Final stats curr...sorry trae young 1 for 7 from 3 11 assists Is he the next westbrook? Compare them at 22. No! i say westbrook is a better defender and rebounder and trae a better shooter, but let the debate begin loll
What a dummy you are. He was being guarded by one of the best defenders in the league (a guy who is much taller than him) in a must win game for the Sixers. I guess you forgot about how Dellavedova, a G leaguer if there ever was one, shut Curry down in his mvp year during a couple of Finals game.
0
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
Final stats curr...sorry trae young 1 for 7 from 3 11 assists Is he the next westbrook? Compare them at 22. No! i say westbrook is a better defender and rebounder and trae a better shooter, but let the debate begin loll
What a dummy you are. He was being guarded by one of the best defenders in the league (a guy who is much taller than him) in a must win game for the Sixers. I guess you forgot about how Dellavedova, a G leaguer if there ever was one, shut Curry down in his mvp year during a couple of Finals game.
Organized basketball. I can tell you've never played organized basketball because you don't understand the X's and O's of the game. Not saying college level but it's clear you weren't on your high school, middle school, or any club teams.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
@budwiser
Organized basketball. I can tell you've never played organized basketball because you don't understand the X's and O's of the game. Not saying college level but it's clear you weren't on your high school, middle school, or any club teams.
@budwiser Organized basketball. I can tell you've never played organized basketball because you don't understand the X's and O's of the game. Not saying college level but it's clear you weren't on your high school, middle school, or any club teams.
And this is clear by you saying, :I played basketball for 20 years." I'm not talking about pick up games. To play 20 years you would have to play from youth clear through college and then some pros. Again, to quote Roger Mayweather, "Most people don't know shit about boxing." You don't know shit about basketball. I do. There are probably only 10-20 guys on this site total that know more about basketball than me, and they aren't posting often. That's not even a flex, that's a fact. The guys that know more are coaches like boxandone, and some guys who played college or overseas pro. You clearly never played, never been coached, never coached yourself... you don't understand the game. And that's fine. I've never played hockey. I have a good general understanding of the game but I don't know it like that. So I keep my mouth shut. Everyone on covers things they are a football expert and a basketball expert but it's clear only 1% of the guys here, or less, actually understand these games.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
@budwiser Organized basketball. I can tell you've never played organized basketball because you don't understand the X's and O's of the game. Not saying college level but it's clear you weren't on your high school, middle school, or any club teams.
And this is clear by you saying, :I played basketball for 20 years." I'm not talking about pick up games. To play 20 years you would have to play from youth clear through college and then some pros. Again, to quote Roger Mayweather, "Most people don't know shit about boxing." You don't know shit about basketball. I do. There are probably only 10-20 guys on this site total that know more about basketball than me, and they aren't posting often. That's not even a flex, that's a fact. The guys that know more are coaches like boxandone, and some guys who played college or overseas pro. You clearly never played, never been coached, never coached yourself... you don't understand the game. And that's fine. I've never played hockey. I have a good general understanding of the game but I don't know it like that. So I keep my mouth shut. Everyone on covers things they are a football expert and a basketball expert but it's clear only 1% of the guys here, or less, actually understand these games.
I know you weren't saying he is overweight and I agree with your assessment. He's 22 and not yet in his "grown man" body. I think by 25, with NBA trainers, he'll lose some fat and gain some muscle and be a monster. Eastern Europeans tend to have good genetics so I don't think his genes will hold him back.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
@Camouflage9
I know you weren't saying he is overweight and I agree with your assessment. He's 22 and not yet in his "grown man" body. I think by 25, with NBA trainers, he'll lose some fat and gain some muscle and be a monster. Eastern Europeans tend to have good genetics so I don't think his genes will hold him back.
ur right. no i never made it to high school but i played organized basketball when i was real young. played a s load of pickup. remember one time i played against joe haden. another time rashard griffith and michael finley, guessing u may or may not know who finley is but r griffith i am sure most haven't heard of
i play another sport, s load of organized including coaching, been a coach for 10+ years gave it up just playing now
0
@StumpTownStu
ur right. no i never made it to high school but i played organized basketball when i was real young. played a s load of pickup. remember one time i played against joe haden. another time rashard griffith and michael finley, guessing u may or may not know who finley is but r griffith i am sure most haven't heard of
i play another sport, s load of organized including coaching, been a coach for 10+ years gave it up just playing now
This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
@budwiser
"I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR 20 YEARS!"
