Most Overrated Player in the NBA

[Zki41]

Bosh and Joe Johnson.

[deamon]

Bosh, Amare, Carmelo, Griffin.

Rose? Durant? Kidd?
Rose is MVP and MIP, both this year, that's why CHI have best RS record.
Durant is best player after Bryant in this league. Not Queen or Melo, but Durant is best SF right now.
Kidd -> NJ was last team in East, when he joined they played in NBA Finals twice. Now he's old, so don't say he's overrated.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

All he has is rings? Isn't that how a superstar is defined? His success in the post season? Kobe not only has had success but has RINGS. Its insane to speak of it like anyone can get them. Only a handful have gotten them in the past 20 years. And Kobe would have no rings if he was on the Mavs but Dirk would have 5 if he was on the Lakers? What is your basis for this opinion? I'd love to hear it.

I've read a stat not that long ago, what summarized all games of the Shaq-Kobe Lakes. Long story short, their winning percentage was about the same, or even rise when Bryant didn't play (significant games, i think around 70?), they won around 70 percent of their games. When Shaq was missing? they won around 20 % (even bigger sample size, don't wanna lie, i think well over 100 games). So they were a lottery team with Shaq out, and Kobe playing, and a championship team when Shaq was playing with Kobe out.

That stat, my general interest for the advanced stats, and the following reasons telling me, no actually screaming to me, that a Shaq-Dirk combo would have been out of this world, and would have meant at least 4 surefire championships. The reasons.

1. On paper, they would have been the perfect fit. Just imagine a Dirk+Howard duo... on crack. The ultimate inside outside combo, the most dominant low post force, combined with the most dominant mid range game that sport ever seen. Statistically, Dirk's impact (PER, adjusted ratings, everything) destroys Bryant's, and also, he's much better in the clutch, despite all the BS Espn trying to advertise. That's a fact, Dirk is a significantly better clutch performer than Mr. Clutch "i have more airball in crunch than anyone in the history of the game, and also one career game winning assist". Dirk is simply a better closer.

2. Chemistry. Dirk would have been a much better sidekick, and happy to play for championships every year. The guy is a winner, and he just wants to win. Obviously, it's impossible to know what would have happened after Shaq gets old, the Lakers gets Gasol, or Artest? Who knows, but i think the logical thinking is that a Shaq-Dirk duo would have been even better not only fit-wise, but from a chemistry standpoint too. So, i'm reversing (or whatever) your original question, and ask you, what is the basis of you thinking when you think Dirk doesn't win playing besides Shaq?

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

All he has is rings? Isn't that how a superstar is defined? His success in the post season? Kobe not only has had success but has RINGS. Its insane to speak of it like anyone can get them. Only a handful have gotten them in the past 20 years. And Kobe would have no rings if he was on the Mavs but Dirk would have 5 if he was on the Lakers? What is your basis for this opinion? I'd love to hear it.

I've read a stat not that long ago, what summarized all games of the Shaq-Kobe Lakes. Long story short, their winning percentage was about the same, or even rise when Bryant didn't play (significant games, i think around 70?), they won around 70 percent of their games. When Shaq was missing? they won around 20 % (even bigger sample size, don't wanna lie, i think well over 100 games). So they were a lottery team with Shaq out, and Kobe playing, and a championship team when Shaq was playing with Kobe out.

That stat, my general interest for the advanced stats, and the following reasons telling me, no actually screaming to me, that a Shaq-Dirk combo would have been out of this world, and would have meant at least 4 surefire championships. The reasons.

1. On paper, they would have been the perfect fit. Just imagine a Dirk+Howard duo... on crack. The ultimate inside outside combo, the most dominant low post force, combined with the most dominant mid range game that sport ever seen. Statistically, Dirk's impact (PER, adjusted ratings, everything) destroys Bryant's, and also, he's much better in the clutch, despite all the BS Espn trying to advertise. That's a fact, Dirk is a significantly better clutch performer than Mr. Clutch "i have more airball in crunch than anyone in the history of the game, and also one career game winning assist". Dirk is simply a better closer.

2. Chemistry. Dirk would have been a much better sidekick, and happy to play for championships every year. The guy is a winner, and he just wants to win. Obviously, it's impossible to know what would have happened after Shaq gets old, the Lakers gets Gasol, or Artest? Who knows, but i think the logical thinking is that a Shaq-Dirk duo would have been even better not only fit-wise, but from a chemistry standpoint too. So, i'm reversing (or whatever) your original question, and ask you, what is the basis of you thinking when you think Dirk doesn't win playing besides Shaq?

