Sure, but my point is that Roy had already played two full seasons as a starter by the time 08-09 rolled around. At the start of the 08-09 season, roy had played 4,807 minutes in the NBA. CJ had played 1,449 minutes before this season started.
If you are going to respond directly to me, you should at least make sure your response takes into account the context of my post. Otherwise, why respond directly? Yes, I agree Roy played more up till that point. That is a factual statement. So what? It doesn't disprove that Roy was significantly better than CJ.
Somehow, in the development of basketball vernacular, the term "combo guard" didn't only have to do with a player's size and skill level, the implication is that they are "chukars" - inefficient. Perhaps, your reservation has more to do with the implied inefficiency of combo guards. Can you name two efficient guards (of any size) who played together and were bad? IMHO, efficiency trumps "combo guard" stereotypes. Of course, I'm somewhat of a unrepentant homer.
I guess you're not following the line of debate. You - That's not fair to CJ. Roy was a monster. Me - CJ could be a monster too, but Roy almost has a larger than life legend status because he retired young. You - Except Roy was better statistically. Me - Roy had a lot more experience in his third season. You - We're comparing one season. Me - Sure but my point is that Roy had played significantly more by his third season. My point is that what CJ is doing with significantly less experience is more impressive to me than what Roy did with a lot more time played in the NBA as a starter and the focal point of the team.
At his best, BRoy rocked the frickin' casbah. That we are bothering to compare the two guys says great things about CJ . . .
Everything I was talking about was in the context of the year we are comparing. Everything you are talking about is in the context of their career up until that point. Why did you even bother responding to me again?
I get what Nate is saying... For example: In 05-06, I played 18ppg and averaged 10/5/5. I was a 3rd year player who didnt really play the first two years because of injury. Making this my first solid year. In 05-06, NATE played 18ppg and averaged 10/5/5. It was also his 3rd year in the league, but he played 82 games the first two years. How can you compare the two? Even though its just one year, they aren't comparable because of the different paths and history that got them there.
Because you seem to hate to have anyone disagree with you. I enjoy debating. I reply to your post because I find the topic interesting and I want to contribute to that topic. It's not a slight against you that I disagree. Stop taking everything so personally.
I am not saying it is ironic that you responded. It is just ironic that this: "Why does it bother you so much?" Is coming from you. Especially considering your post history.
Yup. I'm an asshole, but you're the one that's stepping outside the topic at hand and making it about the poster. So simmer down.
The one that made the personal attack is.....you, and yet I am the one stepping outside the topic. This is definitely not the first time this has happened with you...lol.
Personal attack? Where was the personal attack? Sugar britches? That's an attack on you personally? Can I call you sweet thang? How about love bug? Would it offend you if I called bae?
I am not offended at all. Personally, I don't care if insults are swung around this forum, and if it were any regular poster I wouldn't feel the need to point it out. But coming from a moderator who is supposed to uphold the rules of this site, and someone who has had done stuff like this in the past, you bet I'm going to call you out.
Calling me out for what exactly? Telling you to simmer down? That's a personal insult now? You made a comment about why would I even respond to you, and I said to simmer down. That's not a personal insult. That's not even an insult in any way, shape, or form. That's just you taking things too seriously.
