LOL So now you measure what a player can average by his career high? Yea you just keep owning yourself. Then Ive already demolished your claims, its not my fault you dont have the balls to post it again. You judge a player by his career averages, I measure each individual season separately. No my way is better to measure a players career trend throughout each age and stage of his career. Your way is to look at a players career averages. Its not my fault the person Im debating with has limited knowledge of statistics. I guess we should fire Morey and hire you, since Morey doesnt use FG% and opts to use advanced metrics. You obviously dont know the importance of pace if you dont see the relevance to its mentioning. I dont dismiss them, I only know they arent important. So then what was the purpose of this statement: Basically if Nash retires before his decline trend he will go down as a better player because his per game averages dont decline. A players prime is part of his legacy dimwit Yea people will forget all about Artest's DPOY season, opting to remember his fight. Nope only stating the obvious, glad to see you agree with me. Cowardice at its finest OK so now lets determine how he would play over 200 years. He gets locked up in a hyperbolic chamber of some kind, opting only to spend his alive time to play basketball, and every game he plays 48 minutes ending up with 4pts and after years of consistent crap play he gos down as the all time greatest. Yea your a moron Running out of legs to stand on? My legs are planted firmly on your ass at this point. Your book must not sell very much Both are meaningless when judging a players career. Hence all-time status means very little if Mark Jackson has more assists than Magic. Answer the question does it place him above Magic? Im sorry logic will never go out the window Coming from you that means nothing Your r****ded Thus proving my point, your not a fan of the game because you only watch games that you like and when it comes to stats youve already proven to know nothing. So what credibility does that leave you with? NONE Exactly, why should we trust a man who doesnt care about every team and every player? The same man who diminishes MJ's and Dream's legacy because they played past their prime. Keep em coming
Owning myself how? You said he's incapable of scoring more than 30. His career high proves you wrong. You might think you're owning me, but the problem is, every time i offer a rebuttal, you change your original contention. This is a lengthy thread. If you're not willing to look back and read where I quoted you, why would I spend time searching for it again? Thats becomes a problem when you start talking about legacies. Since I'm not familiar with the obscure stats you bring up, I guess that does mean I have limited knowledge of statistics. It also means that in order for you to prove your point, you have to rely on statistics that for whatever reason havent found their way into the mainstream. In other words, you dont know the importance. Since you brought it up, you should be able to explain its relevance. Guess not... You THINK they're not important b/c you judge players by their prime and not their careers as a whole. Wow, its like you pick only the sentences that help your cause. Too bad you omit their surrounding context. This is what I said: "I've been talking in terms of careers. in fact, this has been favorable for nash b/c stockton's stats have included his developing years as well as his declining years. thus far, nash's stats havent included his declining years." Whether you like it or not, this is a true statement. Go ahead and argue against FACT. Tell you what...I'll shut up if you show me Nash's stats that include his declining years. It'll be hard since he's still in his prime. I'm glad you finally agree. Up till now, you've been using them interchangeably. Exactly. Nothing wrong with agreeing with you. But in this instance, I never disagreed with you. Funny how you keep mentioning it though. So now in your argument, you're using technology that hasnt been invented. And your grasp on human biology is amazingly bad. And you're r****ded. Its funny how much faith you're placing in Nash's hypothetical 200 year career. You're r****ded. How does being the all-time leader in steals and assists become meaningless when judging stockton's career. I know this statement doesnt involve nash's 200 year career, but it deserves an honorary "you're r****ded" statement. You're r****ded. Funny. I say magic is an exception b/c his career was cut short due to disease. And you immediately use magic as an example. I answered the question. Stockton having more assists places him above magic on the all-time assist leader board. Once again, who knows what magic could've accomplished? He was great, and his career was also cut down during his prime. Tell you what. You pay for the extra satellite, cable, whatever. And then i'll watch it. Also, can you handle some of my workload to ensure that I'll have time to watch it? Why should I care about every team and every player? You're setting your standards so high that no one qualifies. In other words, you're saying that off the top of your head, you can name every player on every roster. Since you care about every team and every player.
