My Sport is Better Than Your Sport: the GOAT thread

[DMC]

1 minute ago, baxus said:

You are aware that "Western hemisphere" is not the same as "Americas". Talking about US-centric point of view.

JFC that was obviously what I meant.  Way to try to save face.  It's incredibly hilarious how sensitive Europeans when it comes to talking about sports.

[baxus]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

JFC that was obviously what I meant.  Way to try to save face.  It's incredibly hilarious how sensitive Europeans when it comes to talking about sports.

I edited my previous post and admitted to my mistake. Still, that doesn't make baseball any less of a niche sport.

Hell, they play baseball here in Serbia, too. Do you count Serbia to show that baseball is popular worldwide, despite the fact it attracts less spectators than a regular 3 on 3 pickup basketball game in the street?

And no, it's not Europeans who are sensitive about sports in this case. It's you who are trying to pass off "favourite American pastime" as something more than it actually is, and that's a niche sport pretty much everywhere outside of US, and even in the US it's on a major decline in popularity.

Edited September 10, 2022 by baxus

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, baxus said:

I edited my previous post and admitted to my mistake. Still, that doesn't make baseball any less of a niche sport.

It's not a "niche sport" at all in the US, the Latin American countries mentioned, nor Japan, South Korea, or Taiwan - which was my point to begin with.  It's one of the most popular sports in all of those countries.  It's just insanely ignorant to suggest otherwise - around 30 percent of MLB players are of Latin American descent.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

You really gotta wonder if those estimates are actually based on the percentage of fans in each country or if they're just identifying countries then looking up population figures and doing basic addition.

Both lists I looked at didn't show their math, but I find it hard to believe volleyball is more popular than basketball given the popularity of the sport in China and how much it's increased in Europe and around the world in general.

52 minutes ago, baxus said:

Way to ignore all the other sports I mentioned.  

There's no need to address LeBron's potential as a professional cyclist. It would never work and just be hilarious to see.

Quote

And no, LeBron couldn't be a world class swimmer and the best reason for that would be to have him stand next to world class swimmers. Height and wingspan would work in his favour, but his mass would drag him down massively.

As far as rowing is concerned, it takes completely different type of effort than what he's used to. Basketball is about many bursts of speed, short sprints, explosive jumping etc. while rowing is going 100% all out for 5,5-7,5 minutes. It's really unpleasant at the lowest levels of the sport, let alone at top level where they're basically pushing the limits of what humans are capable of. You can go and watch any Olympic finals race and check out what they look like after crossing the finish line. I have NEVER seen a basketball player in that state after a match, or a football player, or a tennis player etc. Mind you, I'm not saying those sports are any less worthy or anything, just trying to point out difference in types of effort required.

Sure, with top level coaching and training from childhood, LeBron maybe could've become an elite rower, but he's at least 20 years too late to make that switch. There's no turning back for him now, just as you couldn't take a 35 year old elite rower and turn him into world class basketball player by switching his training.

That's the point, could the best athletes also be elite at other sports if that sport was the one they were focusing on since their youth. For example, Russell Westbrook would have no chance if you put him on a PL team today, but if he only trained to be a soccer player his elite athleticism alone would carry him pretty far. Or take Mbappe. If you dropped him into the NFL today he might literally die, but if he was born in the US and wanted to make it to the NFL, there's a reasonable chance he could be a star WR or DB.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Both lists I looked at didn't show their math, but I find it hard to believe volleyball is more popular than basketball given the popularity of the sport in China and how much it's increased in Europe and around the world in general.

Yeah basketball clearly has a more global presence than everything but soccer if we're not just googling population figure or relying on lazy metrics that rather transparently do the same.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

21 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

So about 20% lighter than lebron. He is much wider, hence lots of drag.

Swimmers have very interesting frames, concave chests, huge feet and hands. Being big is not what defines them. 

LeBron's weight concerns are a bit misleading because he's five inches taller than Phelps and he's always try to maintain a bulky build because it's an advantage for him. If he was set out to be an elite Swimmer don't you think he'd train to develop more lean muscle mass than bulkiness? 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

7 minutes ago, baxus said:

Ok, my numbers were off. I must admit I thought some countries were part of Western hemisphere that weren't.

