If Tyson Chandler was a scorer and he had this type of obvious impact: "Top 5 player"

[Jameerthefear]

He's lucky if he's a top 10 C let alone a top 5 player

He isn't even that tbh
In no order:
Cousins
Dwight
Noah
Hibbert
Gasol
Duncan
Vucevic
Pekovic
Horford
Bogut

[andremiller07]

He isn't even that tbh
In no order:
Cousins
Dwight
Noah
Hibbert
Gasol
Duncan
Vucevic
Pekovic
Horford
Bogut

Yeah he's not I just cbf typing all of them out ty for doing it, there's probs a few more you could add as well.

[OldSkoolball#52]

Terrible argument. Monta Ellis has never been considered even close to a top 5 player. Even Gilbert Arenas when he was going off was not considered as such.

And you know what...Chandler's impact isn't as big as an Arenas or peak Monta in my opinion actually.

Bro, you are really struggling to grasp the point here, arent you?


People compare volume scorers based on team accomplishments, WITHOUT taking into account how much credit they actually deserve. Team wins, volume scorer is a superstar, clutch, alpha male. Team loses? What has this volume scorer ever done, he has no rings, empty stats. Nobody analyzes their specific impact. They just take the winning team and credit the highest scorer. Volume scoring wings always get credit for whatever the teams fortunes are when hes there, no matter what. With no further analysis.


If Tyson Chandler was a scoring wing player.... And the Mavs won a title as soon as he showed up... Then he went to the Knicks and they won their first playoff series in 10 years with him.... And then he got hurt and they collapsed.... He would be considered a superstar.


Do you follow me? People mindlessly judge scorers based on team results. If Chandler had the exact same career... Teams winning when hes there, losing when hes not.... But he was vince carter or rudy gay? He would be CONSIDERED a top 5 player by the masses.


Please..... Please tell me you are able to grasp this...

[97 bulls]

He's lucky if he's a top 10 C let alone a top 5 player

He never said such. Heres what he said:

If Chandler were a wing player who scored 23 points per night on 46% shooting and did nothing else useful on the court, people would look at the way teams perform with and without him, and call him a Top 5 player.*

Granted he might be exaggerating a bit but the point is scorers are regarded as better than defensive players but have no more impact. And the he uses examples.

[fpliii]

Jesus ****ing Christ ISH, stop overrating individual scoring!



Individual PPG isn't the bottom line, and defense/rebounding are NOT footnotes, no matter how you slice it. End of discussion.

God damn. Not a fan of the Chandler example but the OP raises a legitimate point.

[97 bulls]

Jesus ****ing Christ ISH, stop overrating individual scoring!



Individual PPG isn't the bottom line, and defense/rebounding are NOT footnotes, no matter how you slice it. End of discussion.

God damn. Not a fan of the Chandler example but the OP raises a legitimate point.

Lol and there you have it

[moe94]

JGod damn. Not a fan of the Chandler example but the OP raises a legitimate point.

OP is implying that Chandler is a better and more valuable player than Anthony. Do you agree?

[Teanett]

OP is implying that Chandler is a better and more valuable player than Anthony. Do you agree?

yes

[OldSkoolball#52]

God damn. Not a fan of the Chandler example but the OP raises a legitimate point.

And really, I wasn't even trying to make a statement about Chandler's game.

He's just a good example because he went to the Mavs, they won a title. And it's not like he was Juwan Howard on the Heat, he was the starting center. He had a direct impact on their title.

He left the Mavs, and they didn't do squat.


He went to the Knicks, who had stunk for years, even when Carmelo showed up, and they finally had a good season and notched a playoff series win.

He got hurt, and the team completely fell apart.



When things like this happen to guys like Carmelo, or Westbrook? People call them superstars and claim they are all-important, irreplaceable players. But what about when the exact same thing happens to a guy whose role isn't as exciting? Once again, the exact same thing. The exact same thing.

Suddenly people don't wanna build a guy up as a superstar? Because he's not the designated volume scorer? Don't people realize a group of regular players can move the ball around and score at an average clip without a guy like Melo? The only time a volume shooter is a real asset is when his efficiency is way above average, like a Dirk or Durant. Chuckers like Melo? They're just massively overrated. Ask the Denver Nuggets.

[andremiller07]

Suddenly people don't wanna build a guy up as a superstar? Because he's not the designated volume scorer? Don't people realize a group of regular players can move the ball around and score at an average clip without a guy like Melo? The only time a volume shooter is a real asset is when his efficiency is way above average, like a Dirk or Durant. Chuckers like Melo? They're just massively overrated. Ask the Denver Nuggets.

The only three current big men you can say that about are Marc Gasol, Noah and Hibbert not Chandler, they bring far more to the table in terms of all around game and impact and all three are far superior on D.

