-
01-27-2025, 10:51 AM
#181
Embiid > Jokic
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by Phoenix
Yeah I know, it wasn't genuine engagement. Its like when I ask 3ball a 'serious' question, I do it more so I can laugh at the reply than any interest in actually discussing the topic. Or I like pointing out the contradictions within their own talking points. What can I say, it amuses me.
That John poster lost me at Stockton> Shaq.
I enjoyed CP3 as the 3rd best player of the last 15 years as well
-
01-27-2025, 10:55 AM
#182
Euros rule NBA, UMAD?
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by SouBeachTalents
I enjoyed CP3 as the 3rd best player of the last 15 years as well
Lol I didn't even notice that. I tend to gloss over his lists because I already know there's gonna be some wacky shit in there.
-
01-27-2025, 06:05 PM
#183
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by Phoenix
How do you come up with a top 4 of MJ, Lebron, Wilt and Larry when by your own admission the game changes every decade( I would push that to about 15 years but the main point holds), and these guys were all at their best in different eras?
Position wise...I consider Larry a Small Forward because he was a shoot first type player and Lebron a Power Foward because he was more of a ball handler point forward. So Jordan is the best shooting guard, Lebron the best PF, Wilt the best Center, and Magic as the best PG. I wouldn't have Magic strictly as the next player up because Kareem was a better player but they would be pretty close.
 Originally Posted by SouBeachTalents
I enjoyed CP3 as the 3rd best player of the last 15 years as well
I think CPIII has a great case for number 3 over other players...who did better in Phoenix Chris Paul or Kevin Durant? Who did better with the Clippers, Chris Paul or Kwahi Leonard? Who did better in OKC Russell Westbrook and Paul George or Chris Paul? Who did better with James Harden, Joel Embiid, Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook etc. I think very highly of Chris Paul and his ability to turn a team into contenders.
 Originally Posted by Phoenix
That John poster lost me at Stockton> Shaq.
I'm not 3Ball I don't post Shaq hate every week on this forum.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...ime-quot-great
But if you want to get into why I would value Stockton over Shaq....well VORP, Value Over Replacement is a metric and Stockton is 3 all time behind Wilt and MJ. He's significantly higher than Shaq in +/- and win shares. Also Head to Head in the playoffs Stockton is 8-1 against Shaq.
-
01-27-2025, 06:11 PM
#184
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by Phoenix
Lol I didn't even notice that. I tend to gloss over his lists because I already know there's gonna be some wacky shit in there.
VORP
1. LeBron James 154.47
2. Michael Jordan* 116.05
3. John Stockton* 106.53
4. Karl Malone* 98.96
5. Chris Paul 98.46
6. Kevin Garnett* 96.86
7. Tim Duncan* 91.09
8. Kevin Durant 86.23
9. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 85.72
10. Dirk Nowitzki* 84.82
Win Shares
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 273.41
2. LeBron James 267.57
3. Wilt Chamberlain* 247.26
4. Karl Malone* 234.63
5. Michael Jordan* 214.02
6. Chris Paul 213.33
7. John Stockton* 207.70
8. Tim Duncan* 206.38
9. Dirk Nowitzki* 206.34
10. Kevin Garnett* 191.42
Plus/Minus
. Nikola Jokić 10.19
2. Michael Jordan* 9.21
3. LeBron James 8.57
4. Magic Johnson* 7.54
5. David Robinson* 7.47
6. Larry Bird* 6.89
7. John Stockton* 6.84
8. Chris Paul 6.75
9. Kawhi Leonard 6.61
10. Giannis Antetokounmpo 6.57
Which begs the question...if Jokic's plus minus is so important why are you guys crapping on Stockton and Paul who are also top ten in the same category?
-
01-27-2025, 08:12 PM
#185
Euros rule NBA, UMAD?
