MJ VS LEBRON VS WHOEVER THREAD

[rzzzzz]

Phil wasnt coming back, because Krause didnt want him to come back.

i got the impression both Jerrys agreed on a rebuild instead of pushing for another title or two. they would show the world where the real talent in the organization lay when they got back to contending for titles with a quick reboot.

[rzzzzz]

double click.

[trueballer7]

You are blaming people for not watching games, then comparing Horace Grant to Tristan Thompson? Who actually don't watch games??

I dont know who doesnt watch games, I know who doesnt read carefully. Did I compare Grant to Thompson? Or did I compare his status to that of Thompson? Or is that the same thing?

Ho Grant was closer to al horford than he is tristan thompson.

Would you say tristan is in the same status as horford? Because that is essentially the type of comparison you are making.
Or saying something like jae crowder is in the same status as robert covington.

Not a valid comparison imo. And if we compare skillsets and impact there is a vast difference...we can bring analytics into this but honestly we shouldn't have to.

Come on now mate, tell me that Grant at his best was more important than Thompson, I 'll run with that, although much of that has to do with the environment he played and Bulls' success, much like a Steve Kerr or BJ Armstrong etc, but ok. Dont tell me he was Horford. That's absurd, beyond absurd. Even in a bad team, Grant wouldnt have been higher than the third scoring option and thats with several ifs. Phil, who was Grants' own coach for much of his career, so much appreciated Grants' offensive prowess he didnt guard him at all in the 1995 playoffs. Horace made the shots eventually, but you get the picture. Otis Thorpe was a clear cut better player than Grant, but you wouldnt compare Otis to Horford. Roy Tarpley was a much much better player than Grant. And I'm not even bringing the top pfs of that era. Grants and Thompsons skillsets are very much alike, with the exception of Grant being a much better individual defender.

[In SVG We Trust]

Horace Grant honest comparison is to Serge Ibaka. I think that's a pretty good caliber player

[trueballer7]

Horace Grant honest comparison is to Serge Ibaka. I think that's a pretty good caliber player

Thats a nice comparison, better than mine in terms of status.

[SF_Warriors]

I dont know who doesnt watch games, I know who doesnt read carefully. Did I compare Grant to Thompson? Or did I compare his status to that of Thompson? Or is that the same thing?

Ho Grant was closer to al horford than he is tristan thompson.

Would you say tristan is in the same status as horford? Because that is essentially the type of comparison you are making.
Or saying something like jae crowder is in the same status as robert covington.

Not a valid comparison imo. And if we compare skillsets and impact there is a vast difference...we can bring analytics into this but honestly we shouldn't have to.

Come on now mate, tell me that Grant at his best was more important than Thompson, I 'll run with that, although much of that has to do with the environment he played and Bulls' success, much like a Steve Kerr or BJ Armstrong etc, but ok. Dont tell me he was Horford. That's absurd, beyond absurd. Even in a bad team, Grant wouldnt have been higher than the third scoring option and thats with several ifs. Phil, who was Grants' own coach for much of his career, so much appreciated Grants' offensive prowess he didnt guard him at all in the 1995 playoffs. Horace made the shots eventually, but you get the picture. Otis Thorpe was a clear cut better player than Grant, but you wouldnt compare Otis to Horford. Roy Tarpley was a much much better player than Grant. And I'm not even bringing the top pfs of that era. Grants and Thompsons skillsets are very much alike, with the exception of Grant being a much better individual defender.

I would say Ho would easily be a tier above TT, and horford a tier above Ho..Ho Grant was better both ends than tristan and its not even arguable to me.

At the same point of their careers Ho Grant had better Ortg, Drtg, VORP, slightly higher BPM, than horford
He was an impactful player but he did play with great players. So impact wise, much more similiar to horford than TT

Otis Thorpe was a quality player offensively, not so much on the other end.
Tarpley averaged 12.6 ppg for his career and really only played one full season.

Ho Grant, in his only playoff series against Chicago averaged 20 ppg on 70% FG%...

I mean, you could say Ho and TT were both role players, but not all role players are create equal just like not all all stars are created equal. You basically compared two guys in different tiers.

[trueballer7]

Ho Grant was closer to al horford than he is tristan thompson.

Would you say tristan is in the same status as horford? Because that is essentially the type of comparison you are making.
Or saying something like jae crowder is in the same status as robert covington.

Not a valid comparison imo. And if we compare skillsets and impact there is a vast difference...we can bring analytics into this but honestly we shouldn't have to.

Come on now mate, tell me that Grant at his best was more important than Thompson, I 'll run with that, although much of that has to do with the environment he played and Bulls' success, much like a Steve Kerr or BJ Armstrong etc, but ok. Dont tell me he was Horford. That's absurd, beyond absurd. Even in a bad team, Grant wouldnt have been higher than the third scoring option and thats with several ifs. Phil, who was Grants' own coach for much of his career, so much appreciated Grants' offensive prowess he didnt guard him at all in the 1995 playoffs. Horace made the shots eventually, but you get the picture. Otis Thorpe was a clear cut better player than Grant, but you wouldnt compare Otis to Horford. Roy Tarpley was a much much better player than Grant. And I'm not even bringing the top pfs of that era. Grants and Thompsons skillsets are very much alike, with the exception of Grant being a much better individual defender.

I would say Ho would easily be a tier above TT, and horford a tier above Ho..Ho Grant was better both ends than tristan and its not even arguable to me.

At the same point of their careers Ho Grant had better Ortg, Drtg, VORP, slightly higher BPM, than horford
He was an impactful player but he did play with great players. So impact wise, much more similiar to horford than TT

Otis Thorpe was a quality player offensively, not so much on the other end.
Tarpley averaged 12.6 ppg for his career and really only played one full season.

Ho Grant, in his only playoff series against Chicago averaged 20 ppg on 70% FG%...

I mean, you could say Ho and TT were both role players, but not all role players are create equal just like not all all stars are created equal. You basically compared two guys in different tiers.

If Krause had been offered Tarpley for Grant straight up, from as early as 1988, he'd have personally carried Horace on his back all the way to Dallas. I'm telling you how it was, exactly. Tarp was a fabulous talent
I always liked Horace, great role player, dedicated. But to claim that people regarded him as clear cut better than PFs of the caliber of an Otis Thorpe or even a Charles Oakley, would be false. Some did, others didnt. None would think of him as better than Derrick Coleman.

[SF_Warriors]

Come on now mate, tell me that Grant at his best was more important than Thompson, I 'll run with that, although much of that has to do with the environment he played and Bulls' success, much like a Steve Kerr or BJ Armstrong etc, but ok. Dont tell me he was Horford. That's absurd, beyond absurd. Even in a bad team, Grant wouldnt have been higher than the third scoring option and thats with several ifs. Phil, who was Grants' own coach for much of his career, so much appreciated Grants' offensive prowess he didnt guard him at all in the 1995 playoffs. Horace made the shots eventually, but you get the picture. Otis Thorpe was a clear cut better player than Grant, but you wouldnt compare Otis to Horford. Roy Tarpley was a much much better player than Grant. And I'm not even bringing the top pfs of that era. Grants and Thompsons skillsets are very much alike, with the exception of Grant being a much better individual defender.

I would say Ho would easily be a tier above TT, and horford a tier above Ho..Ho Grant was better both ends than tristan and its not even arguable to me.

At the same point of their careers Ho Grant had better Ortg, Drtg, VORP, slightly higher BPM, than horford
He was an impactful player but he did play with great players. So impact wise, much more similiar to horford than TT

Otis Thorpe was a quality player offensively, not so much on the other end.
Tarpley averaged 12.6 ppg for his career and really only played one full season.

Ho Grant, in his only playoff series against Chicago averaged 20 ppg on 70% FG%...

I mean, you could say Ho and TT were both role players, but not all role players are create equal just like not all all stars are created equal. You basically compared two guys in different tiers.

If Krause had been offered Tarpley for Grant straight up, from as early as 1988, he'd have personally carried Horace on his back all the way to Dallas. I'm telling you how it was, exactly. Tarp was a fabulous talent
I always liked Horace, great role player, dedicated. But to claim that people regarded him as clear cut better than PFs of the caliber of an Otis Thorpe or even a Charles Oakley, would be false. Some did, others didnt. None would think of him as better than Derrick Coleman.

I never said any of that..I said Ho Grant was a better player and should not be held in the same regard as TT, which is 100% true. TT is an average player at best. Ho Grant was an above average player, even made it to the ASG one year. TT would never sniff that.

If we held a poll to see which player people would prefer, TT or Ho grant, I would bet that at least 90% would choose Ho Grant. That would indicate that they weren't the same tier or caliber of player and shouldn't be compared as such.

[Galloisdaman]

It amazes me how underrated Michael Jordan's passing ability still is. The guy had fantastic court vision. Could pull off passes just as creative as both Magic and Bird, and they very rarely didn't get to the teammate he was aiming to get the ball to.

I agree Jordan's passing is underrated. He really understood the game. Some might argue that it is easy to find the open man when you are triple teamed, lol.