Slam Online: Spurs Preview

[samikeyp]

Now you are just lying. pathetic.

[implacable44]

Had you held your arguments to that, then there would not have been a problem. But you belittled anyone who disagreed with you...and you picked the fights, not the other way around.

And don't mince words and hide behind your "top 10% in law school" mantle. It was a threat. Yeah, I freely admit I used a vulgarism. You were being a complete jerk (better??) to anyone and everyone and frankly you deserved a dressing down. But I never stooped low enough to threaten you.

STFU could be interpreted as a threat the same as I can come down there and see if you could make me STFU -

Maybe we have a problem with semantics in here and the comprehension of words or lack of. maybe we have an issue that we are debating opinions and I willingly admit to calling people stupid - idiot etc - just as I have been called those same names and a troll and crap etc. - people belittled me and I responded in kind.

[implacable44]

Now you are just lying. pathetic.


about >?

[travis2]

STFU could be interpreted as a threat the same as I can come down there and see if you could make me STFU -

Maybe we have a problem with semantics in here and the comprehension of words or lack of. maybe we have an issue that we are debating opinions and I willingly admit to calling people stupid - idiot etc - just as I have been called those same names and a troll and crap etc. - people belittled me and I responded in kind.

No, STFU is not a threat. Vulgarism, yes, but not a threat. Nor was your "make me" response. But when you said you'd come down here...that was your threat.

And no one called you names until you started throwing them out yourself. No one belittled you until you belittled them.


I stand by what I said...if you were merely "debating opinions", there wouldn't have been any problem. You weren't.

[FromWayDowntown]

I guess if you say so. I still wouldn't have done it and I know there were several who made the same comment and like I said - that feeling grew with time.

The Spurs gave Malik that contract and, curiously enough, very few were complaining about the contract when Malik was playing very good basketball in the 2003 playoffs and significantly helping the Spurs to a 2nd title. Few were complaining about that contract when Malik finished 6th in the Sixth Man voting that year. Now, did his subsequent play cause concern about the money spent? Sure. But could anyone go back and undo that contract at that point? No. And again, few were complaining about that contract in its first season.


I don't have any idea who was available at the time - I would take just about all of those players on that list over Malik though.

That's a fairly convenient response. Sort of like, "it's just my opinion."

In any event, to refresh your recollection, here's a column (http://espn.go.com/nba/columns/aldridge_david/1401787.html) from David Aldridge (who I suspect you'll dismiss, but who I'll use as a source anyway) describing his top 10, reasonably available free agents in the summer of 2002:


So these are the real top 10, two per position. Some are young, some old. Some are tall, some shorter. But all of them will help you win next season.

Point guard
1. Jeff McInnis, Clippers. The Angelenos don't seem very interested in signing him (squabbles with teammates and coach Alvin Gentry are to blame), but the 27-year-old had a career year in L.A. If anybody hit more big shots for his team last season, point him out to me. If I'm Detroit, I'm thinking this guy is perfect for my blue-collar bunch.

1a. Travis Best, Bulls. He played very often and very well in big postseason games for the Pacers over the years. His reward for that was getting shuttled off to Chicago in the Jalen Rose deal. All he wants is certainty about his minutes. Any reason Seattle can't give him some cash ... and some run behind the Glove?

Shooting guard
1. Larry Hughes, Warriors. Golden State did not tender the 23-year-old; he's unrestricted and free to go anyplace that will have him. Forget last year's disastrous attempt to make him a point. He's a two and a good one. He needs to play somewhere where he'll get shots. With Terrell Brandon's future anything but secure, is anybody more in need of backcourt scoring than Minnesota?

1a. Bruce Bowen, Spurs. We told you last summer that Gregg Popovich should pick up the phone and get Bowen, and he did. Bowen is still one of the better on-the-ball defenders around. He defended Kobe Bryant as well as anyone could in the Western semis, and there's only one Kobe. Fits all the criteria for Larry Brown in Philly: He can't shoot, he loves to defend and Brown has coached him before -- but gotten rid of him.

Small forward
1. Rashard Lewis, Sonics. He cried on draft night in 1998 when he fell into the second round, but Lewis is having the last laugh after a career year in Seattle that made him the premier free agent this summer. At 6-foot-10, he has the size to score inside, but has the shot to kill from the perimeter. The Sonics insist they'll do whatever it takes to keep him, but the Rockets would love to bring Lewis back to his hometown -- and the Wizards are right behind them.

1a. Lee Nailon, Hornets. He's restricted, but if anyone is worth gambling a full mid-level on, it may be the 6-9 Nailon. He started half of the season for the Hornets for the injured Jamal Mashburn and put up solid numbers. He's a tough left-hander who's getting better and better from the perimeter. If the Raptors lose Keon Clark, Nailon would be a perfect replacement.

Power forward
1. Malik Rose, Spurs. A hard worker, he's a better teammate you will not find anywhere. He guards anybody put in front of him and has killed himself to add a jumper to his offensive game. Mark Cuban is a smart guy; is there a sign-and-trade or three-way that could add Rose's toughness and defense to his locker room?

1a. Popeye Jones, Wizards. Finally healthy after a couple of injury-plagued seasons, Jones' smarts saved the Wizards on several occasions. Not only does he know how to play, but he's a tremendous teacher to young players. Several teams would love to add him, but San Antonio should be at the top of the list. He's the perfect backup for Duncan, and his personality would fit right in with the low-key, professional Spurs.

Center
1. Wang Zhi-Zhi, Mavericks. Laugh if you want, but Wang could help a bunch of teams next season. He can shoot it deep, and if he learns to deal with the physical nature of the game, he'll be able to handle himself inside. There are obvious concerns about his relationship with Chinese officials after his did-he-defect-or-not play of recent weeks, but he's still worth a gamble. If the Magic can't get Jerome James from Seattle, they may want to think about a mobile five who'd knock down open looks created by Tracy McGrady and Grant Hill.

1a. Scott Williams, Nuggets. He missed a lot of time with injuries last season, but there is still some tread left on his tires. Williams is a high-energy guy who will get rebounds, take charges and score without plays being called for him. He was huge for Milwaukee in the 2001 playoffs, and if the Bucks are smart, they'll repatriate him in Cheese City.

So, let's see: if you wanted a power forward type in the summer of 2002, the best choices were Malik Rose and Popeye Jones. If you wanted to expand that out to include any big man, you could get Wang Zhi-Zhi or Scott Williams.

Yes, I guess I do see the quarrel with the Spurs' decision. :rolleyes

But who else was available you ask? Well, here are some other names:

Walter McCarty
Eduardo Najera
Slava Medvedenko
Sam Mitchell
Chris Dudley
Jerome James
Donyell Marshall

That doesn't strike me as a list of guys who could have helped a team aimed at winning a title -- though I suppose you'll cite me to your self-proclaimed center of the future Jerome James, who had 7 dunks on pick and rolls (and a whopping 3 rebounds) against the Spurs in one playoff game.

The market had about 1 power forward type; the Lakers were in need of a power forward type and the Spurs had the power to keep him away from LA. Hmmm; yeah, I guess that was unreasonable.

[travis2]

about >?

This...


I didnt talk big about anything.

[implacable44]

No, STFU is not a threat. Vulgarism, yes, but not a threat. Nor was your "make me" response. But when you said you'd come down here...that was your threat.

And no one called you names until you started throwing them out yourself. No one belittled you until you belittled them.


I stand by what I said...if you were merely "debating opinions", there wouldn't have been any problem. You weren't.


that is not true - i posted an article and responded to critiques - crap - troll etc and it digressed into stupid and idiot and then you topped it all with vulgar language - i played my part in responding -

[implacable44]

This...


i responded to you talking big

[travis2]

that is not true - i posted an article and responded to critiques - crap - troll etc and it digressed into stupid and idiot and then you topped it all with vulgar language - i played my part in responding -

you called FWDT "punk" in your second post! No one had called you anything yet. You didn't throw down the first name?

You dropped your "don't question me" line and started crowing about how you "proved" your argument...you weren't talking big?

