PC Board OT Thread Take 4 [No Politics]

[falcolombardi]

Do i need to subscribe somewhere to hear that podcast? I miss when he still wrote articles lol

Always prefered the blog format to the podcast one and wish he updated/expanded his old backpick list lol

Even if i disagreed with all his rankings (i disagree more and more with ben over time even though his work got me into seriously analizing basketball which is ironic lol) i still would love to read his thoughts on other players

[70sFan]

Do i need to subscribe somewhere to hear that podcast? I miss when he still wrote articles lol

Always prefered the blog format to the podcast one and wish he updated/expanded his old backpick list lol

Even if i disagreed with all his rankings (i disagree more and more with ben over time even though his work got me into seriously analizing basketball which is ironic lol) i still would love to read his thoughts on other players

You can listen it on Spotify or any other podcast platform.

[70sFan]

What a boost for Dirk on the latest update on Ben's rankings (and I agree with it)!

.

It was quite surprising, but I think 15 spot is great for Dirk.

I love how everyone ignores the great Karl Malone finishing so high. People always talk about him as a strictly longevity guy, but Ben mentioned that he has him around 18th spot for 8 years primes, so it's not like he's really behind the other top 20 guys here.

[70sFan]

Any thoughts about Magic vs Bird from Ben?

I still think he overrates a little bit 1980-83 Bird, or maybe I am underrating these early seasons.

Another thing I don't love is that Ben talked about West being clearly better in postseason than Oscar (without taking opponents into account), while negating the same gap in this comparison. I think that Bird regressed significantly more than Oscar in the playoffs and that was the main criticism of Oscar (and the reason why he finished lower).

[falcolombardi]

Any thoughts about Magic vs Bird from Ben?

I still think he overrates a little bit 1980-83 Bird, or maybe I am underrating these early seasons.

Another thing I don't love is that Ben talked about West being clearly better in postseason than Oscar (without taking opponents into account), while negating the same gap in this comparison. I think that Bird regressed significantly more than Oscar in the playoffs and that was the main criticism of Oscar (and the reason why he finished lower).

One of my main criticisms on ben is that
-consciously or not- is when he seemingly presents thinghs in the most positive way possible for players he likes (including not showing thinghs he criticizes other players for) and does the reverse with players he likes less

In bird vs magic case i dislike that he uses ceiling raising as an argument for bird, the old "off ball player fits better with other offensuve talent ti create higher ceiling offense". Even when magic literally created better offenses than bird. he gives the "better ceiling raising" to off-ball players by default even if the "on ball" player had better results

When he compared wilt and russel he brought up wilt high (undestatement of the century) minutes to diminish the accomplishment ("he was just standing mosr possesions, look how often he doest leave the paint to contest shooters") frames it almost as if he was statpadding" minutes per game

But with russel he mentions it in reverse "yes, russel did often not leave the paint to contest shooters but he had to do that because how incredibly high his minutes were!, it was a needed trade off"

Another one i always remember is how much his criticisms on harden are based on his relatively big numbers drop in post season, but with curry postseason drop offs he diminishes it because gravity (another criticism i have on taylor too, when he just says "gravity" or "portability" or "ceiling raising" at seemingly any and every possble criticism on steph)

Or when he had his backpicks profiles of players and he shows his very cool graphs for reg season and playoffs comparing players, but in garnett profile he posts only the regular season one and leaves it at that

Is weird, for how much i like ben and his work that i have so many criticisms of it

[Jaivl]

Any thoughts about Magic vs Bird from Ben?

I still think he overrates a little bit 1980-83 Bird, or maybe I am underrating these early seasons.

Another thing I don't love is that Ben talked about West being clearly better in postseason than Oscar (without taking opponents into account), while negating the same gap in this comparison. I think that Bird regressed significantly more than Oscar in the playoffs and that was the main criticism of Oscar (and the reason why he finished lower).

Yeah I disagree with rookie Bird being a strong MVP (which would be around peak Kobe for example).

[Texas Chuck]

Excuse me, but Jaivl posted this solely for us to all fawn gloriously all over Dirk as we always should. Stay on task people.

[falcolombardi]

Excuse me, but Jaivl posted this solely for us to all fawn gloriously all over Dirk as we always should. Stay on task people.

Dirk=good

[70sFan]

Any thoughts about Magic vs Bird from Ben?

I still think he overrates a little bit 1980-83 Bird, or maybe I am underrating these early seasons.

Another thing I don't love is that Ben talked about West being clearly better in postseason than Oscar (without taking opponents into account), while negating the same gap in this comparison. I think that Bird regressed significantly more than Oscar in the playoffs and that was the main criticism of Oscar (and the reason why he finished lower).

Yeah I disagree with rookie Bird being a strong MVP (which would be around peak Kobe for example).

Indeed, Bird being a strong MVP candidate in his rookie season is just too much for me. His offense just wasn't on that level yet, I'd definitely take someone like peak Kobe over that.

[70sFan]

Any thoughts about Magic vs Bird from Ben?

I still think he overrates a little bit 1980-83 Bird, or maybe I am underrating these early seasons.

Another thing I don't love is that Ben talked about West being clearly better in postseason than Oscar (without taking opponents into account), while negating the same gap in this comparison. I think that Bird regressed significantly more than Oscar in the playoffs and that was the main criticism of Oscar (and the reason why he finished lower).

One of my main criticisms on ben is that
-consciously or not- is when he seemingly presents thinghs in the most positive way possible for players he likes (including not showing thinghs he criticizes other players for) and does the reverse with players he likes less

In bird vs magic case i dislike that he uses ceiling raising as an argument for bird, the old "off ball player fits better with other offensuve talent ti create higher ceiling offense". Even when magic literally created better offenses than bird. he gives the "better ceiling raising" to off-ball players by default even if the "on ball" player had better results

When he compared wilt and russel he brought up wilt high (undestatement of the century) minutes to diminish the accomplishment ("he was just standing mosr possesions, look how often he doest leave the paint to contest shooters") frames it almost as if he was statpadding" minutes per game

But with russel he mentions it in reverse "yes, russel did often not leave the paint to contest shooters but he had to do that because how incredibly high his minutes were!, it was a needed trade off"

Another one i always remember is how much his criticisms on harden are based on his relatively big numbers drop in post season, but with curry postseason drop offs he diminishes it because gravity (another criticism i have on taylor too, when he just says "gravity" or "portability" or "ceiling raising" at seemingly any and every possble criticism on steph)

Or when he had his backpicks profiles of players and he shows his very cool graphs for reg season and playoffs comparing players, but in garnett profile he posts only the regular season one and leaves it at that

Is weird, for how much i like ben and his work that i have so many criticisms of it

Can't wait to listen Ben talking about Wilt. I have sent him a lot of new Wilt footage since 2019, I'm interested if he changed anything in his evaluation.

[falcolombardi]

Any thoughts about Magic vs Bird from Ben?

I still think he overrates a little bit 1980-83 Bird, or maybe I am underrating these early seasons.

Another thing I don't love is that Ben talked about West being clearly better in postseason than Oscar (without taking opponents into account), while negating the same gap in this comparison. I think that Bird regressed significantly more than Oscar in the playoffs and that was the main criticism of Oscar (and the reason why he finished lower).

One of my main criticisms on ben is that
-consciously or not- is when he seemingly presents thinghs in the most positive way possible for players he likes (including not showing thinghs he criticizes other players for) and does the reverse with players he likes less

In bird vs magic case i dislike that he uses ceiling raising as an argument for bird, the old "off ball player fits better with other offensuve talent ti create higher ceiling offense". Even when magic literally created better offenses than bird. he gives the "better ceiling raising" to off-ball players by default even if the "on ball" player had better results

When he compared wilt and russel he brought up wilt high (undestatement of the century) minutes to diminish the accomplishment ("he was just standing mosr possesions, look how often he doest leave the paint to contest shooters") frames it almost as if he was statpadding" minutes per game

But with russel he mentions it in reverse "yes, russel did often not leave the paint to contest shooters but he had to do that because how incredibly high his minutes were!, it was a needed trade off"

Another one i always remember is how much his criticisms on harden are based on his relatively big numbers drop in post season, but with curry postseason drop offs he diminishes it because gravity (another criticism i have on taylor too, when he just says "gravity" or "portability" or "ceiling raising" at seemingly any and every possble criticism on steph)

Or when he had his backpicks profiles of players and he shows his very cool graphs for reg season and playoffs comparing players, but in garnett profile he posts only the regular season one and leaves it at that

Is weird, for how much i like ben and his work that i have so many criticisms of it

Can't wait to listen Ben talking about Wilt. I have sent him a lot of new Wilt footage since 2019, I'm interested if he changed anything in his evaluation.

I jusy hope he acnowledges that wilt era of tough officiating on offensive players initiating contact limited his ability to play offense like shaq did or his defensive effort compared to how shaq saved energy on defense to use on offense

If he also acnowledges the value of wilt high minutes it would be even better

[70sFan]

One of my main criticisms on ben is that
-consciously or not- is when he seemingly presents thinghs in the most positive way possible for players he likes (including not showing thinghs he criticizes other players for) and does the reverse with players he likes less

In bird vs magic case i dislike that he uses ceiling raising as an argument for bird, the old "off ball player fits better with other offensuve talent ti create higher ceiling offense". Even when magic literally created better offenses than bird. he gives the "better ceiling raising" to off-ball players by default even if the "on ball" player had better results

When he compared wilt and russel he brought up wilt high (undestatement of the century) minutes to diminish the accomplishment ("he was just standing mosr possesions, look how often he doest leave the paint to contest shooters") frames it almost as if he was statpadding" minutes per game

But with russel he mentions it in reverse "yes, russel did often not leave the paint to contest shooters but he had to do that because how incredibly high his minutes were!, it was a needed trade off"

Another one i always remember is how much his criticisms on harden are based on his relatively big numbers drop in post season, but with curry postseason drop offs he diminishes it because gravity (another criticism i have on taylor too, when he just says "gravity" or "portability" or "ceiling raising" at seemingly any and every possble criticism on steph)

Or when he had his backpicks profiles of players and he shows his very cool graphs for reg season and playoffs comparing players, but in garnett profile he posts only the regular season one and leaves it at that

Is weird, for how much i like ben and his work that i have so many criticisms of it

Can't wait to listen Ben talking about Wilt. I have sent him a lot of new Wilt footage since 2019, I'm interested if he changed anything in his evaluation.

I jusy hope he acnowledges that wilt era of tough officiating on offensive players initiating contact limited his ability to play offense like shaq did or his defensive effort compared to how shaq saved energy on defense to use on offense

If he also acnowledges the value of wilt high minutes it would be even better

He is aware of different officiating, I just hope he will mention it. I also hope to hear a few new observations, but we will see.

[falcolombardi]

Can't wait to listen Ben talking about Wilt. I have sent him a lot of new Wilt footage since 2019, I'm interested if he changed anything in his evaluation.

I jusy hope he acnowledges that wilt era of tough officiating on offensive players initiating contact limited his ability to play offense like shaq did or his defensive effort compared to how shaq saved energy on defense to use on offense

If he also acnowledges the value of wilt high minutes it would be even better

He is aware of different officiating, I just hope he will mention it. I also hope to hear a few new observations, but we will see.

If he knew about it but never mentioned it in his wilt analisis that is even worse tbh

Is why i hope it was just an accidental omission

[70sFan]

...

Ben's podcast about Wilt is available now

[70sFan]

Have anyone of you read the book called "Giants: The 25 Greatest Centers of All Time"? I've been thinking about purchasing the one, but is it worth reading? I've heard it includes the analysis of Pete Newell, which makes it almost a must-have to me, but I want to know your opinion.

[Colbinii]

Have anyone of you read the book called "Giants: The 25 Greatest Centers of All Time"? I've been thinking about purchasing the one, but is it worth reading? I've heard it includes the analysis of Pete Newell, which makes it almost a must-have to me, but I want to know your opinion.

He was one of the major influence on the Modern Day Big Man.

I haven't read the book but I would recommend it.

[70sFan]

Have anyone of you read the book called "Giants: The 25 Greatest Centers of All Time"? I've been thinking about purchasing the one, but is it worth reading? I've heard it includes the analysis of Pete Newell, which makes it almost a must-have to me, but I want to know your opinion.

He was one of the major influence on the Modern Day Big Man.

I haven't read the book but I would recommend it.

He was amazing, I have seen some of his interviews and he was a walking basketball Encyclopedia.

[Owly]

Have anyone of you read the book called "Giants: The 25 Greatest Centers of All Time"? I've been thinking about purchasing the one, but is it worth reading? I've heard it includes the analysis of Pete Newell, which makes it almost a must-have to me, but I want to know your opinion.

Got it. Not easily to hand though.

First thing that comes to mind is it's not all centers. McHale was the most glaring one. Hayes (or if you want to call him the C then Unseld) and Duncan (through 2003) would primarily be listed at the 4, but are more arguable.

Second is that I recall I had to glue the pages back together because the glue/binding was poor. Don't know if that was just my copy or some weird circumstance but ... perhaps worth considering.

I don't recall it as being especially noteworthy for insights. More a typical big, "pretty" (picture heavy), coffee table type book. Inclusion of Sampson seemed curious (and if one were to say well it's NCAA ... okay but where's Kurland, and if it's something with a heavy weight on NCAA how does Laimbeer get in?).

That said it's been a long time since I looked closely, so if there's something more specific you really want to know I could try to dig it out. And given this has slanted negative, I'll add in general I wouldn't deter people from getting books, so depends on price and disposable income.

[70sFan]

Have anyone of you read the book called "Giants: The 25 Greatest Centers of All Time"? I've been thinking about purchasing the one, but is it worth reading? I've heard it includes the analysis of Pete Newell, which makes it almost a must-have to me, but I want to know your opinion.

Got it. Not easily to hand though.

First thing that comes to mind is it's not all centers. McHale was the most glaring one. Hayes (or if you want to call him the C then Unseld) and Duncan (through 2003) would primarily be listed at the 4, but are more arguable.

Second is that I recall I had to glue the pages back together because the glue/binding was poor. Don't know if that was just my copy or some weird circumstance but ... perhaps worth considering.

I don't recall it as being especially noteworthy for insights. More a typical big, "pretty" (picture heavy), coffee table type book. Inclusion of Sampson seemed curious (and if one were to say well it's NCAA ... okay but where's Kurland, and if it's something with a heavy weight on NCAA how does Laimbeer get in?).

That said it's been a long time since I looked closely, so if there's something more specific you really want to know I could try to dig it out. And given this has slanted negative, I'll add in general I wouldn't deter people from getting books, so depends on price and disposable income.

I found a cheap one, so I decided to purchase it. I hope to find something interesting here, mostly from Newell insights.

[Goudelock]

Rest in peace Twitter.

It's been a fun ride. I guess I'll be posting more on here now.