Reply With Quote
gorilla getting panda on
And BINGO!!!! The ultimate retort from, and the epitome of a total loser.
/THREAD
gorilla getting panda on
The funniest part is how innocent his first seemed to him, never expected this ether, never seen an ownage this bad. OP's thread backfired big time, even Spursfan are ting on him
Anyone who "feuds" on a sports fandom site is a ing loser
I just watched that whole video! Lawd Jesus I didn't know Paul Perice was that good! I didn't watch him at all. Now I see how he got that nickname.
Pierce was a beast in the 2002 postseason:
Trying to understand your logic here., never seen an ownage this bad. OP's thread backfired big time, even Spursfan are ting on him
I posted something. Cobbler comes in and questioned, we go back and forth, I invalidated his points, and he admitted to it, went on an irrelevant tangent on personal attacks which he earlier indicated is a sign of being backed in a corner, and it's an ownage?
I understand you Laker fans are having a little support group going on right here, but you have chosen a wrong forum, and jumped on the wrong bandwagon, just like how you all think the Lakers can make the playoffs last year. You can beat your chest and do battle cries all you want, but at the end of the day, you are wrong and everyone else can see that.
A couple of comments from Laker fans who've never met me with my life can "clearly prove" me being a person I am? Dear you are gullible, no wonder you think anything that any public personality posts out in the open is inarguable from your perspective. You seem to be lacking in logical reasoning and critical thinking abilities, which is absolutely fine, but I just want to be nice and point it out from my perspective, which to you should be inarguable because this is what I feel.
Some thought I would disappear and that means I would. I have rubbed a few guys the wrong way over the years, and I can understand that. It's hard to be shown wrong and take it like a man, and you are the latest of that line of people, so I won't be surprised to see you, a few months down the line, chiming in about how I am being "owned" in another thread. Whoever is the enemy of my enemy is my friend, right?
Hmmm ... spending 2 hours with a total stranger over a week is clearly not obsessing, especially when you go out on your way to try to find the littlest sign of logical inconsistencies of a thread that didn't even have anything to do with our original discussion earlier on, only to be proven wrong.
And it may disappoint or even ruin your day, but I am not really here to try and impress you. I am not really sure who you are, other than someone who seems illogical but is going on a mission to prove how illogical I am in the last week, only to fail spectacularly in it.
And for someone who seems to be quite upset over how sensitive I am, you sure seems to be very sensitive about being called a re , despite me listing 6 or 7 posts in another thread by you, saying similar things. If you can't take it, don't dish it. You want to go out and talk about someone's intelligence? Then take it like a man when it's received on your end, don't suddenly go on your high horse like you have not written what you wrote mere hours ago.
What is that /THREAD thing about? Another way for you to declare victory after having your sub-optimal logic shoved back at you?
I really want to be offended by this, I really do, I just don't really know what you are talking about.The funniest part is how innocent his first seemed to him, never expected this ether
It wasn't just lakerfan IIRC, in fact, it was Harlem (not a Laker fan) that first joked you had lost 99% of your material.
I know you are about more than that and do post some great stuff especially about the old-timers ...
But sometimes it DOES seem like 75% of the stuff you post is related to Kobe ...
Can't help it that 75% on this forum was about Kobe (or Duncan being ).
But can we just move on? I mean dude is DONE pretty much has been done for over two years ... almost 3 now. I figured he would come up again because of duncan's retirement and the media and this place has proved me right. But honestly he is irrelevant as is Duncan now. We should be talking Kiwi vs. Lebron or Kyrie vs. Westbrook.
this is over. There is no new evidence there will be no more les won and it's doubtful there will any new or original takes.
I never really agreed with you that we should talk current NBA players only, as if we don't talk about Magic, Bird, Jordan, Kareem, Hakeem, etc .... We like to talk about the greatest of the greats, and as good as Kawhi, Irving or Westbrook are, they are not likely to be in the top 10 player of all time conversation, or even top 20, top 25, top 50. They are great NBA players right now, but their games don't speak to them ever ending as the truly greats.
The fact that I (and the rest of the board) kept talking about Duncan and Kobe is actually a testament of their greatness. It may shock and surprise you, but Kobe is really one of the greats. I have him in my top 15 for sure, maybe borderline top 12. He'd make the top 15-20 if we include the pre-ABA old timers and that is really saying something. I don't think he is really that good, and is more a beneficiary of cir stances than anything. From a skill and ability perspective, I think he is on par, or slightly above the TMacs, and Carters, but his mental drive and focus is what separates him from those guys. From a total package perspective I think he's on par with Pierce, with the only exception being cir stances. If Kobe and Pierce reversed roles, I'd think their legacies would be reversed as well, and that is hard to find for a top10-15 player in Kobe's situation, where you can switch him with another 15-30 players, and genuinely think that the legacies will be reversed.
