<u>Superstars no longer in the Playoffs after the first round</u>Dwyane WadeShaquille O'NealKobe BryantDirk NowitzkiAllen IversonCarmelo AnthonyTracy McGradyYao MingKevin GarnettElton BrandRay AllenGilbert ArenasDwight HowardPaul PierceJermaine O'NealMichael ReddChris Bosh<u>Superstars still in the Playoffs after the first round</u>Lebron JamesChauncey BillupsJason KiddVince CarterTim DuncanSteve NashBaron DavisIt's funny when you think about it. You could make a very solid argument that 8 or 9 of the top 10 players in the league are in that top group.
I don't see the arguement here at all. As you get farther in the playoffs there are less teams left which means there are gonna obviously be less superstars left. It's kidn of common sense...
Superstars are very important, but who is and isn't a superstar is up for debate. A superstar is worth 20-30 wins, with the occasional one worth 40 wins (KG in 2003 as an example). That said, the facts you gave were flawed at most. If 7 superstars are on 8 teams left, and 17 superstars are on 22 teams that are gone, that means 88% of second round teams have what you call a superstar as opposed to 77% of non-second round teams. Now when you factor in that another eleven of your players you listed made the playoffs, you're looking at 18 superstars on 16 playoff teams and 6 superstars on 14 non-playoff teams. That shows that they're very valuable.
You have to factor in the coaching and the people around them. You cant go like:Sh*t Kobe got knocked out!When he had a sh*t supporting cast as well.
I just think that the fact that all of these players are eliminated, 8 or 9 of the best 10 players in the league, makes you wonder if the difference between a good and great player is as big as it's made out to be. Maybe we vastly overrate our "Superstars".
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RaptorFan#1 @ May 7 2007, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You have to factor in the coaching and the people around them. You cant go like:Sh*t Kobe got knocked out!When he had a sh*t supporting cast as well.</div><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ May 7 2007, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't see the arguement here at all. As you get farther in the playoffs there are less teams left which means there are gonna obviously be less superstars left. It's kidn of common sense...</div>Both points I was thinking of. There are a lot of factors outside of the superstar's hands that can't be dealt with, I.E. KG
Well, it's an interesting subject, but we have to distinguish the difference between superstar and all star. I consider all of thse you guys listed as all starswight HowardPaul PierceJermaine O'NealMichael ReddChris BoshRay AllenYao MingElton brandChauncey BillupsBaron DavisMost of the other superstars have been deep in the playoffs or won a ring. Duncan, Kidd, Nowitzki, Wade, Shaq, Kobe and Iverson have all been to the Finals and/or won a ring. GA is still very young, T-Mac still doesn't have the help, Nash was within 2 games of the Finals, LeBron is likely to make ECF this year and possibly Finals, KG reached WCF, VC reached ECF, and Carmelo has never had the help and is young.So yes, superstars are very important. In the past 30 years or so, outside of the Pistons of 2004 (which was a very rare case), each team who has won the ring has had at least 1 superstar to carry the team. It is necassary as in the playoffs you need the superstar to carry your team and lead by voice and example.
I think in a lot of occassions it is easy to mix up REAL superstars with ball hogs and no defense players. Duncan is a REAL superstar. He does it all. A lot of shooting guards though aren't high percentage shooters and take too many tough shots which is why I think a lot of them are out of the playoffs. Some of the other superstars are great during the regular season but the playoffs don't bring out their best (Dirk).
I think the term "superstar" is tossed around a little too freely in the NBA. There are definitely players that are superstars, but there are also players that are given the label of "superstar" simply because they are very talented/more talented than your average player.With that being said, I think you still have to factor in the supporting cast, and the team that they played against in the postseason. However, I do think that the media overrates some superstars and the impact they have on their respective team.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ May 7 2007, 07:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>So yes, superstars are very important. In the past 30 years or so, outside of the Pistons of 2004 (which was a very rare case), each team who has won the ring has had at least 1 superstar to carry the team. It is necassary as in the playoffs you need the superstar to carry your team and lead by voice and example.</div>I agree that a superstar is important in the playoffs for your team. Your superstar is the one that can score when the rest of the team is having a hard time scoring, and push you through the game. They are usually the ones that answer the other teams runs with huge baskets, and the ones that can push you through in the clutch. They can take over games at any point, and that is always important at the NBAl evel. Last years finals showed how a superstar can push you through a seven game series during the playoffs also. Wade came up huge and really pushed the Heat through that seven game series offensively, when everyone else on the court was having a below average time offensively for the entire series.
Who has won lately?1999-Tim Duncan/David Robinson2000-Kobe/Shaq2001-Kobe/Shaq2002-Kobe/Shaq2003-Tim Duncan/David Robinson2004-Chauncey Billups2005-Tim Duncan2006-Wade/ShaqAll Super Stars
I believe superstars play a key and important role. But they're other factors involved needed to win besides just a superstar. Supporting players are just as important as the superstars imo during a playoff run. It takes a team to win it all.But I think with this about superstars not making it far is kind of off kilter in terms of determing their importance. I mean when it comes down to it, only one superstar is going to come out of the year on top over the others.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (austingriz @ May 7 2007, 08:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Billups isnt a superstar, but that team was STACKED!!!Point proven though.</div>Who were you talking to?
Interesting topic, but I don't buy this. Like people above have said, you have to factor in everything around those players. What does their supporting cast look like? Who were they playing? Was it really the star's fault that they dropped the game? Nowadays, if a star does his job and has a great night, and his team loses - 100% of the blame goes on that star, but they won't talk about his supporting cast who played bad defense, turned the ball over 15 times, and didn't shoot well. Having a star (or 2) on your team pays dividends, but they need the right pieces around them in order to get somewhere.I also agree with Nitro when he says that not all of those players listed are superstars. There is a difference between a star/All-Star and a superstar. Sure, that's getting technical about things, we all understood the opening poster's point, but people do get carried away with calling guys SUPERSTARS.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KobeBryant_24 @ May 8 2007, 01:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Who were you talking to?</div>His post was right below yours, you mentioned Billups. He was clearly referring to your post.
I think the Pistons have showed in this recent run they have made in the last 5 years, that you dont need a superstar to be successful. Sure they have some good players in Billups, Tayshaun Sheed, Webber and Rip but none of them are really superstars. They're all very good team ball players, who do what they need to do each night to win games. A superstar can win you some games, but 5 solid role players can win you more games. A superstar is a great thing to have, but in the fact of cockiness, over confidence, ball-hogging etc. it can hurt you some games.
You have 7 superstars listed on there, and their are 8 teams in the playoffs still. I think that single-handedly proves that superstars are important. When 7/8 teams left have one, its obvious that they are a necessity.
