Challenge for CavsFTW and Laz

[sundizz]

I really do not understand how/why you guys think you know so much about how a past player would do today just by watching highlights of their athleticism or skills. You really have no idea. And that's not a knock on you - it's just the reality of the eye test (even for professional scouts) not being that great an indicator of how good someone would be in the NBA.

I challenge either of you (or both) to go through the non consensus top 10 prospects (meaning anyone projected from 11 onwards) and pick two players that you think will become all stars in the NBA by their 4th year.

Given your incredible understanding based on limited film/footage/direct knowledge of players from a different era this should be a piece of cake and not take more than the time it takes Laz to write up one of his normal posts.

Call this a gentleman's bet. I doubt any of us will remember this, but I'll keep it bookmarked and hopefully come back to it someday in the future.

[warriorfan]

Rent Free

[Marchesk]

Why am I getting left out? Have I not stanned Wilt enough? :rant

[Proctor]

I really do not understand how/why you guys think you know so much about how a past player would do today just by watching highlights of their athleticism or skills. You really have no idea. And that's not a knock on you - it's just the reality of the eye test (even for professional scouts) not being that great an indicator of how good someone would be in the NBA.

I challenge either of you (or both) to go through the non consensus top 10 prospects (meaning anyone projected from 11 onwards) and pick two players that you think will become all stars in the NBA by their 4th year.

Given your incredible understanding based on limited film/footage/direct knowledge of players from a different era this should be a piece of cake and not take more than the time it takes Laz to write up one of his normal posts.

Call this a gentleman's bet. I doubt any of us will remember this, but I'll keep it bookmarked and hopefully come back to it someday in the future.
I love this. But they won't partake. :roll:

[CavaliersFTW]

What?

I explain, and show how players once played NBA basketball. It's past-tense. Like it or not, it's shit that actually happened. I do so well enough that I've been noticed and am now followed by people such as Senior NBA.com writer Steve Aschburner, and players/former players Brent Barry and Dwight Howard subscribing to my YouTube channel and Twitter. I've had my stuff posted on NBA.com, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's and Elgin Baylor's facebook/twitter pages, and had clips that I've uncovered go on and be discussed on TNT over-time with Shaq/Chuck/Kenny, and the Dan Patrick show.

You're talking about crystal ball shit. Not the same thing. Don't be so ****ing retarded. If you think I'm so bad at what I do, best of luck exposing me, in the meantime gonna continue not paying you any rent.

[dontgetchoked]

What?

I explain, and show how players once played NBA basketball. It's past-tense. Like it or not, it's shit that actually happened. I do so well enough that I've been noticed and am now followed by people such as Senior NBA.com writer Steve Aschburner, and players/former players Brent Barry and Dwight Howard subscribing to my YouTube channel and Twitter. I've had my stuff posted on NBA.com, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's and Elgin Baylor's facebook/twitter pages, and had clips that I've uncovered go on and be discussed on TNT over-time with Shaq/Chuck/Kenny, and the Dan Patrick show.

You're talking about crystal ball shit. Not the same thing. Don't be so ****ing retarded. If you think I'm so bad at what I do, best of luck exposing me, in the meantime gonna continue not paying you any rent.

*Toot toot*

[Akrazotile]

Rent Free


Damn.

Rat poisoned :eek:

[CavaliersFTW]

*Toot toot*
You're damn right. I take pride in what I do. So when someone tries to call me out for it for whatever reasons, well, if I'm doing it wrong than try and do better the way you think it should be done, there's a challenge that actually makes sense.

[Done_And_Done]

Post your YouTube link again good sir...

[swagga]

What?

I explain, and show how players once played NBA basketball. It's past-tense. Like it or not, it's shit that actually happened. I do so well enough that I've been noticed and am now followed by people such as Senior NBA.com writer Steve Aschburner, and players/former players Brent Barry and Dwight Howard subscribing to my YouTube channel and Twitter. I've had my stuff posted on NBA.com, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's and Elgin Baylor's facebook/twitter pages, and had clips that I've uncovered go on and be discussed on TNT over-time with Shaq/Chuck/Kenny, and the Dan Patrick show.

You're talking about crystal ball shit. Not the same thing. Don't be so ****ing retarded. If you think I'm so bad at what I do, best of luck exposing me, in the meantime gonna continue not paying you any rent.

so you are full of shit but popular, and without any understanding of the game, just there for the attention. Taking the skip bayless route i see :roll:

[swagga]

I really do not understand how/why you guys think you know so much about how a past player would do today just by watching highlights of their athleticism or skills. You really have no idea. And that's not a knock on you - it's just the reality of the eye test (even for professional scouts) not being that great an indicator of how good someone would be in the NBA.

