Re: The Unpopular Opinion thread
First, just so this post stays on topic for the thread: Today's unpopular opinion - Both Jordan Hill and Wesley Johnson will pan out this year and turn out to be good signings.
2nd: welcome ojandpizza to the discussion. I'm going to combine things here and try to address both you and wwhartom with my example today.
Back to the good discussion we are having: I believe that a player from the second or third tier in today's NBA would have a harder time transcending the 50's era than a second or third tier player of the 50's would have in transcending today's era.
I'll use Michael Beasley as my example today. I chose this player because he individually highlight key points I want to make while he possessed the initial attributes that gave him the potential to be a superstar on draft night.
He is also a player that ojandpizza, I think, will agree could dominate the 50's if time-machined into that era. Heck, Beasley even has the same general build that Mikan had, so that alone, if I am understanding ojandpizza correctly, should allow him to dominate or transcend that era.
The biggest flaw in the pro-Beasley transcending argument would be the motivation. In my humble opinion, Beasely does not have the same level of internal drive that both Kobe and Mikan has/had so he relies on other motivation to excel and transcend the game. He has been given opportunities (such as working with Norm Nixon in the off-season) and even responded well in the short-run to these opportunities. Despite everything done to help him rise to the potential he showed in college, he has not succeeded. All of this, I hope is something we can agree on.
Addressing wwhartom: Lacking this internal drive, what other factors can influence his motivation and help propel him into a transcendent or dominate position in the 50's? One of the biggest motivators available to today's players (the contract year) is not available. He also would not have the disciplinary regime of the NBA that exists in today's game nor such basic resources like drug rehab centers. Can you come up with motivating factors in the 50's I can't?
Addressing ojandpizza's view: Unlike ojandpizza, I don't think a player of today could succeed on physicality alone. Mikan and the sport's reaction to him is exactly why this is not enough. Let us take ojandpizza's position for a moment - Beasely is transported during his college year into the 4th year of a 1950's college career as is. So, using his superior basketball knowledge and IQ, he stands under the basket and swipes everything away from the rim (just as Mikan did). The NCAA is not going to sit there and do nothing, they are going to come out and design a goal-tending rule just like they did for Mikan. Same deal with every other exploitable situation from the baseline adjustments made to the formation of the shot-clock.
ojandpizza would argue that this means that Beasely would still have the transcendent impact that Mikan did. I disagree. Beasely would not have worked with the Lakers in the first place in getting to the position to have that impact; he would have succumbed to the erroneously held view of the day that big men are awkward not nimble enough to play and not desirable. Or he would have burned out on the marijuana addiction as many did without the resources, knowledge and medical advances available today.
First, just so this post stays on topic for the thread: Today's unpopular opinion - Both Jordan Hill and Wesley Johnson will pan out this year and turn out to be good signings.
2nd: welcome ojandpizza to the discussion. I'm going to combine things here and try to address both you and wwhartom with my example today.
Back to the good discussion we are having: I believe that a player from the second or third tier in today's NBA would have a harder time transcending the 50's era than a second or third tier player of the 50's would have in transcending today's era.
I'll use Michael Beasley as my example today. I chose this player because he individually highlight key points I want to make while he possessed the initial attributes that gave him the potential to be a superstar on draft night.
He is also a player that ojandpizza, I think, will agree could dominate the 50's if time-machined into that era. Heck, Beasley even has the same general build that Mikan had, so that alone, if I am understanding ojandpizza correctly, should allow him to dominate or transcend that era.
The biggest flaw in the pro-Beasley transcending argument would be the motivation. In my humble opinion, Beasely does not have the same level of internal drive that both Kobe and Mikan has/had so he relies on other motivation to excel and transcend the game. He has been given opportunities (such as working with Norm Nixon in the off-season) and even responded well in the short-run to these opportunities. Despite everything done to help him rise to the potential he showed in college, he has not succeeded. All of this, I hope is something we can agree on.
Addressing wwhartom: Lacking this internal drive, what other factors can influence his motivation and help propel him into a transcendent or dominate position in the 50's? One of the biggest motivators available to today's players (the contract year) is not available. He also would not have the disciplinary regime of the NBA that exists in today's game nor such basic resources like drug rehab centers. Can you come up with motivating factors in the 50's I can't?
Addressing ojandpizza's view: Unlike ojandpizza, I don't think a player of today could succeed on physicality alone. Mikan and the sport's reaction to him is exactly why this is not enough. Let us take ojandpizza's position for a moment - Beasely is transported during his college year into the 4th year of a 1950's college career as is. So, using his superior basketball knowledge and IQ, he stands under the basket and swipes everything away from the rim (just as Mikan did). The NCAA is not going to sit there and do nothing, they are going to come out and design a goal-tending rule just like they did for Mikan. Same deal with every other exploitable situation from the baseline adjustments made to the formation of the shot-clock.
ojandpizza would argue that this means that Beasely would still have the transcendent impact that Mikan did. I disagree. Beasely would not have worked with the Lakers in the first place in getting to the position to have that impact; he would have succumbed to the erroneously held view of the day that big men are awkward not nimble enough to play and not desirable. Or he would have burned out on the marijuana addiction as many did without the resources, knowledge and medical advances available today.
Comment