Dame playing through separated ribs...

[TorturedBlazerFan]

Oh, no. It is a great thing. With it, I choose when I want to listen to asinine comments made by certain posters. Why should I have to listen to someone spue bullshit here, that they wouldn't say to my face? I'm not going to waste my time getting in some bitchfest, with some of the keyboard commandos running around here. Simple and easy....



Click the posters name, and right above the messages/likes line, it says ignore. Click that. Hit it again to unignore. I can now do it with my eyes closed.....



Lol

Weve had this conversation! I won!!!

 

[Dougnsalem]

Weve had this conversation! I won!!!

~hits ignore button~


LOL!.....

 

[kjironman1]

Well this thread pretty much went to shit.
Dame has separated ribs. It's been pretty obvious to me.
Soft or not.... Leak or fake news or just plain fact doesn't really matter.

Go Blazers!
Win game 4

 

[kjironman1]

Oh, no. It is a great thing. With it, I choose when I want to listen to asinine comments made by certain damn children. Why should I have to listen to someone spue bullshit here, that they wouldn't say to my face? I'm not going to waste my time getting in some bitchfest, with some of the keyboard commandos running around here. Simple and easy....



Click the posters name, and right above the messages/likes line, it says ignore. Click that. Hit it again to unignore. I can now do it with my eyes closed.....



Lol

Damn that is easy. I'll have to work on that with my eyes closed though. I ain't that good.

 

[Dougnsalem]

Well this thread pretty much went to shit.
Dame has separated ribs. It's been pretty obvious to me.
Soft or not.... Leak or fake news or just plain fact doesn't really matter.

Go Blazers!
Win game 4

This was posted in the game thread, and I thought it was awesome. Yeah, maybe not realistic, but who cares! I like the mentality of it....

You know what? FUCK THIS.

REVERSE SWEEP YOU FUCKING CUNTS LETS GO

 

[Blazinaway]

Gimme some Simon time, he should get all Curry's minutes since Seth is very likely not coming back next yr

 

[kjironman1]

This was posted in the game thread, and I thought it was awesome. Yeah, maybe not realistic, but who cares!

You know i fully expect that it will not happen. But some year at some time it will happen and when it does it will be something to watch.

 

[CupWizier]

This just pisses me off even more that we just let them win game 1.

We let them win game one? I'm pretty sure GS won game one on their own merits, talent and because they are the current world champs as well as most likely going to their 5th straight final appearance. Warriors record speaks for itself and sometimes beating the best team just isn't that easy. Our best chance was if Green continued to play in a funk and Curry and Thompson continued to struggle with their shot. Sometimes you just have to tip your hat and acknowledge that they are the better team.

 

[hoopsjock]

We let them win game one? I'm pretty sure GS won game one on their own merits, talent and because they are the current world champs as well as most likely going to their 5th straight final appearance. Warriors record speaks for itself and sometimes beating the best team just isn't that easy. Our best chance was if Green continued to play in a funk and Curry and Thompson continued to struggle with their shot. Sometimes you just have to tip your hat and acknowledge that they are the better team.

Nah man, Stotts made a decision to let the best shooter of all-time go unguarded in pick and roll coverages in game 1. There is no way to justify or spin that.

Evan Turner, Maurice Harkless, and one other Blazer (I forget if it was Aminu or someone else) completely agree as they all went to Stotts to ask him why he would do that.

 

[CupWizier]

Nah man, Stotts made a decision to let the best shooter of all-time go unguarded in pick and roll coverages in game 1. There is no way to justify or spin that.

Evan Turner, Maurice Harkless, and one other Blazer (I forget if it was Aminu or someone else) completely agree as they all went to Stotts to ask him why he would do that.

but how does that prove we would have won that game? Stotts changed and we still lost 2 more games. GS is an extremely good team and a hard team to beat when they get on a roll. That's why they have a solid chance to win the NBA championship 4 out of the last 5 years. Sometimes you just have to tip your hat to the opponent.

