"Hero Ball" pejorative term coincided with the rise of the armchair stat geek expert, from Gen-X & on. (I put the "Generation" context in it because its accepted that people now are brought up on an "everybody gets a trophy" mantra. Everyone's a winner, but then they might resent the REAL "winners", the "1%" thats chastised now. BUT THAT CAN be looking at it TOO far.) Sports fan following is 1 part actual analysis, other part being HIGHLY JUDGMENTAL. And its passed off as "scrutiny". So there's both the statistical evidence measures AND there's still the EMOTIONAL component at play. People value INTELLIGENT UNSELFISH players who ARENT p*****s. Though sports is compromised of highly COMPETITIVE EGOS. And you don't become a standout by BLENDING IN as a role player. So it is a double edged sword, you have to BE THE MAN to make it. But then have to temper that same ego and drive on the next level. Some players probably just are unable to do that.
Depends on who the hero would be. The answer is a resounding "no" if the hero was Hakeem Olajuwon or Michael Jordan.
This. I have no problem running Iso-Melo or Iso Durant a million times a game. Hero ball becomes a problem when you're running Iso-Monta Ellis or Iso-Marcus Thorton.
Not saying hero ball is necessarily bad. But that Philly team couldn't have made it past the first round if they were in the West. Iverson played with some good talent in Denver and didn't really help them that much. Hero ball is good if the guy knows how to use it to make the team better. Some hero ball players, and Iverson is an example, can only thrive when they are the solo star. We all know that a solo star with a bunch of average role players aren't going to win championships.
I never want people to act like taking a team in the Leastern Conference to the Finals is a huge, amazing accomplishment. Look at the pitiful competition the Sixers, Nets and Cavs faced and look at what happened to them when they faced a Western Conference team in the Finals. They all got throttled, pummeled. Either a sweep or gentleman's sweep.
Hero ball is when you have a star and he thinks that he has to take "the shot" whether he is open or not, just because he thinks that's what stars must do. Of course it's bad for the game. Jordan passed to Paxton or Kerr when he was tripled and they were open. That doesn't mean he didn't have his own amazing moments when he was 1-one-1 with Byron Russell or Craig Ehlo. Melo wouldn't pass off to a Paxton or a Kerr in a million years, triple team be damned. Stats show it's also a low percentage shot. Kobe in the last possession will take a higher percentage of shots than he will for the rest of the game, and make less of them. Yet he will be called clutch because he makes enough of them that people forget about the misses.
I agree, Rudy Gay is a bad type "Hero Ball" player, he doesn't seem to maxmize on his team's opportunity to win. I can't believe I didn't list this guy Back to football not having "hero ball" players, I completely disagree, you have to look at the players who are known for taking big risks all of the time versus playing it safe. I do think it doesn't exist at most position by nature of sport working with intermingling parts, but I definitely see where QBs, DBs, DEs, and even receivers from time to time can get caught in "Hero Ball" mode. Pretty much any DBs who is notorious for going for interceptions over things like simply bringing a player down once he catches the ball or keeping the receiver covered is a good example. It's plain as day with QBs, Pretty much any QB who takes alot of downfield throws against good to almost impenetrable coverage or in the intermediate areas, sometimes... is most definitely a hero ball player (I guess in this day and age you can throw in QBs who can overly eager to run the ball, as well Vick or Tebow). He's simply using his accurate, strong arm or athleticism to beat defenses versus picking holes in spots of the defense sometimes, which does often lead to more turnovers/interceptions. I want to touch on the Michael Jordan comment as well, the thing with MJ, you also have to consider is that his teammates got better and better over the years, so him engaging in hero ball wasn't quite as necessary, because of competent scoring options, like Kukoc and Pippen or good shooters, like Armstrong, Paxson, and Kerr. On the other hand, you have Kobe who has shown difficulties adjusting his style to other stars, example 04 Lakers with Shaq, Malone, and Payton, 08-11 Lakers with Bynum and Gasol, and this year with Nash, Howard, and Gasol. I should say I do not think hero ball is always a good thing, especially in certain situations, but if you are on struggling team with mediocre talent...it makes alot more sense.
is this a troll? how could you put larry bird as hero ball and not lebron james....if you put larry bird wheres dirk, ewing, malone, hakeem? might as well put every superstar that has ever played
That's your definition of hero ball, not what it is usually meant. When people say hero ball, it means that a player tries to take over the game win by himself disregarding the possibility that involving his teammates may give the team a better chance to win. By this normal definition, baseball cannot have hero ball. The only players who can play hero ball in football are QBs.
As far as what is usually understood by "hero ball", this post pretty much nails its. You want to define the term differently. Ok, whatever, you can have that discussion. It just seems that most replies operate with the definition pacertom described.
For majority of those on the list, hero ball is about ego, being the top dog on the team, and that's where the flaw is. For some, like Larry Bird, hero ball is solely about winning, knowing your teammates' and opponents' strengths and weaknesses and how best to use them to achieve the goal of winning. The true sense of being a "hero" is doing what it takes to win. The false sense is not trusting your teammates and feeling that you alone can save the team, again, all about ego.
Hero ball is not a bad thing if your team needs someone to score. Trusting your teammates is important but when there is a mismatch or your star player is confident he can take on his defender, then by all means use "hero ball". The only time hero ball is bad is if it's the only offense being ran over long periods of time. In some cases it may work if the person drops 40+ points, but if the defense starts going for heavy double teams then the rest of the team needs to get involved. However, I think it's ridiculous if armchair coaches think during times of offensive stagnation, the team should "move the ball" instead of use hero ball, as if somehow passing the ball without any play intended would do anything more but lead to turnovers or waste time on the clock.
