User Tag List

Page 14 of 21 FirstFirst ... 411121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 307

Thread: Sports Talk 2018: Lebron to Brady and Everything in Between

  1. #196
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    And now the Power Forwards. And this ended with a surprise. I eliminated a number of very good PFs, like Hayes, Garnett, McHale, because their numbers/production on the whole just was a step down, though in their best years they were all right there.

    Duncan, the "Big Fundamental" is so sound and played so perfectly in Pop's system that I think he's actually a tad overrated, when I look at production over time. A truly great player that I think is the NBA equivalent of Tom Brady in that regard. I suspect Duncan will come back a little to the pack, over time. Or he might not given the number of championship wins and the lack of those in his real challengers (so he can thank Jordan, who inhibited that particular among the best outside of Duncan. A healthy AD might take over looking at his career numbers so far, if he can secure a ring or two with the Lakers. What else...Webber was better than I remembered, probably because of the college fiasco and the injury that cost him a potential ring with the Kings.

    Also, Barkley was hands down a better shooter in every respect, compared to Tim. And his numbers were better in playoff situations as well, both in production and shooting percentages. He out rebounded Tim and handed out more assists. The only thing Tim actually did better was block shots.

    I didn't put AD ahead of Duncan because his sample is so much smaller at present and because of the success Tim had, but I think he's already made a case for being a better all around player than Malone or Webber.

    1. Barkley: 22.1 ppg, 11.7 rbs, 3.9 asts, 1.5 stls, .8 blks
    2. Duncan: 19 ppg, 10.8 rbs, 3 asts, .7 stls, 2.2 blks
    3. A Davis: 23.7 ppg, 10.5 rbs, 2.8 asts, 1.4 stls, 2.4 blks
    4. Malone: 25 ppg, 10.1 rbs, 3.6 asts, 1.4 stls, .8 blks
    5. Webber: 20.7 ppg, 9.8 rbs, 4.2 asts, 1.4 stls, 1.4 blks


    And now, waiting on the last selection of center, my team looks like this:

    Magic (PG)
    Jordan (SG)
    LeBron (SF)
    Barkley (PF)
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  2. #197
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    And lastly, Centers. I leave off a few great ones because I think it boils down to these three and mostly for the same reasons. Jabbar and Olajuwon could shoot free throws well enough to not be a fouled liability late in games. Wilt couldn't, but his overall game and the scope of it forces him into consideration for the top spot as well. He once decided to lead the league in assists and did it. He was a superb rebounder and I'm sure if they'd kept the stats his blks would have been equally impressive. He was LeBron plus 4 inches.

    On a given day I'd take any of these three. More often than not I've given the default nod to Jabbar, but the more I consider it the more I'm inclined to take the third name on that list. His numbers are comparable, offensively, to Jabbar, and his shooting is right there, but on the defensive end the Houston great stands out a little more.

    Both Jabbar and Olajuwon were 5 time all-defensive 1st team members, with Jabbar picking up 11 overall defensive team nods to Olajuwon's 9, but Olajuwon was defensive player of the year 2 times. Jabbar never managed that one.


    Jabbar: 24.6 ppg, 11.2 rbs, 3.6 asts, .9 stls, 2.6 blks
    Wilt: 30.1 ppg, 22.9 rbs, 4.4 asts, na stls, na blks
    Olajuwon: 21.8 ppg, 11.1 rbs, 2.5 asts, 1.7 stls, 3.1 blks

    And here's my all-time, first team:

    Magic
    Jordan
    LeBron
    Barkley
    Olajuwon


    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  3. #198
    Over 4000 post club The Berean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wacky California
    Posts
    4,635
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 704 Times in 442 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    325403
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    And now the Power Forwards. And this ended with a surprise. I eliminated a number of very good PFs, like Hayes, Garnett, McHale, because their numbers/production on the whole just was a step down, though in their best years they were all right there.

    Duncan, the "Big Fundamental" is so sound and played so perfectly in Pop's system that I think he's actually a tad overrated, when I look at production over time. A truly great player that I think is the NBA equivalent of Tom Brady in that regard. I suspect Duncan will come back a little to the pack, over time. Or he might not given the number of championship wins and the lack of those in his real challengers (so he can thank Jordan, who inhibited that particular among the best outside of Duncan. A healthy AD might take over looking at his career numbers so far, if he can secure a ring or two with the Lakers. What else...Webber was better than I remembered, probably because of the college fiasco and the injury that cost him a potential ring with the Kings.