It digressed, yes...and there are multiple people here who participated in it...but your instigation of it is easily provable within the body of this thread.

[implacable44]

[QUOTE=FromWayDowntown]The Spurs gave Malik that contract and, curiously enough, very few were complaining about the contract when Malik was playing very good basketball in the 2003 playoffs and significantly helping the Spurs to a 2nd title. Few were complaining about that contract when Malik finished 6th in the Sixth Man voting that year. Now, did his subsequent play cause concern about the money spent? Sure. But could anyone go back and undo that contract at that point? No. And again, few were complaining about that contract in its first season.



That's a fairly convenient response. Sort of like, "it's just my opinion."

In any event, to refresh your recollection, here's a column (http://espn.go.com/nba/columns/aldridge_david/1401787.html) from David Aldridge (who I suspect you'll dismiss, but who I'll use as a source anyway) describing his top 10, reasonably available free agents in the summer of 2002:



So, let's see: if you wanted a power forward type in the summer of 2002, the best choices were Malik Rose and Popeye Jones. If you wanted to expand that out to include any big man, you could get Wang Zhi-Zhi or Scott Williams.

Yes, I guess I do see the quarrel with the Spurs' decision. :rolleyes

But who else was available you ask? Well, here are some other names:

Walter McCarty
Eduardo Najera
Slava Medvedenko
Sam Mitchell
Chris Dudley
Jerome James
Donyell Marshall

That doesn't strike me as a list of guys who could have helped a team aimed at winning a title -- though I suppose you'll cite me to your self-proclaimed center of the future Jerome James, who had 7 dunks on pick and rolls (and a whopping 3 rebounds) against the Spurs in one playoff game.

I repeat if Malik was still here signed through 2009 on that contract sitting at the end -- very end of the bench if not released would you still be happy ?

interesting to note the topic of that article is " best pickings from slim free agent crop" Eduardo Najera would have served basically the same purpose as Rose for probably half the cost and half the length. He also would have sold tickets. signing Najera would have freed up even more money to go after say Karl Malone who the Lakers got the following year and would have looked really good in a Spurs uniform. There is always more to the story than the bias facts you pull.

[implacable44]

you called FWDT "punk" in your second post! No one had called you anything yet. You didn't throw down the first name?

You dropped your "don't question me" line and started crowing about how you "proved" your argument...you weren't talking big?

It digressed, yes...and there are multiple people here who participated in it...but your instigation of it is easily provable within the body of this thread.


i responded to a no link no cred comment and a "crap" comment.

[samikeyp]

about >?

about not talking big.

You have told people that you "bust your ase" (not sure what an "ase" is)

You have also told people that you are better than them in basketball when in actuality you don't know that because you do not know the level of those respective people's basketball skill yet you assume you can beat them...that is arrogance and arrogance is talking big.

You have also told people that since you did play basketball you know more than they do about the game with statements like "well you didn't play so I guess you don't know" which is also arrogance because you do not know the level of their basketball acumen.

If someone disagrees with you, you deride them as less intelligent than you for the sole reason that they don't agree with you, which is also arrogance.

You talk a whole bunch of shit (yes I said shit...ooh I am not as good as you are :rolleyes) while hiding behind a computer which is exactly what you are accusing others of. I am not saying you didn't play D-1 ball but just because you said you did, doesn't mean I have to believe you. Personally I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. You insult people then hide behind "oh I was just joking" or "you're being sensitive" then you get upset when people do the exact same to you. You try to be all badass and "gangsta" by dropping the "make me STFU" card..then you change your mind and say "im not threating anyone". You are not better than anyone else here, not worse but not better either. You might know more about one thing than some but someone here will know more about something else than you do. That's not an insult, that is just life.

[implacable44]

about not talking big.

You have told people that you "bust your ase" (not sure what an "ase" is)

You have also told people that you are better than them in basketball when in actuality you don't know that because you do not know the level of those respective people's basketball skill yet you assume you can beat them...that is arrogance and arrogance is talking big.

