2016 NBA Playoffs

[dukelifer]

Durant singlehandedly losing the game for OKC. Dude is 6-29 and still shooting horrendous fade aways.

Edit: Now 6-31. Brutal.

And misses a 1 footer for the game.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Man, if Livingston had suited up for us in 2004-05... might have been the tarheel antidote. Although that banner will soon be gone anyway...

[fraggler]

Durant singlehandedly losing the game for OKC. Dude is 6-29 and still shooting horrendous fade aways.

Edit: Now 6-31. Brutal.

Kobe tribute?

[COYS]

Man, if Livingston had suited up for us in 2004-05... might have been the tarheel antidote. Although that banner will soon be gone anyway...

That Livingston managed to not only recover from that unbelievably gruesome injury he suffered but actually lock down a role as a solid NBA contributor is really amazing. Wish we could've seen him at Duke.

[rsvman]

Kobe tribute?

Actually a Michael Jordan tribute, as Durant tied the all-time shooting futility record previously held only by His Airness.

[subzero02]

Man, if Livingston had suited up for us in 2004-05... might have been the tarheel antidote. Although that banner will soon be gone anyway...

I think that's an understatement regarding Livingston. Before his horrific injury he was on the brink of becoming an absolute super star. He's honestly lucky to still have 2 legs; amputation was considered as an option. His recovery is truly remarkable but he is only a fraction of the player he could've been.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I think that's an understatement regarding Livingston. Before his horrific injury he was on the brink of becoming an absolute super star. He's honestly lucky to still have 2 legs; amputation was considered as an option. His recovery is truly remarkable but he is only a fraction of the player he could've been.

Ummmmmm... don't think so. Livingston would have been good, and a very solid starter (and potentially a multiple All-Star), but superstar he was never destined for. In 2007, the year of his injury, he was averaging 9.3 ppg on 46.3% shooting, 5.1 assists, and 3.4 rebounds. Solid numbers for a PG, but nowhere near elite, especially for a third year player.

[subzero02]

Ummmmmm... don't think so. Livingston would have been good, and a very solid starter (and potentially a multiple All-Star), but superstar he was never destined for. In 2007, the year of his injury, he was averaging 9.3 ppg on 46.3% shooting, 5.1 assists, and 3.4 rebounds. Solid numbers for a PG, but nowhere near elite, especially for a third year player.

It's impossible to know what Livingston might have become but I recall a player with a high basketball IQ who was phenomenal on the break. He was only 21 at the time of his injury, so to say a player with his obvious talents would never have reached an elite level of play is a pretty significant assumption. Watching his improvement over the last few seasons makes it easy for me to imagine an injury free Livingston playing PG at a dominant level for several years.

[flyingdutchdevil]

It's impossible to know what Livingston might have become but I recall a player with a high basketball IQ who was phenomenal on the break. He was only 21 at the time of his injury, so to say a player with his obvious talents would never have reached an elite level of play is a pretty significant assumption. Watching his improvement over the last few seasons makes it easy for me to imagine an injury free Livingston playing PG at a dominant level for several years.

To have those stats in your third year and call Livingston on the "brink of becoming an absolute super star" is a pretty significant assumption, and much moreso than my assumption.

No doubt the injury derailed some of his potential, but to call Livingston a potential superstar cannot be backed up by facts.

[jimsumner]

The term "superstar" is pretty inexact. How many superstars are currently in the NBA? Three? Eight? Fifteen? Thirty?

Duke was looking at a 2005 lineup of Livingston, Luol Deng, J.J. Redick, Shelden Williams and Daniel Ewing, with a bench that would have included DeMarcus Nelson, Shavlik Randolph and Sean Dockery.

Deng and Livingston bailed and that loaded 2005 lineup only existed somewhere else in the multiverse.

But back to the original question. Luol Deng was a multi-NBA all-star. Was he ever a superstar? Redick has averaged in the teens for a good portion of his NBA career but has never played in an all-star game. Is/was he ever a superstar?

Based on the way I understand the term, the answer to both is no. Maybe others define the term differently.

I could see a never-injured Livingston having a better NBA career than what Redick has had but I don't think it's a lock. Better than Deng would be a bigger stretch.

But definitions matter a bit.

[cato]

The term "superstar" is pretty inexact. How many superstars are currently in the NBA? Three? Eight? Fifteen? Thirty?

Duke was looking at a 2005 lineup of Livingston, Luol Deng, J.J. Redick, Shelden Williams and Daniel Ewing, with a bench that would have included DeMarcus Nelson, Shavlik Randolph and Sean Dockery.

Deng and Livingston bailed and that loaded 2005 lineup only existed somewhere else in the multiverse.

But back to the original question. Luol Deng was a multi-NBA all-star. Was he ever a superstar? Redick has averaged in the teens for a good portion of his NBA career but has never played in an all-star game. Is/was he ever a superstar?

Based on the way I understand the term, the answer to both is no. Maybe others define the term differently.

I could see a never-injured Livingston having a better NBA career than what Redick has had but I don't think it's a lock. Better than Deng would be a bigger stretch.

But definitions matter a bit.

I pull for Livingston, since he was almost a Blue Devil. But I'm very proud that Luol Deng was a Blue Devil.

[Troublemaker]

Stevens said Avery Bradley is likely out the rest of the series with a badly sprained hamstring.

Celtics look awful without their best two-way player in Bradley. Boston has had a habit of making comebacks this season but I don't think it's going to happen tonight.

[brevity]

Luol Deng was a multi-NBA all-star. Was he ever a superstar?

Maybe not, but Luol Deng (indirectly) caused an ownership power struggle and the dismissal of a GM. Not many superstars can say that.

For a while you could safely identify an NBA superstar if they had two first names. LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Kobe Bryant, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Tim Duncan, Ray Allen, Paul George...

[JNort]

The term "superstar" is pretty inexact. How many superstars are currently in the NBA? Three? Eight? Fifteen? Thirty?

Duke was looking at a 2005 lineup of Livingston, Luol Deng, J.J. Redick, Shelden Williams and Daniel Ewing, with a bench that would have included DeMarcus Nelson, Shavlik Randolph and Sean Dockery.

Deng and Livingston bailed and that loaded 2005 lineup only existed somewhere else in the multiverse.

But back to the original question. Luol Deng was a multi-NBA all-star. Was he ever a superstar? Redick has averaged in the teens for a good portion of his NBA career but has never played in an all-star game. Is/was he ever a superstar?

Based on the way I understand the term, the answer to both is no. Maybe others define the term differently.

I could see a never-injured Livingston having a better NBA career than what Redick has had but I don't think it's a lock. Better than Deng would be a bigger stretch.

But definitions matter a bit.

To me a "star" player is:
A) Someone you can build a team around
B) Is consistently on the All Star team

A "superstar" is a star player who also:
C) Is capable of single handedly winning you games
D) Leads his team to the playoffs
E) Has branding power
F) Makes All-NBA teams multiple times

Just my thoughts on the matter. Might be more points I didn't think of and some of those above can be loosely used in certain situations (injuries, time in league, etc...)

[Indoor66]

I can see at least 500 posts on this definition and, possibly, some time outs coming!

[JetpackJesus]

Here is a nice write-up about JJ on a Trail Blazers SB Nation page. It's actually has a decent analysis of how the Clippers use JJ's ability to run forever off and around screens to great effect (Jordan's moving screens help, too). The author even proposes having a dedicated help defender to counter Redick since Portland has no hope of stopping CP3 from doing whatever he wants.

[sagegrouse]

The term "superstar" is pretty inexact. How many superstars are currently in the NBA? Three? Eight? Fifteen? Thirty?

.

Ah, yes, "superstar." I remember when I first saw the term -- it was an AP article in the local paper in the late 1950's. It said there were some players who were beginning to transcend stardom and had reached the level of "superstar." The two cited were "Stan the Man" and the "Splendid Splinter" They were household names and talked about like the weather. But there were some up-and-coming players who might -- might -- turn into superstars, such as Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays.

Aha! This was in about 1958. Musial and Williams had been stars since World War II (Musial) and before (Williams). It was about longevity and "brand" based on long-term exposure to the sporting public. Even non-sports fans knew their names. I mean, Mantle and Mays had already had some of their best years and still weren't yet considered superstars.

Now? Forget about it! It's any rookie who hits 30 home runs.

Kindly,
Sage
'And, of course, they were all baseball players. Baseball was truly the dominant professional sport'

[elvis14]

To me a "star" player is:
A) Someone you can build a team around
B) Is consistently on the All Star team

A "superstar" is a star player who also:
C) Is capable of single handedly winning you games
D) Leads his team to the playoffs
E) Has branding power
F) Makes All-NBA teams multiple times

Just my thoughts on the matter. Might be more points I didn't think of and some of those above can be loosely used in certain situations (injuries, time in league, etc...)

I can see at least 500 posts on this definition and, possibly, some time outs coming!

I agree that we could go around and around on the definition but I think JNort did a pretty good job with this definitions. Applying that to Livingston, I could see him coming into his own before the injury but I never thought he could reach 'super star' level but I was thinking that he was going to be quite good. Don't know if he'd reach JNorts definition of 'star' but he'd be close or at the very least a very important and talented role player.

[huey]

(Jordan's moving screens help, too)

I think Deandre should win the best screener of the year award. I'm constantly in awe when I see JJ running off screens and being wide open. I don't even think it's really 'moving' (well, at least not Draymond Green levels of moving), but he's very quick to step in once JJ goes around him. And with his huge shoulders and arms, he really cuts off the pursuing defender. It's so good that I find it hard to watch NBA/college games with weak pick-setters. Why even run the play if you're not going to set the screen!?

[phaedrus]

Here is a nice write-up about JJ on a Trail Blazers SB Nation page. It's actually has a decent analysis of how the Clippers use JJ's ability to run forever off and around screens to great effect (Jordan's moving screens help, too). The author even proposes having a dedicated help defender to counter Redick since Portland has no hope of stopping CP3 from doing whatever he wants.

Even better, it's at the expense of Duke-slaying villain C.J. McCollum (who, like Gordon Hayward, has so far turned out to be a better professional than anyone on the "Goliath" Duke team he faced).

On the other hand, MP2 - the second-best NBA player from that fateful day - is appearing on some posters this series.