https://twitter.com/ComplexSports/status/1516828712821530631?s=20&t=SiYn1KjekV5abjrmdC5gRw

Such an exceptional line. And not at all wrong in the context of the debate.

JJ's just smarter than a lot of these ESPN blowhards. Funnier too. He's got a great career ahead of him in media if he doesn't get fed up with the nonsense, lol.

Just sucking off white, 1950's Celtics players like they're all GOATS with absolutely no regard for the context of that era.

1960s muscle cars were the first and greatest of their time. Now we
got new muscle cars with computerized features making them the best
of this era, but the original muscle cars will always be revered as classics.

Bob Cousy is a 1960s muscle car.

dude couldn't even dribble the ball with his non-dominant hand.

go see what the long jump use to look like or how passing in football
was before the late 60s.

TVs didn’t have remotes. You had to get up and turn a knob to change
the channel.

Also, the rules didn’t allow for crossing the ball over or shifting the
ball. The rules were more strict. Some would say that the way
players dribble now is cheating. The ball had to constantly dribble with
ZERO pause or hesitation.

https://youtu.be/PDRQ0FYhC0U

You guys don’t know your history for shit.

And it set him off again after he’d come around to admitting Cousy shot 40% too. Hahahah.

His points or perceptions are irrelevant, and don’t prove anything.
There just his takes. Period. He isn’t even a hall of famer.

I never judge eras. It’s like when people say we didn’t have the technology
of your time, of course you didn’t, but you had the latest technology of your time.
It’s evolution .

If Cousy existed in this era he would play the way players play now,
and if Curry existed in Cousy’s era he would play like the players of that
era.

Those plumbers and firefighters were the great athletes of their time,
and athletes had to work regular jobs because they weren’t paid handsomely.
That makes them even greater.....

Today’s players couldn’t imagine doing something like that. But a lot of athletes
before the late 70s/ 80s held blue collar jobs in the offseason. Just like athletes
went to war and served in the army.

This is way off base.

The real argument is about athleticism and talent.

Not about who would have worked a second job or served in the military.

The standards are when were the best athletes ALLOWED TO PLAY.

When did white people allow black athletes to play in mass?

That's when everything changed and that's the only point.

If you send Steph Curry back he would dominate because he's a better athlete. Cousy today would probably be riding the end of the bench or may not even be in the league.

JJ can speak on this all he wants because he played and has a insider perspective. WTF does him not being a HOF have to do with his opinion?

This isn’t a Micheal J Fox film. Speak real life.

The athletes of that era had great athleticism for
that era, black or white. Cousy was one of the first basketball magicians doing
insane passes with the ball,and that led to Pistol Pete , which led to Magic Johnson,
which led to Jason Kidd, etc

Black and white players weren’t doing crossovers or switch handed dribbles,
because the skillset didn’t exist yet, same thing with shooting threes, it didn’t exist.

Cousy skillset is based on the era he was born in and so is Curry’s.

Julius jumped high as hell, then Mike came and jumped higher,
and then Vince came and jumped higher, and then Gordon and Zach
came and jumped higher.

It’s called evolution.

Stop with the hypotheticals and science fiction to push a bullshit narrative
and to shit on someone who did something that you couldn’t and can’t do.

You sound salty and sensitive.

My rebuttle is based entirely on your premise of if Curry "existed" back in the day. I didn't say anything about a time machine. I'm just saying Curry as an athlete. You can put whatever stipulations on it you want. Whether he would shoot threes or know how to crossover. Whatever.

Evolution or not we will never know how black players would have dominated the early NBA because they weren't allowed to play in mass.

Putting the best players on the court is part of this "evolution" as well.

We should side eye a lot of these 1940's/50's/60's players and their accomplishments because they weren't playing in a era where the best athletes could play.

and Jerry West who held their own and then some against black players.

Bob Cousy’s talent was undeniable, and he had no control over who he
played against. And Bill Russell and Wilt were a part of his era. Bill
Russell was his damn teammate, and there were other black players
in the league. Bob did play against and with black players.

You making this into some type of culture war that has nothing to do with the
players.

You make ZERO sense.

Yes, black players should have been allowed to play from the very beginning,
but that has shit to do with Bob Cousy skillset and talent. Bob Cousy spoke out
against racism and befriend his black teammates

You didn’t think this through.

You did not.

You decided to try to disrespect JJ Redick for reasons unknown and discredit his opinion which honestly probably matters more than anyone in this thread.