    Also, Barkley was hands down a better shooter in every respect, compared to Tim. And his numbers were better in playoff situations as well, both in production and shooting percentages. He out rebounded Tim and handed out more assists. The only thing Tim actually did better was block shots.

    I didn't put AD ahead of Duncan because his sample is so much smaller at present and because of the success Tim had, but I think he's already made a case for being a better all around player than Malone or Webber.

    1. Barkley: 22.1 ppg, 11.7 rbs, 3.9 asts, 1.5 stls, .8 blks
    2. Duncan: 19 ppg, 10.8 rbs, 3 asts, .7 stls, 2.2 blks
    3. A Davis: 23.7 ppg, 10.5 rbs, 2.8 asts, 1.4 stls, 2.4 blks
    4. Malone: 25 ppg, 10.1 rbs, 3.6 asts, 1.4 stls, .8 blks
    5. Webber: 20.7 ppg, 9.8 rbs, 4.2 asts, 1.4 stls, 1.4 blks


    And now, waiting on the last selection of center, my team looks like this:

    Magic (PG)
    Jordan (SG)
    LeBron (SF)
    Barkley (PF)
    You didn't mentioned the first true power forward, Bob Petit. Petit led the 1957 St. Louis Hawks to the NBA title, the only team to defeat the Boston Celtics in the NBA finals during the Celtics legendary run. Petit was a ferocious scorer and rebounder.
    Your problem is not technology. The problem is YOU. You lack the will to change...You treat this planet as you treat each other. - Klaatu

    What are you talking about? There is no such thing as the "Mafia"......it doesn't exist. Just a bunch of lies told to defame honest hardworking Italians like myself. - TomO

    I will do you, let's see, goofy, wacky, and to the left side of the bell curve
    . -Ktoyou

    I'm white. I'm not black. I can't convert to being black. It doesn't matter how much I want to become black. I could listen to rap and date fat white women all day; for all that, I'll still remain white.- Traditio

  4. #199
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    Quote Originally Posted by The Berean View Post
    You didn't mentioned the first true power forward, Bob Petit. Petit led the 1957 St. Louis Hawks to the NBA title, the only team to defeat the Boston Celtics in the NBA finals during the Celtics legendary run. Petit was a ferocious scorer and rebounder.
    Deserving of a place at the table, but he wouldn't challenge at the top. 26/16/3 pts, rbs, and assists. Don't know about steals and blocks because of when he played. His percentages get him into trouble. He was a sub .500 guy in the paint, where he did most of his damage. And he was 6'9" but only 205 lbs. I don't think he translates well to the modern game and among the guys I put in play.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  5. #200
    Over 4000 post club The Berean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wacky California
    Posts
    4,635
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 704 Times in 442 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    325403
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    Deserving of a place at the table, but he wouldn't challenge at the top. 26/16/3 pts, rbs, and assists. Don't know about steals and blocks because of when he played. His percentages get him into trouble. He was a sub .500 guy in the paint, where he did most of his damage. And he was 6'9" but only 205 lbs. I don't think he translates well to the modern game and among the guys I put in play.
    I see it as opposite. Pettit was extremely athletic and his slender build would absolutely translate to today's game. His listed weight is wrong. When Pettit entered the NBA he weighed 208-209 but in the video below he said he lifted weights as a pro and got up to 245 lbs. Pettit also says if he played today he's probably play at 260 lbs. He's listed at 6'9". Kevin Durant is also listed at 6'9" (per ESPN and Basketball Reference) but his weight is listed at 240 lb. There is no way Durant outweighed Pettit by 32 lbs.

    Pettit.jpg


    Here is some film of Pettit. It's pretty obvious he was extremely skilled.




    As for the low shooting percentage there are two factors.

    1) Pettit wasn't just an inside guy. he took quite a few jumpers and hooks.

    2) In Pettit's era scoring was much higher as teams took many, many shots, especially during the first half of the 1960's. More shots means lower shooting percentage.