This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score.
I played enough to know you dish it to the guys that nails 3's. Any idiot who spends time on the court knows that.
If a guy is hitting 44% it makes your job on in the inside a h/ll of a lot easier, cause I wasn't a 3 point shooter. You can play with anyone. A guy who hits 34% you can pick anybody off the street
And if you say that isn't basketball, I don't know where your head is at, if you're playing or just dumb or what. Who knows.
0
@StumpTownStu
I played enough to know you dish it to the guys that nails 3's. Any idiot who spends time on the court knows that.
If a guy is hitting 44% it makes your job on in the inside a h/ll of a lot easier, cause I wasn't a 3 point shooter. You can play with anyone. A guy who hits 34% you can pick anybody off the street
And if you say that isn't basketball, I don't know where your head is at, if you're playing or just dumb or what. Who knows.
Played with a dude who hit 3's, I can't tell you how many screens I made for this guy....I got the rebounds and blocks short shots and defense for anyone that comes inside
now that's basketball...
trae young is not in the mold of steph curry. steph curry is the ultimate shooter. trae young is a true point guard, who can shoot and dish, but he'll never play like steph curry. you dish to curry, trae dishes to curry. these days curry gets the ball as point cause no one else on gs can do s
the idea that they are comparable, in my opinion, is a joke. but hey loll
0
Played with a dude who hit 3's, I can't tell you how many screens I made for this guy....I got the rebounds and blocks short shots and defense for anyone that comes inside
now that's basketball...
trae young is not in the mold of steph curry. steph curry is the ultimate shooter. trae young is a true point guard, who can shoot and dish, but he'll never play like steph curry. you dish to curry, trae dishes to curry. these days curry gets the ball as point cause no one else on gs can do s
the idea that they are comparable, in my opinion, is a joke. but hey loll
@budwiser "I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR 20 YEARS!" This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score.
I watched them both in college and rookies and Steph was a much better player, lol. It's not really even close. Trae was just a lower efficient shooter who took tons of shots. He's developed to be a little better but he's nothing special yet. Steph at 22 was one of the most efficient and skilled offensive players in basketball. You comparing him to Trae is laughable. And the funniest part is you claim "I know basketball". Circus comedy.
0
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
@budwiser "I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR 20 YEARS!" This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score.
I watched them both in college and rookies and Steph was a much better player, lol. It's not really even close. Trae was just a lower efficient shooter who took tons of shots. He's developed to be a little better but he's nothing special yet. Steph at 22 was one of the most efficient and skilled offensive players in basketball. You comparing him to Trae is laughable. And the funniest part is you claim "I know basketball". Circus comedy.
or you can spend time losing ca$h, that's what a lot of people do here instead.
most of the people lose $
you could have taken this thread on trae young is the next steph curry and ca$hed a ticket last night...as i said about 4 times just wait until the next game
0
@EastsideBangers
been going on 4 a long time. years.
or you can spend time losing ca$h, that's what a lot of people do here instead.
most of the people lose $
you could have taken this thread on trae young is the next steph curry and ca$hed a ticket last night...as i said about 4 times just wait until the next game
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: @budwiser "I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR 20 YEARS!" This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score. I watched them both in college and rookies and Steph was a much better player, lol. It's not really even close. Trae was just a lower efficient shooter who took tons of shots. He's developed to be a little better but he's nothing special yet. Steph at 22 was one of the most efficient and skilled offensive players in basketball. You comparing him to Trae is laughable. And the funniest part is you claim "I know basketball". Circus comedy.
