NBA All-Star Starters Announced

[Guest The Gecko]

There are no pistons there because the pistons haven't really been shit this year and a utter disappointment while not having a single reason to point to.

They are 2nd in the East, have won there last 5 games, 2nd in the league in Points Allowed, 4th in Opp. Field Goal %, 3rd in Blocks... pretty much top 5 in every defensive category. Quite the disappointment...

 

Ben Wallace: 2nd in RPG, 3rd in BPG

- Note: Best in East in both categories.

 

And were you trying to say that Allen Iverson is a team player? That's laughable.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Popovich and Van Gundy have been named caoches for their respective conferences.

[Youth N Asia 0]

The Pistons are 28-18, 2nd in the east and tops in their division, quite far from shit. 5 wins in a row is league best right now I'll take a team that wins games and plays good TEAM ball over a bad team with a showboat all-star

[Guest Mindless_Aggression]

Allen Iverson is a team player as much as he possibly can be. I'm sorry, but what do you expect the guy to do with what he has? I can promise you the likes of Kyle Korver and such wouldn't be near as effective without Iverson garnering all the attention and setting them up. Korver averages double digit points shooting more three pointers than twos which is pretty hard to do. Unless you've got Iverson setting you up that is.

 

I'd never argue that Iverson is a top 10 team player or anything, but I think he could be and would be if he had the options around him. The thing is, what he has around him now is a collection of rookies, spot up shooters and energy guys that aren't reliable offensively. He's gotta be a ball hog for them to have any real shot at winning and he still manages to chip in with over 7 assists a game. Not many guys who get 20 plus a night can even get close to tacking on 7 assists too and he does.

 

On the Pistons, I'd have no problem with Ben Wallace or Richard Hamilton making it. Wallace will most likely make it, but Hamilton is a long shot with Steve Francis, Gilbert Arenas, Larry Hughes and others out there.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Agreed. I've never seen any teammate bitch about Iverson. He's a heck of a player.

[Guest Flyboy]

I'd never argue that Iverson is a top 10 team player or anything.

 

... I would.

[Guest Mindless_Aggression]

You could make an arguement, I just wouldn't personally. Not so much a knock on him not being one, so much as I think there are others who do more for their team. But people are crazy if they're questioning Iverson's play in regards to that type of thing.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

This game is a complete joke. Steve Nash should be starting for the West. This is probably a bad omen for his MVP chances.

[Guest Rrrsh]

Steve Nash not being a starter is disgusting.

 

 

And Al, Nash is better than T-Mac. All Mack can do is score. Nash is leadership skills and his passing abilties make him better.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Disgusting? A little strong for a glorified exhibition game. He should start but it's not the big a deal he isn't.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Steve Nash not being a starter is disgusting.

 

 

And Al, Nash is better than T-Mac. All Mack can do is score. Nash is leadership skills and his passing abilties make him better.

And how many championships did Nash's leadership bring to the Dallas Mavericks? His departure didn't exactly hurt the Mavs, did it? I am not bashing Nash as a player, but there is more to the Suns' success than "leadership." Is Nash a better passer? Sure. You said all McGrady can do is score. First off, scoring is the OBJECT of the game. Second, McGrady does more than score. He had far more rebounds and blocks than Nash. Nash has never been regarded as even a good defender. If you're selecting an All-Star roster, would you rather have the passer, or the guy who can score, and contribute on defense. I know people will cry that McGrady's a "me first" offensive player, but the East is putting their five best players on the court, and I want someone on the team who can stop them.

 

The Suns have the better record, but let's face it. Nash benefits from having Shawn Marion and Amare Stoudamire as teammates. McGrady has Yao Ming, and role players. And McGrady's got a track record. Even if I were to accept Nash is having a better season, half a season does not make a player a sure-fire All Star.

 

Nash lost out to McGrady and Kobe Bryant. With Bryant's injury, he'll likely start. That's hardly a travesty of Bobby Abreu-esqe proportions.

[Guest Rrrsh]

T-Mac hasnt won anything either, so I am not sure where your going with that. You can say that Nash has players. But without him, there lost. Nash is the MVP this year for a reason, he makes everyone around him better. T-Mac won't lead the Rockets to anything because he is a me-first guy. The kind of player that is Nash is needed to win championships. A great coach or a miracle in the cap will be the only way someone like T-Mac will win anything.

 

 

That, and, Nash is the best Point Guard in the league. T-mac far from the best at what he plays.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

T-Mac hasnt won anything either, so I am not sure where your going with that.

 

He hasn't, but no one's praising his leadership skills.

 

You can say that Nash has players. But without him, there lost.

