Harden check in

RFDC · **Joined:** Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm **Posts:** 57241

FavreFan wrote:

I just think it's interesting point of view. Im more optimistic about most players upside I guess.

I think I started changing the way I view players in 2011. Prior to 2011, Dirk only had 1 game in his career that would've let me to believe he had it in him, and then the 2011 postseason happened. It made me start this thread, viewtopic.php?f=91&t=58981 , before the NBA Finals even started. You could see recognize the career changing postseason even while it was happening. It made me start thinking that rather than blaming Dirk for coming up small, it was probably more a matter of he just wasn't as good as Duncan or Shaq in his prime. That's not his fault necessarily, and if the Mavs never acquire Tyson Chandler then Dirk goes down on what Barkley calls The Shit List, the list of great players who weren't great enough to win a championship. And that clearly would've been untrue. It was just that Dirk never had a team that was good enough around him. I think the same can be said of almost any all time great player who didn't win a championship. Except Karl Malone.

Yeah Dirk is another interesting case. He has been one of my favorite non-Bull players of all time. And yet I was pretty much at the point where I didn't think he had it. But he proved me wrong. That run in the playoffs he had was a thing of beauty.

long time guy · **Joined:** Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am **Posts:** 31948

FavreFan wrote:

RFDC wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

RFDC wrote:

Back to Pippen, I just don't think Pippen had "it" to lead a team as its best player to a title. Jordan had it. Magic had it. Kobe has it. Maybe Harden has it and I just haven't seen it. But so far I gotta say no.

To be fair, it sounds like you have a guilty until proven innocent view on who has "it". Im not saying thats wrong. But can Harden do anything to change your mind other than actually forcibly changing your mind by winning a title as the best player?

Edit: Did Charles Barkley have "it"? If he did, what showed you that he did, but Pippen didnt?

Hmm, my first thought is no Harden cannot do anything to change my mind other than winning a title in that situation. But that is probably not fair. But I am not sure what the answer would be otherwise.

I don't think Barkley had it. If he did I think they would have won that series vs. the Bulls. Barkley had a ton of talent around him and still could not pull it off.

It's not like he had a disappointing Finals though. He went toe to toe with Jordan and just wasn't as good. That's not his fault IMO.

Im guessing you would say Durant has "it". If so, why does he have it, but some of these other all time greats like Charles and Pippen didnt?

Did Jason Kidd have it? I think he maximized the talent on those Nets teams and simply werent as good as the Spurs or Lakers at the time.

By the way, Im not just fucking with you if thats how it comes across. Genuinely curious on how you evaluate players in this situation.

I am glad that you are arguing this point too much is made of superstars not winning it all. Most of the time it is because they come up against better teams. Rarely is any analysis placed upon why they did not win it. DId they perform terribly or were the teams simply better. Barkley was a great player and a player capable of winning it all. The only team that he has ever participated on that was capable of winning was the 93 phoenix team. It reminds me of how Elway was criticized for getting to the Super Bowl four and never winning yet the only reason that they were in the Super Bowl was because of him. Same thing with Marino. Ewing was also a great player that did not have the luxury of playing with any all stars. It is no accident that James won only once he got on a team with two other all stars.

FavreFan · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:23 pm

long time guy wrote:

It reminds me of how Elway was criticized for getting to the Super Bowl four and never winning yet the only reason that they were in the Super Bowl was because of him. Same thing with Marino.

I actually think Marino gets a lot less blame than other big names who never won it all. Maybe it's because he's still active, but Peyton is always the go-to example of an all time great QB who struggles in the postseason, when in reality Marino has 1 less ring and about the same playoff record as Manning does.

long time guy · **Joined:** Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am **Posts:** 31948

FavreFan wrote:

long time guy wrote:

It reminds me of how Elway was criticized for getting to the Super Bowl four and never winning yet the only reason that they were in the Super Bowl was because of him. Same thing with Marino.

I actually think Marino gets a lot less blame than other big names who never won it all. Maybe it's because he's still active, but Peyton is always the go-to example of an all time great QB who struggles in the postseason, when in reality Marino has 1 less ring and about the same playoff record as Manning does.

