, but he's not an up tempo attacking player like Rubio needs to succeed. I think the team will immediately be better on defense and (sad as it is to say) Wiggins and Lavine are already the best players in iso from the perimeter the team has, which was a sorely lacking component in all of those close losses last season.

A Wolves fan that still has hope? That's rare.I think they end up around 20. The West is too damn tough and relying on a couple young/raw players isn't going to get them far. And they can't shoot. None of them. Getting 40 wins with what will likely be bottom 5-6 shooting is damn near impossible unless you have elite defence.

Totally fair critique, I'll easily admit I'm running on optimism. However, they couldn't really shoot last year either (and they do have one shooter, Kevin Martin :/). The team shot .444 on FGs, good for a tie with Utah at 23rd place and a little over 1% better than 30th place Chicago. If we're just limiting it to 3 pointers, they shot .341, good for 26th place and only 3% better than by-far league worst Philadelphia.

So I'd argue they got 40 wins last year while being bottom 5-6 shooting WITHOUT elite defense. Personally, I'd call the loss of Kevin Love's 3pt shooting and the gain of Wiggin's and Thad's defensive skills a wash in terms of team success.

They rated out 9th on offence last year because they got to the line a ton (3rd) and hit a league average amount of 3's. They lost the guy responsible for the vast majority of those two categories. They had only 4 guys above league average in eFG. Love, Brewer, Pekovic and Turiaf. Love gone. Turiaf barely shoots. Brewer's season was far and away a career best and likely to regress back to below average. So that just leaves Pekovic. Martin sure wasn't the efficient scorer he used to be. Maybe he returns to it but he is now in the wrong side of 30.Eta: and Young.

Yeah, I'm aware. I'm not saying it will be easy, I just believe that Wiggins will get to the line a lot immediately, and that we'll again be around, but probably under, league average at hitting 3's. Between Wiggins, Brewer (call it .490), Pek (.541), and Dieng (at league average last year, call it .510 next year), I think they'll be able to score, and they'll be a better defensive team with a much improved bench. I don't think its that ridiculous to assume they'll still be a fringe playoff team.

Oh my.

60ish wins, friendo.

 

[mcintyre1]

I have a $10 bet with a co-worker that the Wolves win more games this year than last (40). I'm pretty confident. With Rubio at the helm and the Adelman hatred gone, I think the makeup of this team is much, much better. Rubio was never a good pairing with Love as the primary option. Love's a great player, but he's not an up tempo attacking player like Rubio needs to succeed. I think the team will immediately be better on defense and (sad as it is to say) Wiggins and Lavine are already the best players in iso from the perimeter the team has, which was a sorely lacking component in all of those close losses last season.

A Wolves fan that still has hope? That's rare.I think they end up around 20. The West is too damn tough and relying on a couple young/raw players isn't going to get them far. And they can't shoot. None of them. Getting 40 wins with what will likely be bottom 5-6 shooting is damn near impossible unless you have elite defence.

Totally fair critique, I'll easily admit I'm running on optimism. However, they couldn't really shoot last year either (and they do have one shooter, Kevin Martin :/). The team shot .444 on FGs, good for a tie with Utah at 23rd place and a little over 1% better than 30th place Chicago. If we're just limiting it to 3 pointers, they shot .341, good for 26th place and only 3% better than by-far league worst Philadelphia.

So I'd argue they got 40 wins last year while being bottom 5-6 shooting WITHOUT elite defense. Personally, I'd call the loss of Kevin Love's 3pt shooting and the gain of Wiggin's and Thad's defensive skills a wash in terms of team success.

They rated out 9th on offence last year because they got to the line a ton (3rd) and hit a league average amount of 3's. They lost the guy responsible for the vast majority of those two categories. They had only 4 guys above league average in eFG. Love, Brewer, Pekovic and Turiaf. Love gone. Turiaf barely shoots. Brewer's season was far and away a career best and likely to regress back to below average. So that just leaves Pekovic. Martin sure wasn't the efficient scorer he used to be. Maybe he returns to it but he is now in the wrong side of 30.Eta: and Young.

Yeah, I'm aware. I'm not saying it will be easy, I just believe that Wiggins will get to the line a lot immediately, and that we'll again be around, but probably under, league average at hitting 3's. Between Wiggins, Brewer (call it .490), Pek (.541), and Dieng (at league average last year, call it .510 next year), I think they'll be able to score, and they'll be a better defensive team with a much improved bench. I don't think its that ridiculous to assume they'll still be a fringe playoff team.

Oh my.

60ish wins, friendo.

Wolves get the 6th seed in the West, win 52 games on the back of Pek averaging 20/10 & Wiggins 20pts/6rebs/2stls while winning ROY and sparking talk of whether Wiggins or Davis is the next superstar. Book it :IBTL: Don't take away the kool-aid yet.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Anthony Davis? He's already a superstar, imo.

 

[mcintyre1]

Anthony Davis? He's already a superstar, imo.

Realistically I agree, but the media/fans don't seem to want to give him that label quite yet.

Apparently Zgoda (Wolves beat writer) is predicting 39 wins for what that's worth (which is nothing).

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Lol at Zgoda.

Still no win futures out, but here's the odds to win the West on Bovada:

Spurs 9/4

Thunder 3/1

Clippers 11/2

Mavericks 8/1

Rockets 8/1

Warriors 10/1

Blazers 20/1

Grizzlies 25/1

Lakers 33/1

Nuggets 40/1

Pelicans 40/1

Suns 40/1

Timberwolves 75/1

Kings 125/1

Jazz 125/1

So, the Wolves are 13 out of 16 teams.

 

[Abraham]

Griz at 25:1 is really interesting. That's not a bad team at all. Their odds are closer to the Lakers than the Warriors.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Griz at 25:1 is really interesting. That's not a bad team at all. Their odds are closer to the Lakers than the Warriors.

Blazers one intrigues me as well.

 

[thecatch]

Griz at 25:1 is really interesting. That's not a bad team at all. Their odds are closer to the Lakers than the Warriors.

Memphis is obviously a handful for OKC. MEM would just need something fairly disastrous to happen to SA and they are right there.

 

[Gr00vus]

Griz at 25:1 is really interesting. That's not a bad team at all. Their odds are closer to the Lakers than the Warriors.

Blazers one intrigues me as well.

Also Dallas.

 

[Balco]

Griz at 25:1 is really interesting. That's not a bad team at all. Their odds are closer to the Lakers than the Warriors.

Blazers one intrigues me as well.

Also Dallas.

Yep. I am going to put some cash on them in Vegas. Parsons helps the team, but I also really like them getting Tyson Chandler back.

 

[DrJ]

Good for the Wolves. The Cavs got bent over pretty badly in this deal, and Wiggins seems like one of the more likeable guys in the NBA in some time.

 

[Frostillicus]

Good for the Wolves. The Cavs got bent over pretty badly in this deal, and Wiggins seems like one of the more likeable guys in the NBA in some time.

Both teams got what they were looking for, imo.

 

[mcintyre1]

Minnesota Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor said he thinks Kevin Love may get exposed for defensive liabilities now that he has joined the high-profile Cleveland Cavaliers.

"I think where maybe he got away with some stuff not playing defense on our team, I'm not sure that's how it's going to work in Cleveland," Taylor said on ESPN Radio 1500 AM in the Twin Cities on Tuesday. "I would guess they're going to ask him to play more defense and he's foul prone."

Taylor also said he thinks Love may get the blame if the Cavs have some struggles.

"I question Kevin if this is going to be the best deal for him because I think he's going to be the third player on the team," Taylor said. "I don't think he's going to get a lot of credit if they do really well. I think he'll get blame if they don't do well. He's around a couple guys that are awful good."

