[討論] 為什麼要酸球員靠體系?
如題
常常看到不少人在酸某某球員之所以能打出好成績,都是因為體系的關係,如果脫離這個
環境根本被看破手腳
但是阿,籃球是團隊運動吧,好的體系是一個成功的隊伍的必備條件吧
除非你是喬丹,不然沒人能靠自己的個人能力帶隊打出好成績的
也就是說,如果球星A只要給他一個體系,就能帶隊打出好成績,那比起個人能力很強卻
沒有體系能匹配,只能找同樣很強的隊友才能打出成績的球星B,應該更珍貴吧
舉幾個球員當例子
球星A這類型的就是鬍子,姆斯,咖哩,可愛,他們都屬於那種只要為他打造一個體系,
就能帶隊打出好成績的那種,其中姆斯最強,自帶體系!
球星B就是老大,西河這種的,個人能力很強,但由於個性,球商...等等因素,沒有匹配
的體系,想要走更遠就必須跟其他超級球星合作了(而且只能是互補的)
所以說,今年鬍子得MVP是實至名歸啦,別在酸他沒有冷笑話就不行了,體系球員才是想
要奪冠隊伍的最佳解!
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 111.83.36.82
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/NBA/M.1489495127.A.F45.html
※ 編輯: star1739456 (111.83.36.82), 03/14/2017 20:39:34
噓
03/14 20:40, , 1F
03/14 20:40, 1F
噓
03/14 20:40, , 2F
03/14 20:40, 2F
→
03/14 20:42, , 3F
03/14 20:42, 3F
禪師體系根本不算一個成功的體系,尤其是在現代籃球
→
03/14 20:42, , 4F
03/14 20:42, 4F
→
03/14 20:43, , 5F
03/14 20:43, 5F
噓
03/14 20:44, , 6F
03/14 20:44, 6F
噓
03/14 20:47, , 7F
03/14 20:47, 7F
勇士是屬於萬能卡榫吧,到哪隊都能融入,不算自帶體系
推
03/14 20:47, , 8F
03/14 20:47, 8F
推
03/14 20:48, , 9F
03/14 20:48, 9F
→
03/14 20:54, , 10F
03/14 20:54, 10F
推
03/14 20:57, , 11F
03/14 20:57, 11F
→
03/14 20:59, , 12F
03/14 20:59, 12F
噓
03/14 21:00, , 13F
03/14 21:00, 13F
→
03/14 21:00, , 14F
03/14 21:00, 14F
推
03/14 21:00, , 15F
03/14 21:00, 15F
LBJ比可愛強多了,但是可愛的天花板無極限
→
03/14 21:02, , 16F
03/14 21:02, 16F
→
03/14 21:03, , 17F
03/14 21:03, 17F
→
03/14 21:03, , 18F
03/14 21:03, 18F
→
03/14 21:03, , 19F
03/14 21:03, 19F
→
03/14 21:03, , 20F
03/14 21:03, 20F
推
03/14 21:05, , 21F
03/14 21:05, 21F
推
03/14 21:06, , 22F
03/14 21:06, 22F
推
03/14 21:07, , 23F
03/14 21:07, 23F
→
03/14 21:07, , 24F
03/14 21:07, 24F
推
03/14 21:07, , 25F
03/14 21:07, 25F
推
03/14 21:11, , 26F
03/14 21:11, 26F
這兩個都是很好的體系球員,奪冠拼圖,比瓜瓜這種看似很強但對隊友幫助不大的更有用
推
03/14 21:11, , 27F
03/14 21:11, 27F
推
03/14 21:13, , 28F
03/14 21:13, 28F
→
03/14 21:13, , 29F
03/14 21:13, 29F
推
03/14 21:13, , 30F
03/14 21:13, 30F
→
03/14 21:13, , 31F
03/14 21:13, 31F
推
03/14 21:13, , 32F
03/14 21:13, 32F
推
03/14 21:13, , 33F
03/14 21:13, 33F
→
03/14 21:16, , 34F
03/14 21:16, 34F
→
03/14 21:16, , 35F
03/14 21:16, 35F
還有 67 則推文
還有 4 段內文
推
03/14 22:58, , 103F
03/14 22:58, 103F
推
03/14 23:05, , 104F
03/14 23:05, 104F
推
03/14 23:10, , 105F
03/14 23:10, 105F
→
03/14 23:10, , 106F
03/14 23:10, 106F
推
03/14 23:12, , 107F
03/14 23:12, 107F
推
03/14 23:20, , 108F
03/14 23:20, 108F
→
03/14 23:20, , 109F
03/14 23:20, 109F
→
03/14 23:20, , 110F
03/14 23:20, 110F
推
03/14 23:29, , 111F
03/14 23:29, 111F
→
03/14 23:29, , 112F
03/14 23:29, 112F
→
03/14 23:29, , 113F
03/14 23:29, 113F
噓
03/14 23:31, , 114F
03/14 23:31, 114F
推
03/14 23:38, , 115F
03/14 23:38, 115F
噓
03/14 23:38, , 116F
03/14 23:38, 116F
噓
03/14 23:47, , 117F
03/14 23:47, 117F
→
03/14 23:47, , 118F
03/14 23:47, 118F
→
03/14 23:47, , 119F
03/14 23:47, 119F
推
03/15 00:22, , 120F
03/15 00:22, 120F
→
03/15 00:23, , 121F
03/15 00:23, 121F
推
03/15 00:43, , 122F
03/15 00:43, 122F
推
03/15 00:53, , 123F
03/15 00:53, 123F
推
03/15 00:58, , 124F
03/15 00:58, 124F
→
03/15 00:58, , 125F
03/15 00:58, 125F
推
03/15 01:12, , 126F
03/15 01:12, 126F
噓
03/15 01:17, , 127F
03/15 01:17, 127F
→
03/15 02:29, , 128F
03/15 02:29, 128F
噓
03/15 02:56, , 129F
03/15 02:56, 129F
噓
03/15 05:16, , 130F
03/15 05:16, 130F
→
03/15 05:16, , 131F
03/15 05:16, 131F
→
03/15 05:16, , 132F
03/15 05:16, 132F
→
03/15 05:58, , 133F
03/15 05:58, 133F
推
03/15 06:05, , 134F
03/15 06:05, 134F
噓
03/15 06:33, , 135F
03/15 06:33, 135F
推
03/15 06:55, , 136F
03/15 06:55, 136F
推
03/15 06:58, , 137F
03/15 06:58, 137F
推
03/15 10:30, , 138F
03/15 10:30, 138F
噓
03/15 13:50, , 139F
03/15 13:50, 139F
推
03/15 14:42, , 140F
03/15 14:42, 140F
→
03/15 14:44, , 141F
03/15 14:44, 141F
噓
03/15 17:16, , 142F
03/15 17:16, 142F
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 2 篇):
討論
23
142