+2800 roster and sidekick < Hornacek, so 73 wins means CURRY is goat-like, not lebron

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15021394]This[/QUOTE]

You are quoting lebron 23

you lost my little bro

[QUOTE=warriorfan;15021407]You are quoting lebron 23

you lost my little bro[/QUOTE]

He knows more ball than you.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15021410]He knows more ball than you.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?507104-Have-any-of-you-guys-heard-the-theory-that-the-Moon-is-a-Spaceship[/url]

[QUOTE=warriorfan;15021496][url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?507104-Have-any-of-you-guys-heard-the-theory-that-the-Moon-is-a-Spaceship[/url][/QUOTE]

Seems like most people in that thread enjoyed the content I brought to their attention. I’m about to make a thread about Saturn next.

[QUOTE=3ba11;15020951]You're forgetting that true franchise players like Curry or Love are dominant elite producers, so they make All-NBA without any playoff success... Otoh, secondary producers like Klay or Pippen needed titles to make All-NBA, similar to Manu, Parker, Pau, Dumars or Worthy - [I]they needed winning spotlight to be seen as All-NBA[/I].. And no one got more winning spotlight than Klay - he never produced anywhere near Jeff Hornacek, but the winning spotlight inflated him to all-time status and media accolade.. Contrastingly, Jeff didn't get this benefit of getting carried to titles early in his career like Klay, and making All-NBA thereafter.. If Klay was barely scraping 20 ppg while losing on the Wizards, he might not make a single all-star game - the numbers show that he's a 1-dimensional player on offense that doesn't get to the line or pass.[/QUOTE]
You've called Bosh a franchise player many times and he had zero playoff success in Toronto but only named to one All-NBA team his first 7yrs. Then had the most playoff success in his career with Miami and never made All-NBA.

Your theories are dumb.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15021549]You've called Bosh a franchise player many times and he had zero playoff success in Toronto but only named to one All-NBA team his first 7yrs. Then had the most playoff success in his career with Miami and never made All-NBA.

Your theories are dumb.[/QUOTE]


It's common knowledge that Bosh was 3rd option in Miami, so they almost never make All-NBA, while Lebron's skillset always destroys 3rd options like Love, Jamison, Kuzma or Bosh.

Secondly, the fact that Bosh made All-NBA as 1st option without playoff success shows that he's dominant, so the playoff success aspect didn't matter.... Franchise players like Curry, Bosh or Love are dominant producers, so they make All-NBA without any playoff success... Otoh, secondary producers like Klay or Pippen needed titles to make All-NBA, similar to Manu, Parker, Pau, Dumars or Worthy - they needed winning spotlight to be seen as All-NBA.. And no one got more winning spotlight than Klay - he never produced anywhere near Jeff Hornacek, but the winning spotlight inflated him to all-time status and media accolade..

Contrastingly, Jeff didn't get this benefit of getting carried to titles early in his career like Klay, and making All-NBA thereafter.. If Klay was barely scraping 20 ppg while losing on the Wizards, he might not make a single all-star game - the numbers show that he's a 1-dimensional player on offense that doesn't get to the line or pass.

[QUOTE=3ba11;15021578] Otoh, secondary producers like [B]Klay [/B]or Pippen needed titles to make All-NBA, similar to Manu, Parker, Pau, Dumars or Worthy - they needed winning spotlight to be seen as All-NBA.. And no one got more winning spotlight than Klay
[/QUOTE]


You're arguing that these guys got all-nba nods specifically because of titles won granting them a 'winning spotlight' , but here's some interesting nuggets of info showing all-nba voting patterns for these players:

Klay made his [U]first[/U] all-nba third team for the [B]2015[/B] season, which is determined [U]before[/U] the champion is crowned in June. So in essence, the Warriors could have [U]not[/U] won that title and Klay still would have made the third team, [U]ergo his first selection wasn't dependent on winning a title[/U]. He made it again in [B]2016[/B] and then lost in the finals, but not in [B]2017[/B] or [B]18[/B] while GS was [U]winning[/U] and Klay's production was virtually identical even with Durant's addition. So why didn't the 'winning spotlight' apply when the Warriors were going back to back? In 2015 as 2nd option he was 22/3/3 59%. in 2017 he was 22/4/2 59% and in 2018 20/4/3 60% TS. The 'winning' spotlight [B]*while he was actually winning*[/B] couldn't get him in over guys like Derozan and Jimmy Butler those years who hadn't then and still haven't won a title? The 'winning spotlight' didn't work in [B]2023[/B] after he won a title in [B]2022[/B], averaging virtually the same 22/4/2 58% numbers he was dropping between 2015 and 2018? You say the 'winning spotlight' inflated Klay to all-time status; perhaps you'll be good enough to point out his name on the top 75 list because I seem to have missed it.

