WingedEagle

Duncan couldn't dominate a game offensively like Shaq or Bird. Throw in defense and his ability to dominate a game is arguably on par with them. What super teams was Duncan on? The '03 Nets team was no all timer and certainly no match for the Spurs, but he went through the West -- including the Shaq/Kobe/Phil Lakers and the final Dirk/Nash Mavs without another all star on the roster. '99 was also post-prime Robinson. Bird's teams were a hell of a lot more loaded than any Duncan title team. I know Bird and Jordan get a lot of love for their competitiveness. I'd argue Duncan holds up fairly well there given the 2 biggest losses of his career ('06 vs. Mavs, '13 vs. Heat) were both followed by title seasons.

What's a workrate match?

Its not hard to believe, its just that batshit is given a much larger forum to make noise in 2015 -- and that goes for conservatives and liberals. Unfortunately nobody seems very interested in anything that's not on the margins when it comes to political discourse.

Does PWG release their shows on VOD after the fact or only DVD?

I still don't understand how he can be a judge. The fact he's a genius doesn't hurt, even if its more insanity than A Beautiful Mind. But its called the other side of the coin. From time to time everybody gets to flip it even if we disagree with it. And that's coming from somebody who finds Fox News & its ilk much more revolting than anything on the liberal side. Unfortunately its that kind of close-minded attitude about the other side that makes all of these discussions so pointless and force anyone who's not extreme conservative or liberal to head for the hills. When people paint Scalia and Elizabeth Warren as standard bears is when you know the bizness is in trouble.

I would never vote for Scalia for elected office, nominate him to the bench or leave him responsible for making important decisions about a loved one. But I would gladly have a beer with him or pay top dollar to see him speak. Highly entertaining.

Want to throw up 3/5/10 matches to watch?

Arguably more fun than any tag team I've seen in years. if I do a tag team ballot they'll probably find a way on.

Anything worth watching on the show last night? I DVR'd it due to the hype and was curious if any parts are worth going back for.

Thanks, will be checking that out. Part 1 of Meltzer's bio was fantastic for anyone that hasn't gotten to it yet. Hopefully not a big delay on the next piece.

I was referring more to when Cena "felt" like he was the top dog, rather than when word was out that he was going to be the guy. My recollection was that in '05 it still seemed that HHH, HBK, maybe even Hogan or Batista were promoted at the top of the card. I could also be imagining all of this but am trying to pinpoint when the change from "We Want Him On Top In the Future" to "On Top" took place.

Interesting, I definitely liked this more than the BOSJ Finals and O'Reilly/Lethal as both dragged for stretches at times where I'd end up checking the phone or computer. This one I was locked in on the whole way. Different strokes for different folks!

I feel crazy saying Brock's work between now and the ballot could move him up a ton, but I absolutely believe it. Rewatched a few of his recent big matches and he is just spectacular. He will definitely place higher than Volk Han or anyone else lacking serious volume.

I don't know if I would go that far, but I expected a clusterfuck and they delivered one hell of a match, with tons of good ideas down the stretch. The one thing I wasn't crazy about was the big Puma comeback after the tables were set up, a little bit too jumpy for me, in a match where the selling was actually well done most of the time. Apart from that, damn that match was fun. Mundo is so much better as a heel, and I think the format of the match allowed them to get creative in a good way. Most logical guitar shot ever. A holy shit spot that actually deserved the chant. Hey, actually, maybe I'd go as far as saying this is a MOTYC to me too. I love this show. YES! I forgot to comment on heel Mundo, but he absolutely brought it here. Using the weapons and capitalizing with 2 quick falls afterwards, taunting Puma and killing clock from the stage, he really delivered on it here. Absolutely a low end MOTYC. Question for you -- what are the must-see matches before let's say February? I watched Aztec Warfare today and thought it was really fun and a great twist on a Rumble, although I wouldn't rave about it at the level I saw from Meltzer and elsewhere. But that's really the point where I was invested on a weekly basis and am not sure what I missed before then.

When would people say the stamp was put on Cena as the #1 guy in WWE? After the HHH mania match in '06? HBK in '07? Somewhere in between?

Jesus, have a drink. Take it easy. She asked where the T&A was in mid-80s Japanese women's wrestling. She didn't use some racist term to ask if she could buy them as whores for an internment camp.

Who doesn't love grandma with a salty mouth? I've yet to find a situation where that doesn't crack up a room.

Its a great, funny story.

Prince Puma vs. Johnny Mundo (Lucha Underground 6/17/15) C/Ping my comments from the LU thread in case it encourages anyone who's not a regular LU-er to check this one out.

Ladder matches -- be they straight, MITB, TLC, etc. when done well often are often spectacular the first go round and even more so before they were run into the ground. They don't hold up nearly as well because they're usually stunt shows.

I absolutely loved Mundo-Puma to the point I thought it was far and away the best match LU has produced and probably a top 10 MOTYC to date. It never dragged which is quite the feat for going so long, mixed in spots, wrestling, strikes and some absolutely top notch violence and hardcore ish outside. Weapon shots may be overdone, but if you're going to go that route then make it matter like they did hear with the crowbar. Ton of credit to everyone involved laying this out. I had it as an easy 4.25 stars.

