It is currently Thu Oct 31, 2024 6:45 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1260 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 42  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Another great game for Lonzo and a really fun game for me to watch. After having to read all the ignorant bullshit in this forum it was nice to get to spend 2.5 hours watching and listening to former greats of the game gush over what an amazing talent Lonzo is. Zeke, McHale, Greg Anthony, Steve Smith, C Web...to a man they all spent the whole game talking about how great Lonzo is and how you have to really understand basketball to totally appreciate just what an immense effect he has on the game.

Talked about how its going to take him a couple years to really get it going (just like I said) and how his very presence has transformed the Lakers.

And what a game he had. 13 pts on 6/13 shooting, 6 boards, 3 assists, 0 turnovers, 2 blocks. Continued to play really good defense as he has most of the season. Doing a great job defending smaller guards. Had trouble on Tobias Harris, but that's a size mismatch and there's no shame in getting burned by a guy as good as Harris. And on top of that, he had several highlight reel plays, scoring and passing.

Plain and simple, there hasn't been a player to enter the league with this much pressure and fanfare since Lebron. Actually he has way more pressure than Lebron given all the stuff Lavar has said. For him to perform this well and show this much poise is really amazing. What he is doing under the microscope is far more impressive than any rookie out there besides Simmons. Last night was the first time he looked really poised and in control of the game, taking his time and finding seams in the defense that allowed him to get all the way to the hoop, he looked like the Nas vet out there as opposed to a rookie.



He played well last night but you make excuses whenever he doesn't so you're not really a credible source. They did gush over him quite a bit and the over the top praise of him didn't quite jive with what he has done thus far. The step back three was a nice move.


The Lakers team is also more talented than you have ever given them credit for. They also heaped praise on Kuzma (A guy that you consistently bash) and the oft maligned Randle. It is not Lonzo and a team of bums. I've seem rookies enter the league and play with much worse talent. He outplayed Jackson but Jackson really isn't that good anyway.

He has Portland tomorrow which means he will have to lock up with 2 guards that are going to be on the attack non stop. Lets see what he has then.

I've never seen a guy with his numbers ever be considered "great" either.



LOL, please name one time I bashed Kuzma. been in love with Kuz since summer league. Can't wait for him to be in the starting lineup so Lonzo can have someone good to pass to.

Just another example of you making shit up and talking out your ass.


Lakers team is awful, nothing but ball stoppers and iso players. Even the players in the studio were saying how Lonzo is the only playmaker on the team and therefore Lonzo has no one to get HIM the ball in scoring positions. The team played great last night and moved the ball better than they have all year, lets hope they keep that up.



You bashed Kuzma during the Phoenix game. I actually have never read anything where you praised the guy.

The Lakers bench stretched the lead during the 2 and 4 quarters last night. This was coincidentally the point in the game where Ball was on the bench. That seems to happen quite a bit. Clarkson comes in putting in work it nearly every game and Kuzma has been solid also. He played well last night. He is now up to two games out of 6. Haven't seem nothing to suggest he is an "ooh" "aah" kind of player.

There is no doubt in my mind that Tatum Fultz Josh Jackson and Lauri Markennan (among others) will be better pros.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Another great game for Lonzo and a really fun game for me to watch. After having to read all the ignorant bullshit in this forum it was nice to get to spend 2.5 hours watching and listening to former greats of the game gush over what an amazing talent Lonzo is. Zeke, McHale, Greg Anthony, Steve Smith, C Web...to a man they all spent the whole game talking about how great Lonzo is and how you have to really understand basketball to totally appreciate just what an immense effect he has on the game.

Talked about how its going to take him a couple years to really get it going (just like I said) and how his very presence has transformed the Lakers.

And what a game he had. 13 pts on 6/13 shooting, 6 boards, 3 assists, 0 turnovers, 2 blocks. Continued to play really good defense as he has most of the season. Doing a great job defending smaller guards. Had trouble on Tobias Harris, but that's a size mismatch and there's no shame in getting burned by a guy as good as Harris. And on top of that, he had several highlight reel plays, scoring and passing.

Plain and simple, there hasn't been a player to enter the league with this much pressure and fanfare since Lebron. Actually he has way more pressure than Lebron given all the stuff Lavar has said. For him to perform this well and show this much poise is really amazing. What he is doing under the microscope is far more impressive than any rookie out there besides Simmons. Last night was the first time he looked really poised and in control of the game, taking his time and finding seams in the defense that allowed him to get all the way to the hoop, he looked like the Nas vet out there as opposed to a rookie.



He played well last night but you make excuses whenever he doesn't so you're not really a credible source. They did gush over him quite a bit and the over the top praise of him didn't quite jive with what he has done thus far. The step back three was a nice move.