    And, I'll repeat, Pettit beat the Celtics in 1958 which included scoring 50 points in series clinching game 6 going head-to-head with Bill Russell. Nobody, not named Will Chamberlain, was scoring 50 on Bill Russell. On a side note the 1958 Hawks were the last NBA team to win a title without a single Black player in the roster.
    Last edited by The Berean; July 12th, 2019 at 01:02 PM.
    Your problem is not technology. The problem is YOU. You lack the will to change...You treat this planet as you treat each other. - Klaatu

    What are you talking about? There is no such thing as the "Mafia"......it doesn't exist. Just a bunch of lies told to defame honest hardworking Italians like myself. - TomO

    I will do you, let's see, goofy, wacky, and to the left side of the bell curve
    . -Ktoyou

    I'm white. I'm not black. I can't convert to being black. It doesn't matter how much I want to become black. I could listen to rap and date fat white women all day; for all that, I'll still remain white.- Traditio

  6. #201
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    Quote Originally Posted by The Berean View Post
    I see it as opposite. Pettit was extremely athletic and his slender build would absolutely translate to today's game.
    He was too slight to bang underneath and too poor a shot to be an outside threat.

    His listed weight is wrong. When Pettit entered the NBA he weighed 208-209 but in the video below he said he lifted weights as a pro and got up to 245 lbs.
    If true that would certainly help, but not enough against the competition I set out. There's no way he started at 205 and would get to 260 without sacrificing something from his quickness and he's not going to compete inside.

    Duncan was 6'11" and 250 without bulking up. Malone was what 6'9" and 250 lbs looks like chiseled from a bigger frame. Webber was a natural 6'9" at around 250. Davis is 6'10" and a little over 250. The smallest competition, Barkley, was 6'6" and around that weight. He'd be out quicked by all of them bulked up and beaten up if he didn't. And then we're back to shooting, and he wasn't that great a shooter. Good, but not great.

    Pettit also says if he played today he's probably play at 260 lbs. He's listed at 6'9". Kevin Durant is also listed at 6'9" (per ESPN and Basketball Reference) but his weight is listed at 240 lb. There is no way Durant outweighed Pettit by 32 lbs.
    Beats me, but that's what I see also. And Durant is both explosive and a great shooter.

    I'm not denigrating Pettit. He'd make my top 10, but he's not getting into my top 5. I appreciate your defense of him though. A great player.

    On the shooting aspect. AD averaged more than 20 shots in 2017 and shot over .500. He averaged 19.5 the next year and shot at .535
    Looking at Petite I see two years when he averaged 20 shots, with both coming in at around .418, not that far off his average otherwise of .436. Malone had five years at around that average and shot well above .500. Webber averaged 20, 23, and 21 in a stretch. His average was closer to .475. Charles never broke 20.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  7. #202
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    I was listening to Will Cain the other day and he was talking about elite athletes. His general theory is that the term is too watered, that elites at any position should be in the top 10 percent. Meaning he's going to limit elite position players to 3 by position, given there are 32 NFL teams and 30 NBA teams.

    That's problematic when you're talking about quarterbacks. But the rules changes are having an impact that's appreciable.

    Now I'm always talking about how quarterbacks have an easier time of it these days, how that ease translates to longer play and inflated stat lines, especially among quarterbacks.

    Here's an illustration of that principle, looking at the average position rating by decade starting with the 80s, and stretching four decades, to our current date.

    80s: 74.3
    90s: 77.3
    2002 to present day: 84.6

    Unsurprisingly, the first 80+ overall rating average occurs the year of major changes to protect qbs, 2002.
    In 2010 wrs received appreciably greater protection from debilitating hits by defensive players after catching the ball. These changes continue to expand.

    From 2010 to present day the average qbr is 86.4

    In 2015 defenseless player protections were expanded to cover intended wrs of a pass. In that year, for the first time the average quarterback rating broke 90.

    In 2017 the protection to wrs was expanded to route running.

    From 2015 to today, the average qbr is 89.8

    Or, the average quarterback plays at the thin edge of a pro bowl player.

    And now you understand why ESPN came up with a new qbr.

    So if you want to get a sense of how the today's qbs compared to the greats of the 80s, you could subtract 10 points from their rating for starters.