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by John8204
VORP
1. LeBron James 154.47
2. Michael Jordan* 116.05
3. John Stockton* 106.53
4. Karl Malone* 98.96
5. Chris Paul 98.46
6. Kevin Garnett* 96.86
7. Tim Duncan* 91.09
8. Kevin Durant 86.23
9. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 85.72
10. Dirk Nowitzki* 84.82
Win Shares
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 273.41
2. LeBron James 267.57
3. Wilt Chamberlain* 247.26
4. Karl Malone* 234.63
5. Michael Jordan* 214.02
6. Chris Paul 213.33
7. John Stockton* 207.70
8. Tim Duncan* 206.38
9. Dirk Nowitzki* 206.34
10. Kevin Garnett* 191.42
Plus/Minus
. Nikola Jokić 10.19
2. Michael Jordan* 9.21
3. LeBron James 8.57
4. Magic Johnson* 7.54
5. David Robinson* 7.47
6. Larry Bird* 6.89
7. John Stockton* 6.84
8. Chris Paul 6.75
9. Kawhi Leonard 6.61
10. Giannis Antetokounmpo 6.57
Which begs the question...if Jokic's plus minus is so important why are you guys crapping on Stockton and Paul who are also top ten in the same category?
Well for one I haven't said anything about Jokic plus minus. But since you want to apply those metrics above, Stockton and Chris Paul would be top 10 players all time since they're top 10 in those categories, right? If that's not the case, then clearly alot more goes into how we measure the greatness of these players than these categories. I mean, plus minus has David Robinson over Bird, the latter whom you have in your top 4 (and Bird is nowhere on the others lists above). Karl Malone is 4th in VORP and Win shares,yet he's way down on your list of PFs in post #171 and nowhere near as high on the GOAT list as those metrics would suggest( or rather, as you're applying those metrics to make a case for Stockton).
That's the problem with using such blanket metrics to make a case for whoever you want to argue for. They often don't hold up across the board and can lead to unintended consequences elsewhere.
Last edited by Phoenix; 01-27-2025 at 08:15 PM.
-
01-27-2025, 08:22 PM
#186
Euros rule NBA, UMAD?
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by John8204
Position wise...I consider Larry a Small Forward because he was a shoot first type player and Lebron a Power Foward because he was more of a ball handler point forward. So Jordan is the best shooting guard, Lebron the best PF, Wilt the best Center, and Magic as the best PG. I wouldn't have Magic strictly as the next player up because Kareem was a better player but they would be pretty close.
That doesn't answer my question. Earlier you said this....
"The game changes every ten years...Jordan only had to play against US players. Lebron was able to move whenever his contract ran out. Kareem only had to play against half the best players in the world because of the ABA. The early generation guys had to be more well rounded because they had less than 100 jobs. The only constant in basketball is change you might not care about what came before you started watching but it still exists and has value."
Again....with all of that said above how are you able to then come up with a top 4 of Lebron, MJ, Bird and Wilt when they all played in different eras( there's some overlap with Bird and MJ but Larry is more 80s and Jordan 90s) and played with different advantages and disadvantages? I'm not talking about their positions, I'm talking about what you said immediately above. One can draw from that is that it's extremely hard to rank players especially across eras, yet you've done it anyway so like most people you apply subjective criteria as much as objective depending on what viewpoint you want to push. When you want to push something like Stockton> Shaq, you search on basketball reference for whatever advanced metrics uphold that viewpoint, but you don't apply those metrics evenly because if you did your own rankings across the board wouldn't hold up.
Last edited by Phoenix; 01-27-2025 at 08:30 PM.
-
01-27-2025, 08:46 PM
#187
Lol
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by Phoenix
Well for one I haven't said anything about Jokic plus minus. But since you want to apply those metrics above, Stockton and Chris Paul would be top 10 players all time since they're top 10 in those categories, right? If that's not the case, then clearly alot more goes into how we measure the greatness of these players than these categories. I mean, plus minus has David Robinson over Bird, the latter whom you have in your top 4 (and Bird is nowhere on the others lists above). Karl Malone is 4th in VORP and Win shares,yet he's way down on your list of PFs in post #171 and nowhere near as high on the GOAT list as those metrics would suggest( or rather, as you're applying those metrics to make a case for Stockton).
That's the problem with using such blanket metrics to make a case for whoever you want to argue for. They often don't hold up across the board and can lead to unintended consequences elsewhere.
VORP and win shares are also cumulative stats, definitely always gonna favor guys like Malone, Stockton, and CP3 who were at minimum good players for like 20 ****ing years in comparison to someone like Bird or Magic who didn't play that long and had even shorter at their peak. No one is probably ever catching LeBron in VORP for this reason, although LeBron is actually a GOAT candidate. I'd probably rank CP3 a lot higher than most would though, personally, Malone and Stockton I can't because they were suspect in the playoffs. For all CP3's playoff criticisms, he's always produced at his normal rate in the playoffs, Malone and Stockton were playoff droppers which kind of insinuates you are beating up on bad teams in terms of your stats.
