|
|
Post by DB on Jan 20, 2010 18:31:37 GMT -5
WELL SEE ABOUT THAT NOVVESSS
|
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 18:36:40 GMT -5
lol @ the rimjob you gave to Dell Curry. The dude's a solid scorer, but on a quality team he's nothing more then a 14-15 ppg player. "The Blazers robbed the Jazz, hands down. Dell Curry happens to a very, very underrated simmer and is coming off a great TC, and Jeff Hornacek looks like he could be an excellent scorer. Dennis Rodman is an amazing fit for this team. " Again, I had Curry. He's good. He ain't that good. And LOL @ all of a sudden loving Hornacek, I've been shopping him forever and no one has ever said anything about him being an excellent scorer. His scoring didn't change...Again, another 13-14 ppg type player. Rodman you are correct about though. Solid article though. Curry is coming off a big TC. I get that you're defensive of your trade. I think it was a terrible move, and that KJ's production isn't really an upgrade. You had Curry, but you underutilized him, IMO. His stats in Dallas point to that, regardless of how bad the supporting cast was - his %s and A:TO speak for themselves. Nobody said I love Hornacek. Again, though, I think you misused him. Might not be your fault, but I think he's going to be a very nice scorer if he plays the 2. Dan's backcourt is loaded with very versatile guys, and I think it's going to be amazing if he finds the right rotation. I think you could've gotten more out of Curry and Hornacek, and I think you're gonna hate KJ at the 1. And at the least, I don't see a way to justify Rodman being in there. IMO, KJ for Hornacek+Curry is a lateral move production wise. Kersey is solid, but he's not Rodman at all. |
|
|
|
Post by nova on Jan 20, 2010 18:43:59 GMT -5
lol @ the rimjob you gave to Dell Curry. The dude's a solid scorer, but on a quality team he's nothing more then a 14-15 ppg player. "The Blazers robbed the Jazz, hands down. Dell Curry happens to a very, very underrated simmer and is coming off a great TC, and Jeff Hornacek looks like he could be an excellent scorer. Dennis Rodman is an amazing fit for this team. " Again, I had Curry. He's good. He ain't that good. And LOL @ all of a sudden loving Hornacek, I've been shopping him forever and no one has ever said anything about him being an excellent scorer. His scoring didn't change...Again, another 13-14 ppg type player. Rodman you are correct about though. Solid article though. Curry is coming off a big TC. I get that you're defensive of your trade. I think it was a terrible move, and that KJ's production isn't really an upgrade. You had Curry, but you underutilized him, IMO. His stats in Dallas point to that, regardless of how bad the supporting cast was - his %s and A:TO speak for themselves. Nobody said I love Hornacek. Again, though, I think you misused him. Might not be your fault, but I think he's going to be a very nice scorer if he plays the 2. Dan's backcourt is loaded with very versatile guys, and I think it's going to be amazing if he finds the right rotation. I think you could've gotten more out of Curry and Hornacek, and I think you're gonna hate KJ at the 1. And at the least, I don't see a way to justify Rodman being in there. IMO, KJ for Hornacek+Curry is a lateral move production wise. Kersey is solid, but he's not Rodman at all. He went up in 2 categories. Yeah, blockbuster TC. His scoring didn't change. How did I underutilize him? He started half the season and was backup PG/SG the other half. His stats in Dallas were inflated as FUCK. He had no one around him, they averaged like 94 PPG. He's solid at Sg, but nothing special unless he's the top scorer you have. Honestly, I just have to laugh @ the mis-use of Hornacek. He played very well for me at PG, but he's not nearly as good at SG. I tried him there. Averaged like 14/4/5. I like his backcourt too, but I don't think it's good enough. If he can upgrade his PG spot and play Dell or Hornacek at SG I'll like it a lot more. And you're absolutely wrong about Curry/Hornacek. I've been shopping Hornacek for 2 seasons. Got only a couple decent offers. Pretty much no one offered stuff for curry either. Maybe KJ won't be good at PG for me, but I do know what Jeff/Dell play like, and neither is anything amazing. |
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 18:50:50 GMT -5
Curry is coming off a big TC. I get that you're defensive of your trade. I think it was a terrible move, and that KJ's production isn't really an upgrade. You had Curry, but you underutilized him, IMO. His stats in Dallas point to that, regardless of how bad the supporting cast was - his %s and A:TO speak for themselves. Nobody said I love Hornacek. Again, though, I think you misused him. Might not be your fault, but I think he's going to be a very nice scorer if he plays the 2. Dan's backcourt is loaded with very versatile guys, and I think it's going to be amazing if he finds the right rotation. I think you could've gotten more out of Curry and Hornacek, and I think you're gonna hate KJ at the 1. And at the least, I don't see a way to justify Rodman being in there. IMO, KJ for Hornacek+Curry is a lateral move production wise. Kersey is solid, but he's not Rodman at all. He went up in 2 categories. Yeah, blockbuster TC. His scoring didn't change. How did I underutilize him? He started half the season and was backup PG/SG the other half. His stats in Dallas were inflated as FUCK. He had no one around him, they averaged like 94 PPG. He's solid at Sg, but nothing special unless he's the top scorer you have. Honestly, I just have to laugh @ the mis-use of Hornacek. He played very well for me at PG, but he's not nearly as good at SG. I tried him there. Averaged like 14/4/5. I like his backcourt too, but I don't think it's good enough. If he can upgrade his PG spot and play Dell or Hornacek at SG I'll like it a lot more. And you're absolutely wrong about Curry/Hornacek. I've been shopping Hornacek for 2 seasons. Got only a couple decent offers. Pretty much no one offered stuff for curry either. Maybe KJ won't be good at PG for me, but I do know what Jeff/Dell play like, and neither is anything amazing. There's really no point in getting into this. You're going to dismiss Curry's TC (that is a huge TC. The jumps he made are really important jumps for a guard, as you know), ignore his production in order to defend yourself, refuse to consider whether or not you got enough out of Hornacek and Curry (when it's clear you didn't), and just generally talk those two down until it makes sense to have dealt Rodman and then for KJ and a backup SF. The deal sucked, and Dan got enough really good pieces out of it to become a contender. Hornacek and Curry are very promising and when I look at their percentages and ratings, along with Curry's past production, I think they have their best stats ahead of them. IDK how Dan will use them, or if he has enough minutes to give them, but when I tell you that I think you misused guys, and you respond by saying you didn't, we're just gonna go in circles. One thing though: I said it was a lateral move production wise, not value wise. Adding in Rodman makes the value awful, but that's not my point. |
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 18:58:39 GMT -5
VOTE
|
|
|
|
Post by nova on Jan 20, 2010 19:20:20 GMT -5
You're so smart habes! Clearly you're right and I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 19:25:42 GMT -5
You're so smart habes! Clearly you're right and I'm wrong. Hahaha, you're so fucking lame. I told you we were going to go in circles because I thought you misused those guys and you thought you didn't (aka it broke down to differing opinions), and like a big fucking baby this is your response. Grow up. |
|
|
|
Post by nova on Jan 20, 2010 19:28:03 GMT -5
Yeah you broke it down to differing opinions.
And then proceeded to trash mine and basically say I'm biased and a fool and once again say how you were right.
If you had just said agree to disagree, fine, but you insist on repeating your opinion and beating it into other people until they give up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 19:31:56 GMT -5
Yeah you broke it down to differing opinions. And then proceeded to trash mine and basically say I'm biased and a fool and once again say how you were right. If you had just said agree to disagree, fine, but you insist on repeating your opinion and beating it into other people until they give up. No, I literally said none of those things. You say smarmy shit like "I have to laugh @ ..." and "Yeah, blockbuster TC." The kind of shit nobody is obnoxious enough to say in an actual argument. I told you why I thought you were wrong and then said it's going to go in circles. Then you withdrew and played like I'm the one being a prick. It's all good. This is the same shit as you not catching onto me joking about my team and then spitefully posting "LOL @ OKC TC". Brutal. |
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 19:47:06 GMT -5
VOTE! GIVE IT A 3! IDC!
|
|
|
|
Post by Pig on Jan 20, 2010 19:58:59 GMT -5
No one in this league can play with the Thunder on paper.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 20:06:07 GMT -5
The Thunder suck! I just need votes!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jan 20, 2010 20:18:02 GMT -5
aaron and noves is the new skillz and noves
|
|
|
|
Post by Stannis Baratheon on Jan 20, 2010 20:22:08 GMT -5
I'm just gonna guess you don't have any clue what you're talking about or something. Four teams won 50 in the Pacific last year. My team is def. winning 50, and it's not like anyone in the Midwest is winning 50 at all. It shouldn't really be too hard. You think 6 teams have a chance. Like I said, you're kidddddddddddddddddddddding |
|
|
|
Post by Haberino on Jan 20, 2010 20:26:48 GMT -5
I'm just gonna guess you don't have any clue what you're talking about or something. Four teams won 50 in the Pacific last year. My team is def. winning 50, and it's not like anyone in the Midwest is winning 50 at all. It shouldn't really be too hard. You think 6 teams have a chance. Like I said, you're kidddddddddddddddddddddding I said I think 5 teams can win 50 in the Pacific. There's no reason why they can't. Five of the seven best teams in BBS are in the Pacific. Five teams winning 50 in a division is the same thing as five winning 50 in a conference, considering nobody in the Midwest is going to win 50. The schedule isn't division based. |
|