The Lakers team is also more talented than you have ever given them credit for. They also heaped praise on Kuzma (A guy that you consistently bash) and the oft maligned Randle. It is not Lonzo and a team of bums. I've seem rookies enter the league and play with much worse talent. He outplayed Jackson but Jackson really isn't that good anyway.

He has Portland tomorrow which means he will have to lock up with 2 guards that are going to be on the attack non stop. Lets see what he has then.

I've never seen a guy with his numbers ever be considered "great" either.



LOL, please name one time I bashed Kuzma. been in love with Kuz since summer league. Can't wait for him to be in the starting lineup so Lonzo can have someone good to pass to.

Just another example of you making shit up and talking out your ass.


Lakers team is awful, nothing but ball stoppers and iso players. Even the players in the studio were saying how Lonzo is the only playmaker on the team and therefore Lonzo has no one to get HIM the ball in scoring positions. The team played great last night and moved the ball better than they have all year, lets hope they keep that up.



You bashed Kuzma during the Phoenix game. I actually have never read anything where you praised the guy.

The Lakers bench stretched the lead during the 2 and 4 quarters last night. This was coincidentally the point in the game where Ball was on the bench. That seems to happen quite a bit. Clarkson comes in putting in work it nearly every game and Kuzma has been solid also. He played well last night. He is now up to two games out of 6. Haven't seem nothing to suggest he is an "ooh" "aah" kind of player.

There is no doubt in my mind that Tatum Fultz Josh Jackson and Lauri Markennan (among others) will be better pros.



Stop lying, its not a good look. Name ONE TIME where I bashed Kuzma and this time please don't lie about it. I even went back and checked all the threads, not a single bash on Kuzma. Lying is not a good look and you are the master of looking like shit as it is.

Lakes bench has been great, not sure how that is an indictment on Lonzo?

Yes, we know your feelings on Lonzo. You are on record stating he will be a bust and out of the league sooner rather than later. at least the other day you softened your stance and called him a journeyman so I guess that's a slight improvement.

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 11:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Youngest player since Lebron in 2005 to put up stats like that. 2 games in Lonzo has set the bar for best game by a rookie this year. let's see how long before someone tops it, or if that even happens. I imagine it will be him and Simmons battling it out all year at the top of class. They're the only two guys who can fill a stat sheet like that.


Shame his team sucks so much or else he would've had an easy triple double. Both Lopez and Ingram missed wide open jumpers in final minute that would've given Lonzo an apple.


The reason that he will put up numbers is because his team sucks so bad. Stats aren't the only barometer either. MCW had a helluva game one when he was a rookie too. Ball is in the best situation to put up numbers and Phoenix plays no defense. They were dying on that high screen roll all night.

I will check him out tomorrow and see what's up.


Narrative before last night: Lonzo can't play in the NBA
Narrative after last night: Lonzo can only play against certain teams in the NBA


Looking forward to seeing the narrative change throughout the season.


You stated that he'd be a stud. There has been nothing to demonstrate that and you find alternative ways to assess him whenever he has a bad game. If he doesn't do shit offensively it becomes about the 5 rebounds that he grabbed. If not that it was the 7 assists. His man dropped 28 on him last night while playing fewer minutes.

Ball also had the worst plus minus of any of the other starters too. I don't generally care about that stat but it should be noted if we are going to discuss his teammates.


29/9/11. Youngest player to ever put up that statline.



Alternative way to assess whenever he had a bad game?

LOL, you mean like quoting +/- single game stats? No, you're the only person here looking for alternative ways to assess. BTW, Kuzma had an awful +/- in that game as well. He went 6/7 from the field, did he have a bad game too?



Didn't read the rest of the sentence but why cite Kuzma when I clearly stated "starters".

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Another great game for Lonzo and a really fun game for me to watch. After having to read all the ignorant bullshit in this forum it was nice to get to spend 2.5 hours watching and listening to former greats of the game gush over what an amazing talent Lonzo is. Zeke, McHale, Greg Anthony, Steve Smith, C Web...to a man they all spent the whole game talking about how great Lonzo is and how you have to really understand basketball to totally appreciate just what an immense effect he has on the game.

Talked about how its going to take him a couple years to really get it going (just like I said) and how his very presence has transformed the Lakers.

And what a game he had. 13 pts on 6/13 shooting, 6 boards, 3 assists, 0 turnovers, 2 blocks. Continued to play really good defense as he has most of the season. Doing a great job defending smaller guards. Had trouble on Tobias Harris, but that's a size mismatch and there's no shame in getting burned by a guy as good as Harris. And on top of that, he had several highlight reel plays, scoring and passing.

