December 29th - New Orleans Pelicans @ Phoenix Suns - 2-1

[Wowowowow]

I will rise above the personal stuff and make my Zion argument clear. If someone disagrees and wants to have an emotionless debate, I would love it. My belief is:

He is limited height and length wise to be an impact two way big a la AD or Giannis, so to be an all time great he would have to do it more like Lebron has as a power perimeter player with all around skill, effort, and intelligence. But he has shown lack of effort and lack of desire to get into absolute peak condition early in his career. That is not the case for all time greats. MJ, Kobe, and others had a lot of skill things they had to work on, but never effort. Never their body.

For Zion to become an all time great level player, he will have to increase his perimeter ball handling, shot making at two of the three other levels, and defense a MASSIVE amount. Massive. On top of that, he will have to shed the tendency to go 1/4 speed for 90 percent of the game and only give one effort, max, per defensive possession.

If it was just skill he had to add, I would say he still has a chance despite being undersized for the position he probably truly is. But when you combine the need for a competitive fire and effort that the greats have, that he doesnt show many signs of having, then I think the odds are massively against him getting to THAT level.

But that is different than saying he is a bum or we should give up on him or whatever other strawmen have been made

I?ll give my last opinion on this and state I think you?ve totally scouted his psych incorrectly.

His intensity on hawking for offensive rebounds - and his ?let me catch my center? dart skip back after an explosion pulls the covers off who he is with a side of how he likes to make quick cut to the chase decisions. That?s not a Demarcus Cousins motor.

But I respect your opinion.

[Silverfoxx]

That is a gross exaggeration. People on one side doubt he can become an all time great. That he has certain red flags that make it incredibly unlikely he will ever reach THAT level. Nobody (but you) said G League player

If we are to have intelligent debates, we must ACCURATELY lay out our opponents case and make counterarguments against the accurate versions of what they say. What you just did above is called a Strawman

I disagree with MM on some things, but we gotta stop getting so emotional, having over exaggerated takes, and attacking people personally when we disagree with each other. It make folks emotional intelligence look crazy.

I will say this, am I pretty concerned about Zion based on what I'm seeing currently? Yes. But it's not what others are saying which is based on his current game and projection of the season with more time.

I already think that either way, the best Zion can improve on this year is slightly better and reading D coverage, and maybe better effort. His iso game, shooting, and post moves ain't happening this season. We have to accept that. My concerns stems further with Zion mental state of playing to "not get hurt again" which is where I would like MM to factor in more of his future projection of what Zion could be. Because two factors of "Duke Zion" or MVP Zion ever being a thing I believe will be:

1. His mentality and commitment to playing the game free. This can improve overtime if Zion trusts his body, instincts, hire sports therapist to overcome the PTSD of his Rookie year of scrutiny, minute bursts, reinjury, etc. Which has to be factored in more when we are discussing his efforts, attention to detail, love for the game, etc.

2. Zions camp and the Pelicans organization working on building trust again. Zion parents is a super akward and avoided conversation but truth is Zion will need more professionals (nutritional experts, basketball coaches, fitness coaches) to make Zion the best version he can be. Zion has trusted his parents since they have gotten Z where he is now, but the NBA is a different league and they will have to put their pride and ego to the side so Zion can truly expand his game, body, and overall knowledge to grow as a player. The lack of trust with Zion and his parents has created a "overbearing rift" and is only going to continue if Zion continues to struggle on national televised games and lord forbid if he gets hurt. This has to be remedied if Zion ever wants to get better and his parents has to fall back and trust trained professionals.

If both of those things are addressed, then I think MM assessment of Zion future potential as a player can be MVP type talent.

[Silverfoxx]

I?ll give my last opinion on this and state I think you?ve totally scouted his psych incorrectly.

His intensity on hawking for offensive rebounds - and his ?let me catch my center? dart skip back after an explosion pulls the covers off who he is with a side of how he likes to make quick cut to the chase decisions. That?s not a Demarcus Cousins motor.

But I respect your opinion.

Just because he hustles for rebounds, screams when he gets a foul, etc that does not define his motor or effort. Motor/effort is displayed throughout your game on both sides of the court, and is reflected throughout your off season regime, basically you doing WHATEVER it takes to be great. Anyone who think that's Zion in the league right now is lying to themselves.

