Mad Dog doesn't think Jimmy Butler is a superstar: 'He's not Jokic! He's not LeBron!'

[Lebron23]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2s0xkJhRTY

I think a poster name Mad Dog was posting in this forum a couple of years ago.

[bullettooth]

No, he's not a superstar. Since the 90s, there's only been FOUR superstars;

MJ, Shaq, Kobe and LeBron.

All four of these guys had incredible success on the court and were basically household names, ask a random off the street (in north america) and they'll almost certainly know who you're talking about. Outside of North America, only Michael Jordan is surely known by basically everyone. These 4 guys are also an easy lock for top 10 players of all time. Again, these 4 guys were and still are known as superstars.

Does someone like Durant, Butler, or Giannis fall into this category? If so, what does that make the first 4 guys? This 'superstar' status gets thrown around way too loosely. If Butler is considered a superstar, that makes someone like LeBron (currently) a HYPERSTAR. The only guy that COULD be considered superstar level is Steph Curry, but even he doesnt have the kind of reach or status outside of basketball like LeBron.

[1987_Lakers]

No, he's not a superstar. Since the 90s, there's only been FOUR superstars;

MJ, Shaq, Kobe and LeBron..

:roll:

[bdonovan]

Stephen A. Smith sounds like Tone Loc. Or has that already been pointed out?

Butler is not an elite player. His game reminds me of Chris Paul- in terms of dribbling around, getting to his spot, and making the mid-range. He's a crafty player; but he can't really beat you off the dribble too often or light you up from outside.

He was not a top 30 scorer in the regular season. He played subpar in the Finals, although who knows what effect the injury had (sorry JVG).

All that said, he's done a lot with a little. He competed with 4 midgets running around on the court- Struss, Vincent, Martin, Lowry- up against the Denver behemoths; managed to take out the only real threat to the Nuggets- the Bucks. And far as I know he only threatened to beat up his head coach once this season, so some improvements on that front.

[90sgoat]

No, he's not a superstar. Since the 90s, there's only been FOUR superstars;

MJ, Shaq, Kobe and LeBron.

All four of these guys had incredible success on the court and were basically household names, ask a random off the street (in north america) and they'll almost certainly know who you're talking about. Outside of North America, only Michael Jordan is surely known by basically everyone. These 4 guys are also an easy lock for top 10 players of all time. Again, these 4 guys were and still are known as superstars.

Does someone like Durant, Butler, or Giannis fall into this category? If so, what does that make the first 4 guys? This 'superstar' status gets thrown around way too loosely. If Butler is considered a superstar, that makes someone like LeBron (currently) a HYPERSTAR. The only guy that COULD be considered superstar level is Steph Curry, but even he doesnt have the kind of reach or status outside of basketball like LeBron.

That has more to do with being a popstar.

Not a lot of people actually knew Lebron either worldwide. More people knew Kobe is my guess.

MJ was a real worldwide star though. If you woke some foreigner in a rice paddy somewhere and asked them to name 3 americans in the 90s, they'd say Bill Clinton, Michael Jackson and Michael Jordan.

[kurple]

Are they talking about american superstars because no one is mentioning Jokic? Joke

[Clifton]

A superstar makes his presence felt on the game more consistently than Butler. Butler is an all-star, and he's a particularly dangerous guy in playoff fourth quarters, because of his mentality and skill set. But half of games he's scoring like 14 points. Every time he scores the ball it takes work, and he's not doing anything at a superstar volume. He's just not a tier-1 basketball talent.

The comp for him is Reggie Miller. People remember him being better than he was because he was such an alpha in important moments. And he should be remembered like that, because those moments matter more. Being able to be the best player in any given playoff game no matter who you're playing is great, but it's not the same as dominance. Paul Pierce and Carmelo could be the best player in a given game against Lebron or Kobe, might even beat them in a series, but everyone who was there remembers that Lebron and Kobe were the superior players. It will be the same with Butler and Tatum/Giannis/Embiid.

[bullettooth]

That has more to do with being a popstar.

Not a lot of people actually knew Lebron either worldwide. More people knew Kobe is my guess.

MJ was a real worldwide star though. If you woke some foreigner in a rice paddy somewhere and asked them to name 3 americans in the 90s, they'd say Bill Clinton, Michael Jackson and Michael Jordan.

Yes, but even if you discard that aspect and focus just on basketball itself, you still have the problem of 'Jimmy Butler is a superstar.... he's on the same level as LeBron James' which is a lie, and since the two are not then what status do you give LeBron? Hyperstar?

It's just inconsistent and needless elevating of lesser players. Butler's a 'star'..... or 'all-star'... but Superstar used to be reserved for the absolute top tier player; and that's the 4 guys I mentioned earlier.