NBA: Hoops Critic Top 50 of all-time

[ambchang]

You do know the difference between team sports and individual sports, right?

Yes, and I showed as much.

Show where I confused the two.

[Killakobe81]

You can look that up. I am not doing all that work for you if you want to prove something.

I dont have to prove anything. the short sale by you is it's team sport when a player you like fails (Duncan/Pau/David) fails but when they win it's their leadership and you have metrics to prove it!!! When it's a player you don't like Kareem/Kobe/LeBron the failing is on them.

So again I ask why missing the playoffs is some huge wart on Kareem's resume but you point to the ty cast Robinson had on why he did not succeed once there? how is that consistent or fair? Wasn't Kareem's cast ty pre-Magic, wilkes etc? And is Charlotte or Bucks etc making the playoffs some merit badge for Al Jeff even though they made the playoffs in a historically ty East? Not all playoffs are created equal ... and for me Kareem winning the 6 les means way more than him missing the playoffs. He won as the leader of the Bucks and was the best player for the Lakers in Magic's first le run ... after that he was a key component but not the star, that was Magic but he did something twice that Robinson failed to do once. Lakers built a competent cast around Jabbar much like the Spurs have done for Duncan ... just maybe David wasnt the star for that. Great player. again He was in many ways the center version of Lebron. Fast, strong chiseled frame. Robotic post games. great team-mates. Lebron and Kareem just has something though David seemed to lack. Maybe it's leadership, hunger, drive difficult to say.

Look I am disputing David had knucklehead and or scrub team-mates ... I am just questioning if David had the qualities you admire so much in Tim. And not al of that can be pinned on supporting casts.

I wish I could replace my director with Amb ... he would pull some metric out his ass when I failed to hit some key deliverable or deadline ...he makes great excuses for those he admires.

[Killakobe81]

Yes, and I showed as much.

Show where I confused the two.

Only when it works to your advantage, Amb.

[ambchang]

I dont have to prove anything. the short sale by you is it's team sport when a player you like fails (Duncan/Pau/David) fails but when they win it's their leadership and you have metrics to prove it!!! When it's a player you don't like Kareem/Kobe/LeBron the failing is on them.

No .... Duncan won 5 les, I don't know what you want, Pau won two, and Robinson won two. They had bad teams and good teams over the years, and it's fine. Robinson couldn't win in his prime but he dragged those deeply flawed teams to 50 wins every year. I am not sure if you get this through your head, there is a difference with winning the le and making the playoffs. Robinson failed to win the finals with a crappy team, which is what happened to great players with bad teams. I have yet to recall a single player who actually dragged his team to a le with a crappy team, other than maybe Rick Barry and the Warriors, and it happened in the 70s when the league stunk.

Making the playoffs is an entirely different scenario, where EVERY. SINGLE. TOP 10. PLAYER managed to do in their respective primes, not matter HOW crappy their teams were.

Jordan made the playoffs with Orlando Woolridge as this 2nd best player, Magic never had a bad team, ditto Bird, Duncan and Russell neither, Kareem was a 4th seed by record in LA he missed playoffs, so I can give him a pass, Hakeem missed the playoffs but he was mostly injured, Shaq never missed the playoffs in his prime, Moses never did either, Wilt, Lebron, Oscar, West, they all make the playoffs in their primes, no matter how bad a team they had.

What IS the problem though is missing playoffs. I don't have much against Kareem because that era was wacky with the division thing (Kareem's team would have made it in LA in today's format), it was you who want to talk about his prime, so I talked about it, but then you went all emo and started breaking out the tissue paper in your purse. The Bucks went from the #1 seed to a #7 seed, a -21 win difference, in a year, once a way over the hill Oscar retired. This is what happens to centers when you don't have decent PGs. C don't bring the ball up, they need people to feed him the ball, that and also Kareem's constant complains about Milwaukee and being a diva about it, but that is for another day.

Kobe missed the playoffs in his prime, his best years stat padding with reasonable teammates. We are not even talking about going past the first round, I am talking about getting into the playoffs where you just have to be a top 8 team in a 15 team conference. That's worse than median, and you will make the playoffs, and yet he failed to. And it's not like the Lakers missed it by a game, it missed the playoffs by 11 games. The Lakers were 34-48 that season, a worse record than the Clippers, who had Elton Brand, Bobby Simmons and Corey Magette as its best players. You seriously think that Simmons and Magette were better players than Odom and Butler by a margin of how much a top 10 player in his prime should be better than Elton Brand? You seriously think that? Garnett had Szczerbiak and Sprewell (last season) as his sidekicks and the Wolves won 10 more games than the Lakers. 10.