Love and his representatives told the Wolves in June that he wanted to be traded this summer because he planned to leave the team in free agency next year. Love came to the Cavs without having a contract extension in place but both sides said Tuesday they are hopeful he will remain with the team long-term.

"If they sign him to a five-year contract like they're thinking about, that's a big contract on a guy that's had some times he's missed games," Taylor said, perhaps referencing how Love twice broke his hand while playing for the Wolves and costing him to miss most of the 2012-13 season.

"The only thing I still have a question mark about is health. I had that concern then (when they negotiated his previous contract) and I still have that concern. I think Cleveland should have that concern too."

When asked about his time with the Wolves, where he played six seasons but never made the playoffs, Love said Tuesday that he felt he had a good relationship with Taylor.

"I loved my time there, the people of Minnesota were great," Love said. "I really developed a lot of relationships all the way down through the organization through ownership."

Taylor repeatedly said in interviews over the last several months that he didn't want to trade Love and hoped he would start the season with the team. But Love's trade demand ultimately forced the Wolves' hands.

"Kevin and I have always had a good relationship," Taylor said. "Kevin has always said I want to win. I said I want to win, too, stay here and let's do it together."

Taylor sounding pretty bitter that Love didn't want to stay in the country club.

 

[Frostillicus]

Minnesota Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor said he thinks Kevin Love may get exposed for defensive liabilities now that he has joined the high-profile Cleveland Cavaliers.

"I think where maybe he got away with some stuff not playing defense on our team, I'm not sure that's how it's going to work in Cleveland," Taylor said on ESPN Radio 1500 AM in the Twin Cities on Tuesday. "I would guess they're going to ask him to play more defense and he's foul prone."

Taylor also said he thinks Love may get the blame if the Cavs have some struggles.

"I question Kevin if this is going to be the best deal for him because I think he's going to be the third player on the team," Taylor said. "I don't think he's going to get a lot of credit if they do really well. I think he'll get blame if they don't do well. He's around a couple guys that are awful good."

Love and his representatives told the Wolves in June that he wanted to be traded this summer because he planned to leave the team in free agency next year. Love came to the Cavs without having a contract extension in place but both sides said Tuesday they are hopeful he will remain with the team long-term.

"If they sign him to a five-year contract like they're thinking about, that's a big contract on a guy that's had some times he's missed games," Taylor said, perhaps referencing how Love twice broke his hand while playing for the Wolves and costing him to miss most of the 2012-13 season.

"The only thing I still have a question mark about is health. I had that concern then (when they negotiated his previous contract) and I still have that concern. I think Cleveland should have that concern too."

When asked about his time with the Wolves, where he played six seasons but never made the playoffs, Love said Tuesday that he felt he had a good relationship with Taylor.

"I loved my time there, the people of Minnesota were great," Love said. "I really developed a lot of relationships all the way down through the organization through ownership."

Taylor repeatedly said in interviews over the last several months that he didn't want to trade Love and hoped he would start the season with the team. But Love's trade demand ultimately forced the Wolves' hands.

"Kevin and I have always had a good relationship," Taylor said. "Kevin has always said I want to win. I said I want to win, too, stay here and let's do it together."

Taylor sounding pretty bitter that Love didn't want to stay in the country club.

Yep. Wish him well, express some regret, and move on with the Wiggins era. I mean the Rubio/Wiggins/LaVine/Bennett era.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Pretty dooshy, Glen.

 

[Premier]

Hatin' ### Taylor

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

This is all Taylor's strategy to get Love to have a hero's return to Minnesota in 4 years.

 

[Village Idiot]

This is all Taylor's strategy to get Love to have a hero's return to Minnesota in 4 years.

He should have said all this in a telegram since the post a letter online shtick was already taken.

Or maybe tweet it.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

This is all Taylor's strategy to get Love to have a hero's return to Minnesota in 4 years.

