Yet another chart that has the internet outraged.

[Kblaze8855]

https://www.hostpic.org/images/2502242044320322.jpeg

[Kblaze8855]

I’m sure you see the one that has basketball fans upset. I’ve heard nobody point out that it seems to be all number based. Win shares and per for basketball. I don’t think the person doing the ranking had any opinions listed outside what stat was chosen to rank everyone. But still.

Kobe fans drawing up battle plans.

[1987_Lakers]

Dirk being on the 00's for the NBA is super random.

[1987_Lakers]

Looks like Kobe & Dirk have close to identical PERs throughout the 00's, but Dirk has him beat in WS.

Duncan has a slightly higher PER than Dirk, but Dirk has a slightly higher WS, not sure how they decide the winner in that case.

Unless the whole stat is WS PER 48?? But Duncan has Dirk beat in that.

[Kblaze8855]

It may literally be winshares multiplied by per but I don’t know why one would choose that.

[warriorfan]

People get too worked up over metrics

[tpols]

Kobe or Duncan easily had the 2000s. Lebron and Shaq only played half the decade in prime.

I love Dirk but this is just goofy. His crowning achievement was in 2011 which wasnt even in that decade.

[SouBeachTalents]

Honestly, that's not the worst list I've seen if you were trying to establish the player of the decade for each league.

Duncan or Kobe would've been the obv choice over Dirk, that's the one that's clearly wrong.

Just on the basis of position Montana would've likely been the choice for the 80's, Rice for the 90's, but I know LT & White are widely considered the GOAT's for their position.

I don't know enough about hockey, but my instinct tells me neither Lidstom nor Borque would be fans choices for those decades. I would've guessed Gretzky/Lemiux/Hasek/Jagr for the 90's, I'd have no clue for the 00's, maybe Brodeur? It feels like there wasn't a truly dominant player during that decade as Crosby & Ovechkin showed up halfway through.

I also doubt Rickey would've gotten the nod for the 80's, but I don't know enough about baseball pre 90's.

[John8204]

The only thing that seems crazy to me is Allan Page over Fran Tarkenton

[1987_Lakers]

The only thing that seems crazy to me is Allan Page over Fran Tarkenton


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7s2y9kOzoM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lx-6hobRGS8

Why not this guy?

[Phoenix]

Kobe or Duncan easily had the 2000s. Lebron and Shaq only played half the decade in prime.

I love Dirk but this is just goofy. His crowning achievement was in 2011 which wasnt even in that decade.

I mean yeah, obviously Kobe/Duncan>, but Dirk was the mainstay on a Mavs team that routinely won 50+ games and a few 60 win seasons in the 2000s in-spite of a few roster overhauls and coaching changes. And while his crowning achievement was in 2011, that 2006 team he got to the finals wasn't exactly stacked with a ton of talent that anyone talks about 20 years later. It does go to show though, that these metrics always need to be graded on a curve when arguing for one great over another. Maybe I'm too high on him, but while the data is 'wrong' as far as whatever conclusions it's arguing for I don't find it the most insulting thing ever.

[ArbitraryWater]

Kobe or Duncan easily had the 2000s. Lebron and Shaq only played half the decade in prime.

I love Dirk but this is just goofy. His crowning achievement was in 2011 which wasnt even in that decade.


Duncan wasnt at Dirks level 07-09, but Dirk wasnt at Duncans level 00-02. Its pretty close. 03-06 they were right there with each other.

I guess you could say Duncan was right there with Dirk in 07, given the playoffs.

Honestly 00s is kind of weird. It doesnt have a standout performer.

Kobe had a weak-ish first half, Duncan a weak end, Shaq tailed off in the 2nd half, James arrived in the middle, Dirk a weak ish first 2-3 years.

Its a tough one.

Its the same in futbol though.

Zidane and Ronaldo tailed off in the middle of the decade, they were mid 90s to mid 00s; Ronaldinho had a mega mid 00s peak but wasnt necessarily elite the other years, and Ronaldo and Messi came to BITW level at the end of the decade.

[Kblaze8855]

Duncan wasnt at Dirks level 07-09, but Dirk wasnt at Duncans level 00-02. Its pretty close. 03-06 they were right there with each other.