[OldSkoolball#52]

The only three current big men you can say that about are Marc Gasol, Noah and Hibbert not Chandler, they bring far more to the table in terms of all around game and impact and all three are far superior on D.

Yes, I prefer all three of those players to Chandler.


Once again, the reason I used Chandler as an example was this:

Chandler is an obvious example of changing teams' fortunes. When he went to the Mavs, they won a title. When he left they crumbled, and the Knicks were suddenly respectable. When he got hurt and went out of the Knicks lineup, they crumbled.


When folks compare guys like Kobe, Rose, Wade, it's always about "resumes" and their success in the playoffs, what their teams have done. Which is dumb, it's a fallacy. But if that's how you're going to do it, why not call Chandler the GOAT center? He is the last center to win a title (not counting miami's token centers) and he is the difference between the Knicks being a playoff threat and not MAKING the playoffs.

So if youre gonna rank scorers based on team results, why not defensive players?

[fpliii]

OP is implying that Chandler is a better and more valuable player than Anthony. Do you agree?

No, but I think a Chandler-like player could be considered more valuable than an Anthony-like player. This particular comparison though, no. I'm in-market so I watch every game on MSG (unless the Lakers are on at the same time on LP), and don't see it. Chandler being out hurts the Knicks more than Melo being out has, but that's partially on the FO for not having depth at his position.

[fpliii]

And really, I wasn't even trying to make a statement about Chandler's game.

He's just a good example because he went to the Mavs, they won a title. And it's not like he was Juwan Howard on the Heat, he was the starting center. He had a direct impact on their title.

He left the Mavs, and they didn't do squat.


He went to the Knicks, who had stunk for years, even when Carmelo showed up, and they finally had a good season and notched a playoff series win.

He got hurt, and the team completely fell apart.



When things like this happen to guys like Carmelo, or Westbrook? People call them superstars and claim they are all-important, irreplaceable players. But what about when the exact same thing happens to a guy whose role isn't as exciting? Once again, the exact same thing. The exact same thing.

Suddenly people don't wanna build a guy up as a superstar? Because he's not the designated volume scorer? Don't people realize a group of regular players can move the ball around and score at an average clip without a guy like Melo? The only time a volume shooter is a real asset is when his efficiency is way above average, like a Dirk or Durant. Chuckers like Melo? They're just massively overrated. Ask the Denver Nuggets.

I think you're raising some good points, but it really depends on the situation. WB was so integral to OKC that they've looked horrible without him.

IMO it's not so much that players like Chandler are necessarily more valuable than players than Carmelo, but they're not necessarily any less valuable. It comes down to what your team needs, and volume scoring is generally easier to find than a good rebounding, defensive anchor.

[CavaliersFTW]

Does Bill Russell?

Do you think what Rodman did was anywhere close to Bill Russell?

[DMAVS41]

Bro, you are really struggling to grasp the point here, arent you?


People compare volume scorers based on team accomplishments, WITHOUT taking into account how much credit they actually deserve. Team wins, volume scorer is a superstar, clutch, alpha male. Team loses? What has this volume scorer ever done, he has no rings, empty stats. Nobody analyzes their specific impact. They just take the winning team and credit the highest scorer. Volume scoring wings always get credit for whatever the teams fortunes are when hes there, no matter what. With no further analysis.


If Tyson Chandler was a scoring wing player.... And the Mavs won a title as soon as he showed up... Then he went to the Knicks and they won their first playoff series in 10 years with him.... And then he got hurt and they collapsed.... He would be considered a superstar.


Do you follow me? People mindlessly judge scorers based on team results. If Chandler had the exact same career... Teams winning when hes there, losing when hes not.... But he was vince carter or rudy gay? He would be CONSIDERED a top 5 player by the masses.


Please..... Please tell me you are able to grasp this...

What are you talking about? I grasp your point...I just could not disagree more.

Tyson Chandler's wing equivalent would be someone like Brandon Jennings or something like that. He was probably the 3rd best player on the title team. His impact was absurdly over-rated after the Mavs won actually.

So it's just a terrible point. His impact is nowhere near top 5 no matter what. You think if the Mavs win the title this year with Monta Ellis that he'll be thought of as better than Paul, Westbrook, Love, Harden, Curry, Wade...etc.? No...he wouldn't...and that probably isn't even fair considering Ellis is currently the Mavs best player and Chandler was 2nd or 3rd.

Bro...I get your point clearly...it's just an awful point that happens to be dead wrong.

We already saw exactly what you are talking about. Chandler got paid 14.5 million a year and people were talking about him as good and as important to the Mavs title as Dirk.

So what the **** are you talking about him not getting credit? He's gotten way more than he deserves.

I'll say it again. 6/8/1 over the last 2 years in the playoffs...ROFL...