@harold bingo the impact is statistical only, which in itself doesn't mean much. this thread is about talent. amen has more than all but a few...
Fair enough, that's an interesting distinction. I don't agree that it "doesn't mean much", I think it matters more than anything else. After all, the team with more points (a stat) wins the game, so that's really the only thing that matters, is impacting that in some way. But if we're just talking talent then you're right about Amen, he should be way higher on the list. And he would be if we were able to use him the same way we did last year.
Right, and in the 2025-26 NBA season alone Amen Thompson has not done a whole lot to positively impact that, despite having a lot of talent.
we'll just have to leave it there. i expected more from him this year and agree he is out of position. more than all that, we are still figuring it out as a team, a work in progress. however, to say amen hasn't had a positive impact on winning is dumber than the list you posted.
Re-read what I said then. I didn't say he hasn't had a positive impact on winning, he very obviously has. I said he hasn't done "a whole lot" - this is relative to his talent and what he did for us last year. He has done less this year than last year, like you said, due to playing out of position and trying to figure out his fit in the new team. And yes, it is a work in progress, I think we all expect it to improve.
Nobody is disputing you need a superstar to win, you were claiming the Rockets didnt have any stars when KD just scored 30 pts in 3 quarters. The Rockets are better than all but a couple teams in the NBA. If they didnt have any stars and arent even contenders how can they even be in this position? Referring back to that ranking you mentioned how can a team with the no 3 and no 14 be worse than the team with no 17 and no 24? That just shows having no "top 10 player" as you say isnt the insurmountable gap that you are claiming it to be. Even a guy in the 10-20 range can beat teams with higher ranked stars depending on team depth, tactics and matchups. Rox may not win a ring and def arent favored to win a ring but they are still contenders as a 7 game series with any team is a toss up considering their losses to OKC and Nuggets are all very small margins.
He literally said the Houston Rockets had no stars nobody is trying to twist anything. You are the one who doesnt get it the Houston Rockets are one of a couple teams top 10 in both offensive and defensive rating if they didnt have any stars how can they get that type of result?
Because its the regular season and not the championship. I'm not disputing they can be a really good team and have a really good record, lots of teams do that without having a top tier player. The Hawks won 60 games and got the 1 seed when their best players were Al Horford and Paul Millsap. Those teams just never win championships is all. I think we agree conceptually on "you need a superstar", I just have the bar way higher for what that means than you do. I don't think there's much more for us to discuss, I don't think anything posted or any evidence is going to get either one of to change our minds. Just a difference of opinion.
