- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: tAthletic NBA Tiers l A must read for Zion haters
Posted on 8/17/23 at 9:38 pm to shel311
Posted on 8/17/23 at 9:38 pm to shel311
quote:
This has happened arguably once in the last 50 years, while teams with at least 1 star or more have won it the other 49 times.
Something like 5 teams have won 80% of the championships. Lebron James has played in 9 of the last 13 finals. It's just not a big selection of teams.
quote:
Stars win titles, they always have. What reason do you have to believe otherwise?
To be fair, you use the title star pretty loosely. You apply it to the top 30ish or so guys in the league. I'm a bit more selective and only use it for the top 15ish, maybe top 20. We just saw Butler and Booker come close recently. Same with Tatum and Brown before they started really emerging.
I think a deep, balanced team with above average players would give teams fits. But let's say I'm right and it worked, well those players would become "stars". Championships tend to do that. It elevates players. So you would end up being right. Chicken or the egg..
2
Posted on 8/17/23 at 9:39 pm to whatiknowsofar
quote:
Refuse to believe this. After watching him in the playoffs he has another level that he unlocks when the spotlight is huge. He'll never be a top 15 player, but he can absolutely be in that 20-25 range.
To be fair, 20-25 range is still tier 3 in this list. Zion has tier 1 potential.
Posted on 8/17/23 at 10:01 pm to brmark70816
quote:Exactly... Because those teams have stars
Something like 5 teams have won 80% of the championships. Lebron James has played in 9 of the last 13 finals. It's just not a big selection of teams.
quote:First of all, these guys are absolutely stars.
Butler and Booker come close recently. Same with Tatum
Second of all, they didn't win. Getting close =/= winning.
quote:Absolutely the egg
I think a deep, balanced team with above average players would give teams fits. But let's say I'm right and it worked, well those players would become "stars". Championships tend to do that. It elevates players. So you would end up being right. Chicken or the egg..
Stars win championships in the NBA, not a team of 5 Naji Marshalls, a Larry Nance, and a Trey Murphy. Now if you have a team with 8-10 guys who are ranked 15-30 in the NBA, sure you can win a championship, but that team is impossible to create.
Posted on 8/17/23 at 10:07 pm to brmark70816
quote:
. I am of the opinion that 8-10 above average players that compliment each other should be a solid playoff team and, given the right circumstances
Your opinion is bad
Posted on 8/18/23 at 5:29 am to PP7 for heisman
quote:
Exactly... Because those teams have stars
Sometimes the championships made them stars. It pushed them to the next level.
quote:
First of all, these guys are absolutely stars.
Maybe now. But were they before they went to the finals the first time?
quote:
Absolutely the egg Stars win championships in the NBA, not a team of 5 Naji Marshalls, a Larry Nance, and a Trey Murphy.
If I had a team of 8-10 guys at Murphy's level/upside, I think that team is dangerous and has a shot.
quote:
Now if you have a team with 8-10 guys who are ranked 15-30 in the NBA, sure you can win a championship, but that team is impossible to create.
Sure. What about 10 players that are all top 100, with 3 in the top 50?
That team is a consistent top 5 seed. Given the right breaks in the playoffs, I think its a contender.
But its a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because that level of success would elevate those players to "stars" and they would become overvalued. So I think I'm right, but I would end up being wrong if I was successful..
Posted on 8/18/23 at 8:55 am to whatiknowsofar
I would agree Tier 1 is
Curry, Durant, Doncic, Giannis, Embiid, and Joker
I think i'd still put Lebron in Tier 1.
I'm good with Kawhi, Jimmy, Tatum, Booker next on the list Something those 4 guys excel at on top of being great offensive players is they are great defensive players as well. Booker isn't as good as the other 3, but he's better than most when he's dialed in.
I think that's what separates that tier 2a and 2b. Defense.
Ja, Lillard, Harden are targets to attack on defense.
I think BI can easily get to this level if he plays a full season and shows how to close out some games this year. I think Murray should be in that 2B tier, not 2c. He's a much better defender than those other guys.
Paul George hasn't done enough by himself to warrant being listed that high, and neither has SGA, but he's getting there.
Anthony Edwards should be on that 2C list, and he'll move up to 2a this year.
anthony davis is a bitch.
Curry, Durant, Doncic, Giannis, Embiid, and Joker
I think i'd still put Lebron in Tier 1.
I'm good with Kawhi, Jimmy, Tatum, Booker next on the list Something those 4 guys excel at on top of being great offensive players is they are great defensive players as well. Booker isn't as good as the other 3, but he's better than most when he's dialed in.
I think that's what separates that tier 2a and 2b. Defense.
Ja, Lillard, Harden are targets to attack on defense.
I think BI can easily get to this level if he plays a full season and shows how to close out some games this year. I think Murray should be in that 2B tier, not 2c. He's a much better defender than those other guys.
Paul George hasn't done enough by himself to warrant being listed that high, and neither has SGA, but he's getting there.
Anthony Edwards should be on that 2C list, and he'll move up to 2a this year.
anthony davis is a bitch.
