Would MJ win 6 rings in todays NBA?

• jpake1

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote: And yes, I still think that Dwight Howard is a better athlete than Shaq ever was. He's a better defensive player now than Shaq ever was--defense is pure athleticism.

  I couldn't disagree any more. Defense is about intelligence, hustle, communication, amongst other things. Bruce Bowen doesn't strike anybody as a pure athlete. However, he was a damn good defender for awhile because he played very smart, busted his ass when other players were taking their breaks, and communicated well. You've seen it first hand. When I was completely out of shape at the rec, I would guard kids that should have been able to blow by me and score on me, but I was rather smart and I hustled on defense and I would do a pretty good job of stopping them. I can name a ton of very athletic players in the NBA that couldn't spell defense if they had a dictionary in front of them. You need a good portion of several things to be a good defender. You know that.
• 2quik4u

  

  you could also add motivation
• SQ_Crazies

  

  Who does the coach ask to go defend the best player? Who's the athlete of the bunch?
  
  Who plays DB in football? The most athletic guys on the team. I know you'll probably say football to basketball, apples to oranges--I agree, but being a corner you play man sometimes--some of the same stuff applies.
  
  Defense is all about those things you said jpake, but if you aren't athletic enough your brain isn't going to get your out of every situation. Not when we're talking professional level sports. And I could name tons of rather unathletic players who can't play D worth a shit too..
• jpake1

  

  He'll have his best defender, whether he be the most athletic or not. Athletic guys play DB, but I can name a fuck load of RB's, WR's, and even some QB's that are just as athletic if not more athletic than DB's. Most of the time, they're playing DB because they can't catch the ball as well or aren't as good in space (which I would say has to do with being a very good athlete as well). And yes, football to basketball are quite different, but I see where you're going. Ok, let me ask you something. If you agree with all the things I said, then how is defense pure athletism? Obviously being a pure athlete isn't everything. Like I said, it takes several things to become a great defender. However, if you asked a lot of people what the most common trait of great NBA defenders is I don't think being a pure athlete is #1. I imagine intelligence would be #1. LBJ was a freak coming into the league, but it took him awhile until he actually became a great defender. His basketball IQ became higher which helped him on that side.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  No that's exactly why I say it's pure athleticism. Any Cavs fan that has consistently watched LeBron since he came into the league will agree with this. We didn't think we were crazy when we said LeBron was a good defender in the early years. But it's because he was when he wanted to be. His basketball IQ improved, but what made him a great defender was the desire to do it. He had everything he needed to do it, he just didn't apply himself all the time. We all saw times when he'd get pissed or just be on fire and elevate his game and he could play nearly as well as he can today. He just wouldn't do it all the time. His IQ improved and it helped him become much more efficient on the offensive end--he doesn't beat himself up like the first 3-4 seasons anymore, he conserves energy more. In other words he's a seasoned pro. Now he's learned that defense is important to win, he made a point of putting more effort into it and he became a great one but he had everything he needed to be just when he was a rookie.
• jpake1

  

  I can sum the paragraph up with a few words... he started to hustle. That was one of my points that you agreed with already. If he could do it, but didn't always do it, I'd consider that being lazy on that end of the floor. He's now started to hustle and put focus on defense. That's what seperates a lot of guys. Some guys go on defense to rest for offense. Other guys give you hell on both ends. I agree with you to an extent. Being a great athlete is a very nice piece to have if you're going to be a great defender. But it's hardly the only thing. When you said it's pure athletism, I took that as being a great defender is all about being a great athlete and not even acknowledging intelligence, hustle, etc. But since you said you agreed with that I'm kinda confused now. Is it pure athletism, or is it that and some other stuff?
• SQ_Crazies

  

  I guess it might be more accurate to say that I feel what separates an elite defender from an average one is athleticism. I for one think Bruce Bowen is very athletic. I play ball, so do you. You watch him play? The way he was able to stay in front of people requires great athleticism.
• hasbeen

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote: Who does the coach ask to go defend the best player? Who's the athlete of the bunch?
  