My take, is that it's more of mental block, and also poor inner circle advice that also go for poorly researched fitness/condition assessments by non professionals aka his stepdad. I think Zion is such a good guy that he truly trusts the wrong information or is so scared to reinjure his self, harm his endorsements deals with injuries, that the overall burden of being a brand at 20 years old is stopping him from only doing what he truly cares about which is basketball.

[new city champ]

You can tell when emotion gets involved because people stop debating facts, stop adding to the conversation with new facts, etc and then just attack the person making the argument.

Its sad we can't have a quality debate about something this inconsequential. I mean, its a dumb game. A person who doesnt even know or care that any of us exist. And we can't even debate about that. No wonder political discourse is impossible

First, yes it’s a dumb game. I’m a ridiculous sports fan but it’s good to remember it has little to do with our real lives.

Second, I’ll take up your Zion debate challenge. You’ve stated several times that you were super-high on Zion when he was coming out of Duke, saw him as a potential league MVP and a generational talent who could carry a team to a title.

My first question is what changed? That wasn't that long ago. Don’t want to relitigate the sample size issue, but I think you would concede that 40+/- games, a half-season, is a little soon to be making definitive judgments, especially ones so at odds with your initial evaluation of Zion’s potential.

So what in your view has changed? And are you sure it couldn’t change back?

[MichaelMcNamara]

First, yes it?s a dumb game. I?m a ridiculous sports fan but it?s good to remember it has little to do with our real lives.

Second, I?ll take up your Zion debate challenge. You?ve stated several times that you were super-high on Zion when he was coming out of Duke, saw him as a potential league MVP and a generational talent who could carry a team to a title.

My first question is what changed? That wasn't that long ago. Don?t want to relitigate the sample size issue, but I think you would concede that 40+/- games, a half-season, is a little soon to be making definitive judgments, especially ones so at odds with your initial evaluation of Zion?s potential.

So what in your view has changed? And are you sure it couldn?t change back?

I thought I saw a leader who would do anything to win and had a non stop motor combined with never before seen athleticism and skill set. The play that keeps coming to mind is the one vs Kentucky where he basically blocks a guy by just jumping and catching the ball and then races down court with a tight dribble and throws a one handed bounce pass to RJ in traffic for a layup. The De'Andre Hunter corner block stands out as well. And while both of those plays show skill, the most impressive part was the effort. It was all out and intense.

I have seen very little of that game to game in the NBA. And my theory is that I miswatched - thats part of it. I watched every game of his that year but I didnt watch him with as critical an eye as I normally do when he wasnt on ball (on offense and on defense) because I was so wowed by the big plays. I got suckered in by them. Also, I think there are some people who are frontrunners. When things are going well, they talk a ton, they run faster, get hype, go 110%. But the truly great ones hate to lose more than they like to win, and are driven to overcome adversity. They are used to adversity and almost welcome it and grind that much harder.

Again, this is just a guess but I do have a Masters in Counseling, my wife does as well - so I know a little but about the human psyche. And my guess is he hasn't faced a ton of adversity in his life and it frustrates him more than it fuels him (like most of us) and he doesnt have that extra gear that the top, top tier have. And as far as skill and athleticism, he would have to be the greatest athlete of all time to overcome his lack of size to dominate like Lebron and Giannis do. I mean, if Lebron was the same exact player and athlete, but 3 inches shorter and with Zion's body type, I think he would be a 6x All Star at best - not a top 4 player of all time.

So, its just a few things that has me think that TOP tier isn't possible. But I still think the 'Rich Man's Shawn Kemp' tier is very possible. Philadelphia Barkley, maybe (though I dont see him being a dog on the defensive glass). And the reason I would take Ja is because he does have that dog. He is driven by adversity and never takes a play off. And thats my bias, my preference. I would personally always take the guy with 8.5 skill, 10 effort and leadership guy over the 10 skill guy with lesser effort and leadership. Totally fine admitting thats my preference.

[Pelicanidae]

I thought I saw a leader who would do anything to win and had a non stop motor combined with never before seen athleticism and skill set.

So you saw all of this, but have already had your mind changed in fewer than 30 games, 24 of which were spend coming off injury?

