He won't score 25 points in a game in this entire career.

[Hopper]

Lotta words there just to end up sayin nuthin, eh, Kicky?

 

[Hopper]

Hopper, on the other hand, is claiming his recollection is perfect and all these things were actually said.

Yeah, right, eh, Kicky? Mebbe if ya keep repeatin that false claim enough times, some peoples will actually believes ya, who knows? You go, boy!

Were you there, Kicky? If you had some specific recollection of this, I would consider your version. Eyewitnesses can be wrong, but that doesn't mean that some guy shootin up smack in an alley 1000 miles away is "just as likely" to know what happened at a particular event as the eyewitness.

As usual, you think your own lack of comprehension encapsulates the stone-cold facts. Do you even realize how pretentous your "I don't remember" claim is? I see it all the time from partisan zealots. Sumbuddy quotes Nixon, or Clinton, or whoever and some blowhard authoritatively declares: "Nixon [Clinton] NEVER said that!"

Which presupposes, of course, that they are intimately acquainted with every word Nixon/Clinton ever said. They are, after all, EXPERTS, like you. They are invariably wrong. Their claims are not based on empirical fact, but rather on their a priori (mistaken) assumptions about what they think someone would say. Whatever their misguided understanding of what he "would" say happens to be becomes what he did, in fact, say. Aint nuthin new. But it is extremely solipsistic and pretentious.

 

[One Brow]

Then why make the thread with that title and specific "debunked" claims?

Perhaps you are used to people only saying things that they seriously advocate. I do not come from such a culture, and when Poster A says "people said X", I don't necessarily assume they seriously advocated for X, even if poster A is accurate.

It's possible, but the threads at that point in time were largely about "how many games in a row do we have to win to get to .500" (I know, but seriously there were a lot of these), keeping track of our lottery odds and likely positions, threads complaining about injuries, game threads, etc.

I agree all those threads existed as well for part of that time frame (I don't think there were many game threads after April or lottery-position threads after mid-May). However, just about everyone agreed we needed to draft a point guard early on, and I recall the dicussions of whom to draft occured even while the NCAA tournament was on.

Sure. But I think he's constructing strawmen to make his point. Surely you would agree that argumentative tactic is troublesome.

You see strawman, I see hyperbole. Of course, I also don't see a serious attempt to make a logical argument.

Hopper, on the other hand, is claiming his recollection is perfect and all these things were actually said.

It's been five damn years and they aint no record. If you were round Kicky, then ya should autta knowz without me tellin ya to begin wit. Could well have been Pearl and some of his sidekicks, but I caint recalls for sure. There were great howls, all around, when I said Deron would have games where he scored 25 or more.

Perfect? He doesnt even pretend to describe what the howlers actually said. Three pages of reaction to vague remembrances. Wow.

One quibble re: Paul. The Jazz originally got the sixth pick in the lottery. Until the trade occurred to get us the third pick just a couple days prior to the draft Paul wasn't realistically in the picture ...

Because trading up to get Paul was never discussed as an option? Because O'Connor never visited one Paul's workouts? For a few posters, Paul was certainly in the picture, well before the draft-day trade, and certainly before we dropped in the lottery.

 

[sirkickyass]

OB: If he's not saying that those things were actually said why is he making such a fuss about my saying that I don't think they were said?

Let's ask him directly: Aint, are you being hyperbolic or are you saying that posters literally said Deron would never score 25, average 5 apg over a season, etc.?

Because trading up to get Paul was never discussed as an option?

Until the trade occurred to get us the third pick just a couple days prior to the draft Paul wasn't realistically in the picture and didn't get a lot of discussion in the comparative sense on the board other than "we should trade up" style threads.

Specifically mentioned, although that's the part you cut out. Not sure why.

For a few posters, Paul was certainly in the picture, well before the draft-day trade, and certainly before we dropped in the lottery.

Sure. I'm saying the bulk of the discussion was on the Deron/Felton/Jack group, particularly between the lottery in May and the draft. Would you disagree with that assessment?

 

[LogGrad98]

Lotta words there just to end up sayin nuthin, eh, Kicky?

Pot meet kettle.

 

[YB85]

You forgot Gerald Green.

 

[Hopper]

Let's ask him directly: Aint, are you being hyperbolic or are you saying that posters literally said Deron would never score 25, average 5 apg over a season, etc.?

It's a compound question with a false dichotomy in it, Kicky, so I can't directly answer it. But, yes, I am claiming posters literally said those things. That said, I don't think it even remotely relates to what Eric might have intended when he used the term "hyperbolic."

 

[sirkickyass]

You forgot Gerald Green.

Poor SJF.

I'm pretty sure that the reason he doesn't post anymore is because so many of his draft picks bombed.

I'll never forget how he wrote about Saer Sene.

 

[sirkickyass]

It's a compound question with a mistaken, false dichotomy, in it, Kicky. Yes, I am claiming posters literally said those things. That said, I don't think it even remotely relates to what Eric might have intended when he used the term "hyperbolic."

We'll let him make that call.

But this establishes, at least between me and OB, that you are representing those statements were literally made.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[bordelais7]

But, yes, I am claiming posters literally said those things.

So wait...why is the burden of proof on kicky, again?

 

[Hopper]

So wait...why is the burden of proof on kicky, again?

Uhh, mebbe because Kicky is out to PROVE sumthin here, and I aint, eh, Bordy?

I done told Kicky to go right on ahead with his bad self and believe any damn thang he wants. I don't give no rat's *** what he believes. He, on the other hand, seems to think his mere refusal to believe what I say constitutes "evidence" that I am fabricating "phantom posters." No doubt many others in the puppy dawg pack think the same. Keep on truckin, there, puppy dawgs.

 

[bordelais7]

Uhh, mebbe because Kicky is out to PROVE sumthin here, and I aint, eh, Bordy?

So the fact that the entire premise of your original post relies upon disputed and seemingly fabricated information means nothing?