For example, if Jordan and Clyde reversed roles, I'd still think Jordan would have a better legacy than Clyde, same with Magic/Moncrief, or Duncan/Garnett, Duncan/Dirk, Shaq/Robinson. Even in the Hakeem/Robinson debate, I'd think Hakeem would do a whole lot worse if the roles were switched, but I don't think Robinson would do a whole lot better.
It's not like I dislike Kobe or anything, and I have gone on record to say that it would have been fantastic to have 00-03 Kobe on the Spurs, taking his sidekick role next to Duncan instead of Shaq, but I dislike the way people look at players by disregarding all the situational cir stances as if they don't matter. They do matter, and it actually matters are great deal. Kobe is actually an all-time great in this regard in how he forced his way to LA, and managed the media to shape his image for a ridiculous amount of these myths about him (clutch, killer-instinct, winning-above-all else). Ample evidence shows that he isn't clutch, his killer instinct is questionable (from a team perspective), and he cares way more about his brand and income than winning.
Sure I like talking oldtimers ...every now and then is apropos.
Great debates like Magic or Bird? Russel or Will?
Is part of hoops and I love it ...but Kobe and Duncan is a tired subject on here. Has anyone switched camps to any degree on here besides me?
Just saying you can spend some time on something new ...i think your peak hakeem vs Duncan stuff was interesting the other day even if that has been debated ad nauseum too but at least your argument was new even if I disagree.
How about pierce vs Bird?
Larry has the peak numbers and rings but pierce owns almost every key offensive Celtic record and the longer career.
What about David vs. Chuck?
David has secondary rings both have MvPs ...
Chuck led his team further but Robinson owns him metric wise ...
So many other debates to have ...why do we keep trudging out this one?
Come on amb you lose me with the I dont hate or dislike Kobe stuff ...you do but thats ok.
I hate Mchale, Dwight and laimbeer ...dont like Karl Malone or Bruce Bowen ...stoll respect all of them.
I semi-agree. I thought it should have been Duncan vs. Shaq, then Kobe vs. Pierce/TMac or whatever. Duncan vs. Kobe doesn't even make sense.
I was surprised as well, but again, thanks to djohn2oo8, I gained new appreciation of how great Duncan really was at his peak.
Too easy, it's Bird. Pierce was just in the wrong situation seriously. If he had a defensive big (not even KG level, but someone like peak Chandler level), and a shooting PG his entire career, he'd have won more than 1 ring. The guy really is the truth.
As for metrics, larry owns pierce in almost everything. it's really a shame Bird's back acted up, he could've been in the Jordan/Kareem conversation.
This one is interesting, and given the Admiral is my favourite of all time, this one is going to be biased. That said, Sir Charles is one of my favourite non-Spurs ever (Magic, Portland Glide, Charles, Hakeem, Moses, Moncrief, pretty much in that order), but I really think Robinson got short changed because:
a) He got a horribly constructed team around him
b) his injuries.
Charles got bad teams in Philly, and he did way worse than Robinson did with comparatively crap teams. All of Robinson's teams were deeply flawed (no outside shooting to speak of, no play making, defensively weak perimeter), and the fact that Robinson can lead them to 45+ wins, and in many cases 50+ wins year in and year out tells you how big a monster Robinson was. What Robinson did with the Spurs in the early/mid 90s is similar to what Lebron did in the late 00s with the Cavs, people talk about Robinson choking in 95? How about him getting constantly tripled team because Avery Johnson can't shoot, and Rodman won't shoot? I mean, Vinny Del Negro? Antoine Carr? Are you kidding me? The only team that Robinson really had a chance was his rookie team, and he did fine in the playoffs. The thing is, if you play on a team that doesn't allow the opposition to double/triple you the entire series with no consequences, you play better, it really isn't that big of a secret.
That said, Robinson couldn't carry a team's offense like Duncan can, he can create some what, but I can't see him doing what Duncan did in 03. Barkley on the other hand, tried to hard to carry the offense, and he'd pound the air out of the ball in the low blocks before he either spins for a score, or passes it out for an outside shot. The Suns were the perfect team for him, and it's too bad Dumas got banned from the league, KJ got hurt(er), and Miller got fat, that team had all the talent in the world, and could have even taken the Bulls head on if kept intact for another couple of years.
Barkley is actually at his best if he focuses on rebounding and scoring in the low blocks, he should have let other people do more of the creating (like Dumas and KJ), and he'd definitely need a rim protector to cover for his defensive short comings.
Robinson needs a dirty work guy next to him (like mings), and outside shooting. Either way, I think it's actually easier to build around Robinson as the #1 than it is to build around Barkley. So I'd take Robinson.
Not to mention Robinson is one of the top 5 all time in terms of metrics (along side Jordan, Lebron and Kareem, but below Wilt).
Because nobody brings them up?
This post is on point, tbh.
Like I said, I only pretty much hate pedo, because of what he did more than his game, but I also find him to be very overrated due to the presence of Stockton. He is a great finisher, but not that great of a creator.
As far as dislike, Kobe probably makes the list, and it's because of him being overrated, but also more because of how he manipulates the media in order to achieve that.
I dislike Rodman a lot because of what he did to the Spurs, maybe borderline hate, but loved his Pistons version.
I dislike Jordan for his manipulation of the media too, and the type of psychopathic personality that he has. He appears astonishingly petty for someone so accomplished.
I love Mchale because of his game, but he could have exerted himself more. Love Laimbeer for the mind games that he does. Impartial to Dwight because he is pretty much a clown.
Bowen though, love his ability to get under someone's skin. He acts all classy off the court, but you know he will chop your toes off to make you miss a shot.
Face it KK, you would love McHale, Laimbeer and Bruce if they are on your team.
Sorry I love physical play but would never condone a clothesline if a player attacking the rim ...that is very dangerous. Love his sublime post-game he was duncan or Pau on the block of the 80's.
Bowen I dislike for similar reasons ....but he was infinitely more dirty
Coop played great defense without being dirty same with Kawahi.
Agree on Bulls era Rodman who was a flopper once his defensive skills declined.
Also did not like Malone which is a switch I used to despise Stockton. I used to say he inflated Stockton's assist totals and anyone could get those assists with Malone finishing ....but the more I watched the Jazz I realized this was false. He was a great PG.
But even as a broken down Laker Malone had a high skill set and his BballIQ was very high.
Much better passer than he showed with the Jazz where he only sought to finish and like you said did not create much.
He could have created more much (like your favorite player) but preferred to be the finisher probably for selfish reasons or personal glory.
As for Laimbeer I did not even like the Celts (obviously) and I did not love jordan at first either but dude was dirty with the he pulled vs Jordan and Bird.
and you are wrong I disliked, Malone and Rodman even when they were Lakers. Dwight and Matt Barnes too (though I defended him some as Bruin alum),
I rooted for all of them because it benefited my team. Doesnt mean I liked them.
And yet here you are, after being shown the fool, whining like the little you are... AGAIN!
Like I said earlier, maybe it's just that time of the month, which gives you a pass on the man card thing.
CLASSIC!!!!
Wrong on what? That there can be more than 10 people widely accepted in top 10 lists? That every personal list is not arguable? That multiple people can simultaneously say "I agree". Really, on what? Be more specific.And yet here you are, after being shown the fool, whining like the little you are... AGAIN!
Like I said earlier, maybe it's just that time of the month, which gives you a pass on the man card thing.
CLASSIC!!!!
My exchange with you has mostly been you going off on a point them declare some sort of e victory before I retort. You then just disappear. I mean, I don't even have time to admit I'm wrong, let alone being shown I have. If you have shown that I am wrong, you've done a horrible job at it.
Mchale had that clothesline but that was one play. He's generally not really a dirty player. A guy like Bynum did much worse. Can't stop you from disliking him but if he was a laker or basically any team other than the lakers you'd be cool. Haha.
Malone I felt finished most of the play because he was the best finisher. I am not sure about his motivations were all for personal glory and I wouldn't be surprised if it was, but his pick and rolls were really lethal but can but shut down with a long defender on Stockton to cut off the passing angles.
I can see how you dislike all those players, but I chose to overlook a lot of those transgressions because I like the other aspects of their game. I'm biased that way.
Either if just one play or not ... it was dirty and very dangerous. Im all for doing anything to win except something that could jeopardize livelihoods.
When did bynum do something like that outside of JJ barea? how is it much worse to me their were equal only difference JJB is smaller ...
Wallace and Beasley.
Not defending mchale on that play, it was horrible but many players did similar.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