MVPau had Battier and Miller as his best sidekicks and got into the playoffs in the same roster as the Lakers. Why was that so difficult for the Lakers to do?

That Laker team had no business winning the le, I agree with you, but not making the playoffs with Kobe putting up 35 ppg? It wasn't that bad of a team.

So again I ask why missing the playoffs is some huge wart on Kareem's resume but you point to the ty cast Robinson had on why he did not succeed once there? how is that consistent or fair? Wasn't Kareem's cast ty pre-Magic, wilkes etc? And is Charlotte or Bucks etc making the playoffs some merit badge for Al Jeff even though they made the playoffs in a historically ty East? Not all playoffs are created equal ... and for me Kareem winning the 6 les means way more than him missing the playoffs. He won as the leader of the Bucks and was the best player for the Lakers in Magic's first le run ... after that he was a key component but not the star, that was Magic but he did something twice that Robinson failed to do once. Lakers built a competent cast around Jabbar much like the Spurs have done for Duncan ... just maybe David wasnt the star for that. Great player. again He was in many ways the center version of Lebron. Fast, strong chiseled frame. Robotic post games. great team-mates. Lebron and Kareem just has something though David seemed to lack. Maybe it's leadership, hunger, drive difficult to say.

Look I am disputing David had knucklehead and or scrub team-mates ... I am just questioning if David had the qualities you admire so much in Tim. And not al of that can be pinned on supporting casts.

I wish I could replace my director with Amb ... he would pull some metric out his ass when I failed to hit some key deliverable or deadline ...he makes great excuses for those he admires.

So after all this, you still have trouble understanding missing the playoffs vs. not winning the le. You ever find me ranting about Kareem not winning a le in those 8 years? No. it's him missing the playoffs that's a problem.

If Robinson missed the playoffs in his prime, it would be a huge wart, no question, but he didn't. he made them year after year, with questionable supporting casts around him.

I rag on lebron in 11 not because he failed to win the le, but because of how the Heat didn't win. He played horrible, absolutely horrible basketball that series going up against Marion. Are you serious man? I thought he was great in defeat in 08 to 10, 14 and 15, just magnificent. I felt he was great in 12 and 13 during wins, but 11 will always be a black mark.

It's not about winning and losing, it's about how you won and how you lost. You seem to just act stupid just to prolong an argument.

[ambchang]

Only when it works to your advantage, Amb.

How?

[Killakobe81]

No .... Duncan won 5 les, I don't know what you want, Pau won two, and Robinson won two. They had bad teams and good teams over the years, and it's fine. Robinson couldn't win in his prime but he dragged those deeply flawed teams to 50 wins every year. I am not sure if you get this through your head, there is a difference with winning the le and making the playoffs. Robinson failed to win the finals with a crappy team, which is what happened to great players with bad teams. I have yet to recall a single player who actually dragged his team to a le with a crappy team, other than maybe Rick Barry and the Warriors, and it happened in the 70s when the league stunk.

Making the playoffs is an entirely different scenario, where EVERY. SINGLE. TOP 10. PLAYER managed to do in their respective primes, not matter HOW crappy their teams were.

Jordan made the playoffs with Orlando Woolridge as this 2nd best player, Magic never had a bad team, ditto Bird, Duncan and Russell neither, Kareem was a 4th seed by record in LA he missed playoffs, so I can give him a pass, Hakeem missed the playoffs but he was mostly injured, Shaq never missed the playoffs in his prime, Moses never did either, Wilt, Lebron, Oscar, West, they all make the playoffs in their primes, no matter how bad a team they had.

What IS the problem though is missing playoffs. I don't have much against Kareem because that era was wacky with the division thing (Kareem's team would have made it in LA in today's format), it was you who want to talk about his prime, so I talked about it, but then you went all emo and started breaking out the tissue paper in your purse. The Bucks went from the #1 seed to a #7 seed, a -21 win difference, in a year, once a way over the hill Oscar retired. This is what happens to centers when you don't have decent PGs. C don't bring the ball up, they need people to feed him the ball, that and also Kareem's constant complains about Milwaukee and being a diva about it, but that is for another day.

