TheBadGuy
Bench
The last two seasons, this season.. well it's only a half-way before the season ends and I meant relevant because atleast now the Knicks have a superstar.
Last edited:
Who are the SUPERstars? (split from trade thread)
- Thread starter TheBadGuy
- Start date
Gary
All-Star
LOL Melo is not a superstar.
Hadlowe
Starter
Ermm, If Melo isn't a superstar, then there are only 3-4 real superstars in the game. He did just win the scoring title and did it pretty efficiently. He has never had a year scoring less than 20 points per game and his career average is a shade less than 25.
Now you can talk about his lack of defense, his tendency to take isolation shots, and his "no snitches" nonsense, but the dude is a top 3 scoring talent in the league even when the opposing team gameplans to contain him and that's superstar territory regardless of anything else.
Gary
All-Star
I think that my definition and other peoples' definition of superstar aren't the same. I might be a bit stingy on who I call a superstar though so who knows.... He's def a star in my book. Just not a star I would want near the team until he learns to make people around him better. But you're right in your assessment. I think there are maybe 3-5 superstars in the league. Unfortunately Miami has two of them. Then of course there is Kobe, and Durant. Guys like Nash and Melo are cusp players in my book..
But like I said above. I am stingy so you're most likely right and I am wrong.
TheBadGuy
Bench
So you're saying that you define a guy a superstar if he makes people around him better and you're saying Steve Nash isn't? how about the players he made better like Amare Stoudemire and even Shawn Marion and also he is a superstar not just in his Canada because he is well known outside his own country and in the world of basketball. Now about Kobe well yes he is definitely a superstar but he did not made people around him better, he had already established players that became his teammate like Pau Gasol don't mention Shaq because he is already a superstar before Kobe became known.
Gary
All-Star
Like I said above (and I don't want to get in a big argument over this), but I think there are only 3-5 superstars in the league at any given time. Compared to how others feel I am sure I am in the minority though. I have a more stringent assessment of players. It's not so much wrong as it is just a higher standard.
Livinthedream
All-Star
I agree with you that there are not many superstars in the league at any one time. I look at it this way. If there is debate on whether someone is a superstar or not, then he probably isn't. Do we argue Lebron's status? How about Durant? Paul? The people that we argue about are stars, but not the cream of the crop.
jalfa
Starter
you might want to update some of those, unless you are talking about how good they were in their prime. plus, five is way too low a number, especially if you count Wade among that group.
TheBadGuy
Bench
Just wanna add, you said Kobe and Durant are superstars, if you'll notice Kobe,Durant and Melo's games are almost the same, they just score and score the only difference individually is that Kobe & Durant play better defense than Melo, and Kobe & Durant had and have all-star teammates and good role players, while Melo had a superstar teammate in Iverson when he was with Denver, then I think he had Chauncey Billups, think that was the time Melo reached the conference finals before losing to Kobe & Pau. Now that Melo is with the Knicks, he doesn't have good role player teammates, he has Chandler but we all know he is injury prone, Martin is old, Smith is a headcase and a chucker, he has Iman who is inconsistent, a terrible coach in Woodson and Amare an all-star years ago who is not the same player anymore.
Gary
All-Star
Nah 3 to 5 was a low number from me. It was incorrect. I was looking at the list of players last night and could see about 10 or so I would call superstars so I was a bit hasty in saying there are only 3 to 5. I think Nash is the cusp of Star and Superstar. Basically a measuring stick of sorts. You could definitely go either way with him and not be wrong.
Paul is probably right above the star/superstar border. You have guys like Kobe/Durant/James/Duncan which are in a class of their own. They are the tier 1 superstar who will all be top 50 list all time. That second tier of super-stardom and top tier of stardom are the arguing points. You have that border between the two and can argue that some of those can go on either side.
Dime Dropper
All-Star
You're talking about all of those guys in their prime right? Because you're using the present tense, and Nash/Duncan are nowhere near being superstars at this point in time.
jalfa
Starter
basically, what Dime Dropper said. if you are talking prime, then what are your current superstar level players, where do you see guys like George, Aldridge, Love, Curry, Westbrook, Harden, Griffin, etc?
Gary
All-Star
Probably borderline star/superstar for most those players. I am partial to Kevin Love though so he's a superstar in my book. His stats are just too good, and his rebounding positioning (when watching his games) is a thing of beauty. He's a very smart player who has good instinct.
I'd be interested in seeing your list.
