I think Detroit is a good example, I think Boston last year is a good example, IMHO, there are very few superstar players. In the league right now, I count a few. Lebron Kobe I think that may be it....Wade is great, as are Duncan, Garnett, Pierce etc, but I don't think any of them are good enough to win a game all alone, or will their team to victory which to me is what a Superstar does. DD
I agree it was a good move Deckard, but now after everything the guy has done, and watching the team grow without him, I don't want him at any cost. I believe he would ultimatly hurt the team....because of who he is and how he plays. DD
OK! That I can understand, but that's not what I got earlier. BTW, You and some of the rest of us were right about Scola from the beginning. Just so you'll feel better.
Mcgrady, before he has hit his health issues was constantly around 6 assist per game. Thats not a me-me attitude. There is a reason Jeff Van Gundy said he was the best wing passer in the game many of times. Dont say he is just a me-me guy. That is a dumb statement. So your saying that you wouldnt take Kobe on this team either, because we both know Tracy is a better passer than Kobe. So would you take Kobe? I mean a fully 100% Tracy is not that far below a Kobe imo.
LOL - at the end of the day most of it is about opinion, and style of play each of us like. There is rarely a lot of right and wrong, mostly shades of gray, let's just say, my shade of gray is really leaning heavily towards the right side. DD
If all you are doing is taking a shallow look at assists then you do not understand what I am talking about. Tell ya what I wlll find funny though is when he is traded, what will all these fans with Tmac in their name do? DD
Nah, I still have Langhi weighing me down... What do you think would happen if Clutch had a one week clemency period where people with Tmac could change their handle, how many or what percentage would take him up on it? DD
Last post on this, because this is really going nowhere. 1. I don't know why you would pick a team oriented approach when superstar dominated teams hold the overwhelming advantage historically in the NBA record books. 2. You're obscuring the parameters of this discussion. Almost everyone here agrees the team is better off this year without the current McGrady. That's not in question - the guy's career is over, I don't want him back, he's done, finished etc. You're obfuscating by interweaving the two separate discussions. The primary debate is concerning the theoretical return of a healthy McGrady and your retrospective critique of his career with the Rockets. Looking at this logically, the primary support of your assertion in not accepting a theoretically healthy McGrady is what you define as this inherent quality of "ball stopping" that you claim has been the crux of all of the Rockets' past failures. When people raise the relevance of his current health/efficacy, you have argued that these are irrelevant as his 'style of play' has always been a problem. If you are committed to this argument, then his degree of health/efficacy is also completely irrelevant to this discussion. So the logical flow of your argument would commit you to not accepting the 2005-MVP level McGrady on this team. Is that correct? You have just argued that you would not take the 2005 Tracy McGrady on this current Houston Rockets team. I'll allow that to sink in for the viewers at home. I realize we are all excited about the big win against Charlotte last night, but let's be reasonable.
That detroit team was stacked. Boston had three hall of fame superstars. How do you not consider KG or Pierce a superstar? You have totally lost me and have become blinded by your hatred of McGrady and love of the scrubs in this league.
I rate very few players as Superstars.......VERY few. I think all 3 boston players are stars......but none are good enough to carry a team to the finals... Just a difference of standards I guess. DD
Arguing who is a superstar is kind of difficult. Some people define the word "superstar" differently so it is hard to argue about.
That bogs down to a pointless debate on semantics. Whatever you want to label them, players like Garnett, Peirce, Duncan etc. are vastly superior to what we have had outside of a healthy McGrady.
No player can carry a team by himself to the finals. You have to have good teammates to get to the finals. I will say the closes I've seen it done is by Lebron and A.I. though. Last year Kobe's had some pretty good players around him.
I find it most humerous then that both of your superstars were not able to beat Boston and their lowly stars last year. KG's overall impact on the game is greater than Lebron, Kobe, Yao or anyone else for that matter. It truly amazes me that you don't consider KG a superstar in this league.
Just a point I'd like to throw out there: I think Tracy McGrady played A LOT differently while Aaron Brooks was starting at the point. He took fewer shots, averaged more points/rebound/assists/steals than usual, and played withing the team concept. Just some food for thought...
As far as this board goes people hate KG's personality so they will always try to downgrade his play on the court. That was obvious when someone tried to say right now Rasheed Wallace is a better player than Kevin Garnett.
