Morey has said it several times- all that you can hope for is to be in the running for the championship. Then, once the season and especially the playoffs start, anything can happen. Dwight and James may or may not be top 5 players, but the simple fact that they have the potential for that is enough to get us in the running. Then- anything can happen.
Superstars do make the difference. Problem is you only have about 4-5 at each time in the league. LeBron, Durant, PG and CP currently. Dwight used to be a superstar and Harden is not yet there. When you can't have a superstar you build around all stars like Dwight and Harden
What team without a superstar has won a chip? In recent memory only the 04 Pistons and thats cause they had 3-4 stars + an excellent coach....
Is it just me, or has the opinion of Paul George gone too far? Don't get me wrong, he is a great player. I would love if he was on our team. I just don't see how so many people are putting him as the 3rd or 4th best player in the league right now. I think that his status as an individual player and especially individual defender is being exaggerated because he plays for such a good defensive team with the Pacers.
I would only consider Duncan and Kobe to be superstars from that list. And that was a while back. It's just semantics ayways. If someone only considers the top 3 or 4 players to be superstars that doesn't mean he thinks any less of the other guys.
And they were in the East, Malone got hurt, and Kobe hijacked the Lakers offense off a cliff while Shaq was beasting. It almost never happens.
Players that are regarded as superstars are more consistent than players that are just regarded as stars or average. Of course you want superstars in your team which you can rely on to give you your 25 points, or your 10+ rebounds or your 10+ assists every game at an efficient rate.
I think the Sacramento Kings of 2002 was a close one. That team was a fun fun team to watch. But since they didn't have superstars when they played the Lakers in the WCF game 6, they lost that game and ultimately the WCF.
Harden is the 3rd best offensive player in the league when he is healthy.If he can start replicating the kind of defense we have seen in the last two game on a regular basis, he will be a top 4 player. Durant, James and Chris Paul are the clear top tier players. Harden can join that list if he ever get his defensive woes under control.
O RLY. We'll be sure to send a memo tomorrow night. You know, after we kick their ass and everything...
You need TEAMWORK to win. A superstar just gets you to the next level. Teamwork can help you win games and make the playoffs, but a superstar can help you win tough games in the playoffs. Kyrie: too young, not a leader yet, does not know how to lead a team or get them together Melo: not a leader, not inspiring and just chucks KLove: I don't watch much of him so I cannot say much for him, but it seems like his team chemistry isn't good enough to go far. Does not have the right pieces. can't think of anyone else at the moment
having a bunch of stars who play well together matters a lot. Pacers are a good example, Hibbert, West, PG, and everyone else plays a good role on the team too.
If you have a team of no-name players at the beginning of the year, and they end up going to the finals and possibly winning it.... the best player on that team will then be named a superstar or a star player. If Portland ends up keeping this momentum up until the playoffs people everywhere will then claim that both LaMarcus Aldridge & Lillard are "Star" players. The term star or superstar just has to do with what your accomplishments are, and how much of a household name you have become. Sustained winning helps quite a bit with this. So does having a star make a difference???.... it helps sell tickets at the beginning of the year, and get some national TV games televised, but at the end of the day its all about the team as a whole and what their accomplishments are that year. If you are a big name player who has previous accomplishments, but haven't been on a team that has won anything in awhile it will catch up to you at some point. The most important thing is having a TEAM that produces, but your best players (the ones who should become or should already be considered "stars") are usually the ones who are relied upon to carry the load to be leaders and produce the most on the team. Not a straightforward answer by any stretch, but the most important thing is to have good players & win. Usually the best players that affect wins the most are dubbed stars or superstars so in the end its one in the same.
