Jack vs Tiger

[Righty to Lefty]

1 hour ago, bscinstnct said:

 

It wasn’t a “given day” though, was it?

 

Tiger had his fusion surgery in April 2017 after years of back issues and surgeries and being out of the top 500 owgr.

 

He first teed it up in late 2017 ranked #1199

Over the course of the next year he had taken out everybody in front of him up to #13 owgr and by late 2018 and won the Tour Championship where he beat the top 30 guys in the world. 

 

Then he continued his assault on the Uber fit and by mid 2019 he had dispatched them all at the Masters and was sitting at

 

#5

 

At this point he had taken out Jon Rahm, Justin Thomas, Bryson, Cantlay, Xander, and was sitting one spot back from Rory. 
 

Not to mention the rest of the top 20, top 100, and everybody else on the planet besides 

 

4 guys

 

At, 43 years old, nowhere near his prime skills. 
 

You need to rethink your thesis; )

 

 

 

Sure it was a given day...that is why Tiger will play a minimal schedule until the Masters and that is because he is trying to time a good performance  at just the right time and there is nothing wrong with that.  The premise of this thread is being the GOAT which you are basically confirming with your posts. 

 

2 hours ago, Obee said:

I don’t think we will ever see anyone dominate the sport like Tiger. Not in my lifetime anyway. Maybe another 30 years. If I’m lucky.

That is is very likely because Tiger has set the bar very very high and it is going to take a very special athlete to approach his accomplishments.  

[bscinstnct]

34 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

Sure it was a given day...that is why Tiger will play a minimal schedule until the Masters and that is because he is trying to time a good performance  at just the right time and there is nothing wrong with that.  The premise of this thread is being the GOAT which you are basically confirming with your posts. 

 

That is is very likely because Tiger has set the bar very very high and it is going to take a very special athlete to approach his accomplishments.  

 

 

🤣

 

What about the 550+ “given days” spanning 2017-2019 when he rose from

 

#1199 to

 

#5

 

And had taken out Jon Rahm, Justin Thomas, Bryson, Cantlay, Xander, and was sitting one spot back from Rory?

 

Arent all those “given days” part of your calculus?

 

Or do you just factor the one “given day” he won the Masters?

 

I think close to two years of “given days” should be part of your equation; )

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by bscinstnct

[Righty to Lefty]

9 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

 

🤣

 

What about the 550+ “given days” spanning 2017-2019 when he rose from

 

#1199 to

 

#5

 

And had taken out Jon Rahm, Justin Thomas, Bryson, Cantlay, Xander, and was sitting one spot back from Rory?

 

Arent all those “given days” part of your calculus?

 

Or do you just factor the one “given day” he won the Masters?

 

I think close to two years of “given days” should be part of your equation; )

 

Especially since he was 43 years old!
 

 

 

 

 

My Man I agree with you that Tiger is the G.O.A.T. The fact is he simply would not dominate today's competition like he did the previous generation because golfers as a whole are better than ever is not a slight on his greatness. 

[rgk5]

On 12/21/2022 at 11:50 AM, wildcatden said:

Ben Hogan enters the chat.....

 

Hogan won 31 events over a three year period.  No one has ever matched that including Jack and Tiger.

[bscinstnct]

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

My Man I agree with you that Tiger is the G.O.A.T. The fact is he simply would not dominate today's competition like he did the previous generation because golfers as a whole are better than ever is not a slight on his greatness. 

 

Cheers 🍻 I understand you think TW is the greatest 

 

Youre missing the point big time though

 

If 43 year old back fused TW can go play after a 2 year layoff and being hooked on drugs and not even being able to walk,

 

and rise to #5 over the course of two years, then beat the 30 best at the  Tour Championship and win a major.
 

Playing with a fraction of the game he had in his 20s
 

He’d certainly totally dominate all these same guys if he played them in his prime. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Body_Visions]

23 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Lol, Tiger at 43 years old, with destroyed knee, and a fused back,

 

Basically at 70% of his skills in his prime 

 

And not having played for like 2 years

 

Started at like #1200 owgr and over the course of a year he cut his way through all these Uber, fit, golfers in their 20s, and rose to #5 owgr

 

Then he beat them all at the masters

 

A decrepit shadow of his TW 1.0 days

 

And you’re saying TW 1.0 doesn’t rip these guys to pieces?!

 

🤣

 

I am the biggest Eldrick hater that ever lived, but this statement is so true.  

 

Since everyone wants to bring other sports into it, is there ever a chance a 43 year old Jordan could come out of nowhere, and win the NBA title by himself.  

 

I think where most get it wrong is not considering that golf is a game of skill.

 

Being taller, running faster and jumping higher doesn’t necessarily make one better at golf. 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2023 by Body_Visions

[Righty to Lefty]

12 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Cheers 🍻 I understand you think TW is the greatest 

 

Youre missing the point big time though

 

If 43 year old back fused TW can go play after a 2 year layoff and being hooked on drugs and not even being able to walk,

 

and rise to #5 over the course of two years, then beat the 30 best at the  Tour Championship and win a major.
 

