Best #2s of all time

[Spur_Fanatic]

Kobe: 5

Daddy: 4

Dude, I'm praising Kobe and you still don't like it.

I don't get it.

[ambchang]

Yeah, and not reading the thread linked in my signature thus making the wrong conclusions further proved you lack reading comprehension, Dumbass. I should say why are you arguing with me? Maybe this thread needs to be about David Hassellhoff, it took a gif of him to shut you up in the other thread you wanted the last word in.
http://www.post-literate.com/gerpunx...-recursion.gif

First please learn how to quote.

Second, why is the onus on me to read a linked post in your signature to guess what you are trying to argue? I mean, you have already shown that you like to argue about arguments are arguable in a basketball forum, so you suddenly taking on a topic around David Hassellhoff is not all that shocking. It is your after, the master of forcing others to argue your point and your point only.

How is your leading sentence treating you? Why are you still debating? You stated in your leading sentence you do not want to debate.

Dumbass, It shows he wasn't a sidekick. Jordan and Pippen were number 1 and number 2. So were Shaq and Kobe, But the gap is close with the latter. not with the former. You act as if all #1's are #2's are equal. they aren't. Huge bit of flawed logic on your part. Being number 2 in Kobe's case is not the degradation of him you want it to be, and that kills much of your argument.

So Kobe creating his own shots doesn’t mean he is a sidekick? McHale created his own shots, Pippen created his own shots, Drexler created his own shots, Ginobili created his own shots, and yet they are all side kicks. And guess what the le is, it’s about ranking all the #2s, which in and of itself means that not all #2s are equal.

And since when was I degrading Kobe? He is the best #2 of all time. Above the ranks of McHale and Pippen, who are just some of my favourite players of all time.

See my quote above, there you go again, with your flawed logic, and we know you are the one that can't read. I proved that time and time again, and refuted you when you said I fail at reading comprehension.

Where did I say all #1s and #2s are the same?

God you are stupid. Did you even see what the point of that video was? no, we know you didn't because you fail at reading comprehension. Of course it isn't a proof. It's a start. Bring on the next video, maybe it supports you. If you don't get it now, you are hopeless. I started the proof, you finish it. If you look at all their games together, you could prove Kobe was a sidekick. go back and read my posts again, you idiot, and don't bring any silly tangents. Bring on the next video and start the proof. that's the point, do I need to say it again?

First off, a person not seeing a point in a video has nothing to do with reading comprehension. Second, you bringing in these tidbits of “proof” that shows nothing is pointless. I do not agree tidbits of Kobe creating his own shot is any indication that he is not a sidekick because:
a) It’s just a small sample, absolutely not enough to prove anything
b) Creating your own shot doesn’t mean you are not a sidekick.
Also, I don’t feel like bringing in videos. Why do I have to? You going on determining the rules again?

Of course you have no clue where this is going, you fail at reading comprehension! I'm not making any rules, you just can't read and debate!

You have your leading sentence about not wanting to debate, and yet you are debating, what the ?

The fact that they relied on Russell for defense and rebounds still relegates him to a sidekick. First, Russell didn't get every rebound, or stop every center. Chamberlain ate him alive. No fast break when Wilt did his number on him. However, Bill had teammates that would outplay Wilt's teammates. Bill also had a coach that figured out the game years before any other coach did. Auerbach is the main reason Boston won. Not Bill Russell. John Wooden was the next coach that could build a dynasty. Then Red Holtzman.

Sure, I am not overly invested in this anyways. I am not going to act like a 60-year old guy to get creds on the internet like some pathetic low lives do.

[stretch]

lol ambchang crying like a total got

what else is new

[Nathan89]

you have a point but why wouldn't a Pippen a true #2, embrace the role he is best suited for? Kobe was meant to be a #1 ...but agre he should of been patient and waited for Shaq to age. But Shaq got lazy and fat and the beef was on ...

2006

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

lol ambchang crying like a total got

what else is new

LMAO/QFT

Cut/Snip/Shred

Told you I wasn't going to argue with you, you have no reading comprehension and aren't worth my time.

However, i did tell you if you respond it is because you want this thread to be about David Hasselhoff. Therefore, your wish is granted. This thread is now about David Hasselhoff:

[NewcastleKEG]

Link to Pippen losing in the Finals

Yeah thought so

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

More David Hasselhoff for ambchang

[Giuseppe]

Link to Pippen losing in the Finals

Yeah thought so

At least you finally showed back up.

tee, hee.