Joe Dumars made his first all-nba in [B]1990[/B] after winning in [B]89[/B].... he also made it in[B] 93[/B], three years after the last Pistons title and Detroit went 40-42 that years. So you're arguing that Dumars winning a title in 1990 was still carrying 'winning spotlight' cache three years later on a Pistons team that couldn't even break .500?

That Pau Gasol getting 2nd team on the Bulls in [B]2015 [/B]was residual 'winning spotlight' for titles he last won on the Lakers in [B]2010[/B]?

That Tony Parker's first all-nba nod in [B]2009[/B] was a 'winning spotlight' perk for a title he last won in 2[B]007[/B]? Did the voters give him preemptive 'winning spotlight' selections in [B]2012[/B] and [B]2013[/B] because they anticipated he'd next win in [B]2014[/B]? Why wasn't he all-nba in [B]2006[/B] when his numbers were comparable to 2012-2014( his 2014 numbers were actually worse than 2006, especially scoring), and he had already won titles in [B]2003[/B] and [B]2005[/B]? Winning spotlight didn't apply then?

James Worthy has two all-nba selections, in [B]1990[/B] and [B]91[/B]. Why didn't the 'winning spotlight' get him selected in [B]1989[/B] right after winning in [B]1988[/B]( WITH the finals MVP to boot)?

Manu has two all-nba nods. The first was in [B]2008[/B] which you'll correlate with him winning in [B]2007[/B]( this actually coincided with an increase in role and minutes, but you'll ignore that). His 2nd selection came in [B]2011[/B], [U]4 years[/U] after his last title and 3 years before his next and final one in [B]2014[/B]. So what would the 2011 all-nba selection be as far as 'winning spotlight'? Residual from his 2007 title, or preemptive for his 2014 one? Why didn't he get 'winning spotlight' all-nba nods for 2006 and 2007 coming off the 2005 title, especially given how well he played in the finals?

It's almost like these awards are handed out moreso based within the context of how good a player was in a given season as compared to other players, and winning a title as a 'secondary producer' doesn't carry the weight you think it does as far as these selections, especially when many of the selections fall well outside of a range where a player would reasonably get some kind of residual effect from winning a title. Gasol wasn't getting 'winning spotlight' all-nba picks in 2015 for shit he was doing in 2010 on a different team.The fact that Klay was winning in 2017 and 2018 averaging basically the same numbers as 2015 and 2016, and didn't [U]sniff[/U] the all-NBA team, means the 'winning spotlight' didn't prevent the voters from concluding that Demar Derozan and Jimmy Butler were better that year at the guard spot and more deserving. And the reality is that Klay getting voted to his first all-NBA team in 2015 before the season concluded with the Warriors winning, but then doesn't get voted in for 2017, 2018 and 2023 proves 'winning spotlight' has sweet fukk all to do with it, or else he'd have 4-5 all-nba selections on his resume.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;15021616]You're arguing that these guys got all-nba nods specifically because of titles won granting them a 'winning spotlight' , but here's some interesting nuggets of info showing all-nba voting patterns for these players:

Klay made his [U]first[/U] all-nba third team for the [B]2015[/B] season, which is determined [U]before[/U] the champion is crowned in June. So in essence, the Warriors could have [U]not[/U] won that title and Klay still would have made the third team, [U]ergo his first selection wasn't dependent on winning a title[/U]. He made it again in [B]2016[/B] and then lost in the finals, but not in [B]2017[/B] or [B]18[/B] while GS was [U]winning[/U] and Klay's production was virtually identical even with Durant's addition. So why didn't the 'winning spotlight' apply when the Warriors were going back to back? In 2015 as 2nd option he was 22/3/3 59%. in 2017 he was 22/4/2 59% and in 2018 20/4/3 60% TS. The 'winning' spotlight [B]*while he was actually winning*[/B] couldn't get him in over guys like Derozan and Jimmy Butler those years who hadn't then and still haven't won a title? The 'winning spotlight' didn't work in [B]2023[/B] after he won a title in [B]2022[/B], averaging virtually the same 22/4/2 58% numbers he was dropping between 2015 and 2018? You say the 'winning spotlight' inflated Klay to all-time status; perhaps you'll be good enough to point out his name on the top 75 list because I seem to have missed it.

