Hey, did you know that successful teams become successful because they play unselfishly? I bet you didn't, so I'm going to write two books around this incredibly obvious premise.
I literally laughed out loud at that. Would it convey to two 2s in 2021 if The Steelers aren’t in the lottery?
so are the Book of Basketball pods not a sequel to the book? What has changed about Shaq's career since the book came out that warrants a podcast about him? Or a Rewatchables about the 04 Finals? Seems like an odd follow-up to Curry Also I hope his guest for the Duncan episode is Shea Serrano because that episode is going to suck in the first place, might as well make it suck extra
Yeah that’s not right. He’d be somewhere between 9-12 to me. Bet he had Moses, Hakeem, Wilt, Kareem and Russell as centers ahead of him.
Enjoying the hell out of the BOB pods. Not sure it dovetails with his book per se, think he gets too much money from talking to actually type, but enjoyed the hell out of him and JA talking basketball. I grew up in the 80s but my formative nba fan years were the early 2000s when I’d come home from work and watch nba from 02-06. I’m to the point where I consume zero of Bill talking football content, but if he’s talking hoops with another knowledgeable person (ie not House), I’m in.
Still triggers the fuck out of me knowing he was a professional writer that never bothered to learn how to type on a keyboard. He hunted and pecked his way through every book and column for his entire career. No wonder he quit writing as soon as his pods got popular enough.
I really enjoyed the Shaq pod but him at 13 seems off. I’m trying to think who he has in front of him now that we know Jordan is 1, Duncan is 7 and Wilt is 8. Jordan Lebron Russell Kareem Magic Bird Duncan Wilt Oscar Hakeem I can see those 10 ahead of him but Shaq at worst would be 11. My guess is he has Moses and Kobe at 11 and 12. Kobe and Shaq are so close to me and Moses is very underrated but I’d still take peak Shaq.
Love Shaq but I agree with Bill that he’s the only top 15 guy who you could see slightly underachieved based on talent. He did get robbed of the 2005 MVP.
The rewatchable with JA is fucking fantastic. Those guys are great together discussing hoops. I’m all Steve Kerred out but Ill take 3 BOB pods a week.
Only people I could see him having in the Top 13 if it isnt Kobe is Jerry West. He had Jerry West in the Top 10 in his book. I think Kobe surpassed West.
the growth and knowledge of analytics has not been kind to kobes legacy he was already dinged for being inefficient/etc with just old timey nba stats, only gotten worse
I’m sure he’s devastated about what a bunch of white stat geeks have to say about his legacy, since those are totally the people who set that standard
Bill has said repeatedly that analytics have not been kind to Kobe and there is zero chance he’s in his top 10. He’s not wrong but...put Kobe in today’s game. All he would do is shoot 5k 3s a day and probably be better? I’m not a Kobe guy but fuck, we are really splitting hairs here.
He is, in a lot of ways, his generation's Isiah Thomas. Better player historically, but very similar in terms of the guy who won two titles (as his team's best player) and had an aura about him in how they did it, but statistically speaking people (most of whom probably didn't see them in their primes) are going to nitpick them and push them down the further they get from their careers. Basketball is fun because there's not really a right or wrong answer to that stuff.
Bill doing a stupid "MVP after 10 games" pod just to suck Luka's dick, only to then see him lose a couple days later to the team he declared the biggest mess in the league
He also dropped a triple double on the road. And he’s 20. But yeah, Bill is pretty cringeworthy with his takes at times, but less cringeworthy than a Mallory Rubin Friday pod segment.
I get where advanced analytics plays a part but I really dislike this part of sports where guys who didnt see anyone play in their prime are trying to tell people who did how great someone is. Both have merit and I didnt particularly care for Kobe as a person but he was either best or second best player in the league for 6-8 years and arguably the second best shooting guard of all-time. It depends what you want to call Oscar either a 1 or 2.
who didn't see kobe play in his prime also you'd be hard pressed to find 6-8 years with consensus on Kobe being that high
I'm talking in general as far as guys retroactively telling people who was better or not better than some fo the stats indicate. 2000-2003 It was basically Shaq, Duncan & Kobe as your top 3. 2004 was the rape trial year which he was off. 2005-13 it was Kobe, Lebron & Duncan. Probably should have said top 3 and best for 2-3 year stretch.
not going to get into the weeds on this but erasing Garnett completely is wild and just peruse the MVP votes each year on bbr. seeing his stats lined up is jarring too, media loved Kobe. its an imperfect way to look at it but gives you a broader view that doesn't erase Dirk/Wade/Garnett/Durant/CP3 and many others who in single years were far better peak at how many people had better WS/48 than him in the year he won it https://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_2008.html
He provided statistical analysis, it wasn't an off the cuff hot take. You can debate the merits of various basketball analytical methods, but you can't just call it a hot take. These facts don't care about your feelings.
05-06 was Kobes best season but i'd probably give the MVP to Dirk that year, 60 win team and best overall stats
i don't like paul pierce but jesus don't insult the man like this. he didnt survive a stabbing to be slandered like that
Kobe was good. Kobe was great. Kobe is wildly overrated because Shaq won him some titles, his game was identical to MJ’s in a time everyone wanted a new Jordan, and we overrated ppg. multiple things can be true at the same time.
when the takes are wrong in opposite directions (overrated Kobe vs underrating Dwight, with the Dwight one being most egregious), you're going to get people on the broader NBA consensus side