A horse has a much stronger motor and upside, but worse ball handling abilities. Bynum can definitely put the ball in the bucket, but doesn't have a beautiful flowing mane which his teammates could comb for days on end. Also if he breaks his leg you don't have to kill him.
Seriously, it's tough.
Bynum vs. a horse
Moderators: PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier, penbeast0, trex_8063
Bynum vs. a horse
-
candy for lunch
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,583
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jul 20, 2007
Re: Bynum vs. a horse
-
Baller 24
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,637
- And1: 18
- Joined: Feb 11, 2006
Re: Bynum vs. a horse
supersteve wrote:A horse has a much stronger motor and upside, but worse ball handling abilities. Bynum can definitely put the ball in the bucket, but doesn't have a beautiful flowing mane which his teammates could comb for days on end. Also if he breaks his leg you don't have to kill him.
Seriously, it's tough.
Horse now, Bynum for the future, as a Horses lifespan is only between 30-35 years. BUT if the Horse shoots a better FG % then Id still keep the Horse. I mean Bynum shoots a better percentage then Howard, Howard must really suck!
Re: Bynum vs. a horse
-
SabasRevenge!
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,221
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jun 10, 2007
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: Bynum vs. a horse
nsballer07 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Horse now, Bynum for the future, as a Horses lifespan is only between 30-35 years. BUT if the Horse shoots a better FG % then Id still keep the Horse. I mean Bynum shoots a better percentage then Howard, Howard must really suck!
Wel sed, u needz mor comprhenesen 4 theees tho u blind son of an idiot!
Bynum eats an entire horse for breakfast every morning and three for dinner.
But once the horse develops a skyhook I'd go with the horse. He'll be like a Cigar/Afleet Alex/Seabiscut combo for the next 40 years.