You have also told people that since you did play basketball you know more than they do about the game with statements like "well you didn't play so I guess you don't know" which is also arrogance because you do not know the level of their basketball acumen.

If someone disagrees with you, you deride them as less intelligent than you for the sole reason that they don't agree with you, which is also arrogance.

You talk a whole bunch of shit (yes I said shit...ooh I am not as good as you are :rolleyes) while hiding behind a computer which is exactly what you are accusing others of. I am not saying you didn't play D-1 ball but just because you said you did, doesn't mean I have to believe you. Personally I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. You insult people then hide behind "oh I was just joking" or "you're being sensitive" then you get upset when people do the exact same to you. You try to be all badass and "gangsta" by dropping the "make me STFU" card..then you change your mind and say "im not threating anyone". You are not better than anyone else here, not worse but not better either. You might know more about one thing than some but someone here will know more about something else than you do. That's not an insult, that is just life.

that is totally agreeable - except the bust your ase comment refers to basketball and nothing else. - on the court.

[samikeyp]

that is totally agreeable - except the bust your ase comment refers to basketball and nothing else. - on the court.

fair enough but my point still stand...you don't KNOW that. You are assuming and to assume is arrogant. I mean, I know you can probably take me on the court but that is like saying USC will beat the local High School team in football. I love to play but I have never been very good. Now as far as knowledge of the game as well as its history....I will take my chances against anyone but I cannot assume I know more than someone without knowing that person and the extent of their knowledge. But to assume you are better than someone without actually knowing their talent level is talking big.

[implacable44]

I agree with that too - and I think every single person on this board is guilty of that.

[travis2]

I agree with that too - and I think every single person on this board is guilty of that.

ok fine...but then don't accuse others of it while claiming you don't...

[FromWayDowntown]

I repeat if Malik was still here signed through 2009 on that contract sitting at the end -- very end of the bench if not released would you still be happy ?

All of which might have happened had Malik's contract, in fact, been completely unresaonable. Instead, Malik's contract was reasonable enough for your basketball guru, Isiah Thomas, to see a justification for a trade to acquire that contract. Either Isiah is not as keen a basketball mind as you proclaim him to be, because he acquires unreasonable contracts in a willy-nilly fashion or Isiah believed that Malik's contract was fairly reasonable. Which one is it?


interesting to note the topic of that article is " best pickings from slim free agent crop"

You know, I never said it was a great free agent crop. My defense of the signing has been entirely based on the fact that it was reasonable in the market that existed at the time. The only relevant components of that market were: a scarcity of big men, a close competitor in need of a big man, and the market price for guys like Malik. In light of those three factors (scarcity, demand, market price) the contract certainly doesn't seem unreasonable.


Eduardo Najera would have served basically the same purpose as Rose for probably half the cost and half the length. He also would have sold tickets. signing Najera would have freed up even more money to go after say Karl Malone who the Lakers got the following year and would have looked really good in a Spurs uniform.

Fine, except that Najera has never, ever been as productive in any facet of his game as Malik, which makes him a vastly inferior player -- half the cost for half the length and half the production likely would have hampered the Spurs chances at the title in 2003.

As for your Malone theory, you forget that Mailman didn't sign with the Lakers because they offered him more money than the Spurs did. The Spurs made an offer to Malone in the summer of 2003 that was identical to the offer the Lakers made; each offered Malone the veteran exception of $1.5 million.

I suppose you could argue that Malone would have signed in San Antonio if there had been more money available, but then again, the Spurs had the most capspace in the NBA that summer. They used the ample cap space they had to pursue Jason Kidd, Jermaine O'Neal, Elton Brand, and others. Because they were making those offers and would have preferred to have those guys over all others who were available, there's nothing that says that the Spurs would have offered up more money to Malone.

And nobody knows if more money would have made a difference to Malone. In 2003, Malone said that he wasn't going to go to a team that had won a title. He also tied his fate to Gary Payton's. The Spurs were disqualified on both fronts, since they were the reigning champions that summer and did not pursue Payton.

[samikeyp]

I agree with that too - and I think every single person on this board is guilty of that.

I see your point but I disagree to a point. We have several who do, but to be fair several who don't as well.

[FromWayDowntown]

I agree with that too - and I think every single person on this board is guilty of that.

Yeah, you know I don't think most of us really resort to the "I'll bust your ase on the basketball court" as evidence to support our arguments.

To the extent that your credibility has been questioned here, the judgment is based entirely upon what you've written.

Honestly, I don't care if you can play basketball -- if your arguments evidence thoughtful consideration of objective facts to reach a conclusion, I'll respect that. I'll respect a disagreement with my opinion, too, if that disagreement has some reasonable basis. But just trying to shout me down with "I played D-1 hoop and can bust your ase" isn't really persuasive.

Just as my pedigree playing D-1 football gives me no extra credibility in the football forum, your pedigree playing D-1 basketball gives you no extra credibility here.

[implacable44]

Yeah, you know I don't think most of us really resort to the "I'll bust your ase on the basketball court" as evidence to support our arguments.

To the extent that your credibility has been questioned here, the judgment is based entirely upon what you've written.

Honestly, I don't care if you can play basketball -- if your arguments evidence thoughtful consideration of objective facts to reach a conclusion, I'll respect that. I'll respect a disagreement with my opinion, too, if that disagreement has some reasonable basis. But just trying to shout me down with "I played D-1 hoop and can bust your ase" isn't really persuasive.

Just as my pedigree playing D-1 football gives me no extra credibility in the football forum, your pedigree playing D-1 basketball gives you no extra credibility here.

I question you credibility - heck I question anyone's credibility. WHo decides who is credible ?

there is no objective analysis when discussing performance. You can put it down on statistics - or salaries -and attempt to make it subjective but there are too many other variables. - for example with najera and malik - well malik averaged 6 _ per game with Dallas 5 boards (comparable to Malik) and that was as the 6th option when he was on the floor ( with only 5 guys on the court). Last year he averaged 7 and 5 and that was only thruogh 26 games. He is a high energy player who does the dirty work and he would have been just as much the player Malik Rose was for the Spurs -- in my opinion and at a much lower price. The thing with Zeke taking Rose - they gave up on Nazr and they should have. He wasn't performing in that system - but he is perfect for the Spurs and what the Spurs want him to do.

Malone was just one of the options they could have had that year. THey were silly to pursue Jason Kidd who is a highly overrated PG anyway. We already have a PG that can't shoot - why would you want to trade for another one ? There were other players they could have focused on with more money. We will just have to agree to disagree - I was never a big fan of Malik's game.

[samikeyp]

I question you credibility - heck I question anyone's credibility. WHo decides who is credible
again...a fair point but you seem to take offense when someone questions yours, and by your own logic, they have the right.

[ambchang]

Dude you know you edited your post to include the last part of my comment - but whatever. - How is rick carlisle a better basketball mind ? 0 I got my facts wrong - isaiah didnt draft mcgrady - carter replaced thomas ? you said those things. Mcgrady left after Isaiah did ??

You can have your opinion about me adding in your quote, but the FACT is that the post has the stamp
Last edited by ambchang : 10-11-2005 at 07:20 PM, while YOU responded to the post Yesterday, 12:16 AM (Yesteday meaning 10-12-2005). I can't help it that you cannot read the original post, and that is fine, people miss parts of post, what I cannot believe is that not only did you make a mistake, you made a mistake and lied about it, then insinuated that I did, knowing that it was you who first make the mistakes. Is this how you got your top 10% finish in your law class?
I did get McGrady wrong, I said Isiah drafted McGrady, and I admitted it. You said Isiah drafted Carter, which he didn't. I never said Carter replaced Thomas, I said Carter was the coach who couldn't get along with McGrady, and caused him to leave. I said Thomas replaced Bird and made the Pacers a worse team, and Carlisle replaced Thomas to make them a better team, meaning the basketball playing ability has NO correlation to basketball mind. And that was your original assertion. Are you now going to start arguing how Shawn Kemp is a better mind than Larry Brown, or how Phil Jackson is a better player than Steve Francis.


