|
|
NBA
Nov 12, 2014 18:53:14 GMT -5
Post by Let It🩸 on Nov 12, 2014 18:53:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 13, 2014 8:35:15 GMT -5
Post by sgtpeppr on Nov 13, 2014 8:35:15 GMT -5
GOAT! altho i do prefer bird... feel so lucky to have watched his career live. kids today dont understand just how dominant he was. it went far beyond mere stats. to put lebron or kobe in the same sentence as MJ is a joke...unless its to say how far off him they are. lebron could win 10 rings and he still wouldnt be in jordans league. just my opinion... |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 13, 2014 8:37:30 GMT -5
Post by Lennon2217 on Nov 13, 2014 8:37:30 GMT -5
I heard the NBA playoffs start next month.  |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 13, 2014 13:24:39 GMT -5
Post by Let It🩸 on Nov 13, 2014 13:24:39 GMT -5
GOAT! altho i do prefer bird... feel so lucky to have watched his career live. kids today dont understand just how dominant he was. it went far beyond mere stats. to put lebron or kobe in the same sentence as MJ is a joke...unless its to say how far off him they are. lebron could win 10 rings and he still wouldnt be in jordans league. just my opinion... Jordan is the best and eva's probably fucked him. God bless. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 14, 2014 9:41:02 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Sternumman on Nov 14, 2014 9:41:02 GMT -5
GOAT! altho i do prefer bird... feel so lucky to have watched his career live. kids today dont understand just how dominant he was. it went far beyond mere stats. to put lebron or kobe in the same sentence as MJ is a joke...unless its to say how far off him they are. lebron could win 10 rings and he still wouldnt be in jordans league.just my opinion... That's silly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
NBA
Nov 14, 2014 9:49:40 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2014 9:49:40 GMT -5
I really wish the clippers of the 80 s and the sixers of today can play , gotta be the 2 worst teams of all time. I mean these guys suck I remember the clippers sucking bad , , the Warriors to , even the six er's in another era , but this is just awful
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
NBA
Nov 14, 2014 9:53:48 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2014 9:53:48 GMT -5
GOAT! altho i do prefer bird... feel so lucky to have watched his career live. kids today dont understand just how dominant he was. it went far beyond mere stats. to put lebron or kobe in the same sentence as MJ is a joke...unless its to say how far off him they are. lebron could win 10 rings and he still wouldnt be in jordans league.just my opinion... That's silly. Is it over the top ? Yes. , But I hear the point , there 2 different guys , Lebron is more physical , but he will never be a pure shooter or super free throw shooter which you have to be to get the ball at the end of the game Lebron is amazing , all time great in.my book , but I'd take JORDAN every day over him for the shooting and free throw factor at end of game , and if you took Lebron it wouldn't shock me I don't think its a huge gap , I do think JORDAN is better in team basketball because you could go to him down the stretch more with confidence , jmo And yet there are people who will still take OSCAR Robertson. So go figure |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 14, 2014 10:28:19 GMT -5
Post by sgtpeppr on Nov 14, 2014 10:28:19 GMT -5
GOAT! altho i do prefer bird... feel so lucky to have watched his career live. kids today dont understand just how dominant he was. it went far beyond mere stats. to put lebron or kobe in the same sentence as MJ is a joke...unless its to say how far off him they are. lebron could win 10 rings and he still wouldnt be in jordans league.just my opinion... That's silly. a slight exaggeration to make my point is all... only mentioned because thats the main argument folks have as to why MJ is above lebron, which in my book isnt the case. for me rings dont have alot to do with whos better. if they did you got about 10 players ahead of jordan. he was just on a far higher level to anyone else playing at the time. his winning mentality had a lot to do with it. you wouldnt see lebron play a final like 'the flu game'... |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 14, 2014 10:32:57 GMT -5
Post by sgtpeppr on Nov 14, 2014 10:32:57 GMT -5
Is it over the top ? Yes. , But I hear the point , there 2 different guys , Lebron is more physical , but he will never be a pure shooter or super free throw shooter which you have to be to get the ball at the end of the game Lebron is amazing , all time great in.my book , but I'd take JORDAN every day over him for the shooting and free throw factor at end of game , and if you took Lebron it wouldn't shock me I don't think its a huge gap , I do think JORDAN is better in team basketball because you could go to him down the stretch more with confidence , jmo And yet there are people who will still take OSCAR Robertson. So go figure i dont agree but i can see where those peeps are coming from. hard to pass up stats like that. as i said earlier, id almost be inclined to take bird ahead of the GOAT...almost. side note: along with MJs shooting/free throws/clutch plays he was an amazing defender. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
NBA
Nov 14, 2014 10:55:26 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2014 10:55:26 GMT -5
Is it over the top ? Yes. , But I hear the point , there 2 different guys , Lebron is more physical , but he will never be a pure shooter or super free throw shooter which you have to be to get the ball at the end of the game Lebron is amazing , all time great in.my book , but I'd take JORDAN every day over him for the shooting and free throw factor at end of game , and if you took Lebron it wouldn't shock me I don't think its a huge gap , I do think JORDAN is better in team basketball because you could go to him down the stretch more with confidence , jmo And yet there are people who will still take OSCAR Robertson. So go figure i dont agree but i can see where those peeps are coming from. hard to pass up stats like that. as i said earlier, id almost be inclined to take bird ahead of the GOAT...almost. side note: along with MJs shooting/free throws/clutch plays he was an amazing defender. I only caught the big o in 72 when he was old ....... His stats are ridiculous and he was 6ft 5 i take MJ. over all others to start team no doubt ....I know centers are always first why bowie taken ahead oh him ....that was smart  |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 14, 2014 11:46:40 GMT -5
Post by sgtpeppr on Nov 14, 2014 11:46:40 GMT -5
i dont agree but i can see where those peeps are coming from. hard to pass up stats like that. as i said earlier, id almost be inclined to take bird ahead of the GOAT...almost. side note: along with MJs shooting/free throws/clutch plays he was an amazing defender. I only caught the big o in 72 when he was old ....... His stats are ridiculous and he was 6ft 5 i take MJ. over all others to start team no doubt ....I know centers are always first why bowie taken ahead oh him ....that was smart it sounds ridiculous today but thats only due to hindsight. back then portland needed a centre and had picked up drexler a season or two before so theoretically they didnt need MJ and werent willing to push aside the glide for him...plus they couldnt know what he would become. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 15, 2014 10:28:44 GMT -5
Post by Sternumman on Nov 15, 2014 10:28:44 GMT -5
Is it over the top ? Yes. , But I hear the point , there 2 different guys , Lebron is more physical , but he will never be a pure shooter or super free throw shooter which you have to be to get the ball at the end of the game Lebron is amazing , all time great in.my book , but I'd take J ORDAN every day over him for the shooting and free throw factor at end of game , and if you took Lebron it wouldn't shock me I don't think its a huge gap , I do think JORDAN is better in team basketball because you could go to him down the stretch more with confidence , jmo And yet there are people who will still take OSCAR Robertson. So go figure I agree. I'd take Jordan over anyone but if Lebron won 10 he'd have to be considered the greatest ever. The FT's are so underrated. They should be free points and to seee LBJ and Wade only shoot 75% is mind boggling. They should be close to 85%. Lebron does shoot better from the floor than people give him credit for though. He's increased his fg% every year of his career. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 15, 2014 10:35:04 GMT -5
Post by Sternumman on Nov 15, 2014 10:35:04 GMT -5
I only caught the big o in 72 when he was old ....... His stats are ridiculous and he was 6ft 5 i take MJ. over all others to start team no doubt ....I know centers are always first why bowie taken ahead oh him ....that was smart it sounds ridiculous today but thats only due to hindsight. back then portland needed a centre and had picked up drexler a season or two before so theoretically they didnt need MJ and werent willing to push aside the glide for him...plus they couldnt know what he would become. People forget MJ was selected 3rd. Hakeem was the first pick. Got to feel bad for Portland and thier history of injured centers. Walton, Oden, Bowie. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 15, 2014 10:58:19 GMT -5
Post by Sternumman on Nov 15, 2014 10:58:19 GMT -5
a slight exaggeration to make my point is all... only mentioned because thats the main argument folks have as to why MJ is above lebron, which in my book isnt the case. for me rings dont have alot to do with whos better. if they did you got about 10 players ahead of jordan. he was just on a far higher level to anyone else playing at the time. his winning mentality had a lot to do with it. you wouldnt see lebron play a final like 'the flu game'... 10 players do have more rings but 9 of them are from the Russell Celtics. There was only 8 teams in the league and you could win the championship by winning just 7 games. Russel was the greatest winner but I dont think those teams could compete with any modern day champion. I think rings do matter when you compare players. Obviously championships are a team accomplishment but over the last 30 years only the 2004 Pistons won a ring without an all time great. Winning rings prove you can beat the best competition at the height of competition. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 16, 2014 22:06:21 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Sternumman on Nov 16, 2014 22:06:21 GMT -5
Anything positive I said about the Heat two weeks ago, I take it all back.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 16, 2014 22:18:43 GMT -5
Post by sgtpeppr on Nov 16, 2014 22:18:43 GMT -5
a slight exaggeration to make my point is all... only mentioned because thats the main argument folks have as to why MJ is above lebron, which in my book isnt the case. for me rings dont have alot to do with whos better. if they did you got about 10 players ahead of jordan. he was just on a far higher level to anyone else playing at the time. his winning mentality had a lot to do with it. you wouldnt see lebron play a final like 'the flu game'... 10 players do have more rings but 9 of them are from the Russell Celtics. There was only 8 teams in the league and you could win the championship by winning just 7 games. Russel was the greatest winner but I dont think those teams could compete with any modern day champion. I think rings do matter when you compare players. Obviously championships are a team accomplishment but over the last 30 years only the 2004 Pistons won a ring without an all time great. Winning rings prove you can beat the best competition at the height of competition. yeah, id agree that rings do play a part in comparisons, just that the amount of them doesnt necessarily mean a player is better/worse. as long as you got a couple, thats enough i think. theres to many other factors involved in winning one for it to be attributed to a single player. like you said, its a team accomplishment. you need a solid back-up to the great. otherwise you could start arguing pippen over the admiral or hakeem...which im sure some people think is vaild. i mean robert horry has like 7 or something. id attribute MVP winners to greatness as much as rings. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 17, 2014 16:34:33 GMT -5
Post by Let It🩸 on Nov 17, 2014 16:34:33 GMT -5
He's, uh, really good...  God bless. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 19, 2014 13:17:51 GMT -5
Post by MG on Nov 19, 2014 13:17:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 19, 2014 17:36:09 GMT -5
via mobile
MG likes this
Post by Sternumman on Nov 19, 2014 17:36:09 GMT -5
Never used it. Have used stubhub plenty of times with no issues. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 19, 2014 18:02:20 GMT -5
Post by Let It🩸 on Nov 19, 2014 18:02:20 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
NBA
Nov 19, 2014 18:04:27 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 18:04:27 GMT -5
a slight exaggeration to make my point is all... only mentioned because thats the main argument folks have as to why MJ is above lebron, which in my book isnt the case. for me rings dont have alot to do with whos better. if they did you got about 10 players ahead of jordan. he was just on a far higher level to anyone else playing at the time. his winning mentality had a lot to do with it. you wouldnt see lebron play a final like 'the flu game'... 10 players do have more rings but 9 of them are from the Russell Celtics. There was only 8 teams in the league and you could win the championship by winning just 7 games. Russel was the greatest winner but I dont think those teams could compete with any modern day champion. I think rings do matter when you compare players. Obviously championships are a team accomplishment but over the last 30 years only the 2004 Pistons won a ring without an all time great. Winning rings prove you can beat the best competition at the height of competition. Im a bit confused , you say rings matter when comparing players , but acknowledge celtics with Russell ,Cousy only had to win 7 games  I don't think bob cousy is better than magic or isah because he played when you only had to win conference to make finals ? Some players just fall into rings like robert horry . Look at football should really great players be penalized in all time stature cause they played in 70 s when steelers were a dynasty ? Or 60 s when packs dominated ? Take staubach no steelers he has 4 rings ,he played well in those games should he be put under another qb who gets more or as many. Does eli manning rank with roger staubach because he won 2 as well Not in my book I think you take individuals SEPERATE from teams because eras are different take hockey if you were great in 80 s but not on islanders or Edmonton you didn't win a cup unless you plsyed for MONTREAL and Calgary who won 1 each in that decAde , isles and oulers won the rest , you can't judge great plsyers with rings imo , because to many eras had dynasty's Edit. Im confused Sternumman in the point ......are U agreeing about titles not mattering or not ? It's a tough call eirher way |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
NBA
Nov 19, 2014 18:15:20 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 18:15:20 GMT -5
I think championships so character no question ,, but in team sports i DONT think having more breaks a tie with who you percieve is better , I think magic is better than bird , yet people will argue bird is better , yet head to head as far as I see magic won the ncaa vs Larry , and they met in 3 finals magic won 2 , or was it 4 and he won 3 ? I forget , yet to this day people will argue bird was better .... Well not if you go by titles or ncaa titles I think magic is better , but a lot of times im in minority there
|
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 20, 2014 1:04:05 GMT -5
Post by Cast on Nov 20, 2014 1:04:05 GMT -5
A tough bounce for LeBron, but the Cavs played decently. It was kinda a weird game for both teams. Odd leading contributors with Diaw and Varejao. Love has to get more touches for the Cavs. Varejao isn't gonna play that well consistently either.
Tough loss for the hornets too. A really lucky buzz beater by the Pacers.
|
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 21, 2014 20:26:24 GMT -5
Post by Sternumman on Nov 21, 2014 20:26:24 GMT -5
10 players do have more rings but 9 of them are from the Russell Celtics. There was only 8 teams in the league and you could win the championship by winning just 7 games. Russel was the greatest winner but I dont think those teams could compete with any modern day champion. I think rings do matter when you compare players. Obviously championships are a team accomplishment but over the last 30 years only the 2004 Pistons won a ring without an all time great. Winning rings prove you can beat the best competition at the height of competition. Im a bit confused , you say rings matter when comparing players , but acknowledge celtics with Russell ,Cousy only had to win 7 games I don't think bob cousy is better than magic or isah because he played when you only had to win conference to make finals ? Some players just fall into rings like robert horry . Look at football should really great players be penalized in all time stature cause they played in 70 s when steelers were a dynasty ? Or 60 s when packs dominated ? Take staubach no steelers he has 4 rings ,he played well in those games should he be put under another qb who gets more or as many. Does eli manning rank with roger staubach because he won 2 as well Not in my book I think you take individuals SEPERATE from teams because eras are different take hockey if you were great in 80 s but not on islanders or Edmonton you didn't win a cup unless you plsyed for MONTREAL and Calgary who won 1 each in that decAde , isles and oulers won the rest , you can't judge great plsyers with rings imo , because to many eras had dynasty's Edit. Im confused Sternumman in the point ......are U agreeing about titles not mattering or not ? It's a tough call eirher way I think they matter. Malone, Barkley, Webber all great forwards but Duncan has 5 rings. It's a team accomplishment but great players win championships. You have to be the number one or two guy for them to matter. Horry has more rings than Jordan but nobody is going to debate who is better. In the NFL Eli has more rings then Peyton but nobody would argue he's better than big brother. However compare Peyton to Brady. Peyton might be the best passer to ever play the game but Brady won more big games than Peyton. |
|
|
|
NBA
Nov 21, 2014 20:31:49 GMT -5
Post by Let It🩸 on Nov 21, 2014 20:31:49 GMT -5
I love those Wizards uniforms.....I, uh, still don't love those Cavaliers uniforms.
God bless.
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5