Tendecy to sensationalize professionals

[J_V]

One thing I have noticed is that people tend to put professionals on pedestals. They don't really look at them as humans, but almost like gods. For instance, I once asked my friend if he thought I could beat Randy Brown....an old Chicago Bulls scrub in losers outs one on one - by ones to fifty with a 45 point lead. He said I wouldn't be able to. Now, I am a very good one on one player......not a professional but I am sure if given the opportunity I could beat any player in the world with this lead, let alone 6-2 Randy Brown. Randy Brown wouldn't have chance. I believe I could have beaten Michael Jordan in his prime with a 40 point lead, maybe lower. I couldn't stop them, but I would score on them a decent amount.

This isn't a statement about my ability, just a statement that pro athletes, while good, aren't god. They don't get paid because they are the best defensive players in the world either. Other interesting discussions were: am I a better dribbler than Michael Jordan, could a D1 college guard beat mugsy bogues one on one. I said yes to both, everyone I know says no to both.

I see the same thing in poker....people assume the "world class poker players" never pay off, never miss bets, and never make mistakes, which of course is not true.

Just an observation.

[Dynasty]

I believe I could have beaten Michael Jordan in his prime with a 40 point lead, maybe lower. I couldn't stop them, but I would score on them a decent amount.

You're deluding yourself.

[J_V]

Hard for you to say since you know nothing about me, but he runs a camp near my house for high schoolers and he has numerous times to players straight up in games to five. He would play soft and get down a little and when he needed to stop them and got up to play hard defense they got a tough shot off and hit it.....now spot ME an 80 point and not only do I beat him, I crush him.

Sort of like giving me a queen against Garry Kasparov. I could beat him blindfolded, literally.

[Dynasty]

I also think Kasparov would crush you spotting you a Queen unless you are a chess master. In that case, he may only be able to spot you a rook.

[M2d]

So, JV, what is your athletic history? If you're an ex CBA player or DI basketball player, I think you may have a shot. If you're a mere mortal like the rest of us, I think you over-estimate your chances. Greatly.

[IrishHand]

Yes, much of this discussion depends on your professed level of skill at basketball. However, I'll assume for the sake of argument that you are/were NOT a Division I or better (CBA, pro overseas, etc.) basketball player.

I will also state beforehand that I worked with an NBA team for 4 years and a D1 college team for 3 years - on both occasions working with and around the players a fair amount.

First of all, you are indeed deluding yourself to think you could beat Jordan in his prime, or, as it turns out, Randy Brown. The difference between normal people who think they're great basketball players based on what they observe playing against other normal people (or even ex-college guys or better who're out of shape or goofing off), and NBA players is astounding. The NBA is the only league that I know of where literally every player could step down one level (to D1 college) and dominate. (Disclaimer - Those guys who carry the luggage and keep the last 4 seats on the bench warm aren't 'players' - they may become players eventually, but if you don't even seen 10 min/game, you're not a 'player' by any practical definition.)

Jordan in his prime would have spotted you 40 points and still made you his woman. You're bright enough to understand that you would essentially never stop him from scoring (also referred to as dunking on you with regularity), but you don't seem to understand that you'd be utterly unable to score on him. You don't seem to grasp that whereas the top defender in the NBA might - might - be able to take one thing away from a Jordan prime (forcing him to shoot from outside, drive, whatever), Jordan would be able to take away everything from you. You wouldn't even be able to hurl up long 3s if he didn't want you to. The man is 6'6", long, and insanely athletic. The fact that he's also one of the most fundamentally talented and defensively skilled players ever also helps.

As for Randy Brown, you'd have some of the same problems. Despite his lack of offense in the NBA, he's still - compared to you - almost certainly a far, far better shooter, dribbler, and post player. NBA players get paid to do one thing - play basketball, and they do it for hours every day, pretty much year 'round. Randy Brown wouldn't score on you every time, but close enough. More the problem, as with Jordan, is that he'd lock you up like a convicted felon. Randy Brown has long been recognized as a great on-ball defender in the NBA - and this is against other basketball gods. On the whole, I'm pretty sure that against you, he could score more than 10 times to your 1. I admit that if you're 6'6" or taller, you could probably heave up those long 3s with impunity, but I tend to suspect that your odds on those aren't better than the 1 in 11 I cited.

