What's new
By:

Speak the Truth or Forever Hold you Tongue

And he was repeating you. You + 1'd yourself. I keep up fine thanks. But if it will prevent you from trying to ruin every thread I start I give you + 5. I love message board tough guys.
 
You're the one looking for an argument. I merely contributed relevant material to your thread. Get over yourself.
 
I not looking for an argument, but I've started three threads in a week only to have GVC mention Larry Sanders. I tried to PM GVC to beg him to ignore me, but he seems intent on hijacking all my threads. I acknowledge I wanted Paul George and Larry Sanders more than Hayward. Now that we have five power forwards I would say Paul George was the better pick. That being said even when I try to acknowledge Hayward's good play of late, GVC is there. GVC is nothing more than Message Board tough guy trying to prove a point. I tried to PM him to ask him to ignore me, but I guess I'm not message board savy enough. I guess I will have to go back to reading the message board rather than posting.
 
oldtimer said:
I not looking for an argument, but I've started three threads in a week only to have GVC mention Larry Sanders. I tried to PM GVC to beg him to ignore me, but he seems intent on hijacking all my threads. I acknowledge I wanted Paul George and Larry Sanders more than Hayward. Now that we have five power forwards I would say Paul George was the better pick. That being said even when I try to acknowledge Hayward's good play of late, GVC is there. GVC is nothing more than Message Board tough guy trying to prove a point. I tried to PM him to ask him to ignore me, but I guess I'm not message board savy enough. I guess I will have to go back to reading the message board rather than posting.
Click to expand...

Trust me, GVC is not a tough guy. I mean, I've never met him but he seems like sort of a bitch. That said, are you implying that Hayward is a power forward? I only ask because you state how we have five power forwards (we won't count any of them as centers, that's okay) and then go on to say that George therefore would have been the better pick. Can you please expound? This makes about as much sense as drafting Larry Sanders would have made.
 
Krazeeyekilla

I did not mean to imply that Hayward is a power forward. What I meant to say is that at the time of the draft I liked Larry Sanders and Paul George more than Hayward. Larry Sanders being a power forward and Paul George being a 3. If the need on the team was power forward I would have drafted Larry Sanders. If the need on the team was outside shooting I would have drafted Paul George. I would not have drafted Hayward. I was hoping the team would resign Mathews and keep Korver. The Jazz ended up getting Jefferson and Favors to add to Memo and Millsap. Obviously being over stocked with bigs and needing outside shooting I would have drafted George if I had been the GM and was making the decision. Some people want to perpetually remind me that I liked Sanders, they conveniently forget that I also liked George. I have never run from my opinion. I still like George and Sanders. However, Hayward is growing on me and playing defense (which I never believed he would be able to on the NBA level).
 
oldtimer said:
Thee Jazz fan you speak truth about the playoffs, but say the jazz get the six pick and the 13th pick. We could move up in the draft. To me that is more important than a first round exit and only one draft pick.
Click to expand...

Where is the logic in losing. This team hasn't hasn't figured out the whole team chemistry thing, if they don't figure out how to win as a team this year they may lose next year as well then both Harris and Jefferson both won't resign. Who wants to play for a loser?

I'm a fan of the team not one or two players alone. I want to see them win every year the Clips draft in the lottery where has that gotten them?

The question you have to ask yourself is do you want a culture of winning or loosing. I'll take winning every time.

That be da truth!!!
 
oldtimer said:
Krazeeyekilla

I did not mean to imply that Hayward is a power forward. What I meant to say is that at the time of the draft I liked Larry Sanders and Paul George more than Hayward. Larry Sanders being a power forward and Paul George being a 3. If the need on the team was power forward I would have drafted Larry Sanders. If the need on the team was outside shooting I would have drafted Paul George. I would not have drafted Hayward. I was hoping the team would resign Mathews and keep Korver. The Jazz ended up getting Jefferson and Favors to add to Memo and Millsap. Obviously being over stocked with bigs and needing outside shooting I would have drafted George if I had been the GM and was making the decision. Some people want to perpetually remind me that I liked Sanders, they conveniently forget that I also liked George. I have never run from my opinion. I still like George and Sanders. However, Hayward is growing on me and playing defense (which I never believed he would be able to on the NBA level).
Click to expand...

The problem is your arrogance. You had declared Hayward a bust after watching a handful of summer league games, and, using the same methodology, appointed Sanders as the next Dwight Howard. Remember this?

I'll play along. I knew Elder Hayward was a bust before he played a single game. His lateral movement test at the combine told me he was not athletic enough to play in the NBA. Now he is smart and shots good free throws, but his physical limitations prevent him from playing in the NBA over the long haul. He is the opposite of Evans, who has all the physical tools, but is still learning the game.

Now that you see Sanders is having a piss poor season, you are backing off, how convenient. If Sanders was putting up 15 and 10, you would be posting the same drivel you did all summer. If you want anyone to have a rational conversation with you, I would create a new user id.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top