looking for a nice pair of lows for ball

[deezyvsop]

That explanation makes no sense though.

The Zoom MVP went for $92 with a heel zoom unit and nothing in the forefoot. A shoe with heel and forefoot zoom costs less and that explanation is supposed tomake sense?

I'd take the Lebron II low, if you can find them, any day. That is some cushy Zoom in the Lebron II's and the lows definitely have zoom throughout.

 

[mt3130]

i said the $90 price point makes sense because nike was claiming that the low-top lebron still featured a carbon fiber heel counter and full-length zoom with adouble stacked zoom unit in the heel. the mid was $140 so a low top that exactly the same shouldnt be $90.

as for the zoom mvp, maybe they used more expensive leathers or the computerized stitching or the firmer density IP wingfoot (whatever the hell that is) makesit more expensive. oh and by the way the zoom MVPs feature only forefoot zoom.

 

[deezyvsop]

Right, I had it backwards, zoom in the forefoot only.

But regardless of how it compares to the Mid, the Bron 6 low at $90 with zoom at the FF and heel sounds about right. Comparing that to the MVP with onlyforefoot zoom, that doesn't make sense.

I don't buy a lot of other reasons for why they charge $92 for that, the one that does stick out to me is Nike wants to see what they can get away with.

 

[frijo sneaker]

Try the kobe's.

 

[mt3130]

i agree that nike tries to see how much they can get away with when picking a price point for a shoe...especially when the style is being pushed as aperformance shoe.

Try the kobe's.

i tried them on and the first thing i noticed is that its not as low as they lead you to believe. it also felt like an upgraded hyperdunk...which i hated. ican't do lunarfoam again. if i get aonther pair of shoes with lunarfoam in the forefoot and play in them and have the shoe bottom out on me in 3 weeksagain ill feel like an idiot for listening to all the kobe stans on here. i'd rather stick with the lebrons because they have heel and forefoot zoom, whichi know works for me. it also helps that the lebron lows are $30 less than the kobes.

 

[deezyvsop]

Man seriously. I was HYPED about the Kobe 4's. A great looking shoe and it's lower than traditional mids.

Then they pull that lunar forefoot garbage. At that price point?

I could find a lot of good lows with zoom throughout in that price range. It wasn't hard to say no at all, Lunar is Nike's new cash cow. Sure it mightbe a little lighter to barely help with performance (and I'm sure it's cheaper to produce), but it bottoms out quicker which has the sheep coming backsooner to buy another pair.

I don't personally know a single person who would be down with any product like that.

 

[cbfpunch]

^ nike's doing the whole american car/ipod thing. you know, it's all good in the beginning but down the road there are going to be problems with theproduct. disposable technology is what it is. people are claiming that the ZK4s are wonderful until they bottom out, and then what can you do with it? nike, ofcourse, wants you to buy another pair. like you said, deezy, lunar is nike's new cash cow.

 

[mt3130]

i completely agree about the disposable technology. i getting to the point where i would pay a premium price for a shoe that would stay in prime condition foryears. every shoe ive had in the past 2 years or so were all $100 plus except for the phenoms (which were $90), yet my shoes are shot in 3 months max. imtalking the sole is worn out, the cushioning is dead, or the shoe breaks.

i wish nike would make the pro versions of shoes available since we now all know that pro shoes often feature different technology than the released version(flywire, different cushioning unit implementations, shoes with extra eyelets, etc.)

i would definitely pay $200 for a shoe that i knew would no doubt last me 2-3 years, meaning no aspect of the shoe breaks down before that time frame:cushioning not dying, outsole not wearing down quickly/falling apart, midsole foam not compressing, upper not weakening. I'm just looking for an all aroundcomfortable shoe that will last. I seem to only be able to find shoes that are either comfortable or durable.

 

[martini555]

why would you ball in lows...no ankle support is bad......probs best to go round to stores and maybe get them fitted properly and test them out. see how theyfeel

 

[prod2]

Originally Posted by Martini555

why would you ball in lows...no ankle support is bad......probs best to go round to stores and maybe get them fitted properly and test them out. see how they feel

That's what I'm thinking as well. I severely sprained my ankle in my air total package (ankle support similar to 2k4's) andthey're not exactly the most protecting shoe for your ankle. I realise that you will roll your ankle if you land on someones foot but I didn't think itwould be this bad. I'm not saying I blame my shoes but I do think that my injury could have been less severe if I had something firm around my ankle.

They're good though when I go laterally or cut to the basket. So it's not like my ankles are weak. Probably intermediate. But I've rolled my anklewith a cheap Nike overplay (number???) and I was back on the court in a week. Enough of my rant maybe those ankle rolls differ much and my current ankle sprainis on my left foot.

Either way, I cringe whenever I see someone going up in traffic. Especially dudes going up for alleyoop dunks without hanging on the rim. But could someonetell me what lowtop shoes do in order to make it more stable or to reduce the severity of ankle rolls?