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

All he has is rings? Isn't that how a superstar is defined? His success in the post season? Kobe not only has had success but has RINGS. Its insane to speak of it like anyone can get them. Only a handful have gotten them in the past 20 years. And Kobe would have no rings if he was on the Mavs but Dirk would have 5 if he was on the Lakers? What is your basis for this opinion? I'd love to hear it.

I've read a stat not that long ago, what summarized all games of the Shaq-Kobe Lakes. Long story short, their winning percentage was about the same, or even rise when Bryant didn't play (significant games, i think around 70?), they won around 70 percent of their games. When Shaq was missing? they won around 20 % (even bigger sample size, don't wanna lie, i think well over 100 games). So they were a lottery team with Shaq out, and Kobe playing, and a championship team when Shaq was playing with Kobe out.

That stat, my general interest for the advanced stats, and the following reasons telling me, no actually screaming to me, that a Shaq-Dirk combo would have been out of this world, and would have meant at least 4 surefire championships. The reasons.

1. On paper, they would have been the perfect fit. Just imagine a Dirk+Howard duo... on crack. The ultimate inside outside combo, the most dominant low post force, combined with the most dominant mid range game that sport ever seen. Statistically, Dirk's impact (PER, adjusted ratings, everything) destroys Bryant's, and also, he's much better in the clutch, despite all the BS Espn trying to advertise. That's a fact, Dirk is a significantly better clutch performer than Mr. Clutch "i have more airball in crunch than anyone in the history of the game, and also one career game winning assist". Dirk is simply a better closer.

2. Chemistry. Dirk would have been a much better sidekick, and happy to play for championships every year. The guy is a winner, and he just wants to win. Obviously, it's impossible to know what would have happened after Shaq gets old, the Lakers gets Gasol, or Artest? Who knows, but i think the logical thinking is that a Shaq-Dirk duo would have been even better not only fit-wise, but from a chemistry standpoint too. So, i'm reversing (or whatever) your original question, and ask you, what is the basis of you thinking when you think Dirk doesn't win playing besides Shaq?

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

All he has is rings? Isn't that how a superstar is defined? His success in the post season? Kobe not only has had success but has RINGS. Its insane to speak of it like anyone can get them. Only a handful have gotten them in the past 20 years. And Kobe would have no rings if he was on the Mavs but Dirk would have 5 if he was on the Lakers? What is your basis for this opinion? I'd love to hear it.

I've read a stat not that long ago, what summarized all games of the Shaq-Kobe Lakers. Long story short, their winning percentage was about the same, or even rise when Bryant didn't play (significant games, i think around 70?), they won around 70 percent of their games. When Shaq was missing? they won around 20 % (even bigger sample size, don't wanna lie, i think well over 100 games). So they were a lottery team with Shaq out, and Kobe playing, and a championship team when Shaq was playing with Kobe out.

That stat, my general interest for the advanced stats, and the following reasons telling me, no actually screaming to me, that a Shaq-Dirk combo would have been out of this world, and would have meant at least 4 surefire championships. The reasons.

1. On paper, they would have been the perfect fit. Just imagine a Dirk+Howard duo... on crack. The ultimate inside outside combo, the most dominant low post force, combined with the most dominant mid range game that sport ever seen. Statistically, Dirk's impact (PER, adjusted ratings, everything) destroys Bryant's, and also, he's much better in the clutch, despite all the BS Espn trying to advertise. That's a fact, Dirk is a significantly better clutch performer than Mr. Clutch "i have more airball in crunch than anyone in the history of the game, and also one career game winning assist". Dirk is simply a better closer.

2. Chemistry. Dirk would have been a much better sidekick, and happy to play for championships every year. The guy is a winner, and he just wants to win. Obviously, it's impossible to know what would have happened after Shaq gets old, the Lakers gets Gasol, or Artest? Who knows, but i think the logical thinking is that a Shaq-Dirk duo would have been even better not only fit-wise, but from a chemistry standpoint too. So, i'm reversing (or whatever) your original question, and ask you, what is the basis of you thinking when you think Dirk doesn't win playing besides Shaq?

[mcsluggo]

wow.. you REALLY wanted to get that point across, didn't you?

[Budapest Maverick]

double post, sorry.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by mcsluggo

wow.. you REALLY wanted to get that point across, didn't you?

Is it went well?

[PartywithDirk]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

I'd take Durant over Westbrook too but I think Westbrook has been the more consistent this season. You know what you get night in and out from him. With Durant sometimes his J is falling sometimes its not. I'd probably take Durant over any superstar right now when you factor in potential and age.

I like Rose's game. I think when JET and Chuck say Rose is the best player in the league they're factoring in his impact he's had on the Bulls. But no I can't say he's the best player or top 5. He's getting there though. He's still very young into his career like Westbrook is.

Bosh, Rose, Durant, Westbrook, Amare.

Rose is overrated because the media make him out to be the 2nd coming of MJ, since he is the man in Chicago. Very good player. Superstar, in fact, but not as good as the hype.

Bosh empty points in Tor and scores in Mia because no one pays attention to him.

Durant is scoring only. And it's mostly jump shooting.

Westbrook selfish player (see last night), horrible 3 pt shooter, plays out of control.

Amare, come on, it's Amare. Anybody notice how much he disappeared when Melo (also overrated) came to NY? Because they were playing in games that meant something, so he disappears.

[xrobx]

stopped reading at rose

[PartywithDirk]

That's cool. I'm not saying he's not a top tier player....but he gets way too much hype. Not as good as LBJ, DWade, Kobe, etc. Not to their level, yet, but already treated like it.

[Mav Addict]

Rose is the best at his position IMO....I don't think he's overrated.

In this era, all NBA superstars are overrated to an extent due to the all the media outlets...twitter, facebook, blogs, all sports sites etc.

There is so many different media outlets that they automatically talk about the same superstar players...everything is overrated nowadays

Imagine what the 90's would have been like if they had twitter or facebook etc.

[Mav Addict]

I think Dirk would be overrated by the media as well if he had tons of commercials and endorsements...but b/c he not the usual superstar as the others, the media tend to forget about Dirk

its the same as the dunk and the layup....the dunk, which is overrated, tends to get all the spotlight on ESPN....however they are both worth 2 points

Anything flashy gets the spotlight...Rose gets the spotlight b/c no one can stop him when he is driving to the basket, and he is the best PG dunker in the league

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Mav Addict

Rose is the best at his position IMO....I don't think he's overrated.

In this era, all NBA superstars are overrated to an extent due to the all the media outlets...twitter, facebook, blogs, all sports sites etc.

There is so many different media outlets that they automatically talk about the same superstar players...everything is overrated nowadays

Imagine what the 90's would have been like if they had twitter or facebook etc.

Yeah, Michael Jordan probably would have been remembered as the best basketball player in NBA history or something crazy like that.

(oh, wait...)

[Budapest Maverick]

C'mon, Rose is most certainly overrated, that's not even a question, if you look up the numbers. The Bulls winning games with defense, and rebounding. Rose scores wayyyy below his team's average efficiency, and also, the Bulls is what, 1,5 points worse with him on the bench /per 100 possession, than with him playing? The real impact players (all of them!) vary between 5 and 8-9 points. He's shooting around 33% percent from the field against the Pacers, averaging 6 assists, with 4 TO's.

Oh, yeah, he's averaging around 30 points. Big, freakin' deal. There are probably around 100 player in the NBA who could average 30 in a series if they could get the green light to throw up any kind of garbage like Rose does. Heck, maybe even more. It's mind boggling what kind of shots he takes. He'll get there next year, and improve his PG skills, and i have no doubt in my mind, he can be the best player in this league. But as of right now, he's horribly overrated.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Yeah, Michael Jordan probably would have been remembered as the best basketball player in NBA history or something crazy like that.

(oh, wait...)

He has a good point though. Those things plays a big part, that more and more people are actually believe that Kobe's is up there with Jordan, when in reality, there shouldn't even be a comparison. Kobe is fringe top 10 player all-time, and for those who actually want to look up the most important impact stats, won't matter if he wins 1 more, 2 more, heck, 3 more championships, it won' change his place. There are at least 20 player whose prime impact destroys Kobe's. At least 20.

[Mav Addict]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Yeah, Michael Jordan probably would have been remembered as the best basketball player in NBA history or something crazy like that.

(oh, wait...)

I know...whats crazy is that MJ hasn't laced up in awhile, yet there are more than 250 dummy MJ accounts on twitter, with followers.....people still try to follow MJ.....now go ask Shaq how many people are trying to follow him

[mavs777]

If Durant and Westbrook were overrated they wouldn't have the 4 seed in the west and are about to take out Denver in 5

[PartywithDirk]

Originally Posted by mavs777

If Durant and Westbrook were overrated they wouldn't have the 4 seed in the west and are about to take out Denver in 5

How does that make sense?

Durant is considered to be one of the 5 to 10 best players in the league right now.

Westbrook is considered one of the top 5 PGs in the league right now.

Plus they have Harden, Chewbacca, now Perkins. If they're (KD and RW) are as good as everyone thinks, that's a pretty salty team to only get the 4 seed (2 "superstars" and several other solid to up and coming players).

And I'm pretty sure any of the other 8 would be doing the exact same thing to the Thugs right now. They're a joke of a playoff team.

The Thun are the Western Conference version of the Bulls....max effort team during the season, which led to that #4 seed. The only difference is they have 2 overrated players and the Bulls only have 1.

[Mav Addict]

Deez nuts are underrated....

[tcat075]

Originally Posted by Mav Addict

Rose is the best at his position IMO....I don't think he's overrated.

In this era, all NBA superstars are overrated to an extent due to the all the media outlets...twitter, facebook, blogs, all sports sites etc.

There is so many different media outlets that they automatically talk about the same superstar players...everything is overrated nowadays

Imagine what the 90's would have been like if they had twitter or facebook etc.

Chris Paul is a better point guard. Rose is much flashier and is scoring four more ppg, but Paul does so much more in every other aspect of the game.

[Mav Addict]

Originally Posted by tcat075

Chris Paul is a better point guard. Rose is much flashier and is scoring four more ppg, but Paul does so much more in every other aspect of the game.

I disagree....CP3 used to be the best PG in the league, but has lost a step...but this year Rose has passed him by...Don't let that Laker series fool you.

[Underdog]

Deron Williams is better than either of them...

[Usually Lurkin]

I just want to put a reminder in the thread: The Knicks featuring Amare and Melo just got swept out of the eastern conference in the first round.

A discussion on who is not actually the best point guard in the NBA really is not really in the same class of epic overrating. And unless Durant and Westbrook lose to the Nuggets, they probably don't belong in the same discussion as Amare and Melo, etiher.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

I just want to put a reminder in the thread: The Knicks featuring Amare and Melo just got swept out of the eastern conference in the first round.

+1

I've been bagging on them ever since the Melo trade - at least the Knicks won't have any trouble selling tickets (although it's NEW YORK, so it's not like they had problems selling tickets in the first place...)

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by Underdog

+1

I've been bagging on them ever since the Melo trade - at least the Knicks won't have any trouble selling tickets (although it's NEW YORK, so it's not like they had problems selling tickets in the first place...)

And Dan Toni is the coach. The only thing that could possibly make it worse is a team rap video.

[Underdog]

Maybe not the most overrated, but Joe Johnson just went 2-12 (1-4 from beyond the arc, 0-0 FT's) for a total of 5 points in a playoff elimination game fresh off of a 6-year $119m contract extension...

[mavs777]

Originally Posted by PartywithDirk

How does that make sense?

Durant is considered to be one of the 5 to 10 best players in the league right now.

Westbrook is considered one of the top 5 PGs in the league right now.

Plus they have Harden, Chewbacca, now Perkins. If they're (KD and RW) are as good as everyone thinks, that's a pretty salty team to only get the 4 seed (2 "superstars" and several other solid to up and coming players).

And I'm pretty sure any of the other 8 would be doing the exact same thing to the Thugs right now. They're a joke of a playoff team.

The Thun are the Western Conference version of the Bulls....max effort team during the season, which led to that #4 seed. The only difference is they have 2 overrated players and the Bulls only have 1.

Uh no the difference is Bulls have a great front line and OKC doesn't

[CadBane]

Uh, Perkins and Ibaka is pretty damn stout.

[Mav Addict]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Maybe not the most overrated, but Joe Johnson just went 2-12 (1-4 from beyond the arc, 0-0 FT's) for a total of 5 points in a playoff elimination game fresh off of a 6-year $119m contract extension...

