Barkley: Camby Should Be Starting All-Star Center Over Yao

ok, if shaq thrives in an up-tempo style, i'll admit i was wrong.

but if the suns slow their pace down to adjust to him, will you admit you're wrong?

 

No dumby you arent listening. The experts already said you were wrong.....we dont need to wait! You are wrong!

 

Actually, whether I'm right or wrong depends on shaq's performance with the suns. Btw, I'm assuming we're talking about my contention that a fast, defensive pf/c who hustles and plays great defense would thrive in the Sun's up-tempo system.

The only article i've read is from yahoo sports, but even it says "O'Neal, 35, still is a physical presence but seems a poor fit for Phoenix coach Mike D'Antoni's up-tempo offense."

What is it that you think i'm wrong about? Please be very clear so theres no confusion.

 

You are wrong that teams like Warriors and Suns would choose Camby over Yao.

 

Although my original statement didnt explicitly state it, i later clarified it by saying that they would have to stick with their current game plan (which is up-tempo).

So once again,

if shaq thrives in an up-tempo style, i'll admit i was wrong.

but if the suns slow their pace down to adjust to him, will you admit you're wrong?

 

Teams like Cleaveland and Celtics would choose Jason Kidd over Kobe.

 

Generally, when we compare two players, to be fair, they should play the same position.

 

I hate Kobe, I would pick Landry over kobe....just cause

 

I hate Kobe too, and I believe most GMs hate Kobe and would pick Bonzi, Shane, ... over Kobe. I must clarify it by saying that they would have to hate Kobe. I really feel that I have a big hole in my head, I'm hopeless, jeezzzzz

.

 

I wasnt saying GMs wouldnt take Kobe....I think GMs are split over him, but I personally wouldnt.

 

C'mon guys, stop arguing with wekko368. You are making him/her a celebrity. And by arguing with him/her, you are dropping yourself to his/her level.

 

True, you are right!

 

Only an idiot like you think DPOY voting measures magnitude.

Let me re-iterate. Stock A earns 15.5% return, forget Stock B and C. Supposed Stock D earn 15.3% return and there are 50 MILLION stocks in between earning 15.4% return, Stock A is ONLY, STILL 0.2% better than Stock D. Increase the number of analysts by 50 million who think, rightfully, A is better than D (i.e. the number of votes), Stock A is STILL, ONLY 0.2% better than D.

DPOY votes meant that X number of reporters THINK Camby is better than Yao. It DOES NOT MEASURE how much Camby is better, even ASSUMING he is better. All the reporters in the world could vote Camby, Bowen and Duncan over Yao, it still DOESN'T prove HOW MUCH they are better.

Your moronic rant on GM's taking Yao over Camby began in post #169 and 170:

See what the quoting function is for? What's even more interesting is "MAINTAINING THE SAME PLAYING STYLE" IS ABSENT FROM YOUR "PARAMETRES," of which "THERE WERE NONE."

The only thing remotely close was a claim Camby fits certain style better than Yao, of which you provided NO proof.

So what's going on here ISN'T that I can't read instructions, it's that YOU TRIED TO CHANGE THE PARAMETRES AFTER YOUR ASS GOT OWNED.

And my god, you even compared Camby to Bill Russell.

The whole keeping the same playing style is just funny. Boy, instead of trying to win, teams should play a certain way just for the sake of it, as if they have some emotional investment involved.

The logical fallacy of your argument is just hilarious. The gap between Camby and Yao is so great there is no reason for keeping him. Camby is neither, great, healthy nor young. Faced with Camby or Yao, GM's would change the style, no ifs and buts about it.

Look in the mirror and say to yourself "I'm an idiot." Good. Now do it 1000 more times.

I guess you are too stupid to read, or too stupid to comprehend, whichever. YOU BROUGHT UP the argument of Camby not being "that inept." NOWHERE in that last post of mine did I compare Yao's offensive output and skills to Camby's. THERE IS NO COMPARISON.

What I did do though, is debunk your moronic argument "Camby isn't that inept on O."

 

ok, its logically plausible that if camby is a 10 on a scale of 1-10, then yao is a 9.78 (22 players scored better than yao and lower than camby).

camby scores over 400. yao scores 1. but yao is almost as good as camby. good lucky trying to sell that concept.

I already quoted my original quote for you in my last post. My original quote touches on the existing structure of a team. This is meant to be the constant. I didnt explicitly say it in my original post (i explicitly said it later on), but it was the logical implication.

Otherwise, there wouldnt be a debate at all.

How can there be proof when Camby doesnt actually play in that style? Speculation is all there is. You have no proof that Camby DOESNT fit certain styles better.

No...the original quote had parameters. Some people misinterpreted them so I was forced to clarify.

Next time i'll phrase my words to accomodate all levels of intelligence.

I believe I was talking about the importance of defense...

You dont think defense is important?

You never did take a logic class did you? I can imagine it.

If the given fact was:
If it rains, the car gets wet.

And the question was:
It rains; does the car get wet?

your answer would be:

No, it doesnt get wet. Theres absolutely no reason for the car to be outside where it can get dirty, stolen, dented, etc... Therefore, its stored in the garage. So no, the car doesnt get wet.

True. Thats why I had to quantify it. I'm sorry you were incapable of understanding that.

I dunno if you're one to talk about intelligence...you've proven yourself incapable of following simple parameters.

You havent debunked anything. If you think Camby is offensively r****ded, then you're just ignorant to his game.

Why exactly do you think you debunked his offensive ability?

 

No offense, but your parameters were illogical. Your opinion is that not many teams would pick Yao over Camby if they wanted to maintain their current game plan (key paramater). You are completely ignoring the obvious....WHEN YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO GET A BETTER PLAYER, ESPECIALLY A BIG LIKE YAO, YOU CHANGE YOUR GAME PLAN. You are listing a paramater that isn't realistic (i.e. dumb). That's like me saying Steve Nash would love to come play for Houston if we gave him the minimum contract. I'm listing something that doesn't make any sense....

The Suns were the model for a run-n-gun team, and today they just said to hell with this, let's get Shaq and if we can't run the same then oh well. You know why....running teams don't win (as I stated earlier). So going by your paramaters, what coach would choose to stick with a game-plan that hasn't worked, or pick a worse player (i.e. Camby over Yao)? Again, your paramaters defy logic. And even your Warriors just picked up a slow footed Chris Webber.

So I understand what your paramaters are. I just don't see how you can say they aren't dumb or at least highly unrealistic.

 

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/n_QXL4z5hcM&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/n_QXL4z5hcM&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

 

Since you really are this stupid, let me explain it to you AGAIN.

Let's start by making AN ASSUMPTION that Camby (because you provided **** as far as facts to back it up) is better at D than Bowen than Duncan than whoever's in between than Yao. Then in DPOY votes, the voting order SHOULD be Camby over Bowen over Duncan over Yao, if we know that as a fact.

Let's also assume that you have 100 voters, each giving 1st 2nd and 3rd DPOY votes. 100 VOTERS SHOULD VOTE Camby over Bowen over Duncan. NONE, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, 0 SHOULD VOTE FOR YAO.

It doesn't matter **** whether Camby is light-years better than Yao (which he is not) or only marginally better, ZERO SHOULD VOTE FOR YAO OVER CAMBY, BOWEN OR DUNCAN.

Your pathetic attempt to use 400 vote vs. 1 vote comparison merely highlights that you are too stupid to have critical thinking skills. You insistence that you have a point when it was explained to you no less than six times to you proves your pathetic reading comprehension. Your wild claim that you have proved Camby is a better defensive player in the face of facts is asinine at best.

There isn't a debate. You are arguing for argument's sake.

I didn't speculate. You were the one that attempted to "show" alleged, that Camby fits certain styles better. I just showed that Yao is a far superior player.

It doesn't matter. You make an assumption (that teams prefer to stick to styles over success) that will NEVER be true.

That... is what we call a straw man. I think defense is very important. At least as important as offense. What's pathetic is you comparing Camby to Russell.

Russell was monumental in limiting arguably the greatest player of all time. Camby can't even limit many of the above average players of the current period.

Russell was a helluva better offensive player too

Your banter is just hilarious. You couldn't tell logic if it bit you in the ass. And with most people that is just an expression.

No, the question was, would you invest Stock A with 15% return in telecom or Stock B in agriculture with 5% return. And you chose Stock B.

I'm not gonna give a lecture you on taking Stock B because, yes, you have the right to be a moron.

If I quantify in "who has a better houses" and limit the comparisons only to my house and trailers, I have the best house IN THE WORLD. BOW TO MY QUANTIFIED SUPERIORITY.

I've watched MANY of Camby's games. Show to me ONE REASON, ONE STAT, ONE SOMETHING, where you think Camby has an offensive game.

You pulled the moronic "Camby has a decent 15 footer" crap and nothing else. I thoroughly trashed that by showing Camby hits only 38% eFG on his jumpers. Actually this is Camby's best year at that too. He averages about 36%.

OK, I didn't debunk you. I just bashed your heads and "logic" against the windshield 100 times. Better?

 

Facts? The great majority of stats point to Camby being a better defensive player.

I really dont know what to tell you. Maybe you're confusing the two?

Everyone knows that Yao is superior. This was never argued. I merely said that Camby is a better defensive player. And his athletic brand of defense suits certain styles better.

Both of us have different opinions. Its all speculation. For you to claim you didnt speculate, then you must know for a fact that Yao would fit any system better than Camby.

And thats just r****ded.

If you dont agree with the parameters of a contention, then dont involve yourself in the conversation.

My comparison was to emphasize the importance of defense. I wasnt comparing them individually.

Wow..its like your purposely taking things out of context to perpetuate this argument.

Is this a trick question? Trailers arent houses. And you think you're logical...

In any case, you have to mention your parameters in your results.

You would have the best house in the world given that the sample selection is limited to all trailers and only your house.

This season, yao is shooting 31.25% (80 total shots) on his jumpers outside of 15 ft but inside the 3 pt line.

camby is shooting 30.7% on 114 shots.

Since you imply that camby is garbage outside the paint, are you implying the same about Yao?

 

These stats are taken from nba.com/hotspots as of 2/7/08

 

Actually, you take stock B.

In this analogy, stock A receives a better performance review than B. We're relating this to the DPOY voting where camby received more votes than yao (and i said camby was a better defensive player; you disagreed and said yao was)

therefore, in your scenario, i would've taken stock A b/c i backed camby. both camby and Stock A had better reviews.

you would've taken stock B b/c it, like yao, received inferior reviews.