Yeah, so skilled that he scored about 4 points in the paint, had a horrible turnover rate compare to his usage, and never got to the line. He just happened to be the best shooter of all time so the other stuff was overshadowed. You don't know basketball.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
Quote Originally Posted by ThrowDemDarts:
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: @budwiser "I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR 20 YEARS!" This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score. I watched them both in college and rookies and Steph was a much better player, lol. It's not really even close. Trae was just a lower efficient shooter who took tons of shots. He's developed to be a little better but he's nothing special yet. Steph at 22 was one of the most efficient and skilled offensive players in basketball. You comparing him to Trae is laughable. And the funniest part is you claim "I know basketball". Circus comedy.
Yeah, so skilled that he scored about 4 points in the paint, had a horrible turnover rate compare to his usage, and never got to the line. He just happened to be the best shooter of all time so the other stuff was overshadowed. You don't know basketball.
@StumpTownStu I played enough to know you dish it to the guys that nails 3's. Any idiot who spends time on the court knows that. If a guy is hitting 44% it makes your job on in the inside a h/ll of a lot easier, cause I wasn't a 3 point shooter. You can play with anyone. A guy who hits 34% you can pick anybody off the street And if you say that isn't basketball, I don't know where your head is at, if you're playing or just dumb or what. Who knows.
3 point shooting, as it is in the league today, is a very recent trend. Basketball was never simply "dish it to the guy who can shoot 3's. You can't find a guy off the street than can hit 34% from 3 in an NBA game and you prove how little you know with every post.
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
@EastsideBangers been going on 4 a long time. years. or you can spend time losing ca$h, that's what a lot of people do here instead. most of the people lose $ you could have taken this thread on trae young is the next steph curry and ca$hed a ticket last night...as i said about 4 times just wait until the next game
Nobody ever said he was the next Steph Curry. You keep twisting words because that's what guys like you do. Guys who don't know dick.
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
@StumpTownStu ur right. no i never made it to high school but i played organized basketball when i was real young. played a s load of pickup. remember one time i played against joe haden. another time rashard griffith and michael finley, guessing u may or may not know who finley is but r griffith i am sure most haven't heard of i play another sport, s load of organized including coaching, been a coach for 10+ years gave it up just playing now
"Most people don't know shit about boxing."
Roger Mayweather
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
@StumpTownStu I played enough to know you dish it to the guys that nails 3's. Any idiot who spends time on the court knows that. If a guy is hitting 44% it makes your job on in the inside a h/ll of a lot easier, cause I wasn't a 3 point shooter. You can play with anyone. A guy who hits 34% you can pick anybody off the street And if you say that isn't basketball, I don't know where your head is at, if you're playing or just dumb or what. Who knows.
3 point shooting, as it is in the league today, is a very recent trend. Basketball was never simply "dish it to the guy who can shoot 3's. You can't find a guy off the street than can hit 34% from 3 in an NBA game and you prove how little you know with every post.
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
@EastsideBangers been going on 4 a long time. years. or you can spend time losing ca$h, that's what a lot of people do here instead. most of the people lose $ you could have taken this thread on trae young is the next steph curry and ca$hed a ticket last night...as i said about 4 times just wait until the next game
Nobody ever said he was the next Steph Curry. You keep twisting words because that's what guys like you do. Guys who don't know dick.
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
@StumpTownStu ur right. no i never made it to high school but i played organized basketball when i was real young. played a s load of pickup. remember one time i played against joe haden. another time rashard griffith and michael finley, guessing u may or may not know who finley is but r griffith i am sure most haven't heard of i play another sport, s load of organized including coaching, been a coach for 10+ years gave it up just playing now
@StumpTownStu right, i don't know sh!t about anything and you do. i guess if you say that 20 times maybe it'll sink in, from the God himself Stu darts doesn't know j and you do but one thing is for sure-you are NOT a pompous condescending know-it-all hole i would hate to hold your betting tix...seen a lot of guys like you
I didn't say you don't know shit about anything. I said you don't know shit about basketball. Why do you continue to put words in my mouth? Let's see if you can give a straight answer to a direct question.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
@StumpTownStu right, i don't know sh!t about anything and you do. i guess if you say that 20 times maybe it'll sink in, from the God himself Stu darts doesn't know j and you do but one thing is for sure-you are NOT a pompous condescending know-it-all hole i would hate to hold your betting tix...seen a lot of guys like you
I didn't say you don't know shit about anything. I said you don't know shit about basketball. Why do you continue to put words in my mouth? Let's see if you can give a straight answer to a direct question.
