Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 46 to 54 of 54
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,113
    [QUOTE=mightybosstone;34022152]



    The only benefit you get from waiting is longevity. But, for me, longevity is one of the least important barometers when I compare the all-time greats.

    /QUOTE]

    Damn, you must have Bill Walton in your top 10 all time then

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,113
    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post

    My point is that you're acting like something dramatically changed from the point when Nash got his second MVP and the point when he retired. It didn't.
    Also this is such a bad take. Even ignoring the fact that Nash had arguably the two best individual seasons of his career in 2007 and 2010 (a team that has a top 5 all time rOrtg), Nash proved a ton after his second MVP. They moved Marion for fat Shaq, forcing Nash to play with a more traditional lumbering center and they still netted the second best offense in the league. Mike D'antoni left after 08 and what happened after that? They the second best offense in 09, and an all time great offense in 2010.

    So after dispelling the Amar'e dependency myth in 06 Nash went on to dispel all the other myths about his impact as well. You can't write off longevity. There's legitimate value in being able to mold and adapt to the league as it changes, as your teammates change, as your coaches change.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    48,457
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    The thing with Kawhi is that from '17 - '21 he's legitimately been one of the best playoff scorers in NBA history, so it's like, how do you value that vs Giannis's 2-way impact? Kawhi's defensive peak was no doubt in 2016, and while he's still been a plus defender since then his net impact is more driven on how you value that step up on offense come postseason time. Similar to Hakeem or Reggie in that regard.

    Their longevity is closer than I thought it was the more I think about it. Both guys have had roughly 4 MVP type seasons in terms of impact, with Kawhi being a clear top 50 player in at least a couple of the seasons preceding 2017. Giannis similar in that regards, where he was a clear all star in 2017, and top 75 player in 2016.

    I think Giannis vs Kawhi is super close, and honestly Kawhi's injuries might make me lean Giannis. It'll be really interesting to see how Giannis's career unfolds from here, because it definitely feels like that top 20 range is realistic. But his play style will also take a toll on his body, so we'll see how long his prime lasts.
    Kawhi from his final Spurs and Raptors seasons is the best hes ever played, peak basketball efficiency vs elite teams and aesthetically, the closest I've seen to MJ since Kobe. Only he had the larger hands like MJ and the added beef to check Giannis whereas MJ would have given that job up to one of his DPOY caliber teammates and Kobe could never dream of clamping down such a physical MVP. His 2 Clipper seasons are still around that level but riddled by injuries and a decline in defensive ability.

    Those 2 seasons tho, Ill take that over anyone not named lebron this decade
    Last edited by Chronz; 07-24-2021 at 02:47 PM.
    Random Highlight of the Month: * RARE - Zo DUNKS on Shaq *

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    48,457
    delete
    Last edited by Chronz; 07-24-2021 at 02:46 PM.
    Random Highlight of the Month: * RARE - Zo DUNKS on Shaq *

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,201
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    It’s not fair, but it’s accurate. They may be far more skilled if they’d played today, but on the flip side their massive lack of athleticism in comparison would balance it out. I respect they built the foundation, but that’s why they get a “for their time” qualifier.
    If you start a sports league now, even with all the advancements we have in player health and training, the first generations of guys in that sport aren't going to be as good as the later generations simply because they're the ones figuring it out having the game get built around their failures and successes.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    48,457
    Quote Originally Posted by ciaban2.0 View Post
    If you start a sports league now, even with all the advancements we have in player health and training, the first generations of guys in that sport aren't going to be as good as the later generations simply because they're the ones figuring it out having the game get built around their failures and successes.
    I think we can all agree with that, its just that theres also a time when the shift becomes too drastic, the evolutionary leap forward too great to compare and a wider range of prospects to choose from. Like there are players from the 50's who could play in the 60's, players in the 60's who could compete vs 70'S/80's players and so on and so forth but the further back you go, the less translative players there are. This is why those stars have a bigger impact than they otherwise would in a more level playing field.

    I also refuse to accept the sport pre-shot clock as anything resembling basketball and thats before we get into segregation limiting the talent.
    Random Highlight of the Month: * RARE - Zo DUNKS on Shaq *

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,201
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post

    Damn, you must have Bill Walton in your top 10 all time then
    LoL every time I see this post it makes me laugh.
    Last edited by ciaban2.0; 07-25-2021 at 10:11 PM.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    5,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    I think we can all agree with that, its just that theres also a time when the shift becomes too drastic, the evolutionary leap forward too great to compare and a wider range of prospects to choose from. Like there are players from the 50's who could play in the 60's, players in the 60's who could compete vs 70'S/80's players and so on and so forth but the further back you go, the less translative players there are. This is why those stars have a bigger impact than they otherwise would in a more level playing field.

    I also refuse to accept the sport pre-shot clock as anything resembling basketball and that's before we get into segregation limiting the talent.
    It resembles basketball,but it's just such a different game, it's like Comparing Cricket to Baseball.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    13,106
    Quote Originally Posted by ciaban2.0 View Post
    If you start a sports league now, even with all the advancements we have in player health and training, the first generations of guys in that sport aren't going to be as good as the later generations simply because they're the ones figuring it out having the game get built around their failures and successes.
    Thats very true. As guys start to train specifically for the skillet your sport requires, you start to unlock the efficiencies of the design of the sport. With the amount of analytics and data collection tools, it would happen faster now, but you're still right.

    Baseball is the prime example of that. When the sport started, it was common sense to have the guy who is the best at pitching throw as many pitches as possible. But it wasn't until more recently that teams have discovered that in order to do that, guys can't give 100% on every pitch. So what's better, your best pitcher throwing pitches at day 90% of his best ability a multiple slightly lesser pitchers throwing at 100% the entire time. And that became even more prevalent with modern training techniques and health measures that made the difference between the best pitchers and the slightly worse pitchers even smaller.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

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