Marino performed better in the playoffs than Manning and he also never had the talent on his Miami teams that the Colts had. He never had the benefit of any running game and the receivers were never as good Harrison and Reggie Wayne. Defenses were similar in most years. There were years that the Colts were the overwhelming favorite to win and came up short. Rarely was Miami the favorite in their one super year the 49ers also had a super year and were simply the better team.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

long time guy wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

long time guy wrote:

It reminds me of how Elway was criticized for getting to the Super Bowl four and never winning yet the only reason that they were in the Super Bowl was because of him. Same thing with Marino.

I actually think Marino gets a lot less blame than other big names who never won it all. Maybe it's because he's still active, but Peyton is always the go-to example of an all time great QB who struggles in the postseason, when in reality Marino has 1 less ring and about the same playoff record as Manning does.

Marino performed better in the playoffs than Manning and he also never had the talent on his Miami teams that the Colts had. He never had the benefit of any running game and the receivers were never as good Harrison and Reggie Wayne. Defenses were similar in most years. There were years that the Colts were the overwhelming favorite to win and came up short. Rarely was Miami the favorite in their one super year the 49ers also had a super year and were simply the better team.

Id agree with that before looking up the numbers.

Marino has a 77 career post season rating

FavreFan · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:35 pm

rogers park bryan wrote:

long time guy wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

long time guy wrote:

It reminds me of how Elway was criticized for getting to the Super Bowl four and never winning yet the only reason that they were in the Super Bowl was because of him. Same thing with Marino.

I actually think Marino gets a lot less blame than other big names who never won it all. Maybe it's because he's still active, but Peyton is always the go-to example of an all time great QB who struggles in the postseason, when in reality Marino has 1 less ring and about the same playoff record as Manning does.

Marino performed better in the playoffs than Manning and he also never had the talent on his Miami teams that the Colts had. He never had the benefit of any running game and the receivers were never as good Harrison and Reggie Wayne. Defenses were similar in most years. There were years that the Colts were the overwhelming favorite to win and came up short. Rarely was Miami the favorite in their one super year the 49ers also had a super year and were simply the better team.

Id agree with that before looking up the numbers.

Marino has a 77 career post season rating

Thanks for saving me the time. I remember it being below 80.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Manning gets it worse because Marino had early playoff success. So the "can he win the big one" was never a question.

FavreFan · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:46 pm

rogers park bryan wrote:

Manning gets it worse because Marino had early playoff success. So the "can he win the big one" was never a question.

Even though he never won the big one?

LeBron was still being dominated by the question even after taking the Cavs to the Finals over a superior Pistons squad and submitting a historically great playoff game in the process. Seems like he did more to evade the question than Marino did after 4-5 seasons in the league.

pittmike · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:51 pm

Well I didn't see this thread going this way.

FavreFan · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:53 pm

pittmike wrote:

Well I didn't see this thread going this way.

My bad.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

FavreFan wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Manning gets it worse because Marino had early playoff success. So the "can he win the big one" was never a question.

Even though he never won the big one?

LeBron was still being dominated by the question even after taking the Cavs to the Finals over a superior Pistons squad and submitting a historically great playoff game in the process. Seems like he did more to evade the question than Marino did after 4-5 seasons in the league.

Yes. Because he won an AFC Championship game.

Im not saying it's right, but if Peyton would have gotten to the Super Bowl and lost in year 2, I dont think he'd have as much as the stigma.

I hate Marino. Total Jagoff. Loved when Boomer Esiason called Peyton Manning "the Dan Marino of his generation" right in front of Marino

FavreFan · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:00 pm

rogers park bryan wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Manning gets it worse because Marino had early playoff success. So the "can he win the big one" was never a question.

Even though he never won the big one?

LeBron was still being dominated by the question even after taking the Cavs to the Finals over a superior Pistons squad and submitting a historically great playoff game in the process. Seems like he did more to evade the question than Marino did after 4-5 seasons in the league.

Yes. Because he won an AFC Championship game.

Im not saying it's right, but if Peyton would have gotten to the Super Bowl and lost in year 2, I dont think he'd have as much as the stigma.