Playing with a fraction of the game he had in his 20s
 

He’d certainly totally dominate all these same guys if he played them in his prime. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I never said he wouldn't be dominant...I said he wouldn't be AS dominant because on the whole golfers are better than the previous generation, not by a vast amount, but they are better. Also you glazed over the fact that he rose to #5 in the world, which means that there were still 4 golfers ranked higher. Apex Rory, DJ, Rahm, even Speith, are more than capable of beating Tiger on any given day, even for a major. If Tiger were entering the tour today he likely doesn't make it to 15 majors as the probability that one of those guys picks off a major from him in a major that he would have previously won by a stroke is much more likely, and majors that he ran away with he would still run away with, just by a slightly less margin say 13 shots instead of 15.  This is precisely why the next GOAT will struggle to reach 15 majors and that is because the GOATS approach max performance faster than the chase pack and eventually max performance will be achieved and chase pack will eventually catch up and equilibrium will be achieved. 

 

To paint a better picture in basketball this will result in position less basketball in the NBA where every one on the court is pretty much the same physically, a trend that is already starting to happen where 7 foot tall players routinely handle the ball and initiate offense when in just one prior generation that would have never happened.  This same trend is happening in all sport, just at different rates. There are 3, well 2 GOATS now that Federer has retired, that were playing concurrently in tennis and that is crazy to even comprehend really.  Imagine if there were 2 or 3 of Tiger, Jordan, etc. playing at the same time, majors would become very hard to come by and would be split amongst them most likely. Also Tiger is not playing with a fraction of his game because that simply wouldn't be enough to win. He is playing with a vast amount of knowledge and is overcoming most of his physical impairments because he knows Augusta inside and out, while before he played off of raw physical ability but we all know that physical ability does not last forever and eventually the young boys will take over as they inevitably gain knowledge.  This is why it is important to gain knowledge as quickly as possible in the hopes that you can maximize any physical advantages while you have them. 

8 hours ago, Body_Visions said:

 

I am the biggest Eldrick hater that ever lived, but this statement is so true.  

 

Since everyone wants to bring other sports into it, is there ever a chance a 43 year old Jordan could come out of nowhere, and win the NBA title by himself.  

 

I think where most get it wrong is not considering that golf is a game of skill.

 

Being taller, running faster and jumping higher doesn’t necessarily make one better at golf. 

 

1. R

 

 

No a 43 year old Jordan could not "come out of nowhere" and win an NBA title by himself because his physical ability would not be enough despite his mental strength and knowledge. The physical demands on a golfer are not on the same planet as those on a basketball player thus a golfer can remain competitive for much longer than a basketball player, but that is obvious.

 

Tiger did not come out of nowhere, he came up with a plan with his team and executed it to perfection and snatched another major at a course that he is very familiar with, just like he is going try and do again here in a few months and we were all very aware. Golf is not a game when played at the highest level, it is a sport which requires discipline both physically and mentally to sustain performance.  Ping pong is a game when we play it, but when played at the highest levels it is table tennis and you better be well conditioned physically.

 

The measurables of the athletes is a start because there is an advantage to being a tall, powerful, yet flexible athlete regardless of whether or not you  want to admit it and we are not all created equal. Creating speed in golf is easier for a taller athlete due to longer levers and that is just the science of it until a limit is breached.  Watch a PGA, or even college golf training session and try to tell me that golf isn't a sport.  I was a college baseball player and vividly remember the torture that we went through to get ready for a season and some will try to say that baseball isn't a sport because "all we do is stand around!" Well the golf team at a college is training right along side the football players I assure you an have the same base strength programs.  Golf is much more harsh on the body than most give it credit for but it is what it is. 

Edited February 24, 2023 by Righty to Lefty

[bscinstnct]

12 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I never said he wouldn't be dominant...I said he wouldn't be AS dominant because on the whole golfers are better than the previous generation, not by a vast amount, but they are better. Also you glazed over the fact that he rose to #5 in the world, which means that there were still 4 golfers ranked higher. Apex Rory, DJ, Rahm, even Speith, are more than capable of beating Tiger on any given day, even for a major. If Tiger were entering the tour today he likely doesn't make it to 15 majors as the probability that one of those guys picks off a major from him in a major that he would have previously won by a stroke is much more likely, and majors that he ran away with he would still run away with, just by a slightly less margin say 13 shots instead of 15.  This is precisely why the next GOAT will struggle to reach 15 majors and that is because the GOATS approach max performance faster than the chase pack and eventually max performance will be achieved and chase pack will eventually catch up and equilibrium will be achieved. 

 

To paint a better picture in basketball this will result in position less basketball in the NBA where every one on the court is pretty much the same physically, a trend that is already starting to happen where 7 foot tall players routinely handle the ball and initiate offense when in just one prior generation that would have never happened.  This same trend is happening in all sport, just at different rates. There are 3, well 2 GOATS now that Federer has retired, that were playing concurrently in tennis and that is crazy to even comprehend really.  Imagine if there were 2 or 3 of Tiger, Jordan, etc. playing at the same time, majors would become very hard to come by and would be split amongst them most likely. Also Tiger is not playing with a fraction of his game because that simply wouldn't be enough to win. He is playing a a vast amount of knowledge and is overcoming most of his physical impairments because he knows Augusta inside and out, while before he played off of raw physical ability but we all know that physical ability does not last forever and eventually the young boys will take over as they inevitably gain knowledge.  This is why it is important to gain knowledge as quickly as possible in the hopes that you can maximize any physical advantages while you have them. 

