Y2K wrote:
Excellent write-up on Duncan. I'm pleasantly surprised that Bill Russell didn't go within the last 2 picks.
like i said before. its not a consistent list. they got malone ahead of kobe but russell ahead of garnett and duncan lol
so rings count with russell i guess... but not for kobe
What makes you think that it's all about rings for Bill Russell to be ahead of Garnett and Duncan?
It certainly isN't about Offense, because KG and Duncan were light-years >>> than Russell in that facet WHILE Russ was by no stretch of the imagination lights-year better than KG/Duncan Defensively.
So what else could it be?
Last edited by thedangerouskitchen on Fri Mar 23, 2018 12:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
Lamelo_Ball wrote:i challenge anyone in this thread to stand outside infront of any heavily population public location wearing a sign that says "karl malone > kobe bryant" and hand out flyers with the backpick dudes formula
like i said before. its not a consistent list. they got malone ahead of kobe but russell ahead of garnett and duncan lol
so rings count with russell i guess... but not for kobe
What makes you think that it's all about rings for Bill Russell to be ahead of Garnett and Duncan?
because bill russell was such an amazing 2way player that stretched the floor, handled the ball, dunked over guys, had such a long 20 year career, anchored the defense while also dropping big offensive numbers on high efficiency. russell was a regular do it all mother fucker i tell ya what. minus the rings hes a regular barry bonds in the individual skills department
man he was tricky to figure out on offense. that high post cut and screen game was on point. that basic system without any real x's and o's involved was glorious..
jesus christ
i got russell top 3 career wise but strip down the fucking team accomplishments and factor in pace/eras/competition and the fucking guy is a slightly taller dennis rodman
Let's also remember Russell was "defending" guys who shot 40% from the field. In fact, that era was so weak a 40-45% shooter was among THE most efficient players in the game.
This begs the question: Just how "great" was Russell's Defense in reality. My guess is he was no better than dozens of other guys (Dream, Pip, MJ, KG, Duncan, etc), but only appeared to be heads-and-shoulders better because of the weak-ass Offensive players he guarded.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
thedangerouskitchen wrote:
Typical bush-league deflection from the point of dicsussion (ie; the obvious and glaring contradictions by the author of this list).
But hey, feel free to continue giving this list credibility even though it makes you look foolish.
The "obvious and glaring contradictions" don't exist, and only appear to exist to you two because you guys simply aren't very smart and can't hold a meaningful amount of information in your head at once.
like i said before. its not a consistent list. they got malone ahead of kobe but russell ahead of garnett and duncan lol
so rings count with russell i guess... but not for kobe
What makes you think that it's all about rings for Bill Russell to be ahead of Garnett and Duncan?
It certainly isN't about Offense, because KG and Duncan were light-years >>> than Russell in that facet WHILE Russ was by no stretch of the imagination lights-year better than KG/Duncan Defensively.
Y2K wrote:
What makes you think that it's all about rings for Bill Russell to be ahead of Garnett and Duncan?
It certainly isN't about Offense, because KG and Duncan were light-years >>> than Russell in that facet WHILE Russ was by no stretch of the imagination lights-year better than KG/Duncan Defensively.
So what else could it be?
I guess you're going to have to stay tuned.
when lebrons listed #1 will you still believe in this formula
Greatest Individual Playoff Performance in NBA history - 22y.o = 29.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 6.1 apg, 15-1 Record, #1 in Win Shares
thedangerouskitchen wrote:
It certainly isN't about Offense, because KG and Duncan were light-years >>> than Russell in that facet WHILE Russ was by no stretch of the imagination lights-year better than KG/Duncan Defensively.
So what else could it be?
I guess you're going to have to stay tuned.
when lebrons listed #1 will you still believe in this formula
thedangerouskitchen wrote:
Typical bush-league deflection from the point of dicsussion (ie; the obvious and glaring contradictions by the author of this list).
But hey, feel free to continue giving this list credibility even though it makes you look foolish.
The "obvious and glaring contradictions" don't exist, and only appear to exist to you two because you guys simply aren't very smart and can't hold a meaningful amount of information in your head at once.
Of course they do, bush-league... all one need do is look at the criteria and then the rankings to quickly determine that fact. Glaring contradictions AND ridiculously stupid criteria too... might as well rank players all-time based solely on who had the best stats.
