[TheSlayer]

(03-28-2013 04:24 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:02 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

That 2000s team did not have multiple superstars. Neither did the 2011 Mavs.

I'm not trying to argue with you.

I just disagree.

The 2004 Pistons had multiple stars -- Chancey Billups (Starter on the US National team) - Rasheed Wallace (All Star) - Ben Wallace (Defensive player of the year) - Tayshaun Prince (National team member, one of the best defenders in the league at that time) That's 2 national team members, The defensive player of the year, and multiple All-Stars.

The 2011 Mavs had multiple stars -- Dirk (MVP of the league) - Jason Kidd (One of the best guards of all time/Hall of Famer) - Tyson Chandler (Defensive player of the year) - Shawn Marion (All Star) - Jason Terry (6th man of the year) Thats the MVP, The Defensive Player of the Year, The 6th Man of the Year, and multiple ALL Stars.

You are saying these teams only had 1 star, yet, these teams had mulitple All Stars, and they both had the Defensive Players of the Year in their startng lineup.

I guess we just disagree on what is a "star"???

That's why I listed their names and accomplishments for their championship season.

Not trying to argue with you, I just like breaking this stuff down!

I am not arguing with you either. Funny thing is, I actually agree with everything you just said. That's why I said those teams had one bona-fide superstar and then very good players/all-stars. I am talking about stars from the perspective of top 20-25 players in the league on one team.

Dirk and Billups were the superstars and the rest were extremely good role players, all-stars, and specialists.

I don't think all-stars really means you are a star. This year the Bulls had 2 or 3 all-stars but there's no way they are advancing past the second round (especially if Rose isn't even back).

You have to read my original post on this in the context of TheCool's post.

What I meant was championship teams usually have one or two top 20 players that year and then a bunch of good role players, all-stars, and specialists.

Spurs: TD and Ginobili in their prime + a young TP
Lakers: Extremely Dominant Shaq (maybe the best player for those 4-5 years) + young Kobe
Miami: LBJ and DWade are both top 5 players + another top 20 player

My point is that all these teams have the really good supporting casts that you just mentioned for the Mavs and Pistons, but I don't classify those players as stars (as you mentioned for the Mavs and the Pistons)

For example, Jason Terry even with the 6th Man of the Year award can never be called a star. He was a very good role player in his prime but never a star.

I feel like we are both saying the same thing just a little differently.

[InternationPlayboy]

(03-28-2013 04:24 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:02 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

That 2000s team did not have multiple superstars. Neither did the 2011 Mavs.

I'm not trying to argue with you.

I just disagree.

The 2004 Pistons had multiple stars -- Chancey Billups (Starter on the US National team) - Rasheed Wallace (All Star) - Ben Wallace (Defensive player of the year) - Tayshaun Prince (National team member, one of the best defenders in the league at that time) That's 2 national team members, The defensive player of the year, and multiple All-Stars.

The 2011 Mavs had multiple stars -- Dirk (MVP of the league) - Jason Kidd (One of the best guards of all time/Hall of Famer) - Tyson Chandler (Defensive player of the year) - Shawn Marion (All Star) - Jason Terry (6th man of the year) Thats the MVP, The Defensive Player of the Year, The 6th Man of the Year, and multiple ALL Stars.

You are saying these teams only had 1 star, yet, these teams had mulitple All Stars???

And, they both had the Defensive Players of the Year in their starting lineups.

I guess we just disagree on what is a "star"???

That's why I listed their names and accomplishments for their championship season.

Not trying to argue with you, I just like breaking this stuff down!

(03-28-2013 04:02 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

2011 Mavs. They had Dirk and a really good supporting cast but not two or three stars.

Other then Dirk -- They had a Hall of Famer, the Defensive Player of the Year, The 6th man of the Year, and another All Star.

But, you are saying they only had 1 Star? This is where we disagree..

I think I'm gonna have to agree with Gio on those teams having multiple stars. One thing I will say about Jason Kidd though, yes he's a star but he wasn't even close to in his prime when the Mavs won. Wasn't he almost 40? Still a solid player though and knocked down a lot of threes.

[TheSlayer]

@InternationPlayboy: You are making my point for me, lol. A 38 year old Jason Kidd can hardly be classified as a star. That year, he was a really good role player again. Case in point, a 39 year old Steve Nash this year. He's not a star anymore, just playing more as a role player.

Guys, I AGREE with you. The formula is to load on up a couple of superstars and a bunch of good role-players and specialists. All I am saying is the Pistons in the 2000s and the Mavs in 2011 did not have multiple SUPERSTARS. Dirk and Billups were their only SUPERSTARS along with good players who had been/are all-stars.

Let me be clear: I am classifying a superstar as a guy who is at least a top 20 player in the league that season. And in that context almost all championship teams have 2 or 3 superstars and a good supporting cast.

The Mavs and Pistons had one such guy and then all-stars and whatnot.

[InternationPlayboy]

What I do know is loading the Lakers with "stars" this year hasn't gotten them very far. It's so frustrating to watch. Lakers fans were so happy to see Dwight get traded and thought we would dominate the league and be great contenders against the Heat. I actually stopped watching them play for a little while when I was in Colombia after watching them lose game after game. I'm just glad I don't live in Miami anymore because the Heat fans would be having a field day making fun of me for how much my team blows. I would never hear the end of it after all the shit I talked at the beginning of the first season the Heat were together.

[Giovonny]

(03-28-2013 04:35 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I feel like we are both saying the same thing just a little differently.

Yeah, I don't think we disagree too much.

However, I consider All-Stars, Hall of Famers, Defensive Players on the Year, and 6th men of the Year to be stars.

You don't consider an ALL-STAR to be a star. We disagree there.

(03-28-2013 04:37 PM)InternationPlayboy Wrote:  

One thing I will say about Jason Kidd though, yes he's a star but he wasn't even close to in his prime when the Mavs won. Wasn't he almost 40? Still a solid player though and knocked down a lot of threes.

Kidd was 38 when they won it. He was maybe the best leader in the NBA that year. He was maybe the best passer in the NBA that year. He was one of the top open 3pt shooters in the league that year. His passing and leadership was the difference for that team. He was not as good as he was when he was a little younger but he was still a great player.

Dirk was amazing that year of course!

[TheSlayer]

(03-28-2013 04:49 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:35 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I feel like we are both saying the same thing just a little differently.

Yeah, I don't think we disagree too much.

However, I consider All-Stars, Hall of Famers, Defensive Players on the Year, and 6th men of the Year to be stars.

You don't consider an ALL-STAR to be a star. We disagree there.

Let me reword myself, may be you will agree with this. All-stars are stars. My point was that most championship teams have at least a couple of superstars (at least a top 20 player in the league that season).

This is where the Mavs and Pistons broke the trend. Only Dirk and Billups could be classified as superstars during their championship runs.

Make more sense? Almost all previous championship teams have had a couple of superstars when they won.

[InternationPlayboy]

(03-28-2013 04:49 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

However, I consider All-Stars, Hall of Famers, Defensive Players on the Year, and 6th men of the Year to be stars.

You don't consider an ALL-STAR to be a star. We disagree there.

I agree with all of the above statement except for a 6th man of the year being a star. How can he be a star if he's not even good enough to be a starter? Of course an all-star is a star. It wouldn't make sense for one not to be.

[Giovonny]

(03-28-2013 04:41 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

A 38 year old Jason Kidd can hardly be classified as a star.

Why not? Because of his age???

Micheal Jordan won a championship at 36. Is that too old to be a star???

Age means nothing. Performance is what counts.

Bernard Hopkins is 48, he just won the middleweight championship of the world. Is he too old to be a champion???

Too old to be a star???

Of course not.

(03-28-2013 04:41 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I am classifying a superstar as a guy who is at least a top 20 player in the league that season.

Wait, so now you are changing your argument to "SuperStar" and "Top 20 Player"!?!?!?

That isn't what you said originally. That isn't what we were talking about.

You said "star". Now, you are saying "Superstar" and "Top 20 Player".

You changed the terms of the discussion.

We are just arguing semantics.

I'm sure we would get along if we spoke in person.

[InternationPlayboy]

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:49 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:35 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I feel like we are both saying the same thing just a little differently.

Yeah, I don't think we disagree too much.

However, I consider All-Stars, Hall of Famers, Defensive Players on the Year, and 6th men of the Year to be stars.

You don't consider an ALL-STAR to be a star. We disagree there.

Let me reword myself, may be you will agree with this. All-stars are stars. My point was that most championship teams have at least a couple of superstars (at least a top 20 player in the league that season).

This is where the Mavs and Pistons broke the trend. Only Dirk and Billups could be classified as superstars during their championship runs.

Make more sense? Almost all previous championship teams have had a couple of superstars when they won.

I don't know if I would agree that the Lakers 09-10 team had two players that were top 20 in the league. I don't think you could consider Gasol to be one of the top 20 players in the league.

[Chewbacon]

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:49 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:35 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I feel like we are both saying the same thing just a little differently.

Yeah, I don't think we disagree too much.

However, I consider All-Stars, Hall of Famers, Defensive Players on the Year, and 6th men of the Year to be stars.

You don't consider an ALL-STAR to be a star. We disagree there.

Let me reword myself, may be you will agree with this. All-stars are stars. My point was that most championship teams have at least a couple of superstars (at least a top 20 player in the league that season).

This is where the Mavs and Pistons broke the trend. Only Dirk and Billups could be classified as superstars during their championship runs.

Make more sense? Almost all previous championship teams have had a couple of superstars when they won.

There are stars, and then there are superstars. Most championship teams have at least 2 top ten players, and at least 1 top 5 player. Obviously the Heat have Lebron, who is no. 1, an aging D-Wade who last year could still be counted as borderline top ten, and a top 15 player in Bosh. You have the 09 and 10 championship lakers, which still had Kobe as a top 5 player at the time, and paul and bynum as both top 15 to 20 players (most people forget how good pau was from 2008 to 2010). The Spurs had Tim Duncan as a top 5 player, a top ten player in tony parker (at the time), and a top 20 player in Manu. The early 2000's lakers had Kobe and Shaq as arguably BOTH top 5 players.

The reason the '11 mavs and 04 pistons break the trend is because they only had one top ten player and no top 5 player. In 2011 Dirk was still great (and he still is now), but he wouldn't have cracked a top 5 that included LBJ, Durant, CP3, Dwight Howard, and Kobe. His supporting cast was a 38 year old Jason Kidd, who wasn't even an all-star that year and arguably could not have cracked the top 30. They had a past his prime Shawn Marion, who would have been in his prime a top 15 to 20 player - but not anymore. They had Jason Terry, who was the sixth man of the year, but still not a top 20 player. The 2004 Pistons had Chauncey Billups, who was an undisputed all-star, but he wasn't top 5 caliber in a league with Kobe in his prime, T-Mac, KG, Lebron, D-Wade, Tim Duncan, and Steve Nash. They had Rasheed, who was extremely talented and an undeniable all-star, but still probably at the time at best a top 15 player. They had Ben Wallace, also probably a top 10 to 15 player. Tayshaun was a great defender, but he wasn't in 2004 close to all-star material. Rip was probably a top 15 to 25 player.

One important point: I don't think being on the U.S. National Team pre-2008 really mattered all that much. You have to remember that this was during a period when the NBA did not take USA basketball very seriously. Many great players did not participate, and many less talented but more experienced players (Billups, Hinrich, Mike Miller) got to play more minutes than more talented but younger players (LBJ, Carmelo).

[Tbone]

For a moment at least, I would say that Gasol was definitely top 20. Gasol does not look the same as the one from a few years ago, but those skills may still be there somewhere.

Look what he did to the USA basketball team.

[Joga Bonito]

(03-28-2013 04:41 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

@InternationPlayboy: You are making my point for me, lol. A 38 year old Jason Kidd can hardly be classified as a star. That year, he was a really good role player again. Case in point, a 39 year old Steve Nash this year. He's not a star anymore, just playing more as a role player.

Guys, I AGREE with you. The formula is to load on up a couple of superstars and a bunch of good role-players and specialists. All I am saying is the Pistons in the 2000s and the Mavs in 2011 did not have multiple SUPERSTARS. Dirk and Billups were their only SUPERSTARS along with good players who had been/are all-stars.