I guess you could say Duncan was right there with Dirk in 07, given the playoffs.




what exactly happened in 2008 to put Dirk on a level above 2008 Duncan? Duncan was like 30-31. Shooting less doesn’t mean he was actually worse does it? He started shootings less in 2005 letting his guards play a larger role but I’m not sure when he stopped being Tim Duncan. I don’t think it was 2005…or 6…or 7. Or 8.

[ArbitraryWater]

what exactly happened in 2008 to put Dirk on a level above 2008 Duncan? Duncan was like 30-31. Shooting less doesn’t mean he was actually worse does it? He started shootings less in 2005 letting his guards play a larger role but I’m not sure when he stopped being Tim Duncan. I don’t think it was 2005…or 6…or 7. Or 8.

Well if you stop taking on superstar responsibilities/duties, yes, you dont deserve to be placed with someone that still carries that burden. In 07 he took freakin 14 shots a game. Dont exhaust yourself too much on offense Timmy.

[Kblaze8855]

Well if you stop taking on superstar responsibilities/duties, yes, you dont deserve to be placed with someone that still carries that burden. In 07 he took freakin 14 shots a game. Dont exhaust yourself too much on offense Timmy.

Im gonna forego a whole “Everybody loves unselfish play till it’s time to rank people who put team interest over stats” thing and ask a simple question.

Early in the finals this play is called for Tim to get his signature shot from the spot he probably scored 8000 points from.


Instead of shooting his patented bank or driving he sees this 5ppg role player cut:











https://i.ibb.co/BKnkVff2/IMG-1292.gif




Is he better at basketball if he takes the shot? Is he more of a superstar?

Superstars have been waving off role players(even other stars) to get the looks they are due because of the status they earned for 100 years.

Is Tim more worthy of high ranking if he ignores the peon and shoots himself?

How might the spurs dynasty have developed differently if he decided that’s what matters instead of fostering a team forward environment where everyone is held accountable for making the right play from the hall of famers to the end of the bench?

Of what benefit to his team…is him getting those 2 points instead?

[Hey Yo]

Just noticed that dude has Ovechkin over Sidney Crosby for 2010's. Don't think he'd get many to agree with him.

[tpols]

Tim Duncan's offensive output dramatically waned in the 2nd half of the 2000s... a gif of him throwing a dime doesn't mean he was Jokic. He averaged 2-3 dimes a game then and wasn't even responsible for clutch. Dirk had way more on his shoulders and was playing with considerably less help.

[Kblaze8855]

Tim Duncan's offensive output dramatically waned in the 2nd half of the 2000s... a gif of him throwing a dime doesn't mean he was Jokic. He averaged 2-3 dimes a game then and wasn't even responsible for clutch. Dirk had way more on his shoulders and was playing with considerably less help.

Same question.

He takes that shot a couple times a game instead of letting his role players grow in their roles….

Who benefits?

Is he playing better basketball by using his status to get a couple more looks?

Is that what “Better” requires?

[GOBB]

RIP Ricky Henderson

[Phoenix]

Duncan's numbers going down a bit in the late 00's coincided IIRC with getting planter facilities ( I believe that was the catalyst behind the whole load management thing that Pop became infamous for), but per 36 they were on par with the first half of the 2000s. Funny enough the minutes he was playing in like 2007 are regular starter minutes by today's standards. From 97 to 04 he averaged 39 mins a night.

[tpols]

Same question.

He takes that shot a couple times a game instead of letting his role players grow in their roles….

Who benefits?

Is he playing better basketball by using his status to get a couple more looks?

Is that what “Better” requires?

The Spurs were talented enough to let Tim Duncan assume a secondary or even tertiary scoring role. Dallas wasn't even close to providing that type of help for Dirk.

We've seen title runs where Tony Parker and Manu outproduced Duncan offensively. We've never seen anything remotely close from Dirks teammates. Nash was the closest thing but he got traded right before he peaked.

[Kblaze8855]

The Spurs were talented enough to let Tim Duncan assume a secondary or even tertiary scoring role. Dallas wasn't even close to providing that type of help for Dirk.

We've seen title runs where Tony Parker and Manu outproduced Duncan offensively. We've never seen anything remotely close from Dirks teammates. Nash was the closest thing but he got traded right before he peaked.


So let me ask again since it’s not being answered.


Duncan shoots that ball and scores 2 more points personally.


Did he play a better game? Or did he score more points?

[tontoz]

I can't believe that Kblaze is defending a player for taking less shots. I feel like i am in the Twilight Zone.

[RRR3]

I can't believe that Kblaze is defending a player for taking less shots. I feel like i am in the Twilight Zone.
Why? Tim Duncan is exactly the type of player he prefers most.

[Kblaze8855]

Taking less shots doesn’t need defending though for some people it damages the reputations of some. In cases like Duncan and wilt who reduce shots for the sake of the team and won championships that way while being incredible defensive players and still scoring when they choose, it’s a weird criticism to me and always has been.

It’s one thing if not shooting enough is doing some kind of tangible harm. Empowering your teammates while you win ring after ring after ring after ring after ring?

I’m not sure what there is to gain by shooting more when you keep ending seasons as the champion. People legitimately say Bill Russell wasn’t a good enough scorer and I just don’t understand what they think would’ve happened if he scored more.

He ended every tournament to determine a champion from age 16 to 35 other than one year he was out with a bad ankle and one year wilt decided to stop scoring and try to play like him.

But people legitimately believe he should’ve scored more for them to give him a higher status.

it’s fine to criticize anything that doesn’t endin success. But calling somebody out for being unselfish and winning? I just don’t see what there is to gain.

[tontoz]

Why? Tim Duncan is exactly the type of player he prefers most.


That hasn't been what i've seen.

He likes guys who take a lot of shots whether they make them or not. If they shoot a weak percentage it's (insert excuse here). It couldnt possibly be poor shot selection or just poor shooting.

For the record i would definitely take Duncan over Dirk in the 2000s.

[Kblaze8855]

That hasn't been what i've seen.

He likes guys who take a lot of shots whether they make them or not. If they shoot a weak percentage it's (insert excuse here). It couldnt possibly be poor shot selection or just poor shooting.

For the record i would definitely take Duncan over Dirk in the 2000s.

I think you confuse me liking something with me defending virtually every version of a great player from fans who think greatness only exists under certain standards they set and not those set by the wider world.

There is no particular player type that has nobody I’ve been a fan of. Not off the top of my head at least.

There was a long time I was fundamentally opposed to three-point shooting big men that probably had something to do with Antoine Walker not being as good as I thought he would be after college and his first couple seasons.

I think the first topic I ever made here was in 2002 and was about how stupid people were to act like Wilt Chamberlain got worse when he started scoring less.

[tontoz]

https://hosting.photobucket.com/61c9c379-dc9e-4342-8972-a3c17258e5a1/45983fa6-6dbc-4a5f-bdd6-bfcb58ee9c2b.jpg

[dankok8]

Indefensible to not have Duncan and Kobe over Dirk...

[Kblaze8855]

https://hosting.photobucket.com/61c9c379-dc9e-4342-8972-a3c17258e5a1/45983fa6-6dbc-4a5f-bdd6-bfcb58ee9c2b.jpg


I remember at some point in his prime he was averaging more three-pointers per game than rebounds and I just could not stop referencing that fact when talking about how much I hated him on here.


without looking up the numbers, I suspect he was more ahead of the curve than he was a monster. Though considering what everyone was shooting back then I’m sure the numbers were deplorable through modern eyes.

[tontoz]

'Toine was a weak shooter from everywhere. The 3s weren't even his big problem. He sucked on 2s.

[Im so nba'd out]

Whoever made that list just did it for shock value to go viral. No jerry Rice for 90s. No Kobe for 00's. Im sure they also did the samething for someone in baseball and hockey (like sideney Crosby but i dont follow hockey so idk).

Reggie White for the 90's lmao....2 teams dominated the 90s, but lets go no Rice....no emmitt... yeah lets not list the all time leading rusher or passer lets list reggie white...who arguably wasn't even the best de of the decade :oldlol:

[ArbitraryWater]

So let me ask again since it’s not being answered.


Duncan shoots that ball and scores 2 more points personally.


Did he play a better game? Or did he score more points?

He played a better game.

Ofc not in that instance. He got an assist right there.

But his assists didnt go up in 2006 or 2007.

He just took a step back.

[SouBeachTalents]

Whoever made that list just did it for shock value to go viral. No jerry Rice for 90s. No Kobe for 00's. Im sure they also did the samething for someone in baseball and hockey (like sideney Crosby but i dont follow hockey so idk).

Reggie White for the 90's lmao....2 teams dominated the 90s, but lets go no Rice....no emmitt... yeah lets not list the all time leading rusher or passer lets list reggie white...who arguably wasn't even the best de of the decade :oldlol:
It's based entirely off statistics, it's not a list someone came up with.

[Kblaze8855]

He played a better game.

Ofc not in that instance. He got an assist right there.

But his assists didnt go up in 2006 or 2007.

He just took a step back.


So over the course of dozens and dozens of possessions, a role player taking a shot that Duncan could absolutely get 100% of the time if he requested it means Duncan is playing basketball worse?

This guy who Would be listened to by every single player to ever share a court with him decides Patty Mills can take a shot instead of him, and that means he is playing worse than if he demanded that shot himself?

He is greater and should be ranked higher if he improved his statistics through sheer selfishness, which we all know he could do probably without pushback?

that’s how a guy with a sack of rings improves his standing? An extra layup he could get whenever he feels like it because nobody in that franchise is going to look him off if he calls the ball? That’s how we judge such a player?

[tontoz]

That isn't the real issue. Dirk was better on offense than Duncan but the gap was far smaller than the gap between them on defense.

Duncan was 1st team All NBA for 6 straight seasons, including 2 MVPs.

[Phoenix]

I'm a bit confused about what the argument is here. At the top of that graph it says 'WS*PER'. I'm not sure exactly what that means in that format, but it seems like the graph is saying Dirk has the best WS*PER that decade, and people seem to be taking it as the person saying he was the best player of the decade.

[ArbitraryWater]

So over the course of dozens and dozens of possessions, a role player taking a shot that Duncan could absolutely get 100% of the time if he requested it means Duncan is playing basketball worse?

This guy who Would be listened to by every single player to ever share a court with him decides Patty Mills can take a shot instead of him, and that means he is playing worse than if he demanded that shot himself?

He is greater and should be ranked higher if he improved his statistics through sheer selfishness, which we all know he could do probably without pushback?

that’s how a guy with a sack of rings improves his standing? An extra layup he could get whenever he feels like it because nobody in that franchise is going to look him off if he calls the ball? That’s how we judge such a player?

Yes.

If that were indeed the case, anyway.

Its your interpretation.

It could also just be that Duncan could no longer carry that kind of load, or decided not to, to enhance his career.

That will come with later benefits.

But you cant have your cake and eat it too.


If you decide to willingly contribute less, which could well be beneficial for the involvement of teammates (this is a luxury not everyone can afford, you only get it on stacked well meshed teams), then you are becoming less of a player.

Thats just how things work.

If Duncan completely took over in the playoffs thatd be one thing, but he didnt. There was no such switch to prevent ugly losses.

[ArbitraryWater]

That isn't the real issue. Dirk was better on offense than Duncan but the gap was far smaller than the gap between them on defense.

Duncan was 1st team All NBA for 6 straight seasons, including 2 MVPs.

Do the offense / defense gap for 2006 and then do who the better player was in 2006

[Kblaze8855]

If you decide to willingly contribute less, which could well be beneficial for the involvement of teammates (this is a luxury not everyone can afford, you only get it on stacked well meshed teams), then you are becoming less of a player.



Playing team ball even when beneficial literally makes you worse at basketball….

I…don’t think I can form a response that wouldn’t sound more personally insulting than I intended so it’s best I just move on.

I’m gonna try strike this conversation from the records mentally so I don’t automatically respond with thinly veiled contempt to all you have to say in the future. Good day.

[Wally450]

Brady over Manning for the 2000s. How is that even a debate?

[SouBeachTalents]

Brady over Manning for the 2000s. How is that even a debate?
People still don't seem to understand this is based solely on statistics. Even if it was based on opinion, Brady missed 2 entire seasons in the 2000's while Manning threw for 89 more touchdowns and 11,000 more yards. You'd have to claim 2 extra rings supersedes that huge gulf in production, and it's not like Brady was winning those rings in statistical dominant fashion. He didn't become that guy until '07.

[tontoz]

Do the offense / defense gap for 2006 and then do who the better player was in 2006



Pretty sure the discussion was the entire decade, not one year. For the decade:

Dirk had 1 MVP and was top 5 3 times total.
Tim had 2 MVPs and was top 5 8 times total.

[FKAri]

lol @ WS*PER.
Basketball might have the least reliable adv stat metrics out of these sports. Meanwhile baseball has the most reliable ones. WAR isn't perfect but it's way better than anything in basketball.

[tpols]

Brady over Manning for the 2000s. How is that even a debate?

Manning was the more talented QB, probably most talented QB ever, but he choked way more than Brady it seemed in playoffs.

[tpols]

Playing team ball even when beneficial literally makes you worse at basketball….

I…don’t think I can form a response that wouldn’t sound more personally insulting than I intended so it’s best I just move on.

I’m gonna try strike this conversation from the records mentally so I don’t automatically respond with thinly veiled contempt to all you have to say in the future. Good day.

The thing is you don't really have evidence Duncan was capable of being an elite scorer post 2007.

When Kobe smoked Duncan in the 2008 WCFs they needed more than 22 ppg on 42% shooting from Duncan. 59% from the line and 0% from 3 as well.

That's trash offense.

You're acting like late 2000s Duncan could just take over a game but didn't because he wanted to be a good teammate but that wasn't the case. He just wasn't a great offensive player past like 2006.

[Kblaze8855]

In every game of every person’s life on every level of basketball the losing team “needed more”. No matter if you Have the best or worst game of your life. Ending the game with fewer points than the opponent means the team needed more. Doesn’t matter if it’s Dirk being an eliminated scoring eight points as the MVP or being eliminated scoring 40. The other team has more Points than you, the team needed more scoring which somebody didn’t provide.

if the other team scores 116, you need 117 and it doesn’t matter if you scored 19 or 24 of them if your team scores 108. Basketball evaluation is so completely wrecked by people taking the most simplistic view possible it’s like there’s a language barrier.

Game might have 170 possessions. If you lose by two, you could just as easily have swung the game with a rebound, a timely rotation an extra pass or a closeout as you could by making an extra shot. People worried about the extra shot but failing to do one of the others is the bane of every coaches existence.

some of you dudes need to sit at an actual practice or Involve yourself in more real games and see what the people responsible for getting teams to play well emphasize.

The number of coaches who stress defense and execution over scoring would blow you away, but casual fans really can’t look any deeper than how many points each individual scores. 10 minutes in even a college setting would have you thinking someone must be playing “The offense will take care of itself” on repeat somewhere.

basketball people talk so much about defense It would blow your mind. And even even when the issue was offense, it’s never about the individual. Deep into the Spurs dynasty they were so much about ball movement pop had to tell them to stop trying to one up each other with the extra pass. I watched a thing once where they were talking about they got so into giving up the good shot for a great shot they started to pass up great shots for the perfect shot and it annoyed the coaches. You could hear pop get upset. They passed up a great shot and then four passes later they get a layup so he lets it go.

They were out there overpassing almost for a laugh. Taking plays deeper than necessary into the shot clock creating a fake scramble the defense would overreact to thinking they were struggling to get a shot off just to get a hard close out that opens up somebody for shot clock beating layup or three.

The entire style of play they developed Was only possible because Tim and Pop spent years empowering role players to stay what they truly were instead of becoming NBA bodies who suppressed their games for the sake of playing off some selfish superstar.

Even the end of bench NBA players know how to play like superstars because most of them were their entire lives. You get to some shit organization that caters to star power and they put you in shackles And your game atrophies. Then everyone wonders why you look like a scrub during big moments after you spent a few years being treated like you can’t do anything but spot up and hustle.

but every now and then you get someone who has the absolute respect of everyone who could demand to be put in best position for himself and his own numbers, but instead he buys into the notion that everybody should be who they are. That Patty Mills Got to where he was at his size by being really ****ing good so if he sees something he can wave off a legend and take it. That five point per game guy like Oberto can cut right into the sweet spot of one of the greatest players of all time and get the ball with no hesitation because that’s the right play.

The whole thing worked because Tim Duncan didn’t care about his own status and allowed himself to be coached hard and held as a accountable for making the right play as the last man on the bench.

from his first game to his last, if he calls for the ball on his spot, every single teammate would give it to him and get out of the way. But in his late 20s still in his prime, they go away from running 4 down whenever he wanted it and let everyone be themselves as the league shifted to open up the perimeter.

They just did the right thing. But in a world infected with selfishness and hot take culture where everything has to be a simple as possible to fit neatly into a soundbite giving up four shots so a role-player who has been a star all his life can feel like a real contributor so you can depend on him later is seen as playing worse. And the fact that it doesn’t result in the impossible(winning every game) is used as evidence it was a broken approach.

The whole discussion around the game is beyond cooked. Shit is extra well done, left to cool off on the table, taken home in a to go box, left in the fridge for three days, then thrown in the air fryer to reheat.

Nothing remains of the product but the name and basic shape.


https://i.ibb.co/Q7NXvJRX/IMG-1296.gif

[SouBeachTalents]

In every game of every person’s life on every level of basketball the losing team “needed more”. No matter if you Have the best or worst game of your life. Ending the game with fewer points than the opponent means the team needed more. Doesn’t matter if it’s Dirk being an eliminated scoring eight points as the MVP or being eliminated scoring 40. The other team has more Points than you, the team needed more scoring which somebody didn’t provide.

if the other team scores 116, you need 117 and it doesn’t matter if you scored 19 or 24 of them if your team scores 108. Basketball evaluation is so completely wrecked by people taking the most simplistic view possible it’s like there’s a language barrier.

Game might have 170 possessions. If you lose by two, you could just as easily have swung the game with a rebound, a timely rotation an extra pass or a closeout as you could by making an extra shot. People worried about the extra shot but failing to do one of the others is the bane of every coaches existence.

some of you dudes need to sit at an actual practice or Involve yourself in more real games and see what the people responsible for getting teams to play well emphasize.

The number of coaches who stress defense and execution over scoring would blow you away, but casual fans really can’t look any deeper than how many points each individual scores. 10 minutes in even a college setting would have you thinking someone must be playing “The offense will take care of itself” on repeat somewhere.

basketball people talk so much about defense It would blow your mind. And even even when the issue was offense, it’s never about the individual. Deep into the Spurs dynasty they were so much about ball movement pop had to tell them to stop trying to one up each other with the extra pass. I watched a thing once where they were talking about they got so into giving up the good shot for a great shot they started to pass up great shots for the perfect shot and it annoyed the coaches. You could hear pop get upset. They passed up a great shot and then four passes later they get a layup so he lets it go.

They were out there overpassing almost for a laugh. Taking plays deeper than necessary into the shot clock creating a fake scramble the defense would overreact to thinking they were struggling to get a shot off just to get a hard close out that opens up somebody for shot clock beating layup or three.

The entire style of play they developed Was only possible because Tim and Pop spent years empowering role players to stay what they truly were instead of becoming NBA bodies who suppressed their games for the sake of playing off some selfish superstar.

Even the end of bench NBA players know how to play like superstars because most of them were their entire lives. You get to some shit organization that caters to star power and they put you in shackles And your game atrophies. Then everyone wonders why you look like a scrub during big moments after you spent a few years being treated like you can’t do anything but spot up and hustle.

but every now and then you get someone who has the absolute respect of everyone who could demand to be put in best position for himself and his own numbers, but instead he buys into the notion that everybody should be who they are. That Patty Mills Got to where he was at his size by being really ****ing good so if he sees something he can wave off a legend and take it. That five point per game guy like Oberto can cut right into the sweet spot of one of the greatest players of all time and get the ball with no hesitation because that’s the right play.

The whole thing worked because Tim Duncan didn’t care about his own status and allowed himself to be coached hard and held as a accountable for making the right play as the last man on the bench.

from his first game to his last, if he calls for the ball on his spot, every single teammate would give it to him and get out of the way. But in his late 20s still in his prime, they go away from running 4 down whenever he wanted it and let everyone be themselves as the league shifted to open up the perimeter.

They just did the right thing. But in a world infected with selfishness and hot take culture where everything has to be a simple as possible to fit neatly into a soundbite giving up four shots so a role-player who has been a star all his life can feel like a real contributor so you can depend on him later is seen as playing worse. And the fact that it doesn’t result in the impossible(winning every game) is used as evidence it was a broken approach.

The whole discussion around the game is beyond cooked. Shit is extra well done, left to cool off on the table, taken home in a to go box, left in the fridge for three days, then thrown in the air fryer to reheat.

Nothing remains of the product but the name and basic shape.


https://i.ibb.co/Q7NXvJRX/IMG-1296.gif
1-9