Trying to be fair here, but does that not strike you as fairly fickle? A sort of fairweather kind of assessment, based more on what you saw most recently rather than what is perhaps most reflective of the truth?

That's not to say that you couldn't be right, I would just want a larger sample size, particularly a healthy sample size, before making that kind of assessment. It's a huge leap from ''a leader who would do anything to win and has a non stop motor'' to ''lack of desire and lack of effort'', and I would generally need quite a large body of high quality evidence (read: not games on load management) before flipping the switch quite that hard.

[MichaelMcNamara]

So you saw all of this, but have already had your mind changed in fewer than 30 games, 24 of which were spend coming off injury?

Trying to be fair here, but does that not strike you as fairly fickle? A sort of fairweather kind of assessment, based more on what you saw most recently rather than what is perhaps most reflective of the truth?

That's not to say that you couldn't be right, I would just want a larger sample size, particularly a healthy sample size, before making that kind of assessment. It's a huge leap from ''a leader who would do anything to win and has a non stop motor'' to ''lack of desire and lack of effort'', and I would generally need quite a large body of high quality evidence (read: not games on load management) before flipping the switch quite that hard.

What does the number of games matter and why are you obsessed with it?

Tell me the RIGHT number of games to make an evaluation and educated prediction.

To me, if it is skill set, you might be right. When it comes to IQ, effort, intangibles, I think I can spot those things way faster because I dont think those things change as much. CP3 was a dog and the smartest rookie I had ever seen. AD was a marble mouth who never led with words in his early years. Those are character and personality traits and those things change far less than skill set IMO. Again, I am not putting a cap on his skills. I think those might develop greatly. But the intangibles only slightly change over time. You are either a dog or you arent. Have the foundation to be a leader or you dont. I can name a ton of guys in NBA history whose skill has grown immensely. Cant think of many who came in the league walking up and down the court, barely talking or sulking after a play and failing to get back on D who turned into KG with regard to dog and intangibles.

[Pelicanidae]

What does the number of games matter and why are you obsessed with it?

Tell me the RIGHT number of games to make an evaluation and educated prediction.

To me, if it is skill set, you might be right. When it comes to IQ, effort, intangibles, I think I can spot those things way faster because I dont think those things change as much. CP3 was a dog and the smartest rookie I had ever seen. AD was a marble mouth who never led with words in his early years. Those are character and personality traits and those things change far less than skill set IMO. Again, I am not putting a cap on his skills. I think those might develop greatly. But the intangibles only slightly change over time. You are either a dog or you arent. Have the foundation to be a leader or you dont. I can name a ton of guys in NBA history whose skill has grown immensely. Cant think of many who came in the league walking up and down the court, barely talking or sulking after a play and failing to get back on D who turned into KG with regard to dog and intangibles.

I think we all understand that the number of games matters. If you had seen 100 games of someone being a dominant generational prospect and then 1 game of them looking a bit glum, I think an overwhelming majority of people would say that it is jumping the shark to take that 1 game and say ''aha, THIS is the representative sample!!!!'' because it's clearly the outlier and not fitting with the general thrust of the data sample.

As for the question as to the right number, I would say you'd have to have seen more of the bad than you had of the good. At least, that's how I would judge it, obviously some other people could set the standard differently and and that's fine, I would just be curious as to the justification they make for their standard. I could give mine, which is that basically once the bad sample outsizes the good sample then the average of their performance is tilted towards the bad side; what's your justification for using essentially 4 games to overwrite everything that made you think he was generational? What's the thought process you're going through there.

You touch on it in that post, where you essentially say that it's mentality rather than skillset and that the 4 game sample of apparent glumness outweighs the larger sample you saw at Duke that gave you the opposite view, and you also mention that maybe he's a frontrunner and that the NBA game being more difficult is the cause of this. Which is fine, though I don't agree; my question would be what happens when the game 'slows down' for him, as it does all young players, and the difficulty level decreases again relative to his experience? Does he then go back to being a frontrunner and a ''dog'' and become a generational prospect again? What's the deal?

[Impose]

Honestly I see Zion making an effort to conserve energy to play longer stretches, either that or hes being a cry baby about being pulled out the game early-ish in the first/third as part of the rotation. It's not uncommon for rookies to want to show off and use huge amounts of energy for highlight plays, I wouldn't be surprised if someone has been in Zion's ear about conserving energy and just making the simple plays. It's hard to tell exactly whether its him not being on board with whats going on or a direction to not over-do anything on court. But for my eye-test it's one of those two.

