NBA - The upside down

[BigFatCoward]

1 hour ago, baxus said:

Ok, so you have a completely wrong definition of athleticism and that's it.

1. Strength - He dominates this one easily
2. Speed - He moved very quickly for most of his career, did coast to coast plays, ran the counters etc. 
3. Power - Dominates it
4. Mental Resilience - If you think that being one of the top players in the NBA for well over a decade, 4 times NBA champion, League MVP etc. and handling all the pressure that goes with it does not prove his Mental Resilience then I don't know what to say
5. Aerobic Capacity - You think he could've played around 80 matches on average per season (playoff matches included) for almost two decades without this one?
6. Anaerobic Capacity - He was very explosive in his play, with all the jumps
7. Balance & Coordination - Rebounding and blocking shots is a pretty good indicator of this, I'd imagine, and he was world class in that.
8. Agility - While he obviously couldn't even come close to some, he ranked pretty good for this size in this one, too.
9. Stability - If you can find a more stable player, I'm all ears.
10. Mobility - Once again, not top-level but very good for his size for most of his career

So, I'd say well over 2.

see, we just see him totally differently.  i don't think we are disagreeing about what 'athletic' is, i think we are disagreeing about what Shaq was. 

speed - fast for size, not fast

mental resilience - very very very weak, allowed players to get in his head with hack a shaq leading to career FT% that was genuinely awful. 

aerobic capacity - very low, plodding up and down court between plays (maybe good for size, not good)

balance and coordination - nobody could knock him off balance, not sure that counts for good balance though. Looking at Hakeem for someone of a similar (ish) size, that was balance and coordination.

agility - very very poor (though not for his size obviously)

stability - like a fucking oak table

mobility - decent for size, not decent overall.  

[DMC]

42 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

aerobic capacity - very low, plodding up and down court between plays (maybe good for size, not good)

I disagree with many of your other evaluations, but this one is just silly and lazy judging a book by its cover.  The guy ranks 29th all-time in minutes played.  Considering him and Wilt are by far the most fouled players ever, based on the data he clearly had above-average stamina (albeit, yes, elite all-timers even among his size were certainly better).  And not just for his size, for any NBA player in history.

[BigFatCoward]

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

I disagree with many of your other evaluations, but this one is just silly and lazy judging a book by its cover.  The guy ranks 29th all-time in minutes played.  Considering him and Wilt are by far the most fouled players ever, based on the data he clearly had above-average stamina (albeit, yes, elite all-timers even among his size were certainly better).  And not just for his size, for any NBA player in history.

I can't even begin to argue with 'high minutes played = aerobic capacity'. There couldn't be less of a correlation between the 2.  

If you look at the list they are pretty much all hall of farmers, they played lots of minutes because they were much better than everyone else for longer and their skills kept them relevant. Not because of aerobic capacity. Fucking terrible argument, even for an internet message board. 

[DMC]

8 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I can't even begin to argue with 'high minutes played = aerobic capacity'. There couldn't be less of a correlation between the 2.  

I can't even begin to argue how stupid this assertion is, even for an internet message board.  What other available data would you like to use to measure "aerobic capacity" for NBA players? 

Are almost all on the list hall of famers?  Yep!  You know why?  Because most hall of famers are also great athletes.  That's the obvious correlation.  Very few NBA players - let alone your broader definition of "athletes" - could endure the punishment Shaq took and still log as many minutes in his career.  If that's not stamina, or "aerobic capacity," I don't know what is.

[BigFatCoward]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

I can't even begin to argue how stupid this assertion is, even for an internet message board.  What other available data would you like to use to measure "aerobic capacity" for NBA players? 

Are almost all on the list hall of famers?  Yep!  You know why?  Because most hall of famers are also great athletes.  That's the obvious correlation.  Very few NBA players - let alone your broader definition of "athletes" - could endure the punishment Shaq took and still log as many minutes in his career.  If that's not stamina, or "aerobic capacity," I don't know what is.

Yeah, you dont know what aerobic capacity is clearly. Like, at all. 