    Back to the elites of today. I'd say we have more than 3 last year. But the truth is that the rules changes in sum have made it hard to meaningfully distinguish among them. Brady had a great ending to the year, but his overall play, adjusted for inflation, would be solid, but not a pro bowl level. The same is true for Rodgers and Big Ben.

    Scaling back there were 8 qbs who played at an elite level last year: Mahomes, Brees, Wilson, Ryan, Rivers, Watson, Wentz, and Goff.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  8. #203
    Journeyman Cricket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cricketland
    Posts
    61
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    3008
    If New Zealand wanted to win, they should have scored more runs. Rules is rules.
    Although I bet the idiots at the ICC tweak a few in response to the tournament:
    1. More wins is not a good separator for advancement past pool play.
    2. Fewer wickets is far more appropriate — and lines up with Duckworth-Lewis-Stern — for a countback system in ties.
    3. The overthrow rule is going to change to dead ball.

    What a match, though. It just never gave up. NZ batted in the first innings like they were saving a Test, which turned out to be spot on. England resisted some top-notch bowling early, but succumbed to relentless pressure till Buttler and Stokes intervened. Neesham bowled a wonderful 49th. Boult stood on the boundary marker, adding to the proof that you don't have to clear the ropes to get the maximum.
    I thought predictor had it right with England favorites all the way through to the 46th over or so, but the Kiwis seem to have put on a few too many, but for the rub of the green in the 50th. England can't capitalize on a 3-from-2 situation, but then take the initiative in the Super Over (which I called in the 30th over).
    The whole dynamic changed in those two added overs. The batters hit without fear, which did not seem to happen in the regulation overs without implosions. I thought Archer showed great poise. That first ball was unlucky to be wided and he missed his length on the 6 (Neesham didn't). Boult missed two or three times, but got away with only 15 from his.
    Then down to Guptill. And this is where you gotta feel for a guy. The pitches throughout this tournament simply have not suited the mentality he has been conditioned to play with. He's there to hurt teams, but as Williamson showed, you hurt teams on these pitches more effectively batting 50 overs than scoring quickly. Martin got 19 runs up top, which were vital and a sign that he was finally adjusting, but then had to face the final delivery in what was effectively a boundary-or-nothing scenario.
    He went for the running option, which might have looked like the best bet, but perhaps a Buttler-style lap was the one to go for. Would have taken nerves of steel to play such a shot in that scenario. Seems impossible to consider, but perhaps it was the way.
    Regardless, he did what he did and has to live with it, but it seems vastly unfair. Williamson should have batted. He can't be that much slower, right?
    Score lots of runs and don't get out!

  9. #204
    Over 4000 post club The Berean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wacky California
    Posts
    4,635
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 704 Times in 442 Posts

    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    325403
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    I was listening to Will Cain the other day and he was talking about elite athletes. His general theory is that the term is too watered, that elites at any position should be in the top 10 percent. Meaning he's going to limit elite position players to 3 by position, given there are 32 NFL teams and 30 NBA teams.

    That's problematic when you're talking about quarterbacks. But the rules changes are having an impact that's appreciable.

    Now I'm always talking about how quarterbacks have an easier time of it these days, how that ease translates to longer play and inflated stat lines, especially among quarterbacks.

    Here's an illustration of that principle, looking at the average position rating by decade starting with the 80s, and stretching four decades, to our current date.

    80s: 74.3
    90s: 77.3
    2002 to present day: 84.6

    Unsurprisingly, the first 80+ overall rating average occurs the year of major changes to protect qbs, 2002.
    In 2010 wrs received appreciably greater protection from debilitating hits by defensive players after catching the ball. These changes continue to expand.

    From 2010 to present day the average qbr is 86.4

    In 2015 defenseless player protections were expanded to cover intended wrs of a pass. In that year, for the first time the average quarterback rating broke 90.

    In 2017 the protection to wrs was expanded to route running.

    From 2015 to today, the average qbr is 89.8

    Or, the average quarterback plays at the thin edge of a pro bowl player.

    And now you understand why ESPN came up with a new qbr.

    So if you want to get a sense of how the today's qbs compared to the greats of the 80s, you could subtract 10 points from their rating for starters.

