Spurs won, but Bonner can't get a got damn rebound when it matters...

[EricD]

That song's much more suggestive than I remembered.

EricD

I thought so.

Good to have your back

[ohmwrecker]

Not to barge in on this, but if he believes the first, he cannot believe the second. If he doesn't believe the first, by default he believes the second.

The first question establishes the idea and I started the second question with "If not". I do appreciate the peanuts however.

[ohmwrecker]

Just say you can't find it and admit your failure.

I don't have to find anything. The discussion was centered around the debate of Bonner over small ball (although the legitimate argument of Bonner=small ball was brought up) when you chimed in. Small ball wasn't even my thought. I prefer "situational rotation".

I really didn't read the rest of your posts since you failed so spectacularly out of the gate. Admit it and I'll move on.

Neat. How about I admit nothing and you move on any way?

[ChumpDumper]

I don't have to find anything. The discussion was centered around the debate of Bonner over small ball (although the legitimate argument of Bonner=small ball was brought up) when you chimed in. Small ball wasn't even my thought. I prefer "situational rotation".

Yes, and my chiming in had nothing to do with a defense of the use of Bonner.

Neat. How about I admit nothing and you move on any way?

OK, your failure stands.

[ShoogarBear]

I thought it was when he was standing on the tracks when the "Choo-Choo" was coming through.

That was Dog bites Man.

The other was 5'5" taking 6'10" on the blocks.

[ohmwrecker]

OK, your failure stands.

As long as you can admit to your purposeful obtuseness, I will admit to assumption.

[nkdlunch]

Bonner has been playing well all season.

R u guys ing re ed?

[TJastal]

Bonner has been playing well all season.

R u guys ing re ed?

He's either playing assertive like he was last night or like a vagina (like he was against the bucks).

Pop needs to better determine which Bonner has shown up for the game and subs ute accordingly.

That said, I would still MUCH prefer to see Tiago out there learning and getting better and helping Tim not have to do so much heavy lifting but man-crushes must be sated.

[ChumpDumper]

As long as you can admit to your purposeful obtuseness, I will admit to assumption.

There was no purposeful obtuseness.

I made a simple statement about posters that you completely failed to understand. Go back and read it and tell me what it has to do with your little diatribe you posted in response.

[DMC]

The first question establishes the idea and I started the second question with "If not". I do appreciate the peanuts however.

Sorry, but no.

"Do you believe that a small ball strategy is never appropriate?"

If he says "yes" here, then all else is moot. If he says "no" here, then by default he believes that small ball strategy is advantageous in some situations. Appropriate and advantageous are, I believe, being used interchangeably here. If not, you are probably being intentionally obtuse.

If not, do you believe that there are certain situations where the deployment of a small ball strategy can be advantageous?

And finally . . . Do you truly believe the one could be against small ball in one scenario, but for it in another, or is everything black or white?

You've actually asked the same question 3 times. The question: Do you believe small ball strategy can be advantageous?

Why all the word play?

So... have all the peanuts you want. Someone needs to feed the elephant in this room. Might as well be you.