Is Donovan Mitchell still a superstar? Cuz AR does what he does but passes better

I wonder what teams might throw a max at him? Surely, LA's going to pick him over LBJ due to youth. Luka + Reaves to mimic the Brunson/Kyrie duos and try to build Dallas 2.0. Find rim rollers/rim protectors & some wing 3&Ds.

[QUOTE=FultzNationRISE;15040508]I mean certainly when I said "could not" or "never" theres some implied hyperbole. What I mean is theyre not high on the list youd expect it from. Theres enough players ahead of them who would all have to have bad luck for a team that's riding Mitchell or Reaves to win a title. Is it possible? Sure. But not as perennially likely as a Lebron, Joker, and then to a slightly lesser extent SGA, Luka, Giannis, prime Steph or KD, then to a little bit lesser extent than that Tatum, Ant.

But yeah of course it's not impossible. I understand that.[/QUOTE]

Wow, Lebron/Joker/SGA/prime Steph are more likely to win a title than MItchell?

That is expert level stuff. How much is your subscription again?

As far as number comparisons and comparisons to people like Tatum?

I don’t know. I’m not the biggest Tatum guy, but I think what we have now is an every day is a sunny day problem. I’ll let forgotten Hood classic vampire in Brooklyn explain it

[video=youtube_share;87Pe6_24Rfc]https://youtu.be/87Pe6_24Rfc?si=5i2LfUID6FIi4wIS[/video]



as he said. If every day is a sunny day….. what’s a sunny day?


a combination of unbelievably good shooting along with the league openly rigging the game for the offense has turned the entire league into a land of sunny days.

I guarantee you if there are more than a few games tonight someone’s gonna score 130. Maybe 140. Only so many players are gonna play big minutes. And not all of them will be scorers. You’ll have like six scorers who have to count for 130 points instead of 90 or 95.

Regardless of how good the players themselves are the increased pace and the style turns middling production to good production and good production to superstar production.

let’s not act like I’m talking about the quality of the players themselves. A player today doesn’t have to be worse to be less productive in a league that allows fewer possessions and doesn’t modify the rules for entertainment.

but what matters is the end result. There is a soft cap on how productive anybody is gonna be. The ceiling is only gonna raise so much unless you have a situation where you have the tremendous pace and somebody like Wilt is being specifically asked to score like never before scene for the express purpose of generating excitement.

the leagues best scores are gonna hang around 30 a game. Maybe a little more. But the difference between the best scorers and the really good scorers isn’t gonna be 15 points.

So with the ceiling staying roughly in place, but the floor being raised by more possessions and beneficial rules the line between good and star is almost nonexistent, and the line between star and all-time great is even thinner.

when everyone the least bit good at attacking could realistically go get 25 out of 138 points. It’s easy to say a lot more People are on the same level.

we all know that just because Jordan had a 29 game 46 or so percent shooting MVP season and Isaiah Thomas had something similar on the Celtics that doesn’t mean they’re the same level of offensive player. But thing is…. if you move that Jordan up just because he potentially could score 40 a game doesn’t mean he’s going to do it on a good team that isn’t asking it of him.

if Jordan scores 32 while Isaiah Thomas scored 30 and Isaiah is similarly or more efficient because he shoots threes and makes 90% of his free throws people who base rankings on numbers would have trouble deciding who is better on offense.

it’s not that there isn’t a difference. The difference is just made slimmer by raising the floor while the ceiling stays more or less constant.

I think the days are done where a good player tops out at 17 game but the elites score 30. A good player given freedom is gonna have numbers that would put him in the Hall of Fame at any point between the 70s and 10 years ago.

When the league is nonstop sunny days it’s harder to differentiate because good and great are both gonna have great production.


it’s easy to say he can be Tatum because Tatum is close to a soft cap of reasonable production in a league that makes it a lot easier to reach that soft cap.

and that makes it harder than ever to know what you’re seeing. You don’t have to be as good as whoever to be roughly as productive as whoever. Especially if we’re gonna throw out defense and the need for it to lead to an effective team style of play.

we are too close to the dawning of the era of nonstop sunshine. We have to reset the standards and I feel like it’s gonna take a while.

