Lets Talk About Noah

[2323]

So you basically made the case for Noah because he is Russell-like, now you make the case against?

It's not binary.

 

[Crystallas]

It's not binary.

But you made that argument that it is. :shrug:

 

[2323]

But you made that argument that it is. :shrug:

It's the opposite. But I acknowledged the hypocrisy in how people overlook these limitations with Russell but place limitations on how Noah is esteemed because of those same limitations.

I said it's somewhere in between and that "in between" is that Russell is overrated while Noah is underrated.

If we're going to have this conversation, we have to also consider Rodman. He's in that big time rebounder but mobile player mold too. I'd put Rodman over Russell.

Best rebounder:
1. Rodman
2a. Russell
2b. Noah

Most mobile:
1. Rodman
2. Russell/Noah--a tie

Most mobile in a functional sense (namely handling the ball)
1. Noah
2. Russell
3. Rodman

Most "grit":
1. Rodman
2. Noah
3. Russell

Most esteemed by way of team success:
1. Russell
2. Rodman
3. Noah

Best shot maker:
None

Best free throw shooter:
1. Noah
2. Rodman
3. Russell--yes people forget he was Soooooo bad.

Best big game player:
They all rise to the occasion--a three way wash.

Btw, I recognize team success factors heavily into this when generally discussed. Should it? I'm not so sure.

 

[houheffna]

It's the opposite. But I acknowledged the hypocrisy in how people overlook these limitations with Russell but place limitations on how Noah is esteemed because of those same limitations.

I said it's somewhere in between and that "in between" is that Russell is overrated while Noah is underrated.

If we're going to have this conversation, we have to also consider Rodman. He's in that big time rebounder but mobile player mold too. I'd put Rodman over Russell.

Best rebounder:
1. Rodman
2a. Russell
2b. Noah

Most mobile:
1. Rodman
2. Russell/Noah--a tie

Most mobile in a functional sense (namely handling the ball)
1. Noah
2. Russell
3. Rodman

Most "grit":
1. Rodman
2. Noah
3. Russell

Most esteemed by way of team success:
1. Russell
2. Rodman
3. Noah

Best shot maker:
None

Best free throw shooter:
1. Noah
2. Rodman
3. Russell--yes people forget he was Soooooo bad.

Best big game player:
They all rise to the occasion--a three way wash.

Btw, I recognize team success factors heavily into this when generally discussed. Should it? I'm not so sure.

Noah shouldn't be compared to Bill Russell...that's a bit silly. As far as who is the best big game player? How is comparing Noah to a guy with 11 rings a wash? Seriously??? Lol...this was just bad.

 

[2323]

Noah shouldn't be compared to Bill Russell...that's a bit silly. As far as who is the best big game player? How is comparing Noah to a guy with 11 rings a wash? Seriously??? Lol...this was just bad.

You really are dumber than a doorknob. It should have been obvious to practically everyone that it was a discussion of stylistic comparison. I believe, however, that here was a brief mention of looking past team accomplishment. And with that in mind, just citing the number of rings demonstrates not only that you're not capable of retaining what you read but that your analysis is garbage--a parrot can say eleven rings. Go look at his FG and FT %s. They're awful. There's not even a case to be made for him, as an individual player to be considered top 5 all time. Not with those numbers. Russell's rebounding numbers are also inflated because of the era he played in. The league hadn't yet been fully integrated and he and Wilt both have inflated numbers because of it. It was far more advantageous to be tall in their era.

Because I know the Illinois public schools are awful and has likely failed you, I'm going to share something with you--free of charge. There is a Latin phrase, "ceteris paribus", it means all things being equal. And it's a very necessary and important consideration when comparing players from different eras. To ignore this is to not be intellectually honest. And the truth is, as was mentioned previously, they're very similar players and very comparable.

 

[The Hawk]

Russell does have a similar skillset and drive to Noah. That's fair. But Noah does not have the same strength and speed, which turns such a comparison into a huge exaggeration. Plus, comparing a pre-ABA, pre-3pt era player to a modern player who has to match up against other players who fit into this modern league is also the wrong way to go about the argument.

The comparison for Noah to me was Rodman all the way. Weird looking. Getting under the skin of whoever matches up against him. Terrible looking shot. Excellent rebounder. From the time he got drafted, that was who I compared him to. So far.......NO DRESS

 

[houheffna]

You really are dumber than a doorknob. It should have been obvious to practically everyone that it was a discussion of stylistic comparison. I believe, however, that here was a brief mention of looking past team accomplishment. And with that in mind, just citing the number of rings demonstrates not only that you're not capable of retaining what you read but that your analysis is garbage--a parrot can say eleven rings. Go look at his FG and FT %s. They're awful. There's not even a case to be made for him, as an individual player to be considered top 5 all time. Not with those numbers. Russell's rebounding numbers are also inflated because of the era he played in. The league hadn't yet been fully integrated and he and Wilt both have inflated numbers because of it. It was far more advantageous to be tall in their era.

Because I know the Illinois public schools are awful and has likely failed you, I'm going to share something with you--free of charge. There is a Latin phrase, "ceteris paribus", it means all things being equal. And it's a very necessary and important consideration when comparing players from different eras. To ignore this is to not be intellectually honest. And the truth is, as was mentioned previously, they're very similar players and very comparable.

Oh boy...have your mother read this to you...loudly. Russell played 50 years ago! Different rules, different games, different players.

What gave away your ignorance to the NBA is saying that Noah and Russell were a wash when it came to big games. That shows what an idiot you are. And whatever school system you've been through, didn't teach you how to do research before wringing out some long-winded thesis that proves absolutely nothing.

Russell's last game was a game 7, on the road, against an opponent that was favored to win. Russell's team won that game. Russell played and coached that game.

Noah's biggest game of his pro career? Spent the fourth quarter on the bench watching a 40 year old play his minutes. They don't compare in big games...and its silly of you to act as if they do.

 

[2323]

Like I said: you're Special person. I'd rather talk to a parrot. Such a poser. Such a fraud. It's hard to be intellectually honest when you have no intellect. Congratulations.

 

[houheffna]

Like I said: you're Special person. I'd rather talk to a parrot. Such a poser. Such a fraud. It's hard to be intellectually honest when you have no intellect. Congratulations.

Lol...well, at least you learned a little about Russell's history...you're welcome.

 

[2323]

Lol...well, at least you learned a little about Russell's history...you're welcome.

Good luck earning your degree at www.onlinehighschool.com

 

[houheffna]

Good luck earning your degree at www.onlinehighschool.com

Good luck spelling and typing "wikipedia.com" next time, dumbass.