He may have. That still ignores the reality of what his actual career was. Garnett changed his trajectory and Carmelo never did.

You still are ignoring the point that Carmelo was mostly irrelevant given his remarkably low amount of playoff success.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

When you submerge Individual success with team success then yeah probably so. I don't however. Basketball team success is just that team success.

Steve Kerr had more playoff success than Carmelo Anthony. Much more in fact. Doubt you'd find one person that believed he had a more relevant career than Carmelo Anthony. Robert Horry either. AC Green either. Horace Grant. You want others? Each of those guys are afterthoughts that happened to play on great teams.

_________________

You're contradicting your entire argument against lebrons move to the Heat by making a case for Melo to do the same.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY

No I'm not. I never had a problem with him chasing the money and i never based his success as a player on whether he won championships or not. He was a top 5-10 player regardless of whether he won a championship or not.

_________________

Wow. More relevant as a player than Steve Kerr! This is well placed in the Carmelo Anthony Appreciation thread. I am sure on the day he was drafted that the hope was that one day it would be pointed out that he was in fact more important than a guy who started 30 career games.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Now you are contradicting your own argument.

_________________

I am not. You just keep on changing it because you can't argue against the point that Carmelo Anthony, at this point in his career, has played on the team that won a playoff series 3 times, which puts him in the illustrious company of Tracy McGrady and Grant Hill and a current NBA player in year 6.

So you then change it to I am saying "rings is all that matters" when it is larger than that.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I don't think McGrady won 3 series. Grant Hill either.

Winning playoff series is more a product of who you play with than who you are as a player. If you can't see that then I don't know what to tell you.

If he'd played on teams that underachieved then you'd have more of a case. His teams either played at a level predicted of them or they overachieved with him. He carried those Denver teams. Carried New York also when he was really good.

I don't blast guys for doing things like that.Apparently you do I guess.

_________________

We aren't going to change the argument here. It doesn't matter if he "underachieved" or not. He won 3 series in his career. That makes him mostly irrelevant in the NBA.

Let me put it another way. Let's say that I told you the Bulls would win 3 total series over the next 15 years. Would you be happy with that?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

How is it that a Hall Of Fame player is irrelevant? How is a guy that was good enough to make Multiple Olympic teams irrelevant? A guy that was good enough to be the best player on 9 playoff teams (first 9 teams of his career) irrelevant? Win 60% of his games 5 times in his career irrelevant?

Its a silly argument.


When his career is over he will still be regarded as a great player. Thats all that matters and you have made it about winning until I provided examples of guys that one and no one talks about.

You can't have it both ways.

_________________

Three playoffs series wins in his entire career. We are talking about as an NBA players so the Olympics don't matter just like Grant Hill isn't saved by his great college career.

Wow. 9 playoff teams!

You didn't provide any examples that help your case. Not one. McGrady is the closest to a great player that didn't win and he is viewed similarly. Grant Hill was not a great NBA player but that was mostly due to injury. But Carmelo was better than Horace Grant!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Kevin Garnett makes the case as does the other guys I listed. You will simply say they didn't and move on to your next point. Carmelo Anthony's had a much more accomplished career than Tracy McGrady. You may think he doesn't but if the only thing that you have to say is that he didn't have much playoff success then you really don't have much.

_________________

Kevin Garnett has a lot of playoff success. Carmelo does not.

McGrady was your example. So now Carmelo is much better than him?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

He had a better career. McGrady missed the playoffs a number of times and never was the best player on a team that made it out of the first round of the playoffs. Carmelo was. Carmelo's Career scoring avg is also much better.

You are saying that he and McGrady are comparable? in what ways other than lack of playoff success? Garnett's success came once he teamed up with other top 15 players.

_________________

I asked you who was a similar player who had as little postseason success as Carmelo. You gave him and Grant Hill as examples. You are now saying that Carmelo was a much better player. That's fine but it also undercuts your defense of Carmelo and his lack of playoff success.
Yeah, and Carmelo never had success. It's not like Carmelo didn't have the means to force a trade or sign someplace else. This is why Carmelo is irrelevant.

How about I put it like this. What is the peak of Carmelo Anthony as an NBA player? What was the one game or series that defines him? If you had one example to show how he had placed his mark on NBA history what would it be?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

The Series against the Lakers where he went to 6 games in the Western Conf finals and played Kobe to a standstill will be the highlight of his career.


He once dropped 60 in an NBA regular season game. There were other things as well.

_________________

There is your answer to his relevancy.

1) Took the Lakers to 6 games in the Conference Finals.
2) Once dropped 60 points in a regular season game.
3) Other thing

Quite a legacy there.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

_________________

1) After the series was tied 2-2, the Lakers beat the Nuggets in Games 5 and 6 by a combined 36 points.
2) That 62 point game for Carmelo occurred for the 16-27 Knicks against the 19-26 Bobcats. What a huge game in a great matchup. Bet it was on national TV too!
3) Okay?