Plain and simple, there hasn't been a player to enter the league with this much pressure and fanfare since Lebron. Actually he has way more pressure than Lebron given all the stuff Lavar has said. For him to perform this well and show this much poise is really amazing. What he is doing under the microscope is far more impressive than any rookie out there besides Simmons. Last night was the first time he looked really poised and in control of the game, taking his time and finding seams in the defense that allowed him to get all the way to the hoop, he looked like the Nas vet out there as opposed to a rookie.



He played well last night but you make excuses whenever he doesn't so you're not really a credible source. They did gush over him quite a bit and the over the top praise of him didn't quite jive with what he has done thus far. The step back three was a nice move.


The Lakers team is also more talented than you have ever given them credit for. They also heaped praise on Kuzma (A guy that you consistently bash) and the oft maligned Randle. It is not Lonzo and a team of bums. I've seem rookies enter the league and play with much worse talent. He outplayed Jackson but Jackson really isn't that good anyway.

He has Portland tomorrow which means he will have to lock up with 2 guards that are going to be on the attack non stop. Lets see what he has then.

I've never seen a guy with his numbers ever be considered "great" either.



LOL, please name one time I bashed Kuzma. been in love with Kuz since summer league. Can't wait for him to be in the starting lineup so Lonzo can have someone good to pass to.

Just another example of you making shit up and talking out your ass.


Lakers team is awful, nothing but ball stoppers and iso players. Even the players in the studio were saying how Lonzo is the only playmaker on the team and therefore Lonzo has no one to get HIM the ball in scoring positions. The team played great last night and moved the ball better than they have all year, lets hope they keep that up.



You bashed Kuzma during the Phoenix game. I actually have never read anything where you praised the guy.

The Lakers bench stretched the lead during the 2 and 4 quarters last night. This was coincidentally the point in the game where Ball was on the bench. That seems to happen quite a bit. Clarkson comes in putting in work it nearly every game and Kuzma has been solid also. He played well last night. He is now up to two games out of 6. Haven't seem nothing to suggest he is an "ooh" "aah" kind of player.

There is no doubt in my mind that Tatum Fultz Josh Jackson and Lauri Markennan (among others) will be better pros.



Stop lying, its not a good look. Name ONE TIME where I bashed Kuzma and this time please don't lie about it. I even went back and checked all the threads, not a single bash on Kuzma. Lying is not a good look and you are the master of looking like shit as it is.

Lakes bench has been great, not sure how that is an indictment on Lonzo?

Yes, we know your feelings on Lonzo. You are on record stating he will be a bust and out of the league sooner rather than later. at least the other day you softened your stance and called him a journeyman so I guess that's a slight improvement.


He can be a both a bust and a journeyman. Kwame Brown was.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Youngest player since Lebron in 2005 to put up stats like that. 2 games in Lonzo has set the bar for best game by a rookie this year. let's see how long before someone tops it, or if that even happens. I imagine it will be him and Simmons battling it out all year at the top of class. They're the only two guys who can fill a stat sheet like that.


Shame his team sucks so much or else he would've had an easy triple double. Both Lopez and Ingram missed wide open jumpers in final minute that would've given Lonzo an apple.


The reason that he will put up numbers is because his team sucks so bad. Stats aren't the only barometer either. MCW had a helluva game one when he was a rookie too. Ball is in the best situation to put up numbers and Phoenix plays no defense. They were dying on that high screen roll all night.

I will check him out tomorrow and see what's up.


Narrative before last night: Lonzo can't play in the NBA
Narrative after last night: Lonzo can only play against certain teams in the NBA


Looking forward to seeing the narrative change throughout the season.


You stated that he'd be a stud. There has been nothing to demonstrate that and you find alternative ways to assess him whenever he has a bad game. If he doesn't do shit offensively it becomes about the 5 rebounds that he grabbed. If not that it was the 7 assists. His man dropped 28 on him last night while playing fewer minutes.

Ball also had the worst plus minus of any of the other starters too. I don't generally care about that stat but it should be noted if we are going to discuss his teammates.


29/9/11. Youngest player to ever put up that statline.



Alternative way to assess whenever he had a bad game?

LOL, you mean like quoting +/- single game stats? No, you're the only person here looking for alternative ways to assess. BTW, Kuzma had an awful +/- in that game as well. He went 6/7 from the field, did he have a bad game too?



Didn't read the rest of the sentence but why cite Kuzma when I clearly stated "starters".


I'm confused, what idiotic point are you trying to make here? Is this your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly"?

So your evidence that I bash Kuzma constantly is the one time I pointed out that your reliance on +/- was idiotic and I used Kuzma playing WELL despite a bad +/- as an example of how stupid +/- is.

So in summary, your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly" is to bring up a post where I state that Kuzma played well? The only thing I'm bashing in that post is your moronic reliance on +/-.

So thanks for bumping something that makes you look stupid.

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 11:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:








I'm confused, what idiotic point are you trying to make here? Is this your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly"?

