Author Topic: Let's build the Warriors Eastside  (Read 23774 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #45 on: May 28, 2015, 07:43:34 PM »

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4098
  • Tommy Points: 419



I agree with this , there is a reason that Nash got those MVP's as well , and it has nothing to do with actual performance on the court.


It's totally realistic to say that he got the MVPs in part because he was white, but to say "it had nothing to do with actual performance on the court'? Are you kidding?  If anything, it had more to do with him being entertaining to watch than his pure numbers.

I'd rank the factors like this:

1.) Most entertaining player to watch in the league by a wide margin
2.) His stats
3.) Being white
4.) The lack of a true statistical behemoth challenger, especially the second time

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #46 on: May 28, 2015, 07:50:50 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842



I agree with this , there is a reason that Nash got those MVP's as well , and it has nothing to do with actual performance on the court.


It's totally realistic to say that he got the MVPs in part because he was white, but to say "it had nothing to do with actual performance on the court'? Are you kidding?  If anything, it had more to do with him being entertaining to watch than his pure numbers.

I'd rank the factors like this:

1.) Most entertaining player to watch in the league by a wide margin
2.) His stats
3.) Being white
4.) The lack of a true statistical behemoth challenger, especially the second time
I was under the impression being white worked against you in the league as it is automatically assumed you arent very athletic and are most fit as a role-player.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #47 on: May 28, 2015, 08:08:41 PM »

Offline GC003332

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 804
  • Tommy Points: 62



I agree with this , there is a reason that Nash got those MVP's as well , and it has nothing to do with actual performance on the court.


It's totally realistic to say that he got the MVPs in part because he was white, but to say "it had nothing to do with actual performance on the court'? Are you kidding?  If anything, it had more to do with him being entertaining to watch than his pure numbers.

I'd rank the factors like this:

1.) Most entertaining player to watch in the league by a wide margin
2.) His stats
3.) Being white
4.) The lack of a true statistical behemoth challenger, especially the second time

You may of mistaken my quote, I agree that Nash's performance in those MVP seasons was tremendous, his defense on the other hand ::)
What I am saying is that from a marketing standpoint when the vast majority of your paying customers are white it is a bonus to sell that to the fans, I believe that the league's attendance was going through a down swing in that period, you had the Palace brawl that gave the league a big black eye , so it has a 'Happy' story for the league.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #48 on: May 28, 2015, 08:12:16 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji



I agree with this , there is a reason that Nash got those MVP's as well , and it has nothing to do with actual performance on the court.


It's totally realistic to say that he got the MVPs in part because he was white, but to say "it had nothing to do with actual performance on the court'? Are you kidding?  If anything, it had more to do with him being entertaining to watch than his pure numbers.

I'd rank the factors like this:

1.) Most entertaining player to watch in the league by a wide margin
2.) His stats
3.) Being white
4.) The lack of a true statistical behemoth challenger, especially the second time
I was under the impression being white worked against you in the league as it is automatically assumed you arent very athletic and are most fit as a role-player.

Well duh (sarcasm), lol ;D. Don't you remember that line from undercover brother, "the NBA really instituted the 3 point shot to give white boys a chance?" Ahaha ;D, I love that movie.

http://www.anyclip.com/movies/undercover-brother/conspiracy-theory/#!quotes/

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #49 on: May 28, 2015, 08:15:07 PM »

Offline GC003332

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 804
  • Tommy Points: 62



I agree with this , there is a reason that Nash got those MVP's as well , and it has nothing to do with actual performance on the court.


It's totally realistic to say that he got the MVPs in part because he was white, but to say "it had nothing to do with actual performance on the court'? Are you kidding?  If anything, it had more to do with him being entertaining to watch than his pure numbers.

I'd rank the factors like this:

1.) Most entertaining player to watch in the league by a wide margin
2.) His stats
3.) Being white
4.) The lack of a true statistical behemoth challenger, especially the second time
I was under the impression being white worked against you in the league as it is automatically assumed you arent very athletic and are most fit as a role-player.
I am talking about from a marketing  standpoint, being able to sell that to the fans, the actual paying customers who are white is close 80 percent, so having a marketable white guy when that the fans can relate to is huge.When you have a star 'White' guy in makes it that much easier.
There is a reason so many teams have white stiffs rotting on the bench of league rosters.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #50 on: May 28, 2015, 08:16:47 PM »

Offline mr. dee

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7828
  • Tommy Points: 597
ahh first it's "let's be Atlanta"!!! now it's "let's be Golden State"!!!

how 'bout we go be a team that's won something?

