Quote Originally Posted by LogansSportsGuy:
Here is my argument:
Many consider Larry as the 2nd or 3rd best player of his generation -- After Michael and Magic (and some would say Isaiah). And most consider the top players of that generation, to be better than the top players of this generation.
Michael, Magic, Bird, Barkely, Zeke, Hakeem, Robinson, vs. Shaq, Ewing, Stockton & Malone etc.
vs.
Kobe, Kidd, Shaq, Nash, Duncan, Iverson, KG, LeBron, Wade.
So if he was top 3 of his generation, and that was the better generation, wouldnt he be top 3 now?
ok, first of all... since you are making an "argument"... do you have any background in arguments? (i.e. logic?)... because your conclusion is about as clearcut of a fallacy as there is in arguments...
in order of abomination:
1) "most consider the top players of that generation, to be better than the top players of this generation."
when you say "most" i assume you mean one of three types of people... 1) people who refuse to let go of the past, 2) people who don't watch basketball anymore, or 3) people who are not qualified to measure greatness...
2) "Michael, Magic, Bird, Barkely, Zeke, Hakeem, Robinson, vs. Shaq, Ewing, Stockton & Malone etc."
interesting that Shaq gets to be in this group... we are loosely defining the word "generation" here, yes? Shaq clearly belongs with the current group, since he is currently playing... how is someone who was drafted years after other players on that list retired considered part of that generation?
3) "So if he was top 3 of his generation, and that was the better generation, wouldnt he be top 3 now?"
no... bad at math? ever heard of set theory?
sorry, i have very little respect for someone who doesn't practice logic in their arguments...
Hot Forum Topics
