Reply With Quote
Sincerely,
Isaiah Thomas and the 2006-07 New York Knicks
Yeah I would like to see him in a Spurs uniform but we already have around 7 bigs and the last thing we need is another big.
Sincerely,
Isaiah Thomas and the 2006-07 New York Knicks
Eff Warrick. The only thing we have left to do is get rid of Bonner and then I'll be a happy Spurs fan.
No Roster Room....... Plus Haislip Is the Same type of player as Warrick, except Haislip has A Better jumper...... Warrick Will Help some team out..... just not the Spurs......
Warrick became expendable after Memphis traded for Zach Randolph. Between Randolph and Darrell Arthur (whom they really like) their PF position was covered and they didn't feel the need to pay $3M a year for a third wheel who lacks the versatility to play SF or C, is a defensive liability, and has had poor +/- numbers.
I had Warrick on one of my deep league fantasy b-ball teams last year. He had some pretty nice games for about a 6 week stretch. Had frequent 20+ points. I would rather have him than Gist.
Gist is not going to be on the roster.
True enough.
Exactly. And even if Gist were to make the roster he'd spend the season in Austin...something Warrick is not eligible for.
I'd have taken Warrick over Haislip for the minimum, but Warrick will command more than that.
No room on this roster for another big, sorry.
You seriously think Hairston can run the point? I would rather add another veteran point guard before this would happen. Gist won't be making the team this year and we are not bringing back Bowen because he hasn't even been released by Milwaukee. Hairston is a SG/SF, and doesn't have the skills necessary to play the point. Finley and Bonner are going to be on the roster come training camp because no one wants them and the sooner everyone accepts that, the better for everyone?
C - McDyess, Ian, Ratliff
PF - Duncan, Blair, Haislip
SF - Jefferson, Bowen, Gist
SG - Mason, Manu, Williams
PG - Parker, Hill, Hairston
CHAMPIONSHIP
I am not your daddy and I did not take you to raise.
Perfect for Dallas. I can't wait toup on the team we would have beat had Ginobili been able to play at even less than 100%.
Just calling someone out for being lazy. Nothing personal, I thought the thread starting standards were a bit higher on here.
Most of the people here know how to look up stats and don't need their hand held. So either, what you accuse others of being is what you are, or you are really a novice. I will not be so juvenile as to call you lazy so I assume you are the later. So, seeing that you are a novice, I can advise you that there are numerous ways to look up stats, the easiest being google where you simply enter the players name along with stats. Enjoy your new found Internet search skills.
So you want 100s of people searching for stats about a guy just because of your wild speculation about a far-fetched acquisition? OK, that makes sense to me now, 1000 pardons for my impudence. Thanks for clarifying that.
Warrick would definitely be a nice pickup. Better than Hairston, Haislip, Gist and Mahinmi.
Okay Novice, I know its hard for you being a newbie at the Internet but usually a person is credited only for the things that they post. I do not get credit good or bad for the things that you post. The issue of stats was your idea. The issue of a far-fetched acquisition is your idea. All this thread did was say he was available. Prior to many of the signings, Warrick was a person of interest to many Spur fans who posts in this forum, so posting his availability is a norm.
Now that credit is given where credit is due I am glad that you have apologized to yourself. It takes a big man to admit when they are wrong. Today you have gained a few pounds.
I am done playing this game now because it is kind of getting to be a bore. I know as a novice you will want to have the last word so go ahead and enjoy. We will see if you have any better incite in any future threads or are you just in reality a toothless troll hiding behind a Spurs mask of credibility.
agree that we don't have room for a player like him.
don't agree that he is a defensive liability. depending on the match up, he can even be a pretty good defender. struggles to defend the paint against stronger PFs, but does a good job on all those combo forwards, especially when they move outside.
Warrick is a limited player, but as a bench player he can be a very useful asset.
WTF is your problem? you act like a spoiled brat. if you don't know who Warrick is, get the information. you are on the internet right? most people with a lack of knowledge are smart enough to get the needed information by themself, instead of complaining that another member didn't carve your meat.
Knoxxx is the new Ghost Writer: someone too ing lazy to type a few things and click on a link or two to look up stats or history on a player or team.
He never said he wanted 100s of people searching for stats, those are your words not his. There's only one person on this thread complaining about Warrick's career stats not being provided by the OP, not "100's". Most people here know enough about who's who in the NBA that they don't need to look up stats to know what a given player has to offer. If you need to do that, that's fine, but that's also your responsibility to look it up on your own, not his responsibility to provide it for you. Its nothing more than a few mouse clicks to get to an NBA player's stats page on the web and you're making it sound like a 10-hour drive.
I could care less that a few loudmouths don't agree about a courtesy that should have been extended by the author of the thread. To argue that even some basic current year stat info would not have been helpful shows your ignorance of good etiquette.
I suspect there are many on here that share my viewpoint. They are just smarter than me because they don't waste time arguing with clowns.
Last edited by Knoxxx; 07-26-2009 at 01:22 PM.
It doesn't take much...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
