Game Thread 2024-25 GAME #2 - BLAZERS VS PELICANS - OCTOBER 25, 2024 - FRIDAY - 7PM - KATU 2.2 - BLAZERVISION

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
crandc said:
Bullshit. This team has been tanking for three years in hopes of an elusive superstar. They got a couple of serviceable players. And deeply entrenched a culture of losing. Being unwatchable.
Click to expand...
Also, the culture of losing is based on Simons and Grant. Those guys are losers, IMO. They don't play winning basketball and you can't build a winning team around them.

Which is what we've been trying to do. That is doomed for failure and as far as I'm concerned you're probably going to have to tank an extra year for every year you keep them.

It's possible that a winning program with a winning coach could make them serviceable to a winning team. The longer we keep them the longer we're going to have to tank before we have any hope to actually be a relevant contender.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Also, the culture of losing is based on Simons and Grant. Those guys are losers, IMO. They don't play winning basketball and you can't build a winning team around them.

Which is what we've been trying to do. That is doomed for failure and as far as I'm concerned you're probably going to have to tank an extra year for every year you keep them.

It's possible that a winning program with a winning coach could make them serviceable to a winning team. The longer we keep them the longer we're going to have to tank before we have any hope to actually be a relevant contender.
Click to expand...
I don't think that Ant and Jerami are losers. I think having them as your first or second best players is a very bad strategy, even for a team like ours. Neither are good enough to play in the fashion we are playing them. I do think if he had two superstars to support on both ends (LeBron and The Brow) that Jerami would be a winning piece that would be meaningful, even as the third best player on a roster. On a team like Orlando where Ant would be an potent offensive piece somewhere in the heavy rotation, I think he would contribute to wins both in the regular season and the playoffs.

Both of these guys have been thrust into roles that make no sense for their level of talent and it also makes no sense for the guys behind them who we are hoping to develop, to give Ant and Jerami so much usage. I hope the Lakers want to give up at least a FRP for Grant and we make a deal like that or a little better happen. I'm sure some GMs around the league like Ant's instant offense at his salary, we just need to get value back for him that makes sense for this rebuild.
 
blazerkor said:
I don't think that Ant and Jerami are losers. I think having them as your first or second best players is a very bad strategy, even for a team like ours. Neither are good enough to play in the fashion we are playing them. I do think if he had two superstars to support on both ends (LeBron and The Brow) that Jerami would be a winning piece that would be meaningful, even as the third best player on a roster. On a team like Orlando where Ant would be an potent offensive piece somewhere in the heavy rotation, I think he would contribute to wins both in the regular season and the playoffs.

Both of these guys have been thrust into roles that make no sense for their level of talent and it also makes no sense for the guys behind them who we are hoping to develop, to give Ant and Jerami so much usage. I hope the Lakers want to give up at least a FRP for Grant and we make a deal like that or a little better happen. I'm sure some GMs around the league like Ant's instant offense at his salary, we just need to get value back for him that makes sense for this rebuild.
Click to expand...
Yeah maybe calling them losers is harsh. But they are among the worst defenders or worst rebounders from their position in the league.

Both of those failures are largely due to lack of effort and caring.

They aren't winners. They aren't leaders. They are followers who make selfish plays. Because they are (insert less harsh word for losers), IMO.

That doesn't mean they are irredeemable. But that means they need to follow a winner (as you said, and as I alluded to in my original post). They will not follow some young kid who is hardly more productive than they are. And they put up good enough numbers that nobody that we draft (even if they are a superstar) is going to be vastly more productive.

They're holding us back in every sense possible. They're a terrible fit here and they really need to go.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Yeah maybe calling them losers is harsh. But they are among the worst defenders or worst rebounders from their position in the league.

Both of those failures are largely due to lack of effort and caring.

They aren't winners. They aren't leaders. They are followers who make selfish plays. Because they are (insert less harsh word for losers), IMO.

That doesn't mean they are irredeemable. But that means they need to follow a winner (as you said, and as I alluded to in my original post). They will not follow some young kid who is hardly more productive than they are. And they put up good enough numbers that nobody that we draft (even if they are a superstar) is going to be vastly more productive.

They're holding us back in every sense possible. They're a terrible fit here and they really need to go.
Click to expand...

i-couldnt-agree-more-john-krasinski.gif
 
THE HCP said:
I don’t know what’s worse….. your unrealistic expectations and constant bitching about a team without much talent or the fact that you got @TBpup who I actually respect on here, to like a post that you are claiming my “feminine traits” as a bad thing. Thinking like a woman is bad?
Click to expand...

I never said it was bad. At least you own it.
 
THE HCP said:
You think it’s an accomplishment that I “OWN” it? So having a feminine mentality is something I need to “own” like it’s something bad?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call it an accomplishment, but you're not in denial.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
beast blazer said:
I wouldn't call it an accomplishment, but you're not in denial.
Click to expand...
Why would I need to “deny” that I think like a woman? Once again, in your eyes, that’s a BAD thing?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think if I keep asking this “person” the same thing over and over, it might just respond.
 
THE HCP said:
Why would I need to “deny” that I think like a woman? Once again, in your eyes, that’s a BAD thing?
Click to expand...

I think he's saying you're acting bitchy and not letting little things go. That's obviously not a characteristic exclusive to women, but it is a common stereotype, and it certainly isn't a compliment (toward you).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
THE HCP said:
You think it’s an accomplishment that I “OWN” it? So having a feminine mentality is something I need to “own” like it’s something bad?
Click to expand...

THE HCP said:
Why would I need to “deny” that I think like a woman? Once again, in your eyes, that’s a BAD thing?
Click to expand...

I've deleted personal insults from the two quoted posts. Please refrain from any further. Thanks.
 
THE HCP said:
Why would I need to “deny” that I think like a woman? Once again, in your eyes, that’s a BAD thing?
Click to expand...

Wether or not it's bad is subjective. I find it unbecoming personally. But you do you...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top