No a 43 year old Jordan could not "come out of nowhere" and win an NBA title by himself because his physical ability would not be enough despite his mental strength and knowledge. The physical demands on a golfer are not on the same planet as those on a basketball player thus a golfer can remain competitive for much longer than a basketball player, but that is obvious.

 

Tiger did not come out of nowhere, he came up with a plan with his team and executed it to perfection and snatched another major at a course that he is very familiar with, just like he is going try and do again here in a few months and we were all very aware. Golf is not a game when played at the highest level, it is a sport which requires discipline both physically and mentally to sustain performance.  Ping pong is a game when we play it, but when played at the highest levels it is table tennis and you better be well conditioned physically.

 

The measurables of the athletes is a start because there is an advantage to being a tall, powerful, yet flexible athlete regardless of whether or not you  want to admit it and we are not all created equal. Creating speed in golf is easier for a taller athlete due to longer levers and that is just the science of it.  Watch a PGA, or even college golf training session and try to tell me that golf isn't a sport.  I was a college baseball player and vividly remember the torture that we went through to get ready for a season and some will try to say that baseball isn't a sport because "all we do is stand around!"  Golf is much more harsh on the body than most give it credit for but it is what it is. 

 

Nobody would be allowed to touch MJ today. Not like when the Pistons would rob and stab you on your way to the hoop

 

”he’d score 50 points a game”

 

 

[Righty to Lefty]

6 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Nobody would be allowed to touch MJ today. Not like when the Pistons would rob and stab you on your way to the hoop

 

”he’d score 50 points a game”

 

 

No he wouldn't...his performance against better athletes would not be 66% higher than his 30.1 points per game that he averaged.  In his era zone defense was not allowed so a physical advantage could be exploited over and over. Next of all the coaches today are better and the schemes could/would be put in place to SLOW him down and force others to beat you.  He would be very good no doubt but at 6'6" and 215 pounds he would not dominate today's game like he did his era though he would still be a very good player no doubt.  The DOMINANT players in today's NBA are all 6'9" or taller and this trend will continue I assure you. 

 

Dennis Rodman would compare more to Draymond Green and likely isn't even a hall of famer in this era though Shaq...would still be Shaq because he is a physical outlier and there has never been one like him before or up until now.  That is just the science of it and you can try to fight it all you want but in the end you will be wrong except for the occasional physical outlier. 

[dropkicked]

5 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

No he wouldn't...his performance against better athletes would not be 66% higher than his 30.1 points per game that he averaged.  In his era zone defense was not allowed so a physical advantage could be exploited over and over. Next of all the coaches today are better and the schemes could/would be put in place to SLOW him down and force others to beat you.  He would be very good no doubt but at 6'6" and 215 pounds he would not dominate today's game like he did his era though he would still be a very good player no doubt.  The DOMINANT players in today's NBA are all 6'9" or taller and this trend will continue I assure you. 

 

Dennis Rodman would compare more to Draymond Green and likely isn't even a hall of famer in this era though Shaq...would still be Shaq because he is a physical outlier and there has never been one like him before or up until now.  That is just the science of it and you can try to fight it all you want but in the end you will be wrong except for the occasional physical outlier. 

Sorry for the OT. But you have no idea what you're talking about...

MJ would destroy the competition in today's game where the offense is allowed to score freely. Yes, he would likely average 50 points.. Rodman, was the greatest rebounder to ever walk the earth. 
Having watched MJ, Scottie and Rodman, play IRL, these teams today wouldn't stand a chance. All world offense and defense.

I also had the privilege of watching Shaq, play while he was with Orlando.... and if that man took the game seriously, he would have won at least 10 titles with Kobe.

 

 

[bscinstnct]

23 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

No he wouldn't...his performance against better athletes would not be 66% higher than his 30.1 points per game that he averaged.  In his era zone defense was not allowed so a physical advantage could be exploited over and over. Next of all the coaches today are better and the schemes could/would be put in place to SLOW him down and force others to beat you.  He would be very good no doubt but at 6'6" and 215 pounds he would not dominate today's game like he did his era though he would still be a very good player no doubt.  The DOMINANT players in today's NBA are all 6'9" or taller and this trend will continue I assure you. 

 

Dennis Rodman would compare more to Draymond Green and likely isn't even a hall of famer in this era though Shaq...would still be Shaq because he is a physical outlier and there has never been one like him before or up until now.  That is just the science of it and you can try to fight it all you want but in the end you will be wrong except for the occasional physical outlier. 

Larry Brown in 2010…

 

Charlotte Bobcats coach Larry Brown said if Jordan played in the league now, he would average 50 points per game. 