I looked on the Official site of the NBA and they have him as first team once - and I already replied to that comment and said I will take your word for it - again - you get your facts right.
The original argument is not whether NBA.com has their data updated, or how many times Bruce Bowen was credited with the All D team on the official site of the NBA, it was about whether or not he made it in consecutive years. And he did. So you were wrong.


All of those people he drafted are good players - even today they are good players. The Spurs would love Marcus Camby to play in the middle with TD - again my opinion - but he blocks shots and rebounds - if he could only stay healthy for a whole season. Again how is it Isaiahs fault that these players left ?
But what good does that do for the Raptors? Isiah created a terrible organization to work for, and Damon Stoudemire and TMac left Toronto because of that. Camby did not fit in with the Raptors at the time, and with a number 2 pick, the Raptors could have drafted Sareef Abdur-Rahim, Marbury, your boy Ray Allen, Kobe Bryant (he was straight out of high school, and it wasn't usual for teams to do that back then, so I can excuse this), Peja (he was from abroad, same as above), Steve Nash, or Jermaine O'Neal (see Kobe).
And you still haven't come up with anything to back up your claim that the defense of the Spurs would be minimal if Bowen was replaced with Allen. Neither have you talked about anything to do with salary cap consideration, nor have you addressed how trading for a guy like Allen solely for the purposes of opening up the offense with his outside shooting could validate a $15 million salary, given that that very same option is available for a much much lower price.

[ambchang]

of course it was. signing him wasn't and he wasn't worth the money.

no i accused him of editing his post where he quoted me and feel free to come make me STFU

Still couldn't read, could you. I will write this for the nth time to get through that thick skull of yours. My post was last edited TWO days ago, and I did it for grammatical changes. Your FIRST reply to my post was YESTERDAY.
You were proven wrong time and time again on this front, and you are trying to weasel out of not reading my response properly by attacking my integrity. You have no credibility and quite frankly, I wonder how you finished top 10% in your class, any class, regardless of whether it was law.

[Man In Black]

I don't need you to explain the cap to me - especially with the new CBA and since you probably don't even comprehend it.

This part irks me. What the hell do you know about what I can comprehend or not? I have a very celar understanding of the cap. Dan Rosenbaum made it easy for me to understand how it all works. Any other questions I had, were answered by Larry Coon. So yeah. I COMPREHEND THE CAP.


interesting to note the topic of that article is " best pickings from slim free agent crop" Eduardo Najera would have served basically the same purpose as Rose for probably half the cost and half the length. He also would have sold tickets. signing Najera would have freed up even more money to go after say Karl Malone who the Lakers got the following year and would have looked really good in a Spurs uniform. There is always more to the story than the bias facts you pull.

Dude...do you understand how dense you can be?
It's very apparent that you will not budge on your opinion. I say fiscally responsible and it shows with all of their signings, including Rose & Nesterovic if you look at it in terms of applied over time. Signing Parker to $66 Mill and Manu to $58 Mil was downright amazing, when you consider the terms of many of the contracts around the L with other lesser talented players. Rasho's contract is such that if Nazr doesn't want to re-sign at a Spur level, then he could easily be going away.

I mean really. Eddie Najera would have sold tickets how? Now freing up cash to sign Karl Malone? I recall Mr. Malone signed for the league minimum. It was never about money for Karl and he seriously considered signing with SA but got a recruitment phone call from Shaq. I'll bold it for you to make it crystal clear...IT WAS NEVER ABOUT MONEY FOR MALONE

You know you remind me of Shaq...Like him you like to Self Proclaim. He wasn't the MDE and I find your opinions to be self-centered.

Whatever, I've yet to see one article support any of your self-procliamed opinions and hypotheses.

It's more of that, well...I ball better than you so I know the game better stuff. I disagree.

[picnroll]

Damn, even by a lawyer's standards this implacable44 is one arrogant fuck. And anybody who thinks Pop would go near Jerome James with a ten foot pole .... LMAO.

[implacable44]

This part irks me. What the hell do you know about what I can comprehend or not? I have a very celar understanding of the cap. Dan Rosenbaum made it easy for me to understand how it all works. Any other questions I had, were answered by Larry Coon. So yeah. I COMPREHEND THE CAP.



Dude...do you understand how dense you can be?
It's very apparent that you will not budge on your opinion. I say fiscally responsible and it shows with all of their signings, including Rose & Nesterovic if you look at it in terms of applied over time. Signing Parker to $66 Mill and Manu to $58 Mil was downright amazing, when you consider the terms of many of the contracts around the L with other lesser talented players. Rasho's contract is such that if Nazr doesn't want to re-sign at a Spur level, then he could easily be going away.

I mean really. Eddie Najera would have sold tickets how? Now freing up cash to sign Karl Malone? I recall Mr. Malone signed for the league minimum. It was never about money for Karl and he seriously considered signing with SA but got a recruitment phone call from Shaq. I'll bold it for you to make it crystal clear...IT WAS NEVER ABOUT MONEY FOR MALONE

You know you remind me of Shaq...Like him you like to Self Proclaim. He wasn't the MDE and I find your opinions to be self-centered.

Whatever, I've yet to see one article support any of your self-procliamed opinions and hypotheses.

It's more of that, well...I ball better than you so I know the game better stuff. I disagree.


I can't question your ability to comprehend the salary cap like you did mine ?

I don't know what Tony PArker, Manu or anyone else has to do with Malik Rose? We are talking about the fiscal nature of malik rose and his contract which I think was a poor decision and was done more out of fear of losing him to the LAkers than it was of wanting him to be a Spur.

[Solid D]

Perhaps Devin Brown should be consulted regarding our main man Mark's ball skills. Not doubtin'. Just, you know, due diligence and all.

:smokin

[Man In Black]

I don't know what Tony Parker, Manu or anyone else has to do with Malik Rose? We are talking about the fiscal nature of malik rose and his contract which I think was a poor decision and was done more out of fear of losing him to the LAkers than it was of wanting him to be a Spur.

Okay let me lay this out so anyone can understand a line of thought.

I said the Spurs were fiscally responsible.

You asked if Malik Rose was a fiscally responsible decision.

I said that if you apply his contract 1 year at a time for salary cap purposes, then the Spurs made a fiscally responsible decision.

FWD gave you some more input as to why it's was fiscally responsible.

You then said I probably can't comprehend the cap.

I countered back by saying that I've read the Rosenbaum articles fully and got any other questions answered by noted Cap genius Larry Coom.

You now are asking what TP & Manu have to do with the Spurs being fiscally responsible.

What it means is that the contracts they sign for players are at rates they feel they can absorb AND send out players & salaries when the time calls.

[implacable44]

Okay let me lay this out so anyone can understand a line of thought.

I said the Spurs were fiscally responsible.

You asked if Malik Rose was a fiscally responsible decision.

I said that if you apply his contract 1 year at a time for salary cap purposes, then the Spurs made a fiscally responsible decision.

FWD gave you some more input as to why it's was fiscally responsible.

You then said I probably can't comprehend the cap.

I countered back by saying that I've read the Rosenbaum articles fully and got any other questions answered by noted Cap genius Larry Coom.

You now are asking what TP & Manu have to do with the Spurs being fiscally responsible.

What it means is that the contracts they sign for players are at rates they feel they can absorb AND send out players & salaries when the time calls.


actually lets try to be completely honest about this - and point out your initial comment that prompted my response :


Originally Posted by Man In Black
Far be it for me to explain the cap to a genuis who can both ball at the D-League level or better and graduated in the top 10% of his law class but hey,okay.


I sense slight hints of sarcasm and jabs at me - especially in the sense that I would need you to explain the cap to me.

[ambchang]

Whatever happened to me editing my post now? I want replies, I believe you owe me an apology for continuously insinuating that I had lied and questioned my integrity.
BTW, you are now complaining about people taking jabs at you? What happened to the Mr. tough guy at the beginning of the post?
To wit:

here is your link punk : http://slamonline.com/links/10032005/index1.html

dont question me - and if you don't think that ray allen and jerome james would be an upgrade to this roster you are as dumb as you appear.

It is funny you can call him ovary but if he was a Spur and Bowen was a Sonic you would be calling Bowen dirty - I guess you hate that Finley is here too - maybe he should be Uterus or fallopian tube because he complained more than Ray Allen ever did.
In response to
No link. No cred. and

He lost me when he fantasized about trading Bowen away, and getting Jerome James and ovary in return.
Neither of them was sarcastic nor offensive.
and who can forget gems like this?

thanks for the comment - no link though - no cred and your opinion is pointless.
Oh, and let's not forget

well God never dies so - nobody I guess. Dont question me is advice because I will prove you wrong. - case in point - man requested a link and he got a link.
Then later on plea that it was a joke.

[Man In Black]

Look you asked if the signing of Malik was fiscally responsible.

If you knew the cap, you would've known that, applied over time, the contract was in no way egregious as many perceive it was. The fact that RC was able to parlay Malik contract into Nazr and some draft picks shows that it was indeed moveable.

Hint of sarcasm? I admit that there was but I'll say that your style comes across as abrasive so I answered back in kind.

It's weird, when I get this way, I'm normally talking to a la"K"er fan.

[implacable44]

Look you asked if the signing of Malik was fiscally responsible.

If you knew the cap, you would've known that, applied over time, the contract was in no way egregious.

that wasnt the point of your last post - you made a statement that I dont agree with - Ambchang - I reply to all -- I didnt see you wrote me - where is it and I will quote it and reply when i get home tonight. and I dot care if people take jabs at me - It doesn't bother me at all.

I dont plea anything. the thing is this is a message board - full of opinions - i posed a write-up I did for Lang - you and others took offense to certain parts of it that I found humor in and thus the conversations etc. ensued. At the end of the day none of it matters anyway - I'm wrong- you're wrong - who cares? We are talking about basketball here - a game. opinions about players and comments on hypothetical situations. the game and this board are for entertainment purposes.

[implacable44]

the contract was in no way egregious ? THat is highly debatable.

[sprrs]

that wasnt the point of your last post - you made a statement that I dont agree with - Ambchang - I reply to all -- I didnt see you wrote me - where is it and I will quote it and reply when i get home tonight. and I dot care if people take jabs at me - It doesn't bother me at all.

I dont plea anything. the thing is this is a message board - full of opinions - i posed a write-up I did for Lang - you and others took offense to certain parts of it that I found humor in and thus the conversations etc. ensued. At the end of the day none of it matters anyway - I'm wrong- you're wrong - who cares? We are talking about basketball here - a game. opinions about players and comments on hypothetical situations. the game and this board are for entertainment purposes.

Had you said that from the beginning you wouldn't have started a flame war

[samikeyp]

the contract was in no way egregious ? THat is highly debatable.

It may have been finacially suspect but...


adj : conspicuously and outrageously bad or reprehensible; "a crying shame"; "an egregious lie"; "flagrant violation of human rights"; "a glaring error"; "gross ineptitude"; "gross injustice"; "rank treachery

might be a little strong. :p

[ambchang]

that wasnt the point of your last post - you made a statement that I dont agree with - Ambchang - I reply to all -- I didnt see you wrote me - where is it and I will quote it and reply when i get home tonight. and I dot care if people take jabs at me - It doesn't bother me at all.

I dont plea anything. the thing is this is a message board - full of opinions - i posed a write-up I did for Lang - you and others took offense to certain parts of it that I found humor in and thus the conversations etc. ensued. At the end of the day none of it matters anyway - I'm wrong- you're wrong - who cares? We are talking about basketball here - a game. opinions about players and comments on hypothetical situations. the game and this board are for entertainment purposes.

You are not getting off the hook that easily. I don't mind either me or you, or anybody else getting the facts wrong about the game of basketball, the fact is you continuously attacked my integrity and refused to admit it EVEN after I pointed out to you that I had never changed my post to make you look bad. I am not even talking about your "opinions" on whether people who disagreed with your are irrelevant, stupid or wrong, it's about questioning my integrity and doing absolutely nothing to admit you were in the wrong and apologize for it.