Are there less franchise players nowadays in NBA?

[hayhayc]

Was thinking today, there seems to be less franchise players around NBA these days compare to like 10 years ago. Is it just me or do you guys think so too?

[greg683x]

i think there's just as many, it just doesnt seem that way bc so many of them are on same team now.

Chris Bosh use to be considered a franchise player, so did Dewayne Wade.

Blake Griffin is one, so is Chris Paul.

Russell Westbrook could be considered one, so is Kevin Durant.

James Harden and Dwight Howard

and so on and so on


10 years ago the NBA was still in the 'Like Mike' era.  NBA stars wanted to be like Michael Jordan, they wanted their own team built around their talents and they wanted to win titles with them as the undisputed star.

The 07-08 celtics killed the like mike era.  Now the thing to do is flock to a team  and load up with other stars, or become a franchise player on a team that players will want to flock too.

Just my opinion.  I dont think talent has thinned over the last decade, it's just really heavy on certain teams and very thin on others,mainly the small market teams in low profile cities.

[staticcc]

Is Lamarcus Aldridge considered a franchise player? If he is, then Love, Durant, Rose, Rondo, Horford, Marc Gasol and Griffin are also franchise players. Then there are up and coming players like Cousins, George, Wall, Lopez, Irving, Lillard, DeRozan, Hibbert, Curry, Lawson, Davis who can be franchise players if they stay with their teams. Then staples like Kobe, Wade, Dirk and Duncan are still there.

Still a lot of franchise players/potential franchise players around especially because of rules on Restricted Free Agency.

[Quinn]

It's a result of all the media hype surrounding the top tier talent in the league. There are a bandful of guys that are capable of being franchise players, but you hear the names LeBron, Durant,  and Howard half of the time ESPN covers basketball. Especially LeBron, we all call him by his first name all the time.

[D.o.s.]

Also there's the fact that fans are much more in tune and up-to-date with information now, so having a "franchise player" that isn't actually a "franchise player" doesn't stick.

There's still, and I assume always going to be a couple of levels--the Jordan tier, and the Drexler tier, if you will. I think that the difference is that no one would really consider Drexler the face of a franchise/Capital-S Superstar type guy in this day and age.

[syfy9]

There's still, and I assume always going to be a couple of levels--the Jordan tier, and the Drexler tier, if you will. I think that the difference is that no one would really consider Drexler the face of a franchise/Capital-S Superstar type guy in this day and age.

I'm a little confused here.

The Drexler tier should be face of the franchise/superstar type players. Drexler in his prime would be a top 3 player if he was playing today. I don't want to argue his place between himself and Durant, but I completely disagree that Drexler wouldn't be a superstar.

Living near Portland, I find that the 110% of the fanbase is in love with Clyde Drexler. He was probably the greatest blazer to ever don the uniform for them. Drexler is a bad example. He is going to be remembered throughout history.

By the way, I'd think the Jordan tier would only include face of the league caliber players.

[wdleehi]

The NBA is in a transition phase.

A large portion of franchise players of the past decade have slowed down.  The young soon to be franchise players haven't fully grabbed the reins yet.

[JBcat]

Well my first post got erased so this will be quick.

Franchise C 10 years ago Shaq. Today Howard. Edge 2003.

Lots of promising PFs today, but maybe no true franchise PF, at least not on the level of a 2003 KG, Duncan, Dirk, and maybe an older Webber.

At SF clearly today with an in prime Lebron, Durant, Melo, and maybe a rising George.  Back then you had TMAC, Pierce, and Carter but those 3 played alot of SG early in their careers. 

At SG Harden might be at the head of the class now with a declining Wade and Kobe coming off a major injury.  Back then those 3 I mentioned also playing SG with Ray and a young Kobe.  I'd give the slight edge to back then.

At PG there are a ton of good ones now with Paul, Rose, Westbrook clear franchise players and several others as maybes Williams, Rondo, Curry, and Irving. 10 years ago you had AI and Kidd with some really good ones like Billups and Baron Davis, but I give the edge to now.