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/464114-michael-jordan-what-if-prime-mj-played-in-todays

 

 

Here’s more…

 

https://medium.com/letters-from-a-sports-fan/how-many-points-would-michael-jordan-average-in-the-nba-today-df5e9b936f70
 

Between 45–50. The rigor isn’t the same. The physicality in today’s game isn’t the same…Players up front [playing center and forward] have gotten smaller. He’s gonna be dunking on everybody” — Jalen Rose

 

“He would evolve into this era. You would see a Jordan shooting more threes…[Averaging] mid-40s, I could see that” — Paul Pierce, Hall of Fame

 

“40 would be easy” — Allen Iverson, Hall of Fame

“If Michael played in this era, he’d average 50” — Dennis Rodman, Hall of Fame

 

“Think about how physical the game was back then. You pretty much got put on your back every time you went to the bucket. Now, somebody blows on your wrist or hits your hand, that’s a foul…He would be averaging in the 40s, for sure” — Jay Williams

 

“It’s so hard to play defense in today’s game because they allow the offense to go wherever they want... I think he would average 40” — Reggie Miller, Hall of Fame

 

“He’d probably average almost 50 a game. You wouldn’t be able to touch him on the perimeter…It’s not the same game” — Alonzo Mourning, Hall of Fame

 

 

 

 

Dont get so caught up in a thesis you’re blinded to contrary opinions ; )

Edited February 24, 2023 by bscinstnct

[Righty to Lefty]

Umm just look at the evolution of the athlete for yourself as it is plain to see.  

 

 

[Righty to Lefty]

3 minutes ago, dropkicked said:

Sorry for the OT. But you have no idea what you're talking about...

MJ would destroy the competition in today's game where the offense is allowed to score freely. Yes, he would likely average 50 points.. Rodman, was the greatest rebounder to ever walk the earth. 
Having watched MJ, Scottie and Rodman, play IRL, these teams today wouldn't stand a chance. All world offense and defense.

I also had the privilege of watching Shaq, play while he was with Orlando.... and if that man took the game seriously, he would have won at least 10 titles with Kobe.

 

 

I literally studied it in college under a PHD professor...I am not giving my opinion??? What you all fail to acknowledge is that the bigger faster stronger package is REQUIRED to remain dominant among an ever evolving crop of athletes. The bigger faster stronger version of those athletes would be dominant, but simply transporting them forward into future generations is not enough. MJ weighed the exact same as...Steph Curry...not Lebron...Steph Curry. Steph Curry is an all time great...but not a pantheon great, and he is a better shooter and ball handler than Jordan and he will never come close to AVERAGING 50 points per game.  Wilt was the last to average 50 points per game...and that was in 1961 - 62 because he was just flat out bigger than everyone on the court.  Shaq is another rare physical outlier and he never came close to averaging 50 but all of a sudden Jordan at 6'6" and 185 pounds (eventually bulked up to 215 as did Steph Curry) would score 50 a game against better competition....that just sounds silly...because it is.  Dennis Rodman with his attributes that he played with would not do that in the current generation... period...he would be good no doubt because he played just one generation ago but his stats would not improve 66% as you say Jordan's would and I assure you that he wouldn't average 21 rebounds a game over his career average of 13.1. 

 

Wilt wouldn't average 50 in today's game because there are other athletes that can check him.  Jordan is not an alpha athlete in todays game...I mean damn Zion has a similar vertical and is almost 100 pounds heavier!  @bscinstnctputting up quotes from guys that played in his same era is in no way proof of your point...it is an opinion. No one in today's NBA averages even 40 points, but yet you assert that a 6'6" 185 pound athlete that last played in the NBA a quarter century ago would average 50?! So Wilt would average 80 I guess by your logic? It just sounds silly because it is silly.  Jack would win majors in today's game, but he almost assuredly wouldn't win 18. 

[bscinstnct]

5 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I literally studied it in college under a PHD professor...I am not giving my opinion??? What you all fail to acknowledge is that the bigger faster stronger package is REQUIRED to remain dominant among an ever evolving crop of athletes. The bigger faster stronger version of those athletes would be dominant, but simply transporting them forward into future generations is not enough. MJ weighed the exact same as...Steph Curry...not Lebron...Steph Curry. Steph Curry is an all time great...but not a pantheon great, and he is a better shooter and ball handler than Jordan and he will never come close to AVERAGING 50 points per game.  Wilt was the last to average 50 points per game...and that was in 1961 - 62 because he was just flat out bigger than everyone on the court.  Shaq is another rare physical outlier and he never came close to averaging 50 but all of a sudden Jordan at 6'6" and 185 pounds (eventually bulked up to 215 as did Steph Curry) would score 50 a game against better competition....that just sounds silly...because it is.  Dennis Rodman with his attributes that he played with would not do that in the current generation... period...he would be good no doubt because he played just one generation ago but his stats would not improve 66% as you say Jordan's would and I assure you that he wouldn't average 21 rebounds a game over his career average of 13.1. 

