LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 117
0 members and 117 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 01-16-2004, 11:57 AM   #1788
ThurgreedMarshall
[intentionally omitted]
 
ThurgreedMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 18,597
Zeke

Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I'm calling in help. [Article about point guards] I know these ranking are bullshit, but so is your argument style.
You don't get it and you never will. You can say Billups is a great point guard until you're blue in the face. It doesn't make him a better player than McGrady. It doesn't make him a better pick than McGrady. It doesn't really mean anything other than he's a good point guard.

Let me help you since you don't really know shit. If every team in the league would trade Billups for McGrady, it makes no sense to take Billups over McGrady. Ever. Even if your team really, really needs a point guard. You can always land Billups (or a much better point guard) using McGrady. Therefore, it's beyond stupid to say that it's a wise decision to choose Billups over McGrady. I anticipate your answer to this will be, "But Billups is a good point guard," because your argument style and the substance of your argument is complete nonsense.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Ben Wallace, Kidd, wait... oh, I know Ben doesn't score much- bounce him.
Wow. You really are retarded.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
My point was that it depends on where you team is, who would be the better choice. This isn't an objective thing.
No. That makes sense only when you're comparing players on the same level. Does it make sense to add a Kidd or a Garnett? Well, let's look to our team's needs. When the decision is to be made between a McGrady and a Billups, the choice is simple, objective one.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Thurgreed tribute argument...You've just showed there's no point talking to you. Michael willed his team to get in shape to win. McGrady will have to buy any rings he wears. You should buy a helmet. ...blah blah blah....
1. Get your own lines.
2. Early in his career, Michael did NOT will his team to get in shape to win. That's why I told you to compare them at similar points in their career. Michael was a one-man show on a team that looked a lot like the Magic right now, you idiot.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Point guards grow up slow. He hadn't gotten the chance to play much until he hit Detroit.
Yeah. All the great point guards needed 5 years before you knew they were something special. Wtf are you talking about? Do you want to know why he didn't get a chance to play much? Because he wasn't that great.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
What I want to say is:
As to my abilities, anyone who ever has played much at any level know you can't call out a person's talent based upon anything other than seeing him play. so My basketball instinct tells me you ain't played much.
Your instincts are about as accurate as your arguments. I played in college (granted it wasn't a division I school).

You can't gauge a player's talent based upon anything other than seeing him play? Really? So, I need to actually see Bimbo Coles play to determine he ain't that good? I can't look at his numbers to make that determination? It's like you just stepped off a space ship and you have no idea how anything in this strange world of ours, works.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
So instead I'll just say:
Fuck that! It's January, let's compare the amounts on our W-2's for playing basketball last year. I know I at least tied your ass.
How about this: We play for paychecks and I don't report the income on my next return?

TM
ThurgreedMarshall is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:30 AM.