Printable View
Ever since Derek Fisher hit that shot, Ghost Writer has been only a part time poster. Whatever happened to the fire breathing Connecticutter who wouldn't back down from a fight? Now he only comes around after losses.
Damn, I miss the real Ghost Writer.
R.I.P.
GHOST WRITER
October-1995 to June-2004
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-d...5941-2004May13
Bump.
That picture is sickening.... Ooooooh I feel woosy........ :depressed :( :cry :bang :wtf :hang :nope :smokin :drunk :oops
Same ol' same ol'. :hatQuote:
Now he only comes around after losses.
maybe he thinks the spurs have a legit shot this year. also his lakers lost to detroit, so that killed his whole supastar theory.
Sack up and bring the fury GW.
Well, his name is starting to pop up on the boards right now...:lolQuote:
Now he only comes around after losses.
.4 killed more than just Ghost... :)
The 0.4 basically confirmed everything I complained about and feared before and during last season.
We didn’t do enough to keep up with the Lakers, even though we had enough cap space to improve much more than LA.
My criticisms of our players and front office were all true, but I did not feel vindicated after the elimination to the Lakers.
I felt burnt out.
I have since paid more attention to my work and wedding plans. I basically took the summer off.
The season has started, and it is coincidental that the Spurs lost last night leading into Monday.
I have accentuated positive that I’ve seen with the Spurs, such as Manu’s overall game, Duncan’s free throws, Barry’s presence, and the fact that I think Beno can be as good as Speedy was for us.
But some general problems still exist and I’m not afraid to talk about them.
If/when we win this year, it won’t be because we overcame the Lakers… it will be because they simply split up.
It’s disappointing that the Spurs could not get the best of Shaq/Phil/Kobe, but that’s the way it is.
P.S.
I still contend that it is near impossible to lose a lead with 0.4. While people here have made every excuse in the book, you can arrange it so you win with less than half a second left at home.
You can foul.
That's like when a team is up by 2 and the game is winding down... you should foul in that spot rather than get beat by the 3.
Unconventional thinking.
What happened in 1999 and 2003?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
P.S.
What hurt worse, .4 or this?
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com.../mdf749428.jpg
P.P.S.
Hopefully marriage won't make you go soft on us.
Quote:
I still contend that it is near impossible to lose a lead with 0.4. While people here have made every excuse in the book, you can arrange it so you win with less than half a second left at home.
You can foul.
That's like when a team is up by 2 and the game is winding down... you should foul in that spot rather than get beat by the 3.
Problem is, the Spurs were beat by the 2.
Please, at least try next time.
L8rs.
I would rather have dead porcupines heaved at me than rehash .4 again.
the death of the original BAMA member...Ghost
it happens and we just have a fragment of the old ghost.
best of luck with the big M. hopefully somewhere along the way the old ghost will reappear.
Ghost is getting married??????????????????????????
Yeah! Apparently, Ghost lives in a state that didn't ban gay marriage last week.Quote:
Originally Posted by adidas11
[Rim Shot]
Why has that lasted so long without a "LOL"? nice JB....
Quote:
Originally Posted by coz
Because I just saw it.
:lmao :lmao :lmao
*ouch :lol *
Quote:
Originally Posted by coz
True humor is never recognized in its own time.
When I'm dead, this thread will be comedy gold.
QUOTE]It’s disappointing that the Spurs could not get the best of Shaq/Phil/Kobe, but that’s the way it is.[QUOTE]
Do you need to open your 03 championship DVD, and rehash the 4th quarter against, THE LOS ANGELES LAKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Lakers won more titles and made the Finals more than us since 1999.
The Spurs could've fouled so as not to get beat with the 0.4.
We f'ed up.
If the Spurs foul before the ball is inbounded then LA gets 2 shots. If they foul once the ball is inbounded then whoever gets it is going to go up with it and instead of forcing the opponent to hit a crazy shot you just gave them two free ones at the line.
Um, if you grab the guy before he has a chance to shot, you win. We had a foul to give.
When you do that he is immediately going to take a shot.
Right.
The player is gonna catch the ball, get fouled and take a shot in under half a second.
Count out loud "1". Now think of that time in half.
Keep making excuses and sounding ridiculous.
How long did it take Fisher to catch and turn? He was going up with it no matter what. You don't even have to worry about whether it would take .4 because your guy is fouling him just as he is in a shooting motion.
2 shots at the line.
Game over.
how the fuck do you foul a guy in .4 before he takes a planned three.
Who thought it would go to Fisher and not Kobe Bryant.
Use your fvckin head trick
T Park, first of all, Fish hit a two.
Secondly, if Fish could catch, spin and shoot in that amount of time, he certainly could've been fouled first.