So your evidence that I bash Kuzma constantly is the one time I pointed out that your reliance on +/- was idiotic and I used Kuzma playing WELL despite a bad +/- as an example of how stupid +/- is.

So in summary, your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly" is to bring up a post where I state that Kuzma played well? The only thing I'm bashing in that post is your moronic reliance on +/-.

So thanks for bumping something that makes you look stupid.


I also remember you bashing during the summer league too when I stated that he looked like the best player.

Your point initially was stupid and really a non sequitor anyway. I stated that he had the worse +/- among the starters as a means of debunking the claim regarding the rest of the roster being garbage. At that point he'd consistently posted +- ratings that were worse amongst the starters. It is patently stupid to continuously suggest that he is playing "great" while the others are "terrible". It really isn't that shocking that you don't see the incongruence inherent in that statement.

It occurred again last night. The lead stretched when Clarkson Randle and Kuzma entered the game.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:








I'm confused, what idiotic point are you trying to make here? Is this your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly"?

So your evidence that I bash Kuzma constantly is the one time I pointed out that your reliance on +/- was idiotic and I used Kuzma playing WELL despite a bad +/- as an example of how stupid +/- is.

So in summary, your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly" is to bring up a post where I state that Kuzma played well? The only thing I'm bashing in that post is your moronic reliance on +/-.

So thanks for bumping something that makes you look stupid.


I also remember you bashing during the summer league too when I stated that he looked like the best player.

Your point initially was stupid and really a non sequitor anyway. I stated that he had the worse +/- among the starters as a means of debunking the claim regarding the rest of the roster being garbage. At that point he'd consistently posted +- ratings that were worse amongst the starters. It is patently stupid to continuously suggest that he is playing "great" while the others are "terrible". It really isn't that shocking that you don't see the incongruence inherent in that statement.

It occurred again last night. The lead stretched when Clarkson Randle and Kuzma entered the game.


The lies from LTG keep coming. HEre are all my comments on Kuzma from summer league.


Speaking of the Lakers, they might have 4 rookies make the team. Kuzma looks like a steal at #27


and this one below where I'm responding to LTG saying that Kuzma had a better SL than Ball.

Kuzma looked better in SL than the guy who won the SL MVP and had the most impressive SL of any player in SL recorded history.

HOT TAKE ALERT!

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:








I'm confused, what idiotic point are you trying to make here? Is this your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly"?

So your evidence that I bash Kuzma constantly is the one time I pointed out that your reliance on +/- was idiotic and I used Kuzma playing WELL despite a bad +/- as an example of how stupid +/- is.

So in summary, your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly" is to bring up a post where I state that Kuzma played well? The only thing I'm bashing in that post is your moronic reliance on +/-.

So thanks for bumping something that makes you look stupid.


I also remember you bashing during the summer league too when I stated that he looked like the best player.

Your point initially was stupid and really a non sequitor anyway. I stated that he had the worse +/- among the starters as a means of debunking the claim regarding the rest of the roster being garbage. At that point he'd consistently posted +- ratings that were worse amongst the starters. It is patently stupid to continuously suggest that he is playing "great" while the others are "terrible". It really isn't that shocking that you don't see the incongruence inherent in that statement.

It occurred again last night. The lead stretched when Clarkson Randle and Kuzma entered the game.


The lies from LTG keep coming. HEre are all my comments on Kuzma from summer league.


Speaking of the Lakers, they might have 4 rookies make the team. Kuzma looks like a steal at #27


and this one below where I'm responding to LTG saying that Kuzma had a better SL than Ball.

Kuzma looked better in SL than the guy who won the SL MVP and had the most impressive SL of any player in SL recorded history.

HOT TAKE ALERT!


Ok I exaggerated.

Now explain in your not so infinite wisdom how his teammates are so terrible if he routinely posts the worse +- among starters and the team increases or decreases leads whenever he isn't in the game? Can you explain that?

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:








I'm confused, what idiotic point are you trying to make here? Is this your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly"?

So your evidence that I bash Kuzma constantly is the one time I pointed out that your reliance on +/- was idiotic and I used Kuzma playing WELL despite a bad +/- as an example of how stupid +/- is.

So in summary, your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly" is to bring up a post where I state that Kuzma played well? The only thing I'm bashing in that post is your moronic reliance on +/-.

So thanks for bumping something that makes you look stupid.


I also remember you bashing during the summer league too when I stated that he looked like the best player.

Your point initially was stupid and really a non sequitor anyway. I stated that he had the worse +/- among the starters as a means of debunking the claim regarding the rest of the roster being garbage. At that point he'd consistently posted +- ratings that were worse amongst the starters. It is patently stupid to continuously suggest that he is playing "great" while the others are "terrible". It really isn't that shocking that you don't see the incongruence inherent in that statement.

It occurred again last night. The lead stretched when Clarkson Randle and Kuzma entered the game.


The lies from LTG keep coming. HEre are all my comments on Kuzma from summer league.


Speaking of the Lakers, they might have 4 rookies make the team. Kuzma looks like a steal at #27


and this one below where I'm responding to LTG saying that Kuzma had a better SL than Ball.

Kuzma looked better in SL than the guy who won the SL MVP and had the most impressive SL of any player in SL recorded history.

HOT TAKE ALERT!


Ok I exaggerated.

Now explain in your not so infinite wisdom how his teammates are so terrible if he routinely posts the worse +- among starters and the team increases or decreases leads whenever he isn't in the game? Can you explain that?


No, you didn't exaggerate. You lied. Big difference.


I refuse to acknowledge any argument that revolves around +/-. It's an idiotic stat in basketball and hockey and isn't taken seriously by anyone with a brain. Only morons would even bring it up.

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:05 am
Posts: 25181
Location: Cultural Mecca
pizza_Place: Pequod's / Barnaby's
shakes wrote:
I refuse to acknowledge any argument that revolves around +/-. It's an idiotic stat in basketball and hockey and isn't taken seriously by anyone with a brain. Only morons would even bring it up.

This isn't true, for either sport.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
IMU wrote:
shakes wrote:
I refuse to acknowledge any argument that revolves around +/-. It's an idiotic stat in basketball and hockey and isn't taken seriously by anyone with a brain. Only morons would even bring it up.

This isn't true, for either sport.



yea it is, especially in hockey.

Here ya go kid, educate yourself on the sport you just started following...

https://hockey-graphs.com/2016/11/01/behind-the-numbers-why-plusminus-is-the-worst-statistic-in-hockey-and-should-be-abolished/

https://www.arcticicehockey.com/2014/6/5/5602668/why-plus-minus-is-the-worst-statistic-in-hockey

Now find any reputable hockey expert who says that +/- is a good stat.

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:








I'm confused, what idiotic point are you trying to make here? Is this your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly"?

So your evidence that I bash Kuzma constantly is the one time I pointed out that your reliance on +/- was idiotic and I used Kuzma playing WELL despite a bad +/- as an example of how stupid +/- is.

So in summary, your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly" is to bring up a post where I state that Kuzma played well? The only thing I'm bashing in that post is your moronic reliance on +/-.

So thanks for bumping something that makes you look stupid.


I also remember you bashing during the summer league too when I stated that he looked like the best player.

Your point initially was stupid and really a non sequitor anyway. I stated that he had the worse +/- among the starters as a means of debunking the claim regarding the rest of the roster being garbage. At that point he'd consistently posted +- ratings that were worse amongst the starters. It is patently stupid to continuously suggest that he is playing "great" while the others are "terrible". It really isn't that shocking that you don't see the incongruence inherent in that statement.

It occurred again last night. The lead stretched when Clarkson Randle and Kuzma entered the game.


The lies from LTG keep coming. HEre are all my comments on Kuzma from summer league.


Speaking of the Lakers, they might have 4 rookies make the team. Kuzma looks like a steal at #27


and this one below where I'm responding to LTG saying that Kuzma had a better SL than Ball.

Kuzma looked better in SL than the guy who won the SL MVP and had the most impressive SL of any player in SL recorded history.

HOT TAKE ALERT!


Ok I exaggerated.

Now explain in your not so infinite wisdom how his teammates are so terrible if he routinely posts the worse +- among starters and the team increases or decreases leads whenever he isn't in the game? Can you explain that?


No, you didn't exaggerate. You lied. Big difference.


I refuse to acknowledge any argument that revolves around +/-. It's an idiotic stat in basketball and hockey and isn't taken seriously by anyone with a brain. Only morons would even bring it up.



Only an idiot would suggest that it isn't relevant when obviously it is. It obviously is relevant when you use it in conjunction with the guys that one plays with. You consistently state that the Lakers are garbage yet for some strange reason they always seem to play better when he isn't in the game.

It doesn't support your thesis regarding the rest of the team being useless so you want to discount the stat.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:








I'm confused, what idiotic point are you trying to make here? Is this your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly"?

So your evidence that I bash Kuzma constantly is the one time I pointed out that your reliance on +/- was idiotic and I used Kuzma playing WELL despite a bad +/- as an example of how stupid +/- is.

So in summary, your evidence that I "bash Kuzma constantly" is to bring up a post where I state that Kuzma played well? The only thing I'm bashing in that post is your moronic reliance on +/-.

So thanks for bumping something that makes you look stupid.


I also remember you bashing during the summer league too when I stated that he looked like the best player.

Your point initially was stupid and really a non sequitor anyway. I stated that he had the worse +/- among the starters as a means of debunking the claim regarding the rest of the roster being garbage. At that point he'd consistently posted +- ratings that were worse amongst the starters. It is patently stupid to continuously suggest that he is playing "great" while the others are "terrible". It really isn't that shocking that you don't see the incongruence inherent in that statement.

It occurred again last night. The lead stretched when Clarkson Randle and Kuzma entered the game.


The lies from LTG keep coming. HEre are all my comments on Kuzma from summer league.


Speaking of the Lakers, they might have 4 rookies make the team. Kuzma looks like a steal at #27


and this one below where I'm responding to LTG saying that Kuzma had a better SL than Ball.

Kuzma looked better in SL than the guy who won the SL MVP and had the most impressive SL of any player in SL recorded history.

HOT TAKE ALERT!


Ok I exaggerated.

Now explain in your not so infinite wisdom how his teammates are so terrible if he routinely posts the worse +- among starters and the team increases or decreases leads whenever he isn't in the game? Can you explain that?


No, you didn't exaggerate. You lied. Big difference.


I refuse to acknowledge any argument that revolves around +/-. It's an idiotic stat in basketball and hockey and isn't taken seriously by anyone with a brain. Only morons would even bring it up.



Only an idiot would suggest that it isn't relevant when obviously it is. It obviously is relevant when you use it in conjunction with the guys that one plays with. You consistently state that the Lakers are garbage yet for some strange reason they always seem to play better when he isn't in the game.

It doesn't support your thesis regarding the rest of the team being useless so you want to discount the stat.


LTG says the Lakers are worse when Ball is on the court.

Actual NBA experts and HOF players say the exact opposite.

Think I'll go with those guys.

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:

I refuse to acknowledge any argument that revolves around +/-. It's an idiotic stat in basketball and hockey and isn't taken seriously by anyone with a brain. Only morons would even bring it up.



Only an idiot would suggest that it isn't relevant when obviously it is. It obviously is relevant when you use it in conjunction with the guys that one plays with. You consistently state that the Lakers are garbage yet for some strange reason they always seem to play better when he isn't in the game.

It doesn't support your thesis regarding the rest of the team being useless so you want to discount the stat.[/quote]

LTG says the Lakers are worse when Ball is on the court.

Actual NBA experts and HOF players say the exact opposite.

Think I'll go with those guys.[/quote]


Stats matter until they don't. I'm sure the almost triple double will continue to interest even as he shoots 30%.

He played well last night. There still is nothing that suggests that he won't be a bust. I'm basing bust on a few things. 1. Where he was drafted 2. Hype. 3. His draft position relative to guys that were taken after him.


Tatum's Per was twice that of Ball's prior to last night and you still claim that Ball was outperforming him and playing "great". His PER was in the single digits at that point.

The ESPN guys (Billups, McGrady, Pierce, and Rose) all stated that he won't ever make an all star team. Shocking that it came from that group but it did. .

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
Tatum is playing in a much better situation and playing a much easier position with much less responsibility. No point in comparing them, its apples and oranges at this point.

I refuse to believe anything you say without a link based on your penchant for lying. So show me the link about the ESPN guys or else don't waste more of my time.

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 2:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:05 am
Posts: 25181
Location: Cultural Mecca
pizza_Place: Pequod's / Barnaby's
shakes wrote:
IMU wrote:
shakes wrote:
I refuse to acknowledge any argument that revolves around +/-. It's an idiotic stat in basketball and hockey and isn't taken seriously by anyone with a brain. Only morons would even bring it up.

This isn't true, for either sport.



yea it is, especially in hockey.

Here ya go kid, educate yourself on the sport you just started following...

https://hockey-graphs.com/2016/11/01/behind-the-numbers-why-plusminus-is-the-worst-statistic-in-hockey-and-should-be-abolished/

https://www.arcticicehockey.com/2014/6/5/5602668/why-plus-minus-is-the-worst-statistic-in-hockey

Now find any reputable hockey expert who says that +/- is a good stat.

Excellent, an SB Nation blog as a source for a hockey expert. I love it.

You link articles that assume people are comparing one championship caliber team's best wing's +/- to the worst team in the league's worst defenseman's +/-. That would be dumb.

It is fair to look at the 2014-15 season though and look at Hjalmarsson's +/- and Rozsival's +/- and see that even though Rozsival had many traditional stats that were ahead of Hjalmarsson (ahead in points per game, ahead in hits per game, and even in blocks per game...even though Hammer had way more TOI per game), you know Hjalmarsson was the better defensemen. +/- shows us just how much more effective the entire Blackhawks team was with Hammer (and his pairing) on the ice.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
Tatum is playing in a much better situation and playing a much easier position with much less responsibility. No point in comparing them, its apples and oranges at this point.