-
01-27-2025, 09:07 PM
#188
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by Phoenix
Well for one I haven't said anything about Jokic plus minus. But since you want to apply those metrics above, Stockton and Chris Paul would be top 10 players all time since they're top 10 in those categories, right? If that's not the case, then clearly alot more goes into how we measure the greatness of these players than these categories. I mean, plus minus has David Robinson over Bird, the latter whom you have in your top 4 (and Bird is nowhere on the others lists above). Karl Malone is 4th in VORP and Win shares,yet he's way down on your list of PFs in post #171 and nowhere near as high on the GOAT list as those metrics would suggest( or rather, as you're applying those metrics to make a case for Stockton).
That's the problem with using such blanket metrics to make a case for whoever you want to argue for. They often don't hold up across the board and can lead to unintended consequences elsewhere.
No single metric should be judged as an end all be all, for me it's when players show up in multiple categories. I probably should rank K.Malone higher but a lot of the stuff he did has become less impressive as the years have gone by. Also growing up watching them play I always considered Charles to be better than Karl. One of the big knocks I would have with Malone was at the time 30K was a big deal but now that bench mark has been crossed by Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Shaq, and Carmello and it's going to be passed by Durant, Harden, Doncic and who else. Somebody averaging 14 APG and leading the league 9 straight seasons..that's not going to happen.
The difference is I'm not going to tell anyone their crazy or wacky if they want to rank Karl in the top 20/10
-
01-27-2025, 09:19 PM
#189
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by Phoenix
That doesn't answer my question. Earlier you said this....
"The game changes every ten years...Jordan only had to play against US players. Lebron was able to move whenever his contract ran out. Kareem only had to play against half the best players in the world because of the ABA. The early generation guys had to be more well rounded because they had less than 100 jobs. The only constant in basketball is change you might not care about what came before you started watching but it still exists and has value."
Again....with all of that said above how are you able to then come up with a top 4 of Lebron, MJ, Bird and Wilt when they all played in different eras( there's some overlap with Bird and MJ but Larry is more 80s and Jordan 90s) and played with different advantages and disadvantages? I'm not talking about their positions, I'm talking about what you said immediately above. One can draw from that is that it's extremely hard to rank players especially across eras, yet you've done it anyway so like most people you apply subjective criteria as much as objective depending on what viewpoint you want to push. When you want to push something like Stockton> Shaq, you search on basketball reference for whatever advanced metrics uphold that viewpoint, but you don't apply those metrics evenly because if you did your own rankings across the board wouldn't hold up.
You have to draw a line somewhere I consider Larry more of an 80's player than a 90's. Things are open for interpretation...Bird and Jordan did play against each other and in the playoffs Jordan never beat Bird. Now I could rank Bird ahead of Jordan but Jordan had other things going for him. No metric can be evenly judged over time different generations had different situations.
Sociology is also a science and kind of a factor here. My issue with Shaq and Shaq is when people talk about him it always feel anecdotal. Oh he was the most dominant player you ever saw, well my counter point would be for a guy so dominant he got swept a lot. He was also only able to win when playing with other MVP's and he wasn't great at that either. I'm more inclined to take players who stuck around on one team than someone who bounces around and doesn't have success.
Which brings me to Chris Paul, you see Chris Paul showing up on these lists. We all saw how Chris performed when he switches teams.
But I reject the notion that we should quantify older players because it's to hard or it won't be equitable. I'd like to think we live in a world with different opinions.
-
01-28-2025, 08:31 AM
#190
Sixers|Eagles|Phillies
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by StrongLurk
Dude is basically Dirk Nowitzki but with elite PG passing abilities added on. Even though he hasn't made a finals yet, he has always been a superstar in the playoffs.
Last three regular seasons averages (170 games).
Jokic: 26.4/12/8.2 with only 3.5 turnovers per game. 32.1 PER, 66 TS%, 12.8 BPM
I understand the league is very offensive friendly now, but the Joker is annihilating everyone on offense. His advanced stats look like prime MJ/Lebron level. If he was a black American and athletic (more exciting playstyle), he'd be in GOAT talks. I still see many people act like Embiid is better than Jokic, which is very odd since Embiid has accomplished less than Joker and is definitely a worse playoff performer.
