Printable View
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Great discussion...we should take you seriously from now on.
Does it make you feel better or worse that everyone here knows you got killed in the debate and are very aware of the BS straw man arguments and ad hominem you just pulled?[/QUOTE]
As I said, whatever helps you sleep better. You cherrypick and ignore points worse than 3ball.
:cheers:
[QUOTE=aj1987]As I said, whatever helps you sleep better. You cherrypick and ignore points worse than 3ball.
:cheers:[/QUOTE]
Actually I addressed all of your points...at least any of the ones that made some amount of sense.
And I'm still waiting to hear how the Lakers were improving their offense against the Pistons.
But, regardless, why even be here and start a discussion if you aren't interested in having one?
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Actually I addressed all of your points...at least any of the ones that made some amount of sense.
And I'm still waiting to hear how the Lakers were improving their offense against the Pistons.
But, regardless, why even be here and start a discussion if you aren't interested in having one?[/QUOTE]
You think this actually made sense?
[QUOTE=DMAVS41][B]Those Lakers weren't an elite offense to begin with[/B]...with a 105.5 regular season ortg....good for [B]6th in the league[/B]. Now you think they are going above that against the Pistons? Why?[/QUOTE]
Please stop embarrassing yourself, dude.
[QUOTE=aj1987]You think this actually made sense?
Please stop embarrassing yourself, dude.[/QUOTE]
Do you know what the word "elite" means?
Are you arguing that the Lakers were an "elite" offensive team in 04 prior to the finals?
Wait...you think the words "good" and "elite" are the same thing...wow...okay...things make more sense now.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Do you know what the word "elite" means?
Are you arguing that the Lakers were an "elite" offensive team in 04 prior to the finals?[/QUOTE]
You think the Sonics and Bucks were elite offensively in '04?
Also, you think Kobe and Shaq missing a combined 32 games doesn't effect their ORtg?
[QUOTE=aj1987]You think the Sonics and Bucks were elite offensively in '04?[/QUOTE]
No...I'd have to look it up, but the only team I remember in 04 having an elite offense was the Mavs. My guess is that everyone else wasn't separating themselves much.
Of course Shaq/Kobe missing time impacts...which is why part of my argument was looking at the playoffs to see how they were performing.
Keep up please.
I take Kidd>Payton>Paul.
Jason Kidd is a player you can't judge on boxscores. If they counted hockey assists Kidd would be the all time leader. I've never seen a player like Kidd with such a chess like ability to create offense just by passing, moving, passing, moving. Kidd was like a maestro thinking 3 moves ahead, being just as valuable off ball as on ball.
The only other player I've seen with that innate understanding of the game was Magic. And Kidd in the open floor was all time best level, almost at Magic level there too. Add to that he was a tripple double machine with very good D. He is underrated because you need to see how he dominated games, not just watch highlights or boxscores. Kidd had a massive part in that Mavs championship but doesn't get the credit, next year he is gone, Mavs don't do anything since that. He took the Knicks and made them into a playoff team, again did not get praise (Melo took it), but then he is gone and Knicks suck again, that's the story of Jason Kidd, making teams much better by doing stuff that doesn't show up fully in boxscores.
Payton is second because he is an all time great defender. The Sonics 96 was suffocating, I've never seen anything like it since and it was better than Knicks that I watched in the 90s too. Payton was the man behind it all, not your typical guard impact on defense, he could shut down point guards and shooting guards completely, even almost shutting down the GOAT.
Paul has the best overall talent of the 3. No weaknesses, the best scorer of the 3, but Paul imo lacks the kind of all time skill in one area that Payton (defense) and Kidd (running an offense) have. He is elite in all areas almost, but he does not have all time great ability in any particular area. That's why I think he really is mostly suited to be 1b and not 1a. He is Stockton to a Malone, but even then I still would pick Stockton over Paul.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]No...I'd have to look it up, but the only team I remember in 04 having an elite offense was the Mavs.[/QUOTE]
So you admit that you actually don't remember the season. Box-scores only tell you so much.
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Of course Shaq/Kobe missing time impacts...which is why part of my argument was looking at the playoffs to see how they were performing.[/quote]
You do know that they beat 2 teams with ATG defenders, right?
[QUOTE=aj1987]So you admit that you actually don't remember the season. Box-scores only tell you so much.[/QUOTE]
What?
I'm doing all of this on the top of my head...I clearly remember it better than you.
Did the Mavs have the best offense that year? Yes.
Did the Lakers look like an offensive power in the playoffs prior to the finals? No
So I ask again...why are they getting better against, as you say, an ATG defense?
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]What?
I'm doing all of this on the top of my head...I clearly remember it better than you.
Did the Mavs have the best offense that year? Yes.
Did the Lakers look like an offensive power in the playoffs prior to the finals? No
So I ask again...why are they getting better against, as you say, an ATG defense?[/QUOTE]
Jesus Christ. Now I know why tpols doesn't even bother with you anymore. I'm out.
[QUOTE=aj1987]So you admit that you actually don't remember the season. Box-scores only tell you so much.
You do know that they beat 2 teams with ATG defenders, right?[/QUOTE]
They beat the Spurs, a very good defensive team, in large part because of their own defense.
They had roughly a 101 ortg in that series.
This is why I brought up how well the Pistons were scoring against the Lakers. The Spurs had a 96 ortg against the Lakers...the Pistons had over a 106 ortg.
See how logic works?
[QUOTE=aj1987]Jesus Christ. Now I know why tpols doesn't even bother with you anymore. I'm out.[/QUOTE]
You have been utterly destroyed and my logic/arguments are sound.
You have offered nothing...well, you've now tried arguing that the Lakers had an elite offense in 04...and, sorry, they did not.
I really don't get some people on here...why even start a discussion if you can't even offer up some form of a valid argument and/or are not willing to change your position?
Like...the discussion ends when someone makes the obvious point that the Lakers weren't a special offensive team to begin with, struggled offensively in the playoffs prior to the finals, and looked pretty bad in the finals. That is the first thing someone is going to say.
And you cry and resort to ad hominem? Grow up or go home please.
[QUOTE=aj1987]Shaq was 2nd in MVP voting the next season and was putting up 23/11/3 on 60% the next season.
How the years years change the status of teams. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]
You're going to tell me 23-11 is prime shaq? I also never understood why people were wanting to call shaq mvp that year. It was a weak year at the top for MVP choices, I admit, but still I never got how shaq was in that conversation.
[QUOTE=90sgoat]I take Kidd>Payton>Paul.
Jason Kidd is a player you can't judge on boxscores. If they counted hockey assists Kidd would be the all time leader. I've never seen a player like Kidd with such a chess like ability to create offense just by passing, moving, passing, moving. Kidd was like a maestro thinking 3 moves ahead, being just as valuable off ball as on ball.
The only other player I've seen with that innate understanding of the game was Magic. And Kidd in the open floor was all time best level, almost at Magic level there too. Add to that he was a tripple double machine with very good D. He is underrated because you need to see how he dominated games, not just watch highlights or boxscores. Kidd had a massive part in that Mavs championship but doesn't get the credit, next year he is gone, Mavs don't do anything since that. He took the Knicks and made them into a playoff team, again did not get praise (Melo took it), but then he is gone and Knicks suck again, that's the story of Jason Kidd, making teams much better by doing stuff that doesn't show up fully in boxscores.
Payton is second because he is an all time great defender. The Sonics 96 was suffocating, I've never seen anything like it since and it was better than Knicks that I watched in the 90s too. Payton was the man behind it all, not your typical guard impact on defense, he could shut down point guards and shooting guards completely, even almost shutting down the GOAT.
Paul has the best overall talent of the 3. No weaknesses, the best scorer of the 3, but Paul imo lacks the kind of all time skill in one area that Payton (defense) and Kidd (running an offense) have. He is elite in all areas almost, but he does not have all time great ability in any particular area. That's why I think he really is mostly suited to be 1b and not 1a. He is Stockton to a Malone, but even then I still would pick Stockton over Paul.[/QUOTE]
Paul might be the best half court point guard of all time. He's rather weak next to the likes of Magic and Kidd in the open court.
[QUOTE=dhsilv]You're going to tell me 23-11 is prime shaq? I also never understood why people were wanting to call shaq mvp that year. It was a weak year at the top for MVP choices, I admit, but still I never got how shaq was in that conversation.[/QUOTE]
I think it's okay to call that end of prime Shaq...he obviously wasn't peak, but he was still an elite top 5 player in the league imo.