Is Melo really a SUPERSTAR?

Originally Posted by dreClark

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

To me a superstar is broken down into a few parts.

1. Popularity. This is easily the most important part of the equation. Some would say production, but I beg to differ. Stardom is popularity. It isn't about how well you are in your field but how many casuals are willing to come see you when they have no emotions attached to the game. Being able to DRAW on the road is a big factor.

2. Production. People want to force themselves to believe a superstar MUST be able to do it on both ends of the court. LIke Larry Bird right? Like Steve Nash right? Like Barkley right? You don't have to do a thing on the defensive end to be considered a superstar. I hate when people bring that part of. Scoring is the most important aspect of the game. If you score so much that you aren't a liability on the other end of the court because you can SHOOT you team out of any situation, then you are fine. Forget defense.

3. Winning doesn't matter. Again, you don't have to win a damn thing to be considered a superstar. You can just look at most superstars in the history of the NBA. Most of them haven't won a damn thing, so does that disqualify them from superstar status? Of course not.

The superstars of TODAY
Kobe
LeBron
Wade
Dwight
Melo
Yao
Nash

I might be missing someone but those are the folks I am going with.

Now if we are asking about the best PLAYERS in the NBA< that is a different discussion. People confuse that and super stardom too often.
Click to expand...
This.
Click to expand...

 Except my list is a little different (+Dirk). IMO being a superstar is being globally recognized where you can be identified with one name.
 
Originally Posted by dreClark

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

To me a superstar is broken down into a few parts.

1. Popularity. This is easily the most important part of the equation. Some would say production, but I beg to differ. Stardom is popularity. It isn't about how well you are in your field but how many casuals are willing to come see you when they have no emotions attached to the game. Being able to DRAW on the road is a big factor.

2. Production. People want to force themselves to believe a superstar MUST be able to do it on both ends of the court. LIke Larry Bird right? Like Steve Nash right? Like Barkley right? You don't have to do a thing on the defensive end to be considered a superstar. I hate when people bring that part of. Scoring is the most important aspect of the game. If you score so much that you aren't a liability on the other end of the court because you can SHOOT you team out of any situation, then you are fine. Forget defense.

3. Winning doesn't matter. Again, you don't have to win a damn thing to be considered a superstar. You can just look at most superstars in the history of the NBA. Most of them haven't won a damn thing, so does that disqualify them from superstar status? Of course not.

The superstars of TODAY
Kobe
LeBron
Wade
Dwight
Melo
Yao
Nash

I might be missing someone but those are the folks I am going with.

Now if we are asking about the best PLAYERS in the NBA< that is a different discussion. People confuse that and super stardom too often.
Click to expand...
This.
Click to expand...

 Except my list is a little different (+Dirk). IMO being a superstar is being globally recognized where you can be identified with one name.
 
Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

To me a superstar is broken down into a few parts.

1. Popularity. This is easily the most important part of the equation. Some would say production, but I beg to differ. Stardom is popularity. It isn't about how well you are in your field but how many casuals are willing to come see you when they have no emotions attached to the game. Being able to DRAW on the road is a big factor.

2. Production. People want to force themselves to believe a superstar MUST be able to do it on both ends of the court. LIke Larry Bird right? Like Steve Nash right? Like Barkley right? You don't have to do a thing on the defensive end to be considered a superstar. I hate when people bring that part of. Scoring is the most important aspect of the game. If you score so much that you aren't a liability on the other end of the court because you can SHOOT you team out of any situation, then you are fine. Forget defense.

3. Winning doesn't matter. Again, you don't have to win a damn thing to be considered a superstar. You can just look at most superstars in the history of the NBA. Most of them haven't won a damn thing, so does that disqualify them from superstar status? Of course not.

The superstars of TODAY
Kobe
LeBron
Wade
Dwight
Melo
Yao
Nash

I might be missing someone but those are the folks I am going with.

Now if we are asking about the best PLAYERS in the NBA< that is a different discussion. People confuse that and super stardom too often.
Click to expand...
Nailed it.

That popularity part is a huge factor. And yes, pub (especially from outlets like ESPN) plays a giant role.

Look at when Melo was leading the L in scoring a couple of seasons ago. Everybody and their mama was saying how he was the best scorer in the L, most diverse scorer, best in clutch situations, etc. And it was hard to argue that he wasn't any of those things.

Quite honestly, being in Denver is probably holding him back a tad. Similar to how playing in Phoenix didn't allow Amar'e to fully blossom into superstardom until he got to NY.

Melo is a superstar, imo.
 
dirk is pretty popular...

i don't care about a label. would love to have the guy on my team. is he as good as lebron or wade? nope. so what? you can still win a championship with him and the right players around.
 
Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

To me a superstar is broken down into a few parts.

1. Popularity. This is easily the most important part of the equation. Some would say production, but I beg to differ. Stardom is popularity. It isn't about how well you are in your field but how many casuals are willing to come see you when they have no emotions attached to the game. Being able to DRAW on the road is a big factor.

2. Production. People want to force themselves to believe a superstar MUST be able to do it on both ends of the court. LIke Larry Bird right? Like Steve Nash right? Like Barkley right? You don't have to do a thing on the defensive end to be considered a superstar. I hate when people bring that part of. Scoring is the most important aspect of the game. If you score so much that you aren't a liability on the other end of the court because you can SHOOT you team out of any situation, then you are fine. Forget defense.

3. Winning doesn't matter. Again, you don't have to win a damn thing to be considered a superstar. You can just look at most superstars in the history of the NBA. Most of them haven't won a damn thing, so does that disqualify them from superstar status? Of course not.

The superstars of TODAY
Kobe
LeBron
Wade
Dwight
Melo
Yao
Nash

I might be missing someone but those are the folks I am going with.

Now if we are asking about the best PLAYERS in the NBA< that is a different discussion. People confuse that and super stardom too often.
Click to expand...
Nailed it.

That popularity part is a huge factor. And yes, pub (especially from outlets like ESPN) plays a giant role.

Look at when Melo was leading the L in scoring a couple of seasons ago. Everybody and their mama was saying how he was the best scorer in the L, most diverse scorer, best in clutch situations, etc. And it was hard to argue that he wasn't any of those things.

Quite honestly, being in Denver is probably holding him back a tad. Similar to how playing in Phoenix didn't allow Amar'e to fully blossom into superstardom until he got to NY.

Melo is a superstar, imo.
 
I am torn on Dirk and Pau. I guess Dirk and Pau can be considered superstars because of their international status. What about Tony Parker and Manu?
 
I am torn on Dirk and Pau. I guess Dirk and Pau can be considered superstars because of their international status. What about Tony Parker and Manu?
 
dirk is pretty popular...

i don't care about a label. would love to have the guy on my team. is he as good as lebron or wade? nope. so what? you can still win a championship with him and the right players around.
 
Of course he is.
laugh.gif
at dudes saying he's not.
 
Originally Posted by dreClark

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

To me a superstar is broken down into a few parts.

1. Popularity. This is easily the most important part of the equation. Some would say production, but I beg to differ. Stardom is popularity. It isn't about how well you are in your field but how many casuals are willing to come see you when they have no emotions attached to the game. Being able to DRAW on the road is a big factor.

2. Production. People want to force themselves to believe a superstar MUST be able to do it on both ends of the court. LIke Larry Bird right? Like Steve Nash right? Like Barkley right? You don't have to do a thing on the defensive end to be considered a superstar. I hate when people bring that part of. Scoring is the most important aspect of the game. If you score so much that you aren't a liability on the other end of the court because you can SHOOT you team out of any situation, then you are fine. Forget defense.

3. Winning doesn't matter. Again, you don't have to win a damn thing to be considered a superstar. You can just look at most superstars in the history of the NBA. Most of them haven't won a damn thing, so does that disqualify them from superstar status? Of course not.

The superstars of TODAY
Kobe
LeBron
Wade
Dwight
Melo
Yao
Nash

I might be missing someone but those are the folks I am going with.

Now if we are asking about the best PLAYERS in the NBA< that is a different discussion. People confuse that and super stardom too often.
Click to expand...
This.
Click to expand...
I agree wholeheartedly.
 
Originally Posted by dreClark

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

To me a superstar is broken down into a few parts.

1. Popularity. This is easily the most important part of the equation. Some would say production, but I beg to differ. Stardom is popularity. It isn't about how well you are in your field but how many casuals are willing to come see you when they have no emotions attached to the game. Being able to DRAW on the road is a big factor.

2. Production. People want to force themselves to believe a superstar MUST be able to do it on both ends of the court. LIke Larry Bird right? Like Steve Nash right? Like Barkley right? You don't have to do a thing on the defensive end to be considered a superstar. I hate when people bring that part of. Scoring is the most important aspect of the game. If you score so much that you aren't a liability on the other end of the court because you can SHOOT you team out of any situation, then you are fine. Forget defense.

3. Winning doesn't matter. Again, you don't have to win a damn thing to be considered a superstar. You can just look at most superstars in the history of the NBA. Most of them haven't won a damn thing, so does that disqualify them from superstar status? Of course not.

The superstars of TODAY
Kobe
LeBron
Wade
Dwight
Melo
Yao
Nash

I might be missing someone but those are the folks I am going with.

Now if we are asking about the best PLAYERS in the NBA< that is a different discussion. People confuse that and super stardom too often.
Click to expand...
This.
Click to expand...
I agree wholeheartedly.
 
How can your opinion be taken serious if you're gonna blatantly lie in your post? For example... "he doesn't rebound." He leads the NBA in rebounding from the SF position.
laugh.gif


24/9/3 in 35 mpg in an off shooting year

And he doesn't make his team better yet they went from something like 17 wins to 43 his rookie season, and made the playoffs every year since he entered the league. 14 game winners...the most clutch player not named KB24. The best scorer in the NBA. Denver has never set up its team properly around Melo, yet he is still successful. That's why he wants out of Denver...because he'll never get the respect he deserves if he stays there
 
How can your opinion be taken serious if you're gonna blatantly lie in your post? For example... "he doesn't rebound." He leads the NBA in rebounding from the SF position.
laugh.gif


24/9/3 in 35 mpg in an off shooting year

And he doesn't make his team better yet they went from something like 17 wins to 43 his rookie season, and made the playoffs every year since he entered the league. 14 game winners...the most clutch player not named KB24. The best scorer in the NBA. Denver has never set up its team properly around Melo, yet he is still successful. That's why he wants out of Denver...because he'll never get the respect he deserves if he stays there
 
Originally Posted by DMV is RNB

And he doesn't make his team better yet they went from something like 17 wins to 43 his rookie season, and made the playoffs every year since he entered the league
Click to expand...
Yet his teams haven't really progressed since he has been there. What do you say against that argument?
 
Originally Posted by DMV is RNB

And he doesn't make his team better yet they went from something like 17 wins to 43 his rookie season, and made the playoffs every year since he entered the league
Click to expand...
Yet his teams haven't really progressed since he has been there. What do you say against that argument?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom