DB23 wrote:Dutchball97 wrote:DB23 wrote:
Curry missed time that year as well. So you excuse it when Oscar misses time but not curry.
They were on just under a 50 win pace when he played.
Double standards again.
Buddy pal you're only digging yourself and your credibility a bigger hole. It's the entire point that it's a double standard but you've got the perpetrator the wrong way around. Sure Oscar missed the play-offs but I'm just showing Curry did as well while still having more help than Oscar. Curry was fortunate he was only in such a situation for 1 season but how can you not see that team context matters? You think Oscar would've missed 3 post-seasons straight if he had Curry's help? No way. Similarly Curry wouldn't have done much more, if more at all, with the supporting casts Oscar had to deal with especially in the late 60s. Besides that what's more impactful? Missing 15 games in a league where playing every game is the standard or missing 9 games in a league where half the star players miss that many games for rest alone?
You didn’t answer my previous question, how much did you see Oscar play live? Because unless your 60-70 years old then I doubt you know how Oscar would have dealt with it either.
Don’t particularly care what you think of credibility when you state that curry is equal to Reggie, terrible take.
I did not see Oscar play live. I'm unsure why that means Curry has to be better by default though. Do you place Curry over Russell and Wilt too? How about Kareem?
I also never asked you for your opinion but you wanted to cry about double standards, while not even getting the point I was arguing against a double standard of Curry getting a pass where Oscar didn't. I'm also not saying Curry is equal to Reggie, that shows a lack of reading comprehension on your part once again.