Basketball is an anaerobic sport primarily. So to assert that the least aerobic players (a centre, a really big plodding one) has a high aerobic capacity really is off the charts mental.

Edited December 1, 2022 by BigFatCoward

[DMC]

1 minute ago, BigFatCoward said:

Yeah, you dont know what aerobic capacity is clearly. Like, at all. 

Or rather you have no idea what athleticism is.  Like, at all.

[BigFatCoward]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

Or rather you have no idea what athleticism is.  Like, at all.

Go and Google 'is basketball an aerobic or anerobic sport'? and work backwards from there. 

Basketball is an anaerobic sport primarily. So to assert that the least aerobic players (a centre, a really big plodding one) has a high aerobic capacity really is off the charts mental.

if you don't even understand the basics of what is being discussed, what am I wasting my time for? 

Edited December 1, 2022 by BigFatCoward

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

if you don't even understand the basics of what is being discussed, what am I wasting my time for?

Same question!  You asserted Shaq wasn't a good athlete - and then grouped him in with other centers that actually are indeed inferior athletes to to the all-time greats.  Since then, you've conceded that Shaq was a good athlete "for his size," but bafflingly continue the argument.  The evidence overwhelmingly suggests because you don't want to admit you were laughably wrong in your original assertion.

[Tywin et al.]

@BigFatCoward, 

Take the L here. What you're arguing is ridiculous. Shaq is both Goliath and one of the craziest athletic marvels to ever exist. That doesn't mean he'd be great at everything, but he might have no equal in exactly what he was great at. I've never seen a more dominate basketball player and, *checks notes*, that requires generationally unique athletic gifts.  

[BigFatCoward]

20 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

@BigFatCoward, 

Take the L here. What you're arguing is ridiculous. Shaq is both Goliath and one of the craziest athletic marvels to ever exist. That doesn't mean he'd be great at everything, but he might have no equal in exactly what he was great at. I've never seen a more dominate basketball player and, *checks notes*, that requires generationally unique athletic gifts.  

Some very specific gifts. But lots of athleticism flaws also.  Malone was nearly the same size and a far superior overall athlete. 

Can't beleive you and DMC have finally found common cause after years of bickering like a pair of old women, and you are both wrong. 

Edited December 1, 2022 by BigFatCoward

[Tywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Some very specific gifts. But lots of athleticism flaws also.  Malone was nearly the same size and a far superior overall athlete. 

Karl Malone would fit in Shaq's ass crack. They're not the same size at all.

Quote

Can't beleive you and DMC have finally found common cause after years of bickering like a pair of old women, and you are both wrong. 

[Relic]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

because you don't want to admit you were laughably wrong in your original assertion.

Yeah, because telling someone they are "laughably wrong" is def gonna get them to admit it. 

In far more interesting news, Durant is averaging like 30 points a game, and he's currently 6th in PPG. That's crazy. What's even crazier is that Tatum, who i compared to Durant during his rookie year, is averaging over a point per game MORE. Patting myself on the back. 

 

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, Relic said:

Yeah, because telling someone they are "laughably wrong" is def gonna get them to admit it. 

Who said I gave a shit if he admitted it?  It's much funnier the other way.

[Relic]

Just now, DMC said:

Who said I gave a shit if he admitted it?  It's much funnier the other way.

Glad you're enjoying yourself. Having a wank at the same time, hopefully?

[DMC]

Just now, Relic said:

Having a wank at the same time, hopefully?

Nah I wait for that until you respond to me with pretentious admonishing.

[Relic]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Nah I wait for that until you respond to me with pretentious admonishing.

Great, so whip it out.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Relic said:

Great, so whip it out.

You're not my supervisor!

[Relic]

 

[DMC]

If we're doing Wahlberg references Other Guys is funnier:

 

To be clear "you're not my supervisor!" is an Archer reference.

Edited December 1, 2022 by DMC
my not your

[Rhom]

Got Kal and HeartofIce singing Kumbaya over in the Star Wars thread and Tywin and DMC shopping for Christmas Trees together over here.  

Its a Festivus Miracle!!!!!

Alas, Relic and DMC appears to be an unmendable bridge.