I'm taking everything you've said about me over this forum, that forum, this forum, that forum..
don't know .. about ...
like a broken record. i already know what you're going to do before you do it. waste of time, waste of energy...but in your world you're the player in control of all of it. cause you think you are, but ya aren't.
i've been around too long. wish i could go back to being young and stupid. brain works, body doesn't follow much anymore.
i do better at this wagering stuff than ever, but i wish i could go back to losing like i'm guessing you do, cause i was better off then.
0
@StumpTownStu
I'm taking everything you've said about me over this forum, that forum, this forum, that forum..
don't know .. about ...
like a broken record. i already know what you're going to do before you do it. waste of time, waste of energy...but in your world you're the player in control of all of it. cause you think you are, but ya aren't.
i've been around too long. wish i could go back to being young and stupid. brain works, body doesn't follow much anymore.
i do better at this wagering stuff than ever, but i wish i could go back to losing like i'm guessing you do, cause i was better off then.
nobody says he's the next steph curry...this thread is about comparing curry to young. maybe you didn't see the title it's all good fellas.
The thread was about comparing them at the age of 22. Not in college. Not in the in the long run. Taking a snapshot of their game, at the age 22, and comparing.Maybe you didn't see the title. Maybe that's your issue, reading comprehension. Darts keeps talking about college. Not what the thread is about. You keep talking about entire careers, not what the thread is about. I've listed 6 or 7 ways Trae at 22 is better than Steph was at 22. All you and darts can say is "shooting percentage" over and over again, which shows how simplistic your understanding of basketball is. You continue to put words in my mouth that i've never said. Why? I bet you don't have the hair on your sack to answer. This thread is ridiculous and i've wasted far too much time on it. You can believe what you want. All of this stuff is subjective. I'm done.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
nobody says he's the next steph curry...this thread is about comparing curry to young. maybe you didn't see the title it's all good fellas.
The thread was about comparing them at the age of 22. Not in college. Not in the in the long run. Taking a snapshot of their game, at the age 22, and comparing.Maybe you didn't see the title. Maybe that's your issue, reading comprehension. Darts keeps talking about college. Not what the thread is about. You keep talking about entire careers, not what the thread is about. I've listed 6 or 7 ways Trae at 22 is better than Steph was at 22. All you and darts can say is "shooting percentage" over and over again, which shows how simplistic your understanding of basketball is. You continue to put words in my mouth that i've never said. Why? I bet you don't have the hair on your sack to answer. This thread is ridiculous and i've wasted far too much time on it. You can believe what you want. All of this stuff is subjective. I'm done.
Quote Originally Posted by ThrowDemDarts: Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: @budwiser "I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR 20 YEARS!" This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score. I watched them both in college and rookies and Steph was a much better player, lol. It's not really even close. Trae was just a lower efficient shooter who took tons of shots. He's developed to be a little better but he's nothing special yet. Steph at 22 was one of the most efficient and skilled offensive players in basketball. You comparing him to Trae is laughable. And the funniest part is you claim "I know basketball". Circus comedy. Yeah, so skilled that he scored about 4 points in the paint, had a horrible turnover rate compare to his usage, and never got to the line. He just happened to be the best shooter of all time so the other stuff was overshadowed. You don't know basketball.
Oh, "He had a bad assist to turnover ratio but he just happened to be the best shooter of all time", haha.
You crack me up with your basketball knowledge.
