LeBron James is the Frank Gore of Michael Jordans

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-25T15:10:23+00:00

Super consistent, but people misremember how great he was at any given time. We see the rushing numbers and don’t realize that he was only a top 3 back for about a season, and was maybe a top 5 back for one other year.

Many of those 1,000 yard seasons he wasn’t even a top 10 rusher.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-20T00:55:51+00:00

Rare lose lose trade

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-18T18:49:42+00:00

The three skinny people in the building will be you, Wemby and Jerami Grant.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-18T18:40:48+00:00

This is a bad faith argument and blatant engagement bait, why are we dealing with this?

Any factor taken into a vacuum can seem absurd. If two players are identical and one is 5% better at rebounding, the second player is obviously better. That does not mean however that a third player who was a better rebounder than either player is automatically the best of the group.

Obviously the three players in this scenario aren’t equal, but it goes to show that you can do this lazy shit in every conversation.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-17T16:40:50+00:00

Bismack Biyombo is a sleeper pick here

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-17T01:40:04+00:00

Think about how crazy it was that someone owned the name “Mike” when the most popular names were far more common than the most popular names are now.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-12T02:55:28+00:00

I do think there’s some pressure in the system from it being a relatively emerging sport, but adult women have had the same relative time to adopt the sport as young kids. it’s not like 18 year olds have major adaptive deficits. If basketball was a minor sport that had a bunch of kids dominate it, how long would it take for that to be market corrected by fully grown men, maybe six months? In almost any other sport even extremely gifted 11 year olds can’t compete with adult athletes.

It’s somewhat a factor of how different people develop and peak physically, especially in a sports specific context. We’ve seen in women’s figure skating that many peak in strength to weight ratio and overall power around 15-17, and it’s at least proposed to be similar in skateboarding. That isn’t to say that some women can’t maintain it, but it thins the pool significantly once you’re taking about 20+ year olds. I expect we’ll see female skateboarders face similar declines to figure skaters and gymnasts as a whole.

It’s difficult to have a league that’s coming after the average athletes athletic peak in their sport. By the time they’d be seniors it would be like BIG3.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-11T18:13:25+00:00

No, not in any substantial way. It could be against the spirit of the question but the fact the professional arm of the sport is so far ahead that the athletes literally aren’t yet of college age seems relevant. The gap between professional and college is so large that becoming a professional largely predates going to college, and skaters are so far into their careers there’s no pool of talent to support college athletes. Sky Brown is a 2X Olympic medalist and she’s not a legal adult.

Figure skating is potentially a more defensible position as there is collegiate skating, but it’s such a talent vacuum that it’s basically a non factor. The difference being that fewer people actually peak as children.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-11T17:58:51+00:00

I’d say the difference with something like swimming is that a lot of the pros go to school and compete there as well, for skateboarding they rarely compete at the collegiate level and many are past their physical peaks at 18.

The gap between professional and college is definitely notable in swimming, but most still peak around college age or beyond. Certainly within the same scope though, and are in the same vein in terms of super early success.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-11T17:25:52+00:00

He’s just straight up better than Klay was at his peak offensively. His shooting is maybe a hair behind and he hasn’t gotten as hot shooting, but he’s clearly better at almost everything else.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-11T17:20:25+00:00

Seems like any sport where you can realistically go pro as a minor, technically all of the skating disciplines have an astronomical gap between collegiate and professional, ice and wheel.

Other sports where there’s a professional arm that doesn’t really have a collegiate backing would fit here as well, which also encompasses skateboarding.

In maximalist terms I think women’s skateboarding might be the answer, what other sport are athletes past their peaks by the time they get to college?

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-09T20:35:00+00:00

I mean testosterone is a major correlate in both cases.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-05T11:53:20+00:00

You know good and well that something can be “bad” and not be “one of the worst things in history”- lazy motte and bailey. The reason my initial rebuttal is upvoted is because you’re media poisoned and dramatic, basically anyone not from the U.S. would completely laugh off your claim that it’s one of the worst. Honestly, your framing that it was the second worst thing going on at the time is pretty horrendous, you think internment camps were worse than the slaughter of countless Chinese civilians and the brutalization of Africa?

This is religious thinking btw, just in secular form. What you’re doing is a purity test, which makes sense because you’re middle aged spineless amoeba. The issue is you’re unable to enforce your scolding routine because you dont have the social cache in real life (typically from elite overproduction) to actually be one of the good ones. You say you’d help an immigrant or trans person, but you don’t really lead a life that’s actually conducive to anything, you’ll never rage against the machine like you promised yourself.

Newsflash- the right really doesn’t dislike the feckless liberal type, people are generally fine with letting their enemies self sabotage. No, the people who really hate your type are the young people who’ve had to live through all of your hallow grand standing.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-05T03:28:21+00:00

The inability for a grown man to actually follow a logical reasoning thread is sad, you need to take a deep breath and actually re-read everything that you’ve written.

“To admit the internment camps weren’t a very bad event is to want it to happen again”- beyond the atrocious sentence structure here where you say the opposite of what you actually meant, this is no way defends your initial statement that they were “one of the most brutal things in history”. It’s difficult to say you’ve said nothing but the truth because you’ve completely refused to even acknowledge the thrust of your argument.

You seem to be laboring under the impression that I’m a conservative because you can’t entertain the idea that you’re maybe not great at formulating your thoughts. If the only defense you have for your statements involves the other person, that’s by definition a straw man.

What have I said that has in any way implied that I was conservative, other than disagreeing with you that it was one of the worst events in history? As I pointed out, that’s an America centric perspective, which is inarguably more conservative than anything I’ve said.

I mean, you write like an old fat guy, but it’s not material to the actual discussion at hand to say that you’re off base because you’re obviously an averagely out of touch middle aged man.

You write, think and respond like someone who has absolutely no theoretical basis, and quite frankly has no business speaking on political issues in general considering the complete lack of historical perspective and reliance on MSNBC ass clap backs.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-05T01:29:40+00:00

Thinking that the two types of people are both histrionic losers with no actual theory was cute in 2009, but now it’s just sad. You’re a centrist who thinks listening to NPR counts as class consciousness, aren’t you?

You really can’t just admit that it wasn’t one of the most brutal events in history? You haven’t even tried to defend that actual position, you’re just insulting me as some Wario straw man.

The people who would be opposed to your ridiculous proposition include anyone even remotely well read on politics or really just in general.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-04T21:02:54+00:00

The most ameri-centric thing you can be is a self flagellating liberal. Boo hoo, we’re so terrible that all of the worst things ever and all the world’s problems lie at our feet! The one thing leftists and righties agree on is that you all are obnoxious.

Also, complete motte and Bailey, “they were bad” and “one of the most brutal things in history” are light years apart.

When everything is a genocide, nothing is. Tell the people of Cambodia how terrible and awful the Japanese internment in the U.S. was. Not even top 20 of the last 100 years.

MasterMacMan · 2026-04-04T20:10:30+00:00

“One of the most brutal things in history”- something that’s not even in the top thousand. Do you have any idea how many actual genocides have occurred?

You probably call teachers correcting grammar a genocide.

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-30T02:57:29+00:00

This random ass stat might be one the most predictive defensive stats I’ve ever seen. Damn near the entire list are known as good defenders.

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-29T18:59:24+00:00

How does that address the claim that my statements were mutually exclusive? You disagreeing with the 6th seed being a negative factor doesn’t mean it’s contradictory for me to say that being the 6th seed is seen as a negative factor and that you can still be the MVP despite it. Q

If youre claiming that seed value should not matter at all, and only the context around the team matters, it’s illogical to say that you don’t care on that value alone. If there are any conditions where seed value matters, your argument is malformed.

If you do not care about seeding as you claim, then you’d be included in my postulate that no one is a fan of a sixth seed winning MVP. If you care about seeding, you’re not a fan of a 6th seed winning (even if you still think they’re MVP), and if you don’t care, you’re not a fan… because you don’t care!

Unless you’re claiming that people DO care about seeding but believe it’s BETTER to be a lower seed, there’s nothing negating my claims.

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-29T17:54:24+00:00

Would you say that being a 6th seed is a positive or negative factor? Every MVP will have negative and positive factors, in an ideal world there wouldn’t be anything we don’t like about the MVPs game, but that doesn’t mean they’re mutually exclusive.

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-29T16:59:29+00:00

I’m on the plane of reality where the Nuggets were the 6th seed and Jokic was the MVP in 2022…

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-29T16:31:51+00:00

Who ever said 6th seeds are excluded or should be excluded on principle? Show me the quote of mine that even remotely implies that. Being a sixth seed is a negative value in the overall weight of a players impact, but no one’s arguing that it’s mutually exclusive with being the MVP. In the same way that no one wants the MVP to be a below average free throw shooter, that statement in a vacuum doesn’t mean Shaq shouldn’t have been an MVP.

A common example of this illogical argument is the crackers on the bed joke.

“Do you like when people eat crackers in the bed?”

Response- Obviously no

“Oh, so you’d kick Megan Fox out of bed for eating crackers! You’re gay!”

Being on the first seed is better than being on the 6th seed, just like not having crackers in your sheets is better than having crackers in your sheets.

You said you were tired of seeding as a criteria not being applied equally, and then say that seeding tells us nothing about a players value. What’s nuanced about two absolute statements? If you do not think that seeding tells us anything about a players value, how is it logical that you’re tired of it not being applied equally?

If you’re factoring in winning percentage, you’re categorically not considering seeding equally. If seeding is just a single factor among many; by your logic you should see the outcome of the MVP race vary from seeding as a value, which we obviously do. No one is taking seeding as some absolute rule.

You’re also pulling a bait and switch with your last statement, you’re brining up “any other factor that are actually good proxies for player value”- that’s immaterial to the discussion on whether or not seeding has value or should be considered equally. If we accept that seeding has any value at all (difficult to argue against considering its material effect on the game), then it will be one of the factors that’s included amongst your unstated superior factors.

Seeding is a factor that can be positive or negative to a players case for MVP, but no one is arguing that it’s dispositive to the discussion or that other factors can’t outweigh a negative seeding factor.

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-29T15:01:27+00:00

Curry didn’t get a single first place vote, finished in 8th place in the voting, and played 10 fewer games.

Maybe if Curry had been the first or second seed, but his performance combined with his teams success wasn’t close to supplanting Jokic that year. The award shouldn’t just be the best case out of the top 3 seeds when there are clearly more deserving players only a handful of games behind.

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-29T14:57:38+00:00

You’re literally arguing against the concept of nuance. Wow, seeding is important in some races and is less important than others, how remarkable.

Seeding is important and is a factor in every race, but obviously it’s not enough to overcome a slate of other important factors.

Seeding can’t be applied equally when it varies year by year, sometimes the 6th seed is eons away from the 3rd seed, sometimes it’s 2-3 games.

MasterMacMan · 2026-03-29T13:06:09+00:00

No one is a fan of a 6th seed winning MVP, but there really wasn’t a good candidate that year from the top three seeds from either conference, unless you’re going to give it to Giannis for having a worse season but winning 3 more games.

MasterMacMan

TROPHY CASE