I refuse to believe anything you say without a link based on your penchant for lying. So show me the link about the ESPN guys or else don't waste more of my time.



I don't care if you believe or not. It was said and I will push on from it. As far as NBA "guys" go since you like to source them let's source them. Patrick Beverly (my guy) referred to him as a "weak ass motherfucker". I'd rather get the opinion of a guy that has actually played against him and shut his ass down. How is that for "sourcing"


As far as lying goes you consistently do it. From stating that he is playing better than Tatum to suggesting that he is playing "great", its one lie after another. It goes beyond having an opinion at this point. Now Tatum is only playing better because he is in a "better" situation. How? Yeah they have a better team but he is a 4th option whereas Ball has had the ball (no pun intended) in his hands from day 1. Ball should be putting up a lot of meaningless stats and he isn't. He is getting minutes and the ball is in his hands the entire time.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Tatum is playing in a much better situation and playing a much easier position with much less responsibility. No point in comparing them, its apples and oranges at this point.

I refuse to believe anything you say without a link based on your penchant for lying. So show me the link about the ESPN guys or else don't waste more of my time.



I don't care if you believe or not. It was said and I will push on from it. As far as NBA "guys" go since you like to source them let's source them. Patrick Beverly (my guy) referred to him as a "weak ass motherfucker". I'd rather get the opinion of a guy that has actually played against him and shut his ass down. How is that for "sourcing"


As far as lying goes you consistently do it. From stating that he is playing better than Tatum to suggesting that he is playing "great", its one lie after another. It goes beyond having an opinion at this point. Now Tatum is only playing better because he is in a "better" situation. How? Yeah they have a better team but he is a 4th option whereas Ball has had the ball (no pun intended) in his hands from day 1. Ball should be putting up a lot of meaningless stats and he isn't. He is getting minutes and the ball is in his hands the entire time.



LOL idiot, Beverly said that in the hallway before they even played.

The crap you try and fling against the wall...

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Tatum is playing in a much better situation and playing a much easier position with much less responsibility. No point in comparing them, its apples and oranges at this point.

I refuse to believe anything you say without a link based on your penchant for lying. So show me the link about the ESPN guys or else don't waste more of my time.



I don't care if you believe or not. It was said and I will push on from it. As far as NBA "guys" go since you like to source them let's source them. Patrick Beverly (my guy) referred to him as a "weak ass motherfucker". I'd rather get the opinion of a guy that has actually played against him and shut his ass down. How is that for "sourcing"


As far as lying goes you consistently do it. From stating that he is playing better than Tatum to suggesting that he is playing "great", its one lie after another. It goes beyond having an opinion at this point. Now Tatum is only playing better because he is in a "better" situation. How? Yeah they have a better team but he is a 4th option whereas Ball has had the ball (no pun intended) in his hands from day 1. Ball should be putting up a lot of meaningless stats and he isn't. He is getting minutes and the ball is in his hands the entire time.



LOL idiot, Beverly said that in the hallway before they even played.

The crap you try and fling against the wall...



Who's lying now? Comment was made after the game.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Tatum is playing in a much better situation and playing a much easier position with much less responsibility. No point in comparing them, its apples and oranges at this point.

I refuse to believe anything you say without a link based on your penchant for lying. So show me the link about the ESPN guys or else don't waste more of my time.



I don't care if you believe or not. It was said and I will push on from it. As far as NBA "guys" go since you like to source them let's source them. Patrick Beverly (my guy) referred to him as a "weak ass motherfucker". I'd rather get the opinion of a guy that has actually played against him and shut his ass down. How is that for "sourcing"


As far as lying goes you consistently do it. From stating that he is playing better than Tatum to suggesting that he is playing "great", its one lie after another. It goes beyond having an opinion at this point. Now Tatum is only playing better because he is in a "better" situation. How? Yeah they have a better team but he is a 4th option whereas Ball has had the ball (no pun intended) in his hands from day 1. Ball should be putting up a lot of meaningless stats and he isn't. He is getting minutes and the ball is in his hands the entire time.



LOL idiot, Beverly said that in the hallway before they even played.

The crap you try and fling against the wall...



Who's lying now? Comment was made after the game.


This will be the last time I ever respond to an LTG post. You're a lying piece of shit, a fucking know nothing moron and not worthy of my time and energy. If I ever find an ignore button here (I assume its somewhere near the mythical active topics button) I'll be pushing it so I never even have to see your posts here (assuming that's how ignore works).

Here are Patrick Beverly's comments post game after he calmed down...

Patrick Beverley on Lonzo: “He’s a great talent, but he’s got to go through the tough times. He’ll be better for it.”

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shakes wrote:
Tatum is playing in a much better situation and playing a much easier position with much less responsibility. No point in comparing them, its apples and oranges at this point.