I'm going to become a broken record as well unless something changes, but SVG's offense has also failed the eye test miserably. Not enough ball movement and players getting the ball in 'nothing' situations. Zion included. And our team, on paper, has a lot of players you feel happy to double off-of to get the ball out of Zion's hands. So these post plays SVG is drawing up are useless a lot of the time coz Zion either has to make a move as soon as he catches the ball or average shooters have to be having a good shooting night to make the defense think twice.

[As I See It]

I only hope that Zion Williamson doesn't turn out to be to Ja Morant as Greg Oden is to Kevin Durant.

Both Zion and Oden labeled as transitional talents in their draft classes.
Both Zion and Oden drafted first overall
Both Zion and Oden injured coming into the league
Both Zion and Oden had knee surgery before their first NBA Game.
Both Zion and Oden deemed massively overweight.
Both Zion and Oden missing significant time in their true rookie season.

AND

Both Ja and Durant drafted 2nd overall in their respective drafts
Both Ja and Durant named Rookie of the Year in their respective classes.

WHAT WE ALSO KNOW

Greg Oden's career lasted three years (105 games)
Greg Oden never lived up to the pre-draft hype.
Greg Oden went on to play in virtual obscurity in China.
Kevin Durant is considered by most as a GOAT in NBA Annals
Kevin Durant is a former league MVP
Kevin Durant is a multiple time First Team All NBA Selection
Kevin Durant is a multiple time All Star Selection
Kevin Durant has led the league in scoring before.

Let's all just agree to hope that the coincidences stop soon.

[Pelicanidae]

I only hope that Zion Williamson doesn't turn out to be to Ja Morant as Greg Oden is to Kevin Durant.

Greg Oden had a literal skeletal deformation (not sure what caused it) which made one of his legs shorter than the other and caused him a number of massive problems. I wish people would stop calling him a bust and using him as an example of failure of a player, when that's not what he was. When he could play he was actually productive.

I know you were just using an analogy to get your point across but it just made me think of this.

[Wowowowow]

So, its just a few things that has me think that TOP tier isn't possible. But I still think the 'Rich Man's Shawn Kemp' tier is very possible. Philadelphia Barkley, maybe (though I dont see him being a dog on the defensive glass). And the reason I would take Ja is because he does have that dog. He is driven by adversity and never takes a play off. And thats my bias, my preference. I would personally always take the guy with 8.5 skill, 10 effort and leadership guy over the 10 skill guy with lesser effort and leadership. Totally fine admitting thats my preference.

I want to reply to this because it’s sort of off topic to the Zion discussion but totally on topic for the gist of this conversation.

Charles Barkley is a goat. There’s nothing about his career that says he wasn’t as great as KD for example except he didn’t join the Bulls in 1992. Sports works like that. Timing is everything. Players these days know - just like what’s going on here - fans are fickle and they can maneuver themselves to great situations to ensure positive “winning” commentary over whatever’s going on in Houston right now (Harden should have been forced his way out, teamed up with Giannis).

A lot of times the difference in sports isn’t how good YOU are, but how good your competition is. Who teams up. Who hit the jackpot continuously in the draft and free agency.

Once upon a time they said Lebron didn’t have MJs killer instinct, it’s now once upon a time because people realized it’s fluff.

They said Wilt Chamberlain would eat junk food at half time then still drop 40 and 20. For every Michael Jordan/Kobe Bryant refuse to lose story, there’s a Shaquille O’Neal or James Harden showing up to camp out of shape or Tim Duncan showing no emotion. There isn’t a one sized glove for sports.

Again I have to ask the number #1 question: are you more concerned about watching aesthetics of how players brand themselves then the actual production of the game?

Ja Morants a “dog”...but Dame Lilliard is touted as the best leader in basketball.

Ewing was a warrior. Stayed in the gym. Sweat like a river.

See where I’m going with this?

Kevin Garnett was ferocious BUT....until a team up.

The way some of you are viewing sports is in Cinderella glass slippers and a lot of times, guys are just better than guys or guys are just in better situations.

If you are basing a career on “dog”...

[MichaelMcNamara]

I think we all understand that the number of games matters. If you had seen 100 games of someone being a dominant generational prospect and then 1 game of them looking a bit glum, I think an overwhelming majority of people would say that it is jumping the shark to take that 1 game and say ''aha, THIS is the representative sample!!!!'' because it's clearly the outlier and not fitting with the general thrust of the data sample.

As for the question as to the right number, I would say you'd have to have seen more of the bad than you had of the good. At least, that's how I would judge it, obviously some other people could set the standard differently and and that's fine, I would just be curious as to the justification they make for their standard. I could give mine, which is that basically once the bad sample outsizes the good sample then the average of their performance is tilted towards the bad side; what's your justification for using essentially 4 games to overwrite everything that made you think he was generational? What's the thought process you're going through there.

You touch on it in that post, where you essentially say that it's mentality rather than skillset and that the 4 game sample of apparent glumness outweighs the larger sample you saw at Duke that gave you the opposite view, and you also mention that maybe he's a frontrunner and that the NBA game being more difficult is the cause of this. Which is fine, though I don't agree; my question would be what happens when the game 'slows down' for him, as it does all young players, and the difficulty level decreases again relative to his experience? Does he then go back to being a frontrunner and a ''dog'' and become a generational prospect again? What's the deal?

I said my Duke evaluation was wrong. Not that he was a dog at Duke and in his first year here and has only been loafing for 4 games.

KG doesnt have months of because of a pandemic and use that time to get fat. KG would have used that to get in the best shape of his life. Like I said, there are all these little red flags. Not flags that say he will stink, but that he wont be THE man in this league. And again, I pray I am wrong. But I remember seeing AD at Summer League and his 2nd/3rd season, interviewing him, talking to coaches and he just wasnt Chris Paul. When I used to go into the locker room after Chris Paul lost, you could feel his anger from 20 feet away. No exaggeration, you could feel it. Jrue, AD.... they were fine. It was then that I knew, but I didnt admit it to myself. I see it again with Zion - amazing talent, but he dont have THAT. And I dont know how you get to be the man without THAT

[Pelicanidae]

I said my Duke evaluation was wrong. Not that he was a dog at Duke and in his first year here and has only been loafing for 4 games.

KG doesnt have months of because of a pandemic and use that time to get fat. KG would have used that to get in the best shape of his life. Like I said, there are all these little red flags. Not flags that say he will stink, but that he wont be THE man in this league. And again, I pray I am wrong. But I remember seeing AD at Summer League and his 2nd/3rd season, interviewing him, talking to coaches and he just wasnt Chris Paul. When I used to go into the locker room after Chris Paul lost, you could feel his anger from 20 feet away. No exaggeration, you could feel it. Jrue, AD.... they were fine. It was then that I knew, but I didnt admit it to myself. I see it again with Zion - amazing talent, but he dont have THAT. And I dont know how you get to be the man without THAT

You have an image in your head of what ''that'' looks like that I think reflects your own personal aesthetic preferences in an athlete rather than what is actually definitively the most impactful.

The natural counter to KG is Tim Duncan, who of course played in the league at the same time as KG but who had much more actual success in terms of the hardware (2x MVP, multiple time FMVP, 5x Rings vs KG's single one, etc) and who is literally famous for being the exact opposite personality. Duncan was a responsible, hard working, and diligent individual, but you couldn't ''feel his anger from 20 feet away'' after every given loss; at least, no report I've ever heard has implied that. Was he not ''that guy'' because he wasn't prowling around with a scowl on his face and cursing people out? Of course not, that would be silly to say.

Am I then implying that Zion is Tim Duncan? No, I'm not, but what I am saying is that there are multiple ways to be great and just because someone has had a handful of games where they look slightly sub-optimal to your eyes doesn't damn them.

And so what, by the way, if he never is the best player in the league? What if he always plays the KD to Luka's Lebron? Is that not also success that this franchise could desperately use?

[Pelicanidae]

I want to reply to this because it’s sort of off topic to the Zion discussion but totally on topic for the gist of this conversation.

Charles Barkley is a goat. There’s nothing about his career that says he wasn’t as great as KD for example except he didn’t join the Bulls in 1992. Sports works like that. Timing is everything. Players these days know - just like what’s going on here - fans are fickle and they can maneuver themselves to great situations to ensure positive “winning” commentary over whatever’s going on in Houston right now (Harden should have been forced his way out, teamed up with Giannis).