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Let's look at Kobe versus Carmelo head-to-head in their playoff careers, since it was referred to as a standstill:

Kobe Bryant: 8-2 Record, 49% FG, 34% 3P, 5.6 REB, 6.0 AST, 1.1 STL, 0.9 BLK, 2.4 TOV, 33.8 PPG
Carmelo Anthony: 2-8 Record, 39% FG, 25% 3P, 6.7 REB, 3.0 AST, 1.0 STL, 0.3 BLK, 2.9 TOV, 25.5 PPG

edit: In 2009's WCF, Carmelo shot 48 of 118 for 40.7%. Kobe shot 63 of 131 for 48.0%.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

You're not arguing that Carmelo was a better player than KG are you?

_________________
If we nominate Trump we will get destroyed & we'll deserve it.- L Graham
I’m going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law.- DJT 2016
MAY THEY ROT IN HELL. AGAIN, MERRY CHRISTMAS!- DJT 12/25/23

To the Contrary. KG was better but he didn't do squat in the playoffs until he got to Boston. He'd only got out of the first round once in 13 years prior to arriving in Boston. Don't think people thought he was "irrelevant". They thought he needed better teammates. He wasn't blamed for his lack of playoff success. He was correctly credited for taking a bunch of stiffs to the playoffs year in and year out.


That is the difference.

_________________

If that were all the guy had ever accomplished then he wouldn't have been a first ballot Hall of Famer. Goes without saying. If the only thing that you have is "lack of playoff success" as a basis then you don't have much. Those are team accomplishments. If you want to stack his individual accomplishments up against other players of his era then he stacks up quite favorably.


14 consecutive years of avg 20 or more. Only the 5th guy to do that in his first 14 seasons in the NBA.

Know that is only chopped liver as far as you are concerned.

_________________

Of course. That's a pretty bad legacy you provided there. I asked you to provide one game or series that places his mark in NBA history. You provided 2. The first was a series they lost 4-2 in the Conference finals and the other was a regular season game where he scored 60 points. Those are the two high points of his entire NBA career. This is why I say that he was irrelevant. The peak of his career was losing a conference finals 4-2. His second peak was scoring 60 in a regular season game(you know, the same number that Kemba Walker did this year).

Here you go trying to change the argument again. He is going to be a hall of famer. Lots of guys make the hall of fame. Chris Bosh will likely be a hall of famer too. Mitch Richmond is a hall of famer.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

So We are back to the essence of your argument which is he is a bum because he never got to the NBA finals. That is a silly argument. Saying a guy had an irrelevant career because he never played in an NBA finals makes little sense.


It really makes little sense while you cite the irrelevance of many guys that have participated in finals and juxtapose their career with his. Either playoff success is the be all end all for you or it isn't.

_________________

No. No. No. I've made it clear and you seemingly ignore it. It doesn't have to do with Finals. It has to do with how irrelevant he was in the entire playoffs. 3 total series wins. That's it for a career that spanned a decade and a half.

As I said earlier, imagine I told you that the Bulls would win 3 total playoff series in the next 15 years. Would this be an acceptable number to you?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Making the playoffs the first 9 years of your career is an accomplishment. Doing it with a team that had missed the previous 6 or 7 and has a losing franchise record since you departed is also an accomplishment.


Providing the Knicks with the best record that they have had as a franchise in the past 25 years is also an accomplishment. Its not a disappointment when no one expects you to win anything anyway. That is what you don't understand and ignore about sports. Disappointment comes from teams and players that are expected to win. Teams that aren't expected to win do not disappoint anyone. If they are disappointed then their expectations were unrealistic.


If you want to agree that his teams were never really a factor in the playoffs then they weren't. I will agree with you on that. If you want to argue it is because of him that they weren't then I will respectfully disagree. Those teams weren't very good.

_________________

1) Took the Lakers to 6 games in the Conference Finals.
2) Once dropped 60 points in a regular season game.
3) Making the playoffs the first 9 years of his career.
4) Provided the Knicks with the best record that they have had as a franchise in the past 25 years.
5) His teams weren't expected to win and they delivered on that by not winning.

What a legacy.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Teams won over 60% of their games on Five Separate occasions.

Only one of 5 guys in NBA history to avg 20 or more during the first 14 years of their career.

Do you care to address that? Doubt it.

That is what you call a "legacy"

_________________

1) Took the Lakers to 6 games in the Conference Finals.
2) Once dropped 60 points in a regular season game.
3) Making the playoffs the first 9 years of his career.
4) Provided the Knicks with the best record that they have had as a franchise in the past 25 years.
5) His teams weren't expected to win and they delivered on that by not winning.
6) Teams won over 60% of their games on Five Separate occasions.
7) Only one of 5 guys in NBA history to avg 20 or more during the first 14 years of their career.

What an amazing career. I especially enjoy the "Won at least 50 games 5 times" statistic. Who wouldn't be excited about 5 50+ win seasons in 16 years?

No, I am not making that argument.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!