He should have said all this in a telegram since the post a letter online shtick was already taken.

Or maybe tweet it.

Does Western Union have a Comic Sans option??

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

The Spurs didn't have a top 5 player last year.

isnt duncan a top10 player of all time?

 

[Instinctive]

I would say Dirk was one of the 5 best players in the league in 2011. Who you put ahead of him? LeBron/Durant. Hmm..........Chris Paul. Nobody else I'd rather have in 2011 at that point.

Disclaimer: shameless Mavs homer.

 

[Abraham]

I would say Dirk was one of the 5 best players in the league in 2011. Who you put ahead of him? LeBron/Durant. Hmm..........Chris Paul. Nobody else I'd rather have in 2011 at that point.

Disclaimer: shameless Mavs homer.

Lebron and durant didn't even finish in the top 2 of MVP voting. To be fair, however, dirk finished 6th.

 

[scoobus]

The Spurs didn't have a top 5 player last year.

isnt duncan a top10 player of all time?

Yes?

 

[Cliff Clavin]

The Spurs didn't have a top 5 player last year.

isnt duncan a top10 player of all time?

Yep. But he wasn't top 5 last year. Semantics.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The Spurs didn't have a top 5 player last year.

isnt duncan a top10 player of all time?

Yep. But he wasn't top 5 last year. Semantics.

And here I was wondering why Bill Russell was still a free agent.

 

[Kev4029]

I would say Dirk was one of the 5 best players in the league in 2011. Who you put ahead of him? LeBron/Durant. Hmm..........Chris Paul. Nobody else I'd rather have in 2011 at that point.

Disclaimer: shameless Mavs homer.

In our build a franchise draft (the cluster#### that No. 16 ran into the ground), that we did in May of 2011 (so right before the Mavs won the title), Lebron went 1, Howard went 2, Durant went 3, Rose 4, Wade went 5, Dirk went 6. Chris Paul was coming off his two worst seasons of his career and people were thinking his knees were going to make him a shadow of his former self at the time, he ended up going 8.

 

[Sammy3469]

http://espngrantland.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/t-wolves-tri.jpg?w=750

FIERCE!

 

[Instinctive]

I would say Dirk was one of the 5 best players in the league in 2011. Who you put ahead of him? LeBron/Durant. Hmm..........Chris Paul. Nobody else I'd rather have in 2011 at that point.

Disclaimer: shameless Mavs homer.

In our build a franchise draft (the cluster#### that No. 16 ran into the ground), that we did in May of 2011 (so right before the Mavs won the title), Lebron went 1, Howard went 2, Durant went 3, Rose 4, Wade went 5, Dirk went 6. Chris Paul was coming off his two worst seasons of his career and people were thinking his knees were going to make him a shadow of his former self at the time, he ended up going 8.

Forgot that was pre-Roe injury. 2011 pre-back stuff for Howard as well.

I think I slot Dirk in as 5th in 2011. Maybe less homer-y than I expected it to look haha.

 

[Kev4029]

I would say Dirk was one of the 5 best players in the league in 2011. Who you put ahead of him? LeBron/Durant. Hmm..........Chris Paul. Nobody else I'd rather have in 2011 at that point.

Disclaimer: shameless Mavs homer.

In our build a franchise draft (the cluster#### that No. 16 ran into the ground), that we did in May of 2011 (so right before the Mavs won the title), Lebron went 1, Howard went 2, Durant went 3, Rose 4, Wade went 5, Dirk went 6. Chris Paul was coming off his two worst seasons of his career and people were thinking his knees were going to make him a shadow of his former self at the time, he ended up going 8.

Forgot that was pre-Roe injury. 2011 pre-back stuff for Howard as well.

I think I slot Dirk in as 5th in 2011. Maybe less homer-y than I expected it to look haha.

IMO, the top 4 from that season are pretty much indisputable (Lebron, Howard, Durant and Rose).

