Derrick Rose - will he be a superstar?

[Kush77]

There's been a lot of talk about Rose on the board lately whether it's about his slow start, is he better than Brandon Jennings or will he be a superstar.

I don't know how we are judging guys. If a guy is a franchise player, isn't he a superstar? I think we all agree that Rose is our franchise player and I think he will be a superstar player.

But then we get into the debate of, will Rose be the guy that delivers a title. And I think that gets confused with whether or not he can be a superstar. As far as guys that bring instant championship contention, there's only three of those players imo. Kobe, LBJ and Wade.

I think Chris Paul is a superstar, but I don't think Chris Paul is the type of player that can carry an average team and make them a title contender. Like James did with the Cavs last year and Kobe with LA before they got Gasol. Guys like Howard and Paul need help.

So when it comes to Rose I think he'll be a superstar player, but being a superstar doesn't means you have to be the type of guy that can instantly win a title. Again, I think there are only three guys that can do that. Measuring Rose to the standards of those three I think is unfair and he can't live up to that. But I think Rose will eventually be in the superstar category and I'm not too worried about his slow start. He'll be fine.

Hou was talking about Joe Johnson in the other thread and said that he was a franchise player. Do we consider Joe Johnson a superstar? Do we consider Joe Johnson on the level of the big three?

I guess we need to rank what these titles mean. I'd like to hear what everyone else thinks about this.

Gamechangers - LeBron, Kobe, Wade. Guys who can take teams with average talent and make them a title contender.

Superstars - Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Dirk Nowitzki. Guys that can carry a team but need another all-star type around them to be a title contender.

Franchise player - Brandon Roy, Joe Johnson, Carmelo Anthony. Guys that are great but not superstars? Or does being a franchise player automatically place you in the superstar category?

This is where I'm seeing some confusion when it comes to Rose. I think some are saying that if Rose isn't a Kobe-type then that means he's not going to be a superstar. I think he can.

I'm curious what everyone else thinks.

 

[TheStig]

Kush its very touch and go with your examples. All of your game changers have missed the playoffs while a guy like Melo has always gotten his team in. I would say Bron is the only true game changers, both Kobe and Wade have had other stars in their title runs.

With respect to your question, I think Rose is a star, he needs another star or superstar to play with.

 

[pinkizdead]

i think rose will be a great player once he gets "it". i believe we need to surround him with some talent though. he's still young. most of roses problems lie with his understanding of the game. he makes bad passes or sloppy turn overs. Even though he's 2 year player, he's still making mistakes out there. If he learns how to play more efficiently, the talent and skill is there. If he extends his range on his jumper, i think he'll be a great player. i agree he'll be a superstar, but i dont think he's kobe, wade, or lebron. not too many pg's can occupy that role. It seems like a pg needs to be surrounded by good players for the reason that they ought to defer to other players.

 

[Kush77]

TheStig wrote:

Kush its very touch and go with your examples. All of your game changers have missed the playoffs while a guy like Melo has always gotten his team in. I would say Bron is the only true game changers, both Kobe and Wade have had other stars in their title runs.

With respect to your question, I think Rose is a star, he needs another star or superstar to play with.

Kobe is in the same category as LBJ. I think Kobe could take a a mediocre team and make them a contender. I think in 07-08 the Lakers weren't that great going into the season and Kobe had them at the top of the West even before the Gasol trade. Bynum was having a breakout season then got hurt. But I would say the talent level on the 07-08 Lakers was pretty similar to last year's Cleveland team.
And Wade did carry the Heat to a title. I know Shaq was on the team but Shaq didn't do a anything in the Finals, and the rest of that team wasn't great. You could also also say if Wade is a "game changer" then why didn't Miami only win 15 games two years ago.
But I think we would mostly agree that those three are the top three players in the league. I don't think any player can single-handedly win a title but there are a select few that can change a franchise.

 

[Shakes]

I'd agree LeBron is a game changer as you've defined it. I'd say for sure neither Wade or Kobe are ... they both struggled when they were the only star player on their team. Howard is probably more of a game changer than those guys. He went to the finals with no other real stars: Nelson was injured and Lewis only made the all-star game because he was playing on Howard's team.

In any case I doubt Rose is ever as good as any of those guys or Chris Paul.

I guess you've got to look at the closest comparison to what Rose's game projects to be: Tony Parker. He's a genuine star, but is he a superstar? I'd say no, and he's not even close. So Rose would need to be a lot better than Parker, and the two ways to do it are play making and shooting. Play making seems to be a have it or you don't skill, so better pray Rose learns how to shoot if you want him to be a superstar.

 

[houheffna]

Kush its very touch and go with your examples. All of your game changers have missed the playoffs while a guy like Melo has always gotten his team in. I would say Bron is the only true game changers, both Kobe and Wade have had other stars in their title runs.

With respect to your question, I think Rose is a star, he needs another star or superstar to play with.

WHAT??? What the heck are you watching? Where have you been for the last 10 years? Kobe is not a game changer? Guess what? Kobe and Wade have championships, Lebron doesn't. What are they trying to do? Get him a star or a superstar to play with...you have to be kidding me...

 

[Kush77]

I know the argument can be made, but can does missing the playoffs make you better or worse than another player.

Kobe and Wade missed the playoffs before for various reasons. But I'm sure none of us doubt their skill. We can look at a bunch of reasons as to why they didn't get to the postseason (injuries, turmoil, etc.).

theStig said that Melo made the playoffs every year, but up until last season he got bounced in the first round every year. Wade helped the Heat get out of the first round his rookie season. But KG also got bounced in the 1st round for about the first 6 or 7 years of his career but I'm sure we don't hold that against him because we know he has the skill.

I think LBJ, Kobe and Wade are those guys. They are on another level. The next level has Howard and Paul etc..

Howard did have Lewis, a boarderline all-star (like Mo Williams with Clev) and he did have Turkoglu. I think Rose can get into that tier of Paul and Howard. The Tony Parker example is interesting. He's an all-star but not a superstar. There's so many variables it's hard to say who's who.

 

[Shakes]

You can't say your definition of gamechanger is someone who can carry a team on their own back and then complain that we shouldn't talk about team success.

Anyway I think you're undervaluing Howard by putting him on the second tier. Big men are more valuable, Wade and Kobe as guards simply can't turn a team into the best defensive team in the league now matter how good they are, but that's what Howard did last year. The rest of the Orlando roster didn't exactly scream defensive powerhouse ...

I'm not sure whether debating whether Rose could be a star, superstar, whatever is the most important thing anyway. Don't we all agree that he's unlikely to win anything without another star player? I mean all the top point guards have needed lots of help, it's just not a position that lends itself to carrying a crap team. "Making your team mates better" means jack if your team mates suck.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Shakes wrote:

You can't say your definition of gamechanger is someone who can carry a team on their own back and then complain that we shouldn't talk about team success.

Anyway I think you're undervaluing Howard by putting him on the second tier. Big men are more valuable, Wade and Kobe as guards simply can't turn a team into the best defensive team in the league now matter how good they are, but that's what Howard did last year. The rest of the Orlando roster didn't exactly scream defensive powerhouse ...

I'm not sure whether debating whether Rose could be a star, superstar, whatever is the most important thing anyway. Don't we all agree that he's unlikely to win anything without another star player? I mean all the top point guards have needed lots of help, it's just not a position that lends itself to carrying a crap team. "Making your team mates better" means jack if your team mates suck.

You can make them suck less?

 

[Kush77]

Shakes wrote:

You can't say your definition of gamechanger is someone who can carry a team on their own back and then complain that we shouldn't talk about team success.

Well there are reasons guys miss the playoffs. Like injuries. The year Kobe missed the playoffs, he was hurt and the West was tough as always. If he was in the East, he makes the playoffs.

Winning is nice but what would you rather have? Camelo's 5 straight years of being bounced in the first round. Or Wade's title, three playoff appearances and 1 season with 15 wins in the same 5-year span?

To say Kobe and Wade aren't game-changers because they missed the playoffs isn't fair. LeBron missed the playoffs too. But what were the reasons? His team sucked and he was only 18 and 19. So I'm not holding that against him at all.

I'm not underestimating Howard I just don't think he's on the same level as the other three guys.

 

[houheffna]

I agree concerning Howard...especially the way he has started the season. I have him on my fantasy team...he is killing me.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

I think there are 7, maybe 8 superstars in this league.

C: Dwight Howard
PF: Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan
SF: Lebron James
SG: Kobe Bryant, Dwayne Wade
PG: Chris Paul, Steve Nash

In my opinion when you are the best player in the league on your position you are a superstar. So there should be at least 5 superstars. Wade clearly is and Nash and Duncan should be on that level, too.

I would also say that Tracy McGrady would be a superstar, too if he would be able to stay healty.

And then you have those many All-Stars:
Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Jason Kidd, Dirk Nowitzki,Carmelo Anthony, Chauncey Billups, Tracy McGrady, Yao Ming, Pau Gasol, Vince Carter, Andre Iguodala, Amare Stoudemire, Brandon Roy, Tony Parker, Chris Bosh, Carlos Boozer, Deron Williams, Gilbert Arenas.

 

[Shakes]

Kush77 wrote:

Well there are reasons guys miss the playoffs. Like injuries. The year Kobe missed the playoffs, he was hurt and the West was tough as always. If he was in the East, he makes the playoffs.

Winning is nice but what would you rather have? Camelo's 5 straight years of being bounced in the first round. Or Wade's title, three playoff appearances and 1 season with 15 wins in the same 5-year span?

I agree that team success is a bad measure of how good a player is. My point is you're the one who made that the focus of the discussion.

As to what I'd rather have, of course you take the championship. I think most fans would gladly take the Bulls 6 titles knowing you have 6 horrid years to follow over being (eg) the Suns and (nearly) always being good but not having anything to show for it.

I'm not underestimating Howard I just don't think he's on the same level as the other three guys.

