The NBA Thread.

You know, you guys could just watch the videos with an open mind like I asked. I don't really care who is saying something if the facts and evidence they use to defend their points make sense and effectively support their positions.

But if we are questioning sources, I'd say the guy who played and won championships with MJ might be at least a little biased in this conversation.

 

Wait, you're being serious? Draymond Green and LeBron have both played their share of the 5 as well. No one is calling them centers.

Dirk is a PF/C with a very heavy lean towards PF. He even played some SF. He's a completely different player than your traditional center, which is what both Ewing and Howard were. How is this even a discussion right now? No one refers to Dirk as a center over a power forward.

 

And the other is a guy on Colin Cowherd's show, which is only slightly more reputable than The Onion Sports.

 

We’re taking about a guy who played major college basketball, spent 15 years playing in the league, won 5 title with two teams, and 3 more as a head coach right?

Yeah, I’m sure he’s clueless and just biased.

 

Lol, Nick Wright is one of the biggest ass clowns on air.

Just flat out lying:
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/06/nba-finals-nick-wright-fs1-called-out-over-2015-finals-mvp-story

A whole bunch of shit takes:


"If the Warriors had to do it over again, they wouldn't get Kevin Durant. And I think the facts bear that out."


Storms off the set after being called out on his man-crush:

 

I said biased, not clueless. That's a strawman. And his basketball resume argues against that strawman, not my claim that he's biased.

 

Shut up.

 

Okay, cool. Do you have any responses to what he said in the videos I posted? So far everyone wants to argue about the source but doesn't want to say anything about the content.

And the stuff you posted seems like much ado about nothing to me. Sports commentators are in the business of opinions. Some of those opinions are going to end up being correct, and some of them are going to end up being incorrect. There's not a sports commentator in the business batting a thousand.

For the first piece, he came out and owned it. I'm not sure what specifically you want me to say about the reddit thread. In the video of him "storming off," I'm like, 90% sure that was all a big joke, as they were definitely all laughing about it. And the last one about the Warriors and Durant needs context. That video took place during their first season together, not at the end of their run. At the time, they were struggling, and plenty of people were wondering if they were going to be able to get their shit together. If you actually listen to what he says and consider it in the context of what was going on at the time, I'm not sure how you can refer to it as a "shit take." He's essentially saying that they went from what looked like the best basketball team ever, playing a unique style of ball that had never been seen, to a team in the hunt for a title and struggling to win the West. He pointed to the depth and style of play they gave up to bring in Durant and questioned if it was the right call. At the time that came out, he was 100% correct. Now, obviously they went on to win two titles, but I also don't think he would make the same claim today that he made then, nor do I think he was the only person entertaining the idea during that season.

But, again, I'm not sure what that has to do with the videos I posted.

 

How do you manage to comment on so many different topics but add nothing but background noise to any of them? It's simultaneously impressive and sad.

I'm still waiting for you to link me to the "plenty of experts who say there is something wrong with Trump" that you mentioned in the 2020 Election Thread. It's been almost 2 weeks.

 

I didn’t say anything about you, I was comparing Steve Kerr to Nate Richert on FS1. Had I said anything about you, I would quote your post. You were simply trying to play the victim, so yeah, shut up.

I don’t know what the [uck fay] you’re talking about in the election thread and what that has to do with anything that’s being discussed in this thread.

 

Play the victim? What the [uck fay] are you talking about? It's sad that I need to hold your hand through this, but...

1. You agreed with a post about Steve Kerr commenting on MJ.

2. I post videos from Nick Wright about LeBron vs. MJ.

3. You post (without quoting me): "Steve Kerr > some rando talking head on *checks notes* FS1"

4. I post (without quoting you): "I'd say the guy who played and won championships with MJ (Steve Kerr) might be at least a little biased in this conversation."

5. You post (without quoting me): "We're talking about a guy who played major college basketball, spent 15 years playing in the league, won 5 title with two teams, and 3 more as a head coach right? Yeah, I'm sure he's clueless and just biased."

And now you're pretending you weren't responding to my posts? I'm the one who brought the FS1 talking head into the conversation, so, by default, any response about that talking head is clearly directed at or at least relates to me. Invol didn't quote me either. Am I to believe him bashing the guy who's opinions I just posted wasn't directed at me either? Don't be an idiot. Then I use the word biased to describe Steve Kerr, and you mock the idea of Steve Kerr being biased 3 posts later. But those were unrelated? Riiiiiiiight. I guess you were talking to the guy who said Steve Kerr is clueless, weren't you? Who was that guy?

You made the quoted claim in the 2020 election thread. I asked you to connect me with those experts, and you disappeared. You add nothing of value.

 

Well I’m not reading all of that tripe because I’m not interested in a pedantic debate.

But in lightly skimming I saw at the end you mentioned the Election Thread, again. We’ve discussed ad nauseam in the election thread the mental capabilities of both candidates, complete with quotes and sources numerous times. That you can’t find them, don’t want to find them, or didn’t see them the first time doesn’t mean I owe you, personally, a [dadgum] thing further.

 

Gonna need to add a "value" ranking function for posters.

 

I'm mostly interested in what Dwight Howard has to say about the issue.

 

You made a claim in the thread. I requested back up for that claim right after you made the claim. You never provided that back up for your claim. Thus, my

Why on earth would you expect me to know that the back up had already been provided in that thread or another, and go off blindly searching for it? Even if you felt the back up had been posted before and didn't want to post it again, why wouldn't you just say that so that I could know it existed, prompting me to go find it?

I get the idea behind wanting to just make claims and then not have to provide anything to support them, but that's not really how any of this works.

 

Can you just admit that you've watched <10 prime Dwight Howard games in your life? It's one of those things where I already know it's probably true, but that confirmation of you saying it would be satisfying.

 

No, because I've watched more than that.

Would you admit that sab fingered your butthole and the reasons that we assume you stopped teaching are true?

 

Indy, I get the idea behind you wanting to think I owe you anything, on command, when you want it, but that’s not really how any of this works.

 

Typically, when people make claims without evidence, and then disappear when prompted for evidence, it means they don't have evidence to support their claims.