Believe me Im not the only who thinks Im owning you, I keep getting PM's telling me to stop hurting you. His career high proves me right because he has never come close to averaging those numbers on a consistent basis Because nothing youve said has ever proven me wrong, therefore Im givin you the chance to try again. Not my fault you dont have the balls Not if you have the capacity to understand how to measure/quantify a players contributions, something you obviously lack. So you want me to teach you? Sorry child I dont have the time to explain to you how eFG% is more accurate than FG% or why per possession starts are so important. Suffice it to say that you should really look into them if your ever to compete with me. I could easily but it would require you to beg for forgiveness. I judge a players career trend, every year holds its own story and I dont hold it against a player for playing past their prime the way you do. NOPE Exactly my point dimwit, Ive been laughing at you this whole time. In other words what MJ did as a Wizard somehow takes away from his Chicago career because (gasp) it lowered his career averages. Exactly and according to your logic Nash would be better served retiring before he hits his decline because for some idiotic reason you take away from what hes done in the past simply because his per game averages decline. Nope Ive been saying the same thing in every post. I treat each players season seperately, I dont bunch them together and I dont hold it against a player for playing past his prime the way you do. Moron Good to know your not a complete moron, keep agreeing with me and you just might save face. Its a hypothetical scenario dont get mad just because you cant debunk it the way I just did yours. Play the game or dont play at all. Because Karl Malone having scored more than MJ never stopped me from KNOWING MJ was the superior scorer Coming from you Ill take that as a compliment Mark Jackson has more assist than Nash and Gary Payton, any more suggestions r****d or have you had enough of this ownage? Answer the question, does it place him above Magic Is Stockton > Magic First of all, get a job that ensures you can buy a DVR and then watch it on your free time, then again if your workload doesnt permit you to have enough time to enjoy a simple basketball game then maybe you should rethink your life in general. Because your a fan of the game, perhaps. Its ok I wouldnt expect you to understand what that means Yes I cant believe you find that so hard to believe.
Actually, they prove you wrong. You said he was incapable of scoring more than 30 pts. For the latest example of where you were proven wrong, please refer to the previous sentence. How do i lack it? When you talk about a career as a whole, you use career statistics. You dont base his career on his prime seasons. No, i dont want you to teach me. How about you use stats that arent obscure? Use stats that show up on any espn channel. use stats that any commentator uses. In other words, you bring up a topic that is totally irrelevant and are incapable of finding a relevance. Career trends should include entire careers. Not just their prime years. Not what i said dumbass. Read it again. I didnt say it took away from his chicago career. All i said was that it lowered his career stats. You're laughing b/c you're too stupid to comprehend what i'm saying. According to my logic, if he wanted to prevent his career stats from decreasing, he would retire immediately after his prime. Keep in mind i'm not advocating this. I have to get to work so i'll respond to the rest later.
Thats why you're ill-equipped to talk about legacy. The only points i'm agreeing with are points that I've never disagreed with. If you want to take that as a victory, go ahead. First of all, you didnt debunk my scenario. I dont know why you think you did. Funny...you think you debunk my scenario of Ricky Davis potentially averaging 39 ppg by saying it has a 0% chance of happening. And then in your scenario you have Steve Nash living and playing ball when he's over 200 years old. This was my original question: "How does being the all-time leader in steals and assists become meaningless when judging stockton's career." And you respond by talking about how Malone's stats relate to Jordan's career. In other words, you avoid the question. B/c you know i'm right. Awesome. You would rather act illiterate than admit i'm right. "Ownage"... Hilarious. Nash's career isnt finished. Its far from over. And as for gary payton...he was more of a scoring pg. Whereas Jackson was a passing one. Its not surprising that Jackson has more assists. Hard to say. If I had to pick one for my team, I'd go with magic. "A simple basketball game" implies one game. You want me to watch every game played by every team. And you fault me if i dont. Its more important to work hard during my twenties so i can have a good, stable, lucrative career in my thirties.
