I don't know him that well to be honest. I don't come by here too often anymore. He sure seems to have a comprehension problem though. Or hey, maybe I don't express myself well enough to get through to him. Regardless, my opinions on the topic are not that difficult to understand. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it that's for sure.
He is mostly cool but the thing I dont get is why does he keep going on, on the subject?
He can establish his opinion explain why he thinks he is right bit on these kinda subjective topics no way to prove something so definitive. He can post a wall of words are crunch data but if you or entrenched in your argument you are not gonna change so he should just move on.
Agreed. And I shall follow that advice as well. I didn't think I was obtuse or misrepresenting how I value team and individual accomplishments. I'm definitely not a very skilled writer but I'm pretty sure my comments were understood by most.
Nah you were clear.
I love Amb but he just refuses to let things die sometimes ...especially related to Kobe.
Plenty have joked he wouldnt have much to talk about once kobe retired, but he has managed to stretch that material for all it's worth.
since splits was also confused let me sum up my stance:
1. duncan had the more consistently great career. Less Lows and as much or more highs than Kobe from a team and in some cases individual perspective. s
2. duncan was the more reliable Finals performer (he had some struggles too but less than Kobe)
3. Duncan seemed like the better team-mate ...leadership is subjective but I would give the nod there as well.
4. Kobe was more dynamic and when he put it together like in 2001 (pre Lebron) there were times I thought he was the best all around player since jordan. Never felt that way about Tim but he was close. That is why I said I would take peak Kobe. At his best when he was unselfish, dominating as a scorer in ways that Duncan never could or did nolt want to ... I just thought Kobe was better.
Again I am not using numbers just my opinion. Not just on eye test but what I felt as a biased observer.
I implore you not to go down this path. If you persist you'll never leave it.
So it's one of those "I feel like it" arguments, which really, holds no weight. If you want to argue Jordan > Duncan, it's pretty easy to do, and even the more ardent DUncan fan would probably say that is true, but to use the repeat stick just speaks to a hidden agenda. Basically, you want to troll, got called out, and backfired, and now you are saying that I just cannot understand you (even though it was you who is speaking in circles), and that you can en led to what you feel. No , everybody is en led to what they feel, just be prepared to be called out when you are feel something incredibly stupid.Defending a championship is both a team and individual accomplishment. Period. How much importance one puts on the accomplishment is subjective. I find it relevant. You obviously find no value in it. You can try to twist my comments all you want. I could not care less. And by the way, thank you for pointing out that I left out the Lakers head to head victories over those Celtics teams. Fits right in to my weighted criteria posted earlier. I could have stated that better no doubt. Also, since you brought it up you must believe the Lakers were the better team vs the Spurs over the last two decades.
And you could care less, when you respond time after time, even after saying you wouldn't respond speak otherwise.
And no, I don't think Lakers > Spurs over the last 2 decades because the Lakers missed the playoffs 4 times during that span, and for someone who stressed comprehension so much:
""The 85, 87 and 88 les were arguably better than the Celtics ones because the lakers beat the Celtics twice, while the Celtics beat the Lakers once, and even then, it’s an iffy statement because the 86 Celtics team was viewed as one of the best teams of all time."
Jordan would have been GOAT without the repeats, so yeah, it did nothing to his legacy.
I thought you said the last time it was the last time you want to respond, and yet here you are, so I am not sure how seriously to take this comment.
I am the arguable side, you are on the inarguable side to say Kobe peak > Duncan's peak. There is absolutely NOTHING that can back you up ... oh wait, or are you saying you feel that way.
Apologize, I can't argue you feeling some re ed crap.
Clear how? That Jordan > Duncan because Jordan won b2b and Duncan didn't? it's about the stupidest things I have ever heard.
Pretty obvious, and Duncan's most definitely had more highs.
So was Pierce.
Seemed like a better teammate? I wasn't in the locker room and neither were you, but based on what we have read and heard, this is like saying it seems like Gandhi is a better guy that Stalin.
So peak Kobe was higher than Duncan, peak Shaq was higher than Duncan, and when peak Shaq and peak Kobe were together (2001 as you noted), they were 3-2 Duncan? How does that work? Is end of prime Robinson > peak Shaq? I am confused here. There is absolutely no logic flow to your statement.
at least you admit you are being biased and have no objective argument. Based on eye test, I can say that TMac > Jordan. It's that stupid.
You have some pretty stupid and ty eyes tbhClear how? That Jordan > Duncan because Jordan won b2b and Duncan didn't? it's about the stupidest things I have ever heard.
Pretty obvious, and Duncan's most definitely had more highs.
So was Pierce.
Seemed like a better teammate? I wasn't in the locker room and neither were you, but based on what we have read and heard, this is like saying it seems like Gandhi is a better guy that Stalin.
So peak Kobe was higher than Duncan, peak Shaq was higher than Duncan, and when peak Shaq and peak Kobe were together (2001 as you noted), they were 3-2 Duncan? How does that work? Is end of prime Robinson > peak Shaq? I am confused here. There is absolutely no logic flow to your statement.
Need to have them s checked, yo ...
Nobody said that. Certainly not me! That was all made up by YOU so now I have to go back on my word and reply based on your outright lying here.
Jordan is greater than Duncan for a mul ude of reasons that have been discussed ad nauseam around here and there is no reason to rehash them. My comment of "he's lightyears behind in defending championships" was a tongue-in-cheek jab at midget, who I have had many discussions with over the years, and his "So career wise, there's an argument. Duncan still remains massively underrated, and isn't really all that far behind Jordan in overall team impact." And even though it was a tongue-in-cheek jab it's the absolute truth. It's a FACT. I pointed out very well that repeating is simply ONE of many factors, and not even close to the most definitive, on who has has been greater in my opinion. And regardless of what you may think, I know quite a few people that place value on the ability to defend your le. And that goes for all sports.
So you may find it one of the stupidest things you have ever heard but you must have been listening to that inner re because the entire statement was made up again... by YOU.
Not surprising though coming from someone who values making the playoffs over head to head victories in the playoffs. But hey, when you can say something is arguably better followed directly by it's iffy in the very same sentence then who's to argue with you?
So if you want to call my ACTUAL comments stupid, feel free to do so. However, fabricating comments and attributing them to me is at the very least disingenuous.
Last edited by cobbler; 07-14-2016 at 06:28 PM.
Ditto for you to have Kobe prime > Duncan prime.
Like I said, of any player in the conversation of top 10 all time kobes prime is the worst of them all.
Oh, so it's now tongue in cheek! Backtrack some more. You also said you had no intentions of trolling, and yet this is a tongue in cheek jab? How is that not trolling?
See ... wouldn't have been a problem if it wasn't for the fact that your entire post was about repeats.
You are really that special that you don't even realize you are showing me how truly incredibly stupid you are. You some how manage to cram two points that are absolutely fine and say they are incorrect as some sort of "proof" to say how wrong I am.Not surprising though coming from someone who values making the playoffs over head to head victories in the playoffs. But hey, when you can say something is arguably better followed directly by it's iffy in the very same sentence then who's to argue with you?
I would imagine most people would understand, but since it's you, here you go:
1) As an individual player, a superstar, all time great player shouldn't have any problems hauling a below average, or even horrible team to the playoffs in his prime. We have seen Jordan haul those aweful Bulls teams to the playoffs starting his rookie year, before he hit his prime. We have seen lebron drag those awful Cavs teams to the playoffs, and even the Finals. We have seen Robinson do it, we have seen Duncan led deeply flawed teams to 50+ seasons, year after year after year, and even to a championship in 2003. We have seen Hakeem do it in the late 80s, we have seen Moses do it to the Rockets (and even led them to the finals) . The only exceptions are Kareem and Kobe, and Kareem should have made it easily as well, just that the divisional rules stopped him with such a small number of teams from each division eligible. Kobe though, had Caron Butler and Lamar Odom in their respective primes, and finished so far out of the playoffs the year Pau Gasol led a similar talent level with the Grizzlies to an 8th seed in the same year.
On the other hand, h2h victories in the playoffs are about timing and supporting casts. Wow! Kobe is 4-2 vs. Duncan, never mind Kobe had Shaq for 3 of those victories (I mean, two supposedly top 10 player of all time together had a 3-2 playoff record vs. another team with one top10 player of all time? How does that work?) and the other year had a very strong team with him vs. a supporting cast where Udoka and Brent Barry were some sort of lynch pin on the team, and never mind Duncan was arguably the best player in the series.
And not only that, Kobe couldn't even get to face Duncan in their respective primes because he was missing the playoff and getting kicked out the 1st round in his three absolute peak years. He also had the Achilles injury in 2013 and missed the date with Duncan, and in all likelihood, finish the h2h at 4-3.