Have at it bub.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
Of course they do, bush-league... all one need do is look at the criteria and then the rankings to quickly determine that fact. Glaring contradictions AND ridiculously stupid criteria too... might as well rank players all-time based solely on who had the best stats.
Have at it bub.
It should give you pause that all the usual smart and thoughtful posters are generally converging around the same ideas, and the only person on your side of the debate is Griff.
That doesn't automatically mean you are wrong, but it would probably cause a serious and sober person to step back and think for a moment.
Of course they do, bush-league... all one need do is look at the criteria and then the rankings to quickly determine that fact. Glaring contradictions AND ridiculously stupid criteria too... might as well rank players all-time based solely on who had the best stats.
Have at it bub.
It should give you pause that all the usual smart and thoughtful posters are generally converging around the same ideas, and the only person on your side of the debate is Griff.
That doesn't automatically mean you are wrong, but it would probably cause a serious and sober person to step back and think for a moment.
Pssst: Way back in the day all the (ahem) smart and thoughtful people believed the earth was flat... and they were wrong, just like you're wrong if you buy into this guy's rankings.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
Pssst: Way back in the day all the (ahem) smart and thoughtful people believed the earth was flat... and they were wrong, just like you're wrong if you buy into this guy's rankings.
I'll take my chances that you aren't Eratosthenes and maintain my previously stated opinion.
Pssst: Way back in the day all the (ahem) smart and thoughtful people believed the earth was flat... and they were wrong, just like you're wrong if you buy into this guy's rankings.
I'll take my chances that you aren't Eratosthenes and maintain my previously stated opinion.
Thanks.
You'll take your chances that KG > Magic and Bird...that pretty much makes you a fool.
You're welcome.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
You'll take your chances that KG > Magic and Bird...that pretty much makes you a fool.
You're welcome.
You have soaring rhetorical abilities dude.
I tip my hat off to you.
Go ahead and explain why you believe KG > Magic and Bird... and while you're at it, tell us why you agree with the author of the list that Malone > Kobe.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
You'll take your chances that KG > Magic and Bird...that pretty much makes you a fool.
You're welcome.
You have soaring rhetorical abilities dude.
I tip my hat off to you.
Go ahead and explain why you believe KG > Magic and Bird... and while you're at it, tell us why you agree with the author of the list that Malone > Kobe.
Why don't you read the scouting reports and criteria instead of just putting your fingers in your ears like a two year old and yelling "I can't hear you".
Bush4Ever35 wrote:
You have soaring rhetorical abilities dude.
I tip my hat off to you.
Go ahead and explain why you believe KG > Magic and Bird... and while you're at it, tell us why you agree with the author of the list that Malone > Kobe.
Why don't you read the scouting reports and criteria instead of just putting your fingers in your ears like a two year old and yelling "I can't hear you".
This list is about "the impact each (player) had in his own time over the course of a career" and "ranks the players who have provided the largest increase in the odds of a team winning championships over the course of their careers".
WIth that, go ahead and tell me why you and bush-league agree with the author that KG > Magic and Bird, and Karl Malone > Kobe.
I'll be waiting.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
Bush4Ever35 wrote:
You have soaring rhetorical abilities dude.
I tip my hat off to you.
Go ahead and explain why you believe KG > Magic and Bird... and while you're at it, tell us why you agree with the author of the list that Malone > Kobe.
Why don't you read the scouting reports and criteria instead of just putting your fingers in your ears like a two year old and yelling "I can't hear you".
Ben specifically stated:
What This List Is Not
This list will not make traditional “arguments” for players. I won’t attempt to balance Kobe’s championships without Shaq, nor do I care about accolades like All-Star teams or the number of Hall of Fame teammates someone played with. I also don’t care how many rings a player won; the very thing I’m trying to tease out is who provided the most lift. Sometimes that lift is good enough to win, sometimes it’s not.
There are no time machines either — it’s not about how players would do today if transported into the past or future. It’s about the impact each had in his own time over the course of a career.
TDK is just in a panic because he knows this methodology has a greater likelihood of placing Lebron over Jordan than the usual "mah rings mah 6 for 6" barbershop type methodologies would.
Everything he has said in this thread is an attempt to devalue the methodology so as to devalue the list so as to protect his hero and homosexual fantasy.
