NBA Discussion Thread*

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » December 7, 2007, 2:15 am

omgthess!

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 7, 2007, 1:03 pm

Hey Zamtuk:

Now that Daequan Cook is one of the best looking rookies in the NBA, are you going to stop hating him for leaving school early?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 7, 2007, 1:05 pm

Thess wrote:Who cares if the Suns have ever won a championship, atleast they consistently have a good solid team with a lot of promise and are fun to watch.

Thess is the Dali Lama of Basketball Zen. Heed her words!

The Suns have won the entertainment title for four years running, ever since the JJ, Q, Nash, Amare, Marion year that reintroduced a funr, entertaining style of basketball back into the league. It may not have won a championship yet (well it did last year actually) but it set in motion changing some things to take the boredom out of the game which actually managed to get some rules changed. Thanks coach D'Antoni!

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » December 7, 2007, 1:11 pm

Thess wrote: and are fun to watch.

So is midget porn, but they are never going to win an Emmy.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 7, 2007, 1:12 pm

OK, OK, I'm sorry I brought up anything about Arizona championships. Jesus fucking christ.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » December 7, 2007, 6:50 pm

Sueven wrote:Hey Zamtuk:

Now that Daequan Cook is one of the best looking rookies in the NBA, are you going to stop hating him for leaving school early?

Yeah, he has done awesome this year, and I was wrong. He looked really ready to jump at the first half of last season, but his production went down a lot the last half, leaving me think he should have stayed. I really am happy to see him doing well since the other two are out with injuries for a while.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 7, 2007, 7:03 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if he had the same thing happen in the NBA this season, and hits a second-half wall. Might not happen, his team sucks, so he might get lots of burn after they're out of contention, but it's a possibility.

Regardless though, he can shoot the lights out and looks like a legit player. Good for him.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 10, 2007, 3:01 am

Nash's assists over the past six games:

14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 15 (16.3 avg)

Boston Celtics
New Jersey Nets
New York Knicks
Philadelphia 76ers
Toronto Raptors
Chicago Bulls
Cleveland Cavaliers
Detroit Pistons
Indiana Pacers
Milwaukee Bucks
Atlanta Hawks
Charlotte Bobcats
Miami Heat
Orlando Magic
Washington Wizards
Dallas Mavericks
Houston Rockets
Memphis Grizzlies
New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets
San Antonio Spurs
Golden State Warriors
Los Angeles Clippers
Los Angeles Lakers
Sacramento Kings
Denver Nuggets
Minnesota Timberwolves
Portland Trail Blazers
Seattle SuperSonics
Utah Jazz

SUCK!

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » December 10, 2007, 9:53 am

lolz.....you clowns lost to the 2006 Celtics Saturday

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 10, 2007, 1:25 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:lolz.....you clowns lost to the 2006 Celtics Saturday

Who's your NBA team? You don't need to tell me. Just say, "an East Coast Team" and I'll know that the Suns have owned them head-to-head over the past four years.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » December 10, 2007, 1:46 pm

everyone has owned my team for more than the last 4 years. Of course I cannot seem to find any award in pro basketball or any other sport that is given out for a team beating someone head to head. They give out the hardware for championships....of which you have exactly the same amount of over the last 10 years as the Celtics do.....ZERO.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 10, 2007, 1:57 pm

Phoenix Suns: Defending Pacific Division Champions (four years running)

How many other teams have won their division every year for the past four years? We're going for half a decade of consistent, entertaining, high performance basketball.

The Suns have had their share of individual awards over the past four years to add to that.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » December 10, 2007, 2:03 pm

ZERO championships.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 10, 2007, 2:12 pm

Living in the past is easy!

and the Suns won the Championship last year if you throw out the dirty play and a corrupt NBA official fixing the game. I understand that all sports are rigged in some way (all you need to do is see why the Sun Devils are going to the Holiday Bowl instead of the Fiesta Bowl) but at least this time it was uncovered so that counts for something.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » December 10, 2007, 2:23 pm

The Sun Devils didn't get into a BCS bowl because they are an awful team. ASU is only good at badminton and archery (yay you guys!). The Suns are no different. They won't be champs because they will lose the big games at the end of the year. You can cry foul all you want (and you do) but it doesn't change the fact that they haven't won a fucking thing that matters.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 10, 2007, 2:29 pm

Arizona State doesn't belong in the BCS, the Suns are a fun and high quality team, and they haven't won any championships. Claiming that the Suns won a 'championship' last year is not only retarded but should also be embarassing. Can we all shut the fuck up now?