There is a gaggle of players after that who had a legit argument for number 5 : Wade 26 Pts/6 Reb/5 Ast/25.65 PER that season, Kobe 25/5/5/23.94, Paul 16/4/10/23.76, Dirk 23/7/3/23.52, Amare 25/8/3/22.78, and maybe Pau 19/10/3/23.33.

If you look at the regular season alone and forget that the Mavs win the title, I think Amare (we forget how awesome he was in his first year with NY, he was probably the leader for MVP half way through the season), Wade and Kobe would all be well ahead of him and possibly Paul as well.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Another recent title team without a Top 5 player: 09-10 Lakers. Gasol was just outside the top 10 in PER and other all-encompassing stats, Kobe was in the 15-25 range.

 

[Kev4029]

Another recent title team without a Top 5 player: 09-10 Lakers. Gasol was just outside the top 10 in PER and other all-encompassing stats, Kobe was in the 15-25 range.

Kobe finished 3rd in the MVP voting, so at least the perception that Kobe was a top 5 player was there.

ETA: And for what its worth, the year the Pistons won the title Ben Wallace finished 7th in the voting (I was closer in votes to 7th place than he was to 6th though) and was a 2nd team All-NBA player.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Another recent title team without a Top 5 player: 09-10 Lakers. Gasol was just outside the top 10 in PER and other all-encompassing stats, Kobe was in the 15-25 range.

Kobe finished 3rd in the MVP voting, so at least the perception that Kobe was a top 5 player was there.

MVP voting is affected by team performance. If you make a statement that you can't win a title without an elite player and then define elite based on a measure that incorporates team success you kind of have a chicken and egg problem.

This is actually something you see a lot when people make the argument that it's hard to win in the NBA without "superstars" or "all time greats" or whatever. Part of the reason that players gain recognition as superstars or all-time greats is because they're the best or one of the best players on a team that wins a champion. So it's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Like Dallas in 2011- the title vaulted Dirk's status from perennial all-star to all-time great, so now they're no longer a team that won a title without an all-time great. Same probably goes for KG on the 2008 Celtics, or pre-LeBron Wade and the 2006 Heat, and so on.

 

[Kev4029]

Another recent title team without a Top 5 player: 09-10 Lakers. Gasol was just outside the top 10 in PER and other all-encompassing stats, Kobe was in the 15-25 range.

Kobe finished 3rd in the MVP voting, so at least the perception that Kobe was a top 5 player was there.

MVP voting is affected by team performance. If you make a statement that you can't win a title without an elite player and then define elite based on a measure that incorporates team success you kind of have a chicken and egg problem.

This is actually something you see a lot when people make the argument that it's hard to win in the NBA without "superstars" or "all time greats" or whatever. Part of the reason that players gain recognition as superstars or all-time greats is because they're the best or one of the best players on a team that wins a champion. So it's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Like Dallas in 2011- the title vaulted Dirk's status from perennial all-star to all-time great, so now they're no longer a team that won a title without an all-time great. Same probably goes for KG on the 2008 Celtics, or pre-LeBron Wade and the 2006 Heat, and so on.

I agree with all of that, but in 2009 some people were still calling Kobe the best player in the NBA. Obviously that is very debatable, but it wasn't an uncommon opinion.

ETA: Here is a poll surveying NBA GMs before that season, Kobe was the number 3 answer to who would you start a franchise with.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Sarver is letting everything that happened with Joe Johnson impact this Bledsoe situation. He's so worried about pissing off the player and looking bad if Bledsoe walks and becomes a star that he's bending over backwards to look like the good guy. They're supposedly shopping him for a sign and trade NOW. This has to be the point where you say, "Sign the 4 year deal or take your chances on next year." What do you think you're going to get for him now?

 

[Frostillicus]

http://espngrantland.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/t-wolves-tri.jpg?w=750

FIERCE!

Don't act like you're not impressed.

 

[Kev4029]

Sarver is letting everything that happened with Joe Johnson impact this Bledsoe situation. He's so worried about pissing off the player and looking bad if Bledsoe walks and becomes a star that he's bending over backwards to look like the good guy. They're supposedly shopping him for a sign and trade NOW. This has to be the point where you say, "Sign the 4 year deal or take your chances on next year." What do you think you're going to get for him now?

There is a lot of talk that Bledsoe would take the QO rather than sign the 4 year deal, but that is baffling to me. If he takes the 6M this year and signs a 4 year/60M contract next year that is $13M a year. Seems like an awful big gamble to gain a million dollars a year with the knees he has.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Sarver is letting everything that happened with Joe Johnson impact this Bledsoe situation. He's so worried about pissing off the player and looking bad if Bledsoe walks and becomes a star that he's bending over backwards to look like the good guy. They're supposedly shopping him for a sign and trade NOW. This has to be the point where you say, "Sign the 4 year deal or take your chances on next year." What do you think you're going to get for him now?

There is a lot of talk that Bledsoe would take the QO rather than sign the 4 year deal, but that is baffling to me. If he takes the 6M this year and signs a 4 year/60M contract next year that is $13M a year. Seems like an awful big gamble to gain a million dollars a year with the knees he has.

It wouldn't be $6 mil this season. It would be $3.7M.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

http://espngrantland.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/t-wolves-tri.jpg?w=750

FIERCE!

Don't act like you're not impressed.

Wiggins/Young/Bennett all pretty much the same height. WIGGINS

 

[Kev4029]

Sarver is letting everything that happened with Joe Johnson impact this Bledsoe situation. He's so worried about pissing off the player and looking bad if Bledsoe walks and becomes a star that he's bending over backwards to look like the good guy. They're supposedly shopping him for a sign and trade NOW. This has to be the point where you say, "Sign the 4 year deal or take your chances on next year." What do you think you're going to get for him now?

There is a lot of talk that Bledsoe would take the QO rather than sign the 4 year deal, but that is baffling to me. If he takes the 6M this year and signs a 4 year/60M contract next year that is $13M a year. Seems like an awful big gamble to gain a million dollars a year with the knees he has.

It wouldn't be $6 mil this season. It would be $3.7M.

Even more reason why he would be dumb to pass up the contract. The Suns hold all the cards, if they actually like him as a player, there is no reason to shop him right now.

 

[Village Idiot]

Another recent title team without a Top 5 player: 09-10 Lakers. Gasol was just outside the top 10 in PER and other all-encompassing stats, Kobe was in the 15-25 range.

Kobe finished 3rd in the MVP voting, so at least the perception that Kobe was a top 5 player was there.

MVP voting is affected by team performance. If you make a statement that you can't win a title without an elite player and then define elite based on a measure that incorporates team success you kind of have a chicken and egg problem.

This is actually something you see a lot when people make the argument that it's hard to win in the NBA without "superstars" or "all time greats" or whatever. Part of the reason that players gain recognition as superstars or all-time greats is because they're the best or one of the best players on a team that wins a champion. So it's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Like Dallas in 2011- the title vaulted Dirk's status from perennial all-star to all-time great, so now they're no longer a team that won a title without an all-time great. Same probably goes for KG on the 2008 Celtics, or pre-LeBron Wade and the 2006 Heat, and so on.

So the best way to handle that is to rate the player based on his perception of ranking before that season?I don't really see any other way to get around the chicken/egg problem there.

 

[Village Idiot]

Sarver is letting everything that happened with Joe Johnson impact this Bledsoe situation. He's so worried about pissing off the player and looking bad if Bledsoe walks and becomes a star that he's bending over backwards to look like the good guy. They're supposedly shopping him for a sign and trade NOW. This has to be the point where you say, "Sign the 4 year deal or take your chances on next year." What do you think you're going to get for him now?

