Total medals or most golds. Which is more important?

Total medals or most golds?

Most Golds
90
82%
Total Medals
20
18%
 
Total votes: 110

User avatar
Al n' Perk No Layups!
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,532
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 30, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#21 » by Al n' Perk No Layups! » Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:35 pm

YiOF wrote:
Why continue this pointless argument? You can say NBA is the "finals" for Basketball. Collegian and over seas players compete to get to the NBA. The D-league and Euro Leagues are for those who didn't make to "the Olympics". NBA can only have 30 teams because of various limitations, so is the Olympic finals for having only few elite athletes competing.


You could ask yourself the same question. The only limitations the NBA has is profitability. You are comparing two different things. There are no gold medals for Olympic qualifiers, there are championships for D-League, Euro League and NCAA. Also not everyone in another league is trying to get into the NBA. In fact, multiple players left the NBA for the Euro League this year. Last time I checked, I haven't seen anyone quit an Olympic team to go mess around in the nation's training facility. You're trying to advance an argument by comparing apples to oranges.
Michael Phelps
Banned User
Posts: 285
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 18, 2008
Location: Baltimore, MD
Contact:

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#22 » by Michael Phelps » Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:38 pm

Most golds, but I own almost have of the U.S total golds so far. The other athletes have be dominant like me.
YiOF
Sophomore
Posts: 192
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 12, 2007

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#23 » by YiOF » Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:11 pm

Al n' Perk No Layups! wrote:
YiOF wrote:
Why continue this pointless argument? You can say NBA is the "finals" for Basketball. Collegian and over seas players compete to get to the NBA. The D-league and Euro Leagues are for those who didn't make to "the Olympics". NBA can only have 30 teams because of various limitations, so is the Olympic finals for having only few elite athletes competing.


You could ask yourself the same question. The only limitations the NBA has is profitability. You are comparing two different things. There are no gold medals for Olympic qualifiers, there are championships for D-League, Euro League and NCAA. Also not everyone in another league is trying to get into the NBA. In fact, multiple players left the NBA for the Euro League this year. Last time I checked, I haven't seen anyone quit an Olympic team to go mess around in the nation's training facility. You're trying to advance an argument by comparing apples to oranges.


It's more like you are trying to twist it into apples and oranges. It's unbelievable how you can make up facts to support your own argument. when "last time you checked", you missed Shaq quitting US basketball team after 1996 so he can mess around in his back yard.

There are no gold medals for Olympic qualifiers, but there is things like African cup which is the Olympic qualifying Tourney for most of Afraican Team sports.

"The only limitations the NBA has is profitbility." did you even read that sentence after you wrote it?

your logic is extremely flawed because you are simply making up facts to support your arguments.
User avatar
Aventador
Head Coach
Posts: 7,323
And1: 3,467
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
   

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#24 » by Aventador » Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:56 pm

depends on the difference. I'd take 10 golds over an assortment of 20 medals of 7 golds ~ and rest bronze/silver for example. but something like 10 golds vs 9 golds and 10 silvers, i'd take total every time.
User avatar
Al n' Perk No Layups!
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,532
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 30, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#25 » by Al n' Perk No Layups! » Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:43 pm

YiOF wrote:It's more like you are trying to twist it into apples and oranges. It's unbelievable how you can make up facts to support your own argument. when "last time you checked", you missed Shaq quitting US basketball team after 1996 so he can mess around in his back yard.


"Quitting" AFTER winning Gold in 1996, Shaq is a multi-millionaire NBA superstar who completed in the Olympics and didn't go again, he didn't go through qualifiers and quit when he reached Sydney in 2000. I expected you would realize that people don't compete in the Olympics indefinately, or maybe you're still wondering why they aren't showing a 46 year old Comaneci's high bar routines on TV. I guess I was expecting too much out of you. Last time I checked, people retire from sports, unless you want to show me Bill Russell's game film from this season.

