A debate started over pong tonight between myself and a few friends. The heroes (myself and my pong partner) contend that there is relatively no defense in the NBA outside of man, and that is essentially a pick-up game. The villains (everyone else), contends the opposite.

Moreover, I went out on a limb and said that the national champion in NCAA Men's basketball could beat whoever won the NBA championship. The reason I believe this is because the type of play between NCAA and NBA is drastically different. NCAA players inherently know how to play D. They can isolate the better players and leave it up to the lesser players to fend for themselves (and lose, ldo).

Once you enter the NBA, the fundamentals of the game leave you. Defense is no longer a necessity. It becomes a gigantic pick-up game, where the best players monopolize the ball. Yes, I guess the same could be said about the NCAA. But, each player is a necessary component of the team in the NCAA. Each player has a vital role. This is not so in the NBA. I'm convinced that in the cases of the better teams, the other lesser players are just there because it's a rule of the game to have 5 players on the court at all time. They play absolutely no vital roles.

This could be drunk ramblings. But, I think a case can be made relatively similar to the above.

Thoughts?

Oh my, it's like you aren't even trying.

Edit: In before an explosion of gifs.

Hoooooo boy. Take that shirt off sir. It could get hot in here.

D- troll, you're not supposed to make the truly absurd claims until you've spent a few posts solidifying credibility.

wow

drink more antifreeze

Sign back into your real account and start posting about college football. You're good at that.

you guys are so cool. i mean, it's easy to say you disagree and not give anything substantive to explain why you're disagreeing.

+1 for you!

"Moreover, I went out on a limb and said that the national champion in NCAA Men's basketball could beat whoever won the NBA championship."

You can't honestly think this, come on.

for the same reasons i gave for why i think ncaa > nba...

Drink more.

sorry broski, this one can't be salvaged. better luck next time...

how 'bout someone not get caught up in the circle jerk and explain to me why i'm wrong? if it is so obvious, wouldn't you snap-post why?

The average top 10 NCAA team plays with better fundamentals than alot of NBA teams, but the gross talent differential would be enough for the worst NBA teams to own most good college teams.

It doesn't matter how good your fundamentals are if you don't have that much raw talent (speed, agiliity, shooting, etc.)

Plus the NBA champions usually have good fundamentals anyway.

NBA Championship team players >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NCAA Championship team players

Here, I'll explain in pictures:



vs

wouldn't you say that ncaa championship teams have some raw talent? the differentials can't be that drastic. especially considering a lot of the talent in the nba today are a few years out of college.

raw talent + fundamentally sound > raw talent.

I think you missed these posts.

just b/c people are moving slower doesn't mean they play w/better fundamentals

It isn't like NBA players have no fundamental skills...

You said that in the NBA, superstars monopolize the ball. True and no one in college can stop them though.

I can't believe I'm actually trying to argue this.

and just b/c people are moving faster and being ushered to the basket doesn't mean they're good

I am impressed with your literacy, good job on that, it must have been a struggle.