He was definitely overrated this past summer...during when some amazing BS happened

[saclare]

Joe Johnson is overrated, especially considering money. I remember when a lot on this board wanted him here this summer, then he got that ridiculous contract.

But guys, almost every top 10 player at any position could be deemed overrated. You can find one aspect or many, but you can always make a case for it. Even Dirk is overrated, certainly by this board, but that is the name of the game. Fans tend to overrate more than others. Some are blinded by the ceilings of players that they overrate the player based on what he could be, when he isn't that player yet.

Someone pointed it out, but media has a major influence as well.

Every player that you guys are arguing about be overrated, I am sure that everyone of you would like to have that player on the Mavs.

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by saclare

Joe Johnson is overrated, especially considering money. I remember when a lot on this board wanted him here this summer, then he got that ridiculous contract.

But guys, almost every top 10 player at any position could be deemed overrated. You can find one aspect or many, but you can always make a case for it. Even Dirk is overrated, certainly by this board, but that is the name of the game. Fans tend to overrate more than others. Some are blinded by the ceilings of players that they overrate the player based on what he could be, when he isn't that player yet.

Someone pointed it out, but media has a major influence as well.

Every player that you guys are arguing about be overrated, I am sure that everyone of you would like to have that player on the Mavs.

Dirk most certainly isn't overrated. We're talking national perspective, not by each individual fan base.

A lot of people think Rose is highly overrated nationally (basketball fan wise), check out RealGM sometime, and you'll see a broader perspective.

Often there's a stark contrast between what the media rates a player to be and what fans (of the league in general) rate them to be.

[PartywithDirk]

Originally Posted by mavs777

Uh no the difference is Bulls have a great front line and OKC doesn't

Ok, I understand now. You consider the Bulls front line to be great.....we just have a completely different understanding of the word overrated.

[mavs777]

Originally Posted by CadBane

Uh, Perkins and Ibaka is pretty damn stout.

not compared to Boozer,Noah, and Gibson

[kenny_817]

Originally Posted by Mav Addict

Rose is the best at his position IMO

this is where I stopped reading^ if ANYONE thinks D. Rose is better than CP3 they are insane. Please be aware that people think Rose is great because he can score. Who can't score 24 a game when they lead the league in shot attempts? He averages more shots than Kobe...as well as everyone else. He is overrated

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by mavs777

not compared to Boozer,Noah, and Gibson

Sure, but that's not what you said, bozo. You said OKC doesn't have a good frontline.

[mavs777]

"Uh no the difference is Bulls have a great front line and OKC doesn't "

OKC has a good but not great front line.

LAL
Chicago
Dallas
ATL

All have better front lines

[PartywithDirk]

Just a little more about the KD/RW overrated debate....

If anyone watched any of round 1 I find it hard to think you wouldn't agree that Westbrook is overrated. Plus, it appears, he's got such a huge effing chip on his shoulder that he's not the #1 guy, that he tries to force things even more.

Now, KD on the other hand, excellent series. And if you note, I said he was a very good player...but he needs to continue to take over games late (like he did tonight) and develop more of his game before I'd put him with Bryant/James/Paul/Wade.

By the way, since it was mentioned that I was crazy for saying they were overrated because they were destroying the Thugs......

Denver shoots 72% from the line since the Melo trade.

Game 1 -- Thunder wins by 4 -- Thugs go 21-33 from the line (63%)
Game 3 -- Thunder wins by 3 -- Thugs go 30-45 from the line (67%)

This series was much, much, much closer than the 4-1 outcome portrays. And, in all reality, we could easily be looking at the Thugs advancing 4-1, just as easily as we are the Thunder advancing.

The Thugs are a collection of above average COLLEGE basketball players. Beating them by the skin of your teeth doesn't define greatness to me.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by PartywithDirk

The Thugs are a collection of above average COLLEGE basketball players. Beating them by the skin of your teeth doesn't define greatness to me.

It's a 4-5 matchup. You expect it to be close. I don't know anyone who says that OKC is more than an up and coming team with a lot of potential. At most, people are looking out for a lightning strike in which they get to the WCF. People rank Durant in the top category of whatever, but nobody places anyone else there. Maybe Westbrook gets discussed as someone in the top category of second rank players or something. Anyway, I think that team and the players on it get rated pretty accurately.