    Back to the elites of today. I'd say we have more than 3 last year. But the truth is that the rules changes in sum have made it hard to meaningfully distinguish among them. Brady had a great ending to the year, but his overall play, adjusted for inflation, would be solid, but not a pro bowl level. The same is true for Rodgers and Big Ben.

    Scaling back there were 8 qbs who played at an elite level last year: Mahomes, Brees, Wilson, Ryan, Rivers, Watson, Wentz, and Goff.
    The NFL had made it so easy for QB's to put out video game passing number it's silly. All these 5,000 yard passing seasons this decade are absurd. As I mentioned before Dan Marino's NFL record of 5,084 passing yards in 1984 stood for 27 seasons. Then in 2011 it was broken by two QB's and a third QB came within 50 yards of Marino. Ten of the 11 5,000 passing yard seasons happened between 2008-18. There have been an additional eight seasons between 4,903 yards and 4,967 yards in the same time frame as well.
    Your problem is not technology. The problem is YOU. You lack the will to change...You treat this planet as you treat each other. - Klaatu

    What are you talking about? There is no such thing as the "Mafia"......it doesn't exist. Just a bunch of lies told to defame honest hardworking Italians like myself. - TomO

    I will do you, let's see, goofy, wacky, and to the left side of the bell curve
    . -Ktoyou

    I'm white. I'm not black. I can't convert to being black. It doesn't matter how much I want to become black. I could listen to rap and date fat white women all day; for all that, I'll still remain white.- Traditio

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to The Berean For Your Post:

    Town Heretic (July 15th, 2019)

  11. #205
    Over 1000 post club
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,170
    Thanks
    60
    Thanked 650 Times in 437 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    166568
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    He was too slight to bang underneath and too poor a shot to be an outside threat.


    If true that would certainly help, but not enough against the competition I set out. There's no way he started at 205 and would get to 260 without sacrificing something from his quickness and he's not going to compete inside.

    Duncan was 6'11" and 250 without bulking up. Malone was what 6'9" and 250 lbs looks like chiseled from a bigger frame. Webber was a natural 6'9" at around 250. Davis is 6'10" and a little over 250. The smallest competition, Barkley, was 6'6" and around that weight. He'd be out quicked by all of them bulked up and beaten up if he didn't. And then we're back to shooting, and he wasn't that great a shooter. Good, but not great.


    Beats me, but that's what I see also. And Durant is both explosive and a great shooter.

    I'm not denigrating Pettit. He'd make my top 10, but he's not getting into my top 5. I appreciate your defense of him though. A great player.

    On the shooting aspect. AD averaged more than 20 shots in 2017 and shot over .500. He averaged 19.5 the next year and shot at .535
    Looking at Petite I see two years when he averaged 20 shots, with both coming in at around .418, not that far off his average otherwise of .436. Malone had five years at around that average and shot well above .500. Webber averaged 20, 23, and 21 in a stretch. His average was closer to .475. Charles never broke 20.
    That neither of you guys give any love to Nate Thurmond as one of the greatest centers of all time is telling. He very well may have been the greatest defensive center of all time as both Kareem and Wilt rate him as good or better than Bill Russell on the defensive end of the court. He could shoot the 20' jump shot, score inside, rebound extremely well--he holds the NBA record for rebounds in a quarter, 18, and had seasons where he averaged 20+ rebounds a game, was a good passer, and was a great shot blocker. During the prime of his career along with his defensive and rebounding ability he was also right around the 20ppg mark too. If the NBA had kept statistics on blocks during most of his career he would be one of the top 2 or 3 shot blockers in NBA history.

    I used to listen to the Warriors play on KNBR out of SF and one game against Chamberlain he blocked 3 consecutive dunk attempts by Chamberlain.

    Thurmond was named as one of the 50 greatest players of all time.

    Here's a synopsis of his career. See how his competitors on the court rated him. https://www.nba.com/history/legends/.../nate-thurmond
    “Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith.”

    “Society is endangered not by the great profligacy of a few, but by the laxity of morals amongst all.”

    ― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

  12. #206
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    Quote Originally Posted by ffreeloader View Post
    That neither of you guys give any love to Nate Thurmond as one of the greatest centers of all time is telling.
    I left a few greats off my short list, but for the same reason, I don't think they can hang with my big 3.

    Jabbar: 24.6 ppg, 11.2 rbs, 3.6 asts, .9 stls, 2.6 blks
    Wilt: 30.1 ppg, 22.9 rbs, 4.4 asts, na stls, na blks
    Olajuwon: 21.8 ppg, 11.1 rbs, 2.5 asts, 1.7 stls, 3.1 blks

    Nate: 15 ppg, 15 rbs, 2.7 asts, .5 stls, 2.5 blks

    Solid numbers, but he's not cracking into that group. Neither is Russell, Shaq, or Ewing.

    He very well may have been the greatest defensive center of all time as both Kareem and Wilt rate him as good or better than Bill Russell on the defensive end of the court. He could shoot the 20' jump shot, score inside, rebound extremely well--he holds the NBA record for rebounds in a quarter, 18, and had seasons where he averaged 20+ rebounds a game, was a good passer, and was a great shot blocker. During the prime of his career along with his defensive and rebounding ability he was also right around the 20 ppg mark too. If the NBA had kept statistics on blocks during most of his career he would be one of the top 2 or 3 shot blockers in NBA history.

    I used to listen to the Warriors play on KNBR out of SF and one game against Chamberlain he blocked 3 consecutive dunk attempts by Chamberlain.

    Thurmond was named as one of the 50 greatest players of all time.
    A lot of top 50 guys aren't making my final team, but he was something.

    You should check out Land of Basketball head to heads. It can help.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  13. #207
    TOL Legend Jerry Shugart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Luis Potosi,Mexico
    Posts
    13,852
    Thanks
    1,282
    Thanked 8,742 Times in 5,737 Posts

    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147840
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    Scaling back there were 8 qbs who played at an elite level last year: Mahomes, Brees, Wilson, Ryan, Rivers, Watson, Wentz, and Goff.
    Wentz?

    Are you serious? If any QB from the NFC East should be on that list it is Dak Prescott! After he finally got a number one receive his play was fantastic!

  14. #208
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
    Wentz?

    Are you serious? If any QB from the NFC East should be on that list it is Dak Prescott! After he finally got a number one receive his play was fantastic!
    Prescott: 242 yds a game, 1.4 tds, to .5 ints, 67.7 comp%, 96.6 rating.
    Wentz: 279.5 yds a game, 1.9 tds, to .6 ints, 69.6 comp%, 102.2 rating

    He's not far off, but I meant only Wentz was over 100 in qbr.

    Of course, last year if you counted the quarterbacks who were above that it was around 12.

    I'm going back and coming up with a new, revised top 25 QBs of all time, using their rating, adjusting it for decades prior to 2002, and adding value for SB appearances and victories.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







  15. #209
    TOL Legend Jerry Shugart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Luis Potosi,Mexico
    Posts
    13,852
    Thanks
    1,282
    Thanked 8,742 Times in 5,737 Posts

    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147840
    Quote Originally Posted by Town Heretic View Post
    Wentz: 279.5 yds a game, 1.9 tds, to .6 ints, 69.6 comp%, 102.2 rating
    In nine games with Cooper, Prescott’s passer rating jumped from 87.4 to 103.

    Besides that, in the last three years Prescott has a higher Passer Rating than both Wentz and Goff.

  16. #210
    Out of Order Town Heretic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Within a whisper of rivers...
    Posts
    21,056
    Thanks
    3,926
    Thanked 8,441 Times in 4,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    15
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147840
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
    In nine games with Cooper, Prescott’s passer rating jumped from 87.4 to 103.

    Besides that, in the last three years Prescott has a higher Passer Rating than both Wentz and Goff.
    He still has a few things to prove to me. Wentz was in line for league MVP. Not many saying that about Prescott, in part because of the running game he has enjoyed to take pressure off of the position. If Wentz is healthy and can stay that way, I don't know many GMs who are taking your guy over him.

    But it's early enough in everyone's career to establish bragging rights. That is, if either can get past the heat generated by KC, Cleveland, Houston and maybe Arizona before long.
    You aren't what you eat, but you're always what you swallow.

    Pro-Life







Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us