Well you can make an argument about whether they're better players in a vacuum, but I think Howard's the second most important player in the league. As I said, you have to consider his position: it means he can make a much bigger difference defensively, and it also means that Howard vs average C is a bigger gap than Wade/Bryant vs average SG, as the average C is pretty crap compared to the average SG. Having a good player at a position where most players aren't very good is a huge advantage to a team.

 

[Kush77]

Shakes wrote:

Kush77 wrote:

Well there are reasons guys miss the playoffs. Like injuries. The year Kobe missed the playoffs, he was hurt and the West was tough as always. If he was in the East, he makes the playoffs.

Winning is nice but what would you rather have? Camelo's 5 straight years of being bounced in the first round. Or Wade's title, three playoff appearances and 1 season with 15 wins in the same 5-year span?

I agree that team success is a bad measure of how good a player is. My point is you're the one who made that the focus of the discussion.

As to what I'd rather have, of course you take the championship. I think most fans would gladly take the Bulls 6 titles knowing you have 6 horrid years to follow over being (eg) the Suns and (nearly) always being good but not having anything to show for it.

I'm not underestimating Howard I just don't think he's on the same level as the other three guys.

Well you can make an argument about whether they're better players in a vacuum, but I think Howard's the second most important player in the league. As I said, you have to consider his position: it means he can make a much bigger difference defensively, and it also means that Howard vs average C is a bigger gap than Wade/Bryant vs average SG, as the average C is pretty crap compared to the average SG. Having a good player at a position where most players aren't very good is a huge advantage to a team.

You can make that argument for Howard because if the Magic didn't have him in the middle they couldn't play their three-point shooting style. If defenses didn't have to worry about Howard in the middle then they could focus more on shutting dow the Magic's outside shooting. So I can't disagree with you there.

With that said, if you could take one player for the Bulls (age aside) do you take Kobe, wade or Howard. I assume the most important player you mean is LBJ.

 

[TheStig]

Kush77 wrote:

I know the argument can be made, but can does missing the playoffs make you better or worse than another player.

Kobe and Wade missed the playoffs before for various reasons. But I'm sure none of us doubt their skill. We can look at a bunch of reasons as to why they didn't get to the postseason (injuries, turmoil, etc.).

theStig said that Melo made the playoffs every year, but up until last season he got bounced in the first round every year. Wade helped the Heat get out of the first round his rookie season. But KG also got bounced in the 1st round for about the first 6 or 7 years of his career but I'm sure we don't hold that against him because we know he has the skill.

I think LBJ, Kobe and Wade are those guys. They are on another level. The next level has Howard and Paul etc..

Howard did have Lewis, a boarderline all-star (like Mo Williams with Clev) and he did have Turkoglu. I think Rose can get into that tier of Paul and Howard. The Tony Parker example is interesting. He's an all-star but not a superstar. There's so many variables it's hard to say who's who.

Kobe also lead a team with him, butler and odom to 34 wins and then got bounced in the first round the next two years before he got a legit C and Pau. Why use half a year as a sample size when you got a three whole years before it. Melo has a really medoicre cast and made it in the west. Do you really think the cavs team that made it to the finals would make it out of the west? Melo and KG had steep competition and bad teams. Take them off of either team and they struggle to win 30 games. I think Bron is the only really game changer, he has had absolute crap and done great with him, Wade did it to a lesser extent but he couldn't even make it out of the first round last year.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

But Denver is a lot better than the Heat! Anthony has guys like Billups, Martin, Nene and Smith who all are good players.

Wade really has nobody in Miami.

 

[TheStig]

Kush77 wrote:

Shakes wrote:

You can't say your definition of gamechanger is someone who can carry a team on their own back and then complain that we shouldn't talk about team success.

Well there are reasons guys miss the playoffs. Like injuries. The year Kobe missed the playoffs, he was hurt and the West was tough as always. If he was in the East, he makes the playoffs.

Winning is nice but what would you rather have? Camelo's 5 straight years of being bounced in the first round. Or Wade's title, three playoff appearances and 1 season with 15 wins in the same 5-year span?

To say Kobe and Wade aren't game-changers because they missed the playoffs isn't fair. LeBron missed the playoffs too. But what were the reasons? His team sucked and he was only 18 and 19. So I'm not holding that against him at all.

I'm not underestimating Howard I just don't think he's on the same level as the other three guys.

Kush, Kobe played 66 games that year, he had plenty of time. To me, the game changers are Lebron and to a lesser extent Wade. Kobe has always been overrated to me. He needs a stacked team to win.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

This is a team sport. Everyone needs good teammates. I doubt that Jordan would have won a title without the Pippens, Grants and Rodmans.

 

[TheStig]

Bullseye wrote:

But Denver is a lot better than the Heat! Anthony has guys like Billups, Martin, Nene and Smith who all are good players.

Wade really has nobody in Miami.

This year he does but he didn't have billups before last year and he didn't have smith the whole time. Nene and Martin have also missed a lot of time with injuries.

Wade meanwhile in those early years had butler and odom or shaq. Last year he didn't have anyone and he was injured the year before.

 

[RC_Skinny22]

Before Billups Melo had Allen Iverson and Marcus Camby.