The A stands for Total Dickhead? That doesnt make much sense...
Try hard to think of a word that begins with A.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The A stands for Total Dickhead? That doesnt make much sense...
I believe the three point line is shorter so that's probably why it looks more cramped.seeing benny simmons slice and dice his way through defences is great. got me thinking, why is it that in the nba there's so much space on the floor. contrast that with the nbl where there's no room to maneouvere!
Coaches should be tech'd more, Trevor Gleeson included.
STFU and stop harassing the refs from the sideline.
Coaches should be tech'd more, Trevor Gleeson included.
STFU and stop harassing the refs from the sideline.
Her voice is like fingernails on a chalk board, and I hate the way she talks over the top of everyone. I'm with you, both annoying and boring.
He's an idiot. But right about Jordan.
It is. But he will never change. All those American shows used to be fun to watch, now they are all very samey, two blokes shouting at each other with clearly opposite opinions on a topic. Yawn.His hatred of LeBron James is just flat out embarrassing.
It is. But he will never change. All those American shows used to be fun to watch, now they are all very samey, two blokes shouting at each other with clearly opposite opinions on a topic. Yawn.
NBL play defence. NBA put on a show.seeing benny simmons slice and dice his way through defences is great. got me thinking, why is it that in the nba there's so much space on the floor. contrast that with the nbl where there's no room to maneouvere!
Surely he's the leader in the MVP at the moment??He was asked the other day if LeBron was an MVP candidate this season. And in the 10-12 minute segment he couldn't say "Yes". I mean seriously?
It's much harder to play defence in the NBA because of how ridiculously athletic most players are.NBL play defence. NBA put on a show.
Yeah pretty much. The NBL would never be able to defend a player like Westbrook or Giannis or LeBron etc...Too big, too quick, too athletic.It's much harder to play defence in the NBA because of how ridiculously athletic most players are.
Wilt Chamberlain is the outright greatest of all time.
Bill Russell's Celtics are the greatest ever team.
Oscar Robertson was a better point guard than Magic.
Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan are not best 10 all-time players.
Hakeem is top 10 all time and was better than Shaq.
LeBron does not feature on my NBA Mount Rushmore with Wilt, Russell, MJ and Kareem still clearly ahead and unlikely to get passed by LeBron.
Russell Westbrook is not a top ten point guard in the NBA today.
Donovan Mitchell is overrated and is likely to have a career trajectory not dissimilar to ex-Bull Ben Gordon. Ben Simmons, Jordan Bell, Jayson Tatum and Lauri Markkanen should all be better with Kyle Kuzma, Dennis Smith Jr, John Collins, Markelle Fultz and Lonzo Ball some others I wouldn't be surprised to also see have stronger careers.
Trae Young is the best in the 2018 NBA Draft class with Luka Doncic the next best.
Bill Russell's Celts team would be dream teamed by the current Warriors.
Only people caught in the moment would have Kobe in the Top 10 of all time.
A lot of people have Hakeem Top 10. And for a career I can see having him ahead of Shaq. But peak Shaq was a lot better than Hakeem. Peak Shaq is almost MJ dominate.
I'm struggling to come up with 10 better point guards than Westbrook (and I don't like him).
You value 60-70s basketball a lot. Stick LeBron in that league and he would be unstoppable.
I suspect most would agree with you on the Warriors beating Russell's Celtics. The Warriors without the 3pt line I don't believe would be competitive with the Celtics pre 3pt line. Under current rules with the three point line, I still like the Celtics. The 3pt line is such an essential part of the game now and you'd need to give the Celtics time to adjust to the line and look at current tape. If they had that, I'd back them in to beat the Warriors. They've got the perimeter pace to prevent 3s, they'd win the battle of the boards and the Warriors wouldn't be quick enough on defence to stop the Celtics on the fast breaks with the way they ran out so early before defenses could get back.
Hakeem I favour to Shaq for his defence as a clearly better defender who by contrast to Shaq applied himself on that end of the floor. His shooting, conversion from the line are bonuses and not clogging up the lane are bonuses. They're in the same conversation, but at their best, I'd against popular opinion take Hakeem.
As for 10 ahead of Westbrook - LeBron, Giannis, Curry, Harden, CP3, Irving, Wall, Lillard, K.Walker and Lowry all are better. With Westbrook the reasons for a position outside the top 10 are - his absurdly high usage rate, poor fg%, 3pt%, ft%, turnover numbers and worst in the game movement off-ball as a point guard you can't win a championship with.
