Both are second option types on Championship teams. I can't really pick between the two, both have their strong suits. But, c'mon guys. Get over it. Love is an AS.
It is nice to continue seeing Aldridge improve, I'm happy for the fans as well. I don't really know what his prime is since this rise has been recent, but I respect him and Love.
The Wolves are hardly a model franchise, they lost about 100 games in KG's last two seasons there. Assuming Love did "step" it up on D and played above LaMarcus Aldridge level definitively, the 2011 Wolves would still be like the 2007 Wolves. Losing about 50 games, probably more since they have lower offensive talent. http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIN/2007.html I want to see the next updates on 82games so I can quantify their issues on defense, specifically at PF and center. Also consider that both Love and LA are talented, and even if LA is better since his prime could be impressive, no need to hate on others.
How does a team lose by 20 at home to Philly with an all-star up front? If only we had such a luxury!
How do the Bulls lose 42 games in 1987? And with Charles Oakley?! Damn, I guess Aldridge is comparable or slightly better than 1986-1987 MJ. Stat whore.
Well, Oakley wasn't an All-Star in 87, so I'm not sure what your point is. Nor will the Timberwolves (or Clippers) sniff 40 wins this year. AND Jordan was the only guy from the Bulls that year who made the ASG, and the guy averaged 37 ppg. And he was voted in by the fans, not by David Stern. But whatever makes you feel like you made a contribution.
Nor will KG's 2007 Wolves? What are you saying, lol? And I mention any great defender, so you can't go by just PER. The point is that Lamarcus is comparable according to some standards. This is not the huevon vs julius debate, what you solely think doesn't matter. Nah that doesn't work. First you don't speak for all the fans around here, I've already seen their arguments and they are flawed. The post works just fine, if you're intelligent enough to understand the nuances of Basketball good for you (you don't have a complete understanding though, it seems). Most here don't seem to grasp that. A Superstar can lose 50 games, imagine an All-Star? Love's roster isn't that good, it is possible for LA to be better and Love to still be an All-Star level player. That seems too complex for most here to handle.
He's not an all-star level player, especially not with that defense - and both the fans and coaches recognized that. Sadly David Stern did not.
Seriously, have you watched him play? His defense is abysmal. He does not take games over down the stretch - likely because he can't create his own shots. You can continue to be the contrarian, but it's clear he is not at the level of the others in that game (or of the player left out by him being included).
You're comparing someone voted by fans to someone picked by the commissioner. You're aware the two aren't equal, right? Considering he was voted by Stern and not the coaches ore fans, I don't really think you're making the point you think you are.
The fans think Yao's an All Star. Your point being? I think its safe to say that 90% of GM's in the league would rather have Aldridge over Love. That's enough proof for me.
Why should one care about the fan vote? Lamarcus Aldridge is not an all-star at this moment, correct?
Does huevon care about the fan vote? "Your (my) point being"? No sorry I am using his standards not mine. Your inability to support this is amusing though. As far as I can tell, you're just giving a vague opinion.