"I a better dribbler than Michael Jordan, could a D1 college guard beat mugsy bogues one on one. I said yes to both, everyone I know says no to both."

No you aren't, and it would depend on the D1 guard.

To further enlighten your thought process in comparing yourself to NBA players, look at the success (or lack thereof) that some phenomenal street-ballers have had in the NBA. Rafer Alston (Skip to my Lou) is a ridiculously sweet basketball player in the 'normal' setting, where people play for fun primarily, even if they're trying their best. He's got an insane handle, a decent shot, and he can take it to the hole with the best of them. There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of intelligent basketball fans and players (especially in the NY area) who will swear up and down that he's better than Iverson, better than Marbury, yet he can barely hang on to an NBA team. Why? It takes more than being able to look great amongst mortals if you want to play with the Gods. They're bigger than you. They're stronger than you. They spend more time honing the finest elements of their craft than you could ever hope to in a normal lifetime.

I played college ball. Not D1, but I'm 6'4", 200, and at one time, I was a decent ballplayer. I had the pleasure of playing Shareef Abdur-Rahim 1-on-1, loser's outs, after a pre-season practice. I was warmed up, and played to the best of my ability. The final score was 21-1. He wasn't trying all that hard. He did what he had to do to ensure that I'd never get off a decent shot, and goofed off when he had the ball. I got the 1 point because he scored without clearing the ball off one of my rebounds and felt it was only fair.

[M2d]

That's one helluva story. great read. says what I felt instictly.
Back in highschool, our assistant basketball coach was a guy who played for the University of Hawaii. His best friend was Richard Haenish who played for NAIA Chaminade. Rich was a good small college guard (6'4" ish with a sweet shot) who got a look from the lakers after he was done.
Anyway, Rich played our school's star guard 1 on 1 one day and just shut him down completely. This was against an all league guard who went on to play small college ball. The NBA wannabe who got a look, but nothing else, completely dominated. I shudder to think of what the greatest guard in history could do, because Richard had us completely in awe.

[J_V]

I am a chess expert, a rank below master. And Kasparov would have no chance spotting me a queen or any other patzer, and I wouldn't need a board to play him. Your type of thinking is exactly what I am talking about....Kasparov himself admitted he doubted he could beat most chess masters spotting them a knight.

[J_V]

Interesting post. I know a friend who played both Scottie Pippen and Stacey King one on one. He flat out beat Stacey King....who lolligagged around and got too far behind. Scottie Pippen lolligagged also, but came back to narrowly beat him. The problem is these players play good defense, but with a full court to work with, you can only do so much. I am not naive on these issues, while I haven't play NBA players, I have played against and with professional basketball players from Europe. None of them would have a shot of stopping me from 40-50.

As for Mugsy Bogues, he is 5-3 and he can be shot over all day. So, he would be easy lunch with a spot.

As for the dribbling, Michael Jordan isn't in the top 5% of serious dribblers out there, if you want to see an exhibition on dribbling rent an And 1 video. Super human athletic ability doesn't make up for hard work dribbling.

I may not be an effective dribbler but in my hey day I could have put on a better show than Jordan and god knows those And 1 dribbling professionals would make him look silly dribbling next to them.

As for defense, Michael Jordan was a good defensive player....its funny how the all defensive teams correllates with ppg though.

In the game of 1 on 1, against normal competition one or two stops determines the game....because it is so hard to play defense when your opponent has the whole court.

In my opinion, you too are sensationalizing the abilities of the professional.

[IrishHand]

There's nothing magical about beating an NBA player if he's totally goofing off. I've seen NBA stars lose to 12-year old kids at 1-on-1 - doesn't really mean a heck of a lot. I have absolutely zero doubt in my mind that your friend, if he like you lacks even the skills to play D1, would get destroyed by both King and Pippen if they had any reason to pound on him.

Next, dribbling is only relevant to any serious student of basketball if it takes place in a relevant situation. The NBA is as good as it gets. Being able to put on a cool-looking dribbling display is fine and dandy, but the most amazing dribbling I've ever seen was at the hand of Rafer Alston. Again, he can't even make an NBA team. Being a great dribbler has absolutely nothing to do with spin dribbles and laser-quick cross-overs. Being a great dribbler means being able to get from one spot on the floor to another while maintaining control of the ball. Jordan is a great dribbler. The guys on "And 1" videos are great entertainers.

