I have to say it feels good to have a star player who averages 25+ ppg. We haven't had this since Drexler. Not Sheed, not Roy, not Aldridge. None of them were dominant scorers like Dame. Finally, a true superstar.
There you go throwing that word around again. This certainly makes more sense than you calling CJ a superstar, but I still think Dame needs to win an MVP before being considered a superstar. He hasn't even made first team all NBA. If you consider Dame a superstar you open the door to labeling a lot of undeserving players as such. Superstars in the NBA today: Kevin Durant, Lebron James, Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, Steph Curry, Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki. There are a lot of fringe superstars - Dame, Melo, Westbrook, CP3, Griffin etc...
Since Steph Curry is the best player in the league he's most certainly a superstar. Your list seems to be more over the hill hall of fame players.
If you want to consider Duncan/Garnett/Kobe/Dirk hall of fame rather than superstar then that is fine. I'm just saying they fit the criteria.
The NBA's definition of a superstar is obviously based on Free Throws. Harden DeRozen Curry Westbrook Cousins Lowry George Galinari Carmelo Wiggins Butler Milsap LeBron THEN Dame. (my list is 2015-16 total made FTs leaders)
Roy was the only true superstar we have had since Clyde. I can see lillard changing that but at this point he still doesn't create the same confidence I had with 08-09 Roy.
Roy was freaking unstoppable in small ball lineups at the end of games. So sucks we never had a third scorer to pair with that team. We could've made some noise in the playoffs when Houston beat us. We only had healthy Roy for that one year. Dame is a much better leader than Roy though. Not that Roy was bad; Dame is LeBron special in that way.
Nah man, prime Roy was special. Controlled the game from start to end effortlessly. Never felt like we were out of games. Looking back at it, it's kind of amazing he led that squad to 54 wins. How many of the guys on that team are still NBA contributors? Aldridge, Batum and Bayless are the only ones that come to mind and Batum and Bayless were rookies.
Blake has always been a rotational guy he's just old now. Pryz was a solid big until career ending injury. But yes it's a good point with Webster/Outlaw/Rudy never amounting to much. LaMarcus may have been better then than he is now.
Damn, you guys got me missing Roy. I have pretty much completely avoided talking or even thinking about him for years now. I know it's pretty much a certainty that we would have gotten Damian if Roy's knees hadn't failed him, but I'm just now thinking about a Lillard, Roy, and Aldridge team for the first time. If Brandon had been able to stay healthy I don't think his game would have deteriorated that much even though he's 31 now. We probably would have won the championship last year! Okay I'm done thinking about this already.
Superstar is such a subjective phrase. Some people might consider only the very best players to be superstars. The Durant, LeBron, Paul, and now Curry type of guys. Some would consider making All-NBA the mark of a superstar. I tend to lean more towards the first definition. We have All-Stars. We have guys who are clearly among the best at their position, but a true superstar is the absolute best at his position and among the very best of the NBA. Dame isn't there yet. He's certainly among the best, but I think Curry is currently the best point guard. It also has a lot to do with how the NBA markets them, and how the refs treat them. If I had to make a list, I'd say it's probably Curry Harden Durant James Anthony Davis Those guys are treated like gods by the refs and the NBA.
You have to be the best at your position to be a superstar? So Drexler wasn't a superstar? I don't buy that.
It's probably the top 10 players in the league that would fall in the "superstar" category. Durant Westbrook Curry LeBron Harden CP3 Blake George Davis Maybe Melo, but at this point in his career I'm not sure if he is.
Nah, he's certainly not. He's another guy who hasn't made First Team All-NBA. I may field an argument for why a player who has never won the MVP should be considered a superstar. But I wouldnt consider a player a superstar if they've never finished a season as the best player at their position. And I didn't list Derrick Rose...
Needs to shoot better than 43% to get to the superstar level-- he's closing in on top 10 in the league though. He's still too streaky. The raw stats are there, but the efficiency isn't always. 23 PER in the current NBA is not superstar status, sadly.