 

[hoopsjock]

but how does that prove we would have won that game? Stotts changed and we still lost 2 more games. GS is an extremely good team and a hard team to beat when they get on a roll. That's why they have a solid chance to win the NBA championship 4 out of the last 5 years. Sometimes you just have to tip your hat to the opponent.

I didn't say we would've won. If you're playing a board game with a kid you can let them win or you can play it out normally. The kid can still win but he has to earn it legitimately. The defense we played was stupid and the equivalent of letting the kid win.

Every single person that can analyze the game of basketball (including some of his own players) knew that strategy was not going to work.

 

[CupWizier]

I didn't say we would've won. If you're playing a board game with a kid you can let them win or you can play it out normally. The kid can still win but he has to earn it legitimately. The defense we played was stupid and the equivalent of letting the kid win.

Every single person that can analyze the game of basketball (including some of his own players) knew that strategy was not going to work.

"This just pisses me off even more that we just let them win game 1." hoopsjock

If we let them win game one then it goes to reason that if we didn't "let them win" that we would have won. May not be what you meant to imply but that's how it read.
Your analogy wasn't really a representation of what went on in game 1. You can disagree with the strategy but Stotts wasn't allowing them to win the game like a parent might do with a kid.

 

[Strenuus]

"This just pisses me off even more that we just let them win game 1." hoopsjock

If we let them win game one then it goes to reason that if we didn't "let them win" that we would have won. May not be what you meant to imply but that's how it read.

I didnt read it that way. I read it how he intended it. Which makes sense because stotts is an inferior coach who rides the coattails of his star

 

[CupWizier]

I didnt read it that way. I read it how he intended it. Which makes sense because stotts is an inferior coach who rides the coattails of his star

and how did he intend it? Don't all coaches ride the coattails of their stars? Isn't Budenholzer riding the coattails of Giannis?

 

[kjironman1]

and how did he intend it? Don't all coaches ride the coattails of their stars? Isn't Budenholzer riding the coattails of Giannis?

From the dawn of competitive team sports as we know it. Even owners of the slaves they used as Gladiators took and placed bets riding their best fighters.

 

[CupWizier]

From the dawn of competitive team sports as we know it. Even owners of the slaves they used as Gladiators took and placed bets riding their best fighters.

Yeah, not sure what he was getting at with basically insinuating that Stotts only rides his star player. Who doesn't? GS just happens to have several all stars. Here is the total all star appearances of both teams:

GS
Thompson 5 time all star
Curry 7 time all star and 2 x MVP
Green 3 time all star
Durant 10 time all star and 1 x MVP
Cousins 4 time all star

Plus numerous other awards like all nba team, all defensive, NBA finals MVP's etc.

Blazers
Lillard 4 time all star

It's absurd how lopsided the awards are by GS compared to the Blazers but yet some think we should be up 3-0.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Yeah, not sure what he was getting at with basically insinuating that Stotts only rides his star player. Who doesn't? GS just happens to have several all stars. Here is the total all star appearances of both teams:

GS
Thompson 5 time all star
Curry 7 time all star and 2 x MVP
Green 3 time all star
Durant 10 time all star and 1 x MVP
Cousins 4 time all star

Plus numerous other awards like all nba team, all defensive, NBA finals MVP's etc.

Blazers
Lillard 4 time all star

It's absurd how lopsided the awards are by GS compared to the Blazers but yet some think we should be up 3-0.

We should be up two to one though.

 

[hoopsjock]

"This just pisses me off even more that we just let them win game 1." hoopsjock

If we let them win game one then it goes to reason that if we didn't "let them win" that we would have won. May not be what you meant to imply but that's how it read.
Your analogy wasn't really a representation of what went on in game 1. You can disagree with the strategy but Stotts wasn't allowing them to win the game like a parent might do with a kid.

I don't know how much clearer I can spell it out for you. Sorry if you don't get it.

 

[CupWizier]

I don't know how much clearer I can spell it out for you. Sorry if you don't get it.