You then tried to make this about defending Bob Cousy against the reality that he didn't play against the most talented players. My issues is not with Cousy. I didn't say one bad word about him.

My issue is with the hypocritical measuring of athletes who played in a non inclusive era.

Out of all the arguments comparing eras......this one to me is the most important.

What JJ Redick said not only applied to the lack of talent and skilled players that Cousy was playing against but the lack of talented skilled black athletes as well.

There's no getting around it. Keep trying to talk around it if you want. It happened. And it is bullshit.

That applies to Bill Russell and Wilt as well. But I guarantee you that they acknowledge it.

There weren't more than 4 black players on any team in the NBA until the mid to late 60's. The Celtics were the first to have 5 in 1963.

Thankfully the ABA came along and blew this up.

of your ass.

Do you not understand that Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, and Elgin Baylor
played during that same era, as well as Chuck Cooper.

Also, similar to MLB in the 20s,30s 40s and 50s, basketball teams would do basketball
tours where they played against black basketball teams. Bob Cousy was a star
in those games!


It’s like when Babe Ruth played against negro league players in
the 20s because he appreciated black players...Bob Cousy did the same
thing.

Know your history before you open your mouth. You’re wrong and JJ Reddick
is wrong.

His points or perceptions are irrelevant, and don’t prove
anything.

There just his takes. Period. He isn’t even a professional athlete.

You’re so original.

You’re so original.

aside from that back to the convo, who are your top 5 point guards?

I have:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Zeke
4. Kidd
5. Stockton

He would remove Stockton or Kidd for underachieving Chris Paul.

Stockton went to the finals twice and is the career leader in assists.

Kidd won a chip and went to three finals and is number 2 in career assists

Paul ain’t even in the same vicinity as anyone in that top 5

And that he will likely finish as number 2, right?

is 3rd on the all time rushing list and gained more yards
than Barry Sanders...does that make him top 5 all time?

Hell No!

So Paul hanging around to pad stats with not titles and only 1
finals appearance means nothing, as well as choking over
and over again.

and finals appearances... and they're all very comparable in that regard.
So for you to go from "Stockton is number 1 in assists. Kidd is number 2. Paul (who is number 3), doesn't belong in the conversation" is just really poor logic. That's all.

which is clearly stated.

Translation: Paul hasn’t done or accomplished enough.

And what I was also pointing out is that Stockton/ Kidd are ahead of Paul in numbers,
finals accomplishments, but he would remove them to go with Paul.

Basically, he makes zero sense.

The title that Kidd won as the 3rd best player in his twilight is not the separation you think it is.

12x all star
4x first team
5x second team
1x third team
7x first team defense
2x second team defense
5x assists titles
7x steals title
3rd all time in assists
4th all time in steals

Plus a finals appearance and a team primed to win this year…it’s a resume. You can argue CP3s team lost 1-3 series they should have won. That is not underachieving.

Kidd:

10x all star
5x first team
1x second team
4x first team defense
5x second team defense
5x assist titles
6x steals leader
2nd all time assists
2nd all time steals
1 title

And if we’re keeping it a buck? Both those resumes are better than Stocktons, Assist total aside.

“Plus a finals appearance and a team primed to win this year…it’s a resume. You can argue CP3s team lost 1-3 series they should have won. That is not underachieving.”

He lost. That’s underachieving and choking.

Kidd was the general of that Dallas team and the leader, Dirk
didn’t win one without him. You would down play it though.

Anyway.

I hate getting into these arguments as far as rankings go. CP3 is in the discussion for Top 5 in the same way Lebron is in the discussion for top 3. Whether you believe it or not - it's not RIDICULOUS. It's also super subjective, obviously.

But your metrics are...not exactly logical.

Stockton had an excuse. He ran into Jordan in both title games. Paul has choked
off several times in the 1st round, and there were games where he completely
gave up.

Plus let’s look at Stockton’s iron man history. Availability matters as well.
John Stockton played in 15 seasons where he played all 82 games,
and he played all 82 games in 7 consecutive seasons

Jason Kidd had 10 seasons where he played 80 or more games

Chris Paul only has one season where he played all 82 games.....one season.
and 3 seasons where he played 80 or more games.

Like I said, he isn’t in the same universe as those guys.