Let me be clear: I am classifying a superstar as a guy who is at least a top 20 player in the league that season. And in that context almost all championship teams have 2 or 3 superstars and a good supporting cast.

The Mavs and Pistons had one such guy and then all-stars and whatnot.

DELETE Dupe

[InternationPlayboy]

(03-28-2013 05:12 PM)SHANbangs Wrote:  

You have the 09 and 10 championship lakers, which still had Kobe as a top 5 player at the time, and paul and bynum as both top 15 to 20 players (most people forget how good pau was from 2008 to 2010).

Ok, I can give you Gasol as top 20 maybe, but Bynum that year? I don't think top 20. Poor guy had a lot of potential. Messed up his career at a young age with those injuries. He def. had potential to be top 20 or even 15, but I don't think he made it there before his injury.

I do get what you're saying about the 11 mavs though and do agree.

[TheSlayer]

Quote:

A 38 year old Jason Kidd can hardly be classified as a star.


Why not? Because of his age???

Micheal Jordan won a championship at 36. Is that too old to be a star???

Come on, you can't compare MJ at 36 to any player when they get old. MJ is MJ, hence, the best ever. As I said, Kidd was a solid role player at the time but I am not sure if I would count him as a star in the league back in 2011.

(03-28-2013 04:41 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I am classifying a superstar as a guy who is at least a top 20 player in the league that season.

Quote:

Wait, so now you are changing your argument to "SuperStar" and "Top 20 Player"!?!?!?

That isn't what you said originally. That isn't what we were talking about.

You said "star". Now, you are saying "Superstar" and "Top 20 Player".

You changed the terms of the discussion.

I never changed the terms of the discussion. My original post on this subject was to TheCool and was talking about Bosh, Wade, and LeBron. If I didn't state it clearly, that's what I was implying. Teams needs at least 2 or three top 20 players (assuming people consider Miami's big 3 to be top 20). That's why I clarified in my previous posts what I was exactly saying. I was talking about superstars (top 20 player), not all-stars.

Quote:

We are just arguing semantics.

I'm sure we would get along if we spoke in person.

I thought we are still getting along . Just having a lively discussion without resorting to name calling, trolling, and insults. Always good to have a discussion with another knowledgeable NBA fan. And yes, we are saying the exact same thing, just weren't clear on the definitions.

[Joga Bonito]

delete

[TheSlayer]

(03-28-2013 05:12 PM)SHANbangs Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:49 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:35 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I feel like we are both saying the same thing just a little differently.

Yeah, I don't think we disagree too much.

However, I consider All-Stars, Hall of Famers, Defensive Players on the Year, and 6th men of the Year to be stars.

You don't consider an ALL-STAR to be a star. We disagree there.

Let me reword myself, may be you will agree with this. All-stars are stars. My point was that most championship teams have at least a couple of superstars (at least a top 20 player in the league that season).

This is where the Mavs and Pistons broke the trend. Only Dirk and Billups could be classified as superstars during their championship runs.

Make more sense? Almost all previous championship teams have had a couple of superstars when they won.

There are stars, and then there are superstars. Most championship teams have at least 2 top ten players, and at least 1 top 5 player. Obviously the Heat have Lebron, who is no. 1, an aging D-Wade who last year could still be counted as borderline top ten, and a top 15 player in Bosh. You have the 09 and 10 championship lakers, which still had Kobe as a top 5 player at the time, and paul and bynum as both top 15 to 20 players (most people forget how good pau was from 2008 to 2010). The Spurs had Tim Duncan as a top 5 player, a top ten player in tony parker (at the time), and a top 20 player in Manu. The early 2000's lakers had Kobe and Shaq as arguably BOTH top 5 players.

The reason the '11 mavs and 04 pistons break the trend is because they only had one top ten player and no top 5 player. In 2011 Dirk was still great (and he still is now), but he wouldn't have cracked a top 5 that included LBJ, Durant, CP3, Dwight Howard, and Kobe. His supporting cast was a 38 year old Jason Kidd, who wasn't even an all-star that year and arguably could not have cracked the top 30. They had a past his prime Shawn Marion, who would have been in his prime a top 15 to 20 player - but not anymore. They had Jason Terry, who was the sixth man of the year, but still not a top 20 player. The 2004 Pistons had Chauncey Billups, who was an undisputed all-star, but he wasn't top 5 caliber in a league with Kobe in his prime, T-Mac, KG, Lebron, D-Wade, Tim Duncan, and Steve Nash. They had Rasheed, who was extremely talented and an undeniable all-star, but still probably at the time at best a top 15 player. They had Ben Wallace, also probably a top 10 to 15 player. Tayshaun was a great defender, but he wasn't in 2004 close to all-star material. Rip was probably a top 15 to 25 player.

One important point: I don't think being on the U.S. National Team pre-2008 really mattered all that much. You have to remember that this was during a period when the NBA did not take USA basketball very seriously. Many great players did not participate, and many less talented but more experienced players (Billups, Hinrich, Mike Miller) got to play more minutes than more talented but younger players (LBJ, Carmelo).

Thank you, that's exactly what I was saying, you just broke it down.

[Giovonny]

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

All-stars are stars.

Thanks for admitting that much.

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

Make more sense?

Yes, but you changed your argument from "star" to "superstar".

Obviously, These are 2 different things.

(03-28-2013 05:00 PM)InternationPlayboy Wrote:  

except for a 6th man of the year being a star. How can he be a star if he's not even good enough to be a starter?

Because the coach wants to bring him off the bench.

Manu Ginobili is good enough to start for the Spurs, yet, he often comes off the bench..

Why? Because the coach wants have more firepower-scoring-playmaking with the 2nd group. If he started, the 1st team would be better but the 2nd team would be worse.

Is Ginobili still a star. Of course.

Was Ginobili a star the year he won 6th Man of the Year. Shit, he was an international superstar that year.

Manu Ginobili and Jason Terry don't always start games, but, they always finish them.

The 6th man award is named after John Havlicek. He won multiple NBA titles with the Celtics and is one of their all time greats. He was one of the best players on the team every year. However, he rarely started. The coach liked to bring him off the bench. Of course, he finished games and took many bog shots late in games. It was all strategy and team management.

Sometimes, the 6th man comes off the bench not because he isn't good enough to start, but because of a specific strategy that the coach is using.

Coach Poppovich in San Antonio likes to use different guys in the starting line up to give them confidence and make them feel like a valuable part of the team. It's not always about starting your best 5 players. It's about managing all 12 guys. The best 5 players will be out there during the 4th quarter.

[TheSlayer]

(03-28-2013 05:16 PM)InternationPlayboy Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 05:12 PM)SHANbangs Wrote:  

You have the 09 and 10 championship lakers, which still had Kobe as a top 5 player at the time, and paul and bynum as both top 15 to 20 players (most people forget how good pau was from 2008 to 2010).

Ok, I can give you Gasol as top 20 maybe, but Bynum that year? I don't think top 20. Poor guy had a lot of potential. Messed up his career at a young age with those injuries. He def. had potential to be top 20 or even 15, but I don't think he made it there before his injury.

I do get what you're saying about the 11 mavs though and do agree.

Gasol was definitely top 20 those years. In 2009-2010 he averaged, 19 11 3 and almost 2 blocks. If you remember, it was him and Lamar Odom that finished the games at the 5 and the 4 respectively. Bynum was definitely not a top 20 player during the two championships. He wouldn't usually close out the games, it would be Odom and Gasol as the two bigs.

[TheSlayer]

(03-28-2013 05:20 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

All-stars are stars.

Thanks for admitting that much.

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

Make more sense?

Yes, but you changed your argument from "star" to "superstar".

Obviously, These are 2 different things.

I didn't change my argument, just didn't specify that I meant superstars. I was talking about Bosh, Wade, and LeBron, so didn't feel the need to specify. But yes, we are finally on the same page.

[InternationPlayboy]

(03-28-2013 05:20 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

Is Ginobili still a star. Of course.

Was Ginobili a star the year he won 6th Man of the Year. Shit, he was an international superstar that year.