Hadlowe
Starter
I know you weren't talking to me, but the present superstars to me are:
1) Lebron
2) KD
3) Hibbert
4) Dwight
5) Melo
6) Paul George
7) Wade
8) Chris Paul
There are a number of injury question marks like Kobe, Rose and Westbrook. It's not a popular opinion, but I think Blake Griffin is on the cusp of superstardom. He has improved his free throws and mid-range game to the extent that it has opened up the lane for him. The only thing left is his defense, but he will never be an amazing defensive presence in the post because of his wingspan.
Leaving out the injured guys you mentioned, the true superstars IMO are:
Lebron, Durant, Chris Paul and Tony Parker. Parker is really underrated IMO and many people still ascribe the Spurs' success to Duncan, but the reality is that he's been their driving force for the past few years, was their last finals MVP and has definitely taken over as the primary guy for the Spurs. One rebound away from being a 4-time champion and yet some don't even think of him as an all-star.
George and Melo and to a slightly lesser extent Wade make up the next class. Superstars in their own right but not quite at the level of the top-tier guys. George can still definitely make the jump though.
I'd put guys like Dwight, Harden, Hibbert, Curry and Blake in the next tier. They're good enough to impact the game in a huge way but still have certain huge deficiencies or inconsistencies. Cousins should be somewhere around this territory, but the team needs to win more first.
I honestly am not sure you can call Kobe a "current" superstar. He's gonna have to work very hard to get back to anything close to superstar level.
Superstardom requires a combination of productivity and popularity. You can't be a superstar without being popular, unless you're one of the 2-3 best in the world. And the last player who was one of the best 2-3 in the world, at any point in his career, without being popular, was Duncan in 2002-03.
Superstardom also demands longevity. You don't get to be a superstar because you had one good year. And you don't stop being a superstar just because you had one bad year.
Superstardom also demands longevity. You don't get to be a superstar because you had one good year. And you don't stop being a superstar just because you had one bad year.
S
SacKings2002NBAChampions
Guest
A superstar is a hall of famer type of player
Those players currently are: Lebron, Durant, Wade, CP3, Aldridge, Love, Westbrook
Love, Westbrook and Aldridge are guys who are still a big notch behind the first 4 guys listed. However, they are playing like hall of famers this season. Westbrook might be the only one not deserving it but if he was on a team with no Durant, his #'s would be way higher.
Aldridge has had an average career thus far; however, he is playing like a true all-star-famer this season and very few big guys can stop him.
DMC, Rondo, Paul George, and Melo are players who still have to prove themselves to be superstars. Some are too young and others forget what Basketball TEAM means...yeah, I'm talking to you Melo.
I might give D. Howard the nod of superstar; however, he is playing way below his level of potential and has been for the last couple of years.
Hibbert is not a hall of famer and neither was Ben Wallace who was a much better defender and rebounder.
There are more superstars in the league such as Kobe, Duncan, Garnett, Pierce etc who were once superstars but are too old now and age/injuries have dampened their skill set.
Blake Griffin as a superstar?!??! LOL
Someone is trolling lol
Those players currently are: Lebron, Durant, Wade, CP3, Aldridge, Love, Westbrook
Love, Westbrook and Aldridge are guys who are still a big notch behind the first 4 guys listed. However, they are playing like hall of famers this season. Westbrook might be the only one not deserving it but if he was on a team with no Durant, his #'s would be way higher.
Aldridge has had an average career thus far; however, he is playing like a true all-star-famer this season and very few big guys can stop him.
DMC, Rondo, Paul George, and Melo are players who still have to prove themselves to be superstars. Some are too young and others forget what Basketball TEAM means...yeah, I'm talking to you Melo.
I might give D. Howard the nod of superstar; however, he is playing way below his level of potential and has been for the last couple of years.
Hibbert is not a hall of famer and neither was Ben Wallace who was a much better defender and rebounder.
There are more superstars in the league such as Kobe, Duncan, Garnett, Pierce etc who were once superstars but are too old now and age/injuries have dampened their skill set.
Blake Griffin as a superstar?!??! LOL
Someone is trolling lol
Last edited by a moderator:
TheBadGuy
Bench
Who? You?
S
SacKings2002NBAChampions
Guest
You think Blake Griffin is a superstar? LOL
The only thing he will be remembered for is his incredible athleticism.
Besides that, he brings nothing to the table. He was just gifted with an incredible ability to leap. Good for him.
Not a superstar though. If he was, the Clippers would be contending CP3 and Jordan but Griffin lacks that superstardom.
He has time though...
It's also unimpressive when your best year was your rookie year...