A lot of times the difference in sports isn’t how good YOU are, but how good your competition is. Who teams up. Who hit the jackpot continuously in the draft and free agency.

Once upon a time they said Lebron didn’t have MJs killer instinct, it’s now once upon a time because people realized it’s fluff.

They said Wilt Chamberlain would eat junk food at half time then still drop 40 and 20. For every Michael Jordan/Kobe Bryant refuse to lose story, there’s a Shaquille O’Neal or James Harden showing up to camp out of shape or Tim Duncan showing no emotion. There isn’t a one sized glove for sports.

Again I have to ask the number #1 question: are you more concerned about watching aesthetics of how players brand themselves then the actual production of the game?

Ja Morants a “dog”...but Dame Lilliard is touted as the best leader in basketball.

Ewing was a warrior. Stayed in the gym. Sweat like a river.

See where I’m going with this?

Kevin Garnett was ferocious BUT....until a team up.

The way some of you are viewing sports is in Cinderella glass slippers and a lot of times, guys are just better than guys or guys are just in better situations.

If you are basing a career on “dog”...

I basically agree with this entire post from start to finish, other than saying Barkley was as good as KD.

[As I See It]

Greg Oden had a literal skeletal deformation (not sure what caused it) which made one of his legs shorter than the other and caused him a number of massive problems. I wish people would stop calling him a bust and using him as an example of failure of a player, when that's not what he was. When he could play he was actually productive.

I know you were just using an analogy to get your point across but it just made me think of this.

I suppose we define things differently (DUH).

If you think I am slighting Oden the man; I'm not. Bear in mind, it was you who injected the words 'BUST' and 'FAILURE' into the 'conversation. I merely pointed out the eerie similarities between the two pairs of draft selections (first and second overall selections in their respective drafts) thus far. I assure you, I sincerely hope that Zion lives up to all the hype that proceeded his arrival (as I do JAX); I think we both do.

[Wowowowow]

I basically agree with this entire post from start to finish, other than saying Barkley was as good as KD.

I hear you. But that also plays into the point.

I personally believe KDs consistently nicer than Lebron. Always has been. I think a lot of players do too. But hardware, stats etc can be subjective to the times and situations players are in. If KD never joined the Warriors and stayed the course in OkC, there?s a chance it could be a Houston situation. Charles Barkley drafted onto the Pistons and no Michael Jordan would seem interesting. What if KD saw who the Warriors were to become in 2011 after the finals lost?

The story of sports feels like it drives perception more. Of course I believe Lebrons nicer than Kobe, but...is his story better? Many won?t get laughed at for saying Kobe?s nicer than Lebron. Infact Kobe?s story to me is the best sports story of all time. But is he nicer than Lebron? Nah...but is he Greater? There?s legitimate arguments. He?s like the NBAs 2Pac now. But the funny thing is, there?s a clear unbiased towards lead guards argument that Duncan?s better than him and you can?t convince a Spurs fan he?s not. Lol It?s crazy.

For instance...again off topic. I personally don?t think Lebron OR Kobe?s ever had a Cinderella post season - based on the story - like Kawhi in 2019. I think that post season is the epitome of a storybook for a star. Game 7 buzzer beater. Knocked off the MvP. Finals MvP. Had he joined the Lakers that offseason....who knows what the story is now. But that doesn?t make him nicer than KD who?s post season runs were great but wouldn?t sell a cheap ticket at your local AMC. That?s sports.

[Pelicanidae]

For instance...again off topic. I personally don't think Lebron OR Kobe's ever had a Cinderella post season - based on the story - like Kawhi in 2019. .

I mean... Of course Kobe doesn't have a ''Cinderella post season'', he was only the best player in the finals once in his career.

Lebron though? Hard for me to believe there could be a season more ''Cinderella'' than him getting to the finals and coming back down 3-1 against the 73-9 Warriors, on the road, to win Cleveland their first title in any sport for decades and decades; Cleveland, his home-town team who he had returned to promising to bring them a ring. And doing it while leading both teams in every major statistical category. Ben Taylor, of Thinking Basketball, makes the argument that in Games 5, 6, and 7, Lebron played the three most perfect consecutive games in history.

Does anything get more story-driven, narrative driven, than that? Not really.

[MichaelMcNamara]

I want to reply to this because it’s sort of off topic to the Zion discussion but totally on topic for the gist of this conversation.

Charles Barkley is a goat. There’s nothing about his career that says he wasn’t as great as KD for example except he didn’t join the Bulls in 1992. Sports works like that. Timing is everything. Players these days know - just like what’s going on here - fans are fickle and they can maneuver themselves to great situations to ensure positive “winning” commentary over whatever’s going on in Houston right now (Harden should have been forced his way out, teamed up with Giannis).

A lot of times the difference in sports isn’t how good YOU are, but how good your competition is. Who teams up. Who hit the jackpot continuously in the draft and free agency.

Once upon a time they said Lebron didn’t have MJs killer instinct, it’s now once upon a time because people realized it’s fluff.

They said Wilt Chamberlain would eat junk food at half time then still drop 40 and 20. For every Michael Jordan/Kobe Bryant refuse to lose story, there’s a Shaquille O’Neal or James Harden showing up to camp out of shape or Tim Duncan showing no emotion. There isn’t a one sized glove for sports.

Again I have to ask the number #1 question: are you more concerned about watching aesthetics of how players brand themselves then the actual production of the game?

Ja Morants a “dog”...but Dame Lilliard is touted as the best leader in basketball.

Ewing was a warrior. Stayed in the gym. Sweat like a river.

See where I’m going with this?

Kevin Garnett was ferocious BUT....until a team up.

The way some of you are viewing sports is in Cinderella glass slippers and a lot of times, guys are just better than guys or guys are just in better situations.

If you are basing a career on “dog”...

Yep. And I might be wrong. And the older I got, the more I am fine with that. I dont need to be right all the time. Why it is an opinion, not a fact.

My bigger issue is why people are so sensitive to this opinion. Yes, I believe it truly and would bet on it being right. But it could be wrong. Just my opinion. Totally fine with people having theirs

[Wowowowow]

Yep. And I might be wrong. And the older I got, the more I am fine with that. I dont need to be right all the time. Why it is an opinion, not a fact.

My bigger issue is why people are so sensitive to this opinion. Yes, I believe it truly and would bet on it being right. But it could be wrong. Just my opinion. Totally fine with people having theirs

Tbh I respect your honesty and opinion on this. Believe it or not, I?m not sensitive at all about this opinion. I feel the thread or board feels like it leans past glass half empty on this matter (some one said his first 28 games was terrible) so I want to share the other side so it?s balanced. I also really feel the way I do, so I share it. You state you view his psyche in a manner and I personally believe I don?t see how anyone can miss he?s the most intense person on the court. We just view things differently.

This isn?t a casino to me. No ones a prophet around here and it?s all just what we think. I?ll tap your glass of drink and say that if I?m wrong, I?m with you...I do not care.

But I definitely want to let it be known that what you feel you may be betting on has a ton of moving parts. Way more moving parts than just leadership abilities and how someone is in the locker room after a loss.

[Wowowowow]

Also just to throw this in here - based on the CP3 / AD comparison - and also the storyline versus the reality.

UnPopular opinion around here or not (i dont know)- I think AD as a player is top 5 EVER. (Im apart of the all the current players are nicer than the past players club). I think if you cut through the red tape and just go based off how good a player is, AD is scary. All this beta, etc. is fluff to me. Its irrelevant to me. He's super nice. And hes a champion now.

In the "mainstream" world will AD be like Michael Jordan/ Kobe (This feels like the real judgement I/O call under the surface)? No...likely not. But he's nicer to me...better than Kobe for sure imo. He might have games where he looks sluggish like Sonics Ewing with no lift. But the thin line with details between AD and Kobe is the gist of the conversation I'm really talking about here.

