What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*NBA THREAD* Abe will be missed (2 Viewers)

IMHO, Gasol should be getting the ball in the high post (which he does on occasion), and play hi/low with Bynum (I don't recall this once lately). Gasol is the best passer on the team, Bynum is the best low post, Gasol can hhit the elbow jumper... no brainer imo. :shrug:
Too late for this. Last night was the last chance to try that, because I have a strong feeling the two will no longer be playing on the same team any longer.
 
IMHO, Gasol should be getting the ball in the high post (which he does on occasion), and play hi/low with Bynum (I don't recall this once lately). Gasol is the best passer on the team, Bynum is the best low post, Gasol can hhit the elbow jumper... no brainer imo. :shrug:
Too late for this. Last night was the last chance to try that, because I have a strong feeling the two will no longer be playing on the same team any longer.
Exactly, and it's a ### ####ed shame because matuski is 100% correct. Brown couldn't game plan it and Kobe wouldn't let them execute it enough to be effective even if Brown could. Gasol's 1st year with the Lakers, after Bynum came back to close out the regular season, they did that all the time and just destroyed people. Some of the best basketball I've ever seen as Bynum was nearly as good at interior passing as Gasol was. Sometimes they'd have Gasol on the low block, just outside the lane, Bynum inside the free throw circle, ball goes to Gasol, Bynum dives to the basket and either Bynum's open and gets the dish from Gasol or the defense collapses on Bynum and Gasol gets a gimmie. Worked every time they did it. Then they just stopped doing it when the playoffs rolled around and things got a bit rougher. It never surfaced again. A real shame.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If/when Duncan gets his 5th.. go ahead and pencil him somewhere on that list behind MJ.
I don't understand the thinking behind this. To me, if you want to be regarded as one of the greatest ever in the NBA, you're going to need to have at least 1 or 2 championships. Otherwise, you'll neve be regarded in the very top tier, and I think that's right. But beyond that, what difference does it make? I mean, assuming you are an NBA fan, you've been watching Tim Duncan for several years now. You know what he's all about. Will it make that much of a difference in your opinion of him if/when San Antonio wins it this year or if they don't? I don't get that.
We may go overboard using titles to define players, but I think it makes sense.Sure, we know who these players are from watching on a daily/yearly basis, but it's what they do in the Playoffs that shapes and defines their career. Titles are the ultimate goal, so seeing Duncan win another certainly adds to his resume for greatness, especially being able to do it at this age on a team that plays so differently than how he's won his others.

As you allude, we're splitting hairs comparing super-elite players, so another title would be another important piece of information.

We've always used a player's ability to help a team win (as opposed to stuffing a stat sheet) as a way to compare players.

If Wilt had beaten Russell more, he'd probably be considered the best player ever. Instead, he's not in the Top 5 for many.

I think it's fine to move Duncan up the all-time list if he wins this year.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If/when Duncan gets his 5th.. go ahead and pencil him somewhere on that list behind MJ.
I don't understand the thinking behind this. To me, if you want to be regarded as one of the greatest ever in the NBA, you're going to need to have at least 1 or 2 championships. Otherwise, you'll neve be regarded in the very top tier, and I think that's right. But beyond that, what difference does it make? I mean, assuming you are an NBA fan, you've been watching Tim Duncan for several years now. You know what he's all about. Will it make that much of a difference in your opinion of him if/when San Antonio wins it this year or if they don't? I don't get that.
Imo, he is already on this list - ahead of Kobe. If I were drafting an all time team, he is my 1.1.Objectively, I think the rings matter when you start splitting hairs among the best ever.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What a joke. The Pacers are done. They're just done mentally. Terrible passing, ridiculous 3 point shots instead of taking advantage of their huge advantage inside, and just slow rotations on defense.

And I'm so tired of how soft they are. They think they're tough because they commit a bunch of fouls, but I need to take off my shoes to count the number of times they've gotten shots blocked because they try to lay it in instead if being aggressive and dunking it. They're afraid to go strong to the basket and take the hard foul while dunking it. Pathetic.

 
If/when Duncan gets his 5th.. go ahead and pencil him somewhere on that list behind MJ.
I don't understand the thinking behind this. To me, if you want to be regarded as one of the greatest ever in the NBA, you're going to need to have at least 1 or 2 championships. Otherwise, you'll neve be regarded in the very top tier, and I think that's right. But beyond that, what difference does it make? I mean, assuming you are an NBA fan, you've been watching Tim Duncan for several years now. You know what he's all about. Will it make that much of a difference in your opinion of him if/when San Antonio wins it this year or if they don't? I don't get that.
Imo, he is already on this list - ahead of Kobe. If I were drafting an all time team, he is my 1.1.Objectively, I think the rings matter when you start splitting hairs among the best ever.
I have a problem with all of the best ever rankings. If you are simply ranking the greatest NBA players of all time, then team accomplishments are a tremendous indicator of that greatness. And I assume that every rankings follows this line of reasoning.However, I tend to think of best player ever in the following terms. If I could choose any players career from beginning to end for my franchise, who would I want? It obviously is far more difficult to try and separate a player's success from the teammates contributions. But when I do attempt to think in these terms, a player like Duncan doesn't get too much extra credit if the Spurs win a title this year. The fact that he is lucky to have the talent around him doesn't change the player he is right now. That said, Duncan is very high on my list. And Kobe isn't as high as his "NBA greatness" would indicate. For instance, Olajuwon would clearly be chosen before Kobe in these terms. I feel that Olajuwon gave his team a year in and year out better chance to compete for titles than Kobe. Duncan is the clear choice before both players IMO.
 
If/when Duncan gets his 5th.. go ahead and pencil him somewhere on that list behind MJ.
I don't understand the thinking behind this. To me, if you want to be regarded as one of the greatest ever in the NBA, you're going to need to have at least 1 or 2 championships. Otherwise, you'll neve be regarded in the very top tier, and I think that's right. But beyond that, what difference does it make? I mean, assuming you are an NBA fan, you've been watching Tim Duncan for several years now. You know what he's all about. Will it make that much of a difference in your opinion of him if/when San Antonio wins it this year or if they don't? I don't get that.
We may go overboard using titles to define players, but I think it makes sense.Sure, we know who these players are from watching on a daily/yearly basis, but it's what they do in the Playoffs that shapes and defines their career. Titles are the ultimate goal, so seeing Duncan win another certainly adds to his resume for greatness, especially being able to do it at this age on a team that plays so differently than how he's won his others.

As you allude, we're splitting hairs comparing super-elite players, so another title would be another important piece of information.

We've always used a player's ability to help a team win (as opposed to stuffing a stat sheet) as a way to compare players.

If Wilt had beaten Russell more, he'd probably be considered the best player ever. Instead, he's not in the Top 5 for many.

I think it's fine to move Duncan up the all-time list if he wins this year.
I would put this in the category as :goodposting:
 
If/when Duncan gets his 5th.. go ahead and pencil him somewhere on that list behind MJ.
I don't understand the thinking behind this. To me, if you want to be regarded as one of the greatest ever in the NBA, you're going to need to have at least 1 or 2 championships. Otherwise, you'll neve be regarded in the very top tier, and I think that's right. But beyond that, what difference does it make? I mean, assuming you are an NBA fan, you've been watching Tim Duncan for several years now. You know what he's all about. Will it make that much of a difference in your opinion of him if/when San Antonio wins it this year or if they don't? I don't get that.
Imo, he is already on this list - ahead of Kobe. If I were drafting an all time team, he is my 1.1.Objectively, I think the rings matter when you start splitting hairs among the best ever.
I have a problem with all of the best ever rankings. If you are simply ranking the greatest NBA players of all time, then team accomplishments are a tremendous indicator of that greatness. And I assume that every rankings follows this line of reasoning.However, I tend to think of best player ever in the following terms. If I could choose any players career from beginning to end for my franchise, who would I want? It obviously is far more difficult to try and separate a player's success from the teammates contributions. But when I do attempt to think in these terms, a player like Duncan doesn't get too much extra credit if the Spurs win a title this year. The fact that he is lucky to have the talent around him doesn't change the player he is right now. That said, Duncan is very high on my list. And Kobe isn't as high as his "NBA greatness" would indicate. For instance, Olajuwon would clearly be chosen before Kobe in these terms. I feel that Olajuwon gave his team a year in and year out better chance to compete for titles than Kobe. Duncan is the clear choice before both players IMO.
That's a pretty tough question, even if you limit it to post-Jordan players (not counting guys on fumes when Jordan retired).I'd go Duncan, then Shaq.

After that, I think it gets messy trying to decide between Kobe, Dirk, Garnett, and then maybe even some of the younger guys (LeBron, Howard, CP3, Durant).

 
42 points 0 assists

:bye:
LOL I had to look at the box score because I thought you were fishing. Too funny.
https://twitter.com/#!/BrianCardinalBrian Cardinal's tweet: 10 assists away from a double/double...

:lmao:

Laker fans hammered him after that comment:

who is Brian Cardinal?

only double double youve ever see was from @InNOut homie

u have more fouls than assist per game

and what the hell have you done?

Brian, I need to overcome some odds in life - how did you do it?

 
42 points 0 assists

:bye:
LOL I had to look at the box score because I thought you were fishing. Too funny.
https://twitter.com/#!/BrianCardinalBrian Cardinal's tweet: 10 assists away from a double/double...

:lmao:

Laker fans hammered him after that comment:

who is Brian Cardinal?

only double double youve ever see was from @InNOut homie

u have more fouls than assist per game

and what the hell have you done?

Brian, I need to overcome some odds in life - how did you do it?
Funny, but he's in the NBA and those dorks aren't. Only reply he needs.
 
'Gr00vus said:
More importantly, for next year can we have a neutral party running the NBA thread? I enjoy Skribbles's bitter banter as much as anyone, but he's had his fun and it's time to move on. Kev? Spears? No16? Polar? Anybody? Who's stepping up?
I'm a neutral party now? I must be slipping. I root against the Lakers at every opportunity I get. My dad and I once heckled a young Leonardo DiCaprio at an LA/SEA game. They are absolutely my favorite team in the league to hate.
 
Gotta suspend Pittman there. That's ridiculous. I'd just take him out for the payoffs and eliminate his eligibility for a ring since a game or two would mean nothing for a scrub.

 
That Pittman elbow was WWE material, multiple game suspension for that...it was premeditated and I think Stern should drop the hammer...I would consider a season ending suspension for that crap. This was several notches above what Haslem did IMO.

See what Chuck thinks

 
I can't imagine how demoralized Stevenson is these days. "Born Ready" getting mop up duty in a blow out at 21 years old. Can't imagine how badly his pride is hurt after 18 years of everyone telling him how great he is.

 
And Pittman was smirking after he did it...you have to send a loud message on this. The series unfortunately has become a street brawl. Refs are gonna have to issue everyone a technical before the next game even begins.

 
I can't imagine how demoralized Stevenson is these days. "Born Ready" getting mop up duty in a blow out at 21 years old. Can't imagine how badly his pride is hurt after 18 years of everyone telling him how great he is.
He's three years in to a four deal earning him an average of 750k per year, which means he's making more in four years than you will make in 20. I imagine he will sleep fine tonight.
 
They should run the flagrant by Pittman in back of when Spoelstra says none of the fouls were with malice...go watch that elbow Eric and then come back to the podium please.

 
Also, want to get all of you guys opinion on this: where does Gregg Popovich rank among the greatest coaches of all time? Because I'm wondering if he's not the very best, even better than Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach. Thoughts?
Phil Jackson is the greatest coach of all time. Controlling the egos of maniacs like Jordan and Kobe is an amazing management job. Popovich is also very great but it's hard for me to put anyone above Phil.
 
If/when Duncan gets his 5th.. go ahead and pencil him somewhere on that list behind MJ.
I don't understand the thinking behind this. To me, if you want to be regarded as one of the greatest ever in the NBA, you're going to need to have at least 1 or 2 championships. Otherwise, you'll neve be regarded in the very top tier, and I think that's right. But beyond that, what difference does it make? I mean, assuming you are an NBA fan, you've been watching Tim Duncan for several years now. You know what he's all about. Will it make that much of a difference in your opinion of him if/when San Antonio wins it this year or if they don't? I don't get that.
Another championship doesn't change my view of Duncan. The fact that he's playing at the level he is now, and how he has transitioned his role so seamlessly means more than the actual ring since he's proven he can win on the biggest stage already.
 
If Wilt had beaten Russell more, he'd probably be considered the best player ever. Instead, he's not in the Top 5 for many.
:confused: I dont think I have ever seen a list that has Wilt outside the top 5.
Jordan, magic, bird, Kareem, russel down?
Yes.
"The Book of Basketball" has him at 6 (behind Abraham's list).Obviously, Simmons is a Laker hater and Bird worshipper, but it doesn't totally wreak of homerism and he gives plenty of support of that position. He's not on a huge island (minority, sure, but not an island).
 
Gotta suspend Pittman there. That's ridiculous. I'd just take him out for the payoffs and eliminate his eligibility for a ring since a game or two would mean nothing for a scrub.
That Pittman elbow got the same call as Artest's "shove" last night.
I'm on board with you saying this was drastically worse. Artest had a run of the mill flagrant. Pittman needs to have a nice season, guy.
 
I feel like im fairly even about the whole thing and have watched enough basketball to have a valid opinion. I don't know how anyone could have anyone other than Jordan or Russell as 1. Magic, Kareem, bird, and wilt have to hold 4 of the next fiche spots. Put on wilt and thats a top 7 that is hard to argue with. Thereafter is Kobe, Duncan, shaq, and Hakeem with about 10 other guys with good arguments (west, Baylor, mchale, Cousy, etc.)

 
I feel like im fairly even about the whole thing and have watched enough basketball to have a valid opinion. I don't know how anyone could have anyone other than Jordan or Russell as 1. Magic, Kareem, bird, and wilt have to hold 4 of the next fiche spots. Put on wilt and thats a top 7 that is hard to argue with. Thereafter is Kobe, Duncan, shaq, and Hakeem with about 10 other guys with good arguments (west, Baylor, mchale, Cousy, etc.)
Sorry Abe but I would not have Wilt in my top 5, Kareem either. 1. JordanLarry BirdMagic JohnsonBill RussellKobe BryantShaqTim DuncanKareemHakeem...in some orderWilt played in an era where no one could really stand up to him, I just discount a lot of his years and I don't know that he would have been quite as elite had he played in the modern era of the NBA.
 
I feel like im fairly even about the whole thing and have watched enough basketball to have a valid opinion. I don't know how anyone could have anyone other than Jordan or Russell as 1. Magic, Kareem, bird, and wilt have to hold 4 of the next fiche spots. Put on wilt and thats a top 7 that is hard to argue with. Thereafter is Kobe, Duncan, shaq, and Hakeem with about 10 other guys with good arguments (west, Baylor, mchale, Cousy, etc.)
Sorry Abe but I would not have Wilt in my top 5, Kareem either. 1. JordanLarry BirdMagic JohnsonBill RussellKobe BryantShaqTim DuncanKareemHakeem...in some orderWilt played in an era where no one could really stand up to him, I just discount a lot of his years and I don't know that he would have been quite as elite had he played in the modern era of the NBA.
Interested in why you have Kobe so high and Kareem do low. Not arguing, truly interested.
 
I feel like im fairly even about the whole thing and have watched enough basketball to have a valid opinion. I don't know how anyone could have anyone other than Jordan or Russell as 1. Magic, Kareem, bird, and wilt have to hold 4 of the next fiche spots. Put on wilt and thats a top 7 that is hard to argue with. Thereafter is Kobe, Duncan, shaq, and Hakeem with about 10 other guys with good arguments (west, Baylor, mchale, Cousy, etc.)
Sorry Abe but I would not have Wilt in my top 5, Kareem either. 1. JordanLarry BirdMagic JohnsonBill RussellKobe BryantShaqTim DuncanKareemHakeem...in some orderWilt played in an era where no one could really stand up to him, I just discount a lot of his years and I don't know that he would have been quite as elite had he played in the modern era of the NBA.
Abe's list makes about 30 times more sense IMO.
 
Gotta suspend Pittman there. That's ridiculous. I'd just take him out for the payoffs and eliminate his eligibility for a ring since a game or two would mean nothing for a scrub.
That Pittman elbow got the same call as Artest's "shove" last night.
I'm on board with you saying this was drastically worse. Artest had a run of the mill flagrant. Pittman needs to have a nice season, guy.
Yea, not sure how he doesnt get ejected for that. I imagine he will miss a game or two now though
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top