What's new
By:

But...like really.....how the **** are we gonna get a star?

You mean to tell me that there are really people who don't think George is a super-star? ****.

And no, Hayward would not be just as good, or even close to as good as George if he could miraculously switch teams/situations. Which is a stupid argument because we can't switch those scenarios. If George is coached by a better coach (and he is), should I discredit skills he learned from that coach just because other players haven't gotten that opportunity? Hell no.

When you grade whether a player is a super-star or not, you have to do it based off of position, and how he performs in comparison to other players. Paul George is a super-star, and anybody who says otherwise is a fool.
 
Last edited:
Here are the teams that have won titles over the last 20 years:

Miami (LeBron)
Dallas (Dirk)
Lakers (Kobe)
Boston (Pierce, Garnett)
Spurs (Duncan)
Pistons
Lakers (Shaq)
Bulls (Jordan)
Houston (Hakeem)


Would you trade LeBron, Dirk, Kobe, Pierce, Garnett or Duncan, Shaq, Jordan, Hakeem for George? Nope, I wouldn't either.

Also, this is why I am so sick of all this no tank ********. To win a title, you must have one of the top two players in the league. Don't give me all this "team" "Detriot Pistons" crap. They won because LA had injuries. So, I take it back. If you want to win a title in the next three years, you have to have Durrant or LeBron or hope that Durrant/LeBron's team has multiple injuries. Good luck with that.

Just LOSE baby. Why do you think LA and BOS are tanking? They can get any FA they want. They are hoping that Wiggins/Parker are better than Durrant/LeBron.

It's the only way.

Let me put it this way: I'd rather have LeBron, one other 10 million per guy, three mid-level exceptions and minimum contracts than the Pacers team. Hell, I'd rather have that than the Pistons team that won it all.
 
Last edited:
green said:
Here are the teams that have won titles over the last 20 years:

Miami (LeBron)
Dallas (Dirk)
Lakers (Kobe)
Boston (Pierce, Garnett)
Spurs (Duncan)
Pistons
Lakers (Shaq)
Bulls (Jordan)
Houston (Hakeem)


Would you trade LeBron, Dirk, Kobe, Pierce, Garnett or Duncan, Shaq, Jordan, Hakeem for George? Nope, I wouldn't either.
Click to expand...

You'd trade them for Hibbert doe, right?
 
We really, really, REALLY need to do a current NBA Players Mock Draft thing to see how crazy of a team Dalmong ends up with.

PS: You know I love you Dalabro, but still.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
I thought you were asking hypothetically, like could anyone average that and have their team win right now. Not going to go through and look at the stats. Can it happen?

Yes. Fo-Sho. Is it sustainable over a long period of time and will it help them achieve playoff success? No. Look at the Bulls last year. They did pretty good without Rose. They probably had some stretches where they played damn good in the regular season, but overall they failed without him. Same **** would happen to the Pacers.

But Rose probably ain't a super-star in your eyes and Curry is.
Click to expand...

Waiting for teh Dalamon response as to Rose being a super-star.
 
UGLI baby said:
We really, really, REALLY need to do a current NBA Players Mock Draft thing to see how crazy of a team Dalmong ends up with.

PS: You know I love you Dalabro, but still.
Click to expand...

His team at teh end:

PG: Dennis Schroeder
SG: Luigi Datome
SF: Khris Middelton
PF: Vitor Favorini
C: Roy Hibbert

Off teh bench is Pero Antic, Omir Casspi (his twin), and Wayne Gretzky
 
UGLI baby said:
Pro tip: Maybe if people keep saying you have gone full retard you need to take a step back and double check whether or not you have indeed gone full retard.
Click to expand...

Just checked-- haven't gone full-retard.

LazyD said:
If George isn't a 'superstar' by today's standard (and how this standard is determined is beyond me), it's pretty clear he will be in the near future judging by his level of improvement from season to season. He'll also be good for quite a while considering his age. Sounds like a good player to have.
Click to expand...

If he keeps improving, then of course he'll be a superstar-- but how certain are we that he will keep improving. I guess that's the question.
fishonjazz said:
Off topic but i just want to say that im feenin for some jazz basketball right now guys.
Despite this season being a strange one and in some ways a disaster, i still love to watch each and every game and i cant wait for the next one.

It helps with my excitement that Burks emergence/improvement is kind of the main storyline for the jazz currently, but even if that weren't the case i would still be itchin for a jazz game right about now
Click to expand...

I've missed way too many Jazz games this season, and it kinda bums me out. Oh well-- at least I'm missing out on a rather forgettable season.

LazyD said:
I think George can be an efficient closer at this point (in the sense that he can get enough buckets in the end to win the game) mostly because he plays for Indiana and their defense is so good. If he had to do it on a different team I'm not sure he'd be able to do it at this point.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. He wasn't even the main-closer for most of last season (David West was).

Hantlers said:
You mean to tell me that there are really people who don't think George is a super-star? *******.

And no, Hayward would not be just as good, or even close to as good as George if he could miraculously switch teams/situations. Which is a stupid argument because we can't switch those scenarios. If George is coached by a better coach (and he is), should I discredit skills he learned from that coach just because other players haven't gotten that opportunity? Hell no.

When you grade whether a player is a super-star or not, you have to do it based off of position, and how he performs in comparison to other players. Paul George is a super-star, and anybody who says otherwise is a fool.
Click to expand...

So basically: you say that you're floored that some of us doing consider George a superstar; you criticize our arguments; then you go on to define what a superstar is in your perception, which is different from all of our perceptions.

So what is your point, really?

green said:
Let me put it this way: I'd rather have LeBron, one other 10 million per guy, three mid-level exceptions and minimum contracts than the Pacers team. Hell, I'd rather have that than the Pistons team that won it all.
Click to expand...

See, I'd be fine with having a Pistons team-- and to me, the 2014 Pacers are the closest thing to the 2004 Pistons the league has ever had. Consequently, that is why I don't refer to George is a superstar-- to reasons similar to why many wouldn't have considered any of the Pistons' starting five as superstars back in '04.
UGLI baby said:
You'd trade them for Hibbert doe, right?
Click to expand...

You realize that I'm not the only one who values Hibbert more than George-- right? Scroll back in this thread alone, for proof.

UGLI baby said:
We really, really, REALLY need to do a current NBA Players Mock Draft thing to see how crazy of a team Dalmong ends up with.

PS: You know I love you Dalabro, but still.
Click to expand...

If I can fantasy re-draft better than you, I'm sure I'm not as dramatically awful with assessing elite talent as you think I am.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top