Kevin Johnson video and some other things....

[QUOTE]On the one hand, you cite MVP awards and top-fifty lists that are determined by writers like Michael Wilbon, but then you censure those same writers when they produce judgments that you don't care for. You can't have it both ways, to cling to journalistic observations when they match your tastes but to deride them when they contradict your deductive notions.[/QUOTE]

For one thing....a large group of people are almost always more likely to come closer to the widespread opinion than a single person writing an article. One person might call Webber better than Duncan or KJ better than Isiah. An entire fanbase is almost sure not to. If the discussion is about where most people had these guys put the more people asked the more accurate the answer. And I dont think you would disagree that if the entire basketball world were asked at the time.....Magic and Isiah are ognna be over KJ.

Secondly...most of the top 50 voters were players and coaches. About 37 of the 50 voters.


[QUOTE]That was my point, to show you that they break both ways and also to reveal that people back then did consider K.J. a rival of Magic/Thomas/Stockton, and not just Hardaway/Mullin. But most of all, the statistical evidence supports many of those observations.[/QUOTE]

"People back then" doesnt mean "most people back then". There are people in every era that have unusual opinions. There are people who would put Arenas on the level of Kobe and Lebron right now. And in the future one could honestly say "People believed Arenas was as good as Kobe." That doesnt make it the norm nor does it mean its really being honest to act like a lot of people thought it.

When it comes right down to it...you look hard enough....someone thinks just about everything.

[QUOTE]And again, Kblaze, as I noted, I actually agreed with most and possibly all of those guys that you listed who you would place above K.J.! In many ways, we're on the same page, and yet you chose to censure me just because I casually stated that I'd start considering K.J. in the twenties-range.[/QUOTE]

"Censure" you? I also saw you mentioned I "went nuts". Which kinda amuses me. I suppose you would have to be around me longer than you have to see how I am. Im almost never as outraged as my "matter of fact" tone might suggest. Im just a confrontational bastard when I even sorta disagree about something. But I can still say KJ being argued in the 20s is among the most "out there" things ive ever read. Im not as concerned about you thinking itas my tone might suggest. But I do find it bordering on insanity.

You caught me like 2 years too late for this. Used to have these looooong drawn out things but I just dont have it in me anymore. I expected to if anything need to defend KJ. I'll read whatever it is you have to say I just dont feel like writing another few thousand words on the matter right now.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]For one thing....a large group of people are almost always more likely to come closer to the widespread opinion than a single person writing an article. One person might call Webber better than Duncan or KJ better than Isiah. An entire fanbase is almost sure not to. If the discussion is about where most people had these guys put the more people asked the more accurate the answer. And I dont think you would disagree that if the entire basketball world were asked at the time.....Magic and Isiah are ognna be over KJ.

Secondly...most of the top 50 voters were players and coaches. About 37 of the 50 voters.




"People back then" doesnt mean "most people back then". There are people in every era that have unusual opinions. There are people who would put Arenas on the level of Kobe and Lebron right now. And in the future one could honestly say "People believed Arenas was as good as Kobe." That doesnt make it the norm nor does it mean its really being honest to act like a lot of people thought it.

When it comes right down to it...you look hard enough....someone thinks just about everything.

You caught me like 2 years too late for this. Used to have these looooong drawn out things but I just dont have it in me anymore. I expected to if anything need to defend KJ. I'll read whatever it is you have to say I just dont feel like writing another few thousand words on the matter right now.[/QUOTE]

I quoted more than one writer. Instead, I noted two of them, Michael Wilbon and Randy Harvey, from two of the nation's most prominent newspapers, the [I]Washington Post [/I]and the [I]L.A. Times[/I], respectively. I also quoted Byron Scott and Michael Cooper talking as if K.J. was a tougher matchup for them than Isiah Thomas in a long [I]L.A. Times [/I]article from '89, earlier in the thread. I've also quoted the [I]Sporting News[/I] pertaining to Magic and K.J., and here's another quote, this one from David Aldridge of the [I]Washington Post[/I]:

[B]Johnson: Lakers Out of Gear;Guard Says Playoff Mode Not Reached in Loss to Suns; [FINAL Edition]
David Aldridge. The Washington Post (pre-1997 Fulltext). Washington, D.C.: May 17, 1990. pg. d.01

They can beat the Lakers in transition. And they have someone who can can out-Showtime Showtime: Kevin Johnson.

"Kevin Johnson is a unique player," Lakers Coach Pat Riley said. "We tried to do everything we could with him. He just rose to the occasion."[/B]

These were leading sportswriters in the nation's premier publications, not just a couple of crazies. But, hey, I agree that writers don't always make the correct assessment. However, they do tend to shape and reflect the common viewpoints of the day, and you can't support their perspective in the MVP balloting but ignore it elsewhere. After all, the writers vote for the All-NBA Teams, too. They last selected Isiah Thomas in 1987, whereas K.J. made one of the All-NBA Teams in five of six years from 1989-1994 (the last six seasons of Thomas' career). Plenty of writers were voting for K.J. and not Thomas, and with sound statistical reason (as I explained earlier).

As for players and coaches, they're subject to the same bias, political correctness, and possible ineptitude as anyone else. In 1999, American League managers gave Rafael Palmerio the Gold Glove for first base even though he spent nearly the enitre season as a designated hitter. There is no "safe," bias-free group at work here, but again, if you want to take the word of coaches, look at Pat Riley's quote about K.J. He'd seen plenty of star players and point guards in his NBA career as a player and coach, but he termed K.J. "unique." Also see Archibald's quote on K.J. from earlier in the thread, or how players, coaches, and executives from around the league said that he could penetrate like Magic Johnson, was as quick with the ball as John Stockton, and had a left-hand like Larry Bird (again, it's all in one of the articles that I posted). See my quote from Olajuwon on K.J., too. I've cited players, coaches, executives, writers, statistics, team success, head-to-head competition, everything. I've covered all the angles here.

Anyway, I still thank you for compiling the video.

With the exception of having a left hand like Larry Bird(Larry was able to play entire games left handed for fun...and did a few times in 86 and 87)...I dont disagree much with anything I see there.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]With the exception of having a left hand like Larry Bird(Larry was able to play entire games left handed for fun...and did a few times in 86 and 87)...I dont disagree much with anything I see there.[/QUOTE]

And remember, that's the opinion of those players, coaches, and executives surveyed around the NBA, not my statement.

[QUOTE=ScottStuart]Put it this way, if KJ would have won a championship during his career, we would be talking about him being a hall of famer right now. If the Suns would have beat the bulls, he would have been elevated a few notches.[/QUOTE]

Late in his career, teammates felt that K.J. was a Hall of Famer. It hasn't turned out that way so far, but ...

Jason Kidd on K.J., March 1998:

[B]When you have a future Hall-of-Famer in KJ, you have to believe in him. He kept everybody composed and took charge, and that's what we've been lacking. [/B]

[url]http://www.basketballreference.com/teams/boxscore.htm?yr=1997&b=19980327&tm=PHO[/url]

Rex Chapman on K.J., February 1998:

[B]In the fourth quarter when everything we did ran dry, we get a Hall-of-Famer off the bench. He was able to break down their defense at will when he wanted to. [/B]

[url]http://www.basketballreference.com/teams/boxscore.htm?yr=1997&b=19980202&tm=PHI[/url]

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]I remember that thread, I did it about 2-3 months or so ago.


KJ's best seasons (stat wise anyway) were 88-89 and 89-90, so those I considered 1980's seasons. GP's best seaons' were probally in the early part of this decade (stat wise). Looking back at it now, it's a tough choice to make as to who had the best career in the 90's out of the two. GP has way more awards and what not like All-Star games/All-NBA Games/All-D teams .[/QUOTE]
1989-1990 is considred part of the 90s. Otherwise, 99-00 would need to be considered part of the 90s, and since seasons are said by the year when the Finals are played, 89-90 is part of the 90s. The Lakers are the 00 Champoins, so 99-00 is part of the 00s.

KBlaze, one thing I still haven't understood, and were you haven't made sense.

[QUOTE=KBlaze]
KJ wasnt voted top 50 all time in 1996. Im sure you agree nothing after 96 made his legacy. Even with all these coaches and players talking him up that you post(you dedicate yourself enough damn near every great player has similar quotes on him). Got a list of legends, long long time media members who covered 30+ years, coaches, and so on voting and KJ did not crack top 50. Yet 12 years later having done nothing to add to his legacy he jumps from below 50 to arguably #21? He might be underrated...but hes not that underrated.[/QUOTE]


This was your number one argument why KJ doesn't deserve Top 40. You argued some other points as well, but GMAT rebuted them and then you didn't argue them back.


And then later you argued more about why what "others" think, matter nothing to you. Hypocritical. I understand that there were more people on the Top 50, than a journal article, but how many time has the "Majority" been wrong? Not just basketball, but in real life. And are you saying you just believe what the "Majority" believes.

The same "coaches" and everything voted Larry Hughes to All-Defensive. The "Majority" did. Does that mean he deserved it?



And then you just kept on arguing how there is "No way" KJ can be that high, and just held that stance. Way too narrow minded. Just didn't believe it because "There is no way it could be true".

Well its not always like that, and its a very ignorant way of thinking. Just because a large majoriity doesn' think so, once you actually start throwing "real" arguments, and giving KJ a chance and a look, you'll come to a different conclusion.

KJ was just as good as Isiah, and better than Stockton at his peak (they played around the same time). I don't see how its "so" unbelievablle.



But yeah, bottom line, you're WAY too narrow minded.
"KJ can't be that high, he just can't, I am not going to even try reading"
You sound ignorant

Really how many times am I supposed to explain this? Pointing out that most wouldnt put him highly doesnt mean im saying the majority is always right. But if what im being given to support it is a few people saying he IS that high pointing out that most wouldnt say it is not only reasonable its pretty much the only thing that needs to be said. I am shown articles with a couple reporters and a couple players saying how great he is. The top 50 list is 37 legends and coaches and more than a dozen longtime media members. Point of mentioning them is the same as his point of showing me what Barkley, Riley, and whoever else said.

Neither opinion from either source proves it right. But he said it to show some people who believed one thing....I showed that a hell of a lot more(equally qialified) peoples combined opinions say otherwise.

Its the exact same thing just on a grander scale without the indidivual quote aspect.

Ive never said the top 50 list is actually the top 50 players. But when most of what I see to suggest KJ deserves to be ranked highly is a few peoples opinion showing 50 of the same kind of peoples combined opinion is relevant.

I dont think I could explain it clearer than that.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Really how many times am I supposed to explain this? Pointing out that most wouldnt put him highly doesnt mean im saying the majority is always right. But if what im being given to support it is a few people saying he IS that high pointing out that most wouldnt say it is not only reasonable its pretty much the only thing that needs to be said. I am shown articles with a couple reporters and a couple players saying how great he is. The top 50 list is 37 legends and coaches and more than a dozen longtime media members. Point of mentioning them is the same as his point of showing me what Barkley, Riley, and whoever else said.

Neither opinion from either source proves it right. But he said it to show some people who believed one thing....I showed that a hell of a lot more(equally qialified) peoples combined opinions say otherwise.

Its the exact same thing just on a grander scale without the indidivual quote aspect.

Ive never said the top 50 list is actually the top 50 players. But when most of what I see to suggest KJ deserves to be ranked highly is a few peoples opinion showing 50 of the same kind of peoples combined opinion is relevant.

I dont think I could explain it clearer than that.[/QUOTE]

Ok so, KJ not being one of the Top 50, or not being there, or not being here don't prove anything. So then why did you post it to start out with?

Thats the only reason GMAT posted all his articles, was because you made it sound like

1. He wasn't in the 50 greatest, so he isn't that great
2. He was compared to lesser players like Hardaway, not greats.


And thats why all the articles were posted.







So basically, him not making 50 greatest doesn't prove anything, and I guess to "you" the articles don't prove anything either. But it does show, the comparisoin is legit, its not something totally off the mark. It proves that it is "believable", not true or false, but has a shot of being true.



So really, you haven't shown anything to say he isn't Top 40, and I guess all the articles posted didn't do anything either.




Quick Question:


Jason Kidd or Kevin Johnson? Tell me career and prime/peak

[QUOTE]Ok so, KJ not being one of the Top 50, or not being there, or not being here don't prove anything. So then why did you post it to start out with?[/QUOTE]

Didnt you just ask that?

[QUOTE]Thats the only reason GMAT posted all his articles, was because you made it sound like

1. He wasn't in the 50 greatest, so he isn't that great
2. He was compared to lesser players like Hardaway, not greats.


And thats why all the articles were posted.[/QUOTE]


Articles were posted before I said anything to him and not all of them were in response to me even then.

[QUOTE]So basically, him not making 50 greatest doesn't prove anything, and I guess to "you" the articles don't prove anything either. But it does show, the comparisoin is legit, its not something totally off the mark. It proves that it is "believable", not true or false, but has a shot of being true.[/QUOTE]

Not really. Someone believing something doesnt make it generally believable. You more than most will dismiss an opinion you dont like and go as far as to claim you can prove things are or arent true. You shouldnt be one speaking on the greatness of an open mind.



[QUOTE]Quick Question:


Jason Kidd or Kevin Johnson? Tell me career and prime/peak[/QUOTE]

I dont consider the difference big enough to bother arguing over it. Tossup.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Didnt you just ask that?




Articles were posted before I said anything to him and not all of them were in response to me even then.



Not really. Someone believing something doesnt make it generally believable. You more than most will dismiss an opinion you dont like and go as far as to claim you can prove things are or arent true. You shouldnt be one speaking on the greatness of an open mind.




[/quote]

Come on, I have a open mind. I'll be honest, I went in with Payton over Reed. A little biased, but mostly just without thinking too much becaues Payton was already 3-4 spots behind Stockton. But quickly the arguments made me change my mind, becaues I realized thats what I would be sayiing...Though its still close. I kept on arguing, because the list wasn't about accuracy anymore, it was about who you like. But anyways, at least it shows I have an open mind.

[quote]
I dont consider the difference big enough to bother arguing over it. Tossup.[/QUOTE]


EXACTLY what I wanted to hear. I remember you calling KJ NOT Top 50.


So either you consider Jason Kidd not Top 50, or your mind has changed because of this thread....


Your call....

Actually the problem is the divide between peak and career. Its hard to decide who ranks higher in those situation. There is the "Who would I rather have" question and the "Who had the btter career" question. On one its a tossup and on the other the answer is clear. Not being able to decide myself which id rather use at the moment it wouldnt be right to argue with someone who has the same opinion I might if asked on a different day.

There is no major difference between how good the two players were and ill leave it at that. should be enough anyway.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Actually the problem is the divide between peak and career. Its hard to decide who ranks higher in those situation. There is the "Who would I rather have" question and the "Who had the btter career" question. On one its a tossup and on the other the answer is clear. Not being able to decide myself which id rather use at the moment it wouldnt be right to argue with someone who has the same opinion I might if asked on a different day.

There is no major difference between how good the two players were and ill leave it at that. should be enough anyway.[/QUOTE]

Now your trying to back off from what you said...

[QUOTE=Glove_20]Jason Kidd or Kevin Johnson? Tell me career and prime/peak [/QUOTE]

Thats what I said. I asked for career AND peak.

Your answer:

[QUOTE=KBlaze8855]I dont consider the difference big enough to bother arguing over it. Tossup. [/QUOTE]


You called it a tie on both.


And now your changing because I questioned your previous calls on KJ
:oldlol:

Someone is back pedaling...

[QUOTE=KBlaze8855]
There is the "Who would I rather have" question and the "Who had the btter career" question. On one its a tossup and on the other the answer is clear. [/QUOTE]

I am trying to figure out which one is a tossup and which one is clear. Because I can't see it. Because even career, is mostly who was better, with slight additions to longevity. Accomplisments can really go into both, but yeah, they go mostly with career as well.



But anyways KBlaze, nice backpedal, I asked for Career AND Peak, and you called it a toss up. But now, you change up...:applause:

You really think I look that deeply into such a question? I told you its a tossup the first time you asked then explained why its a tossup. That isnt a backpedal...its just an explanation. I dont even know what id be backing off of if I were. Do you have some point that I missed and dont know that im supposed to be arguing with?

Oh I see. Since you said peak/career my one response is supposed to have covered both? I just figured you meant in general. Had you asked 2 seperate questions you would have been given two seperate answers. Didnt think it needed two answers at the time.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]
Oh I see. Since you said peak/career my one response is supposed to have covered both? I just figured you meant in general. Had you asked 2 seperate questions you would have been given two seperate answers. Didnt think it needed two answers at the time.[/QUOTE]

Finally you see.

When someone says

[QUOTE=Glove_20]Jason Kidd or Kevin Johnson? Tell me career [B]and[/B] prime/peak [/QUOTE]

And puts a "and" in there, that usually means 2 answers. And you gave it all in 1, so that probably meant that its tossup for both. But then later, after I questioned it, you started to change and seperate the 2 answers...Thats where backpedaling came


2nd, really, the main difference between prime/peak and career is there is a "slight" addition on how long the player played and longevity. Most of career also is how good the player was.