Reply With Quote
What do you want to discuss? That he's slightly better than Fisher?So back to the subject of Steve Blake's defense...
Anyone want to have a fundamental basketball discussion about Blake's defense?
Remember when you tried to change the subject from your 12 year career at espn.com and all of those awesome virtual relationships you had with all of those intelligent Laker fans?So back to the subject of Steve Blake's defense...
Anyone want to have a fundamental basketball discussion about Blake's defense?
What do you want to discuss? That he's slightly better than Fisher?So back to the subject of Steve Blake's defense...
Anyone want to have a fundamental basketball discussion about Blake's defense?
You are really agitated today aren't you? You're trying really hard today.
If I wanted to, with you in this delicate state, I could really initiate quite the tailspin.
Pointing out who you think is better or worse is not a fundamental basketball discussion.
Thank you for trying troll.
Chris Quinn >>> Steve Blake
[QUOTE=history2b;4950867]I invited myself, got.
Lol, who invited you into this conversation?
A reasonable prediction? lol. No it was a moronic prediction that only someone with a very low bball IQ would make.
@ Jefferson making the Spurs as good as the Lakers
Artest is an NBA champion, something Richard Jefferson will never be. Guaranteed.
And Adam Morrison is also an NBA champion. Your point? Truth is (something you claim to be a purveyor of) is that losing Ariza hurt the Lakers. His 2009 championship campaign was every bit as good, if not better, than Artest's. Futhermore, he's a younger player whose athleticism would be a welcome addition to the Lakers, who have trouble matching up with the quicker perimeter players of the league. But I wouldn't expect you understand defense. We all know who you think plays good, fundamental defense
Anyhow, you're obviously an Artest homer, but objectively, it was a move by the Lakers (not necessarily of their own doing, since Ariza wanted more than the MLE and chose to become a free agent) that hurts their longterm prospects at the 3 spot. Not to mention, he fit beautifully in the triangle, while Tru Warier's chimp brain struggles to understand it.
Why don't you google me Steve Blakes stats on D?
[QUOTE=Punchy;4950921]
I invited myself, got.
And Adam Morrison is also an NBA champion. Your point? Truth is (something you claim to be a purveyor of) is that losing Ariza hurt the Lakers. His 2009 championship campaign was every bit as good, if not better, than Artest's. Futhermore, he's a younger player whose athleticism would be a welcome addition to the Lakers, who have trouble matching up with the quicker perimeter players of the league. But I wouldn't expect you understand defense. We all know who you think plays good, fundamental defense
Anyhow, you're obviously an Artest homer, but objectively, it was a move by the Lakers (not necessarily of their own doing, since Ariza wanted more than the MLE and chose to become a free agent) that hurts their longterm prospects at the 3 spot. Not to mention, he fit beautifully in the triangle, while Tru Warier's chimp brain struggles to understand it.
And Adam Morrison didn't play in the Finals... great point. I can see that when we want to talk ball you'll bring up garbage like that because, well you're an idiot.
Ron Artest did his part last season that helped win that championship, arguably the most difficult series the Lakers have ever had. Again, it is a distinction that Richard Jefferson will never be able to claim and I find that particularly gratifying considering you just claimed he made the Spurs as good as the Lakers. You'd have to win a championship to validate that opinion.
By all means, lets talk defense chump. Ariza? Defense? lol. Wow you're dumb. He's a long quick defender who likes to play the passing lanes... And? He could not handle any of the stronger SFs in the league because he's literally 185 lbs sopping wet.
Did you watch the OKC-NO game the other night? I did. And Kevin Durant dropped 43 on his ass because, well, Trevor cannot defend him. That would have been perfect in round 1 last year wouldn't it? You probably should just refrain from talking ball with me troll, you're in way over your head.
That wouldn't entail fundamental basketball either.
Just cry "Uncle! I don't understand defense history" and lets be done with it ok?
I'm just ing with you a little buddy. You really did think you were some hot over there in that Laker minnow pond with all of those morons.You are really agitated today aren't you? You're trying really hard today.
If I wanted to, with you in this delicate state, I could really initiate quite the tailspin.
I think my favorite time was when Kobe demanded the trade. Your thread le - 'Time to weigh in' - as if all of the posters had been waiting with baited breath to know what you had to say. Then you went on to put Kobe ahead of the Laker organization...you understood his plight as a winner and a champion and the Lakers should give him what he wanted, trading him for Darius Miles and a used condom or some other random .
Good stuff.
It sounds like you took things that would said on that message board to heart. I'm flattered. If only you could be more honest and accurate.
Glad to see that after I made the trip over to this side of the tracks you decided to follow like the good little stalker that you've always been.
So when are you going to pay Truth the $1000.00 you owe him for Game 7?
