Hollinger's picks for All Star Reserves

[jestersmash]

When it comes to selecting the All-Star reserves, for some reason nobody calls it for what it is: a game for the fans that's been hijacked by the coaches.


I say that because the standard of "pick the best players" has somehow been corrupted into "pick the best players from winning teams." When asked, coaches often offer the viewpoint that the All-Star Game should be a reward for winning; since they're making their picks Monday, I feel compelled to remind them that actually, it's not, and furthermore, there's no reason it should be.


The point of the game is to have the best players in the world compete in an exhibition for the fans. Period. The job of the coaches is to select the best players. Period. It improves neither the process nor the game if we decide to punish good players whose teams happen to be run by idiots, or to reward middling players who have the benefit of playing with great teammates. Look back in history and almost every cringe-inducing All-Star selection has been made because coaches valued playing with good teammates above playing well.


To date, the coaches have received shockingly little criticism for their self-indulgence, but this year we're in a rare situation -- the coaches are in position to make the game a dramatically worse event by following their historic criteria. Sure, there have been past errors -- taking Wally Szczerbiak over Elton Brand in 2005, for instance, was totally indefensible -- but this year they may end up excluding the league's most exciting players for two or three far less entertaining ones.


Hopefully the coaches relent and common sense rules the day. In the meantime, I'm filling out my own imaginary ballot for the All-Star reserves, and it's time for me to share it with you now.


As a reminder, Dwyane Wade, Derrick Rose, LeBron James, Amare Stoudemire and Dwight Howard have already made the East squad as starters, while Kobe Bryant, Chris Paul, Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony and Yao Ming were voted in for the West. I'm picking the players to join those 10 in L.A.


And now, the envelopes:


Eastern Conference

Guards

Rajon Rondo, Celtics: The first guard reserve for the East is a comically easy call, as he's the only one having a truly All-Star-caliber season. Rondo leads the league in assists and continues to befuddle opposing offenses with his long arms and ball-hawking pressure, all of which make him an extremely valuable player despite the fact that he can't make a foul shot (49.2 percent? That's just embarrassing) and is erratic at best from the perimeter. His D is a big reason Boston's second in defensive efficiency, and his passing is a huge factor in their second-place ranking in true shooting percentage.


Joe Johnson, Hawks: This is tricky, because there aren't four guards deserving of making the All-Star team in the East, but the rules require the coaches to select two subs in additions to starters Wade and Rose. The three least-unqualified ones for the last spot are Johnson, Boston's Ray Allen, and New York's Raymond Felton. Felton appeared to have this wrapped up by Christmas but basically disqualified himself with a brutal January, dropping to 17th among point guards in PER.


That leaves Johnson and Allen, and there's a strong irony there, because over the past seven years or so these two have accounted for more dodgy All-Star selections than the rest of the league put together. They may each get another.


I chose Johnson, for three reasons. First, he's having a better season statistically, despite playing much of the season with an injured elbow. Second, he's been better over the past several seasons, so we can't dismiss this as some kind of short-term blip -- the last time Allen had a better PER, he was a Sonic.
There's a good chance the coaches pick Allen instead. He's more famous and his team has won more games, and Johnson has been maligned for the contract the Hawks gave him -- though I'll remind everyone that it didn't make him any worse a player.


Forwards

Kevin Garnett, Celtics: When he isn't seeking out the opposition's least threatening player for displays of false bravado, Garnett is once again the game's most imposing defender at his position. The movement that returned during last season's playoffs has stayed with him this entire campaign, and he's supported it by supplying more post offense than a year ago. Garnett is shooting 53.3 percent and averaging nearly a point every two minutes; if you ignored defense entirely, he'd still be a solid pick here.


Nonetheless, the D is the difference-maker for KG -- nobody can match his combination of length, mobility and intensity, and there's no question that his superior effort rubs off on his teammates. It's pretty amazing considering just a year ago we were worried that Garnett's knee problems would end his career. That's no longer a concern; instead, his career will end when an opponent throws him through the stanchion.




