Why do people think any good NBA/NFL athlete can beat the Klit bros?

Inspired by another recent thread here.

Now as I've said, I'm not a fan of Wlad's style, but even I have to acknowledge the man has great skills and is athletic for his size in the boxing ring.

It seems that there are a lot of people out there that thinks that if Shaq or Lebron James or Ray Lewis took up boxing either at a young age or later age that they can beat the Klit bros and be HW champs.

We dont know that. Being good at one sport doesn't translate to another. See Michael Jordan as a prime example A great NBA player but a mediocre baseball player who couldn't hit, field, or even run the bases without looking goofy. Those 2 sports stars at the highest level like an Deion Sanders or Bo Jackson is incredibly rare. Would anyone here think that Lebron James could be like Roger Federer or Wayne Gretzky if he took up tennis or hockey at an early age instead of basketball? I'm sure there's a lot of people out there that thinks Lebron can be another Gretzky or Federer if he took up those sports, I don't.

Being a good big athlete at another sport doesn't mean it would mean the same thing in the boxing ring. Things like stamina, the ability to take a punch to the body or head and having good movement inside that boxing ring also has to be taken into consideration. At the HW division size is 1 thing, but usually it's great skills that determines the winner much more than size imo.

What do you guys think?

I don't really know what thread your referring to, so cant comment in much depth. Obviously boxing is largely unlike any other sport as far as intangibles go. One thing I have no doubt of is that basically any NFL or NBA team today has players with greater overall athletecism than probably any HW fighter in history, that's almost a no brainer really. So could Lebron James have been a great HW fighter if he dedicated himself to boxing the same way he has basketball, from a young age? Unless he had a completely glass chin or just lacked the mentality under pressure, I highly suspect he could have. Are you arguing that he isn't a better pure athlete than the Klitschko brothers? Because that is assanine really.

Ha ha... you're not gonna get any arguments from me, bulldog. I remember what happened to "Too Tall Jones" and Mark Gastineau (ex-NFL stars) when they tried their hand at boxing. They got their asses whipped. Being a star at one sport doesn't necessarily translate into being a successful boxer.

However..... going back to the original thread about the Klitschko's chances in MMA, I'd have to bet against it. Same reasoning. Just 'cause they've been successful boxers, it doesn't mean they'd do good in a street fight, or in MMA style fighting. I still point to Wlad's suspect chin, which hasn't been truly tested after his two humiliating KO's, and to Vitali's age, stiffness, and general lack of coordination. Given some training, I suppose they could be marginally successful, but nothing like the dominance they've shown over the bunch of incompetent losers they've faced lately.

Obviously using any crossover examples is not going to tell you anything one way or another. Of course someone who trains their whole life for one sport and then once well past their physical peak decides to give another a shot isn't going to be dominant, that's just redundant to say. I would HOPE that the arguement you are trying to respond to is that if one athlete had focused entirely one another sport from the get go, INSTEAD of their chosen sport, they could be better than so and so, which in the case of boxing obviously holds very little weight either. The point I was making is that Lebron James, for instance, is a FAR FAR FAR better pure athlete than either of the Klitshckos, but that doesn't take intangibles associated with the sport into account obviously. All combat sports are very specific in that sense, I know a couple of guys who were half decent martial artists from a young age who were absolutely useless when it came to so much as catching or throwing a ball etc, but they would beat the hell out of guys who were very multi talented in team sports etc. Just a dumb arguement really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

I don't really know what thread your referring to, so cant comment in much depth. Obviously boxing is largely unlike any other sport as far as intangibles go. One thing I have no doubt of is that basically any NFL or NBA team today has players with greater overall athletecism than probably any HW fighter in history, that's almost a no brainer really. So could Lebron James have been a great HW fighter if he dedicated himself to boxing the same way he has basketball, from a young age? Unless he had a completely glass chin or just lacked the mentality under pressure, I highly suspect he could have. Are you arguing that he isn't a better pure athlete than the Klitschko brothers? Because that is assanine really.

---

What I'm saying is this. Great athleticism in 1 sport does not mean it will translate to another. Lebron is more athletic than Wayne Gretzky, so by your logic he may have been a greater hockey player than Gretzky if he took up the sport? Lebron is more athletic than Diego Maradona would that mean he would be a soccer legend if he took on soccer at an young age? He's more athletic than Roger Federer would that mean he would win 14-15 Grand Slam titles just like him? He's more athletic than Tiger Woods, would that mean he would achieve more success if he took up golf instead of basketball?

