People don't dance no mo. All they do is this...

I miss old Goodie Mob before Cee-Lo........changed.

Although, the Mob is reuniting. I wonder how that's gonna go.

Not good, so far. Some of the stuff I've heard is straight up booty and I've seen them advertised as Goodie Mob featuring Cee Lo Green ( ). There was a time where they were one of my favorite groups. Soul Food and Still Standing were both excellent...

Yeah. I like pittmike, but that's a pretty terrible thought. The 2001 Lakers would've held their own against the '86 C's, '87 Lakers, '92 Bulls, etc. There's literally a zero percent chance any team in history would beat that team 10 out of 10 times.

Only thing I'll say about the McAdoo/Durant thing is that McAdoo was considered a big guy, Durant is not, and Durant is taller, more athletic, and a much better shooter/scorer than Bob was and he probably hasn't hit his prime yet. Yes, they might be comparable, but it's as flawed a comparison as the Baylor/Jordan comparison I've often heard from JORR on this.

But you also have to look at their careers. I'll buy a comparison of Young Elgin and Young Jordan. But there's nothing in Baylor's career comparable to the player Jordan evolved into during the second three peat. Blame his military commitment if you must. He definitely had to deal with real world shit that Jordan didn't. But I think Dominique is a better comp for Baylor, although Baylor was certainly better.

Durant will average 22 for a career.

No way. Unless he gets hurt before he declines.

I think part of the problem is not just that everything is organized, it is organized from an early age. Then when a kid doesn't excel in a particular sport from the very beginning, their are social pressures to quit. Unathletic kids who might have developed quit before they have a chance. Athletic kids end up being specialized into one sport rather than playing everything.

The goals are kind of strange as well. There is no playing just to play. There is playing to win and practicing with some kind of ambiguous goal to have a college scholarship. Meanwhile, I'm not sure playing college sports is a better college experience than hanging out all day and getting blasted (getting homework done, of course).

These travel leagues are really the Ponzi scheme of the parent class. They usually cost four figures. The extra play may result in a better player but to what end. Yeah! You were a slightly above average high school player.

Well you basically paraphrased what I said about Jordan. Baylor was never the best player in the league. Baylor didn't have the diversity in scoring options that Jordan utilized in his later career. Baylor was never an absolute shut down defender like Jordan was. I know how Baylor was viewed also. About the only thing you're right with is the above the rim style they both had, which Baylor largely pioneered. Because he was missing everything else that made Jordan who he was, I said Nique was the better comparison.

You're just wrong about McAdoo. I guess their height is the same, and Durant is 25 lbs heavier. I always thought he was 6'10" but I'll go with the 6'9" he's listed at. The point still stands that Durant is not considered a big guy. But he's certainly more athletic than McAdoo was. Just watch clips of them and it's painfully obvious. And stop the ppg comparisons when you're crossing four decades. The stark decline in possessions/game make that sound silly as hell, as I've explained countless times. It would be like comparing a baseball player with 320 ABs in a season and one with 600 ABs in a season and say "They both hit 20 HRs! There was no difference!". It's just damn silly, and frankly you're way too bright with baseball statistics to not understand this JORR. But yeah Durant will average over 22 ppg for his career.

Way.

No way. Unless he gets hurt before he declines.

And yet, in the next argument you'll be saying the game is faster today.

How could the game possibly be faster if there are less possessions?

I already differentiated the two. Obtuse JORR ain't a good look man.

Not really. If you're going up and down the court more, it follows that the game is faster. You're not being very logical or objective.

Players move faster but they utilize a shit ton more half court offense today

You seem to be contradicting yourself. How can they be moving faster if they're in a half-court offense so much more? Are you saying that theoretically they are faster or would be faster if they played differently? Because the facts show they aren't faster.

When I get to a computer I'll see if they have the data for their measurables. They don't have a traditional numbers-scouting combine like the NFL before the draft but they do take many measurables today. Not sure when they started that or how far back it goes.

But as to your last sentence, what facts? I'm talking about one simple stat. Possessions/game. So yes, the game was obviously more up-tempo back when JORR used to rock and roll. In that sense it was faster. But athletically the players were not faster back then. The players did not run faster or jump higher back then. You're not asserting that, are you?