No way Splitter, Duncan, Blair, or Bonner hits the huge corner 3 and elbow jumper he had for us. Diaw deserves just as much credit as Manu, Green, Kawhi.
He was smoother than an omelet du fromage.
Printable View
No way Splitter, Duncan, Blair, or Bonner hits the huge corner 3 and elbow jumper he had for us. Diaw deserves just as much credit as Manu, Green, Kawhi.
He was smoother than an omelet du fromage.
His defense was great. He had one boneheaded mistake, but that puts him way down the stat list on boneheaded mistakes. If he'd have started the second half, the Spurs probably win this thing in regulation.
Diaw deserves a $15K obscene gesture for tonight.
:toastDiaw was great in the 4th/OT
Clutch Block, Clutch Corner Three. http://files.niketalk.com/smilies/pimp.gif
Diaw challenged Curry on PnR's great, moved his body, and contested down low.
We started to win this game when Duncan went to the bathroom to puke and Diaw started anchoring us.
Diaw was an unsung hero tonight. Along with Green and Leonard, he was probably the best Spur out there tonight. He played smart and stepped up and made some huge shots when the team needed them the most. He also stepped up to guard Curry when the Spurs were forced to switch on the pick and rolls...
Great pick&roll defense, big shots down the stretch, he was huge..
His game was the opposite of Blair's game, tbh..
Props to Boris... :toast
Very impressive for his 1st game in a month
Great to see playoff Diaw back. We'll need him.
He had good moments.
But let's not ignore he was directly responsible for the Warriors last 4 points including the layup for them to take the lead. Who was he guarding on that fast break? We had 2 guys on the man with the ball and he steps up for no reason leaving a clear path to the basket for a layup to lose the lead.
Diaw stepped up in the huge run
Loved seeing him not pass up shots.
Uhhh...someone should probably be asking the 2 guys who didn't fucking get back on defense with a 1 point lead and 11 second on the clock what the fuck they were thinking. I believe that's exactly what Pop did when he called the time out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Irrelevant, the guy furthest back toward the basket is responsible for the opponent nearest the basket and he wasn't in the right spot regardless. The other two were on Curry because it was a fast break and they were just then coming back toward their hoop. Diaw was already back so he has to make that play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Wrong again. He's responsible for one guy when there are five people back. There weren't. Odd rushes are how quick layups are scored, which is the danger of pressing, and why the Popovich Spurs live by a very simple truth, which states that the ball is faster than the man. For that reason, they have, as long as most people can remember, been told to get back on defense at all costs. That means not to crash the offensive glass, not to inexplicably hack Harrison Barnes when he secures a rebound under the basket, or to even more inexplicably charge at Stef Curry 75 feet from the basket with 5 seconds to go in the game. Get five guys back at all times is the rule. Two guys violated it. Don't blame the one guy who was trying to guard two people and had a spectacular layup scored on him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
I miss dat guy :cry
Yeah, completely crazy to blame a guy for giving up a layup when he was the only guy who had a chance to stop it, and lazily backpedaled instead of getting in defensive position. Sure Danny shouldn't of gone for a steal, but that doesn't change that Diaw messed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
I never said he didn't have a good game, but I don't just ignore obvious errors.
Also don't forget when he didn't roll to the basket and caused what appeared to be a bad pass by Manu, but it was only because Diaw just stood there instead of cutting. Then also the bad pass to Kawhi right into two defender resulting in another turnover.
I don't judge players based on a couple of plays, I judge all players on the totality of their game.
You're blaming the doctor for not saving a guy who got shot 30 times and died on the table. Diaw had three guys coming toward him with nobody else in position. Anyone who expects Boris Diaw to do well in 1-on-3 drills doesn't understand the game, and Green and Manu know they fucked up. Teams that go for steals in the back court give up layups at an exponentially higher rate. Teams that send two guys to go for steals hemorrhage points. The defensive breakdown happened way before the ball was anywhere near Diaw.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Oh sorry, I didn't realize Mr Totality of Their Game picks and chooses when to judge someone by one play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Actually you said he had good moments, and then proceeded to blame him and only him for everything that went wrong in the game, including for all four points at the end of the second overtime. You never meant to imply anything OTHER than that you don't think he had a good game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Unless Danny Green and Manu Ginobili violate the cardinal rule of Spurs defense in a critical situation, of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
But you never said he didn't have a good game tbhQuote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Other than every one of your posts in this thread, that could be true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Parker toys with a triple double and he's not in the top 4? Damn we take him for granted.Quote:
Originally Posted by crc21209
Did I say I was judging Diaw on that one play? No. How is saying "He had good moments" saying he didn't have a good game. Not exclusive. Those errors go against Green and Ginobili, but don't effect my opinion of Diaw. It wasn't 1 on 3, it was 1 on 1. Mentioning bad plays doesn't mean I'm saying he had a bad game, you need to learn the difference between a valid argument and an invalid argument. None of your premises can be connected to your conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Just because I'm not ignoring obvious mistakes, in a thread sucking Diaw off, doesn't mean anything about my opinion as a whole. Proving my point about myself and an indication that you do not follow this philosophy.
You actually said you weren't judging Diaw. The half dozen examples where you picked a play and judged Diaw on it say otherwise. Or maybe it's just coincidence that not one of them positive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
When you use it as a preface to start pointing out all the bad plays that you witnessed while people are giving him credit for playing well. It's kind of the way conversations go. You have been standing on the fence like a pussy so far saying what you did or did not say, but you still have yet to give him credit for having a good game in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
You've made it abundantly clear that NOTHING will affect your opinion of Diaw.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Wrong again. Go back and watch. Manu went for the steal on Barnes, Green ran at Curry and missed, and Leonard ran at Curry as he threw the pass instead of chasing down Bazemore. Before Parker crossed half court, it was Diaw with three Warriors running up the court. Jack was at the three point line on the opposite side and Diaw was waiting for Leonard to catch up to the play, which he never did. By that time, Bazemore had the ball and went to the rack, but he had Jack wide open for a jumper because nobody else was there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Mentioning bad plays doesn't mean I'm saying he had a bad game, you need to learn the difference between a valid argument and an invalid argument. None of your premises can be connected to your conclusion.
You're ignoring obvious mistakes by other players to pin them in Diaw in addition to listing the legitimate mistakes that Diaw made in a game where Diaw was pivotal to the comeback and the victory, doing so in a thread where people were trying to give him the credit he deserved for playing well after sitting out for three weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildcat67
Everyone knows your opinion as a whole, but don't try to bullshit people about what happened in the game.
That 3-pointer in the right hand corner was absolute clutch. He played great last night!
Hard to ask more from a guy who hadn't played in so long and suddenly found himself the center in a 4 guard lineup.
You really need to learn how to make a proper argument. None of your accusations are true. They are all straw man arguments where you change my meaning to mean something else that is easy for you to argue against.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
You can not know my opinion as a whole since I never stated it and none of the individual statements are enough to make any conclusions as a whole.
I'm not going to argue with someone who doesn't understand even the basics of making a valid argument. You need a premise that correlates to a conclusion, and since you aren't using this and instead making assumptions you are using as premises for conclusions this is a pointless exercise.
How many times do I have to point out that none of your conclusions, have enough facts to back them for you to stop making them?
Perfect example:
You said "You actually said you weren't judging Diaw"
When, in fact, I said:
"I don't judge players based on a couple of plays, I judge all players on the totality of their game."
You come to the conclusion that I never judged Diaw. Which is obviously false. Since I clearly said "I judge all players on the totality of their game". Then come to the conclusion that I must be judging him poorly overall because I only mentioned his negative plays. Also not a valid conclusion. His good plays are taken into account, but since everyone else mentioned them I felt no need to repeat them as they are implied. Just because I don't mention something is not a reason to conclude they don't exist. A straw man argument is when you change someone elses argument to something else to make it easier for your to refute. It is the most common rhetorical device used by people that don't have any real debate skills.