"The only limitations the NBA has is profitbility." did you even read that sentence after you wrote it?

your logic is extremely flawed because you are simply making up facts to support your arguments


Really? Exactly what facts am I making up? You haven't noticed that the NBA adds an expansion team every time it finds a market where it would be profitable to do so?

I love how you're comparing second place in a 30 team professional sports league to second place in the Olympics, and my logic is flawed. If nobody thought second place in the Olympics was impressive, would there be a silver medal? It seems to me at least 90% (more likely 99%) of the world understands that second place out of thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions) is pretty damn impressive. But whatever, I must be "making up facts" again.
yongaz
Starter
Posts: 2,144
And1: 150
Joined: Dec 30, 2005

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#26 » by yongaz » Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:16 am

2nd place is the first / best loser....

so yup total golds.
User avatar
gsw5
Senior
Posts: 532
And1: 3
Joined: Dec 25, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#27 » by gsw5 » Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:11 am

Whichever one the United States wins...if neither then Chinas cheating
macklock
Sophomore
Posts: 196
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 31, 2005

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#28 » by macklock » Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:12 am

Al n Perk No Layups wrote:Really? Exactly what facts am I making up? You haven't noticed that the NBA adds an expansion team every time it finds a market where it would be profitable to do so?

I love how you're comparing second place in a 30 team professional sports league to second place in the Olympics, and my logic is flawed. If nobody thought second place in the Olympics was impressive, would there be a silver medal? It seems to me at least 90% (more likely 99%) of the world understands that second place out of thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions) is pretty damn impressive. But whatever, I must be "making up facts" again.


Dude are you stupid ?
There is even basketball in the olympics.
So a silver medal in the olympics somehow is won over millions but a second place in the NBA is not ??
Do you realise there are more talents in the NBA than in the olympics.
User avatar
hermes
RealGM
Posts: 93,372
And1: 24,585
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Location: the restaurant at the end of the universe
 

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#29 » by hermes » Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:40 am

golds, but i reserve the right to change it to overall if the US doesn't get most golds :wink:
YiOF
Sophomore
Posts: 192
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 12, 2007

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#30 » by YiOF » Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:51 am

Al n' Perk No Layups! wrote:"Quitting" AFTER winning Gold in 1996, Shaq is a multi-millionaire NBA superstar who completed in the Olympics and didn't go again, he didn't go through qualifiers and quit when he reached Sydney in 2000. I expected you would realize that people don't compete in the Olympics indefinately, or maybe you're still wondering why they aren't showing a 46 year old Comaneci's high bar routines on TV. I guess I was expecting too much out of you. Last time I checked, people retire from sports, unless you want to show me Bill Russell's game film from this season.


I am trying to make sense of what you are trying to do here.

I have no idea how prime 2000 Shaq not wanting to play in the Olympics have anything to do with old gymnastics and old Bill Russell's game films not being shown on TV. Nobody said he should compete in the Olympics indefinitely, he was still in his prime and have a reason not to go. I am sure Josh Childress have a good reason to leave nba too. Telling me why Shaq didn't want to compete in the Olympics doesn't quite make whatever point you are trying to prove.

99.9% of the basketball players in the world wants to play in the NBA. Using a select few exceptions to trying to prove it otherwise is just dumb.

Really? Exactly what facts am I making up? You haven't noticed that the NBA adds an expansion team every time it finds a market where it would be profitable to do so?

I love how you're comparing second place in a 30 team professional sports league to second place in the Olympics, and my logic is flawed. If nobody thought second place in the Olympics was impressive, would there be a silver medal? It seems to me at least 90% (more likely 99%) of the world understands that second place out of thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions) is pretty damn impressive. But whatever, I must be "making up facts" again.


There are so many limitations NBA faces to expend, I can't even tell you all of them. I am sure having a franchise in Shanghai would be profitable, but there are multitude of problems with that. To say profitability is the only limitations just shows how ignorant you are.

It seems like you also needs a lesson in perspectives.