Joe Dumars made his first all-nba in [B]1990[/B] after winning in [B]89[/B].... he also made it in[B] 93[/B], three years after the last Pistons title and Detroit went 40-42 that years. So you're arguing that Dumars winning a title in 1990 was still carrying 'winning spotlight' cache three years later on a Pistons team that couldn't even break .500?

That Pau Gasol getting 2nd team on the Bulls in [B]2015 [/B]was residual 'winning spotlight' for titles he last won on the Lakers in [B]2010[/B]?

That Tony Parker's first all-nba nod in [B]2009[/B] was a 'winning spotlight' perk for a title he last won in 2[B]007[/B]? Did the voters give him preemptive 'winning spotlight' selections in [B]2012[/B] and [B]2013[/B] because they anticipated he'd next win in [B]2014[/B]? Why wasn't he all-nba in [B]2006[/B] when his numbers were comparable to 2012-2014( his 2014 numbers were actually worse than 2006, especially scoring), and he had already won titles in [B]2003[/B] and [B]2005[/B]? Winning spotlight didn't apply then?

James Worthy has two all-nba selections, in [B]1990[/B] and [B]91[/B]. Why didn't the 'winning spotlight' get him selected in [B]1989[/B] right after winning in [B]1988[/B]( WITH the finals MVP to boot)?

Manu has two all-nba nods. The first was in [B]2008[/B] which you'll correlate with him winning in [B]2007[/B]( this actually coincided with an increase in role and minutes, but you'll ignore that). His 2nd selection came in [B]2011[/B], [U]4 years[/U] after his last title and 3 years before his next and final one in [B]2014[/B]. So what would the 2011 all-nba selection be as far as 'winning spotlight'? Residual from his 2007 title, or preemptive for his 2014 one? Why didn't he get 'winning spotlight' all-nba nods for 2006 and 2007 coming off the 2005 title, especially given how well he played in the finals?

It's almost like these awards are handed out moreso based within the context of how good a player was in a given season as compared to other players, and winning a title as a 'secondary producer' doesn't carry the weight you think it does as far as these selections, especially when many of the selections fall well outside of a range where a player would reasonably get some kind of residual effect from winning a title. Gasol wasn't getting 'winning spotlight' all-nba picks in 2015 for shit he was doing in 2010 on a different team.The fact that Klay was winning in 2017 and 2018 averaging basically the same numbers as 2015 and 2016, and didn't [U]sniff[/U] the all-NBA team, means the 'winning spotlight' didn't prevent the voters from concluding that Demar Derozan and Jimmy Butler were better that year at the guard spot and more deserving. And the reality is that Klay getting voted to his first all-NBA team in 2015 before the season concluded with the Warriors winning, but then doesn't get voted in for 2017, 2018 and 2023 proves 'winning spotlight' has sweet fukk all to do with it, or else he'd have 4-5 all-nba selections on his resume.[/QUOTE]

I.mentioned this earlier a few pages back, but you took a sledgehammer to it.:applause:

Also I supposed the winning spotlight made Scottie an all star in 90 and made him all defense in 91, before rhey ever won too.....stupid narratives always get torpedoed once someone can be bothered to give facts.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;15021627]I.mentioned this earlier a few pages back, but you took a sledgehammer to it.:applause:

Also I supposed the winning spotlight made Scottie an all star in 90 and made him all defense in 91, before rhey ever won too.....stupid narratives always get torpedoed once someone can be bothered to give facts.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. He's engineered this whole 'winning spotlight' thing to discredit Pippen's all-NBA nods. And even then, if he wanted to argue that Pippen was all-nba in 94 because of the 'winning spotlight' from the 91-93 titles and not based on his play that season, then why was he also all-NBA in 95 coming off 94 when he lost in the 2nd round? Why didn't he make a single all-NBA team in 93 coming off the 92 title? How did he make the third team in 98 playing 44 games and a worse overall season than 93? How does this 'winning spotlight' work, exactly?