As far as determining if sport is niche or not, popularity is definitely a factor. If the country where baseball is THE most popular in the world has 2 more popular sports (American football and basketball) and a relatively new sport (football) is in the same ballpark, and there's only a handful of other countries where it's played at all, then you can't really make a case that it's popular worldwide, can you?

Here's Michael Phelps and here's LeBron James. You see the difference? Let me help you out - one is 1.93m tall and weighs 90kg, the other is 2.06m tall and weighs 113kg. I'll let you decide which is which.

I could throw in Mark Warnecke (who specialised in breast stroke).

1.87m 100kg. Those guys really do move quite a bit of mass around themselves. Anyway, point is, as massive as James is, pro-swimmers are quite bulky themselves. And weight would really not be the main issue for James (if he wanted to compete in the Tour de France [fill in pick hill to die on joke here], or run long distance competitively, then he'd really need to shed quite bit of weight). The guys train differently, and need/rely on different muscles. But in terms of pure mass, the difference is not that big.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yeah basketball clearly has a more global presence than everything but soccer if we're not just googling population figure or relying on lazy metrics that rather transparently do the same.

And again, it needs to be reiterated, the number of people that watch a sport means fucking nothing about the level of athleticism of the players in it.

[baxus]

31 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

That's the point, could the best athletes also be elite at other sports if that sport was the one they were focusing on since their youth. For example, Russell Westbrook would have no chance if you put him on a PL team today, but if he only trained to be a soccer player his elite athleticism alone would carry him pretty far. Or take Mbappe. If you dropped him into the NFL today he might literally die, but if he was born in the US and wanted to make it to the NFL, there's a reasonable chance he could be a star WR or DB.

I think you are putting a cart before the horse. LeBron is not built the way he's built because he's played basketball his whole life. He has played basketball his whole life because he's built the way he is. Sure, there'd probably be some more muscle on him had he chosen American football, but I doubt it'd be that much. And I very much doubt he'd be as lean as Phelps was from swimming.

Sure, these top level athletes we're talking about would probably be good at some other sports, had they undergone different training from an early age, but there are limitations set even upon them by their physiques.

25 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

LeBron's weight concerns are a bit misleading because he's five inches taller than Phelps and he's always try to maintain a bulky build because it's an advantage for him. If he was set out to be an elite Swimmer don't you think he'd train to develop more lean muscle mass than bulkiness? 

He's 5 inches taller, but he's 20-25kgs heavier. There's a French swimmer called Florent Manadou. He's 1.99m (compared to LeBron's 2.06m) tall, and weighs 99kg (compared to Lebron's 113kg). He's the tallest swimmer I can remember (if anyone can find another example please say so) and he's won medals and with 4 Olympic medals (1 gold, 3 silver) there's no doubt he was world class swimmer, but still much leaner than LeBron and built pretty differently.

24 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I could throw in Mark Warnecke (who specialised in breast stroke).

1.87m 100kg. Those guys really do move quite a bit of mass around themselves. Anyway, point is, as massive as James is, pro-swimmers are quite bulky themselves. And weight would really not be the main issue for James (if he wanted to compete in the Tour de France [fill in pick hill to die on joke here], or run long distance competitively, then he'd really need to shed quite bit of weight). The guys train differently, and need/rely on different muscles. But in terms of pure mass, the difference is not that big.

I must admit, this is the first time I heard of Mark Warnecke.

22 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And again, it needs to be reiterated, the number of people that watch a sport means fucking nothing about the level of athleticism of the players in it.

Yeah, I'm sure the level of athleticism in a sport in which physical drain is such that you can play two matches at top level in a single day must be staggering.

Edited September 10, 2022 by baxus

[polishgenius]

39 minutes ago, baxus said:

Yeah, I'm sure the level of athleticism in a sport in which physical drain is such that you can play two matches at top level in a single day must be staggering.

 

That's not really fair. Gymnasts perform more than one routine in a day during competition and if you asked me to nail down one single sport I'd least like to do because of the level of hardcore preparation required, it'd probably be that. Stamina isn't the only athletic quality. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, baxus said:

I think you are putting a cart before the horse. LeBron is not built the way he's built because he's played basketball his whole life. He has played basketball his whole life because he's built the way he is. Sure, there'd probably be some more muscle on him had he chosen American football, but I doubt it'd be that much. And I very much doubt he'd be as lean as Phelps was from swimming.