2008 vs Dallas - 4-1 Win (NO was favored)
2008 vs Spurs - 3-4 Loss (not sure who was favored here but they both win 56 games)
2009 vs Denver - 1-4 Loss (Denver was favored)
2011 vs Lakers - 2-4 Loss (LAL was favored)
2012 vs Grizzlies - 4-3 Win (Clips were favored)
2012 vs Spurs - 0-4 Loss (SA was favored)
2013 vs Grizzlies - 2-4 Loss (both teams won 56 games)
2014 vs Warriors - 4-3 Win (Clips were favored)
2014 vs Spurs - 4-3 Win (Clips were favored)
2014 vs Rockets - 3-4 Loss (Both won 56 - I think Clips were favored tho)
2016 vs Blazers - 2-4 Loss (Clips were favored)
2017 vs Jazz - 3-4 Loss (both won 51 games)
2018 vs Wolves - 4-1 Win (Houston was favored)
2018 vs Jazz - 4-1 Win (Houston was favored)
2018 vs Warriors - 3-4 Loss (Warriors were favored, but this was a choke even if he didnt play games 6 and 7)
2019 vs Jazz - 4-1 win (Houston was favored)
2019 vs Warriors - 2-4 loss (Warriors were favored)
2020 vs Rockets - 3-4 loss (Houston was favored)

And then his Phoenix career. So - there are 2 or 3 series you can maybe point to that he SHOULD have won, but his "underachieving" status is so beyond exaggerated.

Just skip right over his lack of availability compared to Kidd and Stockton.

Chris Paul is leading a team in his 17th season to a 1 seed.

He's 36 and is outside the top 50 in games played and yet this is his resume. He's had injuries - absolutely. Similar to Nash in that regard. But...look at the head to head shit. Titles and MVPs (regular season and Finals) ABSOLUTELY matter...but Kidd and Stockton have 1 title and no MVPs between them. CP3 has a similar resume and honestly...I'm not doing the Zeke comparison but his titles outweigh his longevity, clearly.

Oh, and DEFLECTION? Please argue your "one of the biggest chokers in NBA history" theory. I'm dying to know - given I actually came with facts.

Stockton or Kidd.

Choker, injury prone, and nut puncher.

Those clippers teams are known as the biggest chokers in NBA history,
but let you re-write the story.

Hell, you even talked about it as a lakers fan during those early exits.

Look at you now.

Fun Fact: Chris Paul is the first player in NBA history to lose not one, not two, not three, but FOUR best-of-seven series in which his team had a ‘2-0’ lead.

Just take the L

I’ll let you argue it.

All *i* did was be mad Stern overturned that trade cause Kobe and Chris woulda been amazing

>2008 vs Dallas - 4-1 Win (NO was favored)
>2008 vs Spurs - 3-4 Loss (not sure who was favored here but
>they both win 56 games)
>2009 vs Denver - 1-4 Loss (Denver was favored)
>2011 vs Lakers - 2-4 Loss (LAL was favored)
>2012 vs Grizzlies - 4-3 Win (Clips were favored)
>2012 vs Spurs - 0-4 Loss (SA was favored)
>2013 vs Grizzlies - 2-4 Loss (both teams won 56 games)
>2014 vs Warriors - 4-3 Win (Clips were favored)
>2014 vs Spurs - 4-3 Win (Clips were favored)
>2014 vs Rockets - 3-4 Loss (Both won 56 - I think Clips were
>favored tho)
>2016 vs Blazers - 2-4 Loss (Clips were favored)
>2017 vs Jazz - 3-4 Loss (both won 51 games)
>2018 vs Wolves - 4-1 Win (Houston was favored)
>2018 vs Jazz - 4-1 Win (Houston was favored)
>2018 vs Warriors - 3-4 Loss (Warriors were favored, but this
>was a choke even if he didnt play games 6 and 7)
>2019 vs Jazz - 4-1 win (Houston was favored)
>2019 vs Warriors - 2-4 loss (Warriors were favored)
>2020 vs Rockets - 3-4 loss (Houston was favored)
>
>And then his Phoenix career. So - there are 2 or 3 series you
>can maybe point to that he SHOULD have won, but his
>"underachieving" status is so beyond exaggerated.
>
>

Lost in the first round his first 7 yrs in the league. Made the conference finals, lost, then missed the playoffs for the next 3 yrs.
And he ain't a 6ft point guard.

Then got career revitalization when he was gifted to Boston with Ray Allen.