  Who plays DB in football? The most athletic guys on the team. I know you'll probably say football to basketball, apples to oranges--I agree, but being a corner you play man sometimes--some of the same stuff applies.
  
  

  The best defender defends the best player.
  
  The best DB's aren't always the best athletes. They are smart. Look at Charles Woodson. He will literally trick the QB into making a bad throw.
  
  The fact of the matter is this, every professional athlete is pretty damn athletic. It's when they learn and understand the game that they reach the next level.
• jpake1

  

  They're all great athletes, they're NBA players. But when comparing to each other... I don't think too many people would say that Bruce Bowen is very athletic. LBJ, Wade, even somebody like Moon are very athletic. Bowen just doesn't strike me as a very athletic player amonst NBA guys. Just one guys opinion though.
• KnightXC1

  

  SQ - I also own that jersey and used to love wearing it. Kidd did have some great years but for one game, I would take Stockton simply for the fact that Kidd doesn't shoot as well as Stockton and couldn't score as much.
  
  At least that Pistons dynasty has a Championship
• hoops23

  

  Can you call one championship a dynasty?
  
  
• SQ_Crazies

  

  KnightXC1 wrote: At least that Pistons dynasty has a Championship

  Hahahaha, I don't have that jersey anymore...and don't worry, the Cavs will make everyone forget the Pistons had a dynasty.
• hoops23

  

  Ah, the Bad Boys Pistons.. Duh, was thinking you were referring to the Billups Pistons, alas, I didn't read the rest of your posts.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  I was referring to the Billups Pistons. They had a dynasty in the East, not sure its even logical to disagree with that.
• hoops23

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote: I was referring to the Billups Pistons. They had a dynasty in the East, not sure its even logical to disagree with that.

  Dynasties aren't labeled for a conference, they're labeled for championships, which is what I was talking about.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  You win a championship when you win the conference. You hang a banner. They call it the Eastern Conference Championship. And the Billups Pistons DID win a title, is your brain working properly tonight?
• hoops23

  

  SQ_Crazies wrote: You win a championship when you win the conference. You hang a banner. They call it the Eastern Conference Championship. And the Billups Pistons DID win a title, is your brain working properly tonight?

  Are you really that dumb?
  
  I don't give a fuck about a conference championship.
  
  DYNASTIES are labeled for LEAGUE championships.
  
  The shear fact that I have to explain that statement probably means you should hang it up for the night.
  
  A team is NOT a dynasty just by GETTING to the championship. Wow. smh....smh...
• SQ_Crazies

  

  LOL...ok, you're right, they didn't have an Eastern Conference dynasty. Calls for my first smh ever.
• hoops23

  

  Wait.. So now we're rewarding conference dynasties?
  
  haha, ok.
• hoops23

  

  Besides, how did Detroit even have an Eastern Conference dynasty? Seeing as how they only won it in 2004 & 2005.
  
  Two straight Eastern conference titles is an eastern conference dynasty? C'MON!
• SQ_Crazies

  

  Um, yes, when your team wins 50+ game for 7 years, goes to the conference championship game 6 straight years, winning twice and you add 1 title into that--I'd say they reigned over the East for long enough to be called a dynasty. Most franchises have never had a run anywhere near that good.
• SQ_Crazies

  

  There are 5 dudes chillin' over here right now--all agreeing that it's worthy of being referred to as a dynasty and one hates the Pistons like NAMBLA members hate age-of-consent laws.
• hoops23

  

  It's not a dynasty, sorry.
  
  If that's the case, and you're including regular season win totals, then I guess the Dallas Mavericks OWN the NBA's Western Conference, since they've won 50+ games in 10 straight seasons.. Including one Finals appearance :huh:
• SQ_Crazies

  

  Yawn. I'm done with this before it turns into the most pointless, stupid debate we've had yet this week. Which would be saying a lot.
• hoops23

  

  There is no debate.