should record really matter?

[Doobie]

When the coaches select the all-star reserves, should they put there team's record into consideration? Andrew used an extreme example in another thread about a player averaging a triple double on a bad team. I'm pretty sure that hasn't happened but that is a valid argument. He should be an all-star. The reason I'm making this thread is because Marc Jackson and Jeff Van Gundy were discussing this during the Cavs-Pistons game yesterday. They said Ray Allen and Mo Williams deserve to be all-stars over Devin Harris and Danny Granger. I completely disagree with them, and think that ANY player who is having a deserving year should make it to the all-star game. In my eyes, the team's record should have nothing to do with whom is an all-star and who isn't.

Basically I'm asking you guys how you feel about this matter? Should a team's record really make the difference of a player making the all-star game or not?

[Oskar]

Indeed, I agree with you. I think the players who are actually the best to choose from, should be put there, the best players on the earth - but it's different on the All-NBA teams, there's honestly a big difference, imo.

[benji]

The coaches shouldn't select the reserves. Entire team should be fan voted.

But to answer your post question, the coaches, like the media and most fans, are convinced an average player on a great team must be doing more than a star on a lottery team. Because that team is better so the player must be doing something the stats don't pick up because they're on a good team and good teams never have bad players and bad teams never have good players. And players from popular teams are also automatically twice as good at doing "intangibles."

[Andrew]

If the player is having a good enough season individually then it really shouldn't matter, and I go back to my example of a player averaging a triple double on a mediocre or losing team that you mentioned. I think too much is made of players putting up good numbers on bad teams, as if it's a foregone conclusion. There have been plenty of teams bad enough to give anyone with enough talent a chance to put up crazy numbers but it doesn't always happen. Take the 1997/1998 Clippers for example. A prime opportunity for someone to break out with ridiculous, All-Star level numbers but Lamond Murray led the team with 15.4 ppg and no one posted stellar numbers across the board.

[NovU]

I think coaches did a superb job this year anyways. There's not a player on a roster who doesn't really deserve a spot. Well, at least all of them have great reasons to be there backing up with stats and team record or in other ways. If all rosters were voted by fans, we'd see Yi, T-Mac, AI every year, not giving any chances to those who also deserve. And team record being a part of consideration, I think is great. Some players might have to sacrifise in stats for the team efforts. Just like individual success is another way to get to ASG. I think overall, system right now works out for the best.

[Andrew]

I wouldn't say it was superb but they did a good enough job. If nineteen or twenty out of twenty four players can be considered spot on picks by the coaches and fan voting then that's a percentage I can live with.

[benji]

How can this be the best system? The coaches system is completely broken due to the voting rules. (And their stupid decisions. Go find that thread about the worst all-stars, you'll note that outside of Steve Francis (and Iverson this year), it's the coaches who are constantly sending average players who nobody considers to be in the top 15 in their conference to the All-Star game.) (And the coaches did a superb job? They sent David West for some absurd reason.)

If all rosters were voted by fans, we'd see T-Mac, AI every year

We don't already? Didn't Paul win in a late surge over McGrady?

And who the fuck cares if Yi is there? Isn't supposed to be a game for the fans? 5/12ths for the fans, and then 7/12ths for the coaches. The fans want to see Yi, Bruce Bowen, and Luke Ridnour, why not let them?

We can't keep pretending it's a game for the fans at the same time it's some measure of the best players in the league. Choose the entire team from the fan votes, two players per team.

West
C: O'Neal
F: Artest, Anthony, Nowitzki, Gasol
G: McGrady, Ginobili

East
C: Perkins
F: Yi, Pierce, Bosh
G: Carter, Harris, Ridnour

[Fresh8]

Kevin Durant and Al Jeffereson should be All-Stars.

I think if you are a player who shines on a team (even if it is bad) still makes you an All-Star. Team Record shouldn't be taken into account unless in cases where it may be too close to call between two similar players and you have to find some reason to put one in front of the other.

[The X]

I wouldn't put Durant as All-Star in front of Melo....not yet....Jefferson probably has more of a case though....

[Fresh8]

Either Durant or Jefferson ahead of David West. And I did forget Melo didn't get picked... ah well. Such is life. But you get the point, some players who probably deserved to be All-Stars may have lost their chance to play to players on winning teams. Which is what I think the question in this thread was aimed at discussing...

[NovU]

For me, David West is not any less of All Star than Amare especially for this year. Amare's stats are only little better and as for the team record, NOH is ahead. I do admit Amare being a better player and more dominant figure but this year, I don't see any wrong in choosing David West as an all star reserve as he has been terrific. Melo or West, I don't think there's no wrong choice there, but yeah, Melo definitely could have been chosen if it wasn't for injury. As for Nelson and Mo, I think the coaches gave little bit of advantage for Nelson due to his stats being little bit better over Mo's.

[Patr1ck]

All Star teams should not be limited to 12 players. It should be a variable depending on how many players really deserve it. You could split it up into All Star Starters, First String, Second String, and alternates. Hell, they could have two teams from each conference of 8 players each, so it would be All-Conference A and B teams.

[Andrew]

You could always expand the team to fifteen and have it play out more like a summer league or preseason game with the additional reserves. A few players wouldn't get much of a run but you could probably still get everyone into the game for at least five minutes each and divide up the rest of the minutes accordingly.