BatiGOOOOOOL
Member
I thought Mobley was doing well in Orlando, alongside his love buddy. To anyone familiar with Orlando's situation, does this trade makes sense? Christie is not even the same great defender of a few years ago.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
January NBA Season Thread - A No Puddin Zone
- Thread starter Heezzi
- Start date
- Status
Ninja Scooter
Member
i always thought it was strange that Mobley and Francis were such close friends and have stuck together as teammates so long, as they don't complement each other than well imo. Both are basically somewhat undersized SGs who never met a shot they didn't like.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Cloudy said:
Lakers are playing? WTF agianst who? DAMMIT I have to get this League Pass shit already.
BatiGOOOOOOL
Member
Ah, that makes sense Konex. Thanks for the explanation.
Though the kings just lost their only good defender.
Though the kings just lost their only good defender.
Does anyone else wonder sometimes where NBA TV gets some of these idiotic commentators for pre/post-game and halftime? I mean, seriously-- what are their qualifications? Some of them aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer...
This guy just now said that Shaq leaving LA changed the whole dynamic of the Western conference (ok so far), because now teams are starting to think, "hey, let's score more and try to run-and-gun on the other team"-- wtf? :lol Shaq hasn't been a dominant defensive force for at least the past two seasons-- at least not any more so than Duncan or Ratliffe etc. How does his departure change the mentality of other teams, causing them to think, "hey, let's fast-break more"? If anything, I'd think it'd have the opposite effect (though I personally believe it hasn't had much of an effect in terms of teams' offensive strategies): With Shaq gone, wouldn't teams be more content to play halfcourt ball, since LA would have no longer have a rather large advantage in the halfcourt? Further, I'd think that when Shaq was in LA, teams would be looking to run it and beat him down the floor, both to get easy baskets and avoid his shot-blocking and also to tire him out and take advantage of his lack of conditioning over the past couple of seasons. So what this guy is saying really makes no sense...
And this is ON TOP of the more obvious question that could be raised, which is "how can one player's departure from a conference affect how EVERY team in that conference plays NOT ONLY the player's former team (which will no longer have him; this would be an understandable stance), but also EVERY OTHER team in the conference?" It's just a totally absurd proposition, yet shockingly commonplace for the "analysts" at NBA TV. Jeez...
This guy just now said that Shaq leaving LA changed the whole dynamic of the Western conference (ok so far), because now teams are starting to think, "hey, let's score more and try to run-and-gun on the other team"-- wtf? :lol Shaq hasn't been a dominant defensive force for at least the past two seasons-- at least not any more so than Duncan or Ratliffe etc. How does his departure change the mentality of other teams, causing them to think, "hey, let's fast-break more"? If anything, I'd think it'd have the opposite effect (though I personally believe it hasn't had much of an effect in terms of teams' offensive strategies): With Shaq gone, wouldn't teams be more content to play halfcourt ball, since LA would have no longer have a rather large advantage in the halfcourt? Further, I'd think that when Shaq was in LA, teams would be looking to run it and beat him down the floor, both to get easy baskets and avoid his shot-blocking and also to tire him out and take advantage of his lack of conditioning over the past couple of seasons. So what this guy is saying really makes no sense...
And this is ON TOP of the more obvious question that could be raised, which is "how can one player's departure from a conference affect how EVERY team in that conference plays NOT ONLY the player's former team (which will no longer have him; this would be an understandable stance), but also EVERY OTHER team in the conference?" It's just a totally absurd proposition, yet shockingly commonplace for the "analysts" at NBA TV. Jeez...
Exactly. This is a fucking dumb trade. Now the Kings have Mobley, Bojax and Bibby playing the same position and similiar types of games. Three undersized shooting guards! And now no defenders! Except maybe Evans, but he is inexperienced. Christie dropped off a bit, but still one of the better defenders in the league and the team's best passer.
KG gets no respect from the officials-- he's getting bumped around inside like a pinball and pushed out of bounds, but gets no calls.
Also, it's good to see that Chris Mihm has continued the Shaq tradition of walking UNDER post-up players (and actually pushing them out while they're in the air) when they throw fadeaways or jump-hooks. Ridiculous that it's not called a foul. Medvedrunko does it all the time, too.
Also, it's good to see that Chris Mihm has continued the Shaq tradition of walking UNDER post-up players (and actually pushing them out while they're in the air) when they throw fadeaways or jump-hooks. Ridiculous that it's not called a foul. Medvedrunko does it all the time, too.
BatiGOOOOOOL
Member
:lol
The Wolves are pathetic.
MVP. Ha!
The Wolves are pathetic.
MVP. Ha!
Cloudy said:
VPhys said:
What logic? Let us use this "logic" you're so fond of:
Question: What is the proper number of FT's that a player should shoot in a game?
Answers:
A) 5
B) 8
C) "10 more than anyone else"
D) As many as he was entitled to
Clearly, the answer is "D". It makes no sense to point to the fact that he shot 9 more FT's than anyone else as a "rebuff" of my point that KG was not getting the calls he should have gotten, because both can be true (i.e., they are not mutually exclusive propositions)-- one does not constitute a refutation of the other.
So what if KG shot 16 FT's? Perhaps he was entitled to 20 tonight-- or is only Kobe entitled to those 20+ FT games? :lol Don't worry, next time I hear a Laker fan crying about how Kobe was "fouled with no call" during a game, I'm going to trot out the FT statistics for the game (where Kobe is usually far and away the leader in FT's) rather than examine the legitimacy of the actual claim made (i.e., was he actually fouled). Such is Laker fanboy logic.
EDIT: Btw, Konex, a simple "yes" or "no" on the PM would suffice.
LMAO! :lol
Joumanna (sp?) Kidd is now doing reporting for NBA TV? :lol What, her husband's $20M/year salary isn't enough? She must be one of these chicks who gets off one seeing her face on TV, trying to get noticed. Or maybe-- just maybe-- she actually has always had a legitimate interest in doing on-the-scene sports reporting...
Joumanna (sp?) Kidd is now doing reporting for NBA TV? :lol What, her husband's $20M/year salary isn't enough? She must be one of these chicks who gets off one seeing her face on TV, trying to get noticed.
Or maybe-- just maybe-- she actually has always had a legitimate interest in doing on-the-scene sports reporting... Loki said:LMAO! :lol
Joumanna (sp?) Kidd is now doing reporting for NBA TV? :lol What, her husband's $20M/year salary isn't enough? She must be one of these chicks who gets off one seeing her face on TV, trying to get noticed.
Joumanna is one of the biggest fame-whores there is. I remember she was insufferable in Phoenix.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll