NBA Regular Season & Playoffs 2019-20 Thread

ButtersSuki

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

Nobody ever enters these conversations with the intention of changing their mind. Anyone entering it has already decided who they feel is the better player.

If you can accept that anyone discussing it is effectively drawing a red line which the other party can't convince them to depart from then you can simply view it as two sides delivering points and showing a knowledge of the subject.

You don't have to agree with them but one side might show an objectively more well rounded knowledge of the topic.

Obviously that doesn't happen all the time and it's a topic which can plummet quite quickly but reading/watching the right people discussing it can be interesting no matter who is your own personal preference.

Especially 4-10 year olds, they are known for their critical analysis, objective reasoning and logical and esp. for their accurate recall of events from the time
they were children 29- 22 years later.

xgronkjabv6pcl

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Especially 4-10 year olds, they are known for their critical analysis, objective reasoning and logical and esp. for their accurate recall of events from the time
they were children 29- 22 years later.

I think the back and forth between you guys on who saw what when they were a given age makes the conversation seem as though it's being had by those currently between the ages of 4-10.

It's fair to say in the current era that far more archival basketball is available to the younger generation than what someone 50+ could have consumed in real time.

I certainly dont feel age is something that adds much weight to a person's argument given what is available today. It's not much of a counter point for me. That's just my opinion.

ButtersSuki

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

I think the back and forth between you guys on who saw what when they were a given age makes the conversation seem as though it's being had by those currently between the ages of 4-10.

It's fair to say in the current era that far more archival basketball is available to the younger generation than what someone 50+ could have consumed in real time.

I certainly dont feel age is something that adds much weight to a person's argument given what is available today. It's not much of a counter point for me. That's just my opinion.

Ah, I wasn’t the one who brought age into it.

xgronkjabv6pcl

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Ah, I wasn’t the one who brought age into it.

I'm not saying you were but you did continue to use as a counter argument to Kiki.

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Kareem (as usual) so incredibly under-rated. The passage of time really blurs memories as we switch to recency bias. Sad really.

There's a little bit in irony in that in light of the above.

Based on you being 47, he played pro basketball 5 years before you were born and until you turned 15, largely peaking before you turned 12.

You can hardly argue the case of how much he is forgotten if you never really had the opportunity to witness it yourself?

ButtersSuki

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

I'm not saying you were but you did continue to use as a counter argument to Kiki.



There's a little bit in irony in that in light of the above.

Based on you being 47, he played pro basketball 5 years before you were born and until you turned 15, largely peaking before you turned 12.

You can hardly argue the case of how much he is forgotten if you never really had the opportunity to witness it yourself?

Except that I'd wager I've read more basketball-related books, and watched documentaries, footage, and actual games than anyone on this forum...........

ButtersSuki

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

I'm not saying you were but you did continue to use as a counter argument to Kiki.

The only logical way to counter that argument was to tease it out, surely you can see that? Aprt from ridiculing it, which actually may have been more appropriate in this case, considering we're taking about ages 4-10.

xgronkjabv6pcl

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Except that I'd wager I've read more basketball-related books, and watched documentaries, footage, and actual games than anyone on this forum...........

You can't know that. I could tell you I'm 48 and I've read more basketball-related books, and watched documentaries, footage, and actual games than anyone on this forum. That is quite literally proof of nothing.

My point is that the points raised regarding age imo is largely moot. I don't doubt you know enough about basketball and Kareem to make your claim even though you never likely saw much of him live.

IMO, you should afford Kiki the same and not use age as something to dismiss his points. Even though, I'd be completely in agreement with you and EagleEye regarding the debate, if someone who didn't know basketball read the last few pages, it is objectively true that Kiki made the best argument for LBJ over MJ.

eagle eye

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote:

You can hardly argue the case of how much he is forgotten if you never really had the opportunity to witness it yourself?

Well I brought up the age thing. The guy was basically saying he got to see him play most of his career but he was a child at the time.
I also said I didn't see enough of Kareem Abdul-Jabar's career to truly have an opinion on him. I'm 51 btw.
I was very young when John Giles played soccer, when Mike Gibson played Rugby, when Bjorn Borg played tennis, Roger Staubach and Walter Payton in American football, Reggie Jackson in baseball and the late great Muhammad Ali.
I couldn't honestly give you a fair judgement on the careers of any of them outside Ali as I've watched every fight he ever had multiple times.
I don't hang on to memories either and think that guys from just one era are the greatest. No doubt Roger Federer is the GOAT tennis player and Serena Williams the GOAT female tennis player for me, no doubt that Bolt is the GOAT athlete, Tom Brady the GOAT quarterback. Federer is still playing, Williams and Brady too, Bolt is only retired.
Michael Jordan is not only the GOAT of the NBA, he's the GOAT in any sport ever.

ButtersSuki

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

You can't know that. I could tell you I'm 48 and I've read more basketball-related books, and watched documentaries, footage, and actual games than anyone on this forum. That is quite literally proof of nothing.

My point is that the points raised regarding age imo is largely moot. I don't doubt you know enough about basketball and Kareem to make your claim even though you never likely saw much of him live.

IMO, you should afford Kiki the same and not use age as something to dismiss his points. Even though, I'd be completely in agreement with you and EagleEye regarding the debate, if someone who didn't know basketball read the last few pages, it is objectively true that Kiki made the best argument for LBJ over MJ.

Sure you could, but I'm not lying about what I've done. I've seen Jordan play in the flesh. And LeBron. Multiple times. And many, many of the other greats.

re. the above in bold, it's not objectively true, it's completely subjective.

ButtersSuki

Carcharodon wrote: »

Did I not say Jordan V LeBron debates never end well, cant we just agree they have been the best players of their generation

You're absolutely right on both counts.

xgronkjabv6pcl

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Sure you could, but I'm not lying about what I've done. I've seen Jordan play in the flesh. And LeBron. Multiple times. And many, many of the other greats.

re. the above in bold, it's not objectively true, it's completely subjective.

I'm not saying you are but you are guessing when you say you have read/watched and/or know more than anyone else on here. That's pure speculation.

I tend to disagree. You and EagleEye didnt really give any examples why MJ is better than LBJ. It was largely just an attack on why Kikis points were invalid.

Given he actually gave some examples-whether you agree or not- his something is better than nothing so seems pretty objective to me.

FWIW, I won't get bogged down in semantics if that is where this is going.

xgronkjabv6pcl

AI always bound to be a good guest for this show.

Along with the JJ Redick podcast, these guys have the potential of carving out a great niche that does the talking heads some damage.

Coneygree

It is like trying to convince someone chocolate is the best ice cream flavour whereas someone else says vanilla and another chimes in with strawberry.

The fact is no matter what, personal bias and stubborn opinion will weigh into it a lot, that goes for sport as well and greatest xyz too.

With regards to basketball, I'm sure a lot of people have Jordan and LeBron 1 or 2 in whatever order, so of course there's going to be endless debate. If two of the greatest talents to ever play the game don't spark a stubborn debate, nobody will. Anyone who says it is clear cut and dry in any direction are the only ones incorrect in my opinion. If any Spurs fan says Timmy Duncan is the GOAT, or a Celtics fan says Bird or Russell, or a Lakers fan says Magic or Kareem I'm not going to say they're flat out wrong either.

It is the same reason why the likes of Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith are multi millionaires even though their takes are often suspect. They speak as if their word is Gospel, they piss off a tonne of people and they draw tonnes of attention in the process which brings great ratings to their show and network.

xgronkjabv6pcl

Coneygree wrote: »

It is like trying to convince someone chocolate is the best ice cream flavour whereas someone else says vanilla and another chimes in with strawberry.

Hardly on anyone's Mt Rushmore

Coneygree

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

Hardly on anyone's Mt Rushmore

Ah here you take that back! Don't make me get the advanced stat sheet out!

xgronkjabv6pcl

Doc apparently in discussions to take over as Head Coach of the 76ers.

Interesting to see what someone of his stature might demand of a front office.
A less tenured coach may have less of a say than Doc on the roster but he might have some decent input. Interesting to see if they try to move Embiid or Simmons.

jk23

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

Doc apparently in discussions to take over as Head Coach of the 76ers.

Interesting to see what someone of his stature might demand of a front office.
A less tenured coach may have less of a say than Doc on the roster but he might have some decent input. Interesting to see if they try to move Embiid or Simmons.

He is 3/1 to take the the job!! In all seriousness he probably has a better chance of taking the 76rs to the finals I think after his lob city and this year's run its best for him to get away from L.A

LuckyLloyd

Outside shout, but wouldn’t be surprised if the Bucks made a move for him. Giannis a big fan, apparently.

kmart6

Five minutes into the third and this is getting very lopsided, essentially a 39 point turnaround by the Lakers right now. Miami have no answer.

Carcharodon

kmart6 wrote: »

Five minutes into the third and this is getting very lopsided, essentially a 39 point turnaround by the Lakers right now. Miami have no answer.

Yep, I made a crazy bet that Miami would win with my friend with 2:1 odds, $200 but whatever I suppose, should of asked for 3:1 or more
Lakers are so strong when LeBron and Davis day lay well

ButtersSuki

Didn’t see that coming tbh.

On Doc and sixers, strange, they apparently had a deal as good as done with D’Antoni. For all the talent a Doc has had over the years he really has under-achieved as a coach tbh. And I say this as a Celtics fan.

xgronkjabv6pcl

kmart6 wrote: »

Five minutes into the third and this is getting very lopsided, essentially a 39 point turnaround by the Lakers right now. Miami have no answer.

The most worrying stat for Heat fans comes from Bam's 8pts, 4 rebounds and zero assists in 21 mins with no foul trouble. He led them in all those categories along with steals during Boston series.

Obviously he got a knock but he's been carrying that for a while so hopefully it can be managed again. Combine the knock with Butler's ankle and Dragic's foot, it's probably somewhat safe to say that this is a foregone conclusion.

I thought the Lakers would win in 5 or 6 but even assuming they get Bam back to the same health, if they can't figure out a way for him to influence the game in a big way we could be looking a clean sweep.

The gap was bigger than the score indicated so I'm thinking this could be over in 4.

LuckyLloyd

I’m unsure as to what some of the ‘Heat in 6’ type predictions floating around forums were based on tbh. It wasn’t their best effort last night but equally it highlighted the magnitude of their task. Very interesting to see how they adjust on Friday.

ButtersSuki

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I’m unsure as to what some of the ‘Heat in 6’ type predictions floating around forums were based on tbh. It wasn’t their best effort last night but equally it highlighted the magnitude of their task. Very interesting to see how they adjust on Friday.

Interestingly Bill Simmons went with Heat in 6 too on his pod (released yesterday, after I said it btw). I guess he knows nothing about basketball either? :rolleyes:

It was based on what I’ve and other have seen to date from Miami. But I didn’t expect an abject Bam to turn up.

xgronkjabv6pcl

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I’m unsure as to what some of the ‘Heat in 6’ type predictions floating around forums were based on tbh. It wasn’t their best effort last night but equally it highlighted the magnitude of their task. Very interesting to see how they adjust on Friday.

Absolutely no clue how quite a few people came to that conclusion tbh. As ButtersSuki mentioned I heard Simmons mention 6 but it was universally referred to as a "bold prediction".
Obviously if a pundit picks the outsider and gets it right, it's more beneficial to them than simply picking the fav.

Bill Simmons wrote: »

I
“I think this is a great matchup for Miami,” Simmons said. “Because they have a ton of guys to throw at LeBron James, 3-point shooting, two guards that are going to have the upper hand against basically anybody that the Lakers throw at them and their biggest issue is going to be Davis and size.

“The Lakers going big, offensive rebounds, that stuff. Getting Bam [Adebayo] into foul trouble, Miami possibly having to play Meyers Leonard a little bit. I get it. I’m just not worried about it. I love the chip on the shoulder that Miami has and the nobody believes in us factor with them, all that stuff.

“They are not going to back down to this Lakers team. I was so impressed with them in the bubble. I think they’re just an excellent basketball team.”.

Not tons of quality rationale behind the predictions but he's a great listen.

Assuming no injury to AD & LBJ, it was never a possibility to me anyway hence why I responded to Butterssuki with:

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

12/1 about for that. Seems quite short to me.

Lakers in 5 or 6 imo

ButtersSuki

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

Absolutely no clue how quite a few people came to that conclusion tbh. As ButtersSuki mentioned I heard Simmons mention 6 but it was universally referred to as a "bold prediction".
Obviously if a pundit picks the outsider and gets it right, it's more beneficial to them than simply picking the fav.



Not tons of quality rationale behind the predictions but he's a great listen.

FWIW, The Ringer as a whole predicted Lakers win 83% of time and according to their predictions that becomes 93% if Lakers win game 1 so he was largely going against the tide of his own team.

Assuming no injury to AD & LBJ, it was never a possibility to me anyway hence why I responded to Butterssuki with:

It’s easy in hindsight isn’t it.
Obviously my prediction wasn’t based on injuries to key Miami players and others not showing up.

Based on what I saw last night it’s hard to see Miami winning now - and I don’t think they will btw - but let’s not get overly carried away with one game.

xgronkjabv6pcl

ButtersSuki wrote: »

It’s easy in hindsight isn’t it.
Obviously my prediction wasn’t based on injuries to key Miami players and others not showing up.

Based on what I saw last night it’s hard to see Miami winning now - and I don’t think they will btw - but let’s not get overly carried away with one game.

What's easy in hindsight??

I quite literally quoted where I responded to you saying 4-2 Heat @ 12/1 is too short and that I personally thought Lakers in 5 or 6.

Here, I'll quote it again for you

Mur28 wrote: »

12/1 about for that. Seems quite short to me.

Lakers in 5 or 6 imo

What is hindsight about that? :pac:

Also, as you can see from my post above, I said "quite a few" predicted similar so relax. It's not a personal dig at you.

Awful game.

ButtersSuki

Walter Hissing Sandpaper wrote: »

What's easy in hindsight??

I quite literally quoted where I responded to you saying 4-2 Heat @ 12/1 is too short and that I personally thought Lakers in 5 or 6.

What is hindsight about that? :pac:

As I said, I didn’t expect injuries and no shows. Or did you miss that part?

Wasn’t having a go or being smart. The hindsight I was referring to was my own, not yours. Hence why it was a statement, and not a question to you - the lack of a “?” at the end of the statement indicates same.

xgronkjabv6pcl

ButtersSuki wrote: »

As I said, I didn’t expect injuries and no shows. Or did you miss that part?

Wasn’t having a go or being smart. The hindsight I was referring to was my own, not yours. Hence why it was a statement, and not a question to you - the lack of a “?” at the end of the statement indicates same.

No didn't miss it, I just thought that you would have the injuries factored in given how they were well documented prior to the series beginning.

Apologies then, I suppose I've just never heard anyone say "isn't it." as a statement in reference to themselves opposed to being used to pose a question but thanks for clearing up the confusion.