Sure, these top level athletes we're talking about would probably be good at some other sports, had they undergone different training from an early age, but there are limitations set even upon them by their physiques.

He's 5 inches taller, but he's 20-25kgs heavier. There's a French swimmer called Florent Manadou. He's 1.99m (compared to LeBron's 2.06m) tall, and weighs 99kg (compared to Lebron's 113kg). He's the tallest swimmer I can remember (if anyone can find another example please say so) and he's won medals and with 4 Olympic medals (1 gold, 3 silver) there's no doubt he was world class swimmer, but still much leaner than LeBron and built pretty differently.

I guess the bet I'm making is that LeBron's legs would be a lot lighter if he was training for swimming. His legs, especially his tights, are enormous and that's a byproduct of training for basketball, where leg strength is so important. 

[dbunting]

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

No and no. Passing at an extremely high level is a great way to evaluate hand eye coordination. And news alert, regular season defensive awards don't mean a lot. Everyone knew LeBron at his peak, and his peak was extremely long, was one of if not the best defenders in the NBA.

Umm yes and yes. Passing a basketball is in no way shape or form comparable to hitting a baseball. And if everyone knows LeBron was so great a defender then why didn't he get rewarded for it like Jordan did? 

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, dbunting said:

Passing a basketball is in no way shape or form comparable to hitting a baseball. And if everyone knows LeBron was so great a defender then why didn't he get rewarded for it like Jordan did? 

While I too am skeptical about much correlation between passing in basketball and hitting a baseball, LeBron was just as good a defender as Jordan - regardless of media-generated awards.

[dbunting]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

While I too am skeptical about much correlation between passing in basketball and hitting a baseball, LeBron was just as good a defender as Jordan - regardless of media-generated awards.

Can't buy into this. Maybe only because I watched a lot of Jordan playing and less of LeBron, maybe I am biased but it would be weird because I hated Jordan and the Bulls since I am a Pistons fan. That and because I've seen LeBron step aside and let people score so he wouldn't get posterized. I don't recall seeing that from Jordan.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, dbunting said:

That and because I've seen LeBron step aside and let people score so he wouldn't get posterized. I don't recall seeing that from Jordan.

Meh, yes, LeBron lacks the relentless intensity Jordan does, but I don't think this is indicative of their overall defensive abilities.  Obviously, at a certain point, effort does make a difference even in such a comparison, but this seems like picking nits.

[dbunting]

Just now, DMC said:

Meh, yes, LeBron lacks the relentless intensity Jordan does, but I don't think this is indicative of their overall defensive abilities.  Obviously, at a certain point, effort does make a difference even in such a comparison, but this seems like picking nits.

I have been known to nit pick

[TheLastWolf]

How about adding WWE in the mix to spice things up?

[BigFatCoward]

9 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

How about adding WWE in the mix to spice things up?

I don't think any sport has had such a proliferation of all time greats up against each other as wrestling did 1997-2002. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 hours ago, dbunting said:

Umm yes and yes. Passing a basketball is in no way shape or form comparable to hitting a baseball. And if everyone knows LeBron was so great a defender then why didn't he get rewarded for it like Jordan did? 

Not 1 for 1, but it should you some belief that it could be done. And you said it yourself in the NBA thread, you don't follow the game as much anymore. Regular season defense is overrated and it's why guys like Rudy Gobert win 3 DPOYs. LeBron almost always plays elite defense in the playoffs and has come up repeatedly in huge moments. So people say he made the best defensive play in NBA Finals history. 

[DMC]

23 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I don't think any sport has had such a proliferation of all time greats up against each other as wrestling did 1997-2002. 

Which is why it's so unfortunate it all started going downhill really slightly before Vince bought WCW in March 2001, and how botched the subsequent NWO and Invasion angles were.  But yeah, just looking at WWF/E, you had Austin and Rock at their peaks, Triple H breaking out and easily at his in-ring peak as well; Foley and Taker; Jericho, Angle, and (eek!) Benoit as the greatest midcard ever.  It was quite something that will never be captured again.  One thing I remember fondly is Taz ("Tazz") debuting and beating the previously undefeated Angle at Royal Rumble 2000.  I was like "jeebus how fantasy-card can this get."  Of course "Tazz" was buried by Vince within weeks.

It's just so unfortunate Michaels - easily the GOAT IMO - was on hiatus for almost exactly the four years or so when everything was at its height.