Jokic has zero personality for starters. For the avg fan to gravitate to you? You must have some type of personality. You have to relate to the avg nba fan in some way as well. Jokic fails at all of this. In fact he’s one of the euros who isn’t pressured to promote, push the NBA like other American star players are held to do. Him and Luka can just hoop and disappear. People like you want him to be the face of the league or the guy that carries the league. But he does zero for the actual NBA brand. He rarely talks, you hardly see him. But if he were black he be popular homie. Real talk son. To debunk this moronic take Tom Duncan had zero personality as well. Too reserved/quiet. KG is outgoing, animated. He drew avg nba fans to him. That’s how that works. You don’t get to be an introvert with no marketability, giving off a non care attitude to promote the game you play. And be well received by the avg nba fan. If he was black he be Tim Duncan. And your next narrative would be “if he were black and acted ghetto he be more popular”.
You fans got to stop this nonsense here.
Jokic won an nba championship and gave off the most I couldn’t care less attitude/vibe I’ve ever seen him an athlete. He shrugged off a parade in Denver. A place that doesn’t get to see man titles. A place that superstars do not sign to play for. He said I want to go home and play with my horsies. Home being overseas not anywhere in America. Euros get off easy not being held to the same standard as American star players to PROMOTE and PUSH the nba brand/logo. Him and Luka get to go home and chug beers and wrestle siblings in the living room while grandmom cooks. Give me a break. Here are the endorsements Jokic reps…
361°: Jokić signed a multi-year deal with the Chinese sports brand in late 2023. He will develop and wear shoes for the brand, including his first signature shoe.
Panini: Jokić has a deal with the trading card company.
Somborac: Jokić has a deal with the Serbian fruit brandy company.
Western Union: Jokić has a deal with the financial services company.
Hotels.com: Jokić appeared in a commercial for the hotel company
What? Hahahaha
Your take on Melo is silly. Melo has relatability to the avg nba fan. You see Melo at basketball camps. You see Melo in the communities be it where he plays or at home. Melo is out and about with the people. Not a hard concept to grasp here. Jokic is not underrated in any sense of the word.
If Anthony Edwards was quiet, reserved. Had a non chalaant attitude towards the league outside the nba. Dunked and handed the ball to ref. Scored on KD and didn’t utter a word. No post game trash talk. Guess what? Ready for this? He’d have less avg nba fans than he does being who he is today. Shocker I know.
-
01-28-2025, 09:55 AM
#191
Euros rule NBA, UMAD?
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by RRR3
VORP and win shares are also cumulative stats, definitely always gonna favor guys like Malone, Stockton, and CP3 who were at minimum good players for like 20 ****ing years in comparison to someone like Bird or Magic who didn't play that long and had even shorter at their peak. No one is probably ever catching LeBron in VORP for this reason, although LeBron is actually a GOAT candidate. I'd probably rank CP3 a lot higher than most would though, personally, Malone and Stockton I can't because they were suspect in the playoffs. For all CP3's playoff criticisms, he's always produced at his normal rate in the playoffs, Malone and Stockton were playoff droppers which kind of insinuates you are beating up on bad teams in terms of your stats.
Good point. I actually do think very highly of CP3 but I can't roll with the idea that he was the third best player of the past 15 years, which is John's contention. Lebron, Steph and KD are inarguable, as are Giannis and Jokic. Kawhi was better peak for peak but he's hard to rank and injuries have become as much a part of his legacy as his accolades. I don't like Harden's style and he's always been a relative playoff underperformer, but his name at least warrants a mention in a discussion about the 10-15 best players of the last 15 years. You also got someone like D.Wade who peaked higher, won a chip with FMVP to boot. I'm probably forgetting a few obvious names in there, but it's early and I'm just on my first coffee lol.
 Originally Posted by John8204
No single metric should be judged as an end all be all, for me it's when players show up in multiple categories. I probably should rank K.Malone higher but a lot of the stuff he did has become less impressive as the years have gone by. Also growing up watching them play I always considered Charles to be better than Karl. One of the big knocks I would have with Malone was at the time 30K was a big deal but now that bench mark has been crossed by Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Shaq, and Carmello and it's going to be passed by Durant, Harden, Doncic and who else. Somebody averaging 14 APG and leading the league 9 straight seasons..that's not going to happen.
The difference is I'm not going to tell anyone their crazy or wacky if they want to rank Karl in the top 20/10
I think alot would say Charles was better, I'm in that category as well. That's talking peak for peak. But they're close enough to where Malone's GOAT ranking is going to be higher for most due to longevity. That would be the major point of separation with those two.
I would say all 30k numbers aren't equal. You had guys who did it without the 3pointer and those for which it's a major component of their games. A few of those guys also came into the NBA as teenagers and due to modern science are playing longer than past players. KD ,Lebron and Steph all dropping 25ppg past 35 is pretty much something only MJ did, in recent memory. Alot of guys by mid thirties were done or not remotely producing like they were in their primes. It just is what it is, as long as it's contextualized.
 Originally Posted by John8204
You have to draw a line somewhere I consider Larry more of an 80's player than a 90's. Things are open for interpretation...Bird and Jordan did play against each other and in the playoffs Jordan never beat Bird. Now I could rank Bird ahead of Jordan but Jordan had other things going for him. No metric can be evenly judged over time different generations had different situations.
Sociology is also a science and kind of a factor here. My issue with Shaq and Shaq is when people talk about him it always feel anecdotal. Oh he was the most dominant player you ever saw, well my counter point would be for a guy so dominant he got swept a lot. He was also only able to win when playing with other MVP's and he wasn't great at that either. I'm more inclined to take players who stuck around on one team than someone who bounces around and doesn't have success.
Which brings me to Chris Paul, you see Chris Paul showing up on these lists. We all saw how Chris performed when he switches teams.
But I reject the notion that we should quantify older players because it's to hard or it won't be equitable. I'd like to think we live in a world with different opinions.
I did say Bird was more 80s and MJ 90s even though their careers crossed paths. You're regurgitating my point at me for whatever reason. 
It's weird to say Shaq's dominance was 'anecdotal'. Millions of us saw him 25 years ago and we mostly all came to the same conclusion. 'Anecdotal' is more of a personal account that isn't shared by many others, but we all saw Shaq in 2000 to speak to his dominance, so I don't think anecdotal is the word you want. Overstated? Overrated? Shaq had his weaknesses, namely free throws and the fact that as a traditional big he needed guards to feed him the ball. The flipside is you couldn't do anything with him for 46 minutes and he was fouling out entire frontlines which compromised your team defense. He sucked so much defensive gravity towards the rim which opened up the perimeter. Saying he didn't do much without elite guards goes down the rabbit hole of looking at every past great who won with other all-time greats by their side. If you don't diminish MJ for winning with Pippen, Bird for winning with Mchale and Parish, Magic winning with Kareem, then you're unfairly diminishing Shaq for playing with Kobe and Wade.
It's also odd that you say you're inclined to take players who stuck around with one team as a knock on Shaq, but not on CP3 who has played on 7 teams and most notably Lebron who you have in your top 4 despite playing on 4 teams. Which is the issue with your takes, not the surface opinion but the underlying logic and more specifically the contradictions. What you use to knock Shaq isn't an issue with another player you prefer, and you have a 3ball-like ability to weasel around such contradictions so you always give yourself an out. It's pretty transparent.
As for how to argue for older players, nobody is saying that we don't live in a world with differing opinions. My point with the metrics you use is that they apply evenly, and if they don't apply evenly then its a flawed way to argue and/or you need to use other criteria but it's all subjective. You don't just throw out VORP, Winshare and +/- numbers when you think it suites the argument, then recoil from it when it doesn't and trot out reductive 'we all have opinions' when yours is challenged.
Last edited by Phoenix; 01-28-2025 at 10:08 AM.
-
01-28-2025, 09:53 PM
#192
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
I can certainly understand why someone would take Kevin Durant over Chris Paul. But Chris Paul went to the finals with Deandre Ayton and Devin Booker while Kevin Durant couldn't win with James Harden and Kyrie Irving. Chris Paul is an elevator he goes to franchises and teams that can't win and puts them into contention...Shaq left Penny, and Kobe and Dwayne and Nash and Lebron. CPIII is near 40 joined a 20 win team and is top 10 in APG and the team is on pace to double it's win total. And here's where we get into the anecdotal part...you go back to 2000 and you see Shaq as a dominant force. I go back to 2000 I remember it took him 7 games and shady officiating to beat Portland. For all the talk about how dominant Shaq was...he pretty much only won when had an easy draw. It's not like he was Bill Walton taking out Kareem and Dr. J in back to back series.
And generally speaking I do hold players that stick around with one franchise for the majority of their careers. I'm always going to support a Reggie Miller or John Stockton or Dirk Nowitzki who puts in the work. I also think in 10 years CPIII will drop down for this generation to about five behind Doncic and Giannis, but they haven't gotten there yet.
-
01-29-2025, 09:13 AM
#193
Euros rule NBA, UMAD?
Re: I still think Jokic is underrated
 Originally Posted by John8204
I can certainly understand why someone would take Kevin Durant over Chris Paul. But Chris Paul went to the finals with Deandre Ayton and Devin Booker while Kevin Durant couldn't win with James Harden and Kyrie Irving. Chris Paul is an elevator he goes to franchises and teams that can't win and puts them into contention...Shaq left Penny, and Kobe and Dwayne and Nash and Lebron. CPIII is near 40 joined a 20 win team and is top 10 in APG and the team is on pace to double it's win total. And here's where we get into the anecdotal part...you go back to 2000 and you see Shaq as a dominant force. I go back to 2000 I remember it took him 7 games and shady officiating to beat Portland. For all the talk about how dominant Shaq was...he pretty much only won when had an easy draw. It's not like he was Bill Walton taking out Kareem and Dr. J in back to back series.
And generally speaking I do hold players that stick around with one franchise for the majority of their careers. I'm always going to support a Reggie Miller or John Stockton or Dirk Nowitzki who puts in the work. I also think in 10 years CPIII will drop down for this generation to about five behind Doncic and Giannis, but they haven't gotten there yet.
You say this knowing that there were alot of off-court things with the Brooklyn roster that really ain't on KD. Let's also not forget that KD did go to the finals in 2012 with a young Westbrook and Harden. You say Chris Paul went to the finals with Devon Booker and Ayton as if those two aren't all-star level players in their own right. Booker was all-NBA first team, for starters. Ayton was 17/10. Mikael Bridges was runner-up DPOY. But sure, let's act like CP3 took a team of nobodies to the finals. CP3 is absolutely a floor raiser but he's had 20 years to show us that he can be the best player on a championship team.
As for Shaq 'taking 7 games to beat Portland', you do realize that Blazers roster with Pippen, Wallace, Stoudamire, Steve Smith, Sabonis etc was the most talented team that year and probably one of the best teams to never win a title, right? You realize that if Shaq isn't on that team in 2000, the Lakers are some lower seed playoff team that at best would be first round roadkill. Also, the Orlando Magic won 21 games the year before Shaq got there. His rookie season, 41 wins... a 20 game improvement and he was the only notable addition. 3 years later they're in the finals. The Lakers are decent at best in 96, Shaq goes there and 4 years later they're winning a title with a young Kobe( Kobe in 2000 was very good but not 'prime'). He joins the Heat in 2004 who won 42 games, two years later he's winning a chip with Wade. But let's act like every team Shaq joined in his prime didn't immediate improve and jump into title contention. You're so pre-occupied with your quest to be contrarian with Shaq that you overlook the reality that those teams aren't remotely close to being title contenders if he's not on the roster. Yes, he had his flaws as I mentioned before but once again you have a very biased and over-critical view of his career. Just admit you don't like the guy for whatever reason and call it a day, instead of blatantly disingenuous talking points. You may actually be taken more seriously because as of now, you just come off as really being full of shit with alot of your takes.
Gonna let you in on a little secret. Giannis with two MVPs, DPOY, a title(won over CP3) and FMVP and multiple All-NBA selections is already ahead of Chris Paul, as a player and on the GOAT ladder. AND Greek beat him heads up in the finals. PLUS he's played on one team( so far) his entire career which you say you prefer( except when it applies to CP3 playing for 7 teams, apparently). All your talking points favor Giannis, but once again you trip over your own contradictions. Don't be deluded into thinking Paul playing for longer warrants a higher ranking, because that would be the only possible talking point you could have and it's not a good one.
Last edited by Phoenix; 01-29-2025 at 09:22 AM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|