Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 16 of 20 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 240 of 293
  1. #226
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    Then why was he a cited reason for why Pippen led that MJ-less team further than the other guys mentioned? Donít worry about it, though. I know the answer.
    I said he had an excellent coach. He did, Phil was not a great Xs and Os coach, but he was still a great overall coach.

  2. #227
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,849
    Big Moves, can you explain how Pippen being passed up for All-NBA teams by Vin Baker or Larry Johnson is any different than Drexler being passed up for All-NBA teams by Dale Ellis or Drazen Petrovic?

  3. #228
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    Nope. You got caught. Red-handed and we all saw it. Your narrative changing caught up with you and now youíre trying to do what you naturally do and weasel your way out of it.
    Not at all man. Like I said, it's pretty clear in the post that you cited and in the direct follow up post and in a post I made several days ago. Why would I say that he belongs in the discussion for GOAT coach if I didnt think he was an excellent coach?

  4. #229
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    You literally said that you havent seen any posts in good faith, indicating that you are not responding in good faith lol
    not responding in good faith and don't respond in good faith are two different things. And you're the one talking about nuance and context?

  5. #230
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Big Moves, can you explain how Pippen being passed up for All-NBA teams by Vin Baker or Larry Johnson is any different than Drexler being passed up for All-NBA teams by Dale Ellis or Drazen Petrovic?
    I was getting to this, but there's a lot of you to respond to (you guys also like to team up on dissenting opinions), but I'm getting to this. You're making a bit of a jump here. Yes, I am arguing that Pippen was not a superstar and using his inconsistent All-NBA awards to support that there was at least not a consensus on him being a superstar by him being passed over for guys who were clearly not superstars.

    With Drexler, he was never a champion, and as far as I can tell, he made all-nba teams when he was on a contender. However, my argument for why Drexler and Ewing were on different levels than Pippen was not predicated on being selected to All-NBA teams. I was simply noting that it's odd that Pippen would be considered a superstar and be a perennial champion and still get passed over for guys who were clearly not superstars and who were not on winning teams (or at least were on teams that were not as winning as Pippen's).
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 06-16-2021 at 04:30 PM.

  6. #231
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    not responding in good faith and don't respond in good faith are two different things. And you're the one talking about nuance and context?
    Well you're responding to me and you're also saying that my posts arent in good faith. It's not really much of a leap there to say you're not responding in good faith based on what you've already posted. Nuance and context doesnt mean something is in bad faith. Just about all of my views on everything have a ton of nuance. I don't generally have too many views that I would say are absolutes. If you ask me my view on something, the response will almost always involve the context and circumstances.

  7. #232
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I was getting to this, but there's a lot of you to respond to (you guys also like to team up on dissenting opinions), but I'm getting to this. You're making a bit of a jump here. Yes, I am arguing that Pippen was not a superstar and using his inconsistent All-NBA awards to support that there was at least not a consensus on him being a superstar by him being passed over for guys who were clearly not superstars.

    With Drexler, he was never a champion, and as far as I can tell, he made all-nba teams when he was on a contender. However, my argument for why Drexler and Ewing were on different levels than Pippen was not predicated on being selected to All-NBA teams. I was simply noting that it's odd that Pippen would be considered a superstar and be a perennial champion and still get passed over for guys who were clearly not superstars and who were not on winning teams.
    This is what I'm talking about. You can't say your argument for Drexler being on a different level is not predicated on being passed over for All-NBA teams and then say however it is an argument for why Pippen was not a superstar. If you want consistency, either it is applicable or it's not, because it applies to both.

    So in response to you saying it's odd that Pippen would be considered a superstar and get passed over for guys who are clearly not superstars I'd counter by saying it's equally as odd that Drexler would be a considered a superstar while being the #1 option on a perennial title contending team and get passed over for guys who are clearly not superstars.

    This is what I'm talking about. There's no way your post can be in good faith. If it was, you would acknowledge you are using completely contradictory logic. Instead you double down. Contextually, it gets even worse because if Drexler were so superior to Pippen as you claim he definitely shouldn't be getting passed over in the same fashion as Pippen.

  8. #233
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I didnt say those other guys were superstars. If you remember our discussion, I said they were borderline guys, much like Pippen was (meaning in between stars and superstars but not quite). Young Kobe doesnt belong there (at least not after 2000, a case can be made in 2000 that he does). I've explained that Pippen never came close to reaching what Kobe did in 01 or any point thereafter. The most comparable season is probably Pippen's 94 season to Kobe's 00 season, but then again, Pippen didn't win a title in 94 and Kobe was still moderately better...after that. it stops being comparable (but again going back to rehashing the same points is pointless).

    I focus on that short term period, because that was the short term period we were referring to in the discussion you are referencing. I was making the comparison between Love in minny. Yes, after that he dropped off, but injuries were a big part, as were playing a completely different role and being the 3rd option, as were probably his mental health issues. That basically becomes a hindsight change of opinion though. In 2014, that is not how we saw Love or at least not how I saw him or how most others saw him (it seems you weren't a big fan and maybe you saw something others didnt, since you saw him play nightly, but the general perception was that this guy was going to be an amazing player and had he just kept doing the same thing he would have).
    Except that you call it not comparable while in other arguments distorting what is similar. Itís always in the same ways. Yes Kobe does belong there due to his role and not leading the team just like them even if he was a bit better than any as noted so is Scottie to Kevin love by a similar/larger amount. Love never carried a team to the playoffs nor did others but you Scottie in one year had that season and made 2nd round who knows if he was built around long term like others what happens. You base it off the twisted looks at stats or rankings ignoring full context for cherry picked short time for example or the poor record of lakers next to Kobe without shaq and just say despite them clearly not being that guy that he could have been. Most are basing it on full context and overall rankings not a singles season here or there to make a point. You have to do this because of the obvious inconsistencies in your narratives.





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #234
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    This is what I'm talking about. You can't say your argument for Drexler being on a different level is not predicated on being passed over for All-NBA teams and then say however it is an argument for why Pippen was not a superstar. If you want consistency, either it is applicable or it's not, because it applies to both.

    So in response to you saying it's odd that Pippen would be considered a superstar and get passed over for guys who are clearly not superstars I'd counter by saying it's equally as odd that Drexler would be a considered a superstar while being the #1 option on a perennial title contending team and get passed over for guys who are clearly not superstars.

    This is what I'm talking about. There's no way your post can be in good faith. If it was, you would acknowledge you are using completely contradictory logic. Instead you double down. Contextually, it gets even worse because if Drexler were so superior to Pippen as you claim he definitely shouldn't be getting passed over in the same fashion as Pippen.
    But my position is not that Pippen is not a superstar because he was passed over sometimes, but more that it doesn't seem like he was widely considered a superstar because he was widely passed over for guys who weren't superstars (this point merely refers to the public opinion of Pippen more than him being or not being a superstar).

    I agree that this issue would also pertain to the idea of whether Drexler was or wasn't considered a superstar, but that's not the reason I was saying that they are or arent superstars. Drexler was also really only on a contender for about 3 years or so...then with the rockets, but by this point he had declined a decent amount. I would agree that the Rockets version of Drexler was comparable to Pippen, but I don't think the Blazers version was (at least from about 87-92)

  10. #235
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Except that you call it not comparable while in other arguments distorting what is similar. Itís always in the same ways. Yes Kobe does belong there due to his role and not leading the team just like them even if he was a bit better than any as noted so is Scottie to Kevin love by a similar/larger amount. Love never carried a team to the playoffs nor did others but you Scottie in one year had that season and made 2nd round who knows if he was built around long term like others what happens. You base it off the twisted looks at stats or rankings ignoring full context for cherry picked short time for example or the poor record of lakers next to Kobe without shaq and just say despite them clearly not being that guy that he could have been. Most are basing it on full context and overall rankings not a singles season here or there to make a point. You have to do this because of the obvious inconsistencies in your narratives.





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    We've had this discussion man and we disagree lol. There really is no need to rehash it. We would literally be saying the same things that we spent a good chunk of time already saying. I know your position and you know mine. We don't agree and it's too a large extent because I think Kobe from 01 onward was a top 3 player in the league and was comparable to shaq and so even though I think shaq was better, I think it was very close. You think it was many years later until Kobe became an all-time great, whereas I think Kobe's game more just matured and changed but how much better he was was fairly minimal. We're not going to agree on this though and this isn't the point of this thread. Not everything I respond to has to be about Kobe and LBJ lol

  11. #236
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The 6
    Posts
    29,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Ehh, yes and no. A key difference from "super teams" from previous eras was that there were several super teams at any one time. Because there were fewer teams, the talent was often concentrated in the top teams and so there were usually several teams that were comparable throughout the league at any given moment. In today's NBA, when guys collude to team up, it creates a power imbalance because there isn't really anyone else with comparable talent and so it creates a massive competitive advantage for today's super teams. Looking at super teams over the past decade, there's usually only been one any given season (2017 was the only exception with the warriors and Cavs). This issue wasn't anywhere near as much of a problem with the super teams of the past that were formed more organically and usually over time.
    It doesn't matter super teams are super teams. The point was that they've always existed. Kareem wanted to play for the Lakers and pushed his way there. How is that any different then what players do today.. Its like a double standard for players and teams today for some reason. Its not the players fault the league has expanded. The league wants to make money that's why they expand and the talent gets spread out but once players become eligible they will go to their desired teams.

    As a fan, I have no problem with it at all. Why wouldn't we want to see Lebrons Heatles, Or Golden States big 4, or Bostons big 4. Any basketball fan who says they didn't tune in to watch those teams is a flat out liar. Any one who says they dont want to see the Nets today is not going to convince me that its more fun to watch the Raptors. Super teams are fun to watch, simply put.

    You know what I cant stand watching, is when a guy like KG spends 9-10 seasons in Minnesota with a crap supporting cast. That was not only boring but a waste. Or in more recent times, how many Wizards games have you tune in to, dont you think Beal is wasting his career on the Wizards, would you be mad if he teamed up with two other stars to form another super team.. I sure as hell wouldn't.

  12. #237
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    12,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    We've had this discussion man and we disagree lol. There really is no need to rehash it. We would literally be saying the same things that we spent a good chunk of time already saying. I know your position and you know mine. We don't agree and it's too a large extent because I think Kobe from 01 onward was a top 3 player in the league and was comparable to shaq and so even though I think shaq was better, I think it was very close. You think it was many years later until Kobe became an all-time great, whereas I think Kobe's game more just matured and changed but how much better he was was fairly minimal. We're not going to agree on this though and this isn't the point of this thread. Not everything I respond to has to be about Kobe and LBJ lol
    Well we agree but the point is how drastically far off you seem to be from rating certain guys compared to most and the way you justify it is often more distorting certain cherry picked pieces (while rejecting more overall evidence towards others points regularly often using same types of stats or rankings you have).

    Others don't have that same issues in their arguments often times. The points made today were similar to what was going on in that thread and the reason you make them to most is pretty obvious. It all seems to hinge on your need to define superstar a certain way to fit that main narrative going back to the thread. It is similar conversation but that's what was already going on when I came in.

  13. #238
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    It doesn't matter super teams are super teams. The point was that they've always existed. Kareem wanted to play for the Lakers and pushed his way there. How is that any different then what players do today.. Its like a double standard for players and teams today for some reason. Its not the players fault the league has expanded. The league wants to make money that's why they expand and the talent gets spread out but once players become eligible they will go to their desired teams.

    As a fan, I have no problem with it at all. Why wouldn't we want to see Lebrons Heatles, Or Golden States big 4, or Bostons big 4. Any basketball fan who says they didn't tune in to watch those teams is a flat out liar. Any one who says they dont want to see the Nets today is not going to convince me that its more fun to watch the Raptors. Super teams are fun to watch, simply put.

    You know what I cant stand watching, is when a guy like KG spends 9-10 seasons in Minnesota with a crap supporting cast. That was not only boring but a waste. Or in more recent times, how many Wizards games have you tune in to, dont you think Beal is wasting his career on the Wizards, would you be mad if he teamed up with two other stars to form another super team.. I sure as hell wouldn't.
    I think it's fine when there are multiple super teams and those teams play each other. That's actually great when that happens. The issue is when there is only one super team, then I think it's bad for the league. I definitely didn't like watching the KD warriors because they had such an unfair advantage. Sure, if there was another super team that would've been fine. There were the cavs, but they broke up after 2017 and so then it was basically a few years of one team being way better than everyone else.

  14. #239
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,355
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Well we agree but the point is how drastically far off you seem to be from rating certain guys compared to most and the way you justify it is often more distorting certain cherry picked pieces (while rejecting more overall evidence towards others points regularly often using same types of stats or rankings you have).

    Others don't have that same issues in their arguments often times. The points made today were similar to what was going on in that thread and the reason you make them to most is pretty obvious. It all seems to hinge on your need to define superstar a certain way to fit that main narrative going back to the thread. It is similar conversation but that's what was already going on when I came in.
    It's not that at all man. I basically define a superstar as a player who is highly potent offensively and can warp the floor in a way that other teams have to double and triple team them and their own team can run an entire offense around and which the opposing team has to game plan their entire defense around. Pippen was never that, imo and was never remotely close to being that. I think guys like Drexler and Ewing did have this quality (especially Ewing). If a player has this quality and can check a few other boxes (e.g., good rebounder, good defender, etc.) I generally consider them superstars. There might be some randomly exceptions here and there but for the most part, this is what I'm considering when I say a player is a superstar and this is also the part of the game that I consider to be the most impactful.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 06-16-2021 at 05:21 PM.

  15. #240
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    41,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    But my position is not that Pippen is not a superstar because he was passed over sometimes, but more that it doesn't seem like he was widely considered a superstar because he was widely passed over for guys who weren't superstars (this point merely refers to the public opinion of Pippen more than him being or not being a superstar).

    I agree that this issue would also pertain to the idea of whether Drexler was or wasn't considered a superstar, but that's not the reason I was saying that they are or arent superstars. Drexler was also really only on a contender for about 3 years or so...then with the rockets, but by this point he had declined a decent amount. I would agree that the Rockets version of Drexler was comparable to Pippen, but I don't think the Blazers version was (at least from about 87-92)
    And again, should we assume that Drexler wasn't widely considered a superstar because he was widely passed over for guys who weren't superstars? Even the years you cite Drexler as being clearly better than Pippen, he didn't even make the All-NBA team in 87 or 89, and only made the 3rd team in 90. Going by All-NBA teams, public perception was that Drexler was also not a superstar.

    And this is again what I'm talking about, here is you talking about Drexler earlier in the thread:

    Both Ewing and Drexler led their teams annually to top seeds in their conferences (or contention for a top seed) and they made multiple deep runs.

    And now it's well Drexler was only really on a contender for 3 years. It's not just about the words, it's about the tenor of your posts. The earlier tenor was that Drexler was constantly having Portland as a contender or top seed in the league and now you're bashing how small a time period he was on contenders to justify his not making All-NBA teams.

    You literally pick and choose how you perceive players and situations to bolster whatever argument you're making at the time.

Page 16 of 20 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •