Zombie Trading CJ (2 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Portland trades CJ in the next calendar year

  • Yep

    Votes: 20 22.5%
  • Nope

    Votes: 69 77.5%

  • Total voters
    89
almost to the point..haha, you've been waiting since your fist ever post here to find someone who is "clearly better" than Damian.

I actually love Dame, his leadership, the examples he sets but ppl overrate him and he has a chucking problem is the negatives i mention only
 
I actually love Dame, his leadership, the examples he sets but ppl overrate him and he has a chucking problem is "the negatives i mention only"
That should be your profile motto
 
CJ could probably be a monster too. I feel like Roy has become some kind of legend because he retired so young. He's the Jimmy Hendrix of Blazers basketball.

Except not really. If you look at the stats, Roy was better in every way except 3PT shooting. He also anchored the number 1 most efficient offense in the entire league that year. I'm not arguing for Roy on his career, but that one year was the best year any Blazer player has had in the last two decades.
 
Except not really. If you look at the stats, Roy was better in every way except 3PT shooting. He also anchored the number 1 most efficient offense in the entire league that year. I'm not arguing for Roy on his career, but that one year was the best year any Blazer player has had in the last two decades.

He was also a starter from day one, and didn't suffer any kind of major injury setback until after a couple seasons. CJ is basically having his first real go as a starter and a healthy starter at that.
 
He was also a starter from day one, and didn't suffer any kind of major injury setback until after a couple seasons. CJ is basically having his first real go as a starter and a healthy starter at that.

We are comparing this season's CJ to 08-09 Roy are we not? That is the context of this discussion as I was replying to Sinobas comparing the two. In no way was I comparing their career production.
 
We are comparing this season's CJ to 08-09 Roy are we not? That is the context of this discussion as I was replying to Sinobas comparing the two. In no way was I comparing their career production.

Sure, but my point is that Roy had already played two full seasons as a starter by the time 08-09 rolled around.

At the start of the 08-09 season, roy had played 4,807 minutes in the NBA.

CJ had played 1,449 minutes before this season started.
 
Sure, but my point is that Roy had already played two full seasons as a starter by the time 08-09 rolled around.

At the start of the 08-09 season, roy had played 4,807 minutes in the NBA.

CJ had played 1,449 minutes before this season started.

If you are going to respond directly to me, you should at least make sure your response takes into account the context of my post. Otherwise, why respond directly?

Yes, I agree Roy played more up till that point. That is a factual statement. So what? It doesn't disprove that Roy was significantly better than CJ.
 
It has nothing to do with comparing him to Terry or Crawford. I'm just skeptical of a team ever winning a championship with two combo guards in their backcourt. I guess it's possible if we have a LeBron James at small forward though, so pray for Ben Simmons?

Somehow, in the development of basketball vernacular, the term "combo guard" didn't only have to do with a player's size and skill level, the implication is that they are "chukars" - inefficient. Perhaps, your reservation has more to do with the implied inefficiency of combo guards. Can you name two efficient guards (of any size) who played together and were bad?

IMHO, efficiency trumps "combo guard" stereotypes. Of course, I'm somewhat of a unrepentant homer.
 
If you are going to respond directly to me, you should at least make sure your response takes into account the context of my post. Otherwise, why respond directly?

Yes, I agree Roy played more up till that point. That is a factual statement. So what? It doesn't disprove that Roy was significantly better than CJ.

I guess you're not following the line of debate.

You - That's not fair to CJ. Roy was a monster.

Me - CJ could be a monster too, but Roy almost has a larger than life legend status because he retired young.

You - Except Roy was better statistically.

Me - Roy had a lot more experience in his third season.

You - We're comparing one season.

Me - Sure but my point is that Roy had played significantly more by his third season.

My point is that what CJ is doing with significantly less experience is more impressive to me than what Roy did with a lot more time played in the NBA as a starter and the focal point of the team.
 
I guess you're not following the line of debate.