You really think your analogy is an accurate depiction of the 1st game? Like I said, don't confuse poor strategy with letting the other team win. Stotts and all the players wanted to win that game and if you don;t think so, then not sure what to tell you. Sorry, just not buying it.

 

[CupWizier]

We should be up two to one though.

How do you figure? It's a 48 minute game and they beat us and GS has made a living off of coming back from large deficits.

 

[hoopsjock]

You really think your analogy is an accurate depiction of the 1st game? Like I said, don't confuse poor strategy with letting the other team win. Stotts and all the players wanted to win that game and if you don;t think so, then not sure what to tell you. Sorry, just not buying it.

Let me put this in baseball terms for you...

A team is in the AL or NL Championship Series with a chance at the pennant. The opposing team's best player is a home run hitter who feasts off of belt high fastballs right in the middle of the plate. Before the game the manager goes to the pitching staff and tells them that he wants them to only pitch belt high fast balls right down the middle to that player. After going 3-3 with 3 home runs on the 4th time at bat the pitchers ask the manager if he should throw something else. The manager says no, I want the belt high fastball still. Boom, another home run.

After the game the manager is questioned why he didn't try to throw a curveball or a changeup or anything else other than letting him just mash home runs in his comfort zone. The manager gets snarky and says well I saw him hit two home runs off curveballs last week.

That sounds completely exaggerated and made up but that is exactly what Stotts did! In the case of game 1 the strategy was so poor that it left very little chance to win the game. If your strategy will in all likelihood fail and everyone knows it then yes, you let the other team win. It was a disgrace.

 

[Orion Bailey]

How do you figure? It's a 48 minute game and they beat us and GS has made a living off of coming back from large deficits.

Well, in my opinion its much harder to dig out of a hole than it is to hold onto a lead. When you are up double digits in a game and can maintain a lead until the fourth quarter and then ythe other teams takes the lead and wins in the fourth, its more about letting the other team win than it is getting beat.

With that said, I do think GSW knows when to turn it on more than any other team we have seen in years, that being the middle of the third to the fourth, I still think we made more unforced errors that caused ourselves to beat ourselves than it was them 100% clamping down. I think its both, but I think if we would have maintained our good play, we would have won both of the games.

I'm also on record as saying the unforced errors I think arfe in part due to hitting the fatigue wall in the second half.

just my thoughts/ opinions Cup. Im sure not everyone agrees.

 

[Mediocre Man]

that's why you're so happy? I mute commercials too.....I don't talk to spammers on the phone either....ignoring bullshit in the world comes with age...it's not childish...what's childish is engaging in bullshit over and over and over...….with the same result

Just don't respond

 

[Mediocre Man]

Oh, no. It is a great thing. With it, I choose when I want to listen to asinine comments made by certain damn children. Why should I have to listen to someone spue bullshit here, that they wouldn't say to my face? I'm not going to waste my time getting in some bitchfest, with some of the keyboard commandos running around here. Simple and easy....



Click the posters name, and right above the messages/likes line, it says ignore. Click that. Hit it again to unignore. I can now do it with my eyes closed.....



Lol

Just don't engage certain people

 

[Orion Bailey]

Just don't respond

Just don't engage certain people

Easier said than done for some.

 

[riverman]

Just don't engage certain people

that's a given anyway....it's a tool just like a mute button on a remote....it's not a character flaw...sure cleans the windshield though

 

[Wade Garrett]

Let me put this in baseball terms for you...

A team is in the AL or NL Championship Series with a chance at the pennant. The opposing team's best player is a home run hitter who feasts off of belt high fastballs right in the middle of the plate. Before the game the manager goes to the pitching staff and tells them that he wants them to only pitch belt high fast balls right down the middle to that player. After going 3-3 with 3 home runs on the 4th time at bat the pitchers ask the manager if he should throw something else. The manager says no, I want the belt high fastball still. Boom, another home run.

After the game the manager is questioned why he didn't try to throw a curveball or a changeup or anything else other than letting him just mash home runs in his comfort zone. The manager gets snarky and says well I saw him hit two home runs off curveballs last week.