So by my count 2003 wins 3 to 2 by position.

[D.o.s.]

There's still, and I assume always going to be a couple of levels--the Jordan tier, and the Drexler tier, if you will. I think that the difference is that no one would really consider Drexler the face of a franchise/Capital-S Superstar type guy in this day and age.

I'm a little confused here.

The Drexler tier should be face of the franchise/superstar type players. Drexler in his prime would be a top 3 player if he was playing today. I don't want to argue his place between himself and Durant, but I completely disagree that Drexler wouldn't be a superstar.

Living near Portland, I find that the 110% of the fanbase is in love with Clyde Drexler. He was probably the greatest blazer to ever don the uniform for them. Drexler is a bad example. He is going to be remembered throughout history.

By the way, I'd think the Jordan tier would only include face of the league caliber players.

For my money, Bill Walton is probably the best player who's done meaningful things for the Trail Blazers.

And I'm not hating on Clyde the Glide, I'm just saying that a player with his resume ( a 20-6-5 SG; one ring with the Rockets when he was past his prime at age 33; Gold Medalist as a backup on the Dream Team, 10 time All-Star, 1 All-NBA First Team, 2 second and thirds) would've been much more divisive in today's hyper-critical environment. The guy is arguably less decorated than T-Mac--it would be a non-conversation had the Spurs had won last year).

I'd put him pretty comfortably on the Westbrook/Rockets Harden/Toronto Bosh level of Superstar-osity, but I don't think he hits the LeBron/KD level with the increased media/fan scrutiny of today's game.

Of course, this could totally be a semantics thing--I suspect we're basically saying the same thing, and had I said "Gary Payton" or "Shawn Kemp" or "Rajon Rondo"  you wouldn't have disagreed.

[syfy9]

There's still, and I assume always going to be a couple of levels--the Jordan tier, and the Drexler tier, if you will. I think that the difference is that no one would really consider Drexler the face of a franchise/Capital-S Superstar type guy in this day and age.

I'm a little confused here.

The Drexler tier should be face of the franchise/superstar type players. Drexler in his prime would be a top 3 player if he was playing today. I don't want to argue his place between himself and Durant, but I completely disagree that Drexler wouldn't be a superstar.

Living near Portland, I find that the 110% of the fanbase is in love with Clyde Drexler. He was probably the greatest blazer to ever don the uniform for them. Drexler is a bad example. He is going to be remembered throughout history.

By the way, I'd think the Jordan tier would only include face of the league caliber players.

For my money, Bill Walton is probably the best player who's done meaningful things for the Trail Blazers.

And I'm not hating on Clyde the Glide, I'm just saying that a player with his resume ( a 20-6-5 SG; one ring with the Rockets when he was past his prime at age 33; Gold Medalist as a backup on the Dream Team, 10 time All-Star, 1 All-NBA First Team, 2 second and thirds) would've been much more divisive in today's hyper-critical environment. The guy is arguably less decorated than T-Mac--it would be a non-conversation had the Spurs had won last year).

I'd put him pretty comfortably on the Westbrook/Rockets Harden/Toronto Bosh level of Superstar-osity, but I don't think he hits the LeBron/KD level with the increased media/fan scrutiny of today's game.

Of course, this could totally be a semantics thing--I suspect we're basically saying the same thing, and had I said "Gary Payton" or "Shawn Kemp" or "Rajon Rondo"  you wouldn't have disagreed.

I agree with you that Bill Walton was better (imo, his career year was one of the greatest), but I think Drex will be more remembered. I also think that Clyde was the more complete player than T-Mac in his prime.

I guess Westbrook/Harden/Bosh could be included in the face of the franchise tier, but they'd have to be on the lower end. Guys like Alex English, Adrian Dantley, Dwight Howard, Stockton, Pierce, and KG would probably be in that tier as well.