Michael Jordan is a good defensive player only if by 'good' you mean 'one of the best ever.' Every coach (NBA and colllege) that I've ever talked to agrees that Jordan was, in his prime, as dominant defensively as offensively.

You also assert that the all-defense teams correlate with ppg. While it can certainly be argued that offensive performance enhances your visibility and the likelihood that your defense will be noticed, All Defense teams tend to be fairly representative. Both Ben Wallace and Dikembe Mutombo score about as often as Steve Urkel, but they're still recognized as two of the best post defenders in the league. Bruce Bowen made the 2nd Team All Defense and he can't score, pass or rebound. The scorers who made the All-D teams are all phenomenal defenders themselves. Nice try though.

As for my sensationalizing - my position is based on years of first-hand observation. Your theories are little more than wishful thinking.

[Ryan_21]

The And1 guys are great to watch and very entertaining, but not good ball players. Most of their flair is because of traveling and double dribbling and most have very very poor fundamentals.

Ryan_21

[J_V]

who said they were great ball players....they are better dribblers. They can more with the ball than Michael Jordan. Now you are saying that there type of dribbling isn't practical. Well, veering on a tangent, thats bullshit. Ball control is practical. However, there are other things more important, which is the reason these exhibitionists are exactly that.

[Ryan_21]

"Now you are saying that there type of dribbling isn't practical."

No I didnt say it wasnt practical, I said it wasnt legal. Its not basketball, who care about all that cool stuff they do if its not legal. Its all double dribbling and traveling.

Did you see the one with the guy on the street talking about how that dribbling would be picked on a real court anyday, then the And1 dribbler challenge him to see if he could get past him and sure enough he picked it on the first try.

Ryan_21

There is nothing wrong with having self-confidence or even being too cocky but if you're a kid ,I would go to/stay in school or university. If not, keep your day job.

[J_V]

my point has nothing to do with my skill level.

I'll pick TMAC as the player to beat. What percentage of the basketball playing population could beat TMAC in a one on one contest over 50% of the time being spotted 40 points where 50 points wins? I would say less than 1% for sure assuming TMAC is giving it his best effort. So to me you're saying you're better than over 99% of the basketball playing population in one on one contests.

Depends what you hem as the basketball playing population and I'm not sure how you come to 1% over .5% or 5%. Let's just say that I am a very good one on one player. Its not really a question of my ability. Let's just say the average ju-co guard instead of me.

"Depends what you hem as the basketball playing population"

Simple, those who play basketball competively an a frequent basis. I suppose there could be an age limitation as I was thinking about 15 years on up.

"I'm not sure how you come to 1% over .5% or 5%."

Often people are categorized statistically in term of percentiles i.e. increments of 1%. All I'm saying is that I'm quite sure that anyone (male and female) that is not in the top 1% of the basketball playing population (greater than or equal to 15 etc. ) couldn't beat TMAC consistently with a 40 point spot etc. Where is the dividing line? Have to give it more thought but easily somewhere in the top 1%.

"Let's just say that I am a very good one on one player."

Totally irrelevent regarding the point you're trying to make.

"Its not really a question of my ability."

Exactly.

"Let's just say the average ju-co guard instead of me."

Which is a much better way to make your point. With that said you've now narrowed down the basketball playing population talent wise considerably IMO. I would guess that players of this ability fall into the top 1% of the basketball playing population quite easily. So when you look at it all you've stated really in my mind is that there is a subset of the basketball playing population that comprises no more than 1% of the total basketball playing population that can beat TMAC often (more than 50% of the time) one on one when spotted 40 points in a 50 point contest. To me that's not a very remarkable statement no offense.

As far as your own ability, I have no reason to doubt what you say nor do I care how good you are. Others who have responded seem to doubt it so maybe there's an oppotunity to make a few bucks /forums/images/icons/smile.gif from those that do.

I agree with you. I also agree TMAC would be the toughest comp right now, particulary because he is so tall you would have to have a lot of room to shoot over him.

[adios]

Several of these posts were mine. I was having a problem logging in and solved it.