Credible is not at all a bad pick. I remember loving the name, loving the the first appearance or 2 and then...the bottom fell out. There was nothing remotely ECW or credible about him.

Perhaps I'm in the minority but I thought the Balor package did more to make a star out of Becky Lynch than Balor. Not that Balor didn't look good and come across well -- as this type of presentation and extended focus is hard to screw up -- but Lynch stood out a lot more here.

I think one of the funny-odd things about Bird were those first four seasons: Eastern Conference Champions 1980 Philadelphia 76ers (4-1 over Celtics) 1981 Boston Celtics (4-3 over 76ers) 1982 Philadelphia 76ers (4-3 over Celtics) 1983 Philadelphia 76ers (Celtics were swept by the Bucks in the ECSF) People like to remember the 1981 series because the 76ers blew the 3-1 lead, but they tend to forget that Doc vs Bird in the ECF was 2-1 before Doc got Moses. Then the Celtics ducked the match up in the fourth season. The Celtics in those four seasons were far from impressive. That's before taking into consideration that they won the 1981 title over the 40-42 team in the Finals thanks to the West melting down in the post season. The 1984-87 Celtics were impressive. Though I'm not sold that coming out of the East in those years was as impressive as coming out of the West in the 2000s and 2010s. They went through Shaqkobe in 1999 as well, sweeping them. They did have some issues with the Lakers from 2000-2004 losing in 2001, 2002 & 2004 while winning in 2003. But those transitional Duncan Spurs really weren't that great behind him. That they still won 53, 58, 58, 60 & 57 games in those years in the West is mind blowing and a sign of just how good Peak Duncan was in carrying them. Look at the 2004 Spurs: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2004.html That is not yet a great team as Tony and Manu hadn't yet taken the leap. Yet they went 57-25 in the West. Tim basically gets very little credit for how pedestrian his teammates were in those years, yet they kept winning. That they won it all in 2003 is pretty mind bending if you look at the roster. I'd take Peak Bird over Peak Duncan, but Peak Duncan was a helluva played and pretty underrated. With Larry you get 1980-1988 as pre-peak and peak, 9 years. Timmy would be 1998-2007, which is 10 years. The thing with Tim is that you get another 8 years where the first few remained a very strong post-peak, and then the "fading" Duncan remained a foundational player on a very good team that was good enough to bag another title. It's just an amazing run. I can't put him above Jabbar, who had an even longer and better pre-peak and peak, and then the same post-peak where he was a key player on some terrific teams. He really only faded in the last two years. Don't know how to format this properly to mix quoting and responding so you'll have to bear with me. No arguments at all here on Bird, and without 84-87 producing the jewelry it did we may very well be talking about the before and after in the same fashion as do LBJ. Maybe I'm not giving Shaq & Kobe enough credit but things got rolling there when Phil showed up so I'm not holding that against them. But you certainly can. Peak Duncan is arguably the most underrated player we've seen. You highlighted Parker & Manu in '04, which is 12 months removed from the biggest talking point in the finals being whether the Spurs could land Kidd to replace Parker -- which they would've if Kidd was on board with their money instead of a larger payday in NY (and perhaps some ear wringing from Joumana, but that's for another day). It still boggles my mind that Parker took Finals MVP in '07 or even Kahwi least year -- he may have made Lebron work but that's a 50 win team if you take away any body other than Tim. Maybe even any 2 bodies. If Duncan isn't there its probably a playoff team due to Pop but you'd find some money betting against it. Absolutely difficult to argue against Jabbar's run when Duncan's post-prime is such a huge part of his resume, but settling for something in the 4-8 range, the #2 big in my eyes and 5 rings is not too shabby.

Yohe is 65+ and grew up watching Baylor and West when the Lakers first showed up in Los Angeles. He admitted that perhaps he was jumping the gun by having him that high. But he also thought he's been clearly the best player in the NBA from 2008/2009 to 2013/2014. There aren't many players who were clearly the best in the NBA for six seasons, and I think in Steve's mind the only ones are the folks he has ahead of Lebron: Russell, Jabbar and Jordan. There is a certain logic to that. He also places more weight in Mikan's dominance (5 titles in 6 years or 6 titles in 7 years depending on how you count it). Jag and I discount him because of (i) the era of Narrow Key & No Shot Clock helped him, and (ii) The Lack of Black Players. We agree he has to be in the Top 50 somewhere, but rate him way down. He would have been exposed in Russell's era. Ha I kind of sensed Yohe may have been around a few more years than me. I kind of see the argument about LBJ being #1 from 09-14, but on the other hand you can point to Duncan being top 2/3 over a 10+ year stretch. With multiple rings. Without an all-time supporting cast. In a system and with a mindset not geared towards posting crushing individual numbers. I'm with you you on MIkan -- great as he may have been, you can't discount those 2 huge, huge points. If we're being unfair to Mikan he'll have to live with his fistful of rings and status as a pioneer and legend but just not widely regarded as a top tier all-timer.