AbeVigodaLive wrote:SLOW DOWN... READ THIS SLOWLY SO YOU UNDERSTAND...REREAD IF NECESSARY...
For the umpteenth time:
1. I never said I didn't watch basketball. I never said I didn't watch A LOT of basketball. Try again.
2. I never said I didn't research every stat I've ever posted. Try again.
3. I never claimed I know more than everybody else. Try again.
4. We finally have our reason for your venom...
You're "butthurt" because I must have refuted something you said at some point or another. Dude... are you really upset that I use evidence to support my takes? Think about how stupid that reads. You'd rather me make random claims that have no factual basis? Really?
If you want to make superficial, reactionary takes... you better accept being refuted if they're myopic, silly, misguided or fucking stupid. I don't post maliciously. (until a little bit right now)
That's why I TRY to use tangible evidence to support my analysis or takes. I don't see how that's a bad thing. If that hurts your feelings, or you can't handle somebody else having a differing opinion... too fucking bad. Either grow a pair or learn more about the game.
There... that felt better.
[Note: Now maybe you can stop LYING about things I never wrote. I'll put up with a lot on a message board. But not people lying about things I never wrote. I'll call you out on it... which is what I'm doing here. Fair enough?]
For the umpteenth time....
You said you can't get LeaguePass because of a girlfriend that won't let you, or gave that as the reason because you decided it sounds better than the real reason. Which means you only see games on basic cable (which to your credit you admitted). Which means you are missing out (how much can be argued, because even if one has LeaguePass, they still can't in theory watch every game). Which means when you say "player X is a good defender because I said so and that is more important than any PER or Roland", it is "superficial, reactionary, myopic, silly, misguided, or fucking stupid" take. It's actually "making random claims that have no factual basis". And I don't post that maliciously, even now.
I never said you NEVER researched. But your research is very sloppy and shortsighted designed to REFUTE, but doesn't do more than contradicts. And sorry, on a base level, when you ATTEMPT to refute someone, you are saying "AT LEAST ON THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT, I do know more than you", whether you are right or wrong. That's just life.
And once again, you contradict, you don't refute. Refuting would mean that it is universally agreed that YOUR OPINION, which once again, does not come from watching as much basketball as you could, means more than PER and/or Roland. I'm not seeing a great deal of people doing that.
AND SOME POINT YOU CONTRADICTED SOMETHING I SAID?!??!?!? When have you not? Which is your right. Just as it is mine to point out not only how wrong you are but how sad your basis for this actually is.
Once again, this started because you ADMITTED not watching as much basketball as you could while giving a reason that may or may not be the real reason, and then very shortly thereafter, taking about your millionth shot at PER and/or Roland. All I'm saying is that if you think your half/assed, basic cable knowledge of the NBA is better than those that MAKE A LIVING AT IT and WE SHOULD LISTEN TO YOU, good luck with that.
And starting a new entry to respond is still responding.