Why was Kevin Willis on the third team in 92? He hadn't won a NBA title at that point( and he wouldn't win one until he was a 40 year old roleplayer on the Spurs in 2003, so the voters really did him a solid voting him in on the 'winning spotlight' premise 11 years later). Why was Gary Payton on the 94 third team as a secondary producer? Guess the voters were getting ahead of him winning a title in 2006 coming off the bench for Miami? Detlef Scrempf on the 95 third team? Juwan Howard on the 96 third team? Rod Strickland on the 98 second team? What 'winning spotlight' was being applied to Anthony Mason being voted onto the 97 third team averaging 16/11 on a Hornets team that got swept in the first round, while Horace Grant doesn't get the same accolade winning titles in 92 averaging 14/10, or coming off a title in 93 averaging 15/11?

EDIT: I just realized, the same way Klay's first all-NBA was decided right before winning the title in June 2015, Gasol's first all-NBA was in the 09 season. The Lakers won that year, but had also lost in the finals the year before, so Gasol getting voted onto the 09 third team( as with Klay) happened a few months before he would win his first title. At best you could say playing for the Lakers raised his profile, but just like Bosh with the Raptors, Gasol was the best player on a middle of the road team. Pau's scoring( something 3ball cherishes) was actually higher on the Grizzlies than on the Lakers. So what was really the difference between Bosh making 2nd team in 07 dropping 23/11 on a 47 win Raptors team, and Gasol dropping 20/9 on a 49 win Grizz squad in 06 and getting nothing? There's a small stat difference but I doubt that was the deciding factor. I can point to one very obvious difference, and that's Bosh playing in the east with Jermaine Oneal as the only real all-star level PF dropping those kinds of numbers, while Gasol was in the west playing prime Duncan, Garnett, Dirk, Amare, Elton Brand, Zach Randolph 4 times a year. I'd bet good money that if Gasol was in the east back then he'd have at least made all-NBA third team before he even got to the Lakers, and Bosh in the west wouldn't have sniffed it.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;15021627]I.mentioned this earlier a few pages back, but you took a sledgehammer to it.:applause:

Also I supposed the winning spotlight made Scottie an all star in 90 and made him all defense in 91, before rhey ever won too.....stupid narratives always get torpedoed once someone can be bothered to give facts.[/QUOTE]


Winning spotlight can be a lot of things, such as a team taking the league by storm, which allowed Mo to make all-star in 2009, or Wiggins in 2022, or Klay in 2015... Mo doesn't make jack-shit if he's losing on the Bucks, or barely winning 40 games like the 08' Cavs... Similarly, Klay's "worse than Jeff Hornacek" stats wouldn't make a single all-star game without the winning spotlight, or Wiggins in 2022 is another great example of winning spotlight inflation.

In addition to allowing Wiggins, Mo, and Klay to make all-star games, winning spotlight is also needed to get secondary producers All-NBA status, especially winning sidekicks like Klay, Pippen, Pau, Manu, Parker, Worthy or Dumars... In contrast to secondary producers needing winning spotlight, [u]elite[/u] producers don't need winning spotlight or any playoff success to make All-NBA, such as Love, Bosh, AD, Curry, Jokic, KAT and more - dominant producers don't need winning spotlight or playoff success to make All-NBA, but secondary producers like Klay or Pippen do...

This historical record has been explained many times, yet guys with bad reading comp like Phoenix miss it, so they post a bunch of garbage above.. But you should get the gist of it with this post... And the reason that Kevin Willis can make All-NBA is because dominant producers don't need winning spotlight to make All-NBA, and 16 rebounds is dominant (18/16).. Otoh, secondary producers don't have elite stats in ppg, rpg or apg, so they need winning spotlight to make All-NBA, or even all-star in many instances..

Zenmaster > doug collins

Fight me.

[Img]https://i.ibb.co/JmpGnKz/IMG-20230528-095117.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Axe;15022355]


[Img]https://i.ibb.co/JmpGnKz/IMG-20230528-095117.jpg[/img]


Zenmaster > doug collins

Fight me.


