Sixers - Revisionist history

[Sparhawk]

Brilliant!

Billy Madison: Okay, a simple "wrong" would've done just fine.

 

[Black Adam]

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

putting this post in as one of the top SportsHoopla Diss posts of all time...


well done...

 

[LogicMan]

Eager to see how the sixers do and match up in the playoffs. That will tell us alot.

As far as sugesting GS has 10 more years.................yeah not feeling it

Until I see sixers deeper and better than Celtics I will take my chance on Celtics and their assets

 

[msgkings322]

putting this post in as one of the top SportsHoopla Diss posts of all time...


well done...

Dude, it's a quote from an Adam Sandler movie.

 

[tlance]

Eager to see how the sixers do and match up in the playoffs. That will tell us alot.

As far as sugesting GS has 10 more years.................yeah not feeling it

Until I see sixers deeper and better than Celtics I will take my chance on Celtics and their assets

I did not say that they did. I said GS' roster is the only one I would take over Philly's for the long term because their outlook is extremely bright for the next few years.

 

[tlance]

Eager to see how the sixers do and match up in the playoffs. That will tell us alot.

As far as sugesting GS has 10 more years.................yeah not feeling it

Until I see sixers deeper and better than Celtics I will take my chance on Celtics and their assets

Also, the Celtics don't have nearly the upside of the 6ers. They have the look of a team that will likely be top 3-4 in the league for the foreseeable future, but probably not ever #1. They lack that true superstar while Philly could perhaps end up with 3.

But yeah, I probably rank Boston after Philly.

 

[trojanfan12]

You'd think he'd get tired of this.

Dexter. I miss that show. One of my all time favorites.

 

[LogicMan]

Also, the Celtics don't have nearly the upside of the 6ers. They have the look of a team that will likely be top 3-4 in the league for the foreseeable future, but probably not ever #1. They lack that true superstar while Philly could perhaps end up with 3.

Agreed. Uncle Drew and Hayward are just good players and Tatum and Brown are just overachieving without most of the starters out. Like do you really believe yourself?

 

[LogicMan]

and what really sucks with the Celtics is that their bench is deeper and younger than the sixers. That will work against them i suppose. man up

 

[LogicMan]

And all those picks Danny has will only distract them in the years ahead. The sixers will use all those second rounders and fool Danny into trading down again like they pulled off masterly this last year. Yeah, thats the narrative

 

[bksballer89]

Agreed. Uncle Drew and Hayward are just good players and Tatum and Brown are just overachieving without most of the starters out. Like do you really believe yourself?

Soooo you think Hayward is a superstar? LMAOOO

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

Soooo you think Hayward is a superstar? LMAOOO

There are only a handful those currently in the NBA and he's not one of them.

He's not even in the Giannis tier.

But, he's a pretty good player.

Rich man's Khris Middleton.

Gordon is a Allstar.

That is not the same as being a SUPERSTAR.

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

Agreed. Uncle Drew and Hayward are just good players and Tatum and Brown are just overachieving without most of the starters out. Like do you really believe yourself?

I get your point.

The Celtics are definitely in the conversation when debating who has the best young talent.

But, @tlance isn't completely wrong.

You have some guys on your team that could become elite.

But, do any of them look like generational talents?

Because Philly has 2 of those.

 

[Black Adam]

Dude, it's a quote from an Adam Sandler movie.

Damn...

So I can't archive it then...?

 

[tlance]

Agreed. Uncle Drew and Hayward are just good players and Tatum and Brown are just overachieving without most of the starters out. Like do you really believe yourself?

Do you?

They are all very good players. None are superstar talents. Tatum maybe, but that is a reach at best.

 

[msgkings322]

I get your point.

The Celtics are definitely in the conversation when debating who has the best young talent.

But, @tlance isn't completely wrong.

You have some guys on your team that could become elite.

But, do any of them look like generational talents?

Because Philly has 2 of those.

What Boston has though is a lot of good to great talent (no superstars) and probably the best coach in the league. That's how the 2004 Pistons won a title.

 

[flyerhawk]

Eager to see how the sixers do and match up in the playoffs. That will tell us alot.

As far as sugesting GS has 10 more years.................yeah not feeling it

Until I see sixers deeper and better than Celtics I will take my chance on Celtics and their assets

The Celtics have a really good team. And I think the near future of the East is going to be a lot of Sixer-Celtics battles.

It ultimately boils down to whether Jaylen Brown/Jayson Tatum become better players than Embiid/Simmons. Too early to tell on that.

 

[LogicMan]

Not going to get in a argument on whether all these young players are better than the others. I agree with hawk on this. I will keep my argument to which team has the roster and the assets (players, picks, coaches, style) to be the best in the east. In that argument to suggest Boston will be a 3 or 4 vs Sixers #1 is foolish. Lets see what the playoffs bring, when under pressure, when defense is needed, when a clutch shot is needed. then we can review

 

[shopson67]

OK, but what exactly is the revisionist history and what is his actual argument against your point?

I don't think he really understands the term "revisionist" and it's negative implication. He's merely projecting what could've been if Okafor hadn't been the pick.

If he is implying otherwise, then it's just a really poor troll attempt.

 

[tlance]

I don't think he really understands the term "revisionist" and it's negative implication. He's merely projecting what could've been if Okafor hadn't been the pick.

If he is implying otherwise, then it's just a really poor troll attempt.

They would be worse, because they wouldn't have Simmons.