MaxFly

Yeah, Tim's absolutely right... You can sync your iPod to iTunes and your iPod will be updated automatically or you can manually add songs and playlists, movies, music videos, etc...

I agree... There's really no excuse.

China Cry

Law Suit...

This game is weird.

So you would agree that the black mayor of New Orleans doesn't care about black people and poor people in general either right... Or the govenor of Louisiana... Because right now, both are simply posturing, and when Nagin had a chance to do something to save lives just before the crisis, he did absolutely nothing. Bush was targeted because he is a white republican. I don't hear rappers criticizing Nagin. I don't hear any of them questioning his actions prior to the flooding and the hurricane. I agree that Bush deserves criticism, but it's not because he doesn't like black people or doesn't like the poor; it's a much larger issue. It's because he's inept and incompetent. If the Iraq war, his foreign policy, and his domestic policies aren't proof enough, I don't know what is. I still don't agree with the place and time in which Kanye said what he said, but if he had made a more educated and enlightened statement, I could at least have backed that... but he came off as a bumbling idiot... an embarrassment.

I agree with AJ. I know there are other rappers doing a whole lot less than Kanye, but that's not much of a justification. If Kanye does something bad, but other rappers do worse things, I don't think that makes Kanye's actions ok...

For anyone who thinks we're joking... we're not. Seriously, Alfonso killed his performance with Chaka Khan...

Interesting plot.

You know, the more I think about it, the more I want it to happen, and the more I question why it hasn't happened yet, lol.

I think people are counting out Tim Duncan. He was injured all last year; played with plantar faciitis, but he played fantastic basketball againt the Mavs in the playoffs... it's just that his supporting cast didn't step up... Even with all that, the Spurs set a franchise record for wins last year. Now Tim Duncan is healthy...

Wow, this looks like it's going to be a great show... http://abc.go.com/primetime/schedule/2006-07/daybreak.html

I agree. I always hear people say that things used to be better back in the day, and then when I question them on it further, it generally turns out that it's something they've heard other people say and that it sounds right. The NBA doesn't seem as strong as it did back in the day because it isn't as competitive. There are only a few teams that have a shot at the NBA championship... San Anotonio, Dallas, Miami, Phoenix... I don't think Detroit has a shot, and the Bulls are probably still one year away from really being a threat... Now that Houston has Bonzi Wells, they have a shot... But that's it... Most of the good teams are concentrated in the west, and the eastern conference teams really can't contend as well. There also used to be fierce rivalries. Knicks vs. Bulls, Knicks vs. Heat, Knicks vs. Pacers, Pacers vs. Bulls Out West, it was Seattle vs. Houston vs. Utah... Last year, it was Miami vs Detroit out east... no one took the Pacers seriously San Antonio vs. Dallas out west... no one takes Phoenix seriously The illusion that things were harder and basketball was better came from the fierce rivalries and the beat-em-up defense...

Again, this wasn't a matchup of dynasties. This poll had a specific purpose; to see which franchise had the All-Time best team and had the most talent. The scenario was that each team had it's best players in their primes when on that team from all generations thrown together to play in a playoff type series. The poll was who would win... the final was Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Charles Oakley, Horace Grant, Dennis Rodman, Toni Kukoc, Steve Kerr, Ben Gordon, Tyson Chandler and others vs. Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Shaquille O'Neal, Magic Johnson, Elgin Baylor, James Worthy, Jerry West, Kobe Bryant, Michael Cooper and others... The Bulls won the poll... convince me that the Bulls winning this was rational and makes sense... because it looks like hype to me. It reeks of Jordan and Bulls hype. And let me add this... if people would hype the Bulls team so much so that they would win something like this when it's obvious that the Celtics and the Lakers should be battling it out, what won't they hype about the Bulls team and Jordan? I have not problem with people saying that Jordan is the goat. I actually think that he is the goat, but I also think that he was good enough to let his accomplishments stand for themselves. I'm not going to resort to weak arguments about him having to carry the Bulls, or having to put down the accomplishments of other players to prop him up. I think that people can be fans without being irrational, know what I mean? But right now, there's little of that, because all the kids that are coming up only know about Jordan. Most don't know about Oscar Robertson and some of the great players of the past. It's a shame...

Actually, the Bulls could have beaten the Knicks in 94... I remember watching the series and Scottie Pippen getting that bad call against him. It's funny, because the author of the webpage brought it up as well. All in all, the Bulls played tough that year and had a legitimate shot at getting to the NBA finals, and that's without Jordan... No way they would have beaten Dream, but the point is that the Bulls team, sans Jordan, isn't nearly as bad as people make them out to be. In fact, they aren't bad at all. They're actually pretty good. Ted, would you agree that though the Bulls team without Jordan weren't a championship team, they were a very good team? Moreover, a Bulls team without Jordan, winning 55 games during the Golden Age of Basketball... taking the Knicks to the limit... without Jordan. That's impressive wouldn't you say? Would you say that that team was filled with scrubs, because that's what a lot of people think... And it's funny, because some of the same people who will say that the All-Time Bulls team had more talent than the All-Time Celtics team will turn around and say that Jordan had to carry the Bulls on his back because they weren't a good team without him.