I challenge either of you (or both) to go through the non consensus top 10 prospects (meaning anyone projected from 11 onwards) and pick two players that you think will become all stars in the NBA by their 4th year.

Given your incredible understanding based on limited film/footage/direct knowledge of players from a different era this should be a piece of cake and not take more than the time it takes Laz to write up one of his normal posts.

Call this a gentleman's bet. I doubt any of us will remember this, but I'll keep it bookmarked and hopefully come back to it someday in the future.

laz might take it, the old man stans very hard but he knows alot about the game :applause: . He just doesn't want to accept the metagame of basketball has evolved and favors different skills today, but I guess that's ok when you get old.

cmon laz, man up and take the challenge, you got a shitload of time too.

[BigNBAfan]

so you are full of shit but popular, and without any understanding of the game, just there for the attention. Taking the skip bayless route i see :roll:

This is news to you? Dude gets all jolly as hell when someone says they watched a wilt clip online... dude gets erect just by the thought it was his upload.

Laz is the only one with substance, he backs his mouth up with numbers, but even then we can all see he's been eating shit because numbers =/= greatness, especially when compared over different eras.

This Cavs dude just makes videos and resizes pictures off of balls, a skill he's trained his eyes very well to.

[ThickassGlasses]

What?

I explain, and show how players once played NBA basketball. It's past-tense. Like it or not, it's shit that actually happened. I do so well enough that I've been noticed and am now followed by people such as Senior NBA.com writer Steve Aschburner, and players/former players Brent Barry and Dwight Howard subscribing to my YouTube channel and Twitter. I've had my stuff posted on NBA.com, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's and Elgin Baylor's facebook/twitter pages, and had clips that I've uncovered go on and be discussed on TNT over-time with Shaq/Chuck/Kenny, and the Dan Patrick show.

You're talking about crystal ball shit. Not the same thing. Don't be so ****ing retarded. If you think I'm so bad at what I do, best of luck exposing me, in the meantime gonna continue not paying you any rent.

Actually it's the exact same thing.

Your taking minimal footage of guys who played a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT game of basketball, and trying to compare them to guys playing current NBA basketball. Then telling us how they'd be better while ignoring how unbelievably nonathletic and different the game was then.

So if you want to toot your own horn, then put up rather than backing away. You should easily be able to tell us 4 players that will be good NBA players that don't have a ton of hype already.. After all, you can pick out all these 60's scrubs that are better than NBA players currently

[ThickassGlasses]

laz might take it, the old man stans very hard but he knows alot about the game :applause: . He just doesn't want to accept the metagame of basketball has evolved and favors different skills today, but I guess that's ok when you get old.

cmon laz, man up and take the challenge, you got a shitload of time too.

Except he's incredibly hard headed.

Guy is either stanning Wilt or hating on Lavine. How Zach Lavine is relevant enough to have haters is beyond me... But he has one. At the age of 19 (20 as of earlier this month) and extremely raw.

[Doranku]

Damn dude, the premise of the thread was actually pretty interesting... but then you went and posted on like three of your alts to agree with yourself because no one else would.

The rent, sadly, really is free. :(

[CavaliersFTW]

Actually it's the exact same thing.

Your taking minimal footage of guys who played a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT game of basketball, and trying to compare them to guys playing current NBA basketball. Then telling us how they'd be better while ignoring how unbelievably nonathletic and different the game was then.

So if you want to toot your own horn, then put up rather than backing away. You should easily be able to tell us 4 players that will be good NBA players that don't have a ton of hype already.. After all, you can pick out all these 60's scrubs that are better than NBA players currently
How often am I initiating these conversations? How often am I making bold projections?

You'll never see me post "____ would average __ __ and __ #'s in today's era".

But you'll see OP doing this kind of thread nonsense:
http://207.58.151.151/forum/showthread.php?t=367790
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=254291

Would you care to call the OP out?

Often times, I'll make a post, such as when I recently compared Komives and Dellavedova, to make a point not to overlook past players and assume they are automatically worse than modern players in the league, because many of them honestly don't appear to be. Be it average players or superstars. I'll only do this when it is obvious. I'll throw some odd sensationalist headlines about Wilt from time to time (he'd dominate today, he'd be the #1 pick, be the highest paid player etc) of course, but that's because he quite obviously is ahead of the curve it's like saying MJ would dominate in any era. Pretty arrogant sure, but still (should be) a no-brainer.

[Marchesk]

Before Cavs, people were making threads about Wilt having a 24 inch vertical, how he would score all of his points standing close to the basket, how Russell was the only other center close to his size, and ignorant stuff like that.

[CavaliersFTW]

Before Cavs, people were making threads about Wilt having a 24 inch vertical, how he would score all of his points standing close to the basket, how Russell was the only other center close to his size, and ignorant stuff like that.
There were posters before me denying it and providing plenty of evidence (IMO) to counter. But there was typically not a lot of film to go with any of it, so all I've done is attempt to add the variable of film to discussion about basketball of that time period. I also look up news archives though that was being done before I ever posted here.

Low and behold the "competition" back then is not so small, nor terrible. And Wilt's "myths" were once not so mythic as much as the were an accepted reality.

This bothers people like OP a great deal for some reason.

[julizaver]

There were posters before me denying it and providing plenty of evidence (IMO) to counter. But there was typically not a lot of film to go with any of it, so all I've done is attempt to add the variable of film to discussion about basketball of that time period. I also look up news archives though that was being done before I ever posted here.

Low and behold the "competition" back then is not so small, nor terrible. And Wilt's "myths" were once not so mythic as much as the were an accepted reality.

This bothers people like OP a great deal for some reason.

I was thinking at the time that you and WiltatKansas are the same person.
And l remember a poster called dennuci (or something), who had some knowledge also and posted a lot under Wilt's video. Do you know if he is active in ISH?

[swagga]

How often am I initiating these conversations? How often am I making bold projections?

You'll never see me post "____ would average __ __ and __ #'s in today's era".

But you'll see OP doing this kind of thread nonsense:
http://207.58.151.151/forum/showthread.php?t=367790
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=254291

Would you care to call the OP out?

Often times, I'll make a post, such as when I recently compared Komives and Dellavedova, to make a point not to overlook past players and assume they are automatically worse than modern players in the league, because many of them honestly don't appear to be. Be it average players or superstars. I'll only do this when it is obvious. I'll throw some odd sensationalist headlines about Wilt from time to time (he'd dominate today, he'd be the #1 pick, be the highest paid player etc) of course, but that's because he quite obviously is ahead of the curve it's like saying MJ would dominate in any era. Pretty arrogant sure, but still (should be) a no-brainer.

are you skip bayless? i'm a great fan of your trolling. :applause:

[sundizz]

I don't know why you are bringing up my other threads - they were perfectly legit conversations.

Korver and Curry play basketball at such a high level that their dominance over perimeter players of that era would be ridiculous. And as always...i say Wilt and Russ would likely be good to arguably the best NBA player (well moreso Wilt) in the modern era. Logic and common sense just makes me think that most of the rest of the league is not comparable in anyway to today's NBA.

Again, why are you so scared of actually trying to do what you do - make predictions of how good a player would be? It's exactly the same thing as what you do. You cannot honestly say the game of basketball in the 1960's is in anyway the game of basketball being played in 2015. You can't even compare a player in the Olympics to the current NBA. Tim Duncan has been a pretty so-so Olympics player and is a top 10 ever NBA player.

That is why I am challenging you to do something that is quite reasonable that would demonstrate whether your eyes/judgement are on a different level than the average viewer or fan. I'm not scared to try :confusedshrug:

It's easy to make bold statements when there is no way anyone can for sure agree or disagree. Why not try to take your scouting talents and actually prove something that we can all quantifiably see the results of? I know absolutely nothing about NCAA hoops as well but I like making predictions of how good NBA players will be.

I thought Curry was going to be amazing coming out of college, and I felt the same way about Wiggins (still do). I haven't watched anything but a few NCAA tournament games and I feel like Kevin Winslow will end up becoming an all star (granted he is a top 10 pick). Could I be wrong - sure.

Dust off that sandy v*gina, grow a pair, and make a few picks.

[swagga]

I don't know why you are bringing up my other threads - they were perfectly legit conversations.

Korver and Curry play basketball at such a high level that their dominance over perimeter players of that era would be ridiculous. And as always...i say Wilt and Russ would likely be good to arguably the best NBA player (well moreso Wilt) in the modern era. Logic and common sense just makes me think that most of the rest of the league is not comparable in anyway to today's NBA.

Again, why are you so scared of actually trying to do what you do - make predictions of how good a player would be? It's exactly the same thing as what you do. You cannot honestly say the game of basketball in the 1960's is in anyway the game of basketball being played in 2015. You can't even compare a player in the Olympics to the current NBA. Tim Duncan has been a pretty so-so Olympics player and is a top 10 ever NBA player.

That is why I am challenging you to do something that is quite reasonable that would demonstrate whether your eyes/judgement are on a different level than the average viewer or fan. I'm not scared to try :confusedshrug:

It's easy to make bold statements when there is no way anyone can for sure agree or disagree. Why not try to take your scouting talents and actually prove something that we can all quantifiably see the results of? I know absolutely nothing about NCAA hoops as well but I like making predictions of how good NBA players will be.

I thought Curry was going to be amazing coming out of college, and I felt the same way about Wiggins (still do). I haven't watched anything but a few NCAA tournament games and I feel like Kevin Winslow will end up becoming an all star (granted he is a top 10 pick). Could I be wrong - sure.

Dust off that sandy v*gina, grow a pair, and make a few picks.

you are wasting your time.

[LAZERUSS]

I really do not understand how/why you guys think you know so much about how a past player would do today just by watching highlights of their athleticism or skills. You really have no idea. And that's not a knock on you - it's just the reality of the eye test (even for professional scouts) not being that great an indicator of how good someone would be in the NBA.

I challenge either of you (or both) to go through the non consensus top 10 prospects (meaning anyone projected from 11 onwards) and pick two players that you think will become all stars in the NBA by their 4th year.

Given your incredible understanding based on limited film/footage/direct knowledge of players from a different era this should be a piece of cake and not take more than the time it takes Laz to write up one of his normal posts.

Call this a gentleman's bet. I doubt any of us will remember this, but I'll keep it bookmarked and hopefully come back to it someday in the future.

Drafting players as high as #1 is an inexact science. There have been GMs whose career's depended on their "expertise" who have drafted complete busts like LaRue Martin and Michael Olowakandi. And again, these guys have had "gurus" studying countless hours of film working for them...and they still goofed up.

And there are so MANY variables that go into how a player's career will pan out, as well. Dennis Rodman was a nobody who had a good college career, albeit, at a tiny school, and because of that, he didn't face any quality competition. Not only that, but take a look at his NBA career. A solid few first few years, but nothing extraordinary...then...BAM!...one of the greatest rebounders in NBA history.

How many "experts" really thought that John Stockton would amount to anything? I suspect that, at best, he was projected as a backup PG. Conversely, Jason "White Chocolate" Williams was a high pic, and I suspect that if you posted college highlights of both, that the overwhelming majority of those watching would have picked Williams.

I was wrong about Anthony Davis myself. I felt he would be a very good defensive player, and a good rebounder, but I was not impressed with his offensive skills in college (despite the fact that he had played guard in high school.)

Conversely, I laughed at the selection of Zach Lavine, who did absolutely nothing in college, and hasn't done anything in the pros, either. He clearly was drafted on pure speculation that he MIGHT be a good player, given his athleticism. But there was certainly nothing that he did in college that warranted such a high pic. I might wind up being wrong on him, but I suspect that within a couple of years he will be an afterthought. IMHO, players like him are a "dime-a-dozen."

The problem with college players is that those that are considered among the cream of the crop, are basically "one-and-done." Not only that, but their best potential competition, is also "one-and'done." Gone are the days when Elvin Hayes, Pistol Pete, Wes Unseld, and Lew Alcindor played FOUR years of college ball. By their Junior seasons, you KNEW that they were going to be great. And sure enough, Hayes led the NBA in scoring in his rookie season; Unseld not only won ROY, but MVP as well; Pistol Pete was an immediate scorer, and would go on to lead the league in scoring a few years later; and Alcindor...well, a Top-5 player in NBA history.

And finally...I don't even bother watching much college basketball. Aside from the NCAA Tournament, college basketball is as exciting to watch as Pro Bowling. In fact, I would recommend it to anyone who suffers from insomnia.

I couldn't tell you who the Top-5 players are in college, much less from 11 on.


As for my takes on how past pro would perform...it goes way beyond "the eye test." We have the KNOWLEDGE that each era plays against the next era. We KNOW that a peak Moses was more dominant than a peak Hakeem. Their peaks were within a a few years of each other, and they faced much of the same competition.

Furthermore, the footage that does exist for the greats from other eras, VALIDATES their greatness. As CavsFTW footage has clearly shown, Wilt was not some slow-footed frankenstein that could only dunk on 6-5 nerds. He was an amazing athlete (arguably the greatest pure athlete of all-time), who had extraordinary skills (and please, I could not care less about his diminishing FT%'s...the footage PROVES that he had range up to 15+ feet, with a variety of post moves and shots.)

Same with Pistol Pete. Just LOOK at the footage that exists. He makes Ricky Rubio look like Stanley Hudson. And how about Kevin Love? What does he do that Jerry Lucas wasn't doing 50 years ago?

Contrary to what the "ESPN Generation" will tell you, the game just has not changed that much in the last 50 years.