Is Magic > Bird because of h2h records? No, it's because Magic had a longer prime. Bird's peak was higher than Magic (pretty clear), but Bird actually had that 1-2 record vs. the Lakers during the peak of his prime.
Is Nash > Kobe because of h2h records? no, because that is a re ed take.
Is Duncan > Lebron because of h2h records? No, Duncan had longevity on his side, and Lebron was just dominant.
H2H is about one of the worst criteria to use in comparing individual players.
2) Saying something is an iffy argument is absolutely totally acceptable. Your narrow mind may not comprehend it, but it's true. There is an argument that Kobe is on the same level as, say TMac, the arguments are there, but they would be iffy. There is an argument that Kobe is on the same level as Paul Pierce, the arguments are there, but ... oh wait, they are not iffy according to you, because they are 1-1 h2h, and Pierce outplayed Kobe in BOTH of those series.
Fabricating? You write it right out there, and I quoted it multiple times. And I am going to quote it TWICE in this thread.
You said not defending pull Duncan down a notch, and used it as a comparison to Jordan directly. I never said that was the SOLE reason you used, but it was the one you used. You tried to troll, got called out, and is now throwing a hissy fit.
Last edited by ambchang; 07-15-2016 at 08:20 AM.
Don't waste your time. I will not be reading it. You ARM made me realize why I don't visit here much anymore. After spending a few hours over the last couple days perusing and commenting it all came back to me today seeing your ignorance in full bloom. You, like DPG, DMC and a few others are so damn sensitive when anyone points out any faults your precious Spurs or TD might have. It's both sad and comical. One little truthful comment that TD is light years behind jordan with respect to defending les and all this ensues. You outright lied and put words in my mouth and then made arguments against them. Absolutely pathetic. I'll waste no more of my time discussing anything with you since you just cannot grasp simple concepts.
Take care and always cherish those regular season accolades!!!!
Did Amb really just say based on the eye test, that t-mac is better than jordan?
He did, but mainly to show that if you define peak performance to be, say best regular season, you have tmac and Jordan beck and neck. But career t Mac is a sad story. And playoffs t MAc.Did Amb really just say based on the eye test, that t-mac is better than jordan?
The idea that Kobe has a better peak is for idiots who only watch one side of the ball and ignore pace. Statistics show it. Duncan didn't need another dominant big to win a ring, he won with Jackie Elson and fabby oberto. Parker and gino are nice, but it's a big three like Cleveland has a big two. LeBron is much better than kyrie.
Again, Kobe had a great career. But Duncan was just on another level as a player.
Duncan also didn't hit the lottery between David Robison retiring and Parker and gino blossoming. Yeah spurs had slightly more talent, but here you mention kobes effect on teammates, and again, Duncan is just on another level.
Except he cannot make the case Tmac's peak is better than MJ's peak based on the eye test...Eye test or numbers test. They aren't even neck and neck.
Was still a dumb analogy which Amb is prone to pull out when he gets fustrated.
Last edited by Killakobe81; 07-14-2016 at 11:06 PM.
Yep. Jordan's peak season, he almost averaged 40 a game.
Wouldn't dream of it tbh. I just find it ironic that you bring up Tim's kids.
Wise decision.
I am sure you won't, it's just the second time you said you won't.
What did me ARM do? Honestly, no idea what you are trying to say.
Oh, wait, you don't troll, why are you taking jabs at people every other post?After spending a few hours over the last couple days perusing and commenting it all came back to me today seeing your ignorance in full bloom. You, like DPG, DMC and a few others are so damn sensitive when anyone points out any faults your precious Spurs or TD might have. It's both sad and comical. One little truthful comment that TD is light years behind jordan with respect to defending les and all this ensues. You outright lied and put words in my mouth and then made arguments against them. Absolutely pathetic. I'll waste no more of my time discussing anything with you since you just cannot grasp simple concepts.
Take care and always cherish those regular season accolades!!!!
I mean, never mind you put an entire post about the importance of b2b to talk about how Jordan > Duncan, and now, after being called it, it's all "I didn't say Jordan > Duncan was because of repeats". You are pretty bad at trolling, and you are even worse in lying, but that doesn't seem to stop you from doing either.
And
I always knew you are a re , and you have proven it yet again.Did Amb really just say based on the eye test, that t-mac is better than jordan?
It was actually to point out how subjective and re ed the "eye test" is, especially when there are no other objective measures to back it up.
Which is the same as saying Kobe's peak > Duncan's peak with the eye test. They are equally stupid.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
