justin time Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 Felt the need to make this while sitting here watching the Cavs/Lakers game. This should be another crazy year in the NBA in the West with the playoffs as opposed to the East, who only have like 5 teams above .500, rather sad. A little pissed with how the All-Star team has been put together so far. Discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedz Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 who are the starters? i tuned into espn late but i saw east: howard, james, west: kobe, nash, ha...yup, and that's it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin time Posted January 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 east: howard, garnett, lebron, wade aaaand.... iverson. (wtf) west: stoudemire, duncan, anthony, kobe, nash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedz Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 wow. i live in michigan, hence pistons fan hence...NOT an iverson fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin time Posted January 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 thankfully the west avoided that, mcgrady was beating out nash almost the whole time of voting. nash squeaked past him within the past day. sad, sad fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loserkid5 Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 Referring to the East vs. West situation, Barkley was on PTI yesterday saying that your average 09-10 game is a joke because there are only very few really good teams. He then said (agreeing with Jerry West) that since there are a lot of perpetually losing teams, and it doesn't seem that the league actually has enough good players to support 30 teams, the league would actually benefit from reducing the number of teams. Interesting idea. I'm sure the league could at least get rid of Memphis and Toronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin time Posted January 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 Memphis is an above .500 team this year. They're really showing a strong rebound after many years. With Gay, Mayo, Randolph, etc. they've got a nice cast, there. And yeah, fuck you Kobe. So glad the Cavs won. Can't stand Kobe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedz Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 i feel like there are a lot more players with superior talent NOW than there were in barkley's day. sure, there were superstars, and i actually enjoyed growing up and watching '90's basketball moreso than today's game, but there are waay better athletes now. and to justin, word. although i haven't watched much of this season, and am a nash fan, i'm still surprised paul isn't starting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin time Posted January 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 i feel like there are a lot more players with superior talent NOW than there were in barkley's day. sure, there were superstars, and i actually enjoyed growing up and watching '90's basketball moreso than today's game, but there are waay better athletes now. and to justin, word. although i haven't watched much of this season, and am a nash fan, i'm still surprised paul isn't starting. word. i would say almost every team has at least one great player, maybe even "superstar", from the cavs to the nets. everyone does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loserkid5 Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 i feel like there are a lot more players with superior talent NOW than there were in barkley's day. sure, there were superstars, and i actually enjoyed growing up and watching '90's basketball moreso than today's game, but there are waay better athletes now. and to justin, word. although i haven't watched much of this season, and am a nash fan, i'm still surprised paul isn't starting. word. i would say almost every team has at least one great player, maybe even "superstar", from the cavs to the nets. everyone does. This is where I'd like to point out that only 8 teams have won the NBA Championship in the past 30 years. Even if these teams have one or two good players, that typically means squat. Going by history, you need to be a stacked, powerhouse team to win anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin time Posted January 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 i feel like there are a lot more players with superior talent NOW than there were in barkley's day. sure, there were superstars, and i actually enjoyed growing up and watching '90's basketball moreso than today's game, but there are waay better athletes now. and to justin, word. although i haven't watched much of this season, and am a nash fan, i'm still surprised paul isn't starting. word. i would say almost every team has at least one great player, maybe even "superstar", from the cavs to the nets. everyone does. This is where I'd like to point out that only 8 teams have won the NBA Championship in the past 30 years. Even if these teams have one or two good players, that typically means squat. Going by history, you need to be a stacked, powerhouse team to win anything. yeah, but the original point was that he said there weren't enough good players to support 30 teams. there is, they're just being stacked on certain teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedz Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 word. although i love my '04 pistons i felt we had great talent, but even better chemistry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loserkid5 Posted January 23, 2010 Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 Well that depends on what you mean by support. I get what your saying, but to me it seems like if there was enough high-caliber talent in the league, more than 8 teams would have won in 30 years. I don't feel like going and looking up a list for all the sports, but I'm pretty sure many more than 8 teams have won championships over 30 years in the NFL, NHL, and MLB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackedSkye Posted January 23, 2010 Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 word. although i love my '04 pistons i felt we had great talent, but even better chemistry. in professional sports, team chemistry is the largest factor in success. Many do not realize it, but it is the most underrated aspect of athletics. And 04 Pistons were amazing, I agree. A very tough team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin time Posted January 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 Well that depends on what you mean by support. I get what your saying, but to me it seems like if there was enough high-caliber talent in the league, more than 8 teams would have won in 30 years. I don't feel like going and looking up a list for all the sports, but I'm pretty sure many more than 8 teams have won championships over 30 years in the NFL, NHL, and MLB. Well, the NBA has been comprised of dynasties the last 30 years. You look at the back and forth between Lakers and Celtics in the 80's, into Jordan's Bulls wreaking havoc in the 90's, and not to mention the Spurs winning 4 in 9 years, it doesn't leave much "room" I suppose. 80's and 90's were just filled with top teams/dynasties. But it's been getting better, seeing as 5 different teams have won in the last 6 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chronicjosh Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Referring to the East vs. West situation, Barkley was on PTI yesterday saying that your average 09-10 game is a joke because there are only very few really good teams. He then said (agreeing with Jerry West) that since there are a lot of perpetually losing teams, and it doesn't seem that the league actually has enough good players to support 30 teams, the league would actually benefit from reducing the number of teams. Interesting idea. I'm sure the league could at least get rid of Memphis and Toronto. er wtf are you talking about, toronto is above 500 and they just beat LA.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin time Posted January 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 they splurged on turkoglu. you never know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loserkid5 Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Referring to the East vs. West situation, Barkley was on PTI yesterday saying that your average 09-10 game is a joke because there are only very few really good teams. He then said (agreeing with Jerry West) that since there are a lot of perpetually losing teams, and it doesn't seem that the league actually has enough good players to support 30 teams, the league would actually benefit from reducing the number of teams. Interesting idea. I'm sure the league could at least get rid of Memphis and Toronto. er wtf are you talking about, toronto is above 500 and they just beat LA.. Lawl first of all, they're one game above 500. Don't make it sound like it's some kind of achievement. For all we know they could end the season sub-500, not even making the playoffs. Second, how many 500-plus years has Toronto had in its history? Can't be many. What's their home attendance been like since their inception? How many playoff games have they won? Even if they do manage to make the Eastern conference playoffs, how far do you think they'll make it? Will they get entirely swept in the first round? Win one or two games? Or slip by to the second round and get pummeled? And if Bosh does leave, down the road Toronto fans will be looking back at the 09-10 season as "the glory days." I know lower ranked seeds have made it far in the NBA in the past, but if you contrast how often it happens in the NBA to any other league, the occurrence is practically non-existent. Well, the NBA has been comprised of dynasties the last 30 years. You look at the back and forth between Lakers and Celtics in the 80's, into Jordan's Bulls wreaking havoc in the 90's, and not to mention the Spurs winning 4 in 9 years, it doesn't leave much "room" I suppose. 80's and 90's were just filled with top teams/dynasties. But it's been getting better, seeing as 5 different teams have won in the last 6 years. Its an inherent problem with the league when dynasty after dynasty takes the prize every year. When Magic and Bird left, Jordan came, when Jordan left, Kobe and Shaq, and then Duncan, and now... Kobe again. I'm just saying, you never see shit like that in the other leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedz Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 2 words: ....yankees Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweedz Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 ^valid point also greater the player = greater the possibility of getting a foul called one's way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.