Yes
No
Just when things couldn't get any worse...Originally Posted by RamiTheBullsFan
No, it really is what you said in the frame I just quoted. You allowed that even if Carmelo is the 2nd best scorer in the entire NBA, he still wouldn't be an elite player. So, the only way for Carmelo to be considered an elite player is to be the best scorer in the entire NBA, otherwise he is interchangeable with Kevin Martin.
Good work.
No, that isn't what I said at all. I said that elite is a subjective word (that is all I ever said in this thread), and implied that, theoretically, even the best scorer in the league can also be the worst defender and worst all-around player at everything else.
In this post I:
(a) implied that "elite" is a subjective word and people define it in varying ways. It is a label, and when you hand out labels, it gets very if-y.
(b) explained the point of view of someone who might believe Anthony is not elite by saying, "Anthony doesn't fall within a certain group of players who happen to be at the top of the league right now,"
and (c) explained the point of view of someone who might believe Anthony is elite by saying, "but he is a borderline top 10 player and a top 2, 3, or 4 scorer in the NBA."
If Grandma had nuts she'd be grandpa.
Martin also would have scored a ridiculously ineffcient 28.8PPG because he shoots in the low 40's percentage wise.
No, thats not what you said at all. You didn't imply anything, and you didn't use a hypothetical "best scorer in the league".
Okay, cool. Kevin Martin was the best example of a player today I could think of that represents a great scorer who is terrible at basically everything else. And the guy shoots nearly 40% from three-point range, and shoots free throws, too. So it isn't as ineffective as a guy taking high-percentage shots close to the rim.
No, this is still wrong. You didn't explain the point of view of someone...you said that "Anthony doesn't fall within a certain group of players who happen to be at the top of the league right now". And you said that Anthony " is a borderline top 10 player and a top 2, 3, or 4 scorer in the NBA."
I don't understand your confusion over your own statement.
(b) is true and (c) is true. And you are completely ignoring (a) altogether.
I said:
Whether or not Anthony is "elite" depends on how you define the word. Anthony doesn't fall within a certain group of players who happen to be at the top of the league right now, but he is a borderline top 10 player and a top 2, 3, or 4 scorer in the NBA. So it really all depends on point of view.
To which you responded:
So, the top 2 scorer in the NBA is not an elite player. Got it.
That's just to clarify.
I have a very loose definition of what I define as "elite". I know James, Wade, and Howard are the three best players in the NBA. They are elite in every sense of the word. I said earlier that Anthony was probably more like the best of the non-elite than he is the worst of the elite. And I defended that broad stance by sharing the concept that a great scorer can theoretically be terrible at everything else (i.e. Kevin Martin). Anthony is obviously not terrible at everything else. I just don't know if that means a person would be idiotic to not have 'Melo as an elite player considering he has a lot of flaws in his game other than scoring, and that there are a number of players who are clearly better than 'Melo is.
Martin is also an undersized 2 guard and not at all a similar player to Anthony size, skill, or style wise so comapring the two makes no sense
The NBA "elite" to me is every player that has a valid case for being the best player on the planet- to start out. It probably would stretch out a little bit further than that to players who really don't have a valid case at being the '#1 guy right now' but are still fantastic and look as though they can lead a team to a championship in their own right. That secondary list, to me, includes CP3, Durant, Rose, Bryant, Nowitzki, and D-Will. Anthony probably could lead a team to a championship, but I am not sure how likely a player as limited as he is (compared to all of the aforementioned players) would be to do that. That is why I originally referred to him as "borderline elite."
Last edited by RamiTheBullsFan; 11-16-2011 at 10:46 AM.
My intent wasn't to compare Anthony and Martin. It was merely to give an example of a player who is a great scorer who is obviously not in the elite category.
Because (a) is irrelevant to the discussion. Yes, "elite" is a subjective word...so? You use it as if its a point for your argument, which is flimsy enough as it is, instead of recognizing that the subjective use of "elite" basically is the argument.
Joe: Curtis Painter is an elite QB.
Moe: Painter has the worst QB rating of any starter...no way he is elite.
Joe (via voicemail): "Elite" is a subjective word...
BARF!
I wouldn't label Martin as a great scorer at all. He's a an ineffcient shooter who averages in the mid to low 20's PPG wise.
Would you say that Martin is the second best scorer in the entire NBA? If not, then your entire farcical comparison is even more ridiculous. Its like you are talking to yourself.
He definitely isn't the greatest scorer at all, but to call him inefficient is a little unfair, don't you think?
He takes 8 free throws per-game and makes almost 90% of them.
He averages almost 6 three-point attempts per-game and makes almost 40% of them.
He averages about 45% shooting about 9 or 10 two-pointers per-game. That is not that good, but pretty much the percentage of what you could expect from a typical SG.
No... that is not the point. I responded to your post saying that it was laughable that I consider Anthony to be non-elite because he is a top 2, 3, or 4 scorer. That is why I brought up the example of Martin to lay out the possibility that it is possible to have a great scorer in the game who is not an elite player.
???????
This makes even less sense. Why bring up Martin in the first place if you don't consider him to be a top 2, 3, or 4 scorer in the NBA?
No.
Kevin Martin's last 3 seasons of FG%:
42
41.7
43.6
Because he is a low top 10 scorer in my opinion. It is obvious that the guy is a great scorer who isn't a great overall player. That's why I brought it up.
FG% in itself defines whether or not you are an efficient scorer?
So you are going to ignore Martin's very high 3-pt and FT percentages because he shoots about 45% from two point range.
IMO it's one of the largest determining factors.
The fact that he's shoots such a high percentage from 3 and still a low % overall is more of an idictment of him as a true scorer than proof of it.
For example, Melo shoots nearly 6% below Martin from 3 but still shoots 1-2% higher than him overall for a career.
I've never liked or been really impressed with Martin's game. It's very "bleh" and doesn't stand out at all.
Bringing Martin up was awful.
Can we please quit discussing him.
But you don't need to bring it up. You already said that Anthony is the second best scorer in the entire NBA, and he's not a great overall player. How does Kevin frickin' Martin "lend credence" to your argument?
It would be like saying Michael Jordan wasn't as good as Wilt Chamberlain, and neither was Bill Wennington.
Stop.
Would you say that Martin is the second-most efficient scorer in the NBA? If so, would that qualify him as being an "elite" scorer? I don't think it would, because elite is a subjective term, and LeBron is better than Martin.
I will bring this up and then we can stop discussing it if you still want to.
Martin scores 6+ ppg shooting three's (very efficiently)
Martin scores 7-8 ppg shooting FT's (very efficiently)
Martin scores 8-10 points shooting two's (below the league average shooting two's but right along pace, and slightly better than the average 2-guard)
How is that not efficient?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks