I am not trying to say that David Lee is a GREAT player, just to be clear. I don’t think he’s borderline 1st Team All-NBA, just borderline All-Star. That can be about the equivalent of being 6th Team All-NBA, or even 7th with some injuries to All-Stars ahead of you.

I usually couldn’t really care less about the All-Star game (or awards either), but I’m definitely rooting for Lee.

“Out of any combo of Bosh, J. Smith, G. Wallace, Pierce, R. Allen, Rondo, J. Johnson, C. Butler, Jamison, Granger, Rondo, Horford, Deng, Jennings I think you can get any combo of 7 in that you like and still meet the criteria for selecting positions.”

What’s your criteria, the biggest names and highest played players are All-Stars? Butler has been absolutely Chris Duhon level bad this season. He’s not one of the top 5 players on one of the worst teams in the East. Ray Allen doesn’t have a leg to stand on: Rondo and Pierce are both way better. Jamison has carried a bad team and has an All-Star rep, but I think Lee is clearly more deserving this season. Jennings is a joke for the All-Star game. So is Deng. Granger’s missed 1/2 the season and I would say he’s clearly less deserving than Lee, but doubt coaches see it that way.

Gerald Wallace has a very good case and probably makes it. Between Smith, Johnson, and Horford at least 2 probably make it. Pierce and Rondo probably. Bosh definitely. I think Lee is legitimately right on the bubble. One or two injuries and he should be in.

“If system guys shouldn’t get into the All Star game, I think good guys on really terrible teams should be eliminated too.”

The Knicks aren’t terrible. They’re two spots out of the playoffs, a legitimate playoff contender. After a truly terrible start they’ve been good. I do think it is harder for a guy on a bad team to make it, but I don’t think a rule is needed.
I do not agree with your statements about great players making teams good all by themselves. Far from it. I am with Brian on his KG comparison. Did Kobe have an off year when the Lakers fell out of the playoffs and suddenly re-find himself when they got better talent around him?

“I’m really shocked that no team has decided to get 2-3 lock down defenders and use them for a single defensive possession.”

The All-Star game is a show-case for the best overall players, it’s not about winning the game.

And the crazy thing is that it is clear that Gallo could be sooo much better than he is right now.

Great point regarding system guys. One wonders how DLee’s stats would look if he had a usage rate as high as Kobe or LBJ.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=bryanko01&y1=2010&p2=jamesle01&y2=2010&p3=leeda02&y3=2010

I love JVG, but have to disagree regarding precluding players from losing teams from being all-stars. As of today’s date 13 of the 30 teams have a losing record, and several are right at the .500 point. What would you do with a player like Bosh, who’s team is only 1 game over .500?

Side note: if anyone is interested in seeing another example of how James Dolan has the bizarro midas touch (i.e. every he touches turns to shite), see here:
http://www.observer.com/2010/media/after-three-months-only-35-subscriptions-newsdays-web-site

Given the satirical tone of the article (which I, embarrassingly, did not pick up until my second reading), I can’t be sure if this is a legitimate statement or another tongue-in-cheek one.

If a defender can make such a significant impact on a single possession, shouldn’t he play the entire game?

Otherwise, it’s just situational play for the sake of situational play. Also, if there is a measurable impact that a group of players can have on a single defensive possession, what would suggest that those players wouldn’t have that same impact on multiple possessions?

Mike– that’s a really interesting point, and I’m not sure if I’ve read a piece about it by you here or not. You may be onto something, though. (To Continue Brian’s analogy) Baseball uses their excess roster spots on situational guys to bring in at “winning time”– either a glove man up the middle, or an outfielder with a strong arm, or a Lenny Harris type pinch hitter. You are right that in the NBA the end of the bench is filled with practice filler that never really gets to contribute to actual games.

Why basketball doesn’t round out a roster with situational players seems foolish, now that you’ve made me think about it. In fact, it would seem that there are very few “situational” situations in basketball, if you look at the way coaches run their rotations. They all want to have their “best” players on the court at the end, regardless of the skill that is needed. Other than putting good 3 point shooters in when you’re down by three with >3 seconds, or putting in a guy with a lot of fouls to hack a guy like Shaq, there really is no variance in player rotation outside of foul trouble and injury. It seems it would be a simple and cheap shift to make, to find players who can do one thing really, really well and tuck them away, for the moment they can help you win.

Why? NBA coaches are too conservative with their lineups anyway. Expanding to 15 means 3 more guys will be sitting around doing nothing. I’m really shocked that no team has decided to get 2-3 lock down defenders and use them for a single defensive possession. The NBA’s version of the LOOGY.