To the "thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions)" of basketball players around the world and in the U.S who wants to join the NBA, Eastern Conference Championship is very impressive. Just like to the "thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions)" of athletes who wants to compete in the Olympics, silver is very impressive. To the hundreds of players who are already playing in the NBA and NBA viewers who has no idea how big the world basketball community is, winning 2nd in the NBA championship might not be as impressive. Just like to the handful of players who already made to the Olympics, Silver medal is no where near as impressive as Gold medal. "90% (more likely 99%)" don't use 2 different perspectives to compare things, you in the other hand clearly do.

You are terrible at this, stop wasting my time, and everyone else's time to read your crap.
User avatar
XcalibuR
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,099
And1: 79
Joined: Jan 04, 2005

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#31 » by XcalibuR » Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:34 am

Image

This is the medal ranking of the USA today in 2004.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/olym ... edals.aspx

and this is the medal rankings of the USA today in 2008.

hmmmm, the media is so unbiased.
canoner
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,722
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 21, 2004

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#32 » by canoner » Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:15 am

XcalibuR wrote:Image

This is the medal ranking of the USA today in 2004.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/olym ... edals.aspx

and this is the medal rankings of the USA today in 2008.

hmmmm, the media is so unbiased.


It looks like they were using the international system back then but changed to total medal count system this time. I wonder why.
User avatar
Napoleon7
Senior
Posts: 537
And1: 76
Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#33 » by Napoleon7 » Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:05 am

I do think the attention is split between the two.
When one thinks of the overall Olympic experience they think more about the total medal count.
canoner
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,722
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 21, 2004

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#34 » by canoner » Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:21 am

Napoleon7 wrote:I do think the attention is split between the two.
When one thinks of the overall Olympic experience they think more about the total medal count.


I think most people would disagree, at least outside of US.
User avatar
Al n' Perk No Layups!
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,532
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 30, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#35 » by Al n' Perk No Layups! » Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:42 am

I have no idea how prime 2000 Shaq not wanting to play in the Olympics have anything to do with old gymnastics and old Bill Russell's game films not being shown on TV. Nobody said he should compete in the Olympics indefinitely, he was still in his prime and have a reason not to go. I am sure Josh Childress have a good reason to leave nba too. Telling me why Shaq didn't want to compete in the Olympics doesn't quite make whatever point you are trying to prove.


I am showing you the flaw in your logic, you claimed Shaq quit the Olympics, he didn't. Shaq completed his Olympic career. He didn't go halfway through an Olympic qualifying tournament and then leave.

The best competition in Shaq's sport is in the NBA, not the Olympics. He didn't need to keep going back and he's not the only BBaller who hasn't. In sports like Gymnastics, Swimming and Track and Field, their biggest stage is the Olympics.

99.9% of the basketball players in the world wants to play in the NBA. Using a select few exceptions to trying to prove it otherwise is just dumb.


But claiming that the Euroleague is the qualifying round for the NBA is smart?

There are so many limitations NBA faces to expend, I can't even tell you all of them. I am sure having a franchise in Shanghai would be profitable, but there are multitude of problems with that. To say profitability is the only limitations just shows how ignorant you are.


What makes you think having a franchise in Shanghai would be profitable? Travel expenses would be hell, the travel itself would make the team playing there and the visiting teams tired and they would probably play poorly and it's likely most players wouldn't want to play there with no other NBA teams on the same continent, which means that team would be pretty bad. Since bad teams don't usually get fan support, it's likely that an isolated team in Shanghai would be pretty unprofitable in the long term.

On the other hand there probably will be a European division in 15-20 years, when it becomes beneficial to do so.

Outside that and international politics, there really aren't any reasons why the NBA can't expand. But why don't you humor a simpleton like me and tell me them?

It seems like you also needs a lesson in perspectives.

