The NBA title is the hardest title in Major sports to win. (2 Viewers)

[ibelieve]

The NHL don't have so many days off between games like the NBA does. The NBA playoffs are a 'walk in the park' compared to the NHL playoffs.

I am not familar with the NHL schedule, but after looking at a random teams, it doesnt look that different than an NBA schedule.

As for the playoffs, they never play back to backs. Also very similar to the NBA. I dont see where the 'walk in the park' is?

NHL.com - The National Hockey League Web Site

 

[NewGold]

Running takes more energy than skating.

Whoa. You've never played hockey before then.
There's a reason why an average hockey shift is only 45-60 seconds long.

 

[jlam]

It's like watching Kid Rock and Jesse James debate quantum physics....

 

[The Mongoose]

In order to tell what sport has the best athletes, you must analyze what their sport demands of them.

Basketball demands the most athleticism. I'm not talking about playing horse, but playing the game of basketball at a high level.

You need explosive movement in any direction, especially laterally and vertically, which are the hardest directions to be explosive.

You need to have excellent hand-eye coordination to dribble and to shoot.

You need stamina to get up and down the court.

You need strength to get under the boards and fight for position.

If anyone wants to know where the world's best athletes are, go sit close to an NBA game. When you see the size of these dudes and the quickness, you won't be arguing against them for very long.

 

[keepoursaints]

It's like watching Kid Rock and Jesse James debate quantum physics....

Shut up and post more pictures of those chicks in your sig

 

[gboudx]

In order to tell what sport has the best athletes, you must analyze what their sport demands of them.

Hockey demands the most athleticism. I'm not talking about playing slapshot, but playing the game of hockey at a high level.

You need explosive movement in any direction, the ability to stop on a dime and change direction, all while wearing small blades and moving on ice.

You need to have excellent hand-eye coordination to locate a fast-moving puck, get on your stick and shoot it at the net while bodies of other players are moving in front of you and trying to make you and wall one and the same.

You need stamina to get up and down the ice.

You need strength to get in front of the net and fight for position.

If anyone wants to know where the world's best athletes are, go sit close to an NHL game. When you see the size of these dudes and the quickness, you won't be arguing against them for very long.

Let me use your argument.

But really, the original argument was about the NBA title being the hardest to achieve. Not who has the best athletes.

 

[SaintMeaux]

We've created a monster!!!

Original question posted: I'll still stick with my Stanley Cup assertion.

The rest of the thread: All professional athletes are talented, skilled, and in good shape (even the fat baseball and football guys...) To go around in circles about who are "better" athletes will go nowhere, and probably not convince anybody.

But hey, that's what the interwebs are for!

 

[ibelieve]

But hey, that's what the interwebs are for!

Im going to have to disagree. The intrawebz are for pornz. This is all lagniappe.

 

[keepoursaints]

Im going to have to disagree. The intrawebz are for pornz. This is all lagniappe.

I've enjoyed the thread for sure!

 

[SaintMeaux]

I've enjoyed the thread for sure!

lus-un2:

That's gold Jerry, GOLD!

 

[SaintJ]

I can see what you're saying in a way, but one of my main issues with the NBA playoffs are the records of the teams going to the playoffs

The 4 seed in the east has a whopping .560 winning percentage, followed by 3 teams with .507 and the 8th seed at .467... so to me is the NBA system truly designed to find a winner based on teams deserving in the regular season?

You're cherry picking, the NHL puts in 16 of 30 teams, the NBA 16 of 32. There's currently an East/West imbalance in the NBA. If that's all you got, it's not enough.

The bottom four seeds of either the NBA East or West, barring a very favorable matchup, aren't even likely to get to the second round. The NHL is littered with first-round upsets in its history, and lower seeded teams making deep runs in the playoffs. In the NBA, it takes first a few years of putting together a contending team before you can consider a deep playoff run, and IMO a multi-year project like that is much harder to accomplish.

 

[St.Ryan]

Now this is reaching dare I say the level of you irrational love for Mike Bibby.

Lots of guys were allstate as sophomores and Ronnie Lott would still take their heads off.

I tend to agree that NBA players are overall the best atheletes, but that does not mean their championship is the hardest to win.

1. Those were great EE days.

2. To this day, that was the best playoff series performance I've ever seen.

3. I think hockey's championship is harder to win, as do I think hockey, without ever having played it, is more taxing on the body. I really started to argue in this thread when someone brought up how easy basketball is because anyone can shoot into a basket.

 

[SaintJ]

So, using this argument, why have playoffs at all if we're concerned about making sure that a team with quality regular season play can get a championship? The 2007 Giants and 2005 Steelers don't like that idea.

If a team is good enough to squeak in to the playoffs in any sport, they are worthy of the championship, IMO. There are too many factors to put into play, maybe they started out slow, and really came on in the last half or third of the season. If this team just barely gets in, are they not deserving?

I view the regular seasons in professional sports as sort of a round robin to gain position for the real season, the post season.

I see your point, but from a standpoint of "who consensus says are the best teams and most likely champs right before the playoffs start," the NBA is the most likely, followed by the NFL, to have those teams make the finals/win the title. The reason I slot the NBA as harder than the NFL is that we've seen some teams make a big leap in one year, or maybe two, whereas the NBA seems to take a number of years to (a) land one or two tue first-tier players and (b) the right surrounding cast and coach.

The NHL and MLB have just had too many lower-seeded teams, or wild card teams, as finals participants/winners for me to say it's "harder;" just stay close, sneak into the playoffs and take your shot. If you can save a couple of years, and rely on a hot goalie or having your top two starters (when rotations shorten from 5 to 3 or 4 pitchers) pitching 80% of the time.

 

[SaintJ]

Wouldn't the fact that the regular season is meaningless in the NHL mean that it's harder to win the Stanley Cup? If playing hard all season does not necessarily lead to playoff success then it seems to me that it is harder to win. In the NBA the team that is dominant in the regular season is usually dominant in the playoffs which means it's not really that hard for them to blow through the playoffs. On the other hand, an NHL team that dominates in the regular season can run into a hot goalie or two making it much harder for them to win the Championship. That in my book makes it harder to win the Stanley Cup.

On the other hand, it's more random. And getting a hot goalie can save your 2-3 extra years of putting a dominant team together.

 

[keepoursaints]

You're cherry picking, the NHL puts in 16 of 30 teams, the NBA 16 of 32. There's currently an East/West imbalance in the NBA. If that's all you got, it's not enough.

The bottom four seeds of either the NBA East or West, barring a very favorable matchup, aren't even likely to get to the second round. The NHL is littered with first-round upsets in its history, and lower seeded teams making deep runs in the playoffs. In the NBA, it takes first a few years of putting together a contending team before you can consider a deep playoff run, and IMO a multi-year project like that is much harder to accomplish.

I don't care what sport it is, but a team with sub .500 or right at .500 winning percentage shouldn't be allowed into the playoffs. The argument was made that the playoffs were to determine the winner based on regular season success, which was the point of my post.

How can this be the case when the select few that have a shot at the title can do so with below .500 winning percentage? How is that rewarding those who deserve a shot based on regular season success?