I hate Marino. Total Jagoff. Loved when Boomer Esiason called Peyton Manning "the Dan Marino of his generation" right in front of Marino

Yeah, the look Marino gave him was epic.

RFDC · **Joined:** Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm **Posts:** 57241

It was a pretty funny moment.

However, how can Peyton be considered the Dan Marino of this generation when he actually won a Superbowl? If Marino had won one he would not ever be talked about in that light.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

RFDC wrote:

It was a pretty funny moment.

However, how can Peyton be considered the Dan Marino of this generation when he actually won a Superbowl? If Marino had won one he would not ever be talked about in that light.

The comment was made before Peyton won and immediately after one of his embarrassments against the Patriots in the AFC championship game.

long time guy · **Joined:** Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am **Posts:** 31948

pittmike wrote:

Well I didn't see this thread going this way.

I just attempted to use be analogous that's all. The original premise is sound though. Bernstein's basketball knowledge is subjective and his arguments often times unsound. He uses Championships when it serves his purpose. He once stated that Allen Iverson was the best small guard to ever play the game I called the show to debate and stated that Isaiah Thomas was better. He talked about how Iverson took Philly to the finals. Thomas was involved in 3 finals won two and consistently kept Detroit in the hunt for 6-7 years none of that was considered by Bernstein. The only thing he considered was one year in which the East was historically bad as the basis for his opinion. His closer to a championship thing is a bunch of crap also, because he only considers the top players as players that "get you closer to a championship". There have many instances when players that may have been considered "closer to a championship" players have actually gotten people closer to a championship. for example who knew that Tyson Chandler would be such a player two years ago. Now it is laughable how many people throw it out that Dallas could not have won without Tyson Chandler.

FavreFan · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:05 pm

long time guy wrote:

There have many instances when players that may have been considered "closer to a championship" players have actually gotten people closer to a championship. for example who knew that Tyson Chandler would be such a player two years ago. Now it is laughable how many people throw it out that Dallas could not have won without Tyson Chandler.

This isn't highsight or second guessing though. The Mavs acquiring Tyson Chandler and the difference it made was a main storyline in the NBA all spring that year.

pittmike · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:07 pm

Didn't Bernsie know all along that Chandler was a man and would be an integral part of a championship team?

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:17 pm

pittmike wrote:

Didn't Bernsie know all along that Chandler was a man and would be an integral part of a championship team?

No.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

pittmike wrote:

Didn't Bernsie know all along that Chandler was a man and would be an integral part of a championship team?

I did.

I mean, sorta.

It was evident early on that Chandler wanted to be good and would use his tools, epecially when juxtaposed against Curry

My roommate and I used to watch what we called "The Eddy Curry Show"

Just watch the horrible Bulls games but dont follow the ball, keep your eye on Curry. The laughs were endless. So many times he'd start to move towards a rebound and you could see his body language saying "Nah, fuck it"

pittmike · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:29 pm

Bernsie is really a tool when it comes to the NBA.

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:38 pm

pittmike wrote:

Bernsie is really a tool when it comes to the NBA.

I'm not a fan of his NBA analysis (but I'm an apologist, so how can that be?).

Dan and Terry's lack of insight became more evident when Goff left. They've offended my sensibilities on several occasions this season (yup, I'm a big apologist).

long time guy · **Joined:** Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am **Posts:** 31948

He never listed Tyson Chandler as a person that gets you closer to a championship. Also it was not thought of as that around the NBA either. Tyson Chandler had just come off of a disappointing season in Charlotte and it was thought that he would split minutes with the extremely pedestrian Brendan Haywood. Bernstein around Finals time was extolling the greatness of James and his main argument was that James was not playing aggressive enough. He and the other resident Goff even went on to say that it was necessary for James to pick up three charging calls in the first half. This would demonstrate aggression which was one of the dumbest comments that I had ever heard. My main problem with Bernstein is that he continues to downgrade the Bulls even though real experts know that the Bulls with a healthy Derrick Rose are legit contenders. Miami and OKC have been promoted as Super Teams when they are imminently beatable. His knowledge of Basketball is suspect and it is evident because his so called guests are always obscure writers and bloggers and not people with real knowledge of the game. His show does not provide the type of insight into the actual game of basketball. Its always centered around basketball transactions and speculation about trades and free agency.

