G
Compare these two players' career stats:
Player A:
14.8 ppg, 6.4 rb, 9.4 asst, 2.1 steals, 3.4 turnovers, 40% FG, 78% FT
Player B:
13.9 ppg, 6.0 rb, 6.2 asst, 2.2 steals, 2.0 turnovers, 45% FG, 77% FT
Who is better? Doesn't it appear that their statistics are fairly similar? Player A scores a little bit more per game, and he averages over 3 assists per game more. Player B, however, averages 1.5 less turnovers per game, and is a more efficient shooter. All their other stats are virtually identical.
Player A is a sure fire Hall of Famer. The only way Player B will enter the Hall of Fame is if he buys a ticket. Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?
The reason that is the case, in my opinion, is because Player A plays during an era when it is important to "do everything." No longer is it sufficient to dominate in one or two areas -- a true superstar must be a man of all trades. It's idiotic, and it's something the media helped create in the early 1990's.
Back when Oscar Robertson averaged a triple-double for a season, no one even knew what a triple-double was. It wasn't until well into Magic Johnson's career that the term became popular. Then the feat reached a level of importance that was a little ridiculous. What do you think is more impressive: scoring 29 points, pulling down 18 rebounds, and only missing 5 shots, or scoring 11 points, pulling down 10 rebounds, dishing out 10 assists, and missing 10 shots? Up until recently, it was the former. Now it appears to be the latter. It seems that the media and fans will ignore the missed shots and the turnovers, just as long as the player puts up the mystical triple-double.
And unfortunately, some athletes have bought into this nonsense. Charles Barkley, Chris Webber, Derrick Coleman, and Antoine Walker, to name a few, are athletes who seem to feel compelled to try and do everything, even if they would be much more effective just doing the things they do well and forgetting about the 3 point shots and the tricky passes.
That is why Player A, in my opinion, is one of the most overrated players in the NBA. People are enthralled with his ability to "do it all," even though he does some things very poorly (like shooting and turning the ball over). Back when Player B was playing and putting up virtually the same stats, no one cared all that much.
They are/were both good players, but Player A does not belong anywhere near the Hall of Fame. He was just lucky enough to play in an era when people cared about players who could "do it all."
BTW, Player A is Jason Kidd. Player B is Fat Lever.
Player A:
14.8 ppg, 6.4 rb, 9.4 asst, 2.1 steals, 3.4 turnovers, 40% FG, 78% FT
Player B:
13.9 ppg, 6.0 rb, 6.2 asst, 2.2 steals, 2.0 turnovers, 45% FG, 77% FT
Who is better? Doesn't it appear that their statistics are fairly similar? Player A scores a little bit more per game, and he averages over 3 assists per game more. Player B, however, averages 1.5 less turnovers per game, and is a more efficient shooter. All their other stats are virtually identical.
Player A is a sure fire Hall of Famer. The only way Player B will enter the Hall of Fame is if he buys a ticket. Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?
The reason that is the case, in my opinion, is because Player A plays during an era when it is important to "do everything." No longer is it sufficient to dominate in one or two areas -- a true superstar must be a man of all trades. It's idiotic, and it's something the media helped create in the early 1990's.
Back when Oscar Robertson averaged a triple-double for a season, no one even knew what a triple-double was. It wasn't until well into Magic Johnson's career that the term became popular. Then the feat reached a level of importance that was a little ridiculous. What do you think is more impressive: scoring 29 points, pulling down 18 rebounds, and only missing 5 shots, or scoring 11 points, pulling down 10 rebounds, dishing out 10 assists, and missing 10 shots? Up until recently, it was the former. Now it appears to be the latter. It seems that the media and fans will ignore the missed shots and the turnovers, just as long as the player puts up the mystical triple-double.
And unfortunately, some athletes have bought into this nonsense. Charles Barkley, Chris Webber, Derrick Coleman, and Antoine Walker, to name a few, are athletes who seem to feel compelled to try and do everything, even if they would be much more effective just doing the things they do well and forgetting about the 3 point shots and the tricky passes.
That is why Player A, in my opinion, is one of the most overrated players in the NBA. People are enthralled with his ability to "do it all," even though he does some things very poorly (like shooting and turning the ball over). Back when Player B was playing and putting up virtually the same stats, no one cared all that much.
They are/were both good players, but Player A does not belong anywhere near the Hall of Fame. He was just lucky enough to play in an era when people cared about players who could "do it all."
BTW, Player A is Jason Kidd. Player B is Fat Lever.
