I agree about the winning, but I cant look at Hibbert and say he is a big reason they win and his stats arent great either.
Noah has a good all-around game, but is he the reason they are winning? Some nights he has very little to do with it and just makes hustle plays... then some nights he grits them into a position to win, but is he the reason? Both of those teams have really good starting fives that collectively win. I feel like they got the spots for being on winning teams rather than being so good that they led their teams to win.
Al has had a direct effect on our win total AND is putting up bigger numbers across the board than both of them. When I was a kid, it was stats that usually pushed a player into an all-star spot, regardless of their team performance. If a player is good, they are good, and typically they carry their team to wins they wouldn't have otherwise. That is Al. I can't say that for some of the guys that made it.
I'm trying to view this as objectively as possible, but it just seems ridiculous. All we can hope for is a winning team at the break next season so Al finally gets his due.
I see where you are coming from I think it just comes down to personal preference. I just don;t look at the hawks and bulls and see a great all around team with loads of talent... For me personally it's hard to say a team is top in a conference above .500 and have zero all stars but a team well below .500 does. For me I'm usually going to give the edge to the player on the much better team because I am going to assume they are part of the reason for that. The only exception is if you have a true bonafide All-Star on a below average team... Like Melo who is 2nd in PPG this season.