If he will only do a sign and trade for a max deal I would not be suprised to see no one interested in doing that unless its for a really crappy trade where the Suns get effectively bent over.Even then no one may be willing to do a trade for Bledsoe.

 

[TobiasFunke]

So the best way to handle that is to rate the player based on his perception of ranking before that season?I don't really see any other way to get around the chicken/egg problem there.

I think even acknowledging that the chicken/egg problem exists means the whole "you need a superstar to win an NBA title" thing is flawed for the get-go. And I say that as someone who used to make the argument.

I'm looking at the 16 teams who made the playoffs last year- how many of them could have won the title without having their best player subsequently crowned a "superstar" who would then validate the theory? Maybe Brooklyn and Atlanta? If Toronto had won a title we'd be calling Kyle Lowry a superstar and he'd be a lock to make the all-star team and probably be at least third team all-NBA teams next season. If Charlotte had somehow pulled off a miracle we'd be talking about how Al Jefferson ranks among the great true centers of the era.

 

[thecatch]

So the best way to handle that is to rate the player based on his perception of ranking before that season?

I don't really see any other way to get around the chicken/egg problem there.

I think even acknowledging that the chicken/egg problem exists means the whole "you need a superstar to win an NBA title" thing is flawed for the get-go. And I say that as someone who used to make the argument.

I'm looking at the 16 teams who made the playoffs last year- how many of them could have won the title without having their best player subsequently crowned a "superstar" who would then validate the theory? Maybe Brooklyn and Atlanta? If Toronto had won a title we'd be calling Kyle Lowry a superstar and he'd be a lock to make the all-star team and probably be at least third team all-NBA teams next season. If Charlotte had somehow pulled off a miracle we'd be talking about how Al Jefferson ranks among the great true centers of the era.

Dirk was considered a superstar/franchise player before he won a title, no question. His subsequent elevation after winning a title was to all time great, which is a little different argument, IMO.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

So the best way to handle that is to rate the player based on his perception of ranking before that season?

I don't really see any other way to get around the chicken/egg problem there.

I think even acknowledging that the chicken/egg problem exists means the whole "you need a superstar to win an NBA title" thing is flawed for the get-go. And I say that as someone who used to make the argument.

I'm looking at the 16 teams who made the playoffs last year- how many of them could have won the title without having their best player subsequently crowned a "superstar" who would then validate the theory? Maybe Brooklyn and Atlanta? If Toronto had won a title we'd be calling Kyle Lowry a superstar and he'd be a lock to make the all-star team and probably be at least third team all-NBA teams next season. If Charlotte had somehow pulled off a miracle we'd be talking about how Al Jefferson ranks among the great true centers of the era.

People are crowning Leonard a superstar. If he played in Milwaukee, he'd get the same recognition as a guy like Batum.

 

[TobiasFunke]

So the best way to handle that is to rate the player based on his perception of ranking before that season?

I don't really see any other way to get around the chicken/egg problem there.

I think even acknowledging that the chicken/egg problem exists means the whole "you need a superstar to win an NBA title" thing is flawed for the get-go. And I say that as someone who used to make the argument.

I'm looking at the 16 teams who made the playoffs last year- how many of them could have won the title without having their best player subsequently crowned a "superstar" who would then validate the theory? Maybe Brooklyn and Atlanta? If Toronto had won a title we'd be calling Kyle Lowry a superstar and he'd be a lock to make the all-star team and probably be at least third team all-NBA teams next season. If Charlotte had somehow pulled off a miracle we'd be talking about how Al Jefferson ranks among the great true centers of the era.

Dirk was considered a superstar/franchise player before he won a title, no question. His subsequent elevation after winning a title was to all time great, which is a little different argument, IMO.

Yeah I guess, but the larger point stands. I'd say more than half the teams in the league have a guy on the roster who could easily be considered a superstar/franchise player by the media and fans if the team won a title, that's the chicken/egg problem.