 

And without McGrady, the Rockets are toast. The difference is the Suns' teammates are starting higher.

 

Nash is the MVP this year for a reason, he makes everyone around him better.

 

A sportswriter cliche that doesn't exist. Are basketball skills really so fickle that they variate by a player's mere presence? Players can work well together, but that doesn't mean the player himself has gotten better.

 

T-Mac won't lead the Rockets to anything because he is a me-first guy.

 

Nonsense. Kobe is regarded as the same type of player, and he won three championships. And for the record, I do not believe McGrady is a selfish player.

 

The kind of player that is Nash is needed to win championships.

 

There are either two responses to this. One, plenty of teams have won without guys like Steve Nash. Or, the teams that won DID have guys like Steve Nash, would would mean that guys like Steve Nash are of fair quantity. I think the latest championships have been more due to dominant players like Tim Duncan and Shaquille O'Neal.

 

A great coach or a miracle in the cap will be the only way someone like T-Mac will win anything.

 

I'm sure if you replaced Bryant with McGrady on the Lakers, McGrady would have three rings right now. He hasn't won because he's been dealt utterly bad teams. His teammates for most of his career were guys like Mike Miller and Darrell Armstrong. They don't tend to bring out the best in anyone. Give McGrady a good team, and he will win.

 

That, and, Nash is the best Point Guard in the league. T-mac far from the best at what he plays.

 

I think Dwayne Wade has a serious argument for the top spot, and Iverson, Baron Davis, and Jason Kidd are deserving of consideration. What shooting guards are better than McGrady, besides Lebron James and MAYBE Kobe Bryant? McGrady's at least top three at shooting guard right now. I don't see how the positional argument really separates the two players.

[Guest Rrrsh]

T-Mac hasnt won anything either, so I am not sure where your going with that.

 

He hasn't, but no one's praising his leadership skills.

 

You can say that Nash has players. But without him, there lost.

 

And without McGrady, the Rockets are toast. The difference is the Suns' teammates are starting higher.

 

Nash is the MVP this year for a reason, he makes everyone around him better.

 

A sportswriter cliche that doesn't exist. Are basketball skills really so fickle that they variate by a player's mere presence? Players can work well together, but that doesn't mean the player himself has gotten better.

 

T-Mac won't lead the Rockets to anything because he is a me-first guy.

 

Nonsense. Kobe is regarded as the same type of player, and he won three championships. And for the record, I do not believe McGrady is a selfish player.

 

The kind of player that is Nash is needed to win championships.

 

There are either two responses to this. One, plenty of teams have won without guys like Steve Nash. Or, the teams that won DID have guys like Steve Nash, would would mean that guys like Steve Nash are of fair quantity. I think the latest championships have been more due to dominant players like Tim Duncan and Shaquille O'Neal.

 

A great coach or a miracle in the cap will be the only way someone like T-Mac will win anything.

 

I'm sure if you replaced Bryant with McGrady on the Lakers, McGrady would have three rings right now. He hasn't won because he's been dealt utterly bad teams. His teammates for most of his career were guys like Mike Miller and Darrell Armstrong. They don't tend to bring out the best in anyone. Give McGrady a good team, and he will win.

 

That, and, Nash is the best Point Guard in the league. T-mac far from the best at what he plays.

 

I think Dwayne Wade has a serious argument for the top spot, and Iverson, Baron Davis, and Jason Kidd are deserving of consideration. What shooting guards are better than McGrady, besides Lebron James and MAYBE Kobe Bryant? McGrady's at least top three at shooting guard right now. I don't see how the positional argument really separates the two players.

A. So, because A guy is called a leader, he needs to win. And since T-mac is not, we shouldn't expect it from him?

 

B: The Rockets are a better team without T-Mac than the Suns without Nash. Without Nash, there a bunch of kids playing street ball. He brings it all together.

 

C. It may be a cliche, but it surely exists.

 

D. Kobe is far more driven that T-mac and wouldnt take games off like T-Mac. There an entirely diffrent type of player. Kobe's goal is to win, T-Mac is to score. Just like his equally selfish cousin, Vince.

 

E. I was purely refering to his leadership skills and how good of a teammate he is.

 

F. Kobe had a great Coach AND a miracle in the cap, dude. That was the point of that.

 

G. Dwayne is definatly good, and I think he will be better than Nash in a couple of years. Baron hasn't doen enough, Kidd has lost a step and AI is far too selfish. Larry Brown was the reason Philly did well. Without Larry, AI became just good and Philly is average. Kobe and Lebron are 1,2. But T-mac is a far three. He turns the ball over and takes too many games off to be ahead. But he is third.