Report from wizards/suns on friday:

The Suns really draw a crowd. The arena was much more crowded than it has been for the other games (Denver drew a lot of fans, too). The crowd was also louder and livelier, starting chants on its own and so on. The Wizards typically don't have a great crowd, so this is really nice. Everyone loves Steve Nash, and even the Wizards fans cheer him when he does well.

Nash is obviously a great player. I think TV does a pretty good job of capturing his style... he just glides around the court and wings the ball around. His ability to penetrate into the lane is amazing. He's not the explosive guy who can blow by people, but he can just sort of slide into the lane and slide right back out at will.

Amare is a pretty sick dunker. He's also obviously a lazy defensive player and a cherry-picker. Anytime the Wizards would get the ball off a turnover or defensive rebound and try to push it upcourt, Amare would hang back and slowly walk upcourt, staying behind everybody, hoping to get an easy basket on the other end. This may have worked once, but far more often the Wizards would get to play offense against a defense missing its biggest interior presence. Amare also does the same thing in reverse-- if the Suns are pushing the ball in transition, and he's not in the middle of it, he'll stand back on defense until it's obvious that the possession is slowing down and he actually needs to get upcourt, at which point he'll sigh and slowly jog to the other end while his team waits for him. He's a hell of a weapon, but he's not going to be a top 5 big man in the NBA until he gets his head out of his ass and plays with a little discipline.

Barbosa is stunning. His penetration and shotmaking abilities are up there with the likes of Iverson and Ginobili. I don't know if he could turn himself into a real superstar with more minutes and more responsibility-- it's very possible that he could-- but at worst, he's every bit as good as Bobby Jackson at his Sacramento best, and he has the potential to be much better.

Andray Blatche and Brendan Haywood were really the bright spot for the Wizards-- both of them were scoring on the Suns big men at will. The Suns were also having serious rebounding issues.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 10, 2007, 2:31 pm

Winnow wrote:Phoenix Suns: Defending Pacific Division Champions (four years running)

How many other teams have won their division every year for the past four years? We're going for half a decade of consistent, entertaining, high performance basketball.

The Suns have had their share of individual awards over the past four years to add to that.

Since 2004-2005, the year when the division changed, the division winners have looked like this (you said past 4 years whereas 2004-2005, 2005-2006, 2006-2007 is only 3, unless you're counting this year, which is far from over, but the Suns are a good bet, however I am leaving them at 3):

Detroit - 3 (1 final appearance)
Miami - 3 ( 1 final appearance, 1 championship)
Phoenix - 3 (0 final appearances)
San Antonio - 2 (2 final appearances, 2 championships)

So for complete years, Phoenix has been 1 of 3 teams to win the division all 3 years, but have done the least by far in the post-season of those 3 teams. Additionally, San Antonio has only won twice due to a great Dallas team, but has more championships than all the 3 time division leaders.

So this year:

Boston, Detroit, Orlando, Denver, Phoenix and San Antonio are currently leading their divisions. This would give Detroit and Phoenix 2, and again Detroit has done more in the post-season unless something happens this year. San Antonio would have 3, and still have the ability to make it to the finals again.

So, while I absolutely love the Phoenix Suns (Individual players, style of play, will to win), they haven't done anything special in the post-season, when it counts. I would compare them to the Philadelphia Eagles, winning their division multiple times, losing at some point in the playoffs (though the Eagles made the Super Bowl once!).

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 10, 2007, 2:41 pm

Winnow wrote:Living in the past is easy!

and the Suns won the Championship last year if you throw out the dirty play and a corrupt NBA official fixing the game. I understand that all sports are rigged in some way (all you need to do is see why the Sun Devils are going to the Holiday Bowl instead of the Fiesta Bowl) but at least this time it was uncovered so that counts for something.

As Sueven pointed out, this is absolutely not true. Dirty play occurs from both teams, and the game of basketball would be different without it. If the refs really tried to eliminate it entirely, the game would stop because of so many fouls, basketball would cease to exist because of lack of fans watching people shoot free throws all night. To counter dirty plays/players, their are things called fouls.

And the corrupt NBA official: do you actually have any proof that he caused the other team to win in this case? Like, do you have records he bet on that game? Or did he do anything particularly stunning when officiating it? Also, isn't betting in basketball based on a spread system similar to football, where you don't say Team X is going to beat Team Y, you bet whether X will beat Y by N number of points? If my assumption is correct, he probably wouldn't have cost the Suns a victory, just beat the spread.

All sports are rigged in some way? Not entirely sure what you mean here, but I think about anyone with professional qualifications to comment on sports (journalists, players, coaches, etc) would disagree with you, unless you mean "rigged" in some sort of way I don't understand.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 10, 2007, 2:43 pm

Also: Even assuming the corrupt official is solely responsible for losing that game... did you lose in 7 games, so that one additional loss would swing the series? No? Shut the fuck up.

A fan of a team which lost in 6 games in the CONFERENCE SEMIFINALS claiming to be NBA 'champions' is an embarassment.

Post by **Sylvus** » December 10, 2007, 2:47 pm

And if you want to include that 4th year back, that's another trip to the finals and a championship for Detroit... I realize that's living in the past, since it was 4 whole seasons ago and people like to live in the present, but what can you do?

But the Suns should, by default, be working on their 40th championship this year. If it weren't for poor officiating and the fact that they can't win games when they need to, they would have won it every year. The NBA playoffs are unfairly biased against Canadians and teams that don't play Defense.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 10, 2007, 2:56 pm

Sylvus wrote:And if you want to include that 4th year back, that's another trip to the finals and a championship for Detroit... I realize that's living in the past, since it was 4 whole seasons ago and people like to live in the present, but what can you do?

Yeah, I almost included that year for 4 years, but the fact that there were 2 divisions screwed it up. However, you're right in that it shows that Detroit is a much more successful team than the Suns, in the past 4 (or 5) years. If you stretch even further back, I'm sure LA would make the case even stronger.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 10, 2007, 4:07 pm

A gchat exchange between Aardor and I:

Aardor: i want winnow to respond
Sueven: yeah
maybe he's actually doing work
Aardor: probably not
probably buying another mp3 player

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 10, 2007, 4:11 pm

SO, the Suns have 82 games of entertaining basketball each year while other teams put you to sleep. If you're an NBA fan, you actually watch the regular season games which makes the Phoenix Suns the best team in the NBA for entertainment purposes while they are also consistently good each year at the same time. Spurs have championships and fans that encourage dirty play. That's cool I guess. the whole "bad boy" image worked for the Pistons as well. The Spurs need even more black in their uniforms...bad boys...ooooooh!

Think of it this way. You have a girlfriend that you bang all year long but once a year she goes to the prom with someone else. Would you rather bang your girlfriend all year long or let someone else have all the fun and then you take her to the prom once a year? In this analogy, the Spurs are experts at making love in the missionary position and have nice Tuxes.

The fans that come to see the Suns when they're on the road tell the story of this team. Being fun to watch, with multiple all-stars, a two time MVP (should be three, Dirk blows chunks), and competitive in the playoffs each year isn't a bad combo.

I'll talk about the past as much as anyone but it's kind of nice to live in the present and focus on the current season as well.

Boston has been a JOKE the past half decade but they're looking good this year. I could comment every thread about how much they've sucked but that gets boring.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 10, 2007, 4:26 pm

Sueven wrote:A gchat exchange between Aardor and I:

Aardor: i want winnow to respond
Sueven: yeah
maybe he's actually doing work
Aardor: probably not
probably buying another mp3 player

I went to lunch! I had half my post typed up but lunch > VV Post!

A half pre-half post lunch message usually doesn't bode well for making sense.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 10, 2007, 4:30 pm

Winnow wrote:SO, the Suns have 82 games of entertaining basketball each year while other teams put you to sleep. If you're an NBA fan, you actually watch the regular season games which makes the Phoenix Suns the best team in the NBA for entertainment purposes while they are also consistently good each year at the same time. Spurs have championships and fans that encourage dirty play. That's cool I guess. the whole "bad boy" image worked for the Pistons as well. The Spurs need even more black in their uniforms...bad boys...ooooooh!

Though I would have agreed with you, after learning more about basketball, I absolutely love watching the Spurs or any of the "boring" teams play. "Boring" play seems to win a good number of championships. I don't really feel like getting into it, but i don't see how you could say the play of Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli is boring. Actually fuck it, why is their play so boring to you? Is it because it's slow?

Think of it this way. You have a girlfriend that you bang all year long but once a year she goes to the prom with someone else. Would you rather bang your girlfriend all year long or let someone else have all the fun and then you take her to the prom once a year? In this analogy, the Spurs are experts at making love in the missionary position and have nice Tuxes.

Uh...This analogy is terrible. The Spurs win a prodigious amount of regular season games, as well as post-season. Sounds to me like they get it all, in addition to getting the prom queen (I mean the NBA championship, or possibly Tony Parker). The more I think about it, the less this analogy makes sense at all.

The fans that come to see the Suns when they're on the road tell the story of this team. Being fun to watch, with multiple all-stars, a two time MVP (should be three, Dirk blows chunks), and competitive in the playoffs each year isn't a bad combo.

I'll talk about the past as much as anyone but it's kind of nice to live in the present and focus on the current season as well.

Boston has been a JOKE the past half decade but they're looking good this year. I could comment every thread about how much they've sucked but that gets
boring.

Yeah, there is nothing wrong with the Suns, Nash is a once in a lifetime player, and they have had a great run this decade. Pretty much, I would rather watch the Suns play against any other team over any other game in the NBA, except for a few match ups, or if Lebron does one of his "I'm going to score every time i touch the ball and stop you on D every play, and you can't stop me" games.

Edit: Boston looks great, but they haven't played anyone to give them serious competition, as you have noted. We'll see how they do, but at least the east appears to have another contender.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 10, 2007, 4:43 pm

Aardor wrote:Uh...This analogy is terrible. The Spurs win a prodigious amount of regular season games, as well as post-season. Sounds to me like they get it all, in addition to getting the prom queen (I mean the NBA championship, or possibly Tony Parker). The more I think about it, the less this analogy makes sense at all.

Yeah, the analogy sucks dick. Here's a better one. The Suns are the nice guy who the girl comes to for emotional support and comfort, the Spurs are the asshole boyfriend who nails her every night.

What did you have for lunch? I'm having grape leaves and hummus. Yes!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 10, 2007, 4:45 pm

Aardor wrote: Though I would have agreed with you, after learning more about basketball, I absolutely love watching the Spurs or any of the "boring" teams play. "Boring" play seems to win a good number of championships. I don't really feel like getting into it, but i don't see how you could say the play of Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli is boring. Actually fuck it, why is their play so boring to you? Is it because it's slow?

There is a movement in the NBA for a more open/exciting style of play. The Suns are heading that movement. The Spurs are the dinosaurs that take advantage of the rules that bore-down play. Times will change (whenever Stern dies) and the fans will benefit.

-------------------------

Aardor wrote: Uh...This analogy is terrible. The Spurs win a prodigious amount of regular season games, as well as post-season. Sounds to me like they get it all, in addition to getting the prom queen (I mean the NBA championship, or possibly Tony Parker). The more I think about it, the less this analogy makes sense at all.

It's not about winning a lot of games. If we're still using the sex analogy, the Spurs have just as much sex as the Suns but it's just maintenance, rerun sex and unimaginative. Once a year they get a blow job. The Suns are making a top ten selling sex tape every time they go at it and then take a breather at the end of the season.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 10, 2007, 4:47 pm

My sex analogy is better.

And being the most entertaining team in the NBA and $1.25 will get you a cup of coffee. Being the best team in the NBA and $1.25 will get you an NBA championship and a cup of coffee.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 10, 2007, 4:50 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIL-JSQX-9s

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » December 10, 2007, 4:52 pm

I still prefer the methodical beatdowns that the "boring" offensive teams hand out. I have loved that since I started playing ball. Sure, run-and-gun is fun to watch, but that takes no skill in the game. If you can set your offense and school the competition, who is busy posing for the latest poster with all of their bling, you win.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » December 11, 2007, 10:18 am

oops, there goes the domination of the East.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » December 11, 2007, 10:28 am

In the last 2 games, the most fun team to watch in the NBA has lived up to its hype. I can't remember the last time I had as much fun watching a team losing to 3-15 Minnesota (aka the 2006 Celtics) and the 6-15 Miami Heat AT HOME. Tremendous job entertaining me. On the plus side Nash had 14 assists! Wooooo.....give them the 2007 Winnow Championship now and lets call it a year.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 11, 2007, 12:30 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:In the last 2 games, the most fun team to watch in the NBA has lived up to its hype. I can't remember the last time I had as much fun watching a team losing to 3-15 Minnesota (aka the 2006 Celtics) and the 6-15 Miami Heat AT HOME. Tremendous job entertaining me. On the plus side Nash had 14 assists! Wooooo.....give them the 2007 Winnow Championship now and lets call it a year.

The Suns are holding back and don't want to show their hand, much like the Steelers seem to do every time they lose to crap teams. I kind of like that excuse! Yeah...here's more...The Suns know they're going to win the Pacific...they don't want to show their hand...yeah!

Next time we'll run the ball on them because everyone knows they're weak against the run.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 13, 2007, 4:18 am

The Jazz vs Suns game was really awesome to watch. No team lead by more that 7 points all game. Nash only had 11 assist, but Marion had a huge game (26 points, 15 rebounds, 2 steals, 5 blocks, 1 turnover). Nash chipped a tooth, handed it to a trainer and immediately started playing again.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 13, 2007, 1:54 pm

Aardor wrote:The Jazz vs Suns game was really awesome to watch. No team lead by more that 7 points all game. Nash only had 11 assist, but Marion had a huge game (26 points, 15 rebounds, 2 steals, 5 blocks, 1 turnover). Nash chipped a tooth, handed it to a trainer and immediately started playing again.

The Suns are 10-1 against teams with winning records. I'm not too worried about their losses to bad teams as they seem to be cruising though the regular season without overdoing it so they can focus on the playoffs. They are winning the games that matter in preparation for the post season.

Nash = MVP for 4th year in a row

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » December 13, 2007, 9:02 pm

Warriors and the Magic for the NBA finals!

Mark it down!

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » December 17, 2007, 11:18 am

Aardor wrote: Yeah, there is nothing wrong with the Suns, Nash is a once in a lifetime player.

For someone who wasn't even the 3rd best at his position for the first 8 years of his career, that couldn't have been more of a gross overestimate. In my 31 year lifetime, I can immediately think of 4 point guards (Magic, Stockton, Isaiah Thomas, Gary Payton) who no one with any sense would ever have ranked behind Nash.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 17, 2007, 12:15 pm

Kelgar wrote:
Aardor wrote: Yeah, there is nothing wrong with the Suns, Nash is a once in a lifetime player.
For someone who wasn't even the 3rd best at his position for the first 8 years of his career, that couldn't have been more of a gross overestimate. In my 31 year lifetime, I can immediately think of 4 point guards (Magic, Stockton, Isaiah Thomas, Gary Payton) who no one with any sense would ever have ranked behind Nash.

I didn't say that he was "the best" point guard ever. Maybe your 31 years of life didn't teach your reading comprehension =(.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 17, 2007, 1:33 pm

Yeah, but Gary Payton's skills took a dive in his later years so his longevity isn't what Nash's is...or it's just the opposite with Nash improving.

I'd rank the PGs:

Magic
Stockton
Nash
Payton
I. Thomas (whiny little bitch)

That's not considering the old timers and not putting much thought into it.

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » December 17, 2007, 6:12 pm

Aardor wrote:
Kelgar wrote:
Aardor wrote: Yeah, there is nothing wrong with the Suns, Nash is a once in a lifetime player.
For someone who wasn't even the 3rd best at his position for the first 8 years of his career, that couldn't have been more of a gross overestimate. In my 31 year lifetime, I can immediately think of 4 point guards (Magic, Stockton, Isaiah Thomas, Gary Payton) who no one with any sense would ever have ranked behind Nash.
I didn't say that he was "the best" point guard ever. Maybe your 31 years of life didn't teach your reading comprehension =(.

You wrote "once in a lifetime". "Once in a lifetime" implies a degree of exceptionality in which is only seen once in one's life. Given that the average life expectancy in the US is ~75 years and the fact that the NBA is only 60 years old, the natural logical progression would be that the statement suggests that Nash is the best PG ever.

It would appear that no one properly explained to you the meanings of words or expressions.

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » December 17, 2007, 6:18 pm

Winnow wrote:Yeah, but Gary Payton's skills took a dive in his later years so his longevity isn't what Nash's is...or it's just the opposite with Nash improving.

I'd rank the PGs:

Magic
Stockton
Nash
Payton
I. Thomas (whiny little bitch)

That's not considering the old timers and not putting much thought into it.

I said "no one with any sense". That disincludes you.

Thomas and Payton were vastly superior defenders and were consistently better over most of the course of their respective careers. Nash is by far the worst defender and his offensive skills only rank ahead of Stockton's.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 17, 2007, 6:21 pm

Kelgar wrote:You wrote "once in a lifetime". "Once in a lifetime" implies a degree of exceptionality in which is only seen once in one's life. Given that the average life expectancy in the US is ~75 years and the fact that the NBA is only 60 years old, the natural logical progression would be that the statement suggests that Nash is the best PG ever.

It would appear that no one properly explained to you the meanings of words or expressions.

I disagree. This is not high quality linguistic interpretation.

"Once in a lifetime" does not necessarily imply "BEST in a lifetime." It implies that something about the player in question is so unique that any given individual is only likely to see a similar player once.

Pete Maravich was a once in a lifetime player. That doesn't mean he's the best player of all time, it means he's unique.
Shaquille O'Neal is a once in a lifetime center. That doesn't mean he's the best center of all time (Russell, Kareem, Wilt and Hakeem all have arguments, at least). But we're unlikely to see another man who can be an explosive athletic beast at 7'2, 330 pounds.

I do, however, agree with your rankings of recent point guards (although I think Nash's peak years may surpass Payton's peak years, Payton still boasts more long-term consistency. And defense).

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 17, 2007, 6:27 pm

Kelgar wrote:
Aardor wrote:
Kelgar wrote:
Aardor wrote: Yeah, there is nothing wrong with the Suns, Nash is a once in a lifetime player.
For someone who wasn't even the 3rd best at his position for the first 8 years of his career, that couldn't have been more of a gross overestimate. In my 31 year lifetime, I can immediately think of 4 point guards (Magic, Stockton, Isaiah Thomas, Gary Payton) who no one with any sense would ever have ranked behind Nash.
I didn't say that he was "the best" point guard ever. Maybe your 31 years of life didn't teach your reading comprehension =(.
You wrote "once in a lifetime". "Once in a lifetime" implies a degree of exceptionality in which is only seen once in one's life. Given that the average life expectancy in the US is ~75 years and the fact that the NBA is only 60 years old, the natural logical progression would be that the statement suggests that Nash is the best PG ever.

It would appear that no one properly explained to you the meanings of words or expressions.

You must not read about sports or watch a great deal about them because "once in a lifetime player" is used to describe many current exception players. I also disagree that the natural logical progression is to be "the best player at his position." Furthermore, "lifetime" in this case generally refers to the players career, which is basically how I was using it.

I do not wish to take away anything from Magic, Stockton, etc, since they are undeniably great. Nash plays in a certain manner that is different than all those before him, and will be all different than all those after him. That's what I meant by a once in a lifetime player. I mean, for god's sake, the man had his tooth chipped, spit it out, handed it to a trainer, and proceeded to play 3 more quarters with the same intensity he puts up every night.

Oh, I also believe that all those people are currently better PG than Nash, but we'll see how he ranks at the end of his career.

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » December 17, 2007, 6:41 pm

Sueven wrote:
Kelgar wrote:You wrote "once in a lifetime". "Once in a lifetime" implies a degree of exceptionality in which is only seen once in one's life. Given that the average life expectancy in the US is ~75 years and the fact that the NBA is only 60 years old, the natural logical progression would be that the statement suggests that Nash is the best PG ever.

It would appear that no one properly explained to you the meanings of words or expressions.
I disagree. This is not high quality linguistic interpretation.

"Once in a lifetime" does not necessarily imply "BEST in a lifetime." It implies that something about the player in question is so unique that any given individual is only likely to see a similar player once.

Pete Maravich was a once in a lifetime player. That doesn't mean he's the best player of all time, it means he's unique.
Shaquille O'Neal is a once in a lifetime center. That doesn't mean he's the best center of all time (Russell, Kareem, Wilt and Hakeem all have arguments, at least). But we're unlikely to see another man who can be an explosive athletic beast at 7'2, 330 pounds.

[/quote]

I can accept that interpretation. However, that line of reasoning leaves itself open to including the nonexceptional which I would suspect isn't the intent. Manute Bol was definately unique, but not someone any team would ever consider starting at center. Daryl Dawkins was more about flash and style rather than substance.

I do, however, agree with your rankings of recent point guards (although I think Nash's peak years may surpass Payton's peak years, Payton still boasts more long-term consistency. And defense).

I would say Nash's value to his team may have surpassed Payton's, but definately not as far as overall skills/talent are concerned.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 17, 2007, 6:49 pm

I do, however, agree with your rankings of recent point guards (although I think Nash's peak years may surpass Payton's peak years, Payton still boasts more long-term consistency. And defense).
I would say Nash's value to his team may have surpassed Payton's, but definately not as far as overall skills/talent are concerned.

My knowledge of past players is seriously lacking, since I did not start watching the NBA till Sueven convinced me sports are awesome. So I really don't know much about their careers other than stats/youtube videos, which fail to properly illustrate a great deal about a players worth.

Who would you say is the best point guard is currently? And hasn't the PG position in basketball changed recently in the style of player used for the PG? Not sure if that's true, but I feel like people have commented on it before, especially with "Nash is the best traditional point guard in the NBA" statements that are made by various people on sports shows.

Also: I'm not asking that because I want to argue about Nash being great, you just seem to have a great deal of knowledge about the NBA and actually enjoy the sport (THEY DON'T PLAY D IT'S NOT FUN TO WATCH) on a professional level. It's not often I get to seriously discuss these things with anyone other than Sueven.

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » December 17, 2007, 6:55 pm

Aardor wrote: I do not wish to take away anything from Magic, Stockton, etc, since they are undeniably great. Nash plays in a certain manner that is different than all those before him, and will be all different than all those after him. That's what I meant by a once in a lifetime player. I mean, for god's sake, the man had his tooth chipped, spit it out, handed it to a trainer, and proceeded to play 3 more quarters with the same intensity he puts up every night.

Sueven addressed this and I'll admit an overly strict interpretation. As for how you use "lifetime", I most articles/colums columns I read use "generation" if you're referring to the 10-15 year career span of someone who had the skill to stay in the league.

Oh, I also believe that all those people are currently better PG than Nash, but we'll see how he ranks at the end of his career.

The only person on the list whom I would take Nash's peak vs another's would be Thomas.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » December 17, 2007, 7:12 pm

Aardor wrote:Who would you say is the best point guard is currently? And hasn't the PG position in basketball changed recently in the style of player used for the PG? Not sure if that's true, but I feel like people have commented on it before, especially with "Nash is the best traditional point guard in the NBA" statements that are made by various people on sports shows.

I think that 'traditional point guard' stuff is mostly to differentiate pass-first point guards, like Nash and Kidd, from glorified shooting guards, like Iverson and Arenas. There was some change in the sort of athlete that played the position when Magic Johnson came around. He was 6'9, and was the first guy with the skill to run the point at that size. He made it possible for some larger, stronger guys to play point, but it turns out that Magic was pretty unique and there hasn't been a top-level point guard of his size since.

Nash and Kidd are clearly the top point guards in their age range. The top young pure point guards in the NBA are Chris Paul and Deron Williams (and Tony Parker I guess, although he's a little bit in the 'nontraditional' category).

Kelgar wrote:I would say Nash's value to his team may have surpassed Payton's, but definately not as far as overall skills/talent are concerned.