THE 40 YEAR OLD STALKER (2010)
Starring: Tipsy
Director: history2b
Synopsis: A journey into the life of internet troll dirtyese, aka Stroker and his obsessive compulsive behavior nature. Chubby, dejected, closeted, and very lonely, Stroker believes that in order to make up for the depressing reality of living in a sexless marriage he must redirect his focus on trolling sports message boards. But the journey takes a striking turn for the worst when he decides to obsess over one anonymous poster,pursuing his every move like a stranger in the night; will he ever recover in time to save his marriage? Or will he implode in cyberland for all to see?
Runtime: 2 hours
Release Date: June 01, 2011
[QUOTE=history2b;4950950][QUOTE=Punchy;4950921]
Missing the point. Saying someone is an "NBA Champion" as a counterpoint in an argument is as worthless as Steve Blake on D, or your opinion on basketball.And Adam Morrison didn't play in the Finals... great point. I can see that when we want to talk ball you'll bring up garbage like that because, well you're an idiot.
The Spurs are playing some of the best basketball in the league, better than the Lakers in fact, and Jefferson has been an integral part of that success. So yes, thus far, Richard Jefferson has made the Spurs as good as the Lakers. Playoffs remain to be seen.Ron Artest did his part last season that helped win that championship, arguably the most difficult series the Lakers have ever had. Again, it is a distinction that Richard Jefferson will never be able to claim and I find that particularly gratifying considering you just claimed he made the Spurs as good as the Lakers. You'd have to win a championship to validate that opinion.
Yeah, he really couldn't handle Carmelo Anthony in the 09 WCF.By all means, lets talk defense chump. Ariza? Defense? lol. Wow you're dumb. He's a long quick defender who likes to play the passing lanes... And? He could not handle any of the stronger SFs in the league because he's literally 185 lbs sopping wet.. And even if you're correct (which you're not), Artest can no longer effectively guard the quicker 2s and 3s of the league, so.....
Hooray for one game sample sizes! Paul Pierce dropped 32 on Artest's grill the other day. That's relevant how?Did you watch the OKC-NO game the other night? I did. And Kevin Durant dropped 43 on his ass because, well, Trevor cannot defend him. That would have been perfect in round 1 last year wouldn't it? You probably should just refrain from talking ball with me troll, you're in way over your head.
Just stop posting.
Follow you? I've posted upstairs for years. This is my troll name for the cesspool I created for you when I ran across a post where I saw you looking for me. You were rambling on about how awesome Shannon Brown was wondering where tipsythelurker was as I think he's straight up NBA scrub (still do)...so, here I am.
history2bs getting worked up over a scrub like Steve Blake
[QUOTE=Punchy;4950996][QUOTE=history2b;4950950]No it is not if you are capable of understanding and discussing their role in earning that championship.
Then it isn't as good as the Lakers because the Lakers are 2 time back to back champions. As much as you'd like to think this is the 50 game 1999 season, it's not. You haven't won . If you do, I'll acknowledge it. I am confident you won't. Until then you aren't as good as the Lakers.
No he couldn't, lol. Which is why Kobe Bryant switched defensively on Carmelo after Melo lit up Ariza in game 1 and game 2. Phil and Kobe made the switch and the rest is history.Yeah, he really couldn't handle Carmelo Anthony in the 09 WCF.
I can mail you a copy of the games on DVD so you can familiarize yourself with the series if you'd like.
I'll take what Ron did to Paul in games 6-7 of the Finals over some random regular season game where Ron only plays 20 minutes and Paul goes off on Luke Walton any day.
Again, go off the actual games and not boxscores and you'll do much better.
[QUOTE=history2b;4951137][QUOTE=Punchy;4950996][QUOTE=history2b;4950950]
Still irrelevant.No it is not if you are capable of understanding and discussing their role in earning that championship.
Last two seasons. We're discussing the present, and presently, the Spurs are as good as the Lakers. Will it translate to the playoffs? Who knows.Then it isn't as good as the Lakers because the Lakers are 2 time back to back champions. As much as you'd like to think this is the 50 game 1999 season, it's not. You haven't won . If you do, I'll acknowledge it. I am confident you won't. Until then you aren't as good as the Lakers.
You're lying to yourself if you don't think Ariza also contributed to Carmelo's shutdown in the following games. Kobe guarded Melo for stretches, but Ariza also played a role. Kobe hasn't "guarded the other team's best perimeter player" for the entire game (like all you assholes like to claim) since '02.No he couldn't, lol. Which is why Kobe Bryant switched defensively on Carmelo after Melo lit up Ariza in game 1 and game 2. Phil and Kobe made the switch and the rest is history.
I can mail you a copy of the games on DVD so you can familiarize yourself with the series if you'd like.