Next thing you will hear is "Let's be the next Cavs and recruit Lebron" ;D

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #51 on: May 28, 2015, 08:21:28 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji



I agree with this , there is a reason that Nash got those MVP's as well , and it has nothing to do with actual performance on the court.


It's totally realistic to say that he got the MVPs in part because he was white, but to say "it had nothing to do with actual performance on the court'? Are you kidding?  If anything, it had more to do with him being entertaining to watch than his pure numbers.

I'd rank the factors like this:

1.) Most entertaining player to watch in the league by a wide margin
2.) His stats
3.) Being white
4.) The lack of a true statistical behemoth challenger, especially the second time

You may of mistaken my quote, I agree that Nash's performance in those MVP seasons was tremendous, his defense on the other hand ::)
What I am saying is that from a marketing standpoint when the vast majority of your paying customers are white it is a bonus to sell that to the fans, I believe that the league's attendance was going through a down swing in that period, you had the Palace brawl that gave the league a big black eye , so it has a 'Happy' story for the league.

For what it's worth, Shaq is still mad, lol ;D.



http://ballislife.com/shaq-says-nash-was-a-sympathy-mvp-and-he-was-the-true-mvp/

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #52 on: May 28, 2015, 08:37:27 PM »

Offline GC003332

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 804
  • Tommy Points: 62



I agree with this , there is a reason that Nash got those MVP's as well , and it has nothing to do with actual performance on the court.


It's totally realistic to say that he got the MVPs in part because he was white, but to say "it had nothing to do with actual performance on the court'? Are you kidding?  If anything, it had more to do with him being entertaining to watch than his pure numbers.

I'd rank the factors like this:

1.) Most entertaining player to watch in the league by a wide margin
2.) His stats
3.) Being white
4.) The lack of a true statistical behemoth challenger, especially the second time

You may of mistaken my quote, I agree that Nash's performance in those MVP seasons was tremendous, his defense on the other hand ::)
What I am saying is that from a marketing standpoint when the vast majority of your paying customers are white it is a bonus to sell that to the fans, I believe that the league's attendance was going through a down swing in that period, you had the Palace brawl that gave the league a big black eye , so it has a 'Happy' story for the league.

For what it's worth, Shaq is still mad, lol ;D.



http://ballislife.com/shaq-says-nash-was-a-sympathy-mvp-and-he-was-the-true-mvp/

Kenny knows which side his bread is buttered  ;)

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #53 on: May 28, 2015, 08:56:16 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Bird is also one of the most romanticized figures in the entire NBA. Particularly around here (no surprising).

If you look at anything approaching evidence, there's an argument in Curry's favor.

::)

I hate to rain on your parade, here, but you do realize that as incredible of a shooter that Bird was  in the NBA that he was actually much better in college?  Ask Jackie Mac if you don't believe me.  He severely injured his right index finger during a game of softball before his rookie year, and to this day it cannot bend straight. 



Therefore, given his already ridiculous shooting numbers in spite of that injury, can you imagine what he would have shot, percentage-wise, without it? :o Even if you don't take that into account, Bird is the better shooter, but when you factor that in, it's not even an argument.

Curry is a much better ball handler, sure, although people tend to drastically underrate Bird's ability to create his own shot, but that doesn't make him the greatest of all time in said category.  Is he an all-time great?  Yes, but he's not even the best shooter in the history of his own franchise.  Has everyone forgotten about Rick Barry?  I hate the guy, personally, but he was incredible.  He's not better than Jerry West, Steve Nash, or, as momma there goes that man ::) has said in comparing Curry to guys from the past, Mark Price, and Price had the ball handling, quickness and speed that Curry could only dream of, and Mark's release was probably the quickest of all time. 

Don't forget about Pete Maravich or Joe Dumars, either, and Joe not only had a great handle, but was a fantastic shooter, except, unlike Steph, he could actually guard people, and some of the toughest guys in the league, I might add, and we haven't even gotten to Reggie Miller, Drazen Petrovic, Ray Allen, and Dirk, yet .  Curry is certainly among the best shooters of all time, but he's not at the top of the list.  At least, imo.

I believe I said in another thread very recently that I thought Drazen was a better shooter than Curry.

I also didn't say that Curry was the best shooter of all time, so while  I appreciate the immense effort it took you to pick the right emoticon, I might suggest doubling down on your reading comprehension instead. :)
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #54 on: May 28, 2015, 08:57:56 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Adorable.