Sometimes...it ain't the guy that's the reason. Sometimes it's the circumstance or the guys around them (front office, team mates, coaches, etc).

You're henceforth banned. Sorry.

The list doesn't include Nash (who I hated but had a better career), Payton, and non-traditional PGs like AI and Steph if we are going to count them.

Then dudes I never really saw play but deserve consideration like Mo, Walt, Nate, etc.

Hell, I'd hesitate to Paul too far above dudes like Tim Hardaway, KJ, etc. I probably would but its closer then some want to admit.


Paul is nice...but he has been vastly overrated along the way. "Greatest leader in the league" has underperformed/underachieved way too any times.

At the very least it is not a given he is on the list imo

And same with AI. So i get that.

But his injuries are the underachievement part and that’s not all that debatable. Someone like Harden has absolutely underachieved. It’s hard to say that about CP3 when his teams ran into absolute monsters.

As for Nash - he had a humongous peak but honestly his longevity doesn’t live up to these other names. He also absolutely underachieved more than the others IMO. So yes the MVPs count for a lot but it’s hard to compare to those other numbers and metrics.

Mine is the same. Slightly different order.

Magic
Kidd
Oscar
Zeke
Stockton.

I got Kidd as the greatest PASSER of all time...from Dallas, Suns, Nets, Knicks, and back to Dallas...no one in the history of the game has as many tandems and trios
that he set up or created.

Mashburn/Jackson
Martin/Jefferson
Jefferson/Vinsanity
Matrix/ I can’t think of the other guy’s name.

jj clearly takes this shit personal and doesnt sugarcoat things.

he borderline chewed out molly at one point lol.

of all time. He played when you couldn’t palm the ball, or crossover.
You had to really dribble with your hand on TOP of the ball. There were
no hesitations allowed. And he was one of the first little men to finish around and
under the rim through big centers and forwards

If you don’t know your focking history, just say so

https://youtu.be/5QCP6mMMH2Q

I think I see dude's pipe cutters fall out of his shorts.

i saw all the lolz first then saw the 40 sec. mark. still made me bust out

down in half speed, grasped at Cousy's ankle, slowly got up, and still had time to make a decent play on the ball before Cousy made the pass...

https://twitter.com/Pokiemane/status/1516942048242417671?s=20&t=uxlPOQGSARB0LeaBFMYxDg

>https://twitter.com/Pokiemane/status/1516942048242417671?s=20&t=uxlPOQGSARB0LeaBFMYxDg

>JJ's just smarter than a lot of these ESPN blowhards. Funnier
>too. He's got a great career ahead of him in media if he
>doesn't get fed up with the nonsense, lol.

because he rubbed Screaming A the wrong way if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure if being smarter is necessarily a good thing in terms of JJ wanting to carve a long term lane for himself at ESPN.

Based on the Youtube clips where he'd going NBA player interviews for his podcast, that seems like a better, more nuanced, and meaningful lane than being just another sullen screaming/talking head on ESPN. Hopefully he'll carve a non-ESPN lane for himself rather than going on First Take is having to bark out his points in the rare silent spaces Screaming A and Madd Dogg will allow him to speak.

https://twitter.com/thedloading_/status/1521874322037518336?s=20&t=TrwOmdA6D1QAtd2t7Kig_w

First Take's twitter account never tweets out the clips Redick goes viral for, lmao. They stay tweeting out SAS and Perk clips. They know JJ's so far above the level of the usual discourse on that show. Only a matter of time before they stop letting him on.

And lol @ "50 million fans who have been watching basketball for 60 years"

He speaks for boomers and mediocre, envious, spiteful white men, and little else

The fact that he had the audacity to say this has nothing to do with race was hilariously in the nose, because that’s exactly how it works with those people. They dance around the edges and avoid the key phrases- but the sentiment is there.

Just like the shit about Cousy. It’s why those guys love Bird so much- because he was a white dude in a modern era dominated by Black men, who was so brash and so good that he could talk crazy shit and back it up against those Black men Bird had the goods against a remarkable generation of athletes, in a way that They inly wish guys like Cousy could, but the kicker here is, he talked a *lot* of shit.

Never once have a I heard one of MD’s base of white boomers say Larry Legend should tone it down.

JJ rightly called out the undertones of that shit. It’s fun to watch MD get chewed up by someone who should be one of his own, just like Max used to eat up Will.

The second that piece of shit Mad Dog- and jesus, people with cornball names like that still pop?- but check the body language and facial expression of both SAS and JJ when he starts that bullshit.