To the "thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions)" of basketball players around the world and in the U.S who wants to join the NBA, Eastern Conference Championship is very impressive. Just like to the "thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions)" of athletes who wants to compete in the Olympics, silver is very impressive. To the hundreds of players who are already playing in the NBA and NBA viewers who has no idea how big the world basketball community is, winning 2nd in the NBA championship might not be as impressive. Just like to the handful of players who already made to the Olympics, Silver medal is no where near as impressive as Gold medal. "90% (more likely 99%)" don't use 2 different perspectives to compare things, you in the other hand clearly do..


So you're trying to tell me that a Gymnast who has been training since she was five, gets selected to the national team, survives all of the qualification rounds, performs an awesome routine and falls to second by less than a tenth doesn't think a Silver is worth even mentioning? Of course she'd be happier with a Gold but I guarentee you the Silver is going to be front and center in her trophy case. You claim I need a lesson in perspective yet you ignore that she may never get to the Olympics again, with the next one being four years away. If the NBA had a season every four years, each player would be much more pleased with a ECF or WCF ring than they are now. Currently if they lose the Finals, most of that team comes back the very next year to take another stab at it. They get 12-18 chances to win the Championship. Olympic athletes get one or two, maybe three. If you gave an NBA player a three year career and he made it to the Finals and lost, he would be damn proud of his ECF or WCF ring.


You are terrible at this, stop wasting my time, and everyone else's time to read your crap.


Ahh, when all else fails, throw some insults and claim the argument is wasting your time. Way to finish like a chump.
User avatar
Al n' Perk No Layups!
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,532
And1: 1
Joined: Jan 30, 2006

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#36 » by Al n' Perk No Layups! » Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:44 am

macklock wrote:
Al n Perk No Layups wrote:Really? Exactly what facts am I making up? You haven't noticed that the NBA adds an expansion team every time it finds a market where it would be profitable to do so?

I love how you're comparing second place in a 30 team professional sports league to second place in the Olympics, and my logic is flawed. If nobody thought second place in the Olympics was impressive, would there be a silver medal? It seems to me at least 90% (more likely 99%) of the world understands that second place out of thousands (or tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of even millions) is pretty damn impressive. But whatever, I must be "making up facts" again.


Dude are you stupid ?
There is even basketball in the olympics.
So a silver medal in the olympics somehow is won over millions but a second place in the NBA is not ??
Do you realise there are more talents in the NBA than in the olympics.


If you are going to call someone stupid, you better damn well be able to put a proper sentence together. I have no idea what you are talking about, and I'm pretty damn sure you missed the point of my argument.
User avatar
MaxRider
RealGM
Posts: 44,473
And1: 5,805
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Location: Choke City
 

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#37 » by MaxRider » Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:53 am

Gold, no contest at all
they only play the Gold winner's National Anthem
User avatar
Rasho Brezec
Knicks Forum Euro Scout
Posts: 61,780
And1: 18,400
Joined: Mar 12, 2008
Contact:
   

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#38 » by Rasho Brezec » Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:47 am

canoner wrote:
Napoleon7 wrote:I do think the attention is split between the two.
When one thinks of the overall Olympic experience they think more about the total medal count.


I think most people would disagree, at least outside of US.

Yep.
Image
YiOF
Sophomore
Posts: 192
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 12, 2007

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#39 » by YiOF » Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:42 am

But claiming that the Euroleague is the qualifying round for the NBA is smart?


why do you put words in my mouth? when did I ever say that Euroleague is the qualifying round for the NBA? If I must quote myself------ "You can say NBA is the "finals" for Basketball. Collegian and over seas players compete to get to the NBA. The D-league and Euro Leagues are for those who didn't make to "the Olympics"." I simply said Euroleague is a place a basketball can go if they didn't make to the NBA or doesn't want to play in the NBA, It is not as good as the NBA. It does not imply that Euroleague is the qualifying round for the NBA like you said.

I am showing you the flaw in your logic, you claimed Shaq quit the Olympics, he didn't. Shaq completed his Olympic career. He didn't go halfway through an Olympic qualifying tournament and then leave.

