- Dec 27, 2011
- 12,996
- 24,961
3rd most ain't a record
You don't break records by becoming 3rd most of all time.
+1
OFFICIAL KOBE IX NIKEID-- NO BUYING/SELLING DISCUSSION--R.I.P KOBE 9 ID
+1
- Mar 24, 2001
- 44,833
- 66,536
Semantics. Bet you will hear about kobe's "record breaking" game soon.
Maybe I could phrase it better. He's going to break jordan's scoring record and in the process set the...mark? Measure? Record (as in recorded event) for 3rd most points all time.
In the history books, Kobe will be recorded as the player totaling the 3rd most points all time. The record will be set for 3rd. It will go on record as the 3rd most points scored all time. The record (recorded event) will read : scoring - highest career total - #3 kobe bryant. It will be recorded as the 3rd highest all time. The previous record (recorded event ) for 3rd highest was set by jordan, but that record will be broken from its original status and a new record will be set in its place
Maybe I could phrase it better. He's going to break jordan's scoring record and in the process set the...mark? Measure? Record (as in recorded event) for 3rd most points all time.
In the history books, Kobe will be recorded as the player totaling the 3rd most points all time. The record will be set for 3rd. It will go on record as the 3rd most points scored all time. The record (recorded event) will read : scoring - highest career total - #3 kobe bryant. It will be recorded as the 3rd highest all time. The previous record (recorded event ) for 3rd highest was set by jordan, but that record will be broken from its original status and a new record will be set in its place
Last edited:
- Aug 22, 2013
- 895
- 739
Lmao....What!?..lol ya lost me after semantics. Lol
- Aug 4, 2005
- 35,032
- 16,945
But it's not semantics at all
Record = best in that particular category. I see what you're trying to get at but record is just not correctly being used in that context.
Record = best in that particular category. I see what you're trying to get at but record is just not correctly being used in that context.
- Mar 5, 2014
- 15
- 11
If it isn't a MC they will definitely throw it on a pair of 29s
- Mar 24, 2001
- 44,833
- 66,536
It is semantics .
Record =/= best tho. A record is just that; something recorded. By definition. A "record" does not mean "best record" anymore than "player" means "best player"
Don't want to turn this thread into linguistics class tho
. Record =/= best tho. A record is just that; something recorded. By definition. A "record" does not mean "best record" anymore than "player" means "best player"
Don't want to turn this thread into linguistics class tho
Last edited:
- Aug 4, 2005
- 35,032
- 16,945
But when you're talking about the record, like you stated, it is referring to the best. Period. Especially in this case.It is semantics.
Record =/= best tho. A record is just that, something recorded. By definition. A "record" does not mean "best record" anymore than "player" means "best player"
Don't want to turn this thread into linguistics class tho
But it's all gucci. Let's keep it moving homie
- May 9, 2005
- 10,219
- 1,671
Yeah I think the only way they can justify making a big deal out of 3rd on a list (even though it's a big accomplishment) is to tie it to who he's passing.
i.e. a Jordan-inspired option. Market it as "one legend passes the another."
i.e. a Jordan-inspired option. Market it as "one legend passes the another."
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,035
- 85,621
Milestone would be more appropriate.
- Aug 4, 2005
- 35,032
- 16,945
Which is exactly what they will do:
-"Two icons"
-"Two players in NBA history have never been this similar"
-"Passing of the torch" (Even though it happened almost a decade ago)
But you catch my drift
- Aug 4, 2005
- 35,032
- 16,945
- Mar 24, 2001
- 44,833
- 66,536
A milestone that will go on record as #3 all time, sure.
- Mar 15, 2014
- 2,961
- 1,767
Yeah in that case I'm a record breaking powerlifter. Broke into the top 100 USA squats.
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,035
- 85,621
[emoji]128557[/emoji][emoji]128557[/emoji][emoji]128557[/emoji]
Like what is dude arguing it's not a record. When Kobe broke Jerry West's all time Laker point total, that was a record cause he stands at the top. Can't be that hard to understand.
- Mar 24, 2001
- 44,833
- 66,536
And if micheal jordan was #100 on that list you would have broken his record. I would definitely put that on my resume.
Last edited:
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,035
- 85,621
Jordan doesn't have a... you know what, never mind, you got it.
- Nov 27, 2014
- 78
- 51
whats good all. made these a while back. my attempt to make a prelude 6. lol
![][v][aximus](/data/avatars/m/114/114913.jpg?1507420990){kind=avatar}
][v][aximus
formerly who8mychips
- Jun 28, 2013
- 2,194
- 2,206
I don't think being #100 on any list qualifies as a record, therefore it cannot be broken.
- Aug 4, 2005
- 35,032
- 16,945
He called it THE record which implies the best.
But he's trying to flip the script and say he means record as in taking data or a statistic.
But he's trying to flip the script and say he means record as in taking data or a statistic.
MVP
Supporter
- Feb 28, 2008
- 83,035
- 85,621
Is it really that hard to say I was wrong or messed up. Type of dudes to tell you the sky is purple just to say they're right.
- Mar 4, 2013
- 4,109
- 3,235
Only if this was tonight
- Mar 24, 2001
- 44,833
- 66,536
I said "the record" meaning the record or milestone whatever you want to call it that kobe is going to break. (Jordan's personal record) Not that serious. But I do encourage you guys to check the actual definition of record. When you say "list" instead of record you are talking about a list.....of what? Records. I know it sounds silly to say 3rd best record but it's not incorrect.
Last edited:
- Apr 3, 2001
- 864
- 448
Stop. He's going to be the third highest scoring player in NBA history. The record would be breaking Kareem's record of 38,387 points. No need to continue.
Last edited:
- Aug 4, 2005
- 35,032
- 16,945
I did check the actual definition. There's various. The definition you tried using in this context is just wrong. Period.
When you're talking about sports, you don't talk about records as in statistical data. You talk about the best or #1.
Have you ever seen ESPN refer to a record in this manner?