Paul Pierce, Celtics: Because Boston kept winning, nobody talked much about Pierce's steady offensive decline over the past three seasons. And because of that, nobody has talked much about his resurrection in 2010-11 at the age of 33.


Pierce's 51.2 percent shooting mark is a career high, as are his 42.3 percent on 3s and 85.3 percent from the line. His rebound rate is as high as it's been in half a decade. He's making dramatically fewer turnovers than in the past several seasons, and he remains one of the game's most underrated defenders. In an Eastern Conference largely devoid of good small forward candidates, he's about as obvious a choice as they come.


Center

Al Horford, Hawks: Horford is one of the most improved players in basketball and has been, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the best player on the Hawks this season. His once-mechanical post game has now become increasingly refined (well, except for the part where he swings the ball from hip to hip 27 times in a row before making his move) and his mid-range jump shot is money, plus he's the only center in the league who routinely snares defensive rebounds, pushes it upcourt and makes the right decision in transition.


The proof is in the numbers, of course: Horford is shooting 57 percent while playing a much more prominent role in the Atlanta offense, has cut his turnovers and maintained his solid rebound rate, and among centers who actually score, only Brad Miller has a better assist rate. The amazing part is that the 6-foot-10 Horford is a natural power forward who has been able to thrive out of position.


Wild cards

Chris Bosh, Heat: As a reminder, coaches are required to list two forwards, two guards, two fake tough guys and a center with their reserves. I've already chosen a center, two guards and a fake tough guy, so Bosh is the obvious name left on the list. While offensively his game has been in-and-out, especially early in the season, defensively he's much more engaged than he was in Toronto, and as the lone quality big man on one of the league's premier defensive teams, he needs to be.


This is despite Bosh's numbers being well down from what he produced in Toronto. Offensively he has had fewer touches but, unexpectedly, is also shooting a lower percentage. And his rebound rate has withered to its lowest level since his rookie season. He'd have a lot of trouble getting into the game from the West because of this, but in this conference he's overqualified.


Carlos Boozer, Bulls: Many will be tempted to look at Ray Allen or Josh Smith for this spot, especially since Boozer has only played 29 games.


Here's what it comes down to for me: Boozer is better than Allen and Smith. He was better last season, he's been better when he's played this season, and we expect him to be better next season. The fact that he missed so many games did nothing to alter that hierarchy. So if we're selecting the best players, why on earth would we exclude him? It's not like he's slacked off, either -- Boozer has the best PER of any East power forward with at least 750 minutes played.


Another reminder -- coaches list their reserves in order of priority, with seven points for the first name and one point for the seventh. Using that scale, I'll list my East ballot as Horford-Rondo-Garnett-Pierce-Bosh-Boozer-Johnson.


Snubs

There are none. Don't give me this tripe about Allen or Andrew Bogut or Smith -- they haven't played well enough, and in the West they wouldn't even get the time of day.


If anything, we have the opposite of snubs. I'll call them "Sbuns" -- players who aren't having All-Star seasons but made the team because we couldn't come up with 12 legit All-Stars from the East. Joe Johnson, Chris Bosh and Carlos Boozer are definitely Sbuns this season.



Western Conference

Guards

Deron Williams, Jazz: The Jazz's recent stumbles have had little to do with the play of Williams (well, except that Boston thing), who played at an MVP level the first month of the season and by and large has been really good even as the Jazz have struggled. If anything, Sunday's game in Golden State allowed everyone to see how fearsomely untalented the Jazz are once one subtracts Williams from the equation.


The most impressive thing about Williams' 2010-11 is that he's been able to boost both his usage and his efficiency; normally one can only increase the first by decreasing the second. His 60.2 TS percentage is a career best and he's pumping in 23.3 points per 40 minutes as he's been asked to take on a heavier scoring load.


Russell Westbrook, Thunder: Westbrook's defensive attentiveness fades in and out, which is why I rank him behind Williams on this list, but it's hard to argue with the rest of his performance. Like Williams, Westbrook has improved both is usage and his efficiency on offense. He's blossomed into a star by averaging a staggering 25 points per 40 minutes from the point and upping his TS percentage to a respectable 53, mostly by a constant attack mode that has sent him to the line over eight times a game. Westbrook adds to that by leading all point guards in rebound rate, offsetting what are still shaky credentials as a true point guard.


Center

Pau Gasol, LA Lakers: The coaches are allowed considerable flexibility with positions, so it's completely permissible to list a player like Gasol at center even though he starts at power forward for the Lakers.


As for his qualifications, he's overly qualified and is likely to be named the starter to replace the injured Yao Ming. While Gasol has slumped a bit since a torrid first month, he ranks 12th in the NBA in PER thanks to his devastating efficiency in the low post and his underrated rebounding skill. As always, we just wish he'd do it a little more often -- 20 power forwards have a higher usage rate, even though only Dirk Nowitzki and Stoudemire can match his skill level.


Forwards

Dirk Nowitzki, Mavericks: Nowitzki missed nine games with a knee injury and has been wobbly since returning, but he still easily qualifies as one of the top 12 players in the West. At 32, he's shooting a career-high 52 percent and averaging just as many points per minutes as a year ago; his scoring average is down only because his minutes are too.


Nowitzki's remarkable consistency is another feather in his cap -- this is his seventh straight season with a PER of 23 or better, and he's scored in double figures in every game he's finished. As the unquestioned centerpiece of a likely top-four Western squad, there's no way he's not making it.

Kevin Love, Timberwolves: Virtually every list I've seen has placed Love on the All-Star team, which may lead people to think he's a shoo-in. Actually, I'm dubious. For starters, there's the long-held bias against players from teams with losing records that I mentioned above.


But in Love's case, a larger bias is at work. Since I presume most of you don't regularly talk with scouts and assistant coaches, I can't emphasize this enough: It is shocking how dismissive virtually every old-school basketball type is of Love. Most personnel types grudgingly admit he's a spectacular rebounder before adding that he's unathletic, struggles on defense and basically doesn't fit their prototype of what a star big man ought to be.


Even his own coach was indifferent toward him for 10 games until the first 30-30 game in a quarter-century clued him in to the fact that Love might be pretty good. Since these are the people doing the voting, and since Love already faces an uphill battle thanks to his non-reclining middle seat aboard Kahn Air, I'm not sure if he's getting in.


I should point out that there is some validity to the scout-speak -- Love is a subpar defender and he can't consistently get his own shot. Nonetheless, it would be unprecedented to leave out a player with such spectacular individual accomplishments. Love has a whopping two-board lead on the field in the chase for the rebound le; additionally, he's shooting 44.5 percent on 3s, and scores at a phenomenal rate (23.5 points per 40 minutes) for a guy who never has plays called for him. The T-wolves may stink, but it's tough to pin that on him. In fact, I'd argue it hurts him -- by my calculations, Sota's soft defense costs Love nearly half a defensive rebound per game.

Wild cards

Manu Ginobili, Spurs: The best player on the league's best team, Ginobili nonetheless has a tough fight in this group. Despite playing only 31.5 minutes a game, he prevails for a few reasons. First, he's probably the best defender on this list other than Williams. Second, he's consistently played at this level for the past seven years, so we can confidently say this is his true level of ability and not a short-term fluke.


And third, he's vastly more qualified than any other perimeter player. The only question is whether one of the hordes of power forwards should outrank him. I would argue that since wing talent is much more scarce than power forward talent at the moment, it should count heavily in Manu's favor.


Steve Nash, Suns: Nash officially wins the "We changed, not you" award for 2010-11. He's having a season that's at least the equal of his 2004-05 and 2005-06 seasons; in those seasons he was honored with two MVP awards but in this one he probably won't even make the All-Star team.