[guava_wrench]

I think the original concept of this thread is fatally flawed. Being a franchise player is always relative to the distribution of talent in the league.

It also makes little sense to talk this way about the league at present because we have to see how careers play out to know how to evaluate players.

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

Is it me or is the league`s marketing drifting away from general marketing players for a face of franchise or bust approach? When I was a kid you would get the likes of Tony Kukoc, Rik Smits plugged from time to time. Where is the love for today`s role players?

[moiso]

There's still, and I assume always going to be a couple of levels--the Jordan tier, and the Drexler tier, if you will. I think that the difference is that no one would really consider Drexler the face of a franchise/Capital-S Superstar type guy in this day and age.

I'm a little confused here.

The Drexler tier should be face of the franchise/superstar type players. Drexler in his prime would be a top 3 player if he was playing today. I don't want to argue his place between himself and Durant, but I completely disagree that Drexler wouldn't be a superstar.

Living near Portland, I find that the 110% of the fanbase is in love with Clyde Drexler. He was probably the greatest blazer to ever don the uniform for them. Drexler is a bad example. He is going to be remembered throughout history.

By the way, I'd think the Jordan tier would only include face of the league caliber players.

Drexler wouldn't be as good today because he was a weak shooter who benefitted by the fast pace and easy buckets of his era.  In today's slower game, his shooting numbers would be even worse and he wouldn't have quite as many fast break assists.

[moiso]

There's still, and I assume always going to be a couple of levels--the Jordan tier, and the Drexler tier, if you will. I think that the difference is that no one would really consider Drexler the face of a franchise/Capital-S Superstar type guy in this day and age.

I'm a little confused here.

The Drexler tier should be face of the franchise/superstar type players. Drexler in his prime would be a top 3 player if he was playing today. I don't want to argue his place between himself and Durant, but I completely disagree that Drexler wouldn't be a superstar.

Living near Portland, I find that the 110% of the fanbase is in love with Clyde Drexler. He was probably the greatest blazer to ever don the uniform for them. Drexler is a bad example. He is going to be remembered throughout history.

By the way, I'd think the Jordan tier would only include face of the league caliber players.

For my money, Bill Walton is probably the best player who's done meaningful things for the Trail Blazers.

And I'm not hating on Clyde the Glide, I'm just saying that a player with his resume ( a 20-6-5 SG; one ring with the Rockets when he was past his prime at age 33; Gold Medalist as a backup on the Dream Team, 10 time All-Star, 1 All-NBA First Team, 2 second and thirds) would've been much more divisive in today's hyper-critical environment. The guy is arguably less decorated than T-Mac--it would be a non-conversation had the Spurs had won last year).

I'd put him pretty comfortably on the Westbrook/Rockets Harden/Toronto Bosh level of Superstar-osity, but I don't think he hits the LeBron/KD level with the increased media/fan scrutiny of today's game.

Of course, this could totally be a semantics thing--I suspect we're basically saying the same thing, and had I said "Gary Payton" or "Shawn Kemp" or "Rajon Rondo"  you wouldn't have disagreed.

A healthy Walton would be a superstar/franchise player in any era.

[Eja117]

i think there's just as many, it just doesnt seem that way bc so many of them are on same team now.

Chris Bosh use to be considered a franchise player, so did Dewayne Wade.

Blake Griffin is one, so is Chris Paul.

Russell Westbrook could be considered one, so is Kevin Durant.

James Harden and Dwight Howard

and so on and so on


10 years ago the NBA was still in the 'Like Mike' era.  NBA stars wanted to be like Michael Jordan, they wanted their own team built around their talents and they wanted to win titles with them as the undisputed star.

The 07-08 celtics killed the like mike era.  Now the thing to do is flock to a team  and load up with other stars, or become a franchise player on a team that players will want to flock too.

Just my opinion.  I dont think talent has thinned over the last decade, it's just really heavy on certain teams and very thin on others,mainly the small market teams in low profile cities.

agreed