|
On November 01 2009 23:33 Ace wrote:
pretty much agreed. Kinda funny how we usually talk about star level players needing a supporting cast but that's a team that has a ridiculous level of support (mostly offensive) that just needs 1 star to do well. A star PF/Center like Al Jefferson would make Detroit a merciless squad.
I feel like this has been Chicago's problem in recent times (before rose)..
Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, Nocioni, all those guys are sick role players but you can't build teams around em.
Now Chicago has Derrick Rose, but what sucks about 'star' players is that for some reason a star PG isn't enough (Allen Iverson and Isiah Thomas are practically the only 2 exceptions to this rule in the past 30 or so years)...
|
|
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On November 01 2009 23:33 Ace wrote:
pretty much agreed. Kinda funny how we usually talk about star level players needing a supporting cast but that's a team that has a ridiculous level of support (mostly offensive) that just needs 1 star to do well. A star PF/Center like Al Jefferson would make Detroit a merciless squad.
You mean spending all that money on BGCV wasn't the way to a championship? GASP!
When I do make my time machine, I'm going to go back and kill Hitler, but only after taking out Darko first.
|
Pistons won their last championship without a "star" so I don't believe that to be a necessary key. Though, we did have a Larry Brown, so that makes a huge difference. Not having a true PG is a bit of an issue too.
|
Rip and Prince were star Caliber at the time though. Plus like you said you had Larry Brown, aka The Phil Jackson Killer.
|
If you believe in David Berri's wages of wins, Ben Wallace was one of the essential stars that helps win championships.
In 2003-2004, basketball reference had the opponents scoring 87 points per 100 possessions while he was playing.
|
well yea, he was a defensive MVP also. That Pistons team was stacked very nicely but injuries and Larry Brown's leaving = end of the line for them. Kinda sucked too because Detroit was one of the few Eastern teams that could hold up vs the Western Conference.
|
On November 02 2009 02:00 tonight wrote:
Pistons won their last championship without a "star" so I don't believe that to be a necessary key. Though, we did have a Larry Brown, so that makes a huge difference. Not having a true PG is a bit of an issue too.
Chauncy + in-his-prime Ben Wallace + in-their-primes Hamilton+Prince + still really effect Rasheed ...
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
GUYS I'M MESSAGING YOU FROM THE PAST
IT IS JUNE 25 2003
I MANAGED TO CONTACT BILL DAVIDSON AND JOE D. I AM HOLDING LARRY BROWN'S CHILDREN HOSTAGE.
WHO SHOULD I HAVE THEM DRAFT? WADE MELO OR BOSH??????
HURRY I HAVE NO TIME
|
On November 02 2009 17:29 HonestTea wrote:
GUYS I'M MESSAGING YOU FROM THE PAST
IT IS JUNE 25 2003
I MANAGED TO CONTACT BILL DAVIDSON AND JOE D. I AM HOLDING LARRY BROWN'S CHILDREN HOSTAGE.
WHO SHOULD I HAVE THEM DRAFT? WADE MELO OR BOSH??????
HURRY I HAVE NO TIME
lol
|
None of those players were considered "stars" during that time. Not one of them had made an all-star team aside from 'Sheed. I remember that being a point of emphasis from commentators and the likes. Saying the Pistons can't stack up to the Lakers because we have no true "star" on the team. Despite if they were in their primes or not none of them were considered stars.
|
Well I'll ask you this, during 2003,2004,and 2005 who in the East were considered the top All Stars?
ETA: Also I like the Roto league. Don't know if it's the settings, Yahoo's version or what but I think I'll try and do a Roto league every year from now on. Not having to draft the best player is actually kind of fun.
|
One week and still at the top, but the gap is closing T____T!
By the way - I don't think enough (actually, anything?) is being said about how fucking crazy it is that Grant Hill who is a 37 year old perimeter player is putting up 20/10 while shooting 50+% from the field and 90+% from the FT line. In just 33 minutes of playing. Holy fucking shit? O____O;;
In my opinion Carmelo, Arenas, and Grant Hill are three of the most interesting individual stories so far this season just based on how insane they're playing... nobody else is really shocking that much.
Well scratch that - Brandon Jennings as a rookie? Whoa, didn't expect him to put up the numbers he's putting up.
Question: can any of these guys keep it up all season?
|
Minnesota, Golden State, Clippers - that explains a lot about his stats.
Carmelo yes, because it's about time he gets the hunger. Seriously took him so long.
Arenas not really a surprise. This was how he used to be before the injury. He's still not at the CP3/Deron Williams level though.
Brandon Jennings - shocking. In fact Evans, Jennings and like 2 other rookies had really good starts. I doubt they will be this good all season but it would be the first time in a long time I remember the NBA having back to back draft classes with a good number of rookies that you can say are going to be great.
just checked the ESPN league..lol.
Brandon Jennings:
%OWN: 52.8 (+33.6)
jeezus
|
On November 02 2009 17:29 HonestTea wrote:
GUYS I'M MESSAGING YOU FROM THE PAST
IT IS JUNE 25 2003
I MANAGED TO CONTACT BILL DAVIDSON AND JOE D. I AM HOLDING LARRY BROWN'S CHILDREN HOSTAGE.
WHO SHOULD I HAVE THEM DRAFT? WADE MELO OR BOSH??????
HURRY I HAVE NO TIME
Darko
LOL
|
Simmons has a good defense of Detroit's choice in his book. There was a CLEARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR 1-2-3, LeBron, Darko, Carmelo. Wade and Bosh weren't even on the radar of the top 3, so it's unfair to criticize them in retrospect. Missing Carmelo sucks, although Simmons has a good argument as to how if they HAD drafted Carmelo they wouldn't have won the title in 2004.
Read his book!
|
On November 02 2009 20:00 tonight wrote:
None of those players were considered "stars" during that time. Not one of them had made an all-star team aside from 'Sheed. I remember that being a point of emphasis from commentators and the likes. Saying the Pistons can't stack up to the Lakers because we have no true "star" on the team. Despite if they were in their primes or not none of them were considered stars.
Right, but it would be a travesty for them to go down in history as a team with no studs.
|
I didn't say that. I'm saying when they won they were the clear underdogs and they won because they were so connected as a complete team.
|
yes this is true, but it's a HUGE exception to the rule.
|
I know, I'm just saying
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