Don't believe me? Let's do Rob Neyer's Player A/Player B test.


Player A: 15.5 points, 11.5 assists, 50.2 percent shooting, 22.04 PER
Player B: 17.0 points, 11.0 assists, 52.8 percent shooting, 24.05 PER


Quick, which one was an MVP year, and which one is this season? Give up?


Nash is playing one minute per game less than in his 2004-05 MVP year. One. Nonetheless, his percentages remain ridiculously good and his PER may set a new career high; his numbers also compared favorably to his 2005-06 MVP campaign.


And now we're gonna leave him off the All-Star team? If so, what we're basically saying is that Nash was responsible for having Amare Stoudemire and Shawn Marion on his team, and now it's his fault that they're gone. If you strictly follow the logic, that's where "rewarding winning" takes you. Unfortunately, there is no doubt in my mind that the coaches are going to hose Nash, even though it's preposterous to take somebody like Tim Duncan or David West ahead of him, which is what they'll do.

My seven-point list for the West, by the way, goes Gasol-Williams-Westbrook-Nowitzki-Ginobili-Love-Nash.


Injury subs ution For Yao Ming

Blake Griffin, Clippers: Gee, if it comes down to this and the commissioner has to choose between Blake Griffin and, well, anybody, whom do you suppose he'll pick? Those who have conspiracy theories about the commish wanting to keep Griffin in the rookie-sop re game can forget it -- that thing is such an afterthought they give away the tickets to teeming hordes of shrieking kids. The league wants the Blake Show in the big event Sunday.


Griffin's addition is also justifiable in basketball terms, although it's very a close call between Griffin, Zach Randolph and David West for my final spot. Actually, I think both West and Griffin will make the team in real life -- the coaches will snub Nash and Love and take West and Tim Duncan instead, and then Stern will pick Griffin.


But in John's little world the vote is down to Z-Bo, West or Griffin, and it's a nail-biter. West can't match the other two on PER, but he's a much better defender, especially this season -- he'd kinda mailed it in at the end of the Byron Scott era but has redoubled his efforts under Monty Williams. Also, West hasn't had the benefit of playing nearly all his games at home like Griffin, and Randolph has had a decidedly road-heavy slate.


However, what tilted the balance for me was Griffin's monthly splits -- he's still gaining steam as a force in this league, so I would argue that mid-February Griffin is better than mid-February West and Randolph, even if that statement may not apply to the entire first half of the season. Randolph, incidentally, would be my choice for the next roster spot if Nowitzki decides to sit the game out because of his knee, or if Carmelo Anthony is traded to the East in the next two weeks.


Actually, if by some stroke of misfortune two players from my above list couldn't participate (let's say Melo gets traded and Dirk's knee makes him exit), then I would pick Randolph next.


Snubs

OK, let's talk first about Tony Parker and Tim Duncan. Spurs fans will undoubtedly be outraged that I only picked one player even though they're 40-7, making the infamous "representation" argument; this line of thought makes sense until you remember we're picking an All-Star team, not choosing delegates to a convention. When you ask for representation over having the best basketball players you're essentially asking for more Mo Williamses and Wally Szczerbiaks. No thanks.


"How can a 40-7 team have only one All-Star?" is the other question I get, but actually it's fairly common. The past two Cleveland teams were perhaps an extreme example, but in San Antonio's case it's just as easy to explain: They have three of the top 20 players in the conference and eight of the top 75. That stacks up favorably with everyone else, and they haven't had any injuries, and that's why they've won.


So sorry, San Antonio -- I'm not going to endorse Tony Parker just because his front office found Gary Neal and DeJuan Blair, or nominate Duncan because Richard Jefferson figured out how to play off the ball. Instead, I have to compare the individual output of Duncan and Parker to their peers, and when I do, they don't stand up.


Nene, Nuggets: He has a much stronger case than most people realize, and if Anthony hadn't snagged a slot in fan voting he might be getting a heavier push for a spot. The number that kills him, however, is 30.5 -- that' s how many minutes per game he plays, making it tough to put him ahead of the guys who get close to 40.


LaMarcus Aldridge, Blazers: He has been mentioned for the All-Star team quite a bit because he played so well in the month leading up to the vote, right up until his duds against Sacramento and Boston this week. The Blazers' big man would be a shoo-in in the East, of course, but there are simply too many good power forwards in the West, and there's really nothing in his résumé that sets him apart from the others. In retrospect, a slow November killed him.


Eric Gordon, Clippers: He is hurt now, but even before the injury, he suffered from two factors -- nobody was going to take a second player from a Clippers team that's in 13th place in the West, and he plays guard in a conference stacked with great guards. What he did do was establish himself as a legitimate aspirant for a spot on next year's squad, especially with most of the good players at his position getting rather long in the tooth.


Monta Ellis: He is a monument to the extremes of the quan y-over-quality approach. While he's improved his shot selection from last year's "reprehensible" to this year's grade of "shaky," he still suffers in any apples-to-apples comparison with his peers. Ellis is third in the league in scoring largely because he plays an insane number of minutes for a fast-paced team. But adjust for pace and minutes and he's 15th with a league-average true shooting percentage and mediocre secondary stats.


The most damning line on Ellis's résumé, however, remains the fact that an awful defensive team magically becomes decent as soon as he checks out of the game. Looking at Golden State's basketballvalue.com chart will amaze you -- no other subs ution has any impact on their defensive numbers, but replacing Ellis immediately produces a dramatic improvement.


In the East, perhaps I could look past all these warts, but in the West it makes him a no-hoper.


Kevin Martin, Rockets: He is the opposite of Ellis -- he's arguably the league's most potent scorer, but his accomplishments are masked by his low minutes and limited impact in other areas. His true shooting percentage remains ridiculous and he's second in the NBA in pace-adjusted points per 40 minutes behind Kobe Bryant, but he's only playing 31.2 minutes a game. Martin's bigger shortcoming, however, is that he provides zilch in the other categories; in fact, he might be even worse on defense than Ellis. He does, however, have the best PER of any player I excluded that has played at least 1,000 minutes.


Lakers fans argue for Lamar Odom because he's really good. That's the problem, though -- "really good" doesn't cut it in this crowd. If you aren't a big star, you aren't getting into this game from the West. News flash: Odom isn't. Ditto for Luis Scola, Rudy Gay and Tyson Chandler.


By my count, that's 23 players from the West (not counting Yao) with legitimate All-Star-caliber first halves of the season. It's a shame we can't export a few more of them eastward.

[Agloco]

Snubs

OK, let's talk first about Tony Parker and Tim Duncan. Spurs fans will undoubtedly be outraged that I only picked one player even though they're 40-7, making the infamous "representation" argument; this line of thought makes sense until you remember we're picking an All-Star team, not choosing delegates to a convention. When you ask for representation over having the best basketball players you're essentially asking for more Mo Williamses and Wally Szczerbiaks. No thanks.


"How can a 40-7 team have only one All-Star?" is the other question I get, but actually it's fairly common. The past two Cleveland teams were perhaps an extreme example, but in San Antonio's case it's just as easy to explain: They have three of the top 20 players in the conference and eight of the top 75. That stacks up favorably with everyone else, and they haven't had any injuries, and that's why they've won.


So sorry, San Antonio -- I'm not going to endorse Tony Parker just because his front office found Gary Neal and DeJuan Blair, or nominate Duncan because Richard Jefferson figured out how to play off the ball. Instead, I have to compare the individual output of Duncan and Parker to their peers, and when I do, they don't stand up.

This thread will not end well...............

[jestersmash]

This thread will not end well...............