 

Wilt wouldn't average 50 in today's game because there are other athletes that can check him.  Jordan is not an alpha athlete in todays game...I mean damn Zion has a similar vertical and is almost 100 pounds heavier!  @bscinstnctputting up quotes from guys that played in his same era is in no way proof of your point...it is an opinion. No one in today's NBA averages even 40 points, but yet you assert that a 6'6" 185 pound athlete that last played in the NBA a quarter century ago would average 50?! So Wilt would average 80 I guess by your logic? It just sounds silly because it is silly.  Jack would win majors in today's game, but he almost assuredly wouldn't win 18. 

 

This quote was from 2010 when Larry Brown had seen LJ for 7 years ; )

 

Charlotte Bobcats coach Larry Brown said if Jordan played in the league now, he would average 50 points per game. 

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/464114-michael-jordan-what-if-prime-mj-played-in-todays

[Righty to Lefty]

1 minute ago, bscinstnct said:

 

This quote was from 2010 when Larry Brown had seen LJ for 7 years ; )

 

 

Charlotte Bobcats coach Larry Brown said if Jordan played in the league now, he would average 50 points per game. 

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/464114-michael-jordan-what-if-prime-mj-played-in-todays

 

"Current Charlotte Bobcats coach Larry Brown said if Jordan played in the league now, he would average 50 points per game. Jordan was a great scorer, but saying he would put up 50 a game is giving him a little too much credit."

Saying that he would AVERAGE 50 is ridiculous as the current high scoring average in the NBA is right at 30 per game, yet MJ would average 50....please stop with this madness! So Jack would have 30 majors in today's game right?! I mean lets keep it going if we gonna go all out with this madness! 

 

[Nard_S]

I don't think MJ gets enough praise of how good he was. Same for Tiger. Their will to win is off the charts. Maybe Tom Brady at distant third. LeBron is great, greatest of his time, but I'll take watching MJ highlights over his. Take a Sunday game with him featured over LJ, no question. He felt obligated to be great. Feel same about Jack vs Tiger. Really, whose game would you rather have? Bear or Cat? Take Mr. Woods all around game & attitude all day, everyday. The man is epic for throwing himself into the chase. His grind factor leaves the rest in dust. Not hard to say, he out worked Jack. Even Jack admits that.

[m d g]

1 hour ago, Righty to Lefty said:

The DOMINANT players in today's NBA are all 6'9" or taller and this trend will continue I assure you. 

6'2" Steph Curry would like a word : )

[Shilgy]

What some seem to be forgetting is that the whole idea of “bigger, stronger and faster” aka BSF  is certainly a benefit in most sports but not the be all end all of the conversation.

Rory and JT  and Morikawa….heck most of the top names in pro golf are certainly not the BSF guys like a DJ.  Same with baseball with guys like Altuve and Betts included in the list of best playing today.

 There are certainly athletic freaks in all sports that are outshadowed by their more talented peers. Christian McCaffrey is not nearly as BSF as some running backs but is still “better”.  
  In basketball Curry has already been mentioned but where does shooting ability cross with BSF?  Having both would be a benefit of course but I certainly have never seen a player with the BSF gene be a great shooter.

[Golfnutgalen]

18 hours ago, rgk5 said:

Hogan won 31 events over a three year period.  No one has ever matched that including Jack and Tiger.

 

That's pretty crazy, the PGA website says 30, not quite number 1 but very close. Here are a few others for comparison:

 

Winningest 3 year stretch 

 

1. Byron Nelson 1944-1946 32/70 wins- (46%)

2. Ben Hogan 1946-1948 - 30/77 wins (39%)

3. Tiger Woods 1999-2002 - 22/60 wins (37%)

3. Arnold Palmer 1960-1962 - 22/75 wins (29%)

5. Tiger Woods 2005-2007 - 21/52 wins (40%)

 

Probably #6

6. Jack Nicklaus 1971-973 - 19/57 wins (33%)

 

There's a wiki article on most wins that includes a few more from Nelson, Hogan, and Arnie, but there's some overlap in the years here so I didn't mention it.

 

And people like to give Byron a hard time for having so many wins during WW2, but many of the other top players still played. Hogan for example played in 18 events in 1945 and won 5! Snead played in 28 and won 6. 

 

A few years ago I took a deep dive into Hogan vs Nelson and found out that if we only include the events which they both played in then up until the end of 1946 Nelson won 27 and Hogan 22. If we break it down to just the two pivotal years of 1945 and 1946 it looks like this:

 

1945 in 11 events Nelson 6 wins, Hogan 2 wins 

1946 in 19 events Nelson 6 wins, Hogan 8 wins

 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2023 by Golfnutgalen

[bscinstnct]

24 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

What some seem to be forgetting is that the whole idea of “bigger, stronger and faster” aka BSF  is certainly a benefit in most sports but not the be all end all of the conversation.

Rory and JT  and Morikawa….heck most of the top names in pro golf are certainly not the BSF guys like a DJ.  Same with baseball with guys like Altuve and Betts included in the list of best playing today.

 There are certainly athletic freaks in all sports that are outshadowed by their more talented peers. Christian McCaffrey is not nearly as BSF as some running backs but is still “better”.  
  In basketball Curry has already been mentioned but where does shooting ability cross with BSF?  Having both would be a benefit of course but I certainly have never seen a player with the BSF gene be a great shooter.

 

Precisely.

 

Rory is the most recent golfer to give a “taste” of what a Tiger/Jack dominating player looks like right out of the gate at 20 years old

 

He didn’t keep it up but it had nothing to do with his smaller stature. He was and still is at the top of the distance leaders.

 

Rorys short game and mental game stopped him from continuing to tear up majors at the same clip. 
 

This is what I was trying to explain to @Righty to Lefty

 

The “next Tiger” is far more likely to be 6’ or less, like Rory. But have the short game and mental game of Tiger.

 

Then be 6’5 and have these attributes. 
 

The height is just not a factor like it is in some other sports. 

[Dutch1008]

2 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

Larry Brown in 2010…

 

Charlotte Bobcats coach Larry Brown said if Jordan played in the league now, he would average 50 points per game. 

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/464114-michael-jordan-what-if-prime-mj-played-in-todays

 

 

Here’s more…

 

https://medium.com/letters-from-a-sports-fan/how-many-points-would-michael-jordan-average-in-the-nba-today-df5e9b936f70
 

Between 45–50. The rigor isn’t the same. The physicality in today’s game isn’t the same…Players up front [playing center and forward] have gotten smaller. He’s gonna be dunking on everybody” — Jalen Rose

 

“He would evolve into this era. You would see a Jordan shooting more threes…[Averaging] mid-40s, I could see that” — Paul Pierce, Hall of Fame

 

“40 would be easy” — Allen Iverson, Hall of Fame

“If Michael played in this era, he’d average 50” — Dennis Rodman, Hall of Fame

 

“Think about how physical the game was back then. You pretty much got put on your back every time you went to the bucket. Now, somebody blows on your wrist or hits your hand, that’s a foul…He would be averaging in the 40s, for sure” — Jay Williams

 

“It’s so hard to play defense in today’s game because they allow the offense to go wherever they want... I think he would average 40” — Reggie Miller, Hall of Fame

 

“He’d probably average almost 50 a game. You wouldn’t be able to touch him on the perimeter…It’s not the same game” — Alonzo Mourning, Hall of Fame

 

 

 

 

Dont get so caught up in a thesis you’re blinded to contrary opinions ; )

Dude I love MJ and consider him the GOAT, but you're quoting a bunch of people from his era. They're all stuck in the same nostalgia trap that their era was the best. Go ask LeBron, KD, or Curry if Jordan would avg 50. They'd laugh. Zone D, 3 & D specialists, an entire league that is bigger/stronger/faster on balance. It wouldn't happen. I still believe prime MJ would be winning scoring titles / MVPs / championships in todays game. But he's not averaging 50 and making the LeBron's of the world look like scrubs. 

[Dutch1008]

36 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

What some seem to be forgetting is that the whole idea of “bigger, stronger and faster” aka BSF  is certainly a benefit in most sports but not the be all end all of the conversation.

Rory and JT  and Morikawa….heck most of the top names in pro golf are certainly not the BSF guys like a DJ.  Same with baseball with guys like Altuve and Betts included in the list of best playing today.

 There are certainly athletic freaks in all sports that are outshadowed by their more talented peers. Christian McCaffrey is not nearly as BSF as some running backs but is still “better”.  
  In basketball Curry has already been mentioned but where does shooting ability cross with BSF?  Having both would be a benefit of course but I certainly have never seen a player with the BSF gene be a great shooter.

Skill obviously plays an enormous role. We've all seen uber athletes that just lack skill. Go check out Drew Cooper on Instagram. The guy is 6'4" 225 and absolutely nukes the ball. But that is not the impressive part. What's impressive is that he generates 200+ mph ball speed looking like he swings at 80% capacity. It's freaking uncanny. Unfortunately for Drew, he does not have the skill to play on the tour despite having more than enough athletic ability. 

 

In every sport there is minimum level of athleticism required and that floor is ever increasing. Take McCaffery. No he is not the BSF RB, but he certainly clears the minimum requirements and is comfortably above the median. He runs a sub 4.5 / 40, his 3 cone drill was in the 98th percentile. So he has premium speed and elite quickness. What makes him an elite player is his vision and receiving ability. He may only have B+ athletic traits (relatively speaking) but he has A+ skills. 

 

Golf is conceptually no different. You need to have a minimum level of athleticism to compete at the top end. There is nobody on tour that maxes a drive out at 250 and keeps a card. Where golf and baseball separate from FB and Basketball, is the ratio of what matters. Skill carries more weight in golf/baseball, athleticism in FB/BB. You still need both at the highest levels. 

 

To ignore athleticism in golf is short sighted. There is a reason Kevin Kisner knows there are tournaments he can't compete. He lacks the athletic horsepower that an ever increasing number of his peers have. The days of Corey Pavin are over. Up your swing speed like Matt Fitzpatrick or wave as the tour passes you by.  

[Shilgy]

1 minute ago, Dutch1008 said:

Skill obviously plays an enormous role. We've all seen uber athletes that just lack skill. Go check out Drew Cooper on Instagram. The guy is 6'4" 225 and absolutely nukes the ball. But that is not the impressive part. What's impressive is that he generates 200+ mph ball speed looking like he swings at 80% capacity. It's freaking uncanny. Unfortunately for Drew, he does not have the skill to play on the tour despite having more than enough athletic ability. 

 

In every sport there is minimum level of athleticism required and that floor is ever increasing. Take McCaffery. No he is not the BSF RB, but he certainly clears the minimum requirements and is comfortably above the median. He runs a sub 4.5 / 40, his 3 cone drill was in the 98th percentile. So he has premium speed and elite quickness. What makes him an elite player is his vision and receiving ability. He may only have B+ athletic traits (relatively speaking) but he has A+ skills. 

 

Golf is conceptually no different. You need to have a minimum level of athleticism to compete at the top end. There is nobody on tour that maxes a drive out at 250 and keeps a card. Where golf and baseball separate from FB and Basketball, is the ratio of what matters. Skill carries more weight in golf/baseball, athleticism in FB/BB. You still need both at the highest levels. 

 

To ignore athleticism in golf is short sighted. There is a reason Kevin Kisner knows there are tournaments he can't compete. He lacks the athletic horsepower that an ever increasing number of his peers have. The days of Corey Pavin are over. Up your swing speed like Matt Fitzpatrick or wave as the tour passes you by.  

No one is “ignoring athleticism”….what is being debunked is the idea that sports will pass by a guy that is not the biggest strongest fastest.  In no sport will biggest strongest fastest be the be all end of of of rankings in that sport.

 

 Nothing shows that better perhaps than the NFL combine.  Every year some guy climbs up draft boards because “oh my he’s such an athletic freak”!   And yet if that player was such a freak surely he would have dominated college games.  To think that in the NFL he would be better is ludicrous.

 

[Dutch1008]

34 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

Precisely.

 

Rory is the most recent golfer to give a “taste” of what a Tiger/Jack dominating player looks like right out of the gate at 20 years old

 

He didn’t keep it up but it had nothing to do with his smaller stature. He was and still is at the top of the distance leaders.

 

Rorys short game and mental game stopped him from continuing to tear up majors at the same clip. 
 

This is what I was trying to explain to @Righty to Lefty

 

The “next Tiger” is far more likely to be 6’ or less, like Rory. But have the short game and mental game of Tiger.

 

Then be 6’5 and have these attributes. 
 

The height is just not a factor like it is in some other sports. 

You're acting as if Jack and Tiger we're athletic slouches when nothing could be further from the truth. Height isn't the only thing that matters. You can be BSF w/o being taller. Jack was a strong dude that swung fast, so was Tiger. They were athletically superior to their peers. 

 

I don't think height will necessarily have anything to do with unlocking the next Tiger. But it might not hurt. Nobody makes golf look easier than Dustin Johnson with his A game. Someday (and this may not happen any time soon) there will be a person w/ DJs athleticism and Tiger's skill and mental makeup. That dude will be a monster. But to @Righty to Lefty point, by the time this DJ/Tiger mutant killing machine arrives, the median player will be so damn good that this new golfing god probably wont win 20-30% of his tournaments and 15-20 majors. 

[bscinstnct]

3 minutes ago, Dutch1008 said:

You're acting as if Jack and Tiger we're athletic slouches when nothing could be further from the truth. Height isn't the only thing that matters. You can be BSF w/o being taller. Jack was a strong dude that swung fast, so was Tiger. They were athletically superior to their peers. 

 

I don't think height will necessarily have anything to do with unlocking the next Tiger. But it might not hurt. Nobody makes golf look easier than Dustin Johnson with his A game. Someday (and this may not happen any time soon) there will be a person w/ DJs athleticism and Tiger's skill and mental makeup. That dude will be a monster. But to @Righty to Lefty point, by the time this DJ/Tiger mutant killing machine arrives, the median player will be so damn good that this new golfing god probably wont win 20-30% of his tournaments and 15-20 majors. 

 

There’s nothing in my post diminishing TW/Jacks athletics

 

Driving a golf ball at that level is parallel to the same speed and athleticism in snapping the kinetic chain as an MLB player.

 

So, to the contrary, TW/Jack have elite level athleticism in this respect.

 

But, as I said, a guy comes out like TW and leads in

 

SG off the tee, SG, approach, SG around the green, and SG putting 

 

They will dominate the same way TW did

 

They could be Rory’s size. 

 

It’s far more likely this person is under 6’1 than over. 

[Dutch1008]

2 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

No one is “ignoring athleticism”….what is being debunked is the idea that sports will pass by a guy that is not the biggest strongest fastest.  In no sport will biggest strongest fastest be the be all end of of of rankings in that sport.

 

 Nothing shows that better perhaps than the NFL combine.  Every year some guy climbs up draft boards because “oh my he’s such an athletic freak”!   And yet if that player was such a freak surely he would have dominated college games.  To think that in the NFL he would be better is ludicrous.

