Reply With Quote
suns blazers goes OT
Mathurin looks like byron scott/lakers from decades ago…
suns blazers goes OT
Yeah because no one has ever heard of these players before.
damn jock had a chance to force double OT but missed
Interesting side note -- the Pacers have the two dudes drafted immediately after Vassel and Primo, in Halliburton and Duarte. Feeling better about the trajectory of our guys over those at the moment.
Obviously Halliburton is a good player, but I dont feel there is some insurmountable gulf between him and Devon -- more like a respectable gap.
Confident is saying Primo has a better future ahead than Duarte. The bigger question will be whether he'll be a better prospect than Trey Murphy or Sengun who where selected after him in the draft (and maybe Moody if you buy Warrior hype machine). Very much TBD, but I'm not feeling bad about passing on Duarte in 2021.
The Pacers are supposedly a tanking team this early on yet their coach (it’s obvious NBA players are never going to have that at ude) tried so hard to win with that tactic he tried to pull. Makes the first few pages of this thread nonsensical.
Hali is such a media with a lot of holes as a primary.
Primo has a better future than Duarte, Sengun and Moody for sure. 2 of those has lateral quickness issues and the other one is 25.
I'm unsure about Sengun. He's flawed but clearly a gamer. Trey Murphy is surprising me, but then everything NOP is doing is gold. I still think Haliburton was a better pick than Vassell but it's still early and last night Vassell looked good.
If nothing else, this keeps Richardson, Poeltl, and McDermott on the radar as potential trade deadline targets for GMs of playoff teams, and that's a good thing.
There's a lot of nuance & debate in the terminology of tanking, and I think lots of people overestimate what a tank is and isn't. If a GM is trading away impactful players for future draft choices, but the coach is still coaching to win, the franchise as a whole is still "tanking." Tanking doesn't imply that the coaches & players in the huddle are drawing up ways to let the opposing team score, or to get terrible looks for themselves. Last year at the end of the season, OKC started three G League guys in their last 5 games, with Presti hoping (I'm sure) to go 0-5, but Jaylen Hoard had other ideas and played well enough to help them to win 2 games. Coach Daigneault was still coaching to win, but it'd be crazy to say they weren't tanking by sitting starters and starting recent G League call ups.
The whole argument behind “front office is behind the tanking, not the players or the coaches” is thrown out the window when you see that in every game thread, majority of the posts consists of “wHy iSnT pOp pLaYiNg the RoOkiEs? TheReS nO pOiNt iN WiNnIng” aka posts about coaches affecting the tank. If that argument was true, you’d have a lot less complaining and fans less reactive to ingame decisions if it had no impact on winning or losing.
An argument isn't thrown out the window because a few anonymous & biased internet folks have a difference of opinion. Lots of homers on the internetz say that Lebron sucks, or Bill Russell was overrated. It doesn't make it true. In the world of sport bros, it's easy to find contrarian opinions on pretty much any topic.
Last edited by R. DeMurre; 10-22-2022 at 01:52 PM.
And really no minutes for Wesley and Branham. The 10 guys in front are legitimately deserving of getting PT. There’s no Forbes, eubanks, nor 2019 circa Belinelli to whine about. Albeit Bates-Diaw is approaching that. His slot should open up to one of the rooks soon enough
Yet here you are, one of the anonymous & biased internet folks, giving his opinion and throwing a blanket definition over what tanking means and we are supposed to take your word for it?
There might be a perceptions difference between a top 10 pick and 20 plus in terms of immediate readiness. Sochan might be on a different expectation timeline than the later 2 picks from 2022.
Bran actually does looks pretty ready from SL and preseason samples so maybe he should see more floor arguably but all summer long ST seemed to agree Blake should spend time in Austin and now we are angry when Blake doesn't get burn in game 2 of the season.
Well, no one is more thin-skinned and biased than you. Besides, if you read what I wrote, I specifically said it's nuanced and then went on to give a clear example of a time when the players and coaches were trying to win in a situation that was clearly tanking, i.e., starting three G Leaguers and sitting your starters despite being a team with a losing record. Sorry you're so touchy & exasperated about everything and a week never goes by where you don't get into a long drawn out insultfest with a fellow spurstalk member. Hope that makes you feel better.
Poke holes in their argument and they come back with an attack that has nothing do with basketballname a better combo for this loser
Poke holes in their argument and they come back with an attack that has nothing do with basketball
"if you read what I wrote, I specifically said it's nuanced and then went on to give a clear example of a time when the players and coaches were trying to win in a situation that was clearly tanking, i.e., starting three G Leaguers and sitting your starters despite being a team with a losing record."
Kinda sounds like a very specific basketball response.
Let me break it down for you.
1. Your key argument from your post is this: Whatever the players and coaches do is irrelevant because ultimately, the what the FO does is directly tied to what “the franchise is doing as a whole”. Just to be clear before I move onto point #2, this is an opinion. And let me say that I agree with the fact that it’s nuanced, and what I disagree with is your use of a blanket statement over the meaning of tanking. Basically, you were making good points but somehow arrived to a conclusion that contradicts your own evidence. In my opinion, anyway. You can’t list examples of how coaching affects tanking and then turn around and say that the franchise is tanking as a whole. Players are part of the franchise. The coach is a part of the franchise. That is not the “franchise as a whole”.
2. I point out that if only what the FO does is what affects tanking (again, the blanket statement) was true, there wouldn’t be a majority of posts in game threads commenting about how ingame decisions affecting the tank because what Pop does wouldn’t matter.
3. You respond by saying well those are just opinions by random internet folks.
4. I point out that your original point was an opinion.
5. Somehow you took offense to that.
I didn't "take offense" to anything. That's you, once again, the most thin-skinned & argumentative person on Spurstalk who regularly has fights and personal vendettas with multiple people at all times. This is your continual issue, that anyone who doesn't agree with you is "offended."
Last edited by R. DeMurre; 10-23-2022 at 03:17 AM.
Yes, you did get offended. This argument took its turn when you brought up claims about me after I said you, too, were a “random and biased internet poster”… which were your own words, by the way. So unless you think you’re different than anyone else on here, I’m not sure what the point was for you to all of a sudden bring up things unrelated to our discussion. Calling me touchy, exasperated, and thin skinned out of the blue? You’re denying that’s not taking the conversation off-road? If that’s not a sign of being offended, then I don’t know what to tell you. Especially since nothing should have sparked that kind of response.
Figures. I gave you a proper rebuttal and gave you a chance to respond back in a civil manner yet you refused, likely because you know your argument is flawed and you’ve hit a brick wall. Sucks that you resort to this childish madeup fantasy in order to deflect away from the conversation at hand.
Last edited by Dejounte; 10-23-2022 at 04:13 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
