You've been watching too much of our current politics. Being bombastic is never a good substitute for being right, unless you can position yourself in front of an adoring crowd of dittoheads.
So here is your argument:
You can never win doing whatever it is that Boogie does ( and that is the real criteria, because there really is no principled or historic lesson being applied). Followed by a list of traits.
My counter:
Teams/great players have in fact won, and won heavily, while displaying similar traits to those you say teams/players can never win with.
Your response:
But see, this OTHER player didn't win with those traits (and actually said player on quite a bit, but still)
Which doesn't prove anything. You made an overbroad argument for a blanket impossibility. I showed that no such blanket impossibility exists. You then counter with but it didn't work this one time, which is no counter at all. I didn't argue that it worked everytime. I argued that it has in fact worked sometimes. Finding a case where it didn't work doesn't disprove my point in the least.
Your swagger is wasted by the weakness of the underlying basketball analysis. If you got the basketball more right, you wouldn't have to constantly work so hard to gussy up weak arguments with colorful and long winded rhetoric.
P.S. Attempts to use Boogie's career numbers again make me more than suspicious that you are just consistently dishonest with these arguments. You're not a moron. As a non-moron you are perfectly aware that Boogie's first three years were development years in the worst development environment possible, and have little to do with the effectiveness of the All NBA player that now leads the team. Its not even an argument, except to just be argumentative. Hence, its dishonest. Hence, your failings are conscious. I would have more patience for that if I actually did think you were stupid. As it is you are just willing to spin things to try to win an argument out of either malice or ego. Its not a good look, and not one I will ever let you get away with, so you should really consider stopping that.
You cannot legitimately contradict my assessment Barkley is better comp for Boogie than Duncan, so you go personal. Weak sauce.
Barkley was a power player with incredible agility for 250 pound player. Cousins is a power player with incredible agility for a 270 pound player.
Duncan does not fit this mold. He was finesse player and classic big.
But you don't want to explore this argument because it exposes the validity of your comparison as specious.
You also cannot look at the career stats for Duncan (TS% and ASST:TO), the whole enchilada instead of a few bites, and acknowledge they are in the ball park of my expectations of a high usage player of championship caliber, and concede Boogie has underperformed relative to this benchmark for a superstar. Period.
Further you cannot concede the game was different in 1999-2001 which also invalidates your comparison.
You also miss intangible variables (leadership, professionalism, accountability) in the context of Boogie's meddling efficiency. They are not there.
If Boogie was the Greatest Teammate in The World, and logged 53% TS and 0.8 assist to turnover with sporadic defensive effort, but in the process inspiring those around him with synergistic spirit, we might have something.
But he's done the opposite. He's been sour, moody and often insufferable, dragging down many around him, an undeniable fact you overlook because it belies your narrative.
I would be remiss to point out I retain optimism regarding Cousins and this opinion of mine must have you twisting in the wind.
I think Boogie is primed for his best year ever, based on superior fitness and high post offense, two drums I have been beating for a while.
When benchmarks I have referenced are met, I promise there will be a correlation between his individual improvement and our win total. When and if Boogie becomes the player I know he can be, my position will be justified further.
This what you and fans need to know: our team only becomes good (legitimate) when Boogie performs better (less variance between good and bad games, less turnovers, less bad and forced shots, less ball dominance).
You contend he does not need to become better for us to win. False and egregiously inaccurate. .
There are two most likely scenarios and you can mark my words on it: (1) More of the same. He will perform to historic efficiency and we will struggle, (2) he will take his game to the next level on both ends and we compete for a playoff spot. I am betting on the latter.
A third option is Boogie raises his game, to over 55% over 1.0 assist to turnover, steady defense, and we still struggle for Ws, but I'd put these odds less than 10%.
Regardless you are on shaky ground, so you assign excessive blame to previous coaches, grasp at old-timers from different era with different playing style for lame comparison, resort to GIFs to put Boogie in the HOF before a whiff of a playoff run. Really?
Then to deflect from the weakness of this position you claim dishonesty? I am not anything if sincere in my perspective. I spew out so much content on this topic it would be hard to be so prolific if I was a liar!
Then you want to try to bully and say "I will never let you get away with that...", as if I do not have right to a differing opinion. Outrageous, hilarious and sad.
I think you may be sore after declaring definitively there is "no place for Ben in the rotation".
How is that assessment working out for you so far? Your degree of delusional certainty is only surpassed by the egg on your face.
/mic shatters
P.S. So now we are to excuse Boogie's performance his first three years, when he was fat and temperamental. When do we count his stats, please let me know? Do we excuse his month of December last year when he performed horribly and threw away our chance at a playoff run? I guess that wasn't his fault. It was the system and coach, right? The same system and coach that led to him scoring 105 points in consecutive games a few weeks later.
And when Boogie lost 30 pounds this summer after you declared doing so would negate his advantage as a punisher in the paint, where does this leave you? Kind of in awkward spot? The same awkwardness with the hiring of a coach you approve of who is intent on instituting a high post offense when you projected we would be getting back to smash mouth basketball.
Awkward!
Do you question the new coach and his plan to best utilize Boogie away from the hoop, or accept it though it is consistent with what Blob has been telling you for a year?
Tough quandary there, good luck sorting it out.
How do you conclude we are spending $32 million per year at C....more dubious analysis! If Boogie stays lean and fit as he looks so far, the best he has looked in his career, his natural position may be PF....with Koufos and Willie logging ALL, yes ALL, the minutes at center. So the premise to your assertion is fundamentally flawed. The Koufos-Boogie failed duo of last year was more related to pace, Cousin's poor conditioning than lack of complementary skill. II have said for years Boogie may be best complement by a center to absorb pounding down low and do the dirty work, to decrease Boogie's rebounding and interior responsibilities, to free him to create more havoc on the other end at a better efficiency, to be the facilitator AND finisher on offense. We are sort of seeing the aforementioned strategy play out with Joerger's high post offense.