Kobe missed the playoffs in his prime, his best years stat padding with reasonable teammates. We are not even talking about going past the first round, I am talking about getting into the playoffs where you just have to be a top 8 team in a 15 team conference. That's worse than median, and you will make the playoffs, and yet he failed to. And it's not like the Lakers missed it by a game, it missed the playoffs by 11 games. The Lakers were 34-48 that season, a worse record than the Clippers, who had Elton Brand, Bobby Simmons and Corey Magette as its best players. You seriously think that Simmons and Magette were better players than Odom and Butler by a margin of how much a top 10 player in his prime should be better than Elton Brand? You seriously think that? Garnett had Szczerbiak and Sprewell (last season) as his sidekicks and the Wolves won 10 more games than the Lakers. 10.

MVPau had Battier and Miller as his best sidekicks and got into the playoffs in the same roster as the Lakers. Why was that so difficult for the Lakers to do?

That Laker team had no business winning the le, I agree with you, but not making the playoffs with Kobe putting up 35 ppg? It wasn't that bad of a team.



So after all this, you still have trouble understanding missing the playoffs vs. not winning the le. You ever find me ranting about Kareem not winning a le in those 8 years? No. it's him missing the playoffs that's a problem.

If Robinson missed the playoffs in his prime, it would be a huge wart, no question, but he didn't. he made them year after year, with questionable supporting casts around him.

I rag on lebron in 11 not because he failed to win the le, but because of how the Heat didn't win. He played horrible, absolutely horrible basketball that series going up against Marion. Are you serious man? I thought he was great in defeat in 08 to 10, 14 and 15, just magnificent. I felt he was great in 12 and 13 during wins, but 11 will always be a black mark.

It's not about winning and losing, it's about how you won and how you lost. You seem to just act stupid just to prolong an argument.

so all type of qualifiers ... and when you lose an argument you throw around "fat hands and "stupid" ...it's a good tell for when you have failed. Good to know.

[ambchang]

so all type of qualifiers ... and when you lose an argument you throw around "fat hands and "stupid" ...it's a good tell for when you have failed. Good to know.

lose an argument?

You can't tell the difference between the winning a le and missing the playoffs.

DMC can't tell the difference between impact and cause.

And I am the one that was losing an argument?

It's not about qualifiers, as much as you want this world to be as simple as your mind can handle, it's not.

[Killakobe81]

lose an argument?

You can't tell the difference between the winning a le and missing the playoffs.

DMC can't tell the difference between impact and cause.

And I am the one that was losing an argument?

It's not about qualifiers, as much as you want this world to be as simple as your mind can handle, it's not.

When you resort to name calling and you are not a child, you already lost your argument no matter how good your posts are. Great posters/debaters dont resort to such behavior unless they are losing, immature and/or feminine.

[da_suns_fan]

Making the playoffs is an entirely different scenario, where EVERY. SINGLE. TOP 10. PLAYER managed to do in their respective primes, not matter HOW crappy their teams were.

So Kobe's not top ten because the Lakers didnt make the playoffs in 2006 in his prime? Who defined this criteria?

Can I define my own criteria?

Youre not top ten if you lose to an eighth seed.

Youre not top ten if you had an embarrassing exit in every single round of the playoffs (swept or lost to a lower seed).

[Killakobe81]

So Kobe's not top ten because the Lakers didnt make the playoffs in 2006 in his prime? Who defined this criteria?

Can I define my own criteria?

Youre not top ten if you lose to an eighth seed.

Youre not top ten if you spend half your career averaging less than 20 points a game.

Youre not top ten if you had an embarrassing exit in every single round of the playoffs (swept or lost to a lower seed).

Thing that is funny he doesnt even see how he makes up his own targets and goal posts, tries to act metrics based but his biases are painfully obvious and even non Kobe fans like yourself and Harlem don't even agree with the he is pumping. So making the playoffs in a ty year with a ty record is better than missing one in a compe ive year ...how does THAT make sense?
But Amb is en led torank his own top 10 ... he can put Pau and David robinson top 5 and tim over Lebron for all I care ...but he acts as if his criteria is holier than yours. If Lebron is over Tim in YOUR rankings how is Amb's criteria anymore valid than yours?

Make your list amb give your reasons and move on ...

[ambchang]

When you resort to name calling and you are not a child, you already lost your argument no matter how good your posts are. Great posters/debaters dont resort to such behavior unless they are losing, immature and/or feminine.

Something like you are a woman or something like that?

How does this logic even work to begin with anyways.

Someone was once arguing with Karl Malone around the topic of impregnating 13 year old girls and then abandoning the baby, Karl Malone's argument was "it felt good man!", but that person said "You are morally corrupt, you sick pedophile!" According to you, under this scenario, Karl Malone "won" the argument because he was called a pedophile, so you, in your sick twisted mind, would stand there, as a third person, thinking, "Man, Karl Malone is right, impregnating 13 year olds and then abandoning the baby is right, because that other guy just called him a sick pedophile."

So Kobe's not top ten because the Lakers didnt make the playoffs in 2006 in his prime? Who defined this criteria?

Can I define my own criteria?

Youre not top ten if you lose to an eighth seed.

Youre not top ten if you had an embarrassing exit in every single round of the playoffs (swept or lost to a lower seed).

Losing in playoff rounds to define players, especially when they had a huge stream of success, is looking at the trees and missing the forest.

Kobe was swept, Shaq was swept, Magic was embarrassed, Jordan was swept, and Duncan never lost in an "embarrassing" fashion in the finals, and how was losing to a lower seed "embarrassing"?

Besides, it wasn't just that one thing, there are many others:
1) Highly inefficient
2) Never led his team in most advanced stats in any championship years
3) His best numbers were posted on bad teams
4) Lakers consistently have about the same record w vs. w/o him on the court
5) Posted some of the worst advanced stats by anyone that can reasonably be considered in the top 15, even top 20 all time.
6) His teams were horrible without the best frontcourt in the league, time after time, even in his prime
7) Had 5 seasons and 8 playoffs where he had a negative ORTG-DRTG
8) Poisonous personality that drove away Shaq (at least partially), drove away MVPau, threw Bynum under the bus, drove away Dwight, and rumoured to drive away a number of free agents.
9) Played in an age where perimeter play was emphasized, and had numbers similar to T-Mac, which no one in their right minds would put in the top 30 all time. Jordan had no peers, Bird was with magic, Kareem was with Wilt and Moses, Duncan was with Garnett, Hakeem was with Robinson and Ewing (dominated them as well), Russell had Wilt, Lebron had no peers, Big O had no peers, and Kobe had .... T-Mac and Vince Carter?

I can't, for the life of me, figure out how you can not understand the difference between missing the playoffs and getting ousted in the playoffs. One is being consistently bad over the course of an entire season, over 82 games, against all other 29 teams, the other is losing to a team that is better than you, and to one single team, that's it. It's like saying, "man, this guy really suck at sport, he is below average in every single one of them", vs. "Man, this guy really suck at sport, he can't play soccer at all, even though he can play basketball, baseball, hockey, football, badminton, gymnastics and everything else."

Thing that is funny he doesnt even see how he makes up his own targets and goal posts, tries to act metrics based but his biases are painfully obvious and even non Kobe fans like yourself and Harlem don't even agree with the he is pumping. So making the playoffs in a ty year with a ty record is better than missing one in a compe ive year ...how does THAT make sense?
But Amb is en led torank his own top 10 ... he can put Pau and David robinson top 5 and tim over Lebron for all I care ...but he acts as if his criteria is holier than yours. If Lebron is over Tim in YOUR rankings how is Amb's criteria anymore valid than yours?

Make your list amb give your reasons and move on ...

How was 2005 missing it in a compe ive year? I listed it out, the Lakers weren't the 9th seed that year, they were the 11th seed. Clippers with Elton Brand leading them finished with a better record than the Lakers, and Kobe was at his absolute prime. It's like if Lebron James missed the playoffs last year in the West if he played on the Jazz in place of Gordon Hayward. Yeah, the team is bad, but you'd expect an all-time great top 10 player to at least lead them to the playoffs, or at least, for Pete's sake, get them a better record than a team led by Elton Brand.

[da_suns_fan]

Kobe was swept, Shaq was swept, Magic was embarrassed, Jordan was swept, and Duncan never lost in an "embarrassing" fashion in the finals, and how was losing to a lower seed "embarrassing"?

[Killakobe81]

Something like you are a woman or something like that?

How does this logic even work to begin with anyways.

