Reply With Quote
Not top 30, but top 50 is a real possibility.
Having better accolades doesn't always mean being the better player.
To determine which player is better, I clearly stated the folowing:
The argument about what player is better should always come down to a mixture of analysis of the skills of that player and stats that show the real impact of that player.
Not top 30, but top 50 is a real possibility.
So you are throwing things out that is up to your discretion.
Everybody comes up with all-time lists taking into consideration their personal opinions. That's nothing new. The thing is seeing how you back those opinions up.
He doesn't have the chutzpah to own it, but damn near everything he types betrays him.
All the time, in indirect and not so thinly veiled fashion.And when the did I ever try to do that?
I have Duncan as a top 5 player of all-time, while I don't even dare to say Manu is top 30. How is that trying to say Manu is as great as Duncan?
Manu being the Spurs' closer for many years is a well known fact, that doesn't mean more than that. Stop with the insecurities son.
At the most insecure poster on the board calling someone else that. I could careless that you think that (though I don't get why you don't own it; it's not like you don't receive a lot of criticism as is). I just call it like I see it and to me, you're the epitome of a fan boy/girl and revisionist historian.
How am I the insecure one? You are the one that thinks that propping guys like Manu and Tony takes away from the greatness of Duncan.He doesn't have the chutzpah to own it, but damn near everything he types betrays him.
All the time, in indirect and not so thinly veiled fashion.
Manu is an underrated all-time great. Relax, that doesn't take away the fact that Duncan is probably a Top 5 player of all-time (top 7 at the absolute worst). Chill the up and stop reading more into what I say, than what I actually say.
How am I the insecure one? You are the one that thinks that propping guys like Manu and Tony takes away from the greatness of Duncan.
Manu is an underrated all-time great. Relax, that doesn't take away the fact that Duncan is probably a Top 5 player of all-time (top 7 at the absolute worst). Chill the up and stop reading more into what I say, than what I actually say.
Duncan: underrated by Spurs fans and non fans
Ginobili: overrated by Spurs fans and underrated by non fans
Parker: underrated by Spurs fan and overrated by non fans
No don’t. I’m just not sure what your point was. I mean “I have a point and this is be backup but the backup doesn’t always work nor does it even work except in this particular instance” doesn’t really help your cause.
What I said was really clear, if you don't get it, it's on you.
Well son, you see it horribly wrong. Stop being a got and don't try to make it seem like I'm saying things I never said. Thank you very much.
Duncan: underrated by Spurs fans and non fans
Ginobili: overrated by Spurs fans and underrated by non fans
Parker: underrated by Spurs fan and overrated by non fans
I’m not saying it’s not clear. I’m saying it doesn’t really back up your point because there really isn’t one.
“It doesn’t always work but it works this time because it is aligned to my point” isn’t a support at all.
Hard to rank him because of his team-first mentality and he wasn't a stat- like most players but regardless he's a 1st ballot HOFer.
You clearly don't get it.
Yeah it's not a foreign concept. The most valuable player and the MVP award are two separate things. It's been long argued that Manu was the most valuable player in the 2005 Finals.
If Manu cared about how he'd be ranked, he'd never have agreed to come of the bench. That at ude is part and parcel of who Manu is, and the "ranking" quest is counter-productive to success in most of the NBA.
Is this every time or is it this one single time?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
