Page 56 of 1658

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:27 pm
by aTm
Number of fouls dont tell you very much.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:30 pm
by Cats rule
Bluecat wrote:Stu agreed with the only point I was making.

James still has time to do a lot with his career.

I don't know why the baby blue boys got their panties in a wad. I do not disparage Jordan's excellence. He is the best I've ever seen and I loved watching him play. He was the only reason I watched NBA basketball in the 90's. I merely pointed out that even his Airness had to go through some growing pains before becoming the greatest champion of our generation. And it's not out of the realm of possibility to think that LeBron is still in the midst of his maturation process.
He was largely responsible for me discontinuing my nba viewership, and i detest the bastard for the part he played in changing the nba from a sport to a travesty/pageant...

the "jordan rules" were a very real, visible thing and they made "his airness" better than he would've been had he been held to the same set of rules as the rest of the league. while that's still damn good, and would've put him in some elite company (top 10ish all time greats) it doesn't allow me (and shouldn't allow anyone) to say unequivocably: greatest ever

i won't comment on james place in the hierarchy, because i just don't watch enough nba these days to form an accurate opinion. i do know he came off looking like an ass-clown w/ the whole dissing of his hometown w/ THE DECISION and subsequent finals disappointment and attitude about same. someone mentioned jordan's heart/will, and that's something lebron ain't going to suddenly develop. I read a quote from bron=bron after game 6 of the finals where he was asked if it bothered him that so many people were glad to see him fail. his answer says all i need to know about his heart: <paraphrasing the answer> "no, because next week when i'm taking my family on vacation and doing things those people won't ever be able to afford, who'll be the loser then" he's got his. all the posturing about leaving cleveland hunting a ring was just blowing smoke up cleveland's ass. he left cleveland for a bigger market and that's it, period. he's all about the paper

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:44 pm
by Bluecat
Jordan's Bulls were swept by Boston in the first round in '86, his 2nd season. He did have his 63-point game during the sweep, but I wouldn't call a sweep "toe-to-toe". The Celtics swept the Bulls again the following year. In Jordan's 4th year ('88) the Bulls got past the first round but were beaten by the Pistons in five in the second round. In '89, they got to the Conference Finals and lost to Detroit. The same happened in '90, except the Bulls extended it to 7 games. In '91, Jordan and the Bulls broke through, won the ring and began their string of dominance. Jordan was 28.

James' Cavs didn't reach the playoffs until his 3rd year, but they did win a series with James hitting two game-winning shots and scoring over 40 points twice; they lost in the next round to the Pistons in 7 games; in his 4th year and 2nd playoff appearance, LeBron led the Cavs to the NBA Finals at age 23, scoring 48 points in Game 5 of the Eastern Conference Finals against Detroit, including the Cavs' final 25 points. He also had disappearing acts in Games 1 and 2 (prompting the media to question his desire, sound familiar?) as the Cavs dropped the first two. The next three seasons the Cavs lost in round 2 to Boston (7 games); lost as the top seed to Orlando in the conference finals (6 games) and gakked as the top seed against Boston in the 2nd round (6 games). And then of course, there is this year's meltdown.

At the age of 26, there's not much separating the two careers. By years of service, however (8 seasons), Jordan had two rings.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 9:11 am
by Bklyn
Moses Malone never fouled out a game. I think there was another more recent player (Karl Malone, maybe) who had only fouled out a handful...if that too. I don't know if that necessarily means you're protected by the refs...or your coach...or you play differently when you get to 4 fouls. Jordan played during the handcheck era too, so he probably would have fouled out more today than he would have in the 90s when the Knicks were relevant.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 10:42 am
by hedge
Sounds like he honed his defensive skills and learned how to be effective without fouling. Mostly from his Carolina training...

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:25 pm
by BigRedMan
hedge wrote:Sounds like he honed his defensive skills and learned how to be effective without fouling. Mostly from his Carolina training...

LMAO. I love you man. That was awesome.

The "Jordan Rules"

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 1:40 pm
by onion eyed gudgeon
There were Patrick Ewing rules, too. The only move he had involved hooking his arm around a guy, shoving him aside while backing over/around him several steps for a layin. That's illegal, of course (and so is walking), but it was the only thing Ewing had so they allowed it.

In college, of course, there are rules. Then there are "Duke rules" and "UConn rules."

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 1:41 pm
by AlabamAlum
Don't forget Ennis Whatley rules.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:00 pm
by Cats rule
AlabamAlum wrote:Don't forget Ennis Whatley rules.
unfortunately for ennis, i don't believe the "ennis rules" made it out of birmingham w/ him...

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:09 pm
by hedge
As a fan of a formerly great program that has gone to shit (no, I'm not talking about UK this time), BRM's rage at his betters (i.e., Carolina fans) is palpable...

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 3:48 pm
by Hizzy III
I give the Canucks in Vancouver some serious dap on their rioting acumen but I think Detroit and LA still have them beat. Folks in Dallas, apparently, are either too hot or too shocked at the Mavs winning to riot.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 3:59 pm
by sardis
To be fair to the Vancouverites, the burning of vehicles doesn't have as good effect in daylight...

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 4:35 pm
by Ron Mexico
Hizzy III wrote:I give the Canucks in Vancouver some serious dap on their rioting acumen but I think Detroit and LA still have them beat. Folks in Dallas, apparently, are either too hot or too shocked at the Mavs winning to riot.
They had a pretty big rally across the ocean though:

[youtube]6hEzs7x5aEM[/youtube]

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 4:39 pm
by DooKSucks
LMAO @ Chuck

It was Wilt who never fouled out of a game.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 4:43 pm
by Ron Mexico
Moses broke his record for consecutive games without fouling out though. The best part about Moses' fouls was that he used to do the old school "raise your hand" every single time. The only guys who do that anymore are ones who are trying to take credit for fouls to avoid having them attributed to stars, but Moses did it damn near every single time he got whistled.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:38 pm
by hedge
Why isn't BRM whining about Wilt and Moses never fouling out? It's outrageous! Wilt was an OK player, but without the coddling of the refs, he'd be nothing. With the refs' help, he's, oh, top 50ish...

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 11:24 pm
by Jungle Rat
Could this be remembered as the day The Goat Pen actually died?

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 11:44 pm
by Owlman
I merely pointed out that even his Airness had to go through some growing pains before becoming the greatest champion of our generation.
You're younger than 48 blue?

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2011 11:47 pm
by Owlman
I merely pointed out that even his Airness had to go through some growing pains before becoming the greatest champion of our generation.
Robert Horry ha 7.

Re: Ostensibly Hoops

Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:22 am
by Saint
You're too hung up age re: James vs. Jordan, Blue. what's more important is number of years in the NBA.