Lol

I just looked it up to make sure... the Lakers started the 03-04 season going 20-5... When Karl Malone got injured, they went 22-18... So yes, going by paper and knowing all the facts, it wasn't beyond the realm of possibility for the Lakers to lose to Detroit since Karl Malone was injured and hobled the entire series. Devean George also missed a game or two. To prove my point, can you name the players the Lakers played in Karl Malone and Devean George's stead? A lot of people thought... oh, 4 HOFs... that should be easy... didn't take injuries and role players into consideration. Serves them right for underestimating their opponents... But that's not the case with these teams, we're talking about all of these players healthy and at their best (Prime) when they were with these teams. No injuries... nothing like that. There's no argument for "team chemistry" either. This is a composite of the best players of those teams... they don't have time to practice together to develop team chemistry. Jordan doesn't have time to play with Andres Nochioni and Luog Deng... Ron Harper and Scottie Pippen don't have time learn how Kirk Hinrich likes to come off his screens... Magic doesn't have time to practice entry passes with Wilt and Shaq... here's no argument to be made for team chemistry... this is a composite team... it's talent against talent... And people believed that the Bulls had more talent than the Celtics composite team and the Lakers composite team. In reality, there's no intangible that would give a series between these two teams to the Bulls... people are going to look for one, not because they think that the Bulls are a better team... but because they want the Bulls to be the better team... because the Bulls are all they know... It really amazes me that people actually think that the composite Bulls team is more talented than both the Laker and Celtics teams... could win a series if the players were just thrown together... With Wilt, Shaq, and Kareem rotating as centers and power forwards... :shakehead:

Still can't get over Alfonso's duet with Chaka Khan... Alfonso needs to do a track with Will and Jeff... That's my new dream...

As I said earlier Ty, the guy is definitely a hater, but I also acknowledged that he made some good points and that his overall point of Jordan being overhyped is correct, though I would never stress it to the degree the author of that webpage did. Wilt Chamberlain had a huge ego, but the reason he didn't win many rings was that his supporting cast was inferior in comparison to those of other teams during his era. If he had taken fewer shots and shared the ball with his teammates more, they would have fared worse. There seems to be this concept that if a player passes the ball more, his team will be automatically be better. I draw this analogy... I played high school basketball. If I go to the playground to run a 5 on 5 and pick four 10 year olds to be on my team against a team of my former high school teammates, will my team do better if I pass the ball a lot? People don't seem to realize that there is a happy medium between passing and being aggressive, and it changes depending on the makeup of a team. Kevin Garnett in Minnesota is an example of a player who isn't aggressive enough. He passes the ball a lot and defers to his teammates, so by some people's expectations, his team should be doing very well... Not the case. Jordan was the same way. When he first came into the league, he had pretty bad teams and had to take on most of the burden. If Jordan had passed the ball more in his early years, his teams wouldn't have done any better, and in fact, they would have done worse. Also, I don't agree with the notion that Basketball IQ and Fundamentals were low back then. Players in Wilt's area weren't extremely athletic, their fundamentals and basketball IQ were actually all they had to depend on. They couldn't freestyle on the court like today's players... They had to depend on providing good help defense, running effective plays by continuing ball movement, boxing out for rebounds, making the smartest passed... if anything, the fundamentals and basketball IQ were higher back then than in today's NBA. Today's players dribble too much, and rely to much on their athleticism. Even coming out of college, many of them don't know how to set proper screens, or how to execute a good pick and roll. The fundamentals in todays NBA are shoddy and basketball IQ is average... Back in the day, that's what players relied on... They couldn't settle for shoddy fundamentals and a low IQ, they had nothing else to fall back on... today's players do. I don't think that the haters are pointing out that Jordan had good teams for the sake of it. People seem to think that Jordan dragged a team of scrubs to the playoffs and the championships... They want to make him seem better and more mythical than he actually was. The reality is that Jordan had some very good teams. The 93-94 team won 55 games after Jordan retired the first time. They only lost two more games than the previous season when Jordan actually played. Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant, the leaders of that 94 Bulls team, had their individual numbers go up in the absence of Jordan, including their shooting percentage. When people bring up the fact that Jordan had good teams, they aren't hating. There's nothing wrong with having a good team... It's the notion that Jordan had a bad team around him and that he was the only reason they were good that people want to set straight. Of course, there will be haters who try to twist things for their own agenda, but it's important to remember that the core of the argument is correct; Jordan didn't play with a bunch of scrubs, and that's what any people have tried to make it out to be. The Celtics were a good team, but that year (86), they were not one of the best defensive teams ever. That Celtics team had aging players. The Celtics from the 80s were never known for being one of the better defensive teams ever. Robert Parish at center made them formidable of the defensive end, but when I think of the best defensive teams, a lot of teams come before those 80s Celtic treams. Being from Boston, one thing I know is Celtic basketball... They kick you out of the city if you aren't a Celtics fan, and as much as I loved those Celtics teams, the team that Jordan hung his 63 points on was not even near one the best defensive team... Moreover, the Bulls lost that game in which he scored 63 and we swept them in that series, 3-0... This is another major misconception that people have... and I know why people bring it up, but I'll get to that later. People keep saying that defenses today make things easier for guards and that the league has changed the rules so that guards can score more easily... I think that this is groupthink...The rule changes did two major things. The first is that it eliminated the allowance of handchecking... That means that defenders were allowed to be more aggressive and put their hands on perimeter players and players in general. This is what people generally harp on when they say that the rules made things easier for guards. The lack of handchecking does make things easier for guards... it doesn't stop there though that's where a few people want to stop. The rules also allowed teams to play the zone defense, a defense which makes it more difficult for perimeter players to get to the rim. Moreover, teams could now double a basketball player who didn't have the ball, something they couldn't do before. If you can double a player before they have the ball, you can keep the ball out of his hands or at least prevent him from easily getting by his defender, making things harder for perimeter players. Prior to the rule changes, a player could catch the ball and make a quick move before the double team came. Handchecking wasn't going to stop a player from going right by you if you were too close back then, but the new rules made it harder for a player to do that. As a result, the handchecking is offset by the zone defense and the allowance of double teams, and some. At the beginning of last season, when Phil Jackson returned to the Lakers, it was decided that Kobe Bryant would play Jordan's role in the triangle offense. Kobe Bryant called Jordan to ask him for pointers... how he should approach Jordan's role in the triangle, etc... Jordan went on record as saying that Kobe Bryant should try to attack defenses from the wing by posting up... Jordan then said that it would be harder for Kobe than it was for him because of the changes to the defensive rules. He said that teams could double Kobe earlier and make it harder for him to consistently get good shots from the post and to drive... That was Jordan saying that the new defensive rules made things harder. Also, I edit this to address your comment about nostalgia. There is no nostalgia whatsoever for today's basketball. The nostalgia is for the basketball of the 80s and 90s. People are always saying that the basketball of the 80s and 90s was better... That they wish today's basketball would be more like the 90s and 80s... That they wish Jordan was still playing. They wish today's defense was like the beat-em-up defense the bad boys and the knicks played in the 90s... The nostalgia is a longing or yearning for things past. You can't have nostalgia for the present.