Manu Ginobili and Jason Terry don't always start games, but, they always finish them.

The 6th man award is named after John Havlicek. He won multiple NBA titles with the Celtics and is one of their all time greats. He was one of the best players on the team every year. However, he rarely started. The coach liked to bring him off the bench. Of course, he finished games and took many bog shots late in games. It was all strategy and team management.

Sometimes, the 6th man comes off the bench not because he isn't good enough to start, but because of a specific strategy that the coach is using.

Coach Poppovich in San Antonio likes to use different guys in the starting line up to give them confidence and make them feel like a valuable part of the team. It's not always about starting your best 5 players. It's about managing all 12 guys. The best 5 players will be out there during the 4th quarter.

Ok those are examples of where the 6th man was a star, but not every time are they stars, for example...

Lamar Odom- He was good, but was he a star?
Jamal Crawford- I don't consider him a star
Leandro Barbosa- No way
Antwon Jameson- No

[InternationPlayboy]

Ha!

[Giovonny]

(03-28-2013 04:35 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I didn't change my argument, just didn't specify that I meant superstars. I was talking about Bosh, Wade, and LeBron, so didn't feel the need to specify. But yes, we are finally on the same page.

Opps, my bad!

I was at work and I was reading too fast. I didn't realize that you mentioned "top 20" and "superstar" like 5 times!!!

(03-28-2013 04:02 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

That 2000s team did not have multiple superstars.

(03-28-2013 04:35 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

I am talking about stars from the perspective of top 20-25 players in the league on one team.

(03-28-2013 04:41 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

Let me be clear: I am classifying a superstar as a guy who is at least a top 20 player in the league that season. And in that context almost all championship teams have 2 or 3 superstars and a good supporting cast.

(03-28-2013 04:56 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  

(at least a top 20 player in the league that season).

I swear to God, I didn't really notice this stuff the first time you wrote it. You even bolded it for me to try and help me out! I still missed it! Ha!

I was so stuck on proving that Jason Kidd, Tyson Chandler, Shawn Marion, Rasheed Wallace, Ben Wallace, Rip Hamilton, and Tayshaun Prince were "stars" that I sort of got tunnel vision! That was weird. My reading comprehension is usually alot better!

We were literally arguing semantics the entire time -- "STAR "vs "SUPERSTAR"

I also have not read your exchange with thecool, so, that didn't help either.

And, I also just like to breakdown the NBA with a fine tooth comb.

Anyway, you were right -- The 2004 Pistons and the 2011 Mavs did not have multiple superstars. They were just great all around basketball teams that played outstanding team defense and team offense. They were great teams with enough size, athleticism, and depth to win it all.

I remember those Pistons for their tough, hardnose, fundamentally perfect team defense. And Chancey, Mr. Big Shot, wow, what a stud. Rip was great too, he never stopped running, and his mid range j was deadly. Tay was the best perimeter defender in the league. Big Ben was the Defensive player of the year and a beast in the paint. Rasheed did a little of everything and he could have been a hall of famer if he was more focused.

That team could have gone back-to-back but Rasheed left Robert Horry open on the wing with 5 seconds to go in game in 5 in Detroit. The Spurs went home with a 3-2 lead.

You guys remember:

I loved that Mavs team. The best passing team I can remember in a long time. You're right, jkidd was not a superstar that year. jj barea was actually the speed guard on that team. jason terry is one of my favorites, an assassin. marion was good and tyson chandler was the best defender in the nba that year. dirk was incredible, wow.

Okay, lets get back to breaking down the NBA!

[InternationPlayboy]

Robert Horry made a few epic buzzer beater shots for the win. I remember watching this one years ago....

[Giovonny]

I'm going to the park to play in a few minutes. I usually watch this as I'm smoking my pre-game j..

[InternationPlayboy]

(03-28-2013 08:14 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

I'm going to the park to play in a few minutes. I usually watch this as I'm smoking my pre-game j..

That's a cool vid. I'm going to try and get involved in b-ball more once I move out to Denver. I used to play real well but lost it a little bit. I think if I play for a month or so I'll get it back though.