-
A moderator should change the thread title though, because "Screw ****ing" sounds (A) kinky and (B) redundant.
-
All of you seem so bad-ass now with all that censored language.
Let me try.
To **** or not to ****.
Ujiri is a proper ****er.
**** off!
Nice. We can now write about basketball and be rockenrollas at the same time.Leave a comment:
-
Peeps, stop wasting hosting's bandwidth. Everyone expressed their opinions in previous threads. This discussion is pointless.
/OUTLeave a comment:
-
On the flip side, anti-****ers have constantly berated the **** side for not being "true fans", and for being pro-losing. Again, it's a stupid argument at this point that lost any sense of rationality it may have once had.MixxAOR wrote: View Post
There is a very cold logic to ****ing, but no guarantees. It is risky as it implies losing talent to hopefully gain a better talent, which could result in constantly lacking talent if picks don't pan out. Either way the draft is important even if the team does well, and there's no guarantee a low pick is a bad pick either, possibly even what the team needs in the long run.
There is a very real spirit of hope and competitiveness to anti-****ing, but also no guarantees. It is very difficult to make a rational argument as to how a team goes from good to great without a high pick, because it involves opportunities which are literally impossible to predict. This last part seemed to frustrate ****ers as they believe that there is at least certainty of opportunity (but not of success) with ****ing and getting a pick. But it also doesn't mean that those other opportunities won't present themselves and won't be taken advantage of by our management.
*Guarantees meaning surefire way of finding the piece(s) to avoid the dreaded scenarios.
Scenario #1: the Charlotte scenario. A perennial bottomfeeder that is poorly managed and can't ever break out.
Scenario #2: the Milwaukee scenario. A perennial fringe playoff team that may not be poorly managed, but it's constant mediocrity makes it difficult to break out.
Scenario #3: the Atlanta scenario. A perennial middle of the pack playoff team that lacks flexibility (talking past years here) and room for growth to really get over the hump into the elite of the league.
These are all less than ideal scenarios in the long run for most every fan. Even the most "desirable" scenario of Atlanta, where the team may win a playoff series now and then, is not something the vast majority of fans want.Last edited by white men can't jump; Sat Jan 11, 2014, 03:01 AM.Leave a comment:
-
This discussion just needs to stop. It's just ridiculous, pointless and endless....especially if you're someone like me who saw positives in both arguments (when made rationally)
I said a long time ago that ****ing is something you kind of have to fall into. It kind of just has to happen. Early, with Gay, that looked very possible. ****ers took the Gay trade to mean management was investing in a ****, when really they were just excising a malignant tumor from the lineup. I didn't know if it would wind up hurting or helping the team, but saw both as possible. The path the team is on now is not going to the lottery. It doesn't mean "screw ****ing". Anything can happen in an NBA season, and fortunes can change fast. I don't wish for an injury or losing streak, but if that happens and throws us back into a lottery path, so be it, I'll look for that positive aspect.
Either way, it comes back to ****ing is something that kind of has to happen naturally. You don't just do it because of a strong draft (ie you don't hold a firesale which ends up in losing assets for nothing so you can lose), and you don't not do it because of one month of solid basketball. There are merits to both sides of the argument, and both could be right/wrong.
It doesn't change that this team could still really use an elite talent, specifically a go-to style guy who can take over a game on his own. It'll be tough to find that no matter what. I'll be fine if things fall apart and we get a top 6-8 pick that ends up being the piece to push us a level higher. I'll also be fine if we finish the season well, make a playoff run (even if brief), and Masai tries to find another way to add that talent.
To me it was an interesting debate once, especially when people on either side tried to come up with rational arguments. But at some point things just flew off the rails. Some ****ers stubbornly insist it's the only way to add what the team could need (it may be the simplest, most obvious way, but it's no certainty). Some anti-****ers insist draft is a crapshoot and reliant on luck of ping-pong balls as if there isn't a stupid amount of luck involved in any path...Arguably more luck involved in free agency for example, where players are in control of their path, whereas in the draft even if you don't get the spot you want, you can do your homework and get a piece you want no matter what, even if it's not a generational talent (and obviously just based on historical stats, the chances of getting a better player increase the higher you want, but good players are not exclusive to the top).
It just all needs to stop....It's pointless....It's exhausting...There's no right, no wrong, and people have dug in in a way that makes American politics look rational and civilized. In other words, the debate may as well be a bunch of chimps throwing crap at each other at this point.
End of rant.Leave a comment:
-
Well in off season anti-****ers had an earful from pro ****ers about whole subject. Anti-****ers support mediocrity, don't see whole picture, short-sighted and dumb to think this team can win anything. And still pro-****ers have this "oh you'll see" attitude. So I understand where animosity is coming from.Leave a comment:
-
I don't understand the animosity between the two sides and the personal attacks. "Screw ****ing" to me is a personal attack, because you are a basically saying my ideas are stupid. I don't think your idea is stupid, why attack me? At the end of the day we all want to see the team do well, but we just have different ideas about how to get there. From that standpoint, I don't understand why anything ever has to get personal.
So to switch it up a bit, I wonder if each side has a different interpretation of what is meant by "no man's land". I think when I heard TL talk about chasing championships and MU talk about no man's land, I thought immediately of the Atlanta Hawks. I know there was also another term thrown around called the "treadmill", I think that was something different, referring to the 7-11 range. So for me, my interpretation of MU's goal was to avoid being Atlanta. But maybe I'm wrong?
As I've mentioned, I personally wouldn't mind it. Obviously I'd love to contend every year, but making the playoffs 6 years in a row while never getting past the 2nd round.. I mean it's not terrible. It's better than what we've been doing the past 6 years, that's for sure!
But if we look at Atlanta, I think it's very similar to where we are headed. As mentioned they've made the playoffs in every one of those years but have never gone past the second round. They improved mostly by developing their own players after Al Horford was drafted, and build around a solid nucleus of Horford, Smith and Joe Johnson. I think the highest draft pick in the last 6 years has been Jeff Teague at #19, who by the way has developed in a fairly decent player. Even after losing Josh Smith they are still right there after getting Millsap. The Horford injury will hurt but the East is so bad they'll very likely make the playoffs for a 7th straight year.Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: