Event Around the 2025 NBA Draft & Offseason Madness!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Phatguysrule said:
You literally compared him them. Not sure if you intended to, but you literally did. Those guys were elite at multiple facets of the game.

They played the same sport as Ant does. That's where the comparison ends.
Click to expand...
I’ll finish this right here. He said ANT couldn’t be a starter on a championship team because he’s not good enough. As if winning championships is a way to measure a players value or accomplishments. I returned with HOF players who never won a championship. Their accomplishments were determined by how many rings. I then gave examples of players who currently have championship rings on their shelves and how they have rings but it shouldn’t mean shit. I never said ANT was a HOF player. Surprised you would actually think that is what I’m saying. 80% of others on this forum might post senseless shit like that, but ME?
 
THE HCP said:
I’ll finish this right here. He said ANT couldn’t be a starter on a championship team because he’s not good enough. As if winning championships is a way to measure a players value or accomplishments. I returned with HOF players who never won a championship. Their accomplishments were determined by how many rings. I then gave examples of players who currently have championship rings on their shelves and how they have rings but it shouldn’t mean shit. I never said ANT was a HOF player. Surprised you would actually think that is what I’m saying. 80% of others on this forum might post senseless shit like that, but ME?
Click to expand...

My point was that they are not comparable. That comparison was invalid.

My point was that the fact that Ant isn't good enough to start for a championship caliber team has nothing to do with those Hall of famers that you mentioned.

They literally shouldn't even be in the same conversation unless they are playing against each other on the same court. There are no similarities. They barely play the same game.

I think you're elevating Ant far more than you should be in even mentioning him in the same conversation as those guys. It's not close. Ant couldn't even carry JR Rider's jock (and Rider shouldn't be mentioned in the same conversation as those HOFers).
 
Phatguysrule said:
My point was that they are not comparable. That comparison was invalid.

My point was that the fact that Ant isn't good enough to start for a championship caliber team has nothing to do with those Hall of famers that you mentioned.

They literally shouldn't even be in the same conversation unless they are playing against each other on the same court. There are no similarities. They barely play the same game.

I think you're elevating Ant far more than you should be in even mentioning him in the same conversation as those guys. It's not close. Ant couldn't even carry JR Rider's jock (and Rider shouldn't be mentioned in the same conversation as those HOFers).
Click to expand...
You are wrong I am right. You are unable to grasp what I’m saying and that is ok. I win this debate. Accept the loss and try to use it as fuel to better yourself. Sometimes it hurts to grow.

#BAM
 
inconceivable said:
how many rings durant roy aldridge win if brandon was healthy?
Click to expand...
Our coaching wasn’t defensive-minded enough to make us a dynasty but I bet we would have earned three really good shots at it, and I bet out of those we get one, maybe two rings.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I think star players today would be in for a rude awakening with how physical the game was in the 80s and 90s.

And Durant is miles behind Bird when it comes to mental toughness.
Click to expand...

Would really depend on which set of rules they played with. I think the current players would struggle with how much more physical the game was then, but the more physical players from the 80's might struggle with the current rules. I think some of the players from the 80's with thrive in the current rules though.
 
twobullz said:
Would really depend on which set of rules they played with. I think the current players would struggle with how much more physical the game was then, but the more physical players from the 80's might struggle with the current rules. I think some of the players from the 80's with thrive in the current rules though.
Click to expand...

Yes but the quote was that Durant would average 50 in the 80s. I don't think that's even remotely true. I think his skinny ass would have been beat to shit.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Yes but the quote was that Durant would average 50 in the 80s. I don't think that's even remotely true. I think his skinny ass would have been beat to shit.
Click to expand...
I agree, I think most of the modern players would not do well with the physicality of the 80's. Another thing was the 3 point shot is a major part of the current players game where it was not back then. Durant would struggle without that shot I think.
 
twobullz said:
I agree, I think most of the modern players would not do well with the physicality of the 80's. Another thing was the 3 point shot is a major part of the current players game where it was not back then. Durant would struggle without that shot I think.
Click to expand...
lol, seriously??? Dude would dominate in any era. He's an all time talent.

STOMP
 
Everything Beagle said:
LeBron's an interesting case because in the 2000s, we saw the rosters expand from 12 to 15, so (by facing their teams; I doubt they did any on-court/off-court tracking) he's faced 25% more players per year than Kareem did.
Click to expand...
Teams carried more than 12 - guys would just have "back spasms" for months so they could be on IR.
 
Everything Beagle said:
Simons won’t win a ring on a team that plays him starter’s minutes. If he wins with Denver it’ll be like Walton’s ring with Boston
Click to expand...
Everything Beagle said:
Any team that would start him despite his defensive liabilities is in no good position to win a championship. Might not be a perfect rubric but I bet it’s pretty solid.
Click to expand...
I'm good with moving on from Ant but some of the criticism is ridiculous.

Put Ant with 4 great two way starters and they totally could contend. Plenty of crappy players have won titles. It's not hard to be a starter with multiple hall of famers and great bench players.

Mario Chalmers was a starting PG that won back to back titles.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
When I watch something like this I'm even more convinced that NBA players today are lightyears better than decades ago. Pete was a superstar back then - I'm not buying he would be one at all today.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the idea that those guys back then would even know what to do with an athlete with the length, talent and skill of Durant is pretty ridiculous. Just saying that guys in the 80s and 90s would just beat him up is even more ridiculous. How would guys that had no idea how to handle Reggie Miller be able to take KD out of games?
 
SharpesTriumph said:
I'm good with moving on from Ant but some of the criticism is ridiculous.

Put Ant with 4 great two way starters and they totally could contend. Plenty of crappy players have won titles. It's not hard to be a starter with multiple hall of famers and great bench players.

Mario Chalmers was a starting PG that won back to back titles.
Click to expand...
Mario Chalmers was a good defender and shooter. Kind of like Derek Fisher.

If Ant were as good a defender as Chalmers he'd probably still be a Blazer and we may well have made the playoffs last season.

Mario Chalmers was a much better all around basketball player than Ant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top