MIChael Jordan is more athletic than Babe Ruth, how come he couldn't recognize a curve ball, fastball, change up and start hitting home runs out of the ball park like the Babe?

Being great at 1 sport does not mean 1 will be great at another. That's my point.

The title of the thread is "Why do people think any good NBA/NFL athlete can beat the Klit bros?" It's not "Do you think if NBA/NFL athletes had taken up boxing from the very beginning, could they beat the Klitschkos?" I wish people would stick to the original arguments, instead of twisting it into something else. And given that the title is the former, I maintain that it's ludicruous to think that a Lebron James, a Shaq, or any other NBA'er or NFL'er for that matter could beat the Klits.

So either stick to the original argument, or make up your own new thread.

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Ha ha... you're not gonna get any arguments from me, bulldog. I remember what happened to "Too Tall Jones" and Mark Gastineau (ex-NFL stars) when they tried their hand at boxing. They got their asses whipped. Being a star at one sport doesn't necessarily translate into being a successful boxer.

However..... going back to the original thread about the Klitschko's chances in MMA, I'd have to bet against it. Same reasoning. Just 'cause they've been successful boxers, it doesn't mean they'd do good in a street fight, or in MMA style fighting. I still point to Wlad's suspect chin, which hasn't been truly tested after his two humiliating KO's, and to Vitali's age, stiffness, and general lack of coordination. Given some training, I suppose they could be marginally successful, but nothing like the dominance they've shown over the bunch of incompetent losers they've faced lately.

---

Exactly that's my point. Being good at 1 sport doesn't mean it will translate to another. Even if the Klit bros did MMA at an early age, would they have dominated? We don't know. Maybe, maybe not. But more than likely they wouldn't dominate.

So would Lebron James be another Babe Ruth if he took up baseball at an early age and just went there? How about if he concentrated on soccer at an young age, would be another Maradona? Would he be another Federer?

Remember different sports requires different skill sets, Being overall athletic is 1 thing, but having the right skills sets to be a superstar in a certain sport is another.

So I would say more than likely no, Lebron wouldn't be another Gretzky, Maradona, Federer, Babe Ruth, Lance Armstrong, or Muhamamd Ali, if he took up those sports at an young age and concentrated in it.

And crossover stars from 1 sport really doesn't translate to another either, just to get back to the original point.

Calling SHAQ...;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

Obviously using any crossover examples is not going to tell you anything one way or another. Of course someone who trains their whole life for one sport and then once well past their physical peak decides to give another a shot isn't going to be dominant, that's just redundant to say. I would HOPE that the arguement you are trying to respond to is that if one athlete had focused entirely one another sport from the get go, INSTEAD of their chosen sport, they could be better than so and so, which in the case of boxing obviously holds very little weight either. The point I was making is that Lebron James, for instance, is a FAR FAR FAR better pure athlete than either of the Klitshckos, but that doesn't take intangibles associated with the sport into account obviously. All combat sports are very specific in that sense, I know a couple of guys who were half decent martial artists from a young age who were absolutely useless when it came to so much as catching or throwing a ball etc, but they would beat the hell out of guys who were very multi talented in team sports etc. Just a dumb arguement really.

---

The title of the thread is "Why do people think any good NBA/NFL athlete can beat the Klit bros?" It's not "Do you think if NBA/NFL athletes had taken up boxing from the very beginning, could they beat the Klitschkos?" I wish people would stick to the original arguments, instead of twisting it into something else. And given that the title is the former, I maintain that it's ludicruous to think that a Lebron James, a Shaq, or any other NBA'er or NFL'er for that matter could beat the Klits.

So either stick to the original argument, or make up your own new thread.

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Ha ha... you're not gonna get any arguments from me, bulldog. I remember what happened to "Too Tall Jones" and Mark Gastineau (ex-NFL stars) when they tried their hand at boxing. They got their asses whipped. Being a star at one sport doesn't necessarily translate into being a successful boxer.

However..... going back to the original thread about the Klitschko's chances in MMA, I'd have to bet against it. Same reasoning. Just 'cause they've been successful boxers, it doesn't mean they'd do good in a street fight, or in MMA style fighting. I still point to Wlad's suspect chin, which hasn't been truly tested after his two humiliating KO's, and to Vitali's age, stiffness, and general lack of coordination. Given some training, I suppose they could be marginally successful, but nothing like the dominance they've shown over the bunch of incompetent losers they've faced lately.

---

Exactly that's my point. Being good at 1 sport doesn't mean it will translate to another. Even if the Klit bros did MMA at an early age, would they have dominated? We don't know. Maybe, maybe not. But more than likely they wouldn't dominate.

So would Lebron James be another Babe Ruth if he took up baseball at an early age and just went there? How about if he concentrated on soccer at an young age, would be another Maradona? Would he be another Federer?

Remember different sports requires different skill sets, Being overall athletic is 1 thing, but having the right skills sets to be a superstar in a certain sport is another.

So I would say more than likely no, Lebron wouldn't be another Gretzky, Maradona, Federer, Babe Ruth, Lance Armstrong, or Muhamamd Ali, if he took up those sports at an young age and concentrated in it.

And crossover stars from 1 sport really doesn't translate to another either, just to get back to the original point.

---

I think it's safe to say we agree on all points.

I think you're obviously referring to my comments against Nameless. Nameless challenged me to name any heavyweight more athletic than the Klitschkos. He said ANY heavyweight. Not necessarily a boxer. So I said this is too easy and I named Lebron James who is 6' 8" 255 pounds along with many other heavyweights. By heavyweight standards the Klitshkos are no where near top of athleticism. They are not athletic. That was my point. Who said anything about Lebron outboxing anyone??? And its a moot point to ponder if Lebron grew up boxing. He would definitely have the most athleticism that heavyweight boxing has ever seen. You can't measure chin or heart. We'd have to see. But Lebron, Ray Lewis, and many other heavyweights would have the Klitschkos easily outbeat in athleticism. But in boxing we all know there are more factors. We don't know if they have the more unless they grew into the sport. Boxing is a specialist sport and no athlete is going to come in as a 20 something year old and beat a Klitschko. Lets be real and not spin things.

It wasn't YOUR comments I was replying to, blegit.

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TitoFan

It wasn't YOUR comments I was replying to, blegit.

;)

---

No, I know. I was referring to the thread and Bulldog. My bad for not specifying.

Personally I don't see the correlation between hitting a jumpshot and the ability to give and take a punch. Have you seen most NBA fights? I remember Shaq when he tried to hit Brad Miller who wasn't even looking and Shaq still missed ;D and damn near tripped over his own feet.

It's just not their sport. Ever see Mike Tyson play basketball :vd: that was just sad. Then there's Jermain Taylor on one of those countdown shows he was shooting hoops with his wife(who i believe played in college) and he can't even dribble. He hops with the ball, then airballed a shot. Again it's not their sport put Lebron James in the ring with Tyson...see what happens ;)

Ray Lewis? Everybody loves to bring him up when this topic is discussed. Hell, Eddie Chambers would probably whip his ass like he did another Football guy, Derric Rossy. I won't even go into what the Klitschko's would do to him. But on the flipside, put Wlad at Wide Receiver and send him across the middle and see what happens ;)

Bottom line it's not their sport. We'll never know how NBA/NFL guys would do if they took up boxing at a young age so why even debate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blegit

I think you're obviously referring to my comments against Nameless. Nameless challenged me to name any heavyweight more athletic than the Klitschkos. He said ANY heavyweight. Not necessarily a boxer. So I said this is too easy and I named Lebron James who is 6' 8" 255 pounds along with many other heavyweights. By heavyweight standards the Klitshkos are no where near top of athleticism. They are not athletic. That was my point. Who said anything about Lebron outboxing anyone??? And its a moot point to ponder if Lebron grew up boxing. He would definitely have the most athleticism that heavyweight boxing has ever seen. You can't measure chin or heart. We'd have to see. But Lebron, Ray Lewis, and many other heavyweights would have the Klitschkos easily outbeat in athleticism. But in boxing we all know there are more factors. We don't know if they have the more unless they grew into the sport. Boxing is a specialist sport and no athlete is going to come in as a 20 something year old and beat a Klitschko. Lets be real and not spin things.

---

The Klitchkos are more athletic than you think. Vitali was a kickboxing champion. There are different types of athleticism. What makes you think Lebron is more athletic than Wladimir? Cause he can jump higher? ESPN ranked boxing as the toughest sport to compete in, so you are saying an athlete from a lesser sport could have dominated?