That's why I posted the article. First off, it's an insider piece so it had to be posted for people to even notice because I suspect most people don't have insider.

Second off, Hollinger has some choice words regarding the prospect of Tim/Tony on the all star team. Good for healthy/heated debate.

I enjoyed the "fake tough guy" bit on KG/Bosh, as well

[Seventyniner]

I have a feeling that Hollinger would have put 1 or 2 Pistons from 2005 on the All-Star team instead of the 4 they got. He did qualify his selections as being based on individual and not team performance, and neither Parker nor Duncan are having career years.

Nonetheless, I would be shocked if Duncan doesn't make it. Hollinger may not like it, but it will be akin to a career achievement award, and I won't argue with that.

I think Duncan and Parker not making his list is more a testament to the quality of players in the West than anything. In the East, Duncan easily makes it, and Parker has a much better shot.

[Mr. Body]

Unlike some around here (because he says things against the Spurs at times - oh no!), I like Hollingers takes a lot, and agree with him here. The All-Star game is arbitrary in the ways he suggests -- the East team gets as many slots as a much more impressive West, after all.

The regular season is for the best teams (read: Spurs); the All-Star game is for best individual talent, for the given seasons. I think it's pretty cool Duncan and Parker may not make it. It shows how balanced the team is this year.

[CubanMustGo]

I would be perfectly happy if not a single Spur player was selected. It would expose the NBA for the hype-driven farce it is. Plus it would give everyone extra rest.

[jestersmash]

I honestly agree with most of what Hollinger said, only I think he may have been a little harsh lumping Tony Parker in with Tim Duncan by saying "Instead, I have to compare the individual output of Duncan and Parker to their peers, and when I do, they don't stand up."

For Duncan? Sure.

But for Parker? He's 6th in the league in PER among all point guards, and every player above him is either an All star starter or one of Hollinger's picks for reserves (CP3, Nash, Westbrook, DWill, Derrick Rose).

[duncan228]

Posted this in the Pop/Duncan All-Star thread this morning, brings the team argument in.

Stats or wins? Duncan’s All-Star spot is at stake
By Brian Mahoney

Tim Duncan’s championship credentials will someday mandate a spot in the Hall of Fame.

“He’s a pillar, one of the few pillars of this league,” Houston’s Shane Battier said.

One who is having a mediocre season statistically, the kind that would normally warrant a long weekend off next month.

Duncan barely cracks the top 20 in scoring among a stellar class of Western Conference forwards. So as coaches submit their ballots this week for All-Star reserves, they’ll have to look elsewhere if they choose to consider Duncan for a 13th straight appearance.

Perhaps away from Blake Griffin’s spectacular highlights. Away from Kevin Love’s point-rebound totals that belong in a video game.

They will have to go directly to San Antonio’s won-loss record.

Because at 40-7, it may be impossible to dismiss how much Duncan means to the Spurs—even in a year when he seems to mean less than ever.

“I haven’t looked at him specifically. … Those guys are 37-4 or something,” Dallas coach Rick Carlisle said last week. “You’ve got to take a strong look at that. That’s meaningful, that Duncan is on a team that’s winning every game. That’s a big deal, and it should be.”

Coaches routinely favor players from winning teams when making their selections, and the Spurs have been even more dominant than in any of their four championship seasons with Duncan. So the West coaches likely believe San Antonio should have multiple All-Stars, just as their East counterparts did in recent years with teams that won so much, sending four Detroit Pistons in 2006 and two Boston reserves to join starter Kevin Garnett in 2008.

Manu Ginobili is the Spurs’ best candidate, averaging 18.8 points. Tony Parker is next at 17.5 on 52 percent shooting, while Duncan’s average of 13.6 points is third on the team and only 20th best among West forwards who have played at least 30 games, according to STATS LLC.