0
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
Quote Originally Posted by ThrowDemDarts: Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu: @budwiser "I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR 20 YEARS!" This statement proves everything i've been saying. I guess this means i've been playing basketball for over 30 years. No, I played basketball for like 8 years, AAU/club, middle school, high school. Coached some youth teams for another few years in my 20s. I know there are guys on this site with more experience. Long time coaches like box, guys who played D1 college, etc but to be clear, you played 0 years of basketball. Did you play any sports growing up? On a team, I mean. I highly doubt it. Whatever, i'm really over this debate. As i've said, Steph is, a will always be, my favorite player. He single handed transformed the Warriors and the entire Bay Area (For worst in some ways. We lost the team to SF.) but make no mistake, he was a work in progress at 22. He didn't come in doing the things he was doing at Davidson in the NBA. And it wasn't simply because of Monta. It was because he had to work on his body and his game. Trae, a player I don't even like, immediately brought his college game to the pros. I'm not a fan of his game but even though he's smaller, he's stronger and more explosive at 22 than Steph was. So he gets into the paint, finishes at the rim more, and gets to the line more than Steph at 22. Steph never got into the paint at 22 (the numbers support this). And because he was just a shooter, he never drew contact and got to the line (the numbers support this). Steph was never a true "point" so Trae is better at setting up teammates (the numbers support this). Steph has always had handle, but it's a lose flashy handle that led to turnovers (the numbers still support this, definitely at 22). Both are/were dogshit defenders. Typical of smaller guys. Steph has always been handsy (then and now) so while he did grab more steals at 22, he also committed more personal fouls. Those are free points the other way. You don't understand basketball so all this shit goes over your head. You say, "well Steph had fewer turnovers..." but you don't understand things like usage rate, assist to turnover ration, and opponents points off turnovers, all of which favor Trae at 22 over Steph at 22. All you can say is, "...but shooting percentage." How many 22 year olds are gonna shoot a better % from 3 than Steph at 22? Kyle Korver, maybe? Anthony Morrow? More than anything, and the reason i'm been so passionate about this argument, this is my home team. I was die hard even when they sucked. I was watching the games when Steph was 22. I watched him develop and get better. There are things you can't put in a box score. I watched them both in college and rookies and Steph was a much better player, lol. It's not really even close. Trae was just a lower efficient shooter who took tons of shots. He's developed to be a little better but he's nothing special yet. Steph at 22 was one of the most efficient and skilled offensive players in basketball. You comparing him to Trae is laughable. And the funniest part is you claim "I know basketball". Circus comedy. Yeah, so skilled that he scored about 4 points in the paint, had a horrible turnover rate compare to his usage, and never got to the line. He just happened to be the best shooter of all time so the other stuff was overshadowed. You don't know basketball.
Oh, "He had a bad assist to turnover ratio but he just happened to be the best shooter of all time", haha.
@StumpTownStu I'm taking everything you've said about me over this forum, that forum, this forum, that forum.. don't know .. about ... like a broken record. i already know what you're going to do before you do it. waste of time, waste of energy...but in your world you're the player in control of all of it. cause you think you are, but ya aren't. i've been around too long. wish i could go back to being young and stupid. brain works, body doesn't follow much anymore. i do better at this wagering stuff than ever, but i wish i could go back to losing like i'm guessing you do, cause i was better off then.
You never even post winners, rarely post plays, but constantly talk about how good you do and how much you know about wagering. Tell me i'm lying. You are one of the most full of shit dudes on this site and have been a waste of my time. I can't believe i've allowed myself to go down this rabbit hole with you.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
@StumpTownStu I'm taking everything you've said about me over this forum, that forum, this forum, that forum.. don't know .. about ... like a broken record. i already know what you're going to do before you do it. waste of time, waste of energy...but in your world you're the player in control of all of it. cause you think you are, but ya aren't. i've been around too long. wish i could go back to being young and stupid. brain works, body doesn't follow much anymore. i do better at this wagering stuff than ever, but i wish i could go back to losing like i'm guessing you do, cause i was better off then.
You never even post winners, rarely post plays, but constantly talk about how good you do and how much you know about wagering. Tell me i'm lying. You are one of the most full of shit dudes on this site and have been a waste of my time. I can't believe i've allowed myself to go down this rabbit hole with you.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
seen a lot of guys like you
Hot Forum Topics
