"Winning As The Main Man" Feels Like An Obsolete Idea Now

[BarberSchool]

I agree with you, but I still think one of a team's two best players should probably have elite iso-scoring skills, and I think certain players get a biiiit too much credit for being cogs in a great system, whereas players like Westbrook and Harden -- both of whom generally work with fewer resources than GSW or SA -- you get labeled a chucker or as a loser. I guess what im saying is -- for my tertiary point -- I don't think those players are without a place in a well-rounded offense.

Yeah, elite iso-scoring is still very effective, when the player of system is able to use it efficiently, with ball/player movement, creating optimal situations for the iso wing to have high efficiency.

For instance, Dallas did this incredibly well during the carlisle era, with old/decrepit formerly-elite wing scorers, playing against weak side closeout defense, after the ball is swung from Dirk getting doubled. Richard jefferson even showed tiny glimpses of doing this during the finals for cleveland.

[SpecialQue]

It doesn't exist anymore. The superteam era effectively killed it.

[Smoke117]

It's fully possible to win with prime Melo or Harden as the #1 option. Surround them with a cast like the 09-10 lakers who can defend and putback bricks.

True

[pauk]

"Winning as the main man" = Being the best player during that championship run, the most impactful player in your team, the guy who had the biggest accountability for the success....

Its as simple as that... and its very simple to see who that main man was or wasnt... You mentioned Lebron there, the reality is he is the definition of what "main man" is, he was that extremly clearly in all of his 3 championship runs... infact he was the "main man" every single season & 99.99% of the time the best performer in his team every single game of his career... not only that but he was the "main man" of the entire NBA (most talented player in the NBA) since arguably 2006....

[Jasper]

OP has a point , but the team built around an individual has to be well built.

Most teams are , but leadership is the key.... (Even though Kobe never did)

Most teams in the playoffs that go deep , have lots of weapons and that is the key to a chip.

Example - Love played much as a role player , shooting important role points and boards then a legit 3rd option as Warriors Green plays.

Melo and HArden will NEVER get a chip , because they are 100% ball hogs that slow the game up significantly (.)

[CTbasketball92]

"Winning as the main man" = Being the best player during that championship run, the most impactful player in your team, the guy who had the biggest accountability for the success....

Its as simple as that... and its very simple to see who that main man was or wasnt... You mentioned Lebron there, the reality is he is the definition of what "main man" is, he was that extremly clearly in all of his 3 championship runs... infact he was the "main man" every single season & 99.99% of the time the best performer in his team every single game of his career... not only that but he was the "main man" of the entire NBA (most talented player in the NBA) since arguably 2006....

I don't disagree, more of what my point is that people saying (insert perennial All Star) can never take a team to a championship -- aka, they can't be built around. People still say that about Kyrie Irving, but the reality is, the cavaliers did build around him (and lebron) and they did win a championship (with Irving having a very high usage rate), so that argument should be done now. For a lot of people. People say the same things about James Harden, Paul George and Melo, but I think it's pretty obvious that those guys could've been the best players or close enough to be considered 1B scoring options on the championship Spurs and GSW and Celtics teams (sans Paul Pierce, Curry).
My point is that there are really only two players in the entire league (maybe 3, we'll see with Westbrook) that can lead a team of average players to 50+ wins by themselves (lebron and durant), so unless you have those players, you're not going anywhere without a legit superstar next to you or a group of consummate role players. With that in mind, saying you can build a team around a James Harden, Melo or Kyrie is silly, because you will usually need player of their caliber to be your second best player --- so, basically, they are players you can and should build around. You just need I have the other aforementioned pieces.

[CTbasketball92]

OP has a point , but the team built around an individual has to be well built.

Most teams are , but leadership is the key.... (Even though Kobe never did)

Most teams in the playoffs that go deep , have lots of weapons and that is the key to a chip.

Example - Love played much as a role player , shooting important role points and boards then a legit 3rd option as Warriors Green plays.

Melo and HArden will NEVER get a chip , because they are 100% ball hogs that slow the game up significantly (.)

More of what my point is that they CAN win a chip in a leading role (averaging 22-28 ppg) if they're on a team that's actually well-rounded to make up for whatever flaws they have. No player besides lebron and maybe Kobe has had to play elite defense, be a great facilitator and scorer to win their chips. All curry did was score. All kawhi really did was play defense and score adequately. Paul Pierce/Ray Allen/Kevin Garnett only had to play their roles (scoring/shooting/kg defense). Insert harden/Melo in any of those three Celtics slots and they still have a great chance at winning, which means you can technically build a championship team around them, which means it shouldn't be a bad thing to get compared to Melo. Unfortunately, melo's best second options were a past-prime Allen Iverson and JR Smith, who can't handle the ball.