Someone was once arguing with Karl Malone around the topic of impregnating 13 year old girls and then abandoning the baby, Karl Malone's argument was "it felt good man!", but that person said "You are morally corrupt, you sick pedophile!" According to you, under this scenario, Karl Malone "won" the argument because he was called a pedophile, so you, in your sick twisted mind, would stand there, as a third person, thinking, "Man, Karl Malone is right, impregnating 13 year olds and then abandoning the baby is right, because that other guy just called him a sick pedophile."




Losing in playoff rounds to define players, especially when they had a huge stream of success, is looking at the trees and missing the forest.

Kobe was swept, Shaq was swept, Magic was embarrassed, Jordan was swept, and Duncan never lost in an "embarrassing" fashion in the finals, and how was losing to a lower seed "embarrassing"?

Besides, it wasn't just that one thing, there are many others:
1) Highly inefficient
2) Never led his team in most advanced stats in any championship years
3) His best numbers were posted on bad teams
4) Lakers consistently have about the same record w vs. w/o him on the court
5) Posted some of the worst advanced stats by anyone that can reasonably be considered in the top 15, even top 20 all time.
6) His teams were horrible without the best frontcourt in the league, time after time, even in his prime
7) Had 5 seasons and 8 playoffs where he had a negative ORTG-DRTG
8) Poisonous personality that drove away Shaq (at least partially), drove away MVPau, threw Bynum under the bus, drove away Dwight, and rumoured to drive away a number of free agents.
9) Played in an age where perimeter play was emphasized, and had numbers similar to T-Mac, which no one in their right minds would put in the top 30 all time. Jordan had no peers, Bird was with magic, Kareem was with Wilt and Moses, Duncan was with Garnett, Hakeem was with Robinson and Ewing (dominated them as well), Russell had Wilt, Lebron had no peers, Big O had no peers, and Kobe had .... T-Mac and Vince Carter?

I can't, for the life of me, figure out how you can not understand the difference between missing the playoffs and getting ousted in the playoffs. One is being consistently bad over the course of an entire season, over 82 games, against all other 29 teams, the other is losing to a team that is better than you, and to one single team, that's it. It's like saying, "man, this guy really suck at sport, he is below average in every single one of them", vs. "Man, this guy really suck at sport, he can't play soccer at all, even though he can play basketball, baseball, hockey, football, badminton, gymnastics and everything else."



How was 2005 missing it in a compe ive year? I listed it out, the Lakers weren't the 9th seed that year, they were the 11th seed. Clippers with Elton Brand leading them finished with a better record than the Lakers, and Kobe was at his absolute prime. It's like if Lebron James missed the playoffs last year in the West if he played on the Jazz in place of Gordon Hayward. Yeah, the team is bad, but you'd expect an all-time great top 10 player to at least lead them to the playoffs, or at least, for Pete's sake, get them a better record than a team led by Elton Brand.

I already told you I wont discuss Achilles with you anymore, besides you lost me with that horrid Karl Malone analogy. So who are you posting all that for? . If there is a "pitch count" for old posters you are over it.

You can copy and paste the same arguments you have made dozens of times. I never said 2005 was some great compe ive year because I am not discussing Kobe. My point is you keep using the missing the playoffs argument (remember we were talking Kareem) when plenty of players leading East teams are getting "credit" for making the playoffs when their team would be e in the West.

With you it's always about Kobe again we were talking about Kareem. I only brought up Kobe as ana example because again you make excuses for your faves and crucify Kareem and others with your arbitrary criteria. We will not discuss Kobe told you this repeatedly. If you wish to debate dasuns fan great I will watch but keep me out of it.

[da_suns_fan]

Getting curb-stomped by the Lakers in 2001 (after all that build up about how they were the "true champions") was embarrassing. Then winning a single game the next year just made everyone understand how limited Duncan truly was.

Losing a game 7 at home in overtime against the Mavs when youre the DEFENDING CHAMPIONS is embarrassing.

Losing to an 8th seed is embarrassing.

Blowing a five point lead with 26 seconds left (and the ball) is embarrassing.

Blowing a layup in the final minute of the NBA finals is embarrassing as :

[Killakobe81]

And if remember correctly, da suns fan was discussing Lebron at first. but with amb all roads lead back to Kobe ...

[ambchang]

You answered your own question before you even asked it.

So Kobe's not top ten because the Lakers didnt make the playoffs in 2006 in his prime? Who defined this criteria?

Can I define my own criteria?

Youre not top ten if you lose to an eighth seed.

Youre not top ten if you had an embarrassing exit in every single round of the playoffs (swept or lost to a lower seed).