LeBron would go great in any era, as any great would, and he would be great in the 60s and 70s. His impact and numbers would be similar in that time to Oscar Robertson, or a more efficient Elgin Baylor.
With no 3 point line the Warriors would still dream team the Celtics team. I'd actually be surprised if a 500 team from today wouldn't beat the Celtics in 5 games in a 7 game series. The game has come so far since the 60s. Everyone talks about Russel being this man mountain in the middle. Dude was 6 foot 9. He'd be a SF in today's game. Only one other guy was over 6 foot 6. The skill level was lol bad. Here's Game 7 of the Finals of that year. It's played at the intensity of a meaningless game in March in today's game. Skill level is right there with two lottery teams. Defense is pretty terrible. Outside a couple of players, jump shots are terrible. Over half the dudes out there are white. And these are the best two teams in the league playing a Game 7 in the Finals.
Warriors are better than them in every aspect of the game. And that's just a time thing. I have no doubt in 50 years the Warriors would fair the same against a team from 2070.
I have no issues with picking Hakeem. Peak Shaq was a lot more dominate though. He was unstoppable.
In your assessment of point guards, you've included two guys that aren't point guards.
LeBron would have been the best player in the game if he had played in the 60s.
What the players did in the 60s that they don't today is they run it up rather than walk it up, they played the fast break much more soundly, they moved much better off the ball rather than isolating, the rim and interior defence was stronger and post moves were of a much greater standard entirely. Every game, you're playing against historically great players, there were no cakewalks during that time. Players didn't have the shooting range then or the handles they do now and it was a below the rim game during that time. Otherwise it was still a very solid era of basketball. Today's teams if entered in the NBA with the rules of the 60s would struggle to compete without the 3pt line outside of the better few teams. With the Celtics unlike many teams from that era while they had Cousy, Ramsey and Heinsohn who are white, you had Russell, Jones, Sanders and K.C. Jones complimenting them. That team added Havlicek through the draft the following year which only made them greater.
In any era Wilt would be the most dominant by a considerable margin, as he was during the 60s when he was given the opportunity to carry an offense. LeBron through the 60s could have been a 32 point, 10 rebound, 9 assist player, playing him in the Oscar Robertson conversation, though marginally ahead with his FG% to be higher due to the way he gets to the rim (though not easy during that era with the way the lane was clogged and harder fouls were allowed). But that's not keeping up with Wilt who averaged 34.5ppg, 24.31rpg, an estimated 9bpg (career estiamted based on tv games 8.8bpg) while leading the NBA in assists for a season and Wilt is in a world of his own with only Russell coming close in rpg and bpg.
This is just so wrong. 60s ball was so bad. The offensive systems were terrible and their team defense was basically hope Wilt/Russel blocks them. You know teams back in the day use to shoot 40%? Warriors shoot 40% from 23 feet away from the basket. And defense is so much better today. Lightyears better. If today's team teleported back in time would take apart the 60s teams because the game has evolved. LeBron is stupidly dominate today. Back then he would have just destroyed everyone. You know he weighs 35 pounds more than Russel? And athletically would leave everyone for dead.
60s ball is, in comparison, pickup ball.
I'm not sure why you think Wilt would be the most dominate by a considerable margin. You know if he played in today's game and played 35 minutes per game or so. At today's pace. His most dominate season, when he scored 50ppg, is about the same as scoring 30ish points today. He'd be pretty good though.
You know why there were so many rebounds to be had back then? Teams couldn't shoot. Rodman's 17rpg were just as dominate as Wilt when he was averaging 30 rebounds per game.
btw I have no issues with calling that Boston team the most dominate NBA team.
How often did Wilt play against someone with comparable size and/or athletic ability? No doubt he was a great, dominant player, but he also had the benefit of being a freakish physical specimen and outlier, who was relied upon by some otherwise-mediocre teams in a small league to "do it all" for many years.
And if anyone thinks LeBron is averaging "only" 10rpg in '60s basketball, they're dreaming. With his size and athleticism and BBIQ, along with the pace and shooting percentages of the day, he'd comfortably average 20 boards a game throughout the '60s, along with probably 40 points and 10 assists as well.