Nobody said you had to be the singular BSF athlete. I simply said that there is a minimum effective dose of athleticism required and that baseline floor is constantly moving up. What separates those that clear that minimum is their individual skill. Skill is still required. But skill isn't everything either. I don't care if you're the worlds greatest shooter if your 5'4" and fat. The worlds best short game despite matter if you hit the driver 225.  

 

"Having both would be a benefit of course but I certainly have never seen a player with the BSF gene be a great shooter."

 

How about Kevin Durant? Is being 7ft tall and moving like a 2 guard not BSF enough for you? 

[Righty to Lefty]

2 hours ago, m d g said:

6'2" Steph Curry would like a word : )

He was never the most dominant player in the NBA sorry to say and plenty of teams were able to neutralize him in the playoffs because of his size. Also when Kevin Durant showed up he wasn't the best player on the team until KD left. 

 

12 minutes ago, Dutch1008 said:

Skill obviously plays an enormous role. We've all seen uber athletes that just lack skill. Go check out Drew Cooper on Instagram. The guy is 6'4" 225 and absolutely nukes the ball. But that is not the impressive part. What's impressive is that he generates 200+ mph ball speed looking like he swings at 80% capacity. It's freaking uncanny. Unfortunately for Drew, he does not have the skill to play on the tour despite having more than enough athletic ability. 

 

In every sport there is minimum level of athleticism required and that floor is ever increasing. Take McCaffery. No he is not the BSF RB, but he certainly clears the minimum requirements and is comfortably above the median. He runs a sub 4.5 / 40, his 3 cone drill was in the 98th percentile. So he has premium speed and elite quickness. What makes him an elite player is his vision and receiving ability. He may only have B+ athletic traits (relatively speaking) but he has A+ skills. 

 

Golf is conceptually no different. You need to have a minimum level of athleticism to compete at the top end. There is nobody on tour that maxes a drive out at 250 and keeps a card. Where golf and baseball separate from FB and Basketball, is the ratio of what matters. Skill carries more weight in golf/baseball, athleticism in FB/BB. You still need both at the highest levels. 

 

To ignore athleticism in golf is short sighted. There is a reason Kevin Kisnernows there are tournaments he can't compete. He lacks the athletic horsepower that an ever increasing number of his peers have. The days of Corey Pavin are over. Up your swing speed like Matt Fitzpatrick or wave as the tour passes you by.  

Fantastic assessment Dutch1008...I was beginning to feel like none of what I was saying was making sense! Drew Cooper is a perfect example of what will be possible in the future as bigger faster stronger athletes pick golf.  The future Tiger will start with Drew Cooper like physical attributes and also possess a ridiculous short game and equivalent or better mental game to Tiger's. He will have to in order to be dominant amongst the golfers that will exist on tour in just the next 20 or 30 years. Tiger isn't even a physical outlier and I am waiting for one of those to choose golf. What would Kyle Berkshire do to a golf course he he had Tiger's skillset? It would be borderline unfair and he would mow over the entire tour from day one.  It will happen one day...it will have to if that person wants to approach Tiger's level of dominance. 

[Dutch1008]

3 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

It’s far more likely this person is under 6’1 than over. 

Why? What proof do you have of this?

 

Rory is the freakish outlier here. I think it's far more likely to be a guy like Jon Rahm. 

[Righty to Lefty]

Look at what is on the way in the future as BSF athletes begin to pick golf: 

Pure alpha athlete with excellent coordination and a beautiful swing.  One day this package will also have Tiger's skillset and will mow over the tour I assure you.  

[bscinstnct]

4 minutes ago, Righty to Lefty said:

He was never the most dominant player in the NBA sorry to say and plenty of teams were able to neutralize him in the playoffs because of his size. Also when Kevin Durant showed up he wasn't the best player on the team until KD left. 

 

Fantastic assessment Dutch1008...I was beginning to feel like none of what I was saying was making sense! Drew Cooper is a perfect example of what will be possible in the future as bigger faster stronger athletes pick golf.  The future Tiger will start with Drew Cooper like physical attributes and also possess a ridiculous short game and equivalent or better mental game to Tiger's. He will have to in order to be dominant amongst the golfers that will exist on tour in just the next 20 or 30 years. Tiger isn't even a physical outlier and I am waiting for one of those to choose golf. What would Kyle Berkshire do to a golf course he he had Tiger's skillset? It would be borderline unfair and he would mow over the entire tour from day one.  It will happen one day...it will have to if that person wants to approach Tiger's level of dominance. 

 

You ignore the fact that what kept Rory, BK, or Jordan Spieth from being the “next Tiger”

 

Had nothing to do with not being a physical outlier.

 

They were all dominating the same way TIger was. 

 

If any of them could have maintained the same level of play, any could have won 15 majors in ten years.

 

So why didn’t they?

 

Because they couldn’t maintain the same level of elite play in the key categories. And none could maintain the level of mental strength to keep it up. 
 

In golf, putting and short game carry as many strokes as driving. 
 

Any of them could have been the next Tiger at their average physical size.