[MrRant 0]

......

[Damaramu 0]

Why is everyone bitching about who should and shouldn't be in this game?

You have left it up to a fan vote and I gurantee you about 85% of the people that voted on this don't follow the NBA as closely as people on this board. And if they do they still probably play favorites.

It's a huge popularity contest so you should expect to see only the big names.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

B: The Rockets are a better team without T-Mac than the Suns without Nash. Without Nash, there a bunch of kids playing street ball. He brings it all together.

 

......Your kidding, right?

 

D. Kobe is far more driven that T-mac and wouldnt take games off like T-Mac. There an entirely diffrent type of player. Kobe's goal is to win, T-Mac is to score. Just like his equally selfish cousin, Vince.

 

...... Seriously, do you even watch McGrady play?I I'm sure McGrady LOVES losing, just as long as he can drop 30 points a game.

G. Dwayne is definatly good, and I think he will be better than Nash in a couple of years. Baron hasn't doen enough, Kidd has lost a step and AI is far too selfish. Larry Brown was the reason Philly did well. Without Larry, AI became just good and Philly is average. Kobe and Lebron are 1,2. But T-mac is a far three. He turns the ball over and takes too many games off to be ahead. But he is third.

 

AI is not a selfish player. Like I said earlier in the thread, I've never heard a teammate say a bad word about him. He DOES pass the ball regularly, and he plays harder than 95% of the players in the NBA. He busts his ass for a sub-.500 club. How exactly is he selfish? He takes shots because he's the only person with the ability to take the shots that he does. I don't have the statistics, but I'd be willing to bet that the Sixers have the fewest number of shot clock violations in the NBA.

 

As for McGrady, he is one of the least turnover prone players in the NBA. Let's compare two players, say, McGrady and Steve Nash. Nash has played 45 games, and McGrady's played 44. Nash has turned the ball over 143 times. Now, that number seems like alot, but Nash also carries the ball alot. So we use a statistic called turnover ratio. We take a player's turnovers, assists, field goal attempts, and free throw attempts to estimate how many times a player handled the ball. Nash's Turnover Ratio is 11.9, a decent ratio. McGrady made less turnovers, just 122. But when he look at turnover ratio, McGrady clocks in at 8.4, an excellent mark. So McGrady makes turnovers 40% less of the time than does Steve Nash.

[Guest Flyboy]

*looks around*

 

Well, I think my work is done here.

[The Fett 0]

To say the Rockets without Mcgrady is better than the Suns without Nash is ludicrous.

 

I've watched every game the Rockets have played this season. The Rockets would be the absolute worse team in the league without Mcgrady. His supporting cast is much, much less talented than Nash's. Yao is the most overrated player in the league. He should be at most the 3rd best player on a championship team. The rest of the Rocket role players are scrubs from bad teams.

 

Nash has had the benefit of playing with 2 all stars players who are capable of being all star players with or without Nash. People forget the key addition of Quentin Richardson and the fact that both Joe Johnson and Amare Stoudamire are young up and coming players that were bound to make huge strides this season even without Nash. Nash is getting far too much credit for the Suns success.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

if you want all deserving candidates, then have the frikken coaches pick the entire team.

This is the side effects of having fans choose, of course its popularity. why else even have the fans choose if you dont want a popularity contest?

[Guest Vitamin X]

Well considering how long NBA coaches seem to be lasting these days, that doesn't seem like such a reliable option.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Nash has had the benefit of playing with 2 all stars players who are capable of being all star players with or without Nash.

 

So then why did the Suns completely tank without Nash and looked horrible until he came back?

[The Fett 0]

Nash has had the benefit of playing with 2 all stars players who are capable of being all star players with or without Nash.

 

So then why did the Suns completely tank without Nash and looked horrible until he came back?

Because Nash’s backup is a scrub that would be a 12th man on most teams. He doesn't know how to run a team. Put any half way decent point guard to replace Nash and the Suns wouldn’t look nearly as bad.

 

Nash has been very fortunate to have great scorers around him in both Dallas and Phoenix. Let’s see him try to carry that team without Stoudamire and Marion by his side.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

if you want all deserving candidates, then have the frikken coaches pick the entire team.

This is the side effects of having fans choose, of course its popularity. why else even have the fans choose if you dont want a popularity contest?

Personally, I don't have any problem whatsoever with fans picking the starters. Sure they cough up an embarassing choice now and then, but a group of coaches or sportswriters would produce the same problems. At least this way, the players are the ones the fans want to see.

[alfdogg 0]

The coaches are Popovich and SVG, btw.