Those numbers are still All-Star worthy, even if they're not his career bests. And he had the good fortune of catching fire over the last dozen or so games, before the coaches had to turn in their ballots, which probably left a good impression.
Agree about Gobert. I'd have given it to Harris, though.
Hey, don't get it twisted: it's not zero-sum. When I say that Klay Thompson has had an All-Star worthy season, that doesn't mean that I'm saying that Donovan Mitchell hasn't had an All-Star worthy season. You can talk about Thompson getting in on reputation, and I'm not even going to say it's not true, but just because he got in on reputation doesn't mean that he didn't earn it.
I mean, seeing as how Mitchell and Thompson's line's are virtually identical, what's the case for Mitchell getting in over Thompson?
But Anthony Davis and Karl-Anthony Towns got in despite their teams being under .500. The Warriors don't need 3 All-Stars. If winning is what matters, the Clippers and Jazz both deserved to have 1 player in the game and somebody on the Kings gets in over AD or Towns. If stats matter more than team success then LaMarcus and Klay don't get in. It's some weird combination of stats and team wining percentage and rewarding past performance and "you're too young kid so better luck next year". If they actually had clear guidelines that made sense that would be one thing but this is like Hall of Fame voting where everybody just makes up their own rules to justify their biases. There is no single criteria whereby these 7 players are the most deserving in the Western Conference this year.
Like I said in the other thread, I want to know what the crossover is between people who think that Klay Thompson doesn't deserve to be an All-Star, and people who thought that the Warriors still would have lost last night, had he been available?
Like I said in the other thread, I want to know what the crossover is between people who think that Klay Thompson doesn't deserve to be an All-Star, and people who thought that the Warriors still would have lost last night, had he been available?
He wins games on his own sometimes and he's certainly worthy of an All-Star spot, but I don't think with the year he's had he deserves a spot more than anyone on the Jazz or anyone on the Clippers or Luka Doncic who is carrying an entire team or Buddy Hield who's almost keeping up with Steph Curry from three point range this season. Until January when he started to shoot like Klay Thompson again he'd been pretty mediocre this season. And then when you factor in that Golden State already has 2 All-Stars and Klay has been there 4 times already, I think someone else should have had that spot. He would still be on the short-list for injury replacements though.
Again, I don't disagree that there are other All-Star worthy players in the western conference. I'm just saying that Thompson isn't the guy I take out, to put them in.
Again, I don't disagree that there are other All-Star worthy players in the western conference. I'm just saying that Thompson isn't the guy I take out, to put them in.
You really think the guy that is the 3rd option on a great team is more deserving than the guy that has defensive game plan drawn up to stop him every night?
Klay almost never sees a double team. He is 3rd on the scouting report and the other 2 are sure fire hall of famers that may be the best to ever play their positions offensively. IS he a good player? Sure. Could he be an All Star? Sure. Is he more deserving that Donovan? No way.
The sad part is that Donovan isn't the most deserving player on his team. Rudy is one the top 10 most impactful players in the league. He completly changes what teams try to do against the Jazz and dominates the game in ways that no other player does.
I guess such is life playing in a small market. Its no wonder that all the stars try to get to bigger markets.