- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,350
- Reaction score
- 6,591
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
There are thousands of college and NBA ball players over the past 12 years who would probably have given anything to have such "garbage" themselves.
Twelve years in a league where there's a max of 450 is not a career one could reasonably call "garbage".
Let's take just the tournament teams, and unlike the NBA lets assume they have the least amount of people on the bench possible with 12. That's 768 basketball players every year that would LOVE to have even probably a fourth of that "garbage" career.
Is he LeBron James? Of course not. That's like saying someone making $250k a year doing something they enjoy has a "garbage" career compared to a CEO making multi-millions. In the scope of reality, his career isn't garbage.
Hell, look at the team he's on. You want to know who on the Wizards has a better chance of having what you'd call a "garbage career". Jan Vessely. A guy who will probably be lucky if he gets more than 4 years in the NBA. He may have better stats...but you go team by team of GMs and ask which player they'd want on their team all contract things being equal and I'd bet money Collins gets the nod every time (unless that GM was ernie grumsfeld...sigh).
Or looking around the NBA...how about Luke Jackson. In his six combined seasons he didn't play in a seasons worth of games. Collins has six SEASONS where he played in more games than Jackson did his entire career. Luke's minutes played per game average was less than 10, Collins is over 20. Their PPG were similar, but Collins brought you half a block per game and about 3 rebounds per game more.
Yes...I do think referencing the guys stats can be reasonable and realistic in the discussion. When part of the conversation after he came out was concerning his chances of getting hired next year they NEED to be brought up. And it's entirely reasonable, when talking about historical and long lasting impact, that the level of player he was could come into play. But one must be at least honest and realistic about it.
He was no superstar, but his career is not one that should be considered "garbage" and labeling it as such lends immedietely questioning to the motives of those making such a statement.
The guy stuck around because he was 7 ft. 250 pounds. There is a reason why no team kept him around. Look at his career numbers. They suck across the board. Now you can make a case that he is sooo much better than a bunch of guys not in the NBA, which is rediculous. Compare him and his performance to almost any other NBA center who played significant minutes every game. He is a ****ty player.
Every individual in the nation, no, but the nation as a whole singular unit, yes.
Since you continue to ask the question using the singular form of the word group, the answer remains "the Nation", which, as a unified group, finds it important. Individuals in that group might disagree, but the group as a whole considers the issue important.
Do you want me to talk about which groups within the nation find the issue important? If so, I can provide that answer for you as well.
The guy stuck around because he was 7 ft. 250 pounds.
There is a reason why no team kept him around.
Now you can make a case that he is sooo much better than a bunch of guys not in the NBA, which is rediculous.
Compare him and his performance to almost any other NBA center who played significant minutes every game. He is a ****ty player.
If you are trying to come off as ignorant, job well done.
.
Tucker Ignorant?
In much the same way as Sarah Palin is well-educated, I would say.
No, I am pointing out you are trying to argue over points of irrelevance.
If you are trying to come off as ignorant, job well done.
No do you think you can answer the question?
Who finds this story important?
Please don't say the nation because that is not true at all.
Also please try to not turn this into a pissing contest like you do with the other posters. They are so tiresome.
If you are not capable of answering the question please just say so.
Nonsense. Your argument is predicated on your ability to correctly identify and differentiate between pseudo-events and non-pseudo-events. When your "example" is not relevant, it becomes important to make that an issue, since in demonstrates an inability to make those differentiations which your position is based on.
Nonsense. Your argument is predicated on your ability to correctly identify and differentiate between pseudo-events and non-pseudo-events. When your "example" is not relevant, it becomes important to make that an issue, since in demonstrates an inability to make those differentiations which your position is based on.
My example was relevant
Your first statement killed your second one.
Why would his position EVER be predicated on anything other than distinguishing the difference between pseudo-events, and non-pseudo-events?
Tim-
Nonsense.
Exactly my point. When he provides an example that is neither psuedo-event nor non-psuedo event, which is what he did by virtue of giving an example which was not an event at all, he demonstrates his inability to make such assessments. Since his entire argument can only be considered sound if he can demonstrate competence in this regard, demonstrated incompetence at making such assessments (incompetence which would be demonstrated, for example, by providing examples which fit neither category of assessment in any way shape or form), would demonstrate that his argument is unsound.
well.....apparently this wasn't such an earth shattering, landscape of sports altering event after-all.....
after the initial hoop-la.....haven't heard a peep about it.
guess we'll just have to wait until the start of the next season and see if JC gets offered a contract.
the entire point of my argument was that merely discussing an event doesn't lend it legitimacy (contrary to your original claim).
well.....apparently this wasn't such an earth shattering, landscape of sports altering event after-all.....
guess we'll just have to wait until the start of the next season and see if JC gets offered a contract.
So you agree that your arguments were invalid because being a "topic of national conversation" is more than "merely discussing it". :shrug:
you never even define how "a topic of national conversation" is anything more than a discussion, or why such translates to something having inherent value.
you never even define how "a topic of national conversation" is anything more than a discussion, or why such translates to something having inherent value. You just slap a label there and expect us to merely accept it as a declaration of unquestionable fact
Usually tucker argument: I labeled it, therefore it is ...
Clearly this generated discussion, and many athletes added their (mostly positive) thoughts, which will make it easier for others to come out. That's the entire point! In fact, there's a collection of almost 200 comments from pro athletes, some of them surprisingly thoughtful. It certainly is not just a 'media flash in the pan,' because this does matter, to many people. I guess you think it should not. Well since this doesn't apply to you, I really doubt he or anyone else gives a damn.
Soon they won't be talking about this in abstraction, about the hypothetical gay athlete, because it will be common, thanks to people like Collins. That you don't sense some immediate payoff does not mean that it was worthless/selfish/whatever negativity you want to attach to this guy.
I was just reading about a high school football player who came out. This kid talked about how he was run out of town by his former team, and credited Collins for having the courage to be open after the first time backfired so badly.
As i said before, if it helps one young person, which was a motivation for Collins if you actually read the article, then it succeeded. That's the value. If you can't understand that and still have some insatiable desire to crap all over the moment, then I do think you have a problem with the substance of what he is saying and not just the 'media agenda.'
Where did I claim it was selfish? My point is that it's unlikely to have much impact beyond the media circus.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?