I don't consider them to be true superstars. Then again, you're taking my PER of 25 thing very seriously. I probably should have posted low 20s, while also being a perennial MVP candidate. I basically put "25" because that's kind of been the standard theshhold for an MVP-type player by Hollinger himself, but of course there are subjective exceptions for every hard data point. Such as the definition of "superstar", for example. It means different things to different people. He's a nice player who has had what, compared to his career, is an aberration in terms of level of play 18 games into this season. If he sustains that level of play for a few years, he gets elevated in my mind as a player. Why is this such a difficult concept for you to understand? Paul George isn't a "superstar", IMO. He's not even Pippen/Ewing/Clyde in my mind.
Yes, you did say that - the second time you changed the argument to suit your needs. Ah, changing the argument for a 3rd time. Now, we have superstars and top-tier superstars. Did anyone ever claim Paul George was a top-tier superstar (whatever that means)? Try telling the experts that voted Ewing, Pippen, Stockton and Payton into the Hall of Fame that they weren't superstars. BNM
My only 'argument' is that Paul George isn't a "superstar" to me. I'm flattered that you're so concerned about how I rate players, but I haven't changed my initial opinion about Paul George at all.
Again, who currently meets your subjective definition of "superstar". How many of them ate better than Paul George right now? If your list only consists of LeBron, Durant and CP3, win by default. BNM
WTF, you're the one who first said a superstar is someone who had multiple PER => 25.0 seasons. When I pointed out how ridiculous that was, you immediately changed your criteria to include perennial MVP contenders. It's pretty hard to discuss an issue logically and rationally, when the issue is a moving target. BNM
Oh, and yes BNM, I do subscribe to a tier-system of separating 'superstars'. Bill Simmons' Book of Basketball is as close I've seen as to how I personally rate NBA Hall of Fame players. I disagree with Simmons on a few players and how he has them rated, but his approach to a pyramid diagram of hierarchy made a lot of sense to me when I read it. I suggest you read it as well, and see what you think about that approach to rating players. Or, everybody can just be "superstar" or "non-superstar" based on copy/paste of links, which requires no critical thinking.
If Paul George isn't an emerging superstar, no one is. Since the league business model is superstar driven, somebody has to be. And he is.
You brought up those players, BNM. Unless you're trying to compare Paul George, who this thread is about, to Ewing/Pippen/Stockton, of course. In that case, what's your point? Is 16 PER "superstar" Paul George at the level of the players you listed? If so, wow.
Then why did you go to the trouble of inventing multiple definitions of the term "supesrtar"? If your opinion is the only thing that matters, why drag in all the extraneous details about PER => 25.0 for multiple seasons, perennial MVP contenders, etc. Why not just be honest and say he's not a superstar to you and nothing anyone can say will change your mind? BNM
BNM, you do realize that you're doing exactly what I used to do, and that drove you nuts? Which is taking one small part of a side argument, and dwelling on it repeatedly. So, like you used to do to me, it's best if I just put you on ignore. I don't get baited anymore into lashing out, so nice try! I think both of our opinions are clear to anyone reading this thread in terms of Paul George, and I'm OK with you claiming victory.
Why are you so intentionally obtuse? At least I hope it's intentional. I brought up those players as specific examples of all-time great, first ballot Hall of Famers who did not meet YOUR definition of "superstar". And no, I never claimed Paul George was at that level - yet. But, that doesn't mean he's not a superstar today. His PER is not 16, it's 24.7 at 23 years of age - something none of those other players ever accomplished. Does that mean he's an all-time great? No, of course not. He needs a much larger body of work to be considered a Hall of Famer, but he's playing like a superstar right now, getting superstar calls, and getting accolades from all kinds of experts. So, since you constantly want to change your definition of "superstar", how about we go back to the original subject of this thread? In today's NBA, do you think Paul George is worth a 5-year $90 million contract? If not, who is? BNM