Posted on 8/18/23 at 9:43 am to brmark70816
the fact just show you’re wrong.
there are good balances team with no stars but deep good rosters. they win games not championships
.
look at the Raptors pre: Kawhi.
they averaged 52.6 Wins a year for the 5 years prior. made it to the conference finals 1 time.
ad a legit Superstar, they win a title. he leaves, they win 53 games and lose in the semis.
Jokic, Giannis and Lebron all won MVPs before they won championships.
when you hit playoff basketball when your stats are playing more minutes your 10th guy being way better than their 10th guy doesn’t matter.
there are good balances team with no stars but deep good rosters. they win games not championships
.
look at the Raptors pre: Kawhi.
they averaged 52.6 Wins a year for the 5 years prior. made it to the conference finals 1 time.
ad a legit Superstar, they win a title. he leaves, they win 53 games and lose in the semis.
Jokic, Giannis and Lebron all won MVPs before they won championships.
when you hit playoff basketball when your stats are playing more minutes your 10th guy being way better than their 10th guy doesn’t matter.
This post was edited on 8/18/23 at 9:48 am
Posted on 8/18/23 at 10:58 am to SammyTiger
So the other 25 teams should just give up?
Is it always championship or bust?
Just a hypothetical. Let's say we did build around Ingram, just surrounded him with a ton of depth. Then we do win a championship. As a star of a championship team, wouldn't he vault into superstardom?
People are saying we have to have the star(s) first. I don't think that has to be the case..
Is it always championship or bust?
Just a hypothetical. Let's say we did build around Ingram, just surrounded him with a ton of depth. Then we do win a championship. As a star of a championship team, wouldn't he vault into superstardom?
People are saying we have to have the star(s) first. I don't think that has to be the case..
Posted on 8/18/23 at 11:19 am to brmark70816
quote:
I am of the opinion that 8-10 above average players that compliment each other should be a solid playoff team and, given the right circumstances, contend for a title. You don't have to have a star or Superstar.
quote:
So the other 25 teams should just give up?
Is it always championship or bust?
Posted on 8/18/23 at 11:19 am to brmark70816
quote:
As a star of a championship team, wouldn't he vault into superstardom?
Two separate concepts.
Superstardom is based on individual play/impact.
Championships are a team stat.
Posted on 8/18/23 at 2:14 pm to ned nederlander
quote:
"Dirk was tier 1 when he won his title."
This.
Dirk was a beast those entire playoffs. His fade away with the kick out for separation was unstoppable and he hardly missed from the line. He still holds the record of most consecutive free throws made in a playoff game that year with 24.
Other than Dirk that team had a past his prime Jason Kidd, Jason Terry, and Tyson Chandler. Take Dirk away and that team doesn't make it out of the first round. Dirk was a legit star.
Posted on 8/18/23 at 2:46 pm to mikesliveisacheater
Put some respect on JJ Barea's name.
Posted on 8/18/23 at 4:15 pm to brmark70816
quote:Yes but the point is we won't win a title that way because BI is obviously not a #1 on a title team guy. The hope for us us he can be the #2 guy on a title team.
Let's say we did build around Ingram, just surrounded him with a ton of depth. Then we do win a championship. As a star of a championship team, wouldn't he vault into superstardom?
Posted on 8/18/23 at 4:23 pm to brmark70816
quote:
Just a hypothetical. Let's say we did build around Ingram, just surrounded him with a ton of depth. Then we do win a championship. As a star of a championship team, wouldn't he vault into superstardom?
If BI started with Herb, Mikal Bridges, Trey Murphy and Jarrett Allen, with Jose, Brogdon, Larry and Bobby Portis off the bench. Sure they might win the west. might. They still couldn't come close to beating a fully healthy Denver or Milwuakee.
Posted on 8/23/23 at 9:17 am to saints5021
You need a superstar who can play a full season.
Posted on 8/23/23 at 10:33 am to TeddyPadillac
Last team to win it all without a superstar was Detroit in 2004.
Maybe, someday, it'll happen again. But I wouldn't bet on it being anytime soon.
Maybe, someday, it'll happen again. But I wouldn't bet on it being anytime soon.
Posted on 8/23/23 at 7:20 pm to ned nederlander
quote:
I know this isn’t the point of your thread, but have to disagree with the article on that. Dirk was 31 years old and averaged 27.7 and 8.1 in the playoffs while shooting .488/.460/.941.
Found that odd as well… while Dirk was MVP 5 years earlier so removed from that part of his career, but I remember him being a top 12 player at the time. He was playing at an MVP level in the playoffs.
This post was edited on 8/23/23 at 7:24 pm
Posted on 8/23/23 at 7:50 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Last team to win it all without a superstar was Detroit in 2004.
Who was the superstar on the 2014 Spurs?
Maybe we are just talking about reputation. But they didn't have a player average over 17ppg. Parker was an allstar and was 2nd team all NBA. Are we going to credit him as a superstar to lead a team to a title?
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News