For 95% of Spurstalk who are idiots...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cessation

Smart people talk like that? lol

---

Refute it if you can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

Refute it if you can.

---

I don't take trolls seriously, tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

Refute it if you can.

---

I think you're spot on Chazley. In reality, Bonner is under utilized. He should be taking at least 10-12 three point attempts per game. With his high 3 pt. percentage, that would give him somewhere between 14 to 17 points per game. That would be huge for the Spurs come playoffs!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by underdawg

I think you're spot on Chazley. In reality, Bonner is under utilized. He should be taking at least 10-12 three point attempts per game. With his high 3 pt. percentage, that would give him somewhere between 14 to 17 points per game. That would be huge for the Spurs come playoffs!

---

I agree, as chazley has shown, bonner is key to our championship hopes, that 50% from 3 is our secret weapon. Its time to Unleash The Ginger!!

Wasn't Roger Mason the thing the Spurs needed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Wasn't Roger Mason the thing the Spurs needed?

---

Luckily we got Gary Neal, or else we would've needed him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cessation

I don't take trolls seriously, tbh.

---

I don't take idiots seriously. Guess it's a wash. Get some facts or GTFO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Splitman4evah

Bonner is going to take a huge dump on all his haters when the playoffs come around, and none of these POS fucks like Sean Cagney will be around to see it. Because fat fucks like him only know how to talk shit, but when the shit goes the other way they are facing a shitstorm of shit in their face that they don't know how to deal with. Bonner, as the 8th rotation player, is fine. Sean Cagney will have a lot of shit on his face come playoff time, and then he (she/it) will never be heard from again and some other troll will be praising the Spurs offense for dominating other teams and it will be Sean Cagney in disguise. Dude is a tool, and a Splitter cock knobber.

---

not sure where you get that Bonner is the 8th rotation player - he's at least 7th and if Hill keeps playing as poorly as he has, Bonner should be able to move up to 6th.

I know it was mentioned earlier in the year, but do you think Bonner still has a chance at Most Improved Player?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by underdawg

I think you're spot on Chazley. In reality, Bonner is under utilized. He should be taking at least 10-12 three point attempts per game. With his high 3 pt. percentage, that would give him somewhere between 14 to 17 points per game. That would be huge for the Spurs come playoffs!

---

Nah this would be stupid. He's perfect as a good 7th/8th man on a contending team taking his 4-5 shots per game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

I don't take idiots seriously. Guess it's a wash. Get some facts or GTFO

---

lol troll is mad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cessation

lol troll is mad

---

lol idiot is mad that I exposed him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

I don't take idiots seriously. Guess it's a wash. Get some facts or GTFO

---

What are the facts exaclty - Bonner is part of the best defensive lineups that the Spurs have?

If the Spurs rank 12th in points allowed and 12th in FG% allowed, what does that mean?

You're going about this the wrong way - the Spurs are no longer a great defensive team - at least not top 10.

Their strength is in their offensive ability and the reality is that The Red Rocket has not been turned loose yet. Give him 10-12 attempts per game and his points per game could jump as much as 10 points per game. He'd be extremely valuable to the Spurs offense then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

Luckily we got Gary Neal, or else we would've needed him.

---

He's been such a huge boost for the Knicks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

Nah this would be stupid. He's perfect as a good 7th/8th man on a contending team taking his 4-5 shots per game.

---

now I'm confused - Bonner scoring more points per game would be stupid?

You clearly describing yourself, #1 poster lol, thats shows a retard troll if there ever was one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by itzsoweezee

Lol, the conclusions you're making based on these stats, however, are dishonest.

---

haha, just saw this.. explain please (should be good).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

He's been such a huge boost for the Knicks.

---

Read my sig if you wanna remember who won this argument before the season.

I'm super fuckin glad we have Gary Neal, he's 10x the player Mason will ever be, but if we didn't have Neal, I would want Mason on the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

haha, just saw this.. explain please (should be good).

---

I'd like to see that explanation too - because at this point, I'm not sure what the conclusion has been.

Is it that Bonner shouldn't have a bad rap as a poor defensive player because, according to statistics, he's usually on the floor when the Spurs' mediorcre defense does its best?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

if we didn't have Neal, I would want Mason on the Spurs.

---

Wow - we have a winner.

My argument/conclusion is that Pop and the Spurs organization are smarter than all of us, and it's funny that people on Spurstalk think otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by underdawg

Wow - we have a winner.

---

Go back and read my Mason thread if you want to see where I annihilated all the naysayers about Mason. Ask Obstructed how that went.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

Read my sig if you wanna remember who won this argument before the season.

I'm super fuckin glad we have Gary Neal, he's 10x the player Mason will ever be, but if we didn't have Neal, I would want Mason on the Spurs.

---

The fact that you make stupid statements and continue to restate them over and over until people get tired of trying to get you to see reason doesn't mean you won anything. The only thing to take from your signature is that I rightfully pegged you as a troll and an attention whore from your first post. Anyone who reads the bolded part above doesn't even need to bother to read the thread to know who lost that argument. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

My argument/conclusion is that Pop and the Spurs organization are smarter than all of us, and it's funny that people on Spurstalk think otherwise.

---

It's not the folks on the internet forums that Pop needs to be smarter than - it's the other teams in the NBA.

Since he's changed his philosophy in favor of offense over defense, he hasn't quite been able to outsmart them yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

Go back and read my Mason thread if you want to see where I annihilated all the naysayers about Mason. Ask Obstructed how that went.

---

Probably much like this one. Chazley makes a declaration that's moronic and indefensible, designed to draw lots of people to disagree with it (trolling). When there aren't any other threads to post in, people argue with him. He doesn't listen to anything anyone says, instead posting strawman arguments and insults, continually attempting to get the last word on anyone, regardless of whether or not it is relevant to the conversation. Then when people get tired of his shit, or if actual interesting threads start coming up, people abandon him and he declares victory.

If you'd like proof, Chazley still thinks Roger Mason would have been good for the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chazley

My argument/conclusion is that Pop and the Spurs organization are smarter than all of us, and it's funny that people on Spurstalk think otherwise.

---

That's ironic, since most people are smarter than you are. It's funny that you think otherwise.