There's a big difference between being the star of a team and being a role player. Draymond Green, Kenny Smith, Robert Horry are some of the best role players ever, but they were never stars of their franchises. Payton didn't become a role player until his Heat and Laker days.
White Chocolate Just Compared Carmello Anthony to Stockton and Malone
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
There's a big difference between being the star of a team and being a role player. Draymond Green, Kenny Smith, Robert Horry are some of the best role players ever, but they were never stars of their franchises. Payton didn't become a role player until his Heat and Laker days.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
No you cant. Because he does what most players can't do. You can find a lot of players who shoot 44% or close to it.
Think about it. You are pretty much guaranteed so many possessions and opportunities to shoot the ball. With good ball movement and screens you can get open looks. With decent players you can get just as many buckets with or without Melo. So having a guy like Green does something for you that not everyone can do. That's stop the other players and force them to shoot lower percentages. That's why Rudy made such a huge impact on our team.
Having an elite scorer is nice if he plays the other parts of them game. If he doesn't then it's a waste. Having a great defender is never a waste. And Draymond is a pretty damn good offensive player too. That's all getting lost in this argument.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
You're arguing against me when I was trying to defend your point. Denver got Gallinari and Chandler and were still just about as good record-wise. That doesn't mean Melo was a scrub. It means they got weaker at his position, but made up for it at another by bringing in TWO quality players. And I'd argue the same would be true with GS trading Green...if they got two players of similar talent as Gallinari and Chandler in return.
Look at the Jazz. Would Utah be a better team if we could trade Hayward for a decent SF and a decent PG? At least in the short-term, yes. Losing Hayward would be a hit, but Jazz would be vastly improved at the PG position (based on last season's production from Exum/Burke).
And before I get negged from the usual crowd that hate me, NO, I am NOT advocating trading Hayward or benching Exum. Our hope for contending largely rests on Exum becoming a top-10 PG (along with Gobert making some major leaps forward).
Honestly, what separates Ron Artest and Draymond Green?
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
If anyone thinks Draymond Green didn't have a huge impact on the success of the Warriors in both the regular season and the playoffs, then you are just seeing what's really going on out there. I'm sorry., but it's true.
Green gave them that defensive identity and attitude. He is what transformed them into a championship squad. Steph is the best player, and they don't win it without him. Klay is second and they don't win it without him, and Draymond is 3rd, and they don't win it without him.
It usually takes a stacked team to win the championship. 3 big time players is a formula that gets its done quite often. Rarely do you see stars do it by themselves.
Green gave them that defensive identity and attitude. He is what transformed them into a championship squad. Steph is the best player, and they don't win it without him. Klay is second and they don't win it without him, and Draymond is 3rd, and they don't win it without him.
It usually takes a stacked team to win the championship. 3 big time players is a formula that gets its done quite often. Rarely do you see stars do it by themselves.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Not much, but what's your point? Artest in his prime was very good and made his teams better.
Just wondering.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
I guess we can agree to disagree. They were on their way the year before. Replacing the coach did wonders, as did another year of experience for Klay. Sure, you can say Green was the final piece, but that doesn't make him equally important to the other stars. Replace the weakest link on ANY team and that team will improve. You could also make a case that the W's improved as much as they did because Barnes (48%/41%) replaced Iggy in the starting lineup.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
What Melo is and was is a guy who had a lot of promise, and got everyone all excited about how good he could be, and in the end he never capitalized on it. He didn't improve his game. He just shot the ball and scored, and didn't learn how to win. That's his story. A guy who didn't get it. Pretty much wasted his talents. He had his moments and was really good on the USA team when he was surrounded other really good players. But he always lacked that extra stuff that champions have that sets them apart.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I didn't say he was as equally important. I posted in order their importance. But he still was very important. Without him, it's a good possibility they don't win as many games and lose in the conference finals or something.
Rodman was still very important for the Bulls.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
I disagree. You don't build a team around a guy like Carmello and win in the playoffs. You probably can't build a team around Draymond and win in the playoffs but at least he is not going to destroy your chances of winning it all. With Carmello he does destroy your chances of winning it all because of the player he is. I'd take Green every time regardless of circumstances.
Artest in his prime was a way better scorer than Green too. I'm not sure if this is suppose to be a diss at Green, Im confused.
They are pretty different. I mean, they are both great defenders who play hard, but the comp kind of ends there.