Here we go again. About two weeks ago, maybe one, a writer with ESPN's page 2 crowned Kobe as a MUCH better ball player than Michael Jordan. The writer, Jemele Hill, has great skills as far as her pen is concerned, but she's a chick and must be under 35. Why? Because today's NBA sucks when compared to yesterday's and the players arent, as people wish, bigger, better and faster.
BUT NOW IT GETS WORSE. Because, ya see, when a woman steps up and starts saying things about the skill level in a sport like the NBA, well, just turn on the WNBA and you'll see why its not really possible for a chick to truly grasp NBA talent... But at the same time, while she's "ranting" its possible for YOU to do what most guys do when chicks start opening their mouths and speaking with authority on anything except menstruation .. you can just not hear her.. BUT WHAT ABOUT A MAN....
YES
Yet ANOTHER writer has hailed today's NBA as better than yesterday in view of the actual players. MICHAEL VENTRE states in a recent article "athletes across the league are far superior overall than they were in Wilt’s day, when defenses are more sophisticated, when scouting is more meticulous, when travel is more arduous (well, there’s more of it to more cities, but of course, the comfort level is far better now than back in the day) and when the pressure is higher than ever because of television and huge salaries."
To quote BORAT "Whuuuuuut!" How can both of these people be this dumb with regard to the league? Where does the brainwashing start and end. Are these writers serious? Is Ventre really a lady???
Where is PROFESSOR NBA?
8 comments:
I can't really comment without readig the article. but the paraphrase that "Kobe is today's Wilt" is at worst, insulting and, at best, grossly oversstated. There is no comparison to Wilt on ANY level regardless of the sport. Forget "basketball", I'm talking IN ANY SPORT. Wilt was too tall, too strong, too gifted, too dominating to be compared with anyone in yesterdays, todays or tomorrow's NBA.
Ventre consistently teeters on "hack" status and was looking to justify his paycheck by glamorizing 4 stunning games out of an 82 game season. The mere mentioning of Kobe Bryant with the dominance of Wilt Chamberlain is insulting and I cant help but feel that Ventre has babmboozled me into wasting my time to answer this drivel..so I wont continue this bullshittyness. Kobe is no Wilt and dont ever mention this to me again..because I may kill you.
Yeah, but the post has nothing to do with the Kobe/Wilt comparison, the post is two writers who both claim that today's NBA is much better because the players are better, faster, stronger...
What more do you need Professor?
Come on I sit in this class to learn.
Keepin the blog folks in the loop, this little post led to some exchanges:
Subject: Re: NBA - today/yesterday..crappy or great?
where is the link to to the article?? you should post the link on the blog too. I cant comment unless I read the article.
wrote:
There's nothing else to read except the excerpt I put in the blog... otherwise I'd put more.. I'm never going to link an article because I have no idea how long the link will be 'live' and I HATE going to blogs that have dead links.
Subject: Re: NBA - today/yesterday..crappy or great?
you must. seriously. "I" need a reference point. "People" need a reference point. it's like quoting something and having no footnotes.
I will be posting links all over the place. If this is going to be a pseudo-email then I will treat it as such. ..whatever went into e-mail, goes in the blog.
is it possible to edit comments once they're posted?
wrote:
I've already answered your post. My post pretty much specifically questions two writers who claim today's NBA has players who are BETTER than yesterdays with the specific quote from Ventre that explains HIS reason for such a crazy statement.
No need for the article when it is two pages long and the only paragraph that was 'stunning' was another writer who thinks today has a better NBA player than yesterday.
Subject: Re: NBA - today/yesterday..crappy or great?
I stand on my disagreement.
Subject: RE: NBA - today/yesterday..crappy or great?
Stand on it.
Its wrong but stand on it..
Today's nba is better. so says Ventre and Jemele. Ventre spells out why in ONE paragraph in his article.
If you need to read about why he thinks KOBE is today's WILT that has nothing to do with Ventre saying Today's NBA is better than yesterdays. Him comparing Kobe to Wilt is stupid and only done because Kobe can score at will, as could WILT. Today, metaphorically speaking Kobe is WILT. Especially since today we are a nutered, balless culture that tends to be without a backbone..so we get KOBE.
WILT was from the days of power and crazyness.. he rep'd well.
Subject: Re: NBA - today/yesterday..crappy or great?
Wilt would have ate these fools alive.
Subject: RE: NBA - today/yesterday..crappy or great?
But NOT because he was simply bigger and/or stronger..
BUT BECAUSE HE WAS A DAMN HELLA GOOD POST PLAYER. GREAT CENTER
Physically he was just as strong as today's players, as were most of the other players in the NBA in the 70s and 80s. What I dont get is where is this rumormill that turned yesterdays players into weaker/slower dudes than today's players.
[and not I have cut and pasted this entire discussion to the place where it should be held.
Wilt was a GREAT "player". not just a "giant". Glad you made that distinction.
Its ..
See, like we discussed the other day, I'm TIRED of people trying to say today's NBA player is 'bigger/stronger/faster' as if the leaps being made between todays NBA players are like growing from 9 years old to 17. I'd put most 17 year olds up against a 9 year old anyday and BET hard on the 17 year old.
I'd put Doc J up against, say, Vinsanity and I dont know where I'd put my money. Vince's diet and training make him 'look' pretty hard, but Doc was no joke... and the evolution of the players ISNT that great. Its like track and field, 50 years ago the 100 yard sprinters, transported to TODAY would still place in the top 5 if they placed in the top 5 50 years ago.
Which is why when people DIS yesterday's NBA, they dont understand the athletes are essentially the same, with slight changes.. but they ARENT the same skill wise.
For example, Wilt entered the league at 275.
Shaq entered the league in his low 300s? Right???
Thats TWO big dudes... but they are not THAT different. Wilt would have played him tough, and they would have had battles, but SHAQ WOULD NOT HAVE DOMINATED...
--sidenote- SHAQ would have been Wilt's ONLY problem. He would have ABUSED the rest of today's NBA big men.
..and what about Artis Gilmore, Lanier, Dawkins, Malone...hell..MIKAN! all HUGE human beings. The NBA isn't any faster or stronger than it was 30 years ago. I even bet it's SLOWER than it was back then!
No one knows their history. No one looks at NBA Hardwood Classics, or the ESPN Classic. All they see is "what's on now".
You'd think sportswriters who are PAID to know these things would, in fact, KNOW. It's criminal the misinformation that some of today's sportswriters are spewing. They should know better.
Post a Comment