Probably right. Nash has a slight edge on some fronts (passing, court vision), but Payton has a tremendous advantage in defense, and a significant advantage in scoring.

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » December 17, 2007, 7:17 pm

Aardor wrote:

I do, however, agree with your rankings of recent point guards (although I think Nash's peak years may surpass Payton's peak years, Payton still boasts more long-term consistency. And defense).
I would say Nash's value to his team may have surpassed Payton's, but definately not as far as overall skills/talent are concerned.
My knowledge of past players is seriously lacking, since I did not start watching the NBA till Sueven convinced me sports are awesome. So I really don't know much about their careers other than stats/youtube videos, which fail to properly illustrate a great deal about a players worth.

I started watching since Detroit won the 2nd of its back to back in the 1989-90 season, but only the playoffs up until 1992-93. When Charles Barkley was traded to Phoenix and Orlando drafted Shaq is when I started watching a lot more.

Who would you say is the best point guard is currently? And hasn't the PG position in basketball changed recently in the style of player used for the PG? Not sure if that's true, but I feel like people have commented on it before, especially with "Nash is the best traditional point guard in the NBA" statements that are made by various people on sports shows.

Nash is still the best, but not by much. Chris Paul and Deron Williams are a close 2nd and 3rd respectively with a way past his prime Jason Kidd at 4th. They all fit the ideal dribble penetration and pass-first/create-opportunities-for-your-teamates mentality, score 2nd. I haven't been able to watch as many games as I'd like since I have spent the past 5 years overseas, so I haven't been able to get as much of a feel for some of the best players in small market teams who get very little air time. In some cases, I can only go on statistics and limited knowledge of the systems they play under and what kind of supporting talent they have.

Also: I'm not asking that because I want to argue about Nash being great, you just seem to have a great deal of knowledge about the NBA and actually enjoy the sport (THEY DON'T PLAY D IT'S NOT FUN TO WATCH) on a professional level. It's not often I get to seriously discuss these things with anyone other than Sueven.

Thanks, I also enjoy discussing it. I only started watching about 17 years ago, but I've also tried finding older footage from the old-timers (but not from before Bill Russell).

Side note: to this very day, Russell is still the most athletic center to have ever played the game. The man was an Olympic class high jumper and was said to be able to reach the top of the backboard.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » December 17, 2007, 7:29 pm

I will have to watch some Bill Russel videos. I didn't really pay attention to sports till 2003-2004, so I have a large lack of knowledge. Till I argued with Winnow about the Suns division wins, etc, I had totally forgotten that there used to be less division, and playoff structure was different.

I think Bill Walton should get more TV time than just ESPNs coverage of games. I was in awe during his recent appearance on the BS Report (bill simmons radio show), when he was speaking of how the NBA was in the past with respect, money, etc.

Anyone who wants a good read/laugh, should check out the last 2 entries in Gilbert Arenas's Blog (12/7 and 12/14, though all of them are good):
http://my.nba.com/forum.jspa?forumID=400032200&start=0

My other favorite blog about basketball is Flea's blog (bassist from RHCP, diehard LA fan). Though he generally ignores punctuation and sentence structure, I always find the posts funny and enjoyable. (i fail at finding a link to this blog)

Kelgar · Post by **Kelgar** » December 17, 2007, 7:45 pm

Aardor wrote:I will have to watch some Bill Russel videos. I didn't really pay attention to sports till 2003-2004, so I have a large lack of knowledge. Till I argued with Winnow about the Suns division wins, etc, I had totally forgotten that there used to be less division, and playoff structure was different.

It's not easy to get a hold of. Videos like the NBAs 50 Greatest Players don't have as much material on the old timers as they do from Dr. J, Magic, Bird, Jordan and so on.

I think Bill Walton should get more TV time than just ESPNs coverage of games. I was in awe during his recent appearance on the BS Report (bill simmons radio show), when he was speaking of how the NBA was in the past with respect, money, etc.

I personally think Walton is a fucking douchebag as far as his broadcasting goes. The only more annoying person to listen to is Marv Albert. If you enjoy reading interesting, well thought-out analyses of playing style, skills, talent, etc, Bill Russell has perhaps one of the highest basketball IQs and offers far superior an insight than Walton ever could.