Later, SAS tells MD that Dray is being unfairly crucified by the likes of him (MD), and MD says, "what, I can't have an opinion?"

That's all it takes for this fucking buffoon to feel attacked?

He's what you get if Nick Dipalo had decided to be a hack sports talk radio guy instead of a hack standup comic.

https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=2746101&mesg_id=2746101&listing_type=search#2758775

And just then two of them with a straight man to keep the show moving. A lean 3 person crew. It would be really good.

i mean, the list is grant hill and zion and jj. that's pretty much it.


peace & blessings,

x.

www.twitter.com/poetx

=========================================
I'm an advocate for working smarter, not harder. If you just
focus on working hard you end up making someone else rich and
not having much to show for it. (c) mad

hes just head and shoulders above everyone else in terms of knowledge and insight and he has very little tolerance for the passive ignorance you have to entertain on these debate shows to make other people come off as near-equally credible authorities on the subject.

you gotta be willing to laugh off a lot of dumb shit and treat wrong takes like valid opinions worthy of level headed challenges. you can tell he struggles to play that game tho. dude be getting red, rolling his eyes, taking shit personal, etc.

its hard for him to hide his disgust at times and not come off as looking down on these folks. i seen him almost be about to light up malika andrews once lol.

Only a matter of time because ESPN decides he's a bit too real with it.

just not on the yelling shows

>https://twitter.com/ComplexSports/status/1516828712821530631?s=20&t=SiYn1KjekV5abjrmdC5gRw
>
>Such an exceptional line. And not at all wrong in the context
>of the debate.
>
>JJ's just smarter than a lot of these ESPN blowhards. Funnier
>too. He's got a great career ahead of him in media if he
>doesn't get fed up with the nonsense, lol.

JJ was an athlete, who competed at an elite collegiate level, followed by a respectable pro career as an important piece on a couple of contending teams.

As far as I can tell, his peers respect him.

All that to say, he has a backbone and his tone in situations show that while he's holding back a few degrees worth of heat, he's not here for the fuck shit.

So it's possible, but he comes across like the type to stand up and make you knock him down rather than roll over.

I like Max, and he very often had insightful points that relied heavily on contextual elements to make his points, but he's too jovial and was a bit of a pushover.

JJ has a competitive dog in him that Max doesn't. And while he wasn't a champion or an all star, he had a career that you can't exactly shit on, so he can speak with a fair amount of authority.

I just don't see him going out like Max.

They just gotta tune him up a bit on the show business aspect of it cause he takes it too seriously and gets angry.

...that they're trying to push (two loud animated guys yelling back and forth like those two Muppets that always argue...I'm forgetting their names and don't feel like googling)

Mad Dog doing his best Laura Ingraham impression with that "shut up and dribble bit" comment about Draymond was cringe though.

>They just gotta tune him up a bit on the show business aspect
>of it cause he takes it too seriously and gets angry.

Agreed

specialize in one sport and try to present them as all sports experts and they just sound like a loudmouth at the bar.

Max is a boxing guy and sounds foolish when he talks about any other sport.

Stephen A is a basketball guy that sounds foolish when he talks about any other sport.

They try to balance it out now with separate shows and rotation sport specific co-hosts but it’s still weird.

I think the whole sportswriter yelling their opinion thing is getting played anyway. Even Wilbon and Kornheiser are annoying to me and I used to love those guys now they just come off as old men yelling at clouds.

but somebody is watching considering how much they are paying SAS

>but somebody is watching considering how much they are paying
>SAS

The two of them are definitely Statler and Waldorf at this point, and that's fine. They were like that when George Michael had his show (RIP to the legend)

As for the ESPN personalities, you're 1000% right. Max knows an insane amount of boxing, whether he's a good TV personality or not. For sports in general, he's not good. Never has been, never will be.

SAS definitely knows his wheelhouse, and sounds foolish once the NBA playoffs are done. But he's a brand now, so somebody is listening (not me). Honestly, Shannon kinda has a similar trajectory, but it feels he does a bit more work to get knowledgeable on things (or he's just a better fit with Skip).

Screaming A is a guest on Reddick's non-ESPN podcast.

It appears JJ will be safe on those ESPN airwaves for the time being.

Have to wonder how toxic things were between Kellerman and Screaming A off the air and behind the scenes for Kellerman to get moved the way he did.