[QUOTE="MarkSmith"][QUOTE="7LES"] [QUOTE="MarkSmith"]Leave it to you to make that post right before I have to go. You have an ownage coming your way later tonight son. I'm feeling shades of the ownage I dealt in the A.I.-Kobe debate last year.
I'll sum up my basic points for your ADD-self, and you can gather up all the information you need -- you'll need a lot, considering you don't watch basketball.
1. Mavs will be a certified choke if they lose on Sunday.
2. Mark Cuban blows things out of proportion, with the most obvious incident being the hypocritical backing of Jason Terry.
3. Mavs fans constantly complain of poor referring when they lose, in lieu of their owner, but say nothing when the same happens to them.
4. I'm not a baby and it'd have to be the most heinous, obvious fix in the history of the world for me to admit the refs cost the team I happen to be rooting for the game.
5. Lakers losing to the Suns doesn't qualify as a flop
6. Throwing in an irrelevant "omg teh Lakers are teh flop" means nothing, and is just another futile attempt by yourself to try to change the subject.
7. Amare Stoudemire is nothing close to the best player on his team.
8. It's all coincidence that nearly the whole Suns team had career years playing with Steve Nash, including Amare himself last season.
2. meh, at least he cares
Obviously other owners don't care. :| At least be consistent in something, and call out BS even if it's for the other team. LMAO Cuban has a billion dollar penis LMAO
3. Fans of every team do that
Except the Mavs fans are known for it.
4. Refs cost teams games ALL THE TIME. Its just how the human aspect works. Im not mad that the refs are human, Im mad that the league refuses to take an aggressive initiative to eliminate their errancy as much as possible.
"ALL THE TIME" is hyperbole. It's so silly to look at a few isolated incidents and declare, "Yep, they cost us the game." Really? What about calls earlier in the game that went for the other team? It's human nature to knee-jerk to everything. If you can't truly quantify it, give it up and stop trying to point towards every little individual thing.
And I'm still seriously wondering why the shot clock went off in Game 5. Not ONE outlet has reported about that; is that some scant rule I don't know about? I'm genuinely curious about it.
5. Like hell it doesn't.
Okay, so a 7th seed getting to a 7th game over a 2nd seed -- how many times has that happened? Even when it was a 5-game series, how many times did a 7th seed get to the 5th game? One of the youngest, if not THE youngest (pretty sure they're the youngest, though) teams in the NBA were projected by SOME not to make the playoffs, projected by most to get the 8th seed, and projected by few to have a chance to beat the Suns. They are not close to the Suns on a talent or system level, but the master game plan of Phil Jackson was almost enough to steal it. If it was a 5 game series, they would've won; unfortunately, the Suns adjusted correctly and the better team won. I have no problem with that.
6. Why do you always get to dictate what the subject is? Read the title of this thread, buddy
Lmao, what a horrible comeback. That was just grasping at straws. We both know that.
7. He's at least their most valuable asset, if not their current best player
Not necessarily, but he probably is. What that teams, though, is not much.
8.No its, definitely not coincidence.
That was a joke son. :|
I love Steve Nash, and I've seen first hand what difference he makes. Unlike you, I never said Starbury>Nash, and that Nash wasnt a top 5 PG.
Actually, when I made that statement, it WAS true. Steve Nash is a WAY different point guard now than he was in Dallas. Dallas DID get better point guard production from Jason Terry (+2.8) than the last year of Nash (+1.5). Nash was a very good, but not great on Dallas. In the system of the Suns, though, you can see how much of a monster he is when he gets to run everything. In Dallas, he couldn't.
I'm also not stupid enough to not give Amare any credit though, and act like Nash is the only reason for his boost in production. Its called getting older and more experienced.
Really? Quote me where I gave Amare no credit. The fact of the matter is, though, that while Amare is obviously an awesome player right now, it was mostly Nash that made him the most dominant offensive force in 2005. An argument could've been made last year that it was more 50-50. But the things Nash did this season were by far the greatest accomplishments of any other player, past Kobe, past LeBron, even past my boy Brand. That proves that it was a Nash-to-Stoudemire thing, not a Stoudemire-made-Nash-an-MVP thing.
Then again, why am I arguing about Amare and Nash with someone who said Starbury, Terry>Nash, and Kwame>Amare.
Funny part is when I made the Starbury/Terry statements, they were better than Nash. So okay. Somebody needs to stop living in the past and accept his current ownage like a man.
To take a page out of your book, "roffles, gg"
You got raped. Matter of fact, you amounted so little of an argument you're basically conceding you AGREE with me. You can just come out and say it, you know.
Log in to comment