TheBadGuy
Bench
You think Aldridge, Love & Westbrook are superstars? LOL
Guess what Blake is known outside the US, plus the fact that he plays in a big market team adds to a players superstar status, look at Tim Duncan, he has HoF/superstar skills alright but guess what he plays in a small market team so he isn't that famous so he can't be labeled as a superstar. I'm not a fan of Griffin but you said he is only remembered because of his athleticism? how about Durant, he is only known for his uncanny scoring ability. Look at Shaq, he is a superstar but he is only known for his brute strength. Dennis Rodman is considered a superstar because of his hustle,defense and especially his rebounding.
Last edited:
S
SacKings2002NBAChampions
Guest
I don't consider fame a factor in superstardom LOL
I am talking about on court abilities.
Get real.
Kris Humphries is a superstar according to you as well because the majority of the world knows of him due to being married or whatever to Kim Kardashian. Don't make me laugh....
Aldridge, Love and Westrbook are having superstar seasons. Will they be considered superstars when they retire....Who knows. Probably not Aldridge.
If Blake Griffin is not a superstar, then the word has no value.
TheBadGuy
Bench
Now you're talking about on court abilities, tell me is Shaq that skilled? he only uses his strength dude, like Shaq again he uses his strength to score inside. It's like saying Monta Ellis or Jamal Crawford is a superstar because they have better on court skills than Blake.
If I said that player's superstar status is defined by that then I would have mentioned that Rick Fox is also a superstar because of his marriage to Vannessa Williams or Sasha Vujacic's previous relationship with tennis superstar Maria Sharapova, or I mentioned that Rodman is a superstar because of his affair with Madonna.
Since when fame did not become a factor in superstardom? how can you become a superstar if you're not famous? now tell me how did Michael Jordan become a superstar if he's not famous? It's like saying you're a basketball player even if you don't even know how to dribble/shoot the ball. LOL
Keep trolling and someday you might become a superstar like what you're saying. LOL
Last edited:
S
SacKings2002NBAChampions
Guest
Probably the most ridiculous thing I've ever read.
Michael Jordan became famous because he's the best basketball player to have played the game- Skill set
Roger Federer became famous because he's the greatest tennis player to have played the game- Skill set.
Tiger Woods became famous (besides scandal) because he is the greatest golfer of all time- Skill set.
Fedor Emelianenko became famous (without speaking a word of English) because he was one of the greatest MMA fighters of all time and went practically undefeated for a decade- Skill set.
Shaq was one of the best big men to play the game. He was an unstoppable force. He was gifted with his athleticism and formidable strength. Just like Cousins was gifted with his acrobatics and flexibility. Like Novak Djokovic was gifted with his athleticism, acrobatics and flexibility.
These are all athletes who earned their right to superstardom from years of domination, blood spills and hard work. Not because they could crack a joke or two. Novak Djokovic was always known as a funny guy in his teenager years and the whole world loved him but was never considered a superstar because he only had 1 grand slam under his belt. Once he matured and became more serious, he became a superstar. His personality is now more bland but he is considered one of the greatest of all time because of his improved Skill set and hard work that he put into his career.
Your definition of a superstar is a joke and if it was up to you, Kris Humphries would be a hall of famer LOL joke
TheBadGuy
Bench
Your previous post was the most ridiculous post here, why? because you said, FAME is not a factor in superstardom. Michael Jordan didn't became famous if he didn't have FAME.
See, now you're saying it's based on a players skill set, you mentioned now Shaq bases that on his strength and athleticism but in your past posts you said Blake only has his athleticism, what you said now is contrary to what you've posted earlier. Why don't you add Rick Fox as a superstar because he is the husband of Vanessa Williams and Sasha Vujacic because he is the former fiancee of Maria Sharapova. LOL
Keep trolling.
Last edited:
Given how faulty your definition of "superstar" is, I shouldn't be surprised that your definition of "fame" is equally faulty. You are either deliberately obfuscating, or you have a problem understanding the definitions of words. Superstardom requires a combination of talent and fame. Therefore, your Kris Humphries strawman suffers from two important problems:
- Kris Humphries doesn't have the talent to merit consideration as a superstar.
- Kris Humphries is not famous. Or rather, Kris Humphries is famous in the same way that Drew Bisnaught is famous. Which is to say, Kris Humphries is not famous.
Famous, in sports terms, is when your name puts an ass every eighteen inches, as the saying goes. Famous is when your merchandise sells out in Bucharest. Famous is not having a cup of coffee on a second-rate cable reality show.
Superstars are not guys about whom they ask, "Could he be an All-Star?" Superstars are guys about whom they ask, "Could he be the MVP?", or "Could he lead his team to the championship?" But superstars are also guys about whom people say, "You know, if I can only afford to go to one game a year, I'm going to go to the one when that guy's playing!"
Similar threads