RFDC · **Joined:** Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm **Posts:** 57241

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

pittmike wrote:

Bernsie is really a tool when it comes to the NBA.

I'm not a fan of his NBA analysis (but I'm an apologist, so how can that be?).

Dan and Terry's lack of insight became more evident when Goff left. They've offended my sensibilities on several occasions this season (yup, I'm a big apologist).

You know how it goes Kid.

If you have ever stated that you enjoy the show and it entertains you then you automatically agree with every stance the boys take.

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:46 pm

RFDC wrote:

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

pittmike wrote:

Bernsie is really a tool when it comes to the NBA.

I'm not a fan of his NBA analysis (but I'm an apologist, so how can that be?).

Dan and Terry's lack of insight became more evident when Goff left. They've offended my sensibilities on several occasions this season (yup, I'm a big apologist).

You know how it goes Kid.

If you have ever stated that you enjoy the show and it entertains you then you automatically agree with every stance the boys take.

Right. And you're the only one who acknowledged my post. Every time I make a comment in opposition of B&B, I hear crickets chirping. But when I comment in opposition of any of the usual posters, I get called an apologist or a defender. It's bullshit and it's unfair criticism.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

pittmike wrote:

Bernsie is really a tool when it comes to the NBA.

I'm not a fan of his NBA analysis (but I'm an apologist, so how can that be?).

Dan and Terry's lack of insight became more evident when Goff left. They've offended my sensibilities on several occasions this season (yup, I'm a big apologist).

That's pretty sad because Goff was no NBA expert either.

Goff pretty much labeled anyone who wasnt a top ten player to be "a bum"

Lazy analysis by someone who hadnt done their homework

RFDC · **Joined:** Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm **Posts:** 57241

rogers park bryan wrote:

Goff pretty much labeled anyone who wasnt a top ten player to be "a bum"

Now that is lazy analysis

SomeGuy · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:48 pm

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

RFDC wrote:

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

pittmike wrote:

Bernsie is really a tool when it comes to the NBA.

I'm not a fan of his NBA analysis (but I'm an apologist, so how can that be?).

Dan and Terry's lack of insight became more evident when Goff left. They've offended my sensibilities on several occasions this season (yup, I'm a big apologist).

You know how it goes Kid.

If you have ever stated that you enjoy the show and it entertains you then you automatically agree with every stance the boys take.

Right. And you're the only one who acknowledged my post. Every time I make a comment in opposition of B&B, I hear crickets chirping. But when I comment in opposition of any of the usual posters, I get called an apologist or a defender. It's bullshit and it's unfair criticism.

Do you need a hug or something?

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

RFDC wrote:

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

pittmike wrote:

Bernsie is really a tool when it comes to the NBA.

I'm not a fan of his NBA analysis (but I'm an apologist, so how can that be?).

Dan and Terry's lack of insight became more evident when Goff left. They've offended my sensibilities on several occasions this season (yup, I'm a big apologist).

You know how it goes Kid.

If you have ever stated that you enjoy the show and it entertains you then you automatically agree with every stance the boys take.

Right. And you're the only one who acknowledged my post. Every time I make a comment in opposition of B&B, I hear crickets chirping. But when I comment in opposition of any of the usual posters, I get called an apologist or a defender. It's bullshit and it's unfair criticism.

I disagree.

The B and B so called haters and the B and B so called defenders are about equal. No respect going either way in that relationship.

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:49 pm

rogers park bryan wrote:

That's pretty sad because Goff was no NBA expert either.

Goff pretty much labeled anyone who wasnt a top ten player to be "a bum"

Lazy analysis by someone who hadnt done their homework

I agree with that, Spark. But you hit the nail on the head. With Jason it was more laziness than any lack of NBA insight. Jason knows the NBA, but didn't really care to dive much into it beyond calling guys bums and whatnot.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

RFDC wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Goff pretty much labeled anyone who wasnt a top ten player to be "a bum"

Now that is lazy analysis

You disagree that Goff threw around the bum label way too frequently?

Harden check in

Who is online