Lowe: Seven takeaways from the Spurs series win over Houston..

[apalisoc_9]

Lowe is great. Fantastic really. He's got a better sense and understanding of the spurs than most vanilla cliche guys but like with most NBA writers and personalities...You're never going to be able to watch a single team play 82 games.

He's been off with the spurs for like a lot but that's common with second-tier teams in terms of popularity.

[pgardn]

"Lowe has been off concerning the Spurs"

How about we say that about 95% of this board with the other 5% just posting cheers.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

DMC. Using latin and claiming a fallacy ignorantly is about as pseudo-intellectual as one can be.

When the Spurs change their pick and roll defenses and the Rocket's efficiency on pnr decreases that is not just happenstance. Frankly arguing post hoc ergo propter hoc when the mechanics are explained in detail with visual evidence is monumentally ignorant.

Similarly, Ryan Anderson and his limitations on defense were explained in detail and the mechanics and quan y of how the Spurs took advantage of it were well fleshed out.

Further, claiming that Lowe could have used these exact points had the Rockets won is plain stupid. Only using the above two examples underscores this quite clearly. The Spurs improving their pnr defense and the Rockets PFs ty defense would not meet the theme of a Rockets win.

Frankly, it looks like you went to a logic website and picked out a fallacy despite not knowing in the slightest how to apply it and posted the latin in attempt to look intelligent. I have come to expect facile analysis and regurgitated takes from you but this is perhaps your most pathetic yet. I pity you.

[sananspursfan21]

Rob Lowe is a jackass!

[DMC]

DMC. Using latin and claiming a fallacy ignorantly is about as pseudo-intellectual as one can be.

When the Spurs change their pick and roll defenses and the Rocket's efficiency on pnr decreases that is not just happenstance. Frankly arguing post hoc ergo propter hoc when the mechanics are explained in detail with visual evidence is monumentally ignorant.

Similarly, Ryan Anderson and his limitations on defense were explained in detail and the mechanics and quan y of how the Spurs took advantage of it were well fleshed out.

Further, claiming that Lowe could have used these exact points had the Rockets won is plain stupid. Only using the above two examples underscores this quite clearly. The Spurs improving their pnr defense and the Rockets PFs ty defense would not meet the theme of a Rockets win.

Frankly, it looks like you went to a logic website and picked out a fallacy despite not knowing in the slightest how to apply it and posted the latin in attempt to look intelligent. I have come to expect facile analysis and regurgitated takes from you but this is perhaps your most pathetic yet. I pity you.

Happenstance is that one block here, one missed shot there made the difference in game 5. Had the Rockets won that game, nothing he said would have mattered. All of it would have still occurred but the narrative would be how the Rockets overcame a lower seeding to beat the mighty Spurs at home and put them on the brink of elimination. The game is full of mechanics, the winner seems to get the nod. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Never confront me again.

[DMC]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

Well played.

Tu quoque..