Leaderboard

Let the lulz ensue.

no, he looks more like you

Your O sucks

Come on, this is just getting ridiculous. If this had any legs, how could Obama go to a University, then Law School and then become a Senator, without any of this ever being brought up? I mean it's not like he was born in his parents living room in 1882. He was born in a hospital in Hawaii that has records of his birth. If we're gunna make a fuss about this idiotic story than I demand to see every other politicians birth certificate tomorrow. If I were the Head of State and some one asked to see my birth certificate I wouldn't even dignify that request with a response. Oh wait, that would never happen because I'm White, seriously this story needs to go away, I'm pissed at myself for even spending any time to recognize this as a worthy discussion topic.

If they do anything to the U.S., it's time to obliterate the Middle East.

Tracy McGrady. Not only do I believe him to be the better overall player, but he is an easier player to build around because: 1) He's more versatile, you can stick him in 3 or 4 different positions. So he's your man for a big or small line-up. 2) His skill-set is also versatile. You can put him in different roles. You can make him a ball handler and set up the offense, or you can have him iso on the wing. Perhaps have him post up as well. 3) He does more. He can defend multiple positions, plus add more elements other than scoring/creating such as rebounding and adding defensive length. Plus he keeps turnovers to a minimum with a career turnover percentage of just 10.2%. Also, if you look throughout NBA history, teams that win championships are usually teams with multiple ball handlers, or multiple decision makers with the basketball (like Tim Duncan, though while he won't bring the ball up, he can make reads in the post). Teams that revolve around a single decision maker like Steve Nash, Allen Iverson, and LeBron James (in Cleveland) may win games in the regular season, but when more heavily scouted and gameplanned against in the playoffs, things become much more difficult. For further examples, look at the Lakers with Derek Fisher, Kobe Bryant, and Pau Gasol. The Spurs with Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, and Tim Duncan. Also notice the Celtics. When they won a championship, Rondo was just one of the team's decision makers. Pierce and Garnett being the others. Ever since they changed their gameplan to have Rondo dominate the ball, they have won 0 championships. So my main point here is that T-Mac brings something rare and much needed for championship teams. 6 foot 8 (reliable) ball handlers aren't that common. Bringing him on the team ensures that you have at least one-third of a crucial element needed to win championships. To properly build around him, the next step is to bring the other two-thirds. Then fill the rest of the needs, such as rebounding. With that point made, I'm NOT saying Nash can't be a part of a championship team. HOWEVER, it's more difficult to do so with him (remember, for a championship team, not necessarily a volume winning team in the regular season). While T-Mac can play four positions and fill up many elements, Nash plays one position and brings only two elements - scoring and creating (although he greatly excels in these areas). Not only does this mean you've limited options, say, in the draft (like having an elite PG available using a high draft pick, whereas having an elite SF available isn't an issue with T-Mac), but you also need to put more effort into filling many other elements, like perimeter defense, interior defense, rebounding, screen-setting, players that create turnovers defensively, etc. While T-Mac brings a majority of these elements. Now that I think I've exhausted what there is to argue on Nash vs T-Mac as far as building a team, I will make one last point about Nash, and this doesn't have to do with vs T-Mac, but more to do on what *I* would do differently to build a championship team than what the Phoenix Suns did. This goes back to my earlier point on the need of having multiple ball handlers and decision makers in the offense. Having Nash run around with the ball until somebody is open may be successful up to a point, but it has its limits. You need to have more variety than that, and therefore be less predictable. If I was running the Suns, I would have done what I could to have guys like T-Mac and Tim Duncan around Nash, rather than have Amar'e and Marion. And for the #1 reason: Turnover percentage. Steve Nash has a career TOV% of 19.1. The reason for that is not because he is a bad ball handler by any means, but because his teams have relied FAR too much on him to handle the ball. It's FAR too much pressure to make only ONE out of FIVE offensive players handle the ball 50% of the time, and make FOUR players handle it roughly 10% each. For Nash, it needed to be decreased to no more than, say, 33%. As a result, his TOV% may have decreased from his very high 19.1%, down to more towards T-Mac's range of 10.2%, or maybe Kobe's range of 11.4%, or Chauncey Billups of 13.5%. Had the Suns done this, they may have come that much closer to an NBA championship, if not actually won one.

I don't think where you go to school should have any resemblance on what school you cheer for. Getting an education and ultimately a job from a place you want to go is totally irrelevant to which sports team you like.

Good idea. Free Luke!!!

No player truly makes their teammates better, unless they do it in practice. They make the game easier, but it doesn't necessarily make them a better player. Smush Parker looked like a pretty good player when he was here. Once he left, though, he didn't do a damn thing. He didn't improve, just had a lot of open shots when he was playing alongside Bryant. Cleveland absolutely sucked when LeBron left. They had it easy when he was there because of the defensive attention he required. Had he made them better players, it would show without him in a Cavs jersey.

Well now it does....

Here's a little teaser screen shot of what a general poll will look like. http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/2668/pollexample.png

IMO Johnson is the most annoying commentator out there.

Gus Johnson is a BOSS. Absolutely my favorite announcer.

LeBron > Kobe. I thought people would have known by now.

http://bluntobject.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/lol-wut.jpg That's makes virtually no sense, unless you are claiming someone outside of the NBA is better than him. .

Bynum is our second option now. I would personally apologize to him for ever wanting him traded over Pau Gasol, if given the chance. I wasn't too excited over his Game 1 numbers, but when he was out there with Brown and Blake, he wasn't getting the ball at all, so the eight shot attempts didn't tell us much. Gasol is a damn loser. I don't care if he was playing well during our two championship runs, today matters most. After last night, he has driven to the top of my most hated list, over LeBron. I'm honestly sick of his flopping and moaning, walking to Dirk when he takes his jumpers and not bothering to contest them, being three seconds late on any help, not taking any responsibility in post-game interviews, demanding more touches but being passive as hell, and playing 20 feet from the rim despite having Dirk Nowitzki on him. I have no idea where Odom's stupid ass was at last night, stopping to talk to someone in the crowd at least 4-5 different times, promising a win (probably Khloe). Steve Blake hasn't done anything, in a two-game stretch, this entire season...and Phil Jackson playing this goon as long as he did? Makes me sick talking about it.

Bring out the wheel chairs.

ECN is you're typical internet troll

lol I stopped taking this seriously when I saw who made the thread.