2. George or Melo: Whom would you rather build your team around?
Elhassan: George, but it's a lot closer than one might think. Anthony has caught a lot of flak in recent years for not being the type of player who can elevate his teammates, but if he were surrounded by the right personnel, he could be a devastating force. I choose George because his ability to impact the game in categories other than scoring gives a team a lot more flexibility in the type of supporting cast it can put around him.
Harper: In a vacuum in which both players are the same age and have the same contract, I'd still take Melo because I'm a big believer in building your team around an offensive focus (like the Mavs did with Dirk). However, basketball exists in TV sets, not a vacuum. I'll take George because of the two-way play and his youth.
Pina: George. He's a 23-year-old phenomenon, able to take over games with a pterodactyl wingspan on offense and defense. For those who hark back to
Carmelo Anthony's sensational scoring ability, George is averaging 2.4 fewer points per game on 4.5 fewer shots. His PER and true shooting percentage are both higher, but George's real value comes when his team needs a stop -- something that will never be said about Anthony, who's also six years older.
Stein: Who's younger? More importantly: Who's by far the better two-way player? Crazy as this might have sounded in November 2012, who could vote against Paul George at this stage?
Windhorst: George. It's not a completely fair question since George is 23 and Melo is 29. You're talking to one of George's bigger supporters in the media here, and the reason I've been impressed with him is his ability to play both ends. He's also focused on being a team-first guy, sometimes to a fault where he needs to take on a more commanding role. Melo is a truly amazing scorer, but no one will ever accuse him of being a team-first guy or a dedicated defender.