Charles Barkley would take Isiah Thomas over Stephen Curry

If I was in a , if I had to choose – and I love Steph Curry and I know people are going to go online because they don’t have a life – if I had to choose between Steph and Isiah, I would probably go with Steph in a scenario said Charles Barkley on the Dan Patrick Show.

This morning I see https://twitter.com/thedunkcentral/status/1788214518897582231?s=61&t=77Dcy8W01SMCTiEBzkpunA, and we discuss it with Théo. We tell ourselves that we have to see the Source, because we would like to know its reasoning, regardless what we think of the sentence itself. Well, for the reasoning, you will have to go back…

And it’s not Barkley’s fault. No, it’s just that Dan Patrick doesn’t care about Chuck’s argument:

Some journalists really drive me crazy. They are complicit in the stupidity that social networks are exponentializing. Ok, my sentence doesn’t really make sense. By this I mean that:

1. Some people and certain fans don’t need the networks to be lazy when it comes to thinking, to blurt out bullshit, to favor sentences without argument.

2. Social networks multiply all this to a minimum of 1000 (no need to explain, there are excellent documentaries where psychologists and neurologists who have worked for these companies come to repent by explaining how it all works)

3. And there you have Dan Patrick who has the opportunity to ask Charles Barkley WHY he would take Isiah Thomas over Stephen Curry. But no, they prefer to move on to “Isiah and the Dream Team”. Because we don’t have time, we have to generate the next sentence that will end up on social networks. Isiah stronger than Curry, check, people will have a field day. Now I need my Dream Team quote. “Michael didn’t want Isiah on the team,” check. Come on quickly, let’s move on.

And the guy must be satisfied, he thinks he’s done his job. It will be used in lots of tweets, in lots of videos, in lots of visuals. And so on lots of different subjects, because he managed to string them together.

It doesn’t matter that through his fault, the comments under his video, under the tweets, boil down to ” Damn, old people don’t understand anything about basketball, Isiah Thomas didn’t shoot three-pointers » versus « Of course Thomas he smashes Curry that nothing could have done at the time of real basketball when it was still a men’s sport that had the severely filled shorts “.

Stupid and unnuanced comments? Yes, but many, very many, endless, and that generates commitment and visibility, my brave lady! Amen.

And there is of course a third type of comment: “ don’t compare eras “. Comment that I understand perfectly given the comments mentioned above unfortunately generated by these debates. But with which I do not agree, see the rest.

The guy just had to ask “Why?” “. ” For what ? » it’s the simplest question in the world, the question of children. Barkley seems to want to talk, he’s calm at home, not in his suit on the TNT set getting paid to be an idiot with Shaq and also to come out with as many punchlines as possible.

Simply ask the question “why?” » and open up reflection. Maybe the answer will be zero. But perhaps Barkley will try to ask himself what Curry would have given in the 80s (a huge player, of course, but what profile, what type of domination in the context where he would have grown up in the 70s?). That he will try to ask himself what Thomas would have been like in the 2020s (a huge player, of course, but what player would he have become if he had been trained in the early 2000s, would it be a Improved Chris Paul, or rather an even stronger or less strong Kyrie?).

Perhaps he will give other reasons and open up other areas of reflection. Perhaps the conclusion will be that “ no Curry is above Zeke “, or ” yes Isiah can be chosen over Stephen “, or that in fact there is no conclusion. And that’s very good, because in the end, we don’t care about the result. The important thing is the type of reflection that these debates should generate in an ideal world, in a world where posture, brushing your community in the direction of the grain and making commitment would not be the most important things.

These reflections would require us to go further in the analysis of our sport. But no, the majority of fans, observers and journalists are looking for a “moment because no matter the question, no matter the answer”” as Léa Salamé says so disgustingly:

Fortunately there are still people who still want to think. That’s why we created this new version of the site, and for you.

-

-

PREV Marine Le Pen sues the far-right Chez Nous party and “does not support it”
NEXT “I grabbed her leg and pulled”: how Fabrilene saved her colleague from a burning car