Here's a list of the All-Time Lakers Magic Johnson Kareem-Abdul Jabbar Wilt Chamberlain Shaquille O'Neal James Worthy Elgin Baylor Gail Goodrich Jerry West Kobe Bryant James Worthy Michael Cooper Norm Nixon That's 9 HOFs if you consider Kobe Bryant and Shaq HOFs... This is what young kids are arguing... They grew up in a generation where all they saw was Michael Jordan but they don't know anything about the past players, they haven't watched any of the old games or battles, and so they're tranxfixed Jordan and the Bulls, and while those Bulls teams were great, their All-Time most notable players are Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Charles Oakley and Horace Grant... Add a sprinkling of past and present Bulls and that's supposed to beat a team with 9 HOFs? That's what kids are arguing, and that's why I say that Jordan, and subsequently, the Bulls, are overhyped.

I think the notion that Jordan routinely carried a bunch of scrubs to the NBA finals and championships is what bugs me the most when it comes to the hype that surrounds him. Some of the commentary is obviously biased, but the writer's argument that Jordan had great teams around is right in line with what I've been saying since I was 8. A lot of people don't know this, but Jordan and Scottie Pippen were dang near exploited salary wise. For the longest time Jordan wasn't being paid what he was worth, and neither was Pippen. However, it worked out well for them in that the team was able to surround them with great role players. I thought that the "Jordan didn't make those around him better" argument was dumb, though I will agree that he was a one man show for the better part of the first 6 years of his career. His coaches repeatedly asked him to trust his teammates, and Phil Jackson finally got through to him. That's when they started winning championships; but he has a great team player during the championship years. I do think that Jordan is overhyped. There was a poll on ESPN at the beginning of last season pitting all time teams against eachother in a playoff format to see who would have the best team if you put all the stars of that team over the generations together... All-Time Celtics, All-Time Sixers, All-Time Bulls, All-Time Lakers, All-Time Knicks... etc... there were 8 teams... The Bulls won the poll, beating out both the All-Time Celtics, and the All-Time Lakers... merely because of Jordan...

Dag, I forgot how good Lucy Lawless looks... :mygod:

Wow, Alfonso and Chaka Khan... Wow... wow.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF2zDny3Z6s...related&search=

Man, this guys tries to murder Jordan. Enjoyable read for any NBA fan and there's plenty to agree and disagree with. http://airjudden2.tripod.com/jordan/index.htm

I agree AJ.