[/QUOTE]



Jordan's shot attempts, usage and scoring rate increased in the triangle as shown below:



[indent][i]Regular Season[/i]

[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1985-1989-sum:per_poss]85-89' Jordan[/url]........ 41.5 pts per 100.... 29.5 FGA per 100..... [url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1985-1989-sum:advanced]33.8[/url] usage
[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1990-1993-sum:per_poss]90-93' Jordan[/url]........ 42.0 pts per 100.... 31.1 FGA per 100..... [url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1990-1993-sum:advanced]33.2[/url] usage


[i]Playoffs[/i]

[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1985-1989-sum:per_poss_post]85-89' Jordan[/url]........ 42.9 pts per 100.... 29.7 FGA per 100..... [url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1985-1988-sum:advanced_post]35.1[/url] usage
[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1990-1993-sum:per_poss_post]90-93' Jordan[/url]........ 44.4 pts per 100.... 33.4 FGA per 100..... [url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1990-1993-sum:advanced_post]36.1[/url] usage


[i]Finals[/i]

[url=https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=michael+jordan+averages+in+the+1990-91+to+1992-93%27+finals]91-93' Jordan[/url]........ 36.3 PPG...... [url=https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=michael+jordan+usage+rate+in+1990-91+to+1992-93+finals]35.9[/url] usage[/indent]



The Pistons were 22-1 in the 89' and 90' Playoffs against other teams, but only 8-5 against the Bulls..

[I]So Jordan had already developed the Bulls to the 2nd or 3rd-best team in the league by the end of the 89' Playoffs despite Pippen being bad and Phil yet to arrive.. Phil inherited a team on the cusp of the Finals and the steepest trajectory in the league.[/I]

[QUOTE=3ba11;15022353]Winning spotlight can be a lot of things, such as a team taking the league by storm, which allowed Mo to make all-star in 2009, or Wiggins in 2022, or Klay in 2015... Mo doesn't make jack-shit if he's losing on the Bucks, or barely winning 40 games like the 08' Cavs... Similarly, Klay's "worse than Jeff Hornacek" stats wouldn't make a single all-star game without the winning spotlight, or Wiggins in 2022 is another great example of winning spotlight inflation.

In addition to allowing Wiggins, Mo, and Klay to make all-star games, winning spotlight is also needed to get secondary producers All-NBA status, especially winning sidekicks like Klay, Pippen, Pau, Manu, Parker, Worthy or Dumars... In contrast to secondary producers needing winning spotlight, [u]elite[/u] producers don't need winning spotlight or any playoff success to make All-NBA, such as Love, Bosh, AD, Curry, Jokic, KAT and more - dominant producers don't need winning spotlight or playoff success to make All-NBA, but secondary producers like Klay or Pippen do...

This historical record has been explained many times, [B]yet guys with bad reading comp like Phoenix miss it, so they post a bunch of garbage above..[/B] But you should get the gist of it with this post... And the reason that Kevin Willis can make All-NBA is because dominant producers don't need winning spotlight to make All-NBA, and 16 rebounds is dominant (18/16).. Otoh, secondary producers don't have elite stats in ppg, rpg or apg, so they need winning spotlight to make All-NBA, or even all-star in many instances..[/QUOTE]

Lol this little bitch thought he'd sneak in a dig at me in a post addressed to someone else instead of quoting my posts directly. Bitch behavior, just like you running away from the post the first time. I understood exactly what you said before, and it's garbage. First, you're just now adding all this mental gymnastics garbage like 'taking the league by storm' because your prior 'winning spotlight' arguments didn't have that context. Here's the FACTS after which I'll strip down your narratives to again show how full of shit you are:

FACTS are Klay Thompson was voted onto his first all-nba team averaging 22/3/3 in 2015 before the Warriors won the title. His scoring jumped from 18 in 2014 to 22 in 2015, which will tend to get you in line for possible All-NBA especially if your team has a good/great record. The voters considered that his performance played enough of a role in the Warriors season to warrant all-NBA before they won two months later. That's how voters think, not your drug-induced thought patterns.

FACTS are that Joe Dumars was voted all-nba in 1993 [U]THREE YEARS[/U] after winning a title averaging 24/4/2 on a team that won 40 games. Those aren't dominant numbers, and 40 wins isn't taking the league by storm individually or team-wise. The voters weren't going in 1993 "[I]you see Joe Dumars? Let's reward him for the 1990 title. Wait, Pistons only won 40 games? Not a problem, WINNING SPOTLIGHT from 3 years ago!"[/I]

FACTS are Jimmy Butler was voted all-nba in 2018 averaging 22/5/4, that is neither dominant production nor taking the league by storm( Wolves won 47 games and the 8th seed). That's the same 'secondary' production PPG you shit on Scottie for in 94, except Scottie averaged 9 rebound and 6 assists (both firsts among small forwards that year) and 2nd overall in steals.

FACTS are Anthony Mason made all NBA averaging 16/11 on a 54 win Hornets team, that's not taking the league by storm nor the 'dominant' production of 16 rebounds you tried to apply to Kevin Willis, and is weak 'secondary' scoring production. By the way, Willis didn't make the all-NBA team in 94 averaging 19/12 on a 57 win Hawk team. You really think the voters thought more of him dropping 18/16 on a 38 win team in 92, than 18/13 on a 45 win team in 93, or 19/12 on a 57 win team in 94? How fortunate for us that you aren't a decider of these things with your retarded takes.

FACTS are Detlef made all-nba averaging 19/6/4 in 95, secondary production on a 57 win Sonics team that had already won 63 games the year before( and he didn't get voted in all-nba that season). They were already a known factor, so there was no 'taking the league by storm' team-wise nor were his stats dominant.

FACTS are Rod Strickland made all-nba on 18/11/5, non-dominant production except for assists which wasn't that out of the park for him because he had prior years averaging 10 and not taking all-NBA, on a 42 win Bullets team( not taking the league by storm).

FACTS are James Worthy made all-NBA in 1990 and 1991 coming off seasons where the Lakers [U]didn't [/U]win a title. If 'winning spotlight' had that much credence he would have made all-nba in 1989 immediately coming off the 1988 chip, especially when they added the third team that year and he was decisively the 2nd best Laker after Magic at this point. 'Winning spotlight' would have gotten him onto one of the all-NBAs earlier in his career, if that was actually a thing, when the Lakers were winning titles in 85 or 87 and he was averaging the same 20-21ppg 'secondary production' that got him in for 90 and 91.

Those are historical record FACTS of WHAT happened. WHY it happened with your winning spotlight narratives are just that, narratives that you can spin and twist to obfuscate and ultimately mean nothing. There's too many examples that counter your 'winning spotlight' narrative to take all-NBA voting patterns as anything but subjective year to year. At the least, they don't follow the logic of some glue-sniffing retard like you who gets out on day release frothing at the mouth to create agendas for the express purpose of discrediting certain players.

Now go back to pretending like you didn't see my post originally before I get formally charged with assault.

[QUOTE=3ba11;15022353]Winning spotlight can be a lot of things, such as a team taking the league by storm, which allowed Mo to make all-star in 2009, or Wiggins in 2022, or Klay in 2015... Mo doesn't make jack-shit if he's losing on the Bucks, or barely winning 40 games like the 08' Cavs... Similarly, Klay's "worse than Jeff Hornacek" stats wouldn't make a single all-star game without the winning spotlight, or Wiggins in 2022 is another great example of winning spotlight inflation.

In addition to allowing Wiggins, Mo, and Klay to make all-star games, winning spotlight is also needed to get secondary producers All-NBA status, especially winning sidekicks like Klay, Pippen, Pau, Manu, Parker, Worthy or Dumars... In contrast to secondary producers needing winning spotlight, [u]elite[/u] producers don't need winning spotlight or any playoff success to make All-NBA, such as Love, Bosh, AD, Curry, Jokic, KAT and more - dominant producers don't need winning spotlight or playoff success to make All-NBA, but secondary producers like Klay or Pippen do...

This historical record has been explained many times, yet guys with bad reading comp like Phoenix miss it, so they post a bunch of garbage above.. But you should get the gist of it with this post... And the reason that Kevin Willis can make All-NBA is because dominant producers don't need winning spotlight to make All-NBA, and 16 rebounds is dominant (18/16).. Otoh, secondary producers don't have elite stats in ppg, rpg or apg, so they need winning spotlight to make All-NBA, or even all-star in many instances..[/QUOTE]

You kinda shine sometimes under this thing we call "retard spotlight" your content here is so terrible, that its rare anyone takes you serious.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;15022454]You kinda shine sometimes under this thing we call "retard spotlight" your content here is so terrible, that its rare anyone takes you serious.[/QUOTE]


Winning spotlight is real, which is why secondary producers like Klay, Mo and Pippen don't get media accolade until they get winning spotlight first, while dominant producers like Love or AD don't need winning teams or playoff success to get media accolade

This is the historical record