Brady Helping Celtics Recruit Kevin Durant

fnordcircle said:

It's a bad example because a dream team of NFL players is doing to crush a dream team of CFL players.

Within the confines of a single league, however, 'dream teams' have generally flopped from what I've seen.

Click to expand...

OK, fair enough, let's ignore amateur sports. Let's also ignore soccer and focus on the 4 major North American pro sports because only a small minority of us can discuss soccer history intelligently (and I am certainly not in that small minority).

You say Dream Teams have "generally flopped" and yet no one can give me any example which fits the following criteria:

1) The team was recognized as a "dream team" by the general fandom at large. One moron 2nd string QB saying "we are a Dream Team!" does not make them one.

2) The team was truly a flop. Calling the Shaq-Kobe LA Lakers "a flop" because they failed to win in 2003-04 is intellectually bankrupt considering they had already won 3 titles.

All that has happened here is Supafly quoted 5 articles, throwing as much **** against the wall as he could, hoping at least 1 would stick. But there really aren't any that actually fit the above criteria. It is a list of teams that won championships, just not in the specific year given.

supafly said:

The example doesn't work due to multiple reasons like: 1) It wasn't professional sports, 2) The absence of a salary cap or anything close to an equal playing field.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Of course, if you actually looked at your own articles, you've just eliminated about half of your own examples based solely on the above criteria.

supafly said:

Keep trolling though--and by the way, I did attempt to leave things in a respectful manner by agreeing to disagree. The fact of the matter is that you won't shut up about it by continuing to quote me.

Click to expand...

You can drop out of the conversation anytime you want, my friend. Nobody is forcing you to respond.

XLIX said:

OK, fair enough, let's ignore amateur sports. Let's also ignore soccer and focus on the 4 major North American pro sports because only a small minority of us can discuss soccer history intelligently (and I am certainly not in that small minority).

You say Dream Teams have "generally flopped" and yet no one can give me any example which fits the following criteria:

1) The team was recognized as a "dream team" by the general fandom at large. One moron 2nd string QB saying "we are a Dream Team!" does not make them one.

2) The team was truly a flop. Calling the Shaq-Kobe LA Lakers "a flop" because they failed to win in 2003-04 is intellectually bankrupt considering they had already won 3 titles.

All that has happened here is Supafly quoted 5 articles, throwing as much **** against the wall as he could, hoping at least 1 would stick. But there really aren't any that actually fit the above criteria.

Click to expand...

I dunno man, we see a new offseason super bowl champ every year. The Broncos added Ware and Ward and other **** and crapped out. The Eagles added Asoughmah and some other people and everyone wet their paints and they crapped out. The Heat lost in the finals the year they added LeBron and Bosh. I haven't done a goddamn study on what constitutes a dream team and how they've performed. It's just seemed like a recurring theme that sometimes these overhyped teams don't produce.

You seem really intense over this and I'm not sure why.

I don't know about the Dream Team argument but I'm not sure that's really the point.

What I would think about is the notion that the best collection of individual players is not always the best performing team. In many respects, GSW will be as talented as any team in recent memory. Are the pieces complimentary? Will limiting the number of shots allocated to so many great players result in poor shot selection or create conflicts and division within the team?

They'll be huge favorites and justifiably so but they haven't won anything yet. Lots of things can happen and (as the cliché says) that's why they play the games.

supafly said:

My point is that it's a terrible example, specifically for the points you've just made.

That example hardly dispels the notion of a dream team (in professional sports) often failing to win a championship.

Click to expand...

OK I didnt see the context.

Under the T&Cs that you outline there isn't such a thing as dream teams. You have 3 starts and the rest are role players.

1963 Celtics had 9 Hall of Famers. That is close as you will get.

fnordcircle said:

I dunno man, we see a new offseason super bowl champ every year. The Broncos added Ware and Ward and other **** and crapped out. The Eagles added Asoughmah and some other people and everyone wet their paints and they crapped out. The Heat lost in the finals the year they added LeBron and Bosh. I haven't done a goddamn study on what constitutes a dream team and how they've performed. It's just seemed like a recurring theme that sometimes these overhyped teams don't produce.

You seem really intense over this and I'm not sure why.

Click to expand...

I am politely and respectfully stating my point of view, no more or less "intensely" than yourself. Multiple people have made the statement that "Dream Teams" tend to flop more often than not. I am still waiting for an example which fits my reasonable criteria.

XLIX said:

You can drop out of the conversation anytime you want, my friend. Nobody is forcing you to respond.

Click to expand...