I'm not diminishing Larry Bird by saying that Steph Curry is arguably a better shooter. I do happen to agree somewhat with Isiah's statement about Bird's immense popularity being augmented due to his whiteness, but that's another discussion for another thread.
Reading this post made me dumber.

Just trying to bring you closer to our status quo.

Forget it kid. When it comes to Latin nomenclature you are out of your water.
Same when it comes to your writing.

So hostile.

You don't think that Bird's popularity was related to his skin color? In a league that was, as players, coaches, commentators, and fans of the era have all said, seen as "too black" by the general public?

I think you should maybe stick to Gifs for the rest of the week. You seem like you're having a rough time.

And, speaking of my writing, the correct phrasing would be "out of your depth." Have a nice day. :)
« Last Edit: May 28, 2015, 09:03:30 PM by D.o.s. »
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #55 on: May 28, 2015, 10:12:59 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
Bird is also one of the most romanticized figures in the entire NBA. Particularly around here (no surprising).

If you look at anything approaching evidence, there's an argument in Curry's favor.

::)

I hate to rain on your parade, here, but you do realize that as incredible of a shooter that Bird was  in the NBA that he was actually much better in college?  Ask Jackie Mac if you don't believe me.  He severely injured his right index finger during a game of softball before his rookie year, and to this day it cannot bend straight. 



Therefore, given his already ridiculous shooting numbers in spite of that injury, can you imagine what he would have shot, percentage-wise, without it? :o Even if you don't take that into account, Bird is the better shooter, but when you factor that in, it's not even an argument.

Curry is a much better ball handler, sure, although people tend to drastically underrate Bird's ability to create his own shot, but that doesn't make him the greatest of all time in said category.  Is he an all-time great?  Yes, but he's not even the best shooter in the history of his own franchise.  Has everyone forgotten about Rick Barry?  I hate the guy, personally, but he was incredible.  He's not better than Jerry West, Steve Nash, or, as momma there goes that man ::) has said in comparing Curry to guys from the past, Mark Price, and Price had the ball handling, quickness and speed that Curry could only dream of, and Mark's release was probably the quickest of all time. 

Don't forget about Pete Maravich or Joe Dumars, either, and Joe not only had a great handle, but was a fantastic shooter, except, unlike Steph, he could actually guard people, and some of the toughest guys in the league, I might add, and we haven't even gotten to Reggie Miller, Drazen Petrovic, Ray Allen, and Dirk, yet .  Curry is certainly among the best shooters of all time, but he's not at the top of the list.  At least, imo.

I believe I said in another thread very recently that I thought Drazen was a better shooter than Curry.

I also didn't say that Curry was the best shooter of all time, so while  I appreciate the immense effort it took you to pick the right emoticon, I might suggest doubling down on your reading comprehension instead. :)

Actually, I wrote my response mainly in defense of Bird off of your first sentence, which is why I emboldened it in the first place ;), or did you somehow miss that?

I then further tied that into giving evidence as to why I believe that Larry is that best shooter of all time, given that that was the direction in which the conversation was headed, but you're right, I'm the one who needs to work on my reading comprehension (sarcasm) ::).

« Last Edit: May 28, 2015, 10:23:40 PM by Beat LA »

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #56 on: May 28, 2015, 10:15:01 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
Adorable.

I'm not diminishing Larry Bird by saying that Steph Curry is arguably a better shooter. I do happen to agree somewhat with Isiah's statement about Bird's immense popularity being augmented due to his whiteness, but that's another discussion for another thread.
Reading this post made me dumber.

Just trying to bring you closer to our status quo.

Forget it kid. When it comes to Latin nomenclature you are out of your water.
Same when it comes to your writing.

So hostile.

You don't think that Bird's popularity was related to his skin color? In a league that was, as players, coaches, commentators, and fans of the era have all said, seen as "too black" by the general public?

I think you should maybe stick to Gifs for the rest of the week. You seem like you're having a rough time.

And, speaking of my writing, the correct phrasing would be "out of your depth." Have a nice day. :)

Some of it, perhaps, but not all of it.  Ask the players and coaches from his era, black or white, and they'll all tell you the same thing - he was incredible.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #57 on: May 28, 2015, 10:19:08 PM »

Offline GetLucky

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1760
  • Tommy Points: 349
Dang, Dos is kicking internet-persona butt and taking (user)names.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #58 on: May 28, 2015, 10:44:43 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Bird is also one of the most romanticized figures in the entire NBA. Particularly around here (no surprising).

If you look at anything approaching evidence, there's an argument in Curry's favor.