Lastly, don't talk out of turn. I'm not the kid behind the counter at your local Taco Cabana.
The problem with your theory is that it doesn't take that long to catch and turn. The Lakers knew that whoever caught the rock had to go up with it immediately. With the defender immediately making contact suddenly the time left becomes less important. All that matters is that there is contact before time expires and that the player is in a shooting motion, not that he gets it off in time.
Also you are assuming that whoever is guarding the man who catches the ball can wrap him up in time. Even if the man is there then you have Fisher catching the ball and going up with the shot immediately just as you want the defender to make contact.
Again, act of shooting. 2 free shots at the line.
Your assumption that the player could be fouled in the act of shooting is as likely as the player getting fouled and not being able to twist around and get in the shooting motion.
The bottom line is that you are convinced that nothing could've been done, while I believe something could've been done.
Even though I don't think Fish ever gets to the line in SA, I'd rather him take 2 FTs with the SBC center going bananas than what actually happened to us.
You are asking for the impossible. You want the defender to be able to stay on top of him, yet not foul him before the ball is inbounded and then you want him to foul him before he is able to get into a shooting motion. That's basically impossible.
Again, all Fisher would have needed to do is catch and turn into a shooting motion. Your defender fouls him and then the only question is whether or not there was contact before the shot. And of course there was because you told him to foul.
This is pretty basic shit. You definitely avoid contact in that situation.
Nope.
Fisher's shot was possible.
Fouling him first with a foul to give was the thing to do, not take a chance by playing D and not fouling.
There is no way the refs send a Laker to the line in that spot in SA anyway.
You forget where Fisher caught the ball. He caught it on his left, away from the defender. He definitely caught, turned, and released in one motion. Based on your argument the defender would have been fouling Fisher just as he had caught, turned, and was elevating. The defender would have been fouling him just as he was in a shooting motion.
2 at the line. Game over.
:guffawQuote:
There is no way the refs send a Laker to the line in that spot in SA anyway.
You are also forgetting that the defender was not there at the moment that Fisher caught the ball. There was some distance to close and as the defender is closing then Fisher is going up with the ball. Defender makes contact before the horn, shooting foul called, and you just gave him 2 at the line instead of having to hit a shot with a high degree of difficulty.
Again, standard NBA procedure in that situation is to avoid contact for precisely this reason. Figure it out.
No, but I guess I did.Quote:
Did .4 Kill Ghost Writer?
withdrew
That's insane. Their isn't a coach in the NBA, NBDL, or college basketball who would have asked his players to foul in a situation where avoiding fouls should be the primary goal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Writer
You always make a player convert a tough shot to beat you. You don't give it to him for free. With such a small amount of time on the clock, if the refs see the player even begin to turn to shoot they are going to blow the whistle if he is fouled.
You've got this one wrong. It's as simple as that.
It's a tar baby argument that ties up valuable time and energy. There are hundreds of thousands of fans, players and coaches who would agree that you don't foul someone when it takes a continuous motion catch and shoot in order to count. Fish the Flopper, as he is known, has fooled refs for years and only the naive would think Fish couldn't flail his arms in a shooting motion, even if he wasn't allowed to catch it cleanly from a foul.
Ghost doesn't get it.
:wtf
Ghost Writer vs. DogNazty, Part 3478927348748392.
Actually, I'm going to agree with SpursFan on this one Ghost. You don't foul in that situation, you make the player attempt the impossible shot to beat you.
Ghost, welcome back from the other side! And best wishes to you and your fiance on your upcoming wedding.
Yeah, that worked out great, adidad. You're a Laker fan, right?
You know what, Fisher made a fucking great shot under a pressure situation. Kudos to him. His team then used that momentum to slap us silly. But you never fould him under that situation.
We had a foul to give.
Did we win that series?
Oh, wait... no.
We let him get a shot off that cut our [email protected] off.
How the hell do you foul somone not in the act with .4 seconds to play? He was in shooting motion as he caught the ball.
Wake up.
Pop made the decision not to foul, it was the correct one. Fisher made a tremendous shot. It's done with. Let it go
The argument you're pushing is akin to "We lost the game by 8, so we should have launched halfcourt shots for the last minute of the game."Quote:
Did we win that series?
Your schtick is tired.
Fish caught, spun and shot.
You wake the F' up.
And don't act like I am the only one sitting at home or in the stands that looked up and saw a foul to give and knew we'd somehow blow it.
The people sitting at home or in the stands are by and large morons who make knee jerk assumptions about a game and players. Kinda like you
Dope.
Your way failed.
We were the Lakers' b1tches. Once again.
Having afoul to give and not using it is like your dad leaving the condom in his wallet.
Tragedy ensued.
Damn you are a dumb fuck.