The Spurs lost once in the finals, ever, to the Heat with a better record, and in 7 games. So they were neither swept nor lost to a lower seed. Not entirely sure why you have to ask.

[ambchang]

I already told you I wont discuss Achilles with you anymore, besides you lost me with that horrid Karl Malone analogy. So who are you posting all that for? . If there is a "pitch count" for old posters you are over it.

You came up with your "you lost an argument if you call other people mean names" rule, what is this, kindergarten? I just pointed out how stupid that was.

You can copy and paste the same arguments you have made dozens of times. I never said 2005 was some great compe ive year because I am not discussing Kobe. My point is you keep using the missing the playoffs argument (remember we were talking Kareem) when plenty of players leading East teams are getting "credit" for making the playoffs when their team would be e in the West.

And that is precisely why I didn't hold the two missed playoffs in Kareem's prime against him. Thank you, you finally realized it's not a black and white issue, but a context issue.

With you it's always about Kobe again we were talking about Kareem. I only brought up Kobe as ana example because again you make excuses for your faves and crucify Kareem and others with your arbitrary criteria. We will not discuss Kobe told you this repeatedly. If you wish to debate dasuns fan great I will watch but keep me out of it.

I didn't crucify Kareem, I said Kareem and Magic, as the #2 and #3 on the top fifty list, "only" had a 2-1 record. You said it wasn't his prime, and I asked you if you want me to talk about his prime. You brought this entire chain in it.

[ambchang]

And if remember correctly, da suns fan was discussing Lebron at first. but with amb all roads lead back to Kobe ...

You remembered wrong. First time Kobe was brought up between da_suns_fan and me (not including the list itself).

Thats a fair point but I think they've got Lebron ranked way too low. Several players are obviously getting a nostalgia vote.

Never in our lifetime will another player average 36, 13, and 9 assists in the finals. Lebron's combination of absurd athleticism, size and high basketball IQ will never be duplicated. He's not the SCORER that MJ, Kobe or Durant were/is but he's easily the best overall player to ever play the game.

Tim Duncan? Please.

For good measure, this is the first time Kobe showed up between our conversation (not including the list itself):

I dont have to prove anything. the short sale by you is it's team sport when a player you like fails (Duncan/Pau/David) fails but when they win it's their leadership and you have metrics to prove it!!! When it's a player you don't like Kareem/Kobe/LeBron the failing is on them.

So again I ask why missing the playoffs is some huge wart on Kareem's resume but you point to the ty cast Robinson had on why he did not succeed once there? how is that consistent or fair? Wasn't Kareem's cast ty pre-Magic, wilkes etc? And is Charlotte or Bucks etc making the playoffs some merit badge for Al Jeff even though they made the playoffs in a historically ty East? Not all playoffs are created equal ... and for me Kareem winning the 6 les means way more than him missing the playoffs. He won as the leader of the Bucks and was the best player for the Lakers in Magic's first le run ... after that he was a key component but not the star, that was Magic but he did something twice that Robinson failed to do once. Lakers built a competent cast around Jabbar much like the Spurs have done for Duncan ... just maybe David wasnt the star for that. Great player. again He was in many ways the center version of Lebron. Fast, strong chiseled frame. Robotic post games. great team-mates. Lebron and Kareem just has something though David seemed to lack. Maybe it's leadership, hunger, drive difficult to say.

Look I am disputing David had knucklehead and or scrub team-mates ... I am just questioning if David had the qualities you admire so much in Tim. And not al of that can be pinned on supporting casts.

I wish I could replace my director with Amb ... he would pull some metric out his ass when I failed to hit some key deliverable or deadline ...he makes great excuses for those he admires.

Oops, you did it again.

Seems like you have have a few moves:
1) amb is obsessed with Kobe, brings him up every time - Truth is, you brought him up every single time
2) You are female - Just randomly created rules, you use the word destroy? OMG that is so feminine. You said "You want to go there?" Dear Lord that is so girly *giggle giggle giggle*
3) You just called me a name, so you lost an argument - Yes, that is so masculine indeed
4) I already said I am not going to talk about Kobe with you - yeah, usually after 14 posts back and forth, and then you realized you can't argue the case, then suddenly you pull this up. Wonder why you didn't do it earlier
5) You change the goal post - but you have never once showed me how I did it. I mean, you finally got that winning a le and making the playoffs are two different things, right?
6) I am a Laker fan first - yeah, whatever, I don't know how that relates to anything.

