Reply With Quote
You said Derrick Rose is a loser. You made that statement. Now support that statement, what criteria did you base it on. Why was he considered a loser and not a winner, what must a player do to achieve winning status?
Na its funny having him following me around to try to grab my attention.
You said Derrick Rose is a loser. You made that statement. Now support that statement, what criteria did you base it on. Why was he considered a loser and not a winner, what must a player do to achieve winning status?
You're cherry picking my statements, much like you cherry picked Whelden's article.
This argument goes alot further back than what I said today. Read that part first, then get back to me.
Somebody needs to let it go. That position is crumbling by the day.
Just to clarify my position, in case all the cherry-pickers have clouded it up:
1) Derrick Rose is a very good player
2) He is not as good as CP3/DWill/Tony Parker
3) He is not a winner
4) He has not won anything yet
Numbers 1-4 are what I said in the past. And all 4 are true as of right now.
And this is what I think about DRose's future
5) A Derrick Rose led team will never be more than Playoff fodder
6) Derrick Rose is a great #2/#3 player, but doesn't have what it takes to be the #1 player (on a contending team)
1) Derrick Rose is a very good player
2) He is not as good as CP3/DWill/Tony Parker
3) He is not a winner
4) He has not won anything yet
How do you disagree on points #2-#4 ? It's easy to put up emoticons, let's have some answers.1) Derrick Rose is a very good player
2) He is not as good as CP3/DWill/Tony Parker
3) He is not a winner
4) He has not won anything yet
2) He is not as good as CP3/DWill/Tony Parker
3) He is not a winner
4) He has not won anything yet
3)Well I still dont get why you say Derrick Rose is not a winner. What classifies him as a winner or not?
4) Refer above.
Did you copy something again?
Why did you leave out #2? You're cherry picking again.
Do you think Derrick Rose is as good as CP3/Dwill/Tony Parker?
Derrick Rose hasn't won anything yet. To be as good as CP3/DWill/Tony Parker (all of whom have won multiple series), he needs to win something.
As of now DRose is not as good as CP3/DWILL, where did I say that?
But I still dont know what you mean when you say Rose is not a winner? Why isnt he a winner?
Excellent. Why did you leave out the thumbs up in your original thumbs up/thumbs down post?
Because Derrick Rose hasn't won anything.But I still dont know what you mean when you say Rose is not a winner? Why isnt he a winner?
Whats the anything you are referring to?
You tell me. What has Derrick Rose won that we should know about?
Just because he hasn't passed the first round doesn't make him a loser. He has won 41 games and made it to the playoff so I guess that makes him a winner.
(We interrupt this debate to re-hijack this thread
GO BULLS, KICK SOME ASS!!!!
(We now return you to your regularly scheduled argument.)
Good players can win 41 games and make it to the Playoffs.
T-Mac has won multiple games in the Playoffs, but he's not a winner either.
I'll lose my argument but I would love nothing more than to see the Celtics get their asses handed to them by Derrick Rose.(We interrupt this debate to re-hijack this thread
GO BULLS, KICK SOME ASS!!!!
(We now return you to your regularly scheduled argument.)
So you're saying Rose won't be a "Great Superstar" Unless he gets past the first round? You're judging a player's performance over his winning habits?
Lets say theres a player that averags 50 ppg, 25rbpg 15 apg, 10 bpg and 10 spg but never made it past the first round playoffs in his career, does that mean he's just a good player and not a Great Player?
Perkins.... a dumb statement coming from a dumb guy.
the celtics!
Winners find ways to win. That's the difference between a good player and a winner. CP3 has a pretty horrible team, but even he finds ways to win with that motley bunch.
If you average 50ppg, 25rbpg and 15apg, 10bpg and never make it out of the first round, you are a serious loser.Lets say I have a player that averaged 50 ppg, 25rbpg 15 apg, 10 bpg and 10 sbpg but never made it past the first round playoffs in his career, does that mean Im just a good player and not a Great Player?
First off, anyone can critique any premise in your argument. It is not cherry picking, it is basic ways of arguing.
Second, he led his team to the playoffs in his first year despite the rookie adversities. By making the playoffs, he is already a winner. There are several teams at home watching these playoffs. Those teams are losers.
Third, he is already making a good showing in this here first round. So premise three and premise four is garbage. If we are going to put expectations such as championship hopes, and le contention on him in year one, someone is being quite unreasonable.
We know what will come next. "Well he hasn't won a playoff series. When he does that i'll call him a winner". You can change what a winner is by upping the level of winner all you want to. But a low winner is still a winner. He is better than all of those players as a rookie.
If Chicago wins this playoff series, you will look even more of a fool. It's ok, it'll be alright.
As far as your predictions go, they are not even worth talking about as anyone can say anything about the future. It's a bunch of crystal ball educated guessing.
Yes he would be a serious loser, but would that mean he is not a Great Superstar?
Yes, he would be a great superstar.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