That’s a career low, as are his 9.4 rebounds in only 29 minutes per game while the Spurs monitor the 14-year veteran’s minutes. Still good for most players, those statistics look even punier next to the nightly double-doubles of Griffin and Love, players Duncan has to compete with, along with perhaps players such as Dallas’ Dirk Nowitzki, LaMarcus Aldridge of Portland, the Lakers’ Pau Gasol, or Zach Randolph of Memphis.

Keep reading...

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...ll-star-duncan

[Cane]

The lack of minutes really hurts Duncan and Parker's boxscore averages when you compare them with their peers. Parker even plays less minutes than CP3 who is imo still recovering from knee surgery and not 100%.

But anyone focused on the big picture should appreciate winning at a historical rate while conserving mileage for their star players at the same time. Imo all the big 3 have a case for getting in.

[024]

an all star without duncan will be strange. i hope the coaches vote him in. he deserves the honor.

[hater]

nominating Pau Gasoft and snubbing Nene.

FAIL from Trollinger

[jestersmash]

25 members and 76 guests

Sign up and participate you leechers

[spurs1990]

Plus it would give everyone extra rest.

Word.

Rather win the 'ship than have our guys play in this exhibition. Besides we're gonna be represented on the bench anyway.

Additionally, the snubs will serve as mondo motivation for the Duncan, the Parker, and the Ginobil for the post-break season.

[Spurminator]

I don't necessarily agree with all of his picks but I do agree with his take overall. I think wins should only come into play if you are comparing two players with similar individual skill levels. If anything, including great players from bad teams will be an opportunity to showcase some of the league's lesser-televised stars like Kevin Love.

[ajh18]

The same argument about team success vs individual could be made for the MVP award. Yet you'll almost never find an MVP from a losing team.

Following Hollinger's logic, and if the MVP continues to be based on team success, you could have MVP candidates who aren't all stars.

[ALVAREZ6]

when do they announce the reserves???????????????????????

[jestersmash]

when do they announce the reserves???????????????????????

Thursday, I believe, on TNT. Or Tuesday?

[Spurologist]

I'd take the big 3 resting over playing in the all star....really

[duncan228]

Thursday, I believe, on TNT. Or Tuesday?

Thursday, February 3.

[Rummpd]

Hollingers own PER/players ratings have Duncan right behind (difference is minimal and goes back and forth) as the top center (he always consider's Duncan a center) in the West:http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/holli.../c/league/west

[Rummpd]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/holli.../_/league/west

PER totally makes all stars in his view - Duncan 1s 15 and 17th and Duncan is the top player he ALWAYS considers a center. Now why is he not picked?

[lil'mo]

jestersmash, just curious, does your opinion matter? and if so, why?

[jestersmash]

jestersmash, just curious, does your opinion matter? and if so, why?

It doesn't matter anymore than anybody else's opinion. Given that, your second question is not applicable.

[mathbzh]

OK, let's talk first about Tony Parker and Tim Duncan. Spurs fans will undoubtedly be outraged that I only picked one player even though they're 40-7, making the infamous "representation" argument; this line of thought makes sense until you remember we're picking an All-Star team, not choosing delegates to a convention. When you ask for representation over having the best basketball players you're essentially asking for more Mo Williamses and Wally Szczerbiaks. No thanks.

So sorry, San Antonio -- I'm not going to endorse Tony Parker just because his front office found Gary Neal and DeJuan Blair, or nominate Duncan because Richard Jefferson figured out how to play off the ball. Instead, I have to compare the individual output of Duncan and Parker to their peers, and when I do, they don't stand up.

So we are 40-7 thanks to Neal, Blair and Jefferson?
I believed this also had something to do with Ginobili, Duncan and Parker being healthy at the same time...

I am fine with Duncan and/or Parker having some rest instead of playing in a meaningless game... but Duncan and Parker deserve more respect.

[ALVAREZ6]

but Duncan and Parker deserve more respect.

Everyone respects the Spurs. They just have commercial interests.



And trolling interests, if you're John Trollinger