You - That's not fair to CJ. Roy was a monster.

Me - CJ could be a monster too, but Roy almost has a larger than life legend status because he retired young.

You - Except Roy was better statistically.

Me - Roy had a lot more experience in his third season.

You - We're comparing one season.

Me - Sure but my point is that Roy had played significantly more by his third season.

My point is that what CJ is doing with significantly less experience is more impressive to me than what Roy did with a lot more time played in the NBA as a starter and the focal point of the team.

Everything I was talking about was in the context of the year we are comparing. Everything you are talking about is in the context of their career up until that point.

Why did you even bother responding to me again?
 
Everything I was talking about was in the context of the year we are comparing. Everything you are talking about is in the context of their career up until that point.

Why did you even bother responding to me again?

Why does it bother you so much? Relax sugar britches.
 
Everything I was talking about was in the context of the year we are comparing. Everything you are talking about is in the context of their career up until that point.

Why did you even bother responding to me again?

I get what Nate is saying...

For example: In 05-06, I played 18ppg and averaged 10/5/5. I was a 3rd year player who didnt really play the first two years because of injury. Making this my first solid year.

In 05-06, NATE played 18ppg and averaged 10/5/5. It was also his 3rd year in the league, but he played 82 games the first two years.

How can you compare the two? Even though its just one year, they aren't comparable because of the different paths and history that got them there.
 
This is very ironic coming from you.

Because you seem to hate to have anyone disagree with you. I enjoy debating. I reply to your post because I find the topic interesting and I want to contribute to that topic. It's not a slight against you that I disagree. Stop taking everything so personally.
 
Because you seem to hate to have anyone disagree with you. I enjoy debating. I reply to your post because I find the topic interesting and I want to contribute to that topic. It's not a slight against you that I disagree. Stop taking everything so personally.

I am not saying it is ironic that you responded. It is just ironic that this:

"Why does it bother you so much?"

Is coming from you. Especially considering your post history.
 
I am not saying it is ironic that you responded. It is just ironic that this:

"Why does it bother you so much?"

Is coming from you. Especially considering your post history.

Yup. I'm an asshole, but you're the one that's stepping outside the topic at hand and making it about the poster. So simmer down.
 
Yup. I'm an asshole, but you're the one that's stepping outside the topic at hand and making it about the poster. So simmer down.

The one that made the personal attack is.....you, and yet I am the one stepping outside the topic. This is definitely not the first time this has happened with you...lol.
 
The one that made the personal attack is.....you, and yet I am the one stepping outside the topic. This is definitely not the first time this has happened with you...lol.

Personal attack? Where was the personal attack? Sugar britches? That's an attack on you personally? Can I call you sweet thang? How about love bug? Would it offend you if I called bae?
 
Personal attack? Where was the personal attack? Sugar britches? That's an attack on you personally? Can I call you sweet thang? How about love bug? Would it offend you if I called bae?

I am not offended at all. Personally, I don't care if insults are swung around this forum, and if it were any regular poster I wouldn't feel the need to point it out.

But coming from a moderator who is supposed to uphold the rules of this site, and someone who has had done stuff like this in the past, you bet I'm going to call you out.
 
I am not offended at all. Personally, I don't care if insults are swung around this forum, and if it were any regular poster I wouldn't feel the need to point it out.

But coming from a moderator who is supposed to uphold the rules of this site, and someone who has had done stuff like this in the past, you bet I'm going to call you out.

Tell me about it
 
I am not offended at all. Personally, I don't care if insults are swung around this forum, and if it were any regular poster I wouldn't feel the need to point it out.

But coming from a moderator who is supposed to uphold the rules of this site, and someone who has had done stuff like this in the past, you bet I'm going to call you out.

Calling me out for what exactly? Telling you to simmer down? That's a personal insult now?

You made a comment about why would I even respond to you, and I said to simmer down. That's not a personal insult. That's not even an insult in any way, shape, or form. That's just you taking things too seriously.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top