The best competition in Shaq's sport is in the NBA, not the Olympics. He didn't need to keep going back and he's not the only BBaller who hasn't. In sports like Gymnastics, Swimming and Track and Field, their biggest stage is the Olympics.


Bringing back your old post
not everyone in another league is trying to get into the NBA. In fact, multiple players left the NBA for the Euro League this year. Last time I checked, I haven't seen anyone quit an Olympic team to go mess around in the nation's training facility.


If Shaq didn't quit, why do you consider those players quit when they left the NBA for Euro league? They too completed their NBA career. they too didn't go halfway through a season and then leave. NBA players Leave NBA to player overseas is no where near the same thing as Athletes quitting the Olympics. They leave because they couldn't compete in the NBA or for more money. Besides, I've never said "everyone in another league is trying to get into the NBA." you just brought this whole point up for no appearant reason other than just have something to say.

What makes you think having a franchise in Shanghai would be profitable? Travel expenses would be hell, the travel itself would make the team playing there and the visiting teams tired and they would probably play poorly and it's likely most players wouldn't want to play there with no other NBA teams on the same continent, which means that team would be pretty bad. Since bad teams don't usually get fan support, it's likely that an isolated team in Shanghai would be pretty unprofitable in the long term.

On the other hand there probably will be a European division in 15-20 years, when it becomes beneficial to do so.

Outside that and international politics, there really aren't any reasons why the NBA can't expand. But why don't you humor a simpleton like me and tell me them?


Is this also some non-sense you bring out just so that you have something to say? "international politics" isn't one of the limitations that doesn't belong to the profitability category? if it isn't, how is profitability the only limitations for NBA to expend like you claimed? you just humored yourself there, just don't laugh too hard.

So you're trying to tell me that a Gymnast who has been training since she was five, gets selected to the national team, survives all of the qualification rounds, performs an awesome routine and falls to second by less than a tenth doesn't think a Silver is worth even mentioning? Of course she'd be happier with a Gold but I guarentee you the Silver is going to be front and center in her trophy case. You claim I need a lesson in perspective yet you ignore that she may never get to the Olympics again, with the next one being four years away. If the NBA had a season every four years, each player would be much more pleased with a ECF or WCF ring than they are now. Currently if they lose the Finals, most of that team comes back the very next year to take another stab at it. They get 12-18 chances to win the Championship. Olympic athletes get one or two, maybe three. If you gave an NBA player a three year career and he made it to the Finals and lost, he would be damn proud of his ECF or WCF ring.


Now that the "number game" did get through, you turn to the "time game"? how many players in the NBA plays 12-18 years like you mentioned? You have to be special to play that long in the NBA. Most solid players play 8-10 years. A lot of players only able to play in the NBA for a few years. Player like Kevin Garnett would trade any number of second places to a world championship. Players like Wang Zhizhi who played in the NBA only 4 seasons would also trade any number of second places to win a championship. A 2 time Olympian would trade his 2 silver medal for a gold medal, a 3 time Olympian would trade his 3 silver medal for a gold medal (all assuming you can only win one medal per Olympics), all silver medalists keeps coming back to try to win gold the next time.

I have never ever in any of my post said silver isn't good. I only said people would trade multiple 2nd places to a first place. again you bring up pointless stuff so you have something to say.

Ahh, when all else fails, throw some insults and claim the argument is wasting your time. Way to finish like a chump.


LOL, you've failed on all of your attempts to justify your argument. All of your blind shots have missed, but you just keeps on firing. Your relentlessness just make this stupid.
Mike Hunt
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,769
And1: 37
Joined: Apr 11, 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Total medals or most golds. Which is more important? 

Post#40 » by Mike Hunt » Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:10 pm

I'm more of a total medals kind of guy but that might be because I'm Canadian (We average 2-5 golds per game). Whenever I'm trying to gauge who's tops in the medal standings, I always go to my own points system though (gold=4, silver=2, Bronze=1).

Return to Olympics