 

[Sammy3469]

http://espngrantland.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/t-wolves-tri.jpg?w=750

FIERCE!

Don't act like you're not impressed.

More jealous than impressed

 

[thecatch]

So the best way to handle that is to rate the player based on his perception of ranking before that season?

I don't really see any other way to get around the chicken/egg problem there.

I think even acknowledging that the chicken/egg problem exists means the whole "you need a superstar to win an NBA title" thing is flawed for the get-go. And I say that as someone who used to make the argument.

I'm looking at the 16 teams who made the playoffs last year- how many of them could have won the title without having their best player subsequently crowned a "superstar" who would then validate the theory? Maybe Brooklyn and Atlanta? If Toronto had won a title we'd be calling Kyle Lowry a superstar and he'd be a lock to make the all-star team and probably be at least third team all-NBA teams next season. If Charlotte had somehow pulled off a miracle we'd be talking about how Al Jefferson ranks among the great true centers of the era.

Dirk was considered a superstar/franchise player before he won a title, no question. His subsequent elevation after winning a title was to all time great, which is a little different argument, IMO.

Yeah I guess, but the larger point stands. I'd say more than half the teams in the league have a guy on the roster who could easily be considered a superstar/franchise player by the media and fans if the team won a title, that's the chicken/egg problem.

Who has acquired top 5/superstar player status solely by virtue of winning a title? I guess I don't agree that there are a ton of people for whom merely winning a title would confer superstar status. The stars and franchise players are usually recognized as such even in the absence of a title.

 

[TobiasFunke]

So the best way to handle that is to rate the player based on his perception of ranking before that season?

I don't really see any other way to get around the chicken/egg problem there.

I think even acknowledging that the chicken/egg problem exists means the whole "you need a superstar to win an NBA title" thing is flawed for the get-go. And I say that as someone who used to make the argument.

I'm looking at the 16 teams who made the playoffs last year- how many of them could have won the title without having their best player subsequently crowned a "superstar" who would then validate the theory? Maybe Brooklyn and Atlanta? If Toronto had won a title we'd be calling Kyle Lowry a superstar and he'd be a lock to make the all-star team and probably be at least third team all-NBA teams next season. If Charlotte had somehow pulled off a miracle we'd be talking about how Al Jefferson ranks among the great true centers of the era.

Dirk was considered a superstar/franchise player before he won a title, no question. His subsequent elevation after winning a title was to all time great, which is a little different argument, IMO.

Yeah I guess, but the larger point stands. I'd say more than half the teams in the league have a guy on the roster who could easily be considered a superstar/franchise player by the media and fans if the team won a title, that's the chicken/egg problem.

Who has acquired top 5/superstar player status solely by virtue of winning a title? I guess I don't agree that there are a ton of people for whom merely winning a title would confer superstar status. The stars and franchise players are usually recognized as such even in the absence of a title.

Nobody acquires that status solely by winning a title, of course. You have to be pretty good. But my point is that there's a LOT of players who are already considered stars or "franchise players" by basketball fans, and if they were to win a title casual fans and the media would acknowledge them as such. So saying you need a transcendent superstar type (or whatever description is being used that day) to win a title is basically meaningless. We change the narrative of the players to fit the results. KG was left off the all-NBA teams completely in 2006 and was a third-teamer in 2007, all of a sudden he's first team in 2008 and an MVP candidate. Was he that much better with the Celtics? Not according to the numbers; he was basically the same guy he was for his last few years in Minnesota.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

For Raider Nation

 

[Abraham]

Who has acquired top 5/superstar player status solely by virtue of winning a title? I guess I don't agree that there are a ton of people for whom merely winning a title would confer superstar status. The stars and franchise players are usually recognized as such even in the absence of a title.

Dwyane Wade, perhaps, after 2006...?