This is Rockets related but it seems more of a hangout vibe to it. Would you rather have a Rockets team composed of the cleanest cut guys, no techs, no flagrants, does lots of community service, and is well received by the community and is consistently one and out and at times they don't make the playoffs or a Houston Rockets team composed of your Latrell Spreewell's and your Portland Jailblazers, dirty players always in the news for drugs and other stuff, they don't care about Houston but they win Championships or at least make it to the playoffs consistently. (Longest run-on sentence ever! I needs the grammar school) I've kinda had that question lingering in my head ever since the possibility of Artest coming to Houston came about. While I don't think Artest would completely undermine the rest of the team and turn them into degenerates, it's just a "what-if" if you will.
I picked Good Guys. I would LOVE to see the Rockets win all the time, but the players are also role models for Houston's youth. No druggies, please.
I want to win. It's fun to root for good guys, but winning is what matters. With that said, I heard a cool story form a friend who works as a Rockets ball boy. Yesterday he received a letter. Shane Battier had mailed him a handwritten thank you note for the seasons work with a $2,000 bonus check. Doesn't get much gooder than that.
Depends on the kind of bad guys. Real thugs like the Miami Hurricanes? I'd rather lose with good guys. Hard-nosed tough guys with an edge like the Bad Boy Pistons? I'd rather win with bad guys.
I've said this before, I don't care what you do off the court. I don't look up to you as a person, I look up to you as a player. If you do drugs, it doesn't mean I will do them even if you're my favorite player. If your kids do drugs because someone in the NBA does, you fail as a parent and it's not the particular player's fault. Give me Artest over Shane any day. This isn't even a question.
...said the pot to the kettle.... Back to the topic at hand: I'll have to think about it. I'm leaning towards bad guys winning.
This seems to be a very misleading poll. Good guys don't always lose and bad guys don't always win. If you have the context above then most would pick the bad guys because we all want to win. In reality, I would prefer to win WITH good guys than win with bad guys. I would rather lose with good guys than lose with bad guys. SO the poll should read: Who would you rather win with: Good guys or Bad guys.
Good guys are easy to root for, good guys that win even easier to root for. How come that isn't a choice? Our good guys won, they just didn't get past the first round. Bad guys don't win all the time either.. see Denver. Bad Boys like those in Detroit are fun to root for because they aren't badly behaving people in society, just rough and tough... and easy to root for.
Ok, the whole premise of this thread is purely hypothetical, given two teams, which would you chose, Good Losers, or Bad Winners.
LOL, I think you're missing the point of the thread. If those were our choices, OF COURSE everyone would pick winning with good guys. I voted win with bad guys. Any good things in the community pro athletes do is gravy, but the bottom line is these guys are paid to WIN first and foremost.
id rather have a team of good guys. as much as parents should be role models, athletes are also role models.