[QUOTE=Carbine;15040509]Wow, Lebron/Joker/SGA/prime Steph are more likely to win a title than MItchell?

That is expert level stuff. [B]How much is your subscription again?[/B][/QUOTE]



It's about tree fiddy.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;15040507]I wonder what teams might throw a max at him? Surely, LA's going to pick him over LBJ due to youth. Luka + Reaves to mimic the Brunson/Kyrie duos and try to build Dallas 2.0. Find rim rollers/rim protectors & some wing 3&Ds.[/QUOTE]

Hopefully la gives him max. Two guys other teams want to put on an island on max deals. Good luck with that formula! :cheers:

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;15040518]Hopefully la gives him max. Two guys other teams want to put on an island on max deals. Good luck with that formula! :cheers:[/QUOTE]


I mean... no offense bro but your boy has been put on an island in the playoffs and embarrassed many times while offering almost 0 offensive capability. Aside from simple screen setting and bobbling the ball on any move he makes.

[QUOTE=tpols;15040523]I mean... no offense bro but your boy has been put on an island in the playoffs and embarrassed many times while offering almost 0 offensive capability. Aside from simple screen setting and bobbling the ball on any move he makes.[/QUOTE]

More stops than embarrassments while playing for top offensive teams. Facts tell a different story than the false narratives

I'm really curious what the difference between Manu and Reaves is? Manu was obviously a better defender but by how much? He played on loaded defensive San Antonio teams where he never took top guys... Bowen did... and Timmy anchored the paint. What would his defense be on a shit defensive team? I'm not seeing much. But AR has a higher offensive ceiling.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9XbDCXLE94[/url]

That's a good place to start.

The 2004 Olympics would also be another place to start.

Id take manu over most fuys. Certainly over reeves. Lakers may have beat the wolves last year with manu

[QUOTE=tpols;15040528]I'm really curious what the difference between Manu and Reaves is? Manu was obviously a better defender but by how much? He played on loaded defensive San Antonio teams where he never took top guys... Bowen did... and Timmy anchored the paint. What would his defense be on a shit defensive team? I'm not seeing much. But AR has a higher offensive ceiling.[/QUOTE]

Reaves is going to be a starter the rest of his career to where Manu was only a starter in 2 of the 16 seasons he played avg. only 25mph while Reaves us avg. 30mpg. A prominent 6th man really shouldn't be compared to a starter.

[QUOTE=Xiao Yao You;15040531]Id take manu over most fuys. Certainly over reeves. Lakers may have beat the wolves last year with manu[/QUOTE]

And thats why I'm asking why. His defense wasnt that great. He actually made some really boneheaded plays on defense in the playoffs that cost spurs a title... straight up. His game was scoring and genius passing at times. Reaves can dime too and has a higher scoring ceiling. Its just wierd that you have a huge rift between them. Manu on a bad team isn't a known player.

Like youre shitting on Reaves for getting a max bag. If Manu was maxed out today his team would be going nowhere too. Probably in the lottery after he gets injured trying to carry huge load.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15040532]Reaves is going to be a starter the rest of his career to where Manu was only a starter in 2 of the 16 seasons he played avg. only 25mph while Reaves us avg. 30mpg. A prominent 6th man really shouldn't be compared to a starter.[/QUOTE]

Manu wasnt just any 6th man. :facepalm

He literally beat a superteam of NBA players as the #1 guy in 2004 on the world's biggest stage.

I think he proved at the very least he could be the #1 guy on a title contender. He already proved he could float between a 1.b to #3 option on a dynasty. That's quite a difference than being an underperforming #3 option on two first round exit teams and a #5 option on a WCF team.