Totally agree. Just because we feel the roster needs to be upgraded with a true superstar doesn't mean we think the current team can't compete for home court as is. For those who think we are underestimating the team, personally I think we can push for 55 wins this year with a semi-healthy Yao. That would have been 2nd seed in the west last year. With that said, we are still a clear step below the Lakers, Heat, Celtics and probably Orlando. So it all comes down to what our goals are as a team. To compete or to contend?
Right, scoring guards who didn't make the max. I don't believe Parker was the best player on the team though.
Yes, that was 20 years ago. Since that time, it is actually MORE true to say that superstar point guards do not win championships than it is to say you MUST have a superstar to win a championship.
I'll take a healthy superstar center (a la Hakeem) over a point guard any day. Yao is our missing piece, but unfortunately he's also our biggest IF.
I think if we go for Melo that would be reestructuring the whole team offense, not sure if that is what we need right now. Id say yes if we were going to also get CP3.
1. How long will Aaron Brooks be at his current salary for? 2. Even at his current salary, still no. Absolutely not.
This whole argument is silly. You act like a PG winning it can never happen again just because it hasn't happened recently.
Just like in love there isn't the one, there's just people that happen to be avaliable at the same time you're looking. So it would be just as nice if we got granger or wallace....
Isn't that the same argument that people are using about having a Superstar? I mean some of the time, the players that win the championship are not considered superstars until later in their careers...... Magic was a rookie when he won the first championship......was he a superstar that year? Was Duncan a superstar when he won it his rookie year? DD
Obviously when your point guard is making the max, it leaves less resources to stock other, more important positions. Do you really not see the argument? I mean I know you don't agree, but you act like I'm just making things up as I go along.
I see the argument. But Morey has said max players are the best value in basketball. I don't think it matters if it's at PG. Would I rather have a dominant Center. All things being equal, yes. But other things are not always equal.
And you act like a team without a 'superstar' winning it can never happen again just because it hasn't happened recently ... oh wait, except that it has happened recently. I'm not saying that either route is preferred, just that they're equally as unlikely to lead to a championship. This whole "must have a superstar" argument is mostly all based on what's happened in the last 30 years as well.
Okay, you are making 2 separate arguments. Yes, that is similar to the Superstar argument. However, there are more examples of great PGs winning it (Isaiah and Magic multiple times each) than the nonsuperstar teams winning it (just Detroit). Just to be clear, I think we CAN win it without a superstar, but we have a much better chance WITH one. And statistically, yes Magic and Duncan were arguably superstars their rookie years. Both posted 20+ PERs.
I am just going by what Morey said. He has said that his goal is to acquire a superstar. BTW, this started when you implied it was a bad thing that Melo would make Houston attractive to CP3. I don't see how that can possibly be a bad thing.
We will see if Morey thinks it's worth it to pay a point guard the max. If he does, I'll feel free to disagree with him, if that's okay. It's a bad thing if you don't want a max point guard on the team. Also, with those 2 guys making the max, it would be very interesting to see the quality of bigs Adelman will have to work with. I guess we'd at least get to see more of Chuck, whom I like. If we think it's hard to find a rim protector now ...