I refuse to believe anything you say without a link based on your penchant for lying. So show me the link about the ESPN guys or else don't waste more of my time.



I don't care if you believe or not. It was said and I will push on from it. As far as NBA "guys" go since you like to source them let's source them. Patrick Beverly (my guy) referred to him as a "weak ass motherfucker". I'd rather get the opinion of a guy that has actually played against him and shut his ass down. How is that for "sourcing"


As far as lying goes you consistently do it. From stating that he is playing better than Tatum to suggesting that he is playing "great", its one lie after another. It goes beyond having an opinion at this point. Now Tatum is only playing better because he is in a "better" situation. How? Yeah they have a better team but he is a 4th option whereas Ball has had the ball (no pun intended) in his hands from day 1. Ball should be putting up a lot of meaningless stats and he isn't. He is getting minutes and the ball is in his hands the entire time.



LOL idiot, Beverly said that in the hallway before they even played.

The crap you try and fling against the wall...



Who's lying now? Comment was made after the game.


This will be the last time I ever respond to an LTG post. You're a lying piece of shit, a fucking know nothing moron and not worthy of my time and energy. If I ever find an ignore button here (I assume its somewhere near the mythical active topics button) I'll be pushing it so I never even have to see your posts here (assuming that's how ignore works).

Here are Patrick Beverly's comments post game after he calmed down...

Patrick Beverley on Lonzo: “He’s a great talent, but he’s got to go through the tough times. He’ll be better for it.”


You are a lying piece of shit you dumbass. He made the comment about being a weak ass motherfucker as he walked to the locker room after the game. If he said he is a great talent it still doesn't excuse the fact that he referred to him as a weak ass motherfucker. The killer part of it is that it is widely known asshole so what is there to argue at this point?

Here's a tip for you you fucking jerk. Google Beverly and weak ass motherfucker and see whose name appears. You're a fucking idiot who continuously pops in for the purpose of offering biased and often conflicting pieces of information.

When it serves your purpose you cite statistics. When it is non beneficial you try to rely on a non existent eyetest. Pick a damn lane and stick with it.

The new angle is that his teammates are shitty. Give it a rest. If he is as great as you proclaim then he will make them better. The fact that he routinely has the worst +- of any of the starters disproves this particular excuse. You sound dumb as shit continuously pontificating about his great his play after he's just gone 2-13 with 5 turnovers. Where in the fuck did you ever learn about sports if that somehow constitutes great play?

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
This is how stupid this damn idiot happens to be. The kid's own father felt compelled to comment about Patrick referring to his son as a "weak ass motherfucker". That is how dumb Shakes happens to be. His father addressed the comment the very next day. Damn you really are a stupid fuck.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:10 pm
Posts: 32067
pizza_Place: Milano's
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:24 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57082
Bagels wrote:
Image

:lol:

You are having a big fall. You are positioning yourself for a big March Madness run

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
Hey Shakes and LTG. When you are the only 2 people posting in the thread it's kind of insane to keep quoting each other.

I am concerned.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72371
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
I think shakes and ltg both make strong points

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Jbi11s wrote:
Hey Shakes and LTG. When you are the only 2 people posting in the thread it's kind of insane to keep quoting each other.

I am concerned.


Correct him on his lying bullshit. That would help.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
Jbi11s wrote:
Hey Shakes and LTG. When you are the only 2 people posting in the thread it's kind of insane to keep quoting each other.

I am concerned.


don't worry, I'm done with him forever. Won't quote, read or reply to anything he posts ever again. If he wants to ruin the NBA forum he's going to have to do it by himself. I think he's up to the challenge.

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:05 am
Posts: 25181
Location: Cultural Mecca
pizza_Place: Pequod's / Barnaby's
shakes wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:
Hey Shakes and LTG. When you are the only 2 people posting in the thread it's kind of insane to keep quoting each other.

I am concerned.


don't worry, I'm done with him forever. Won't quote, read or reply to anything he posts ever again. If he wants to ruin the NBA forum he's going to have to do it by himself. I think he's up to the challenge.

Does this mean you're in tomorrow?

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Lonzo: Year 1
PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:36 pm
Posts: 16765
pizza_Place: Il Forno in Deerfield!
IMU wrote:
shakes wrote:
Jbi11s wrote:
Hey Shakes and LTG. When you are the only 2 people posting in the thread it's kind of insane to keep quoting each other.

I am concerned.


don't worry, I'm done with him forever. Won't quote, read or reply to anything he posts ever again. If he wants to ruin the NBA forum he's going to have to do it by himself. I think he's up to the challenge.

Does this mean you're in tomorrow?


Image

better?

_________________
LTG wrote:
Trae Young will be a bust. Book It!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1260 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 42  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group