[MichaelMcNamara]

Top 5 talent maybe. Skill set and size plus athleticism. But to be in my top 5 you need to be a killer IMO. But let's see how his teams do when Lebron leaves

[AusPel]

I feel like every time you hear Zion talk he has this smirk letting you know the thinks he's better than everyone

As opposed to BI where every word that comes out of his mouth is super sincere

Also, Bledsoe is beyond trash, how did he fool people into paying him 80 mil

I respect the hustle to get the bag but got damn

[new city champ]

I thought I saw a leader who would do anything to win and had a non stop motor combined with never before seen athleticism and skill set. The play that keeps coming to mind is the one vs Kentucky where he basically blocks a guy by just jumping and catching the ball and then races down court with a tight dribble and throws a one handed bounce pass to RJ in traffic for a layup. The De'Andre Hunter corner block stands out as well. And while both of those plays show skill, the most impressive part was the effort. It was all out and intense.

I have seen very little of that game to game in the NBA. And my theory is that I miswatched - thats part of it. I watched every game of his that year but I didnt watch him with as critical an eye as I normally do when he wasnt on ball (on offense and on defense) because I was so wowed by the big plays. I got suckered in by them. Also, I think there are some people who are frontrunners. When things are going well, they talk a ton, they run faster, get hype, go 110%. But the truly great ones hate to lose more than they like to win, and are driven to overcome adversity. They are used to adversity and almost welcome it and grind that much harder.

Again, this is just a guess but I do have a Masters in Counseling, my wife does as well - so I know a little but about the human psyche. And my guess is he hasn't faced a ton of adversity in his life and it frustrates him more than it fuels him (like most of us) and he doesnt have that extra gear that the top, top tier have. And as far as skill and athleticism, he would have to be the greatest athlete of all time to overcome his lack of size to dominate like Lebron and Giannis do. I mean, if Lebron was the same exact player and athlete, but 3 inches shorter and with Zion's body type, I think he would be a 6x All Star at best - not a top 4 player of all time.

So, its just a few things that has me think that TOP tier isn't possible. But I still think the 'Rich Man's Shawn Kemp' tier is very possible. Philadelphia Barkley, maybe (though I dont see him being a dog on the defensive glass). And the reason I would take Ja is because he does have that dog. He is driven by adversity and never takes a play off. And thats my bias, my preference. I would personally always take the guy with 8.5 skill, 10 effort and leadership guy over the 10 skill guy with lesser effort and leadership. Totally fine admitting thats my preference.

Late to reply but I'll throw in a few thoughts.

First, your analysis is reasonable and your points are plausible, if based on some speculation as well as observations. Happily, that's what sports message boards specialize in!

Your take is basically that you misjudged Zion's competitive make up at Duke and because he isn't the insane level competitor that Kobe or Jordan were he is destined to be a good, not great, player in the NBA.

Very possible, but I frankly disagree with the "Great Prick" theory of sports greatness as explored recently in The Last Dance--i.e. that you have to be a massive dick to win championships. In my experience ********** are ********** because they choose to be and enjoy being ********** at some level. We have plenty of counter examples of people who were champions without being full time jerks (see, e.g. steph curry).

I've played sports all my life and of course know what you mean by the guys who hate to lose more than they like to win. They can be driven because of the need for validation, but it doesn't always lead to victory. I know I've beaten more than a few of those guys and watched them meltdown.

Allow me to offer an alternative explanation on Zion. Right away I'll stipulate that the Zion we are seeing now is not the guy we saw at Duke. But the reason could easily be as much physical as mental or emotional. Some guys internal make up is influenced to a great degree by their external feeling of well being. Zion had two significant knee injuries in '19 and we haven't really seen the "one-of-one" Zion since he blew out that shoe against Carolina.

To me Zion looks like a guy who is still feeling his way a little bit. He hasn't cut loose because he may still be unsure about his knee. He may be pacing himself because he isn't sure of his fitness. You can say his lack of conditioning is part of the problem you are talking about and I would agree. But we have seen players in the past who aren't serious enough about their conditioning when they are young who later grow out that phase.

In past eras so many of these guys would still be in college. I think you've got to give them a little time to grow up. Sure some guys are fully formed at 18 inside and out. But many aren't and Zion I think is one of them. He seems to have been coddled and protected a bit in a way that many of us older folks find risible. It may just be a question of 1) letting Zion mature a bit, and 2) his body becoming fitter and hardened to a pro career. Both are lacking and both can change with time. That's why I wouldn't discount right away that the Zion you saw at Duke might reappear at some point...

[AusPel]

When Zion speaks articulately and flashes that smile, it's all over

I always feel like he's trying to placate everyone when asked about himself