::)

I hate to rain on your parade, here, but you do realize that as incredible of a shooter that Bird was  in the NBA that he was actually much better in college?  Ask Jackie Mac if you don't believe me.  He severely injured his right index finger during a game of softball before his rookie year, and to this day it cannot bend straight. 



Therefore, given his already ridiculous shooting numbers in spite of that injury, can you imagine what he would have shot, percentage-wise, without it? :o Even if you don't take that into account, Bird is the better shooter, but when you factor that in, it's not even an argument.

Curry is a much better ball handler, sure, although people tend to drastically underrate Bird's ability to create his own shot, but that doesn't make him the greatest of all time in said category.  Is he an all-time great?  Yes, but he's not even the best shooter in the history of his own franchise.  Has everyone forgotten about Rick Barry?  I hate the guy, personally, but he was incredible.  He's not better than Jerry West, Steve Nash, or, as momma there goes that man ::) has said in comparing Curry to guys from the past, Mark Price, and Price had the ball handling, quickness and speed that Curry could only dream of, and Mark's release was probably the quickest of all time. 

Don't forget about Pete Maravich or Joe Dumars, either, and Joe not only had a great handle, but was a fantastic shooter, except, unlike Steph, he could actually guard people, and some of the toughest guys in the league, I might add, and we haven't even gotten to Reggie Miller, Drazen Petrovic, Ray Allen, and Dirk, yet .  Curry is certainly among the best shooters of all time, but he's not at the top of the list.  At least, imo.

I believe I said in another thread very recently that I thought Drazen was a better shooter than Curry.

I also didn't say that Curry was the best shooter of all time, so while  I appreciate the immense effort it took you to pick the right emoticon, I might suggest doubling down on your reading comprehension instead. :)

Actually, I wrote my response mainly in defense of Bird off of your first sentence, which is why I emboldened it in the first place ;), or did you somehow miss that?

I then further tied that into giving evidence as to why I believe that Larry is that best shooter of all time, given that that was the direction in which the conversation was headed, but you're right, I'm the one who needs to work on my reading comprehension (sarcasm) ::).


So this bit:
Quote
Even if you don't take that into account, Bird is the better shooter, but when you factor that in, it's not even an argument.

Curry is a much better ball handler, sure, although people tend to drastically underrate Bird's ability to create his own shot, but that doesn't make him the greatest of all time in said category.  Is he an all-time great?  Yes, but he's not even the best shooter in the history of his own franchise.  Has everyone forgotten about Rick Barry?  I hate the guy, personally, but he was incredible.  He's not better than Jerry West, Steve Nash, or, as momma there goes that man ::) has said in comparing Curry to guys from the past, Mark Price, and Price had the ball handling, quickness and speed that Curry could only dream of, and Mark's release was probably the quickest of all time. 

Don't forget about Pete Maravich or Joe Dumars, either, and Joe not only had a great handle, but was a fantastic shooter, except, unlike Steph, he could actually guard people, and some of the toughest guys in the league, I might add, and we haven't even gotten to Reggie Miller, Drazen Petrovic, Ray Allen, and Dirk, yet .  Curry is certainly among the best shooters of all time, but he's not at the top of the list.  At least, imo.
Certainly seems to me like you're telling me Bird was the best shooter of all time instead of Curry, which isn't something I said.

I'm sorry I tend to take replies on a message board as a conversation between quoted posters?

Also, FWIW, your introductory paragraph is the dictionary definition of romanticizing. But, whatever, CelticsBlog reading skills.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Let's build the Warriors Eastside
« Reply #59 on: May 28, 2015, 10:55:28 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Adorable.

I'm not diminishing Larry Bird by saying that Steph Curry is arguably a better shooter. I do happen to agree somewhat with Isiah's statement about Bird's immense popularity being augmented due to his whiteness, but that's another discussion for another thread.
Reading this post made me dumber.

Just trying to bring you closer to our status quo.

Forget it kid. When it comes to Latin nomenclature you are out of your water.
Same when it comes to your writing.

So hostile.

You don't think that Bird's popularity was related to his skin color? In a league that was, as players, coaches, commentators, and fans of the era have all said, seen as "too black" by the general public?

I think you should maybe stick to Gifs for the rest of the week. You seem like you're having a rough time.

And, speaking of my writing, the correct phrasing would be "out of your depth." Have a nice day. :)

Some of it, perhaps, but not all of it.  Ask the players and coaches from his era, black or white, and they'll all tell you the same thing - he was incredible.

Please, tell me where I said Larry Bird wasn't an incredible basketball player, or even where I said he was only famous because he was white. I wait with baited breath.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.