[ambchang]

Getting curb-stomped by the Lakers in 2001 (after all that build up about how they were the "true champions") was embarrassing. Then winning a single game the next year just made everyone understand how limited Duncan truly was.

As in getting swept in 07 in the finals? How as that not embarrassing? Wow, the Cavs won two games vs. the Warriors, such a heroic effort!

Losing a game 7 at home in overtime against the Mavs when youre the DEFENDING CHAMPIONS is embarrassing.

Losing in OT in game 7 is embarrassing? How do you draw these conclusions?

Losing to an 8th seed is embarrassing.

I will give you that.

Blowing a five point lead with 26 seconds left (and the ball) is embarrassing.

Losing to a higher seed in the finals is embarrassing?

Blowing a layup in the final minute of the NBA finals is embarrassing as :

No, people miss shots, Lebron missed plenty in his career, but if you want to go down that route .....

Finals:
Getting swept in the Finals 0-4 is embarrassing
Allow the opposition to put up the best shooting half and game in NBA history is embarrassing
Having the biggest margin of defeat in NBA history is embarrassing
Putting up 8 points in a loss and being generally horribly in the 4th quarter is embarrassing

CF:
Going 2-12 and missing a fingerroll to miss Game 1 was embarrassing
Losing to the Magic in 6 games with home court advantage, not to mention a 66-16 record, is embarrassing

CSF:
Losing to the lower see in 2010 was embarrassing

But he never lost in the 1st round, he just missed the playoffs twice, that is so much LESS embarrassing? Eh?

[Killakobe81]

You remembered wrong. First time Kobe was brought up between da_suns_fan and me (not including the list itself).



For good measure, this is the first time Kobe showed up between our conversation (not including the list itself):



Oops, you did it again.

Seems like you have have a few moves:
1) amb is obsessed with Kobe, brings him up every time - Truth is, you brought him up every single time
2) You are female - Just randomly created rules, you use the word destroy? OMG that is so feminine. You said "You want to go there?" Dear Lord that is so girly *giggle giggle giggle*
3) You just called me a name, so you lost an argument - Yes, that is so masculine indeed
4) I already said I am not going to talk about Kobe with you - yeah, usually after 14 posts back and forth, and then you realized you can't argue the case, then suddenly you pull this up. Wonder why you didn't do it earlier
5) You change the goal post - but you have never once showed me how I did it. I mean, you finally got that winning a le and making the playoffs are two different things, right?
6) I am a Laker fan first - yeah, whatever, I don't know how that relates to anything.

LOL who actually struck a nerve here? BTW using "oops you did it again" does nada to change the perception.
I missed your metro-sexual comment/post earlier ... have you heard of the pot calling the kettle black?

No way do I bring up Kobe more than you ... it's not even humanly possible. You are right, I did bring him up first in this convo but it was once in a whole paragraph Along with Kareem and LeBron. You followed with another essay (#4,080) on Kobe .. but honestly it doesnt matter.

It doesnt take much from me to get you going ...It takes only 4 little letters not even a cuss word to get you flowing like Bridget Jone's diary or dat Carrie from Sex and the City.

[da_suns_fan]

As in getting swept in 07 in the finals? How as that not embarrassing? Wow, the Cavs won two games vs. the Warriors, such a heroic effort!

The Spurs (and their fans) talked mad all of 2000-2001 about how they were the "true champions" and how the Lakers' 2000 championship was tainted since Duncan was injured. Then they get the "showdown" they wanted in the western conference finals and even had home court advantage.

They got swept in four games by an average of 20+ points per game.

Yes...that much more embarrassing that Lebron's Cavs getting swept in 07. No one even expected the cavs to be there. I remember thinking "this team has no business being in the finals".

And losing at home in a game 7 in overtime is a embarrassing. The only other one that comes to mind is the Kings in 2002. Those choke-jobs rarely happen.

[daslicer]

The Spurs (and their fans) talked mad all of 2000-2001 about how they were the "true champions" and how the Lakers' 2000 championship was tainted since Duncan was injured. Then they get the "showdown" they wanted in the western conference finals and even had home court advantage.

They got swept in four games by an average of 20+ points per game.

Yes...that much more embarrassing that Lebron's Cavs getting swept in 07. No one even expected the cavs to be there. I remember thinking "this team has no business being in the finals".

And losing at home in a game 7 in overtime is a embarrassing. The only other one that comes to mind is the Kings in 2002. Those choke-jobs rarely happen.

It also happened to your suns back in '95 when they lost to the rockets in game 7 on their home court. Anyways you sound like a re ed Laker fan in disguise. A suns fan that hates the spurs with a passion but gives the Lakers a lot of head. That to me blows my mind. Both the Spurs and the Lakers have ted on the Suns a bunch of times in the playoffs in the past but Spurs get your wrath. Anyways can't take your opinion seriously considering you have extreme biases.

[ambchang]

The Spurs (and their fans) talked mad all of 2000-2001 about how they were the "true champions" and how the Lakers' 2000 championship was tainted since Duncan was injured. Then they get the "showdown" they wanted in the western conference finals and even had home court advantage.

They got swept in four games by an average of 20+ points per game.

Yes...that much more embarrassing that Lebron's Cavs getting swept in 07. No one even expected the cavs to be there. I remember thinking "this team has no business being in the finals".

And losing at home in a game 7 in overtime is a embarrassing. The only other one that comes to mind is the Kings in 2002. Those choke-jobs rarely happen.

The Suns were expected to win from 05 to 08, peaking in 07 but couldn't even get to the finals, not even stretch it to 7 games in the conference SEMI finals WITH homecourt, that was embarrassing. Getting their asses handed to them by the eventual three time champion with Steve Smith and Terry Porter is expected. can't help it that you are so re ed that you actually thought the Spurs had a chance.

[da_suns_fan]

The Suns were expected to win from 05 to 08, peaking in 07 but couldn't even get to the finals, not even stretch it to 7 games in the conference SEMI finals WITH homecourt, that was embarrassing. Getting their asses handed to them by the eventual three time champion with Steve Smith and Terry Porter is expected. can't help it that you are so re ed that you actually thought the Spurs had a chance.

Touched a nerve, did I? Are you ready to admit that Duncan had a lot of embarrassing losses?

The Suns have had plenty of embarrassments throughout their history but you didnt name any of them. They certainly werent expected to win in 06 with no Amare Stoudemire. I dont remember anyone picking them to win in 05 either. That was their first year together..many "experts" didnt even pick them to make the playoffs.

2007 they were "expected to win" and probably would have. I mean they had a 2-2 series tied with home court advantage. We'll never know what would have happened.

For embarrassing Suns moments I would think of how they blew two game leads against the rockets in 94 and again in 95. More recently the decisions they made 2010-2013 were just awful.

But what do the Suns have to do with Spurs' respective embarrassments? If the Suns had lost to the Lakers in 06 (which they almost did) I could easily admit that it was an embarrassing loss for them.

You, on the other hand, are a defensive homer and cant admit that Duncan had some REALLY embarrassing playoff losses in his career. But it happened whether you want to admit it or not.

[ambchang]

Touched a nerve, did I? Are you ready to admit that Duncan had a lot of embarrassing losses?

The Suns have had plenty of embarrassments throughout their history but you didnt name any of them. They certainly werent expected to win in 06 with no Amare Stoudemire. I dont remember anyone picking them to win in 05 either. That was their first year together..many "experts" didnt even pick them to make the playoffs.

2007 they were "expected to win" and probably would have. I mean they had a 2-2 series tied with home court advantage. We'll never know what would have happened.

For embarrassing Suns moments I would think of how they blew two game leads against the rockets in 94 and again in 95. More recently the decisions they made 2010-2013 were just awful.

But what do the Suns have to do with Spurs' respective embarrassments? If the Suns had lost to the Lakers in 06 (which they almost did) I could easily admit that it was an embarrassing loss for them.

You, on the other hand, are a defensive homer and cant admit that Duncan had some REALLY embarrassing playoff losses in his career. But it happened whether you want to admit it or not.

You didn't read my earlier post where I said 8 was embarrassing didn't you?

But then, I am not a fan of an embarrassing team so I must be a home if I don't consider losing to eventual 3 time champions embarrassing.

But then, you seemed to have lost track in your original argument, which was Duncan didn't deserve to be in the same breath as Lebron because Duncan had embarrassing playoff losses, but then using your own definition Lebron had plenty as well, which contradicted what you said.

My bad in bringining the Suns in the conversation, they don't have anyone remotely close to a top 10 player, which was why you had to suck off Lebron so badly b