re: Proof that Chris Jackson was the greatest college player (other than Pete)

quote:

---

would say that stats are, in general, the best evidence available.

---

My ninja

Here's the problem-- you will never be convinced CJ was better than Shaq. Shaq played with CJ and says-- CJ was the best. Your response-- Shaq doesn't know what he is talking about. That response shows what an obnoxious and self righteous a-hole you are. In your feeble mind, you are the greatest evaluator of basketball talent.

ETA: Merry Christmas.

quote:

---

Here's the problem--

---

The actual problem is that you refuse to even ATTEMPT to discuss this in a consistent manner. When you think the stats are on your side, you cite them. When I point out your flaws there you start making it a "degree of difficulty" argument. When I say that value is value, you cite Shaq as the authority on the subject. If you pick one method of evaluation we might actually get somewhere.

quote:

---

you will never be convinced CJ was better than Shaq.

---

If CJ had been a better player than Shaq it would be very possible to convince me. Thus far nothing you or anyone else in this thread has said leads me to that conclusion.

quote:

---

Shaq played with CJ and says-- CJ was the best.

---

Shaq did indeed play with CJ and say CJ was better. There are several possible reasons for this:
Possibility 1) CJ was actually better. If true, there should be more evidence than just Shaq's word.
Possibility 2) Shaq was better, but thinks CJ was better. Did you know even really great basketball players can still be terrible at evaluating other players? For proof, look at Michael Jordan's time as a basketball executive. He is the greatest player in basketball history, but he is miserable when it comes to evaluating other players.
Possibility 3) Shaq was better, knows he was better, but is being diplomatic. Did you know that sometimes people tell lies? They do!

quote:

---

Your response-- Shaq doesn't know what he is talking about.

---

Not exactly what I said, but whatever. As pointed out above in the Michael Jordan example, being a great player does not make you a great scout. Your entire premise (that I should take Shaq's word for which player was superior) is entirely reliant on Michael Jordan being the greatest executive in the NBA. Do you really not understand that someone can be good at playing basketball but not at scouting basketball? Are you unaware that most teams employ scouts who were not great players themselves? Some great players are also great talent evaluators, some are not. Until Shaq demonstrates a high level of talent for evaluating players there is no reason to assume he must be great at it.

quote:

---

That response shows what an obnoxious and self righteous a-hole you are. In your feeble mind, you are the greatest evaluator of basketball talent.

---

This is simply an absurd lie. First of all, to extrapolate from your assumption that I consider myself a better talent evaluator than one person to a conclusion that I consider myself the BEST talent evaluator would require that that other person be my pick for second best talent evaluator. So what you are saying here is that I must consider Shaq the 2nd greatest evaluator of basketball talent in the world. Well, I don't. Secondly, I put no special stock in my ability to scout basketball players; I simply don't put any stock in ANYONE's ability to have accurately scouted and perfectly remembered two players from 25 years ago. Even if Shaq were the greatest basketball scout on the planet, unless he had kept meticulous notes on both himself and CJ and reproduced those notes (or at least read from them) we would be relying on a 25-year old memory! I would not trust a 25-year old memory on any topic without some corroborating evidence.

The combination of length of time and lack of available scouting evaluations of the players leads me to looking at the statistics. And the statistical evidence is clearly in Shaq's favor when any attempt is made to fairly judge on-court contributions. If you disagree, present a formula that gives CJ a better rating while accounting for all of the stats that you yourself said that you consider important. If CJ was so obviously better, it should be pretty easy.

quote:

---

Well at least you don't dispute that you are a self-righteous and obnoxious a-hole.

---

Are you illiterate? I did dispute that. I had a whole two paragraphs showing that your conclusion (that I am a self-righteous and obnoxious a-hole) was based on faulty reasoning. If someone argues with a point that you've made, that IS disputing it.

Also, it's pretty rich that you would call me a self-righteous and obnoxious a-hole considering you have:
1) Called me single over a disagreement about college basketball
2) Called me feeble-minded
3) Attempted to force me into non-responsiveness by declaring your question rhetorical
4) Insulted my intelligence when I chose to respond anyway.

Sorry that you have to lash out when people demonstrate that you are wrong. I'm not sure what you're hoping to gain from it, though. It would be much more effective if you would actually post that formula I keep asking for.

quote:

---

No you didn't. Cmon. Your challenge dealt with the "evaluator" part. Go read your own argument. Accept who you are. You'll feel better.

---

If you think I am self-righteous and obnoxious because I consider myself the best basketball talent evaluator in the world, and I do NOT consider myself the best basketball talent evaluator in the world, than your conclusion is flawed. So maybe you should read it again. You obviously struggled with it the first time.

quote:

---

Good try.

---

The response of a person who knows the argument is lost. I accept your concession.

Your panties are in a bunch. Just stop it.

Answer just one simple question: Did you see CJ and Shaq play at LSU?

If not-- I'd suggest you watch tape of them at that time. May not change your mind-- but you never know.

It's the classic little man vs big man. Would you start a team with Steph Curry or Anthony Davis? Reasonable minds can differ. Are ball handling skills outweighed by rebounds? Are blocks better than 3 point shots? I concede there are statistics that give an advantage to Shaq. And your metrics favor Shaq.

I won't convince you to trust my non-perfect memory-- but these eyes know what they saw. And watching those two play at LSU (even with my 25-year old memory) you knew greatness when you saw CJ. With Shaq-- you knew greatness was to come.