That sounds completely exaggerated and made up but that is exactly what Stotts did! In the case of game 1 the strategy was so poor that it left very little chance to win the game. If your strategy will in all likelihood fail and everyone knows it then yes, you let the other team win. It was a disgrace.

I like your analogy hj.
Here's another:
From what I've seen in the three games is that pitcher could be throwing 110mph curveballs made from hand grenades and the (Warriors) batter still parks them. In fact they hit the grenade so good , it doesn't have time to explode until hit lands in the parking lot.
Stotts had a bum strategy fir sure..but I'm starting to believe it just doesn't matter..
GS is just better and they only need 2 or 3 minutes to prove it.

 

[hoopsjock]

I like your analogy hj.
Here's another:
From what I've seen in the three games is that pitcher could be throwing 110mph curveballs made from hand grenades and the (Warriors) batter still parks them. In fact they hit the grenade so good , it doesn't have time to explode until hit lands in the parking lot.
Stotts had a bum strategy fir sure..but I'm starting to believe it just doesn't matter..
GS is just better and they only need 2 or 3 minutes to prove it.

This goes back to my original point of being more pissed to employ that bum strategy in Game 1. Dame hurt (or possibly re-aggravated) his ribs in the 2nd half of game 2. If we use a similar strategy as used in games 2 and 3 and have a less injured Dame do we possibly steal game 1? We'll never know the answer to that. Confidence is a tricky thing. If we win game 1 do we possibly have more swagger and not collapse in the 2nd half of the last two games? We'll never know that either.

 

[CupWizier]

Let me put this in baseball terms for you...

A team is in the AL or NL Championship Series with a chance at the pennant. The opposing team's best player is a home run hitter who feasts off of belt high fastballs right in the middle of the plate. Before the game the manager goes to the pitching staff and tells them that he wants them to only pitch belt high fast balls right down the middle to that player. After going 3-3 with 3 home runs on the 4th time at bat the pitchers ask the manager if he should throw something else. The manager says no, I want the belt high fastball still. Boom, another home run.

After the game the manager is questioned why he didn't try to throw a curveball or a changeup or anything else other than letting him just mash home runs in his comfort zone. The manager gets snarky and says well I saw him hit two home runs off curveballs last week.

That sounds completely exaggerated and made up but that is exactly what Stotts did! In the case of game 1 the strategy was so poor that it left very little chance to win the game. If your strategy will in all likelihood fail and everyone knows it then yes, you let the other team win. It was a disgrace.

Well, that's a completely different analogy whether exaggerated or not. I think we are going in two different angles and directions on this as my issue wasn't trying to claim the strategy was good and I know the phrase is often used "well, we gave that one away". My philosophy has been you can't give away what you don't have and GS has shown that they can beat us in pretty much any way regardless of the strategy. All in all, it's been a fun and exciting season and hopefully this team can continue to grow.

Not that it matters or not or have anything to do with our discussion, but my take on the game last night was that the Warriors came out fast and hard to start the 3rd and we weren't able to counter as we became tentative and a bit scared because that's the kind of fear Golden State puts in an opponent and a good part why they have been so successful. We also ran into a team that appears to be gelling at the right time and look more like the champs than the team we saw in the regular season and earlier rounds of the playoffs. Our team has never been this far before and some fatigue could be hitting them as well both physically and mentally. Hopefully we learn something from this series and the season.

 

[Dougnsalem]

Just don't engage certain people

SEE??? Now, YOU are wasting my time. You did not even listen to what I said.....

With it, I choose when I want to listen to asinine comments made by certain damn children. Why should I have to listen to someone spue bullshit here, that they wouldn't say to my face? I'm not going to waste my time getting in some bitchfest, with some of the keyboard commandos running around here.

What don't you get about that asinine post of mine? Humm??? It's not a matter of not engaging them. I REFUSE to waste minutes of my precious time left on this planet, reading their bullshit. Pretty simple. Go ahead and waste your time. That's your decision....