This means what exactly? He scored a ton of points on a ton of shots. Plenty of players have done that.
Dumars, Rip, Dave Bing, all better selections. I don't see the point for a 4th string shooting guard on a team that doesn't need any scoring help.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Because he's easily one of the 15 best players they could find. Needs no other explanation. Use him at SF if you need to. It's not like there's any depth behind grant hill.
I like a lot of what you said about a lot of the picks, but I'll step up to defend Jerry Stackhouse's honor here. If we're talking about skill and/or being a good player, we can't vie for Andre Drummond on one hand then opt against Jerry Stackhouse on the other.
Drummond eats rebounds due to his body and leaping ability. He's also good at finishing above the rim within three feet. But he might literally be the worst shooting NBA player I've ever seen, has very little court sense, is frequently a terrible and/or disinterested help defender, is foul prone, mentally checks out, and generally speaking, hasn't really proven to be a reliable asset year in and year out.
Stackhouse put up big numbers on a lot of usage for a few years in Detroit (NBA's second leading scorer in 2001), but I've always had respect for how he modified his game for the benefit of the franchise in 2002. Less scoring, more leadership, more defense, and subsequently, he spearheaded the team's first division title and playoff series win in over a decade.
I don't have a real issue with the inclusion of either, but right now I think Stackhouse is more deserving than Drummond at this point when accounting for impact, skills, and legacy. He helped put the Pistons back on the map.
Edit: If I had to guess, you don't feel that strongly about what you said but no one really talks about the Pistons these days so when the opportunity arises, I can't help myself.
In reality, there are enough players missing that should be there that I wouldn't have either of them on the All-Time squad.
I've never had much love for a volume scorer, Stackhouse is pretty much a definition of that. Neither is a great choice IMO. Technically I don't see a point in having 15 spots for an All-Time team. What's the point of two players on the IR. But given the option of having to pick one, I'd pick an extra big body to play behind Lanier and Ben rather than a 4th string SG.
It's not a 70's-90's, that's why there is Deng, Rose, Jimmy, Noah. It's not a lack of respect of those two aren't top 15 players they don't need a spot. Neither of them were ever an All Star or all NBA player, or even the best player on their team. Leaving them off isn't a lack of respect, they just happen to land somewhere between 15-20 and not the top 15.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Gordon, Hinrich and Deng were the core offense for the Bulls before Rose got there and they deserve that respect in a game. WHy because like I said before the teens/20 somethings who play this game will remember them more so then people from the 70s-80 chicago team outside of Michael Jordan.
In reality, there are enough players missing that should be there that I wouldn't have either of them on the All-Time squad.
I've never had much love for a volume scorer, Stackhouse is pretty much a definition of that. Neither is a great choice IMO. Technically I don't see a point in having 15 spots for an All-Time team. What's the point of two players on the IR. But given the option of having to pick one, I'd pick an extra big body to play behind Lanier and Ben rather than a 4th string SG.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In reality Stackhouse is one of the most popular names in Detroit history and deserves that respect. Sometimes that's all you need for a video game. Case in point Linsanity Knicks getting in.
Because he's easily one of the 15 best players they could find. Needs no other explanation. Use him at SF if you need to. It's not like there's any depth behind grant hill.
Because they are missing, which is the point of this thread. Dantley, Prince Yardley, Aguirre.
In reality, there are enough players missing that should be there that I wouldn't have either of them on the All-Time squad.
I've never had much love for a volume scorer, Stackhouse is pretty much a definition of that. Neither is a great choice IMO. Technically I don't see a point in having 15 spots for an All-Time team. What's the point of two players on the IR. But given the option of having to pick one, I'd pick an extra big body to play behind Lanier and Ben rather than a 4th string SG.
I respect your opinion on the Stackhouse matter.
Also, I think the 15-man rosters allow for some semblance of preference and flexibility. The more players that are included, the more we have to choose from when customizing our experience. If you're a Bing and Lanier guy, you're covered. If you're a Stack and Drummond guy, you're still covered. Some teams get pretty thin at that point due to licensing issues, but I like that they tried to go that deep.