The whole x player is the franchise guy threads are annoying.

I wouldn’t consider tatum a franchise guy but i also have much higher standards for who makes that cutoff. Usually there are max 5 in the league

 

So, you came in to slay us!

 

Even the most silly Alperen fans (mostly the Turkish ones) were closer to the truth than the multitude of peeps trying to sign Mo Bamba to start over Alperen because of his wingspan.

In other words, the Alperen Franchise thread is a good troll tickler.

 

Vince is a much better name than Sixth man Jalen....who knew.....it's Saturday Night Live.

 

The purpose was to prematurely anoint Sengun our franchise player without determining if he's even capable of carrying that load. European players tend to get lesser expectations with more praise in these circles which is annoying

 

How is it premature? Sengun has been the best player on the team for 2 years now....now there is a player on the Rockets that seems to get VERY low expectations with a ridiculous level of praise for his failure....but that guy isn't European.

So maybe you just said that backwards?

 

Joined 18 days away from having a say in the matter…

 

I think there is a serious point to be made here. Finding our "franchise" guy, or three, is important in this league if we want to win. That aside, I think most of the "x is our franchise guy" are either meant to be a bit ironic, something of a joke, or are just the shorthand for "I love this player, he's gonna be the ONE!" Shampoo is better! No conditioner is better! Sorry it pisses you off so much, and I'm glad you posted about it.

The truth is, we are about to find out where Stone and the gang see the hierarchy of our "franchise" players. Sengun is going to get paid we know. Will Jalen? Honestly, we can rank all of them but I don't think I would count any as top 10 players in the league. Or even top 20. I think that's where the "franchise" guys actually are. SGA for sure. Anthony Edwards absolutely. Jalen...not yet. Sengun...closer but not yet. I hope they all find they're way there and we become the Lakers of the 80s.

 

@Jontro

Tilman is the franchise playa

 

It does matter though. I read your whole post but I'm singling this part out because it seems like you're suggesting that we don't need to "pick a franchise player" and that we should just root for everyone. But this is the NBA, and you need a franchise player, you need a pecking order, you need a top guy, and you need roleplayers. There's only one ball, and only one guy can be at the top. So for example, if you think we should play through Jalen, and he requires a fast paced playstyle and open floor to thrive, then we should trade Sengun. Not that I'm on that team, but if you think Jalen Green has MVP potential with a properly spaced floor and rim running center, we should absolutely get rid of Sengun. On the opposite end of the spectrum, if you think Sengun has Jokic potential, we should start playing through him, push him up to 35% usage, and let him control the offense on every possession. We should surround him with shooters, and we should trade away players who need to touch the ball, who need open lanes. Which means we should probably trade Jalen for a guy who does better off the ball.

And look, obviously those aren't the only two options. Those are just two extremes. There are a million different options in between the two, but I'm just trying to say that these are important discussions. It's not as simple as "I hope everyone is really good! Lets root for all our guys!" Certain guys can be held back by their role and their situation. I think James Harden was a really obvious example that we should all be familiar with. Or a more recent example would be a guy like Jalen Brunson, there's no way he would've ascended to his current level if he was playing behind Luka, or especially if he was a sixth man behind Luka and Kyrie. Not that I'm saying they should've gotten rid of Luka or anything, I think Luka is obviously way better. But players can be held back by their role, they can be held back by a system, and they can be held back by other players. And Brunson was absolutely being held back by Luka and the Dallas system.

All of this is to say that I don't think it makes you a "bad fan" to disparage current rocket players. They can't all dominate the ball, they can't all average 30, they can't all have the offense set up in their favor. So I think in general these are worthwhile discussions. As long as we don't have a "franchise player", I think deciding who the franchise player is going to be is probably the most important topic. And I do agree with you on the "X-only-fans" guys get weird and annoying, I could write a lot more on that, but my post is getting long so I'll just cut it off here.

 

Well, now you know.

He is.

 

Vince is the GARM's Franchise Poster

 

lots of dumb shi+ on here everyday bro. It’s entertaining and fun to dispel bias, myths and misinformation

 

There's some thought here that I respect but your thesis statement at the end I disagree with, IMO. "Deciding who the franchise player is going to be is probably the most important topic."

Championship teams don't "decide who the franchise player is going to be". The franchise player makes himself undeniably a franchise player by being elite in the opportunity that they're given.

The Knicks didn't anoint Jalen Brunson their franchise player when they signed him. They weren't built around him. They signed him to be a starting PG, and then he's played so well he's made it undeniable that he's the franchise guy. Then they built around him. They had actually been planning on getting Donovan Mitchell long-term.

The metrics said James Harden was already a top 20 player before he was traded to the Rockets (14th in RAPM). Morey's FO was all metrics based, particularly RAPM type models. Daryl Morey said they traded for him because they thought he was already at that level. Hence he was a franchise player. They didn't choose a young good up and coming player and say "we decide you're our franchise player now". They acquired a player they already thought was truly elite, and gave him the keys.

Hell, Shai wasn't even considered a franchise player by OKC until 2022-23. The Thunder were heavily rumored to be open to trading him for the #1 pick.

It doesn't go: young player is very good -> team decides he's the franchise player -> now young player can become worthy of franchise player status.

It goes: young player is very good -> young player improves and shows he's truly elite -> young player achieves franchise player status.

So I'm all about realist player evaluation discussion. Calling out our players' flaws and strengths, figuring out who's getting better and who's stagnating, realistically evaluating where our players stand in the league etc. But the truth is that if there's a franchise player among our core 7, it'll be apparent on the court and via metrics in comparison with the rest of the league, not because of an organizational decision or discussion pitting them against each other.

 

this thread needs a poll . . . which franchise player thread is most annoying?

 

I.D.I.O.T.

 

I think we actually mostly agree here. I wasn't suggesting that we should anoint someone before they prove it. As you said, we have to wait for someone to prove it. But at the same time, it is possible to stifle the potential of a player if they aren't being used correctly, or if they aren't given the opportunity to succeed, just like Brunson. Would he ever have revealed himself as a tier 1 player who can average 29 and carry a team to the playoffs if he stayed in Dallas? Was it "apparent on the court", as you said? I think the answer is almost definitely not. Sure, the knicks didn't build their entire team around him and crown him before he could prove it, but they definitely saw enough in him to give him that opportunity to prove himself. An opportunity he didn't get in Dallas, just like Harden was given an opportunity he wasn't given in OKC.

So I'm not suggesting we've reached a point where any player has demonstrated they are at the point that they should be built around. We don't have a franchise player yet. But a player's metrics differ drastically based on who they share the court with, and what role they're given. The organization doesn't have to crown a player before he deserves it, but the way this org decides to use each player can definitely impact our view of them. What's the quote about judging a fish by it's ability to climb a tree? Something like that.