But like I said, even if you're right, I still take Ariza's youth, athleticism, and superior understanding of the triangle over Artest's steady decline. So Artest had a nice tip in and a great game 7. You act like Ariza wouldn't have had his moments as well, which he did in '09, prompting all you re s to vicariously suck his in the aftermath. But once he was no longer a Laker and Artest was, all of sudden Ariza became "an overrated defender/player" while Artest was touted like he magically reverted to his DPOY form, and anyone who has watched Artest the past couple of years knows that he lost a big step on defense. A Purple 'n Gold jersey can do a lot of things. Make a world class athlete look like a sexual, or be used as a jerkoff rag, but it cannot turn back time.
Anyhow, we can argue Ariza/Artest all day. I simply like Ariza's game better at this point, and think he's a better fit for the Lakers.
Which reinforces my point of why one game sample sizes are bull .I'll take what Ron did to Paul in games 6-7 of the Finals over some random regular season game where Ron only plays 20 minutes and Paul goes off on Luke Walton any day.
Again, go off the actual games and not boxscores and you'll do much better.
[QUOTE=Punchy;4951225][QUOTE=history2b;4951137][QUOTE=Punchy;4950996]It was irrelevant to even bring a player who didn't contribute to a championship, absolutely. Next time bring something relevant to the discussion instead of idiotic comments like your initial one.
It's the regular season. Are you capable of reasonable perspective? If your team doesn't win , then you weren't as good as the Lakers. In essence we're in the 2nd quarter of a game that you haven't won yet but you're claiming greatest because the game is tied at halftime.
Your dumbass doesn't even know when the real evaluation begins. I'll give you a little help though; it's not February.
I am right. I know I am right because I watched the games. I watched Carmelo who is about 40lbs heavier than Trevor abuse the out of him which hurt the Lakers since their plan was to use Kobe on Billups to disrupt their offense. LA lost that first game precisely because Ariza could not contain Carmelo and when he started going again in game 2 they switched Kobe on him.
Again, I can mail you a copy of the games if it would help you out. Until then don't talk out of your ass to someone who is vastly more familiar with the Lakers. That may seem cool on a horse message board with your chimp friends jump up and down for bananas but I'll rip that crap to shreds with reality.
Trevor is a nice young player but he couldn't handle the physical SFs defensively and so he was replaced. It doesn't really matter what Spurs fanboys perceive to be offensive advantages with someone else since LA already proved it was the right move.
Yup.
And I'll take the evidence of a 7 game series over anything.
You're still failing to understand. The context in which you delivered that comment made it irrelevant. Citing that Ron Artest is a champion was meaningless to the conversation.It was irrelevant to even bring a player who didn't contribute to a championship, absolutely. Next time bring something relevant to the discussion instead of idiotic comments like your initial one.
After the Lakers acquired Gasol, everyone with a normal functioning brain knew they had passed up the Spurs, despite the Spurs winning 2 out of the last 3 championships. A "reasonable perspective" is one that evaluates based on the most recent evidence and events available. The Lakers being the two time defending champions has meaning, but it's not the be all-end-all.It's the regular season. Are you capable of reasonable perspective? If your team doesn't win , then you weren't as good as the Lakers. In essence we're in the 2nd quarter of a game that you haven't won yet but you're claiming greatest because the game is tied at halftime.
Then you're not the logical, empirical person you claim to be. I tend to base my evaluations on what's happening now, and now tells me that the Spurs are every bit as good as the Lakers. This could change in a month, but as of right now, the Spurs are legitimate contenders. Spurs fans said the same about Dallas in '06. "They're a jump shooting team." "They can't matchup with our size." Blah, blah, blah. Truth was, Dallas was a 60 win team that year, and just as good as the Spurs in the regular season, splitting the regular season series. And they ultimately proved themselves to be a better team. Point is, the regular season does matter and can be used to evaluate how teams will possibly match up if they should meet in the Playoffs. Anyone who says differently is just posturing or deluded.Your dumbass doesn't even know when the real evaluation begins. I'll give you a little help though; it's not February.
Fair enough. But I still like Ariza better at this point. Just because Artest "contributed" and basing his worth off that is being results oriented. Key players on championship teams tend to "contribute" and will have superlative moments. Stephen Jackson did for the Spurs, but that doesn't necessarily mean there's not a player out there who would have been a better fit.I am right. I know I am right because I watched the games. I watched Carmelo who is about 40lbs heavier than Trevor abuse the out of him which hurt the Lakers since their plan was to use Kobe on Billups to disrupt their offense. LA lost that first game precisely because Ariza could not contain Carmelo and when he started going again in game 2 they switched Kobe on him.
Again, I can mail you a copy of the games if it would help you out. Until then don't talk out of your ass to someone who is vastly more familiar with the Lakers. That may seem cool on a horse message board with your chimp friends jump up and down for bananas but I'll rip that crap to shreds with reality.