It just seems odd that one party would make statements like "I respect your point of view," or that "maybe we should agree to disagree on this one," and the other party would just ignore that and continue their tirade.

To each his own.

Judging by some of the pissing contests you've tried to get in with Jackson2 and Joe Six Pat this past weekend, I'm guessing you're simply in a bad mood lately.

drewskie said:

Youre saying this in hindsight about Love because he hasnt panned out because Lebron marginalizes what he does well.

Before Lebron went back home, people who werent brainwashed by the media about his homecoming basically said that he was only going home because Kyrie was now there and Wiggins was gona be traded for a proven star. Better than anyone else in the east by far. Just like it was when he hand picked Wade and Bosh as his running mates.

Again both Lebron and Kd are entitled to pick the team of their choosing. But to say Lebron delivers championships as your premise (implying that he stays with his team through the good and bad is disengenious and grossly inaccurate). Theyre both ring chasing. Gsw is more proven absolutely, but youd be a fool to think that joining Wade/Bosh then Kyrie/Over on paper was anything but stacking the deck.

Click to expand...

I'm still looking for when LeBron left a team because they were bad. Both the Cavs and the Heat were good until he left, and then they were bad.

Yes, I know. Jumping to a 33-win team hoping to gel with complete strangers and eventually win a ring is totally the same thing as jumping to a 73-win team that's already the prohibitive favorite. Identical! There's no difference between wanting to build and lead a championship team ... and jumping on a juggernaut because you can't beat them and be along for the ride.

I can't waste anymore time on this.

robertweathers said:

OK I didnt see the context.

Under the T&Cs that you outline there isn't such a thing as dream teams. You have 3 starts and the rest are role players.

1963 Celtics had 9 Hall of Famers. That is close as you will get.

Click to expand...

Here's the bottom line: I made a comment reminding someone that maybe we should hold off on crowning them champions until they actually go out and win something.

I made the statement of "historically speaking, dream teams have often failed to reach their goals" or some slight variation of that phrasing. I do believe that we've seen some prime examples of off season winners and loaded teams that haven't produced championships, and I believe that's been true for all sports.

supafly said:

It just seems odd that one party would make statements like "I respect your point of view," or that "maybe we should agree to disagree on this one," and the other party would just ignore that and continue their tirade.

Click to expand...

Except what really happened was you said "maybe we should agree to disagree on this one" and I let it go, but you continued participating in the thread anyway.

No seriously, reread the thread. You didn't honor your own "agree to disagree" post. But, for some reason, you're criticizing me as if, for some reason, I was obligated to drop out at that point.

supafly said:

Judging by some of the pissing contests you've tried to get in with Jackson2 and Joe Six Pat this past weekend, I'm guessing you're simply in a bad mood lately.

Click to expand...

You're the one who is making this personal. I am respectfully and politely expressing my point of view, no more, no less. For some reason, you are taking respectful disagreement personally and responding with uncalled for attacks.

supafly said:

Here's the bottom line: I made a comment reminding someone that maybe we should hold off on crowning them champions until they actually go out and win something.

I made the statement of "historically speaking, dream teams have often failed to reach their goals" or some slight variation of that phrasing. I do believe that we've seen some prime examples of off season winners and loaded teams that haven't produced championships, and I believe that's been true for all sports.

Click to expand...

The media loves to throw that crap around. It's really annoying.

No question GS is loaded. Are they a dream team? I dunna know but you have 3 of the top 12 scorers in the league on the same team.

It is likely that GS will win next year but they need to prove it. I don't think it's a shoo-in at all.

As a team they took 87 shots a game on average last year. Curry took 20, Thompson took 17, and Green and Barnes took 10 each.

Durant took about 20 a game as well so they'll need to find 10 more shots for him to take.

I do think one of those 3 will need to defer a little. The question is which one.

supafly said:

The example doesn't work due to multiple reasons like: 1) It wasn't professional sports, 2) The absence of a salary cap or anything close to an equal playing field.

Keep trolling though--and by the way, I did attempt to leave things in a respectful manner by agreeing to disagree. The fact of the matter is that you won't shut up about it by continuing to quote me.

Click to expand...

wrong. you never said ANYTHING about professional sports. You just said a dream team doesn't work or in most cases doesn't. I am merely pointing out that it can and history proves it. You can point to other teams to like the past several gold medal canadian olympic hockey teams. AND there are some professional sports teams that assemble a boatload of talent and goes onto win championships like the 2002 red wings. Is it harder in a salary cap league? yes, but you made a general statement about dream teams not working.

XLIX said:

Except what really happened was you said "maybe we should agree to disagree on this one" and I let it go, but you continued participating in the thread anyway.

No seriously, reread the thread. You didn't honor your own "agree to disagree" post. But, for some reason, you're criticizing me as if, for some reason, I was obligated to drop out at that point.
You're the one who is making this personal. I am respectfully and politely expressing my point of view, no more, no less. For some reason, you are taking respectful disagreement personally and responding with uncalled for attacks.

Click to expand...

When someone attempts to make peace, that's usually between those two parties. We agreed to disagree and move on, or so I thought.

That hardly means that I can't comment on someone else's thoughts, and I'm pretty sure you realize that. I wasn't involving you in the slightest, but you continue to quote me with snarky comments. What gives? Let it go, man.

TommyBrady12 said:

wrong. you never said ANYTHING about professional sports. You just said a dream team doesn't work or in most cases doesn't. I am merely pointing out that it can and history proves it. You can point to other teams to like the past several gold medal canadian olympic hockey teams. AND there are some professional sports teams that assemble a boatload of talent and goes onto win championships like the 2002 red wings. Is it harder in a salary cap league? yes, but you made a general statement about dream teams not working.

Click to expand...

Okay, just to clarify--I believe that there have been many examples where off season winners and highly talented squads have failed (more often than not, actually) to win championships.

If you feel differently, more power to you. Citing the 92 Olympic team who had used pro athletes for the first time ever is a very weak argument though, at least in my opinion.

supafly said:

They could trade Love, which is what they probably should do. He doesn't seem to be a good fit there, let alone worth all of that money.

Click to expand...

Agree, except he's damaged goods reputation-wise. I'd be surprised if any team thinks he's worth the money, even with the expanded cap.

Jackson 2 said:

Agree, except he's damaged goods reputation-wise. I'd be surprised if any team thinks he's worth the money,never with the expanded cap.

Click to expand...

Yep. That's the problem. I agree.

CLE has painted themselves into a corner of sorts, by trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Perhaps someone bites, but I agree with you that it's probably unlikely.

supafly said:

When someone attempts to make peace, that's usually between those two parties. We agreed to disagree and move on, or so I thought.

That hardly means that I can't comment on someone else's thoughts, and I'm pretty sure you realize that. I wasn't involving you in the slightest, but you continue to quote me with snarky comments. What gives? Let it go, man.

Click to expand...

You gave your "agree to disagree" comment, then continued with the exact same discussion. I have no obligation to sit on the sidelines and I'd be curious as to why you think you have the authority to dictate that I do.

I have politely and respectfully stated my point of view and you continue to make things personal. What gives? Let it go, man.

supafly said:

Yep. That's the problem. I agree.

CLE has painted themselves into a corner of sorts, by trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Perhaps someone bites, but I agree with you that it's probably unlikely.

Click to expand...

You know, even with the "damaged goods" stuff, there's this little voice that I hear every once in a while suggesting maybe, just maybe he could resurrect himself here. Then, thankfully, it goes away...

XLIX said:

You gave your "agree to disagree" comment, then continued with the exact same discussion.

Click to expand...

I responded to another poster who had quoted a previous message from earlier. It obviously had nothing to do with re-hashing a back and forth with you.

I attempted to make peace long ago, and you chose to ignore it. I don't understand why anyone would wish to continue an unproductive conversation unless they were simply trolling.

XLIX said:

I have no obligation to sit on the sidelines and I'd be curious as to why you think you have the authority to dictate that I do.

Click to expand...

No one is trying to make you do anything. It was an attempt at agreeing to disagree while moving forward in a positive fashion. You're intelligent enough to realize that my intentions were good. You're simply embarrassing yourself at this point.

You have all the internet power in the world to continue this pointless conversation with yourself. Take care.

supafly said:

I attempted to make peace long ago, and you chose to ignore it. I don't understand why anyone would wish to continue an unproductive conversation unless they were simply trolling.

Click to expand...

Now you're just lying. You claim an attempt to "make peace" and then you continued the same discussion. It's perfectly fine to continue the discussion, but it is disingenuous to lie about how you tried oh-so-hard that every time you tried to get out they pulled you back in.

supafly said:

No one is trying to make you do anything. It was an attempt at agreeing to disagree while moving forward in a positive fashion. You're intelligent enough to realize that my intentions were good. You're simply embarrassing yourself at this point.

You have all the internet power in the world to continue this pointless conversation with yourself. Take care.

Click to expand...

It is wise of you to (finally) let it go. It took you about 5 posts too many but you are obviously too argumentative to stop your trolling. You must have had a bad weekend or something to make you so grouchy.