And the trade off, as we're seeing now, is that Artest is getting torched by the more athletic wings of the league, and the Lakers can't defend the fast break for . Not to mention, Ariza is much more of a scoring threat. Still, I won't knock you for preferring Artest. I just personally like Ariza more as a player at this point. Artest is edging toward the cliff while Ariza is entering his prime.Trevor is a nice young player but he couldn't handle the physical SFs defensively and so he was replaced. It doesn't really matter what Spurs fanboys perceive to be offensive advantages with someone else since LA already proved it was the right move.
[/QUOTE]Yup.
And I'll take the evidence of a 7 game series over anything.
The 6 game sample size of the Spurs/Nets Finals told me that Speedy Claxton is a better player than Tony Parker.
Yup.
No because it is with the understanding of the contribution. That is a given in any discussion. You brought up Morrison, it was stupid and irrelevant so you really should just own up to it.
Not Tipsy.
Irrelevant when your context is limited to "halftime" in the game. Wait till the game is over before you go sucking everyone's .
Ariza is shooting worse than Artest. Contract years do wonders for many players games.
I could rationalize that Speedy Claxton would have been "perfect" for your system moreso than Parker. But again, contract seasons do wonders for role players games.
There is nothing to discuss.
No, you brought up Artest's champion status as a dig at Richard Jefferson. That would be like me saying (prior to Artest being a Laker) "Richard Jefferson has been to the Finals two times, something Ron Artest will never experience." The statement, as well as yours, is meaningless.No because it is with the understanding of the contribution. That is a given in any discussion. You brought up Morrison, it was stupid and irrelevant so you really should just own up to it.
Trolling you. I'm very familiar with the Lakers ESPN forum circa 05-08, and Tipsy trolled the out of all you Kobe homers to the point where it created an irrational hatred of the Spurs and their fans. Funny actually.Not Tipsy.
And like a halftime score has never been a good indication of how a game will turn out. I'd be willing to bet that the team who leads at halftime wins more than the team who is trailing. Just a guess.Irrelevant when your context is limited to "halftime" in the game. Wait till the game is over before you go sucking everyone's .
Good one.
Artest's game relies on open looks created by Kobe, Gasol, etc. He can't create his own shot. Ariza is a threat to drive, slash, and can run the break. Combine that with him feeding off Kobe and Gasol and his natural fit inside the triangle, I'd say he'd be shooting much better than .408, which is what Artest is shooting now.Ariza is shooting worse than Artest. Contract years do wonders for many players games.
INo you couldn't. It would take some real assaults against logic to do that. The Spurs system as it pertains to Parker relies heavy on his penetration. Speedy, despite the name, wasn't Parker's equal in that regard, even then. On the other hand, we know Ariza was a great fit, something supported by many basketball people, while Artest scratches his head at the mention of the word triangle.could rationalize that Speedy Claxton would have been "perfect" for your system moreso than Parker. But again, contract seasons do wonders for role players games.
History was my favorite target too. Mother er's ridiculous ego wouldn't allow him to ignore me. He responded everytime.
Then when the Lakers got back on top he fell into an emotional tailspin of trolling spurs fans that he is still trying to pull out of.
Because it was a qualifier as to why Jefferson did not and has not made the Spurs "just as good as the Lakers" since Ron Artest helped make the Lakers championship. My god you are slower than sliding down a mountain.
If trolling was saying that Kobe would never win again, yeah, I guess he really won that one, lol.
Wow. Sound logic.
2010 Cavs?
2009 Cavs?
2007 Mavs?
2006 Pistons?
2005 Suns?
You aren't the sharpest tool in the shed but you are a tool nonetheless. One unfamiliar with the Nba's history I might add.
Still shoots a terrible percentage driving or shooting. Again, contract season... does wonders to many a player's games. I liked Trevor and wouldn't mind having the kid on the Lakers but what I won't do is overrate him and act like he was some kind of defensive stopper who shot the lights out. He's proven he's not that over the last year and a half.
I don't feel that way about Parker/Claxton. I just said I can rationalize it. Personally I don't give what any "basketball people" say (read: sports writers) as they are just as capable of romanticizing as anyone else. Ariza could very well be shooting bricks and getting lit up here right now just as he is in NO and then what? People would be talking about how the Lakers need to fix "X" instead of "Y." That kind of overdramatic, overanalyzed speculative talk that comes from people in the business of having something to say in order to sell their publication has never been of interest to me. I trust what I see on the floor.
You had like 10000 posts and bunch of tweenagers who actually respected your basketball opinion on the Laker board and I managed to reduce you to an emotional troll that hung out on the Spurs board 24/7 for 2+ years and now hangs out at spurstalk.com.
I am pretty sure I won...albeit at the expense of the fine spurs fans that post here and in the minnow pond that don't particularly like your brand of trolling. I find your ridiculous ego fueled by the anonymity of the internet fascinating.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
