AbeVigodaLive wrote:Q predicted the Wolves would be 25 - 57. I predicted 26 - 56.
Seems like we were right. (although still too optimistic) But with how Cool dictates we can and cannot judge who's right (for him it's instantaneous... for us it's (xx months/years), I guess I have to wait for further proof that I might just know what I'm talking about more often than not...
So be it. But playing the board's resident asshole doesn't have to be his gimmick entirely. Others can play that role too when they grow tired of a 50+ year old man acting like a spoiled teenybopper.
To be fair not a single person guessed we'd have half the team down with injuries for a big chunk of the year, especially the top 3 players going into the year. Because of those injuries I put absolutely 0 stock into those guesses including my own and simply throw that whole thing out.
Exactly, Grey. I find it humorous that we are talking about who was most correct on predicting wins, when the "winners" were more than 50% off in their prediction! Claiming the title this year is kind of like bragging about being the tallest midget in the room (can we still say midget?).
The Wolves' games lost to injury this season were so ridiculously beyond any other team, this year's contest has no validity whatsoever.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Q predicted the Wolves would be 25 - 57. I predicted 26 - 56.
Seems like we were right. (although still too optimistic) But with how Cool dictates we can and cannot judge who's right (for him it's instantaneous... for us it's (xx months/years), I guess I have to wait for further proof that I might just know what I'm talking about more often than not...
So be it. But playing the board's resident asshole doesn't have to be his gimmick entirely. Others can play that role too when they grow tired of a 50+ year old man acting like a spoiled teenybopper.
One thing I can say for sure, is I've never called anyone an asshole. But name calling does seem to fit your character.
Oh, come on now, Cool. Let's not be hypocritical...
Abe's not the only "name-caller" here, though he doesn't do it often either. Cool, khans and myself have tossed around insults in the heat of debate.
I'm not attempting to throw shade at you, but I do respect (not agree) with you and Abe's posts and felt the need to jump in here.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Q predicted the Wolves would be 25 - 57. I predicted 26 - 56.
Seems like we were right. (although still too optimistic) But with how Cool dictates we can and cannot judge who's right (for him it's instantaneous... for us it's (xx months/years), I guess I have to wait for further proof that I might just know what I'm talking about more often than not...
So be it. But playing the board's resident asshole doesn't have to be his gimmick entirely. Others can play that role too when they grow tired of a 50+ year old man acting like a spoiled teenybopper.
To be fair not a single person guessed we'd have half the team down with injuries for a big chunk of the year, especially the top 3 players going into the year. Because of those injuries I put absolutely 0 stock into those guesses including my own and simply throw that whole thing out.
Exactly, Grey. I find it humorous that we are talking about who was most correct on predicting wins, when the "winners" were more than 50% off in their prediction! Claiming the title this year is kind of like bragging about being the tallest midget in the room (can we still say midget?).
The Wolves' games lost to injury this season were so ridiculously beyond any other team, this year's contest has no validity whatsoever.
Always a disclaimer.
By the way, the Rockets lost only 22 or so fewer games to injury... Toronto is #3. Miami is #4. OKC is #6. Indy is #7.
Granted, every team has different types of guys who miss games. Losing Chase Budinger isn't the same as losing Ricky Rubio. But other teams weren't built on a proverbial house of cards that if one key guy was out... trouble was looming. That's one of the reasons why some guys predicted a bad season for the Wolves.
Too much had to go just right for this team to be competitive. With average injuries, they became a bad team. With a ton of injuries... they become a terrible team. We know that. But it was pretty obvious this team lacked the depth to withstand much turmoil at all.
I understand that having Harden makes a difference for Houston. He might win the MVP. But I think there's a bigger issue at play here. Houston knows who it is... and how they're going to play. Thus, when a guy gets hurt, they aren't seeking a new style or a new way to fit them in or trying to change on the fly. They've embraced their identity (for better or worse) and continue to thrive. I've said all year that I wished Flip was working on building an identity of some sort here. I don't think he really has and that's been disappointing.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Q predicted the Wolves would be 25 - 57. I predicted 26 - 56.
Seems like we were right. (although still too optimistic) But with how Cool dictates we can and cannot judge who's right (for him it's instantaneous... for us it's (xx months/years), I guess I have to wait for further proof that I might just know what I'm talking about more often than not...
So be it. But playing the board's resident asshole doesn't have to be his gimmick entirely. Others can play that role too when they grow tired of a 50+ year old man acting like a spoiled teenybopper.
One thing I can say for sure, is I've never called anyone an asshole. But name calling does seem to fit your character.
Oh, come on now, Cool. Let's not be hypocritical...
Abe's not the only "name-caller" here, though he doesn't do it often either. Cool, khans and myself have tossed around insults in the heat of debate.
I'm not attempting to throw shade at you, but I do respect (not agree) with you and Abe's posts and felt the need to jump in here.
I didn't say he was the only one. And yes, I've done it before, but I've always apologized after the heat of the moment went away.
That being said, I feel I get along well with just about everybody on the board. Abe would be an exception to that.
I will say that when I'm irritated with something, I'm more likely to say something than let it go. Maybe that's what Abe is referring to when he calls me the board asshole.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Q predicted the Wolves would be 25 - 57. I predicted 26 - 56.
Seems like we were right. (although still too optimistic) But with how Cool dictates we can and cannot judge who's right (for him it's instantaneous... for us it's (xx months/years), I guess I have to wait for further proof that I might just know what I'm talking about more often than not...
So be it. But playing the board's resident asshole doesn't have to be his gimmick entirely. Others can play that role too when they grow tired of a 50+ year old man acting like a spoiled teenybopper.
To be fair not a single person guessed we'd have half the team down with injuries for a big chunk of the year, especially the top 3 players going into the year. Because of those injuries I put absolutely 0 stock into those guesses including my own and simply throw that whole thing out.
Exactly, Grey. I find it humorous that we are talking about who was most correct on predicting wins, when the "winners" were more than 50% off in their prediction! Claiming the title this year is kind of like bragging about being the tallest midget in the room (can we still say midget?).
The Wolves' games lost to injury this season were so ridiculously beyond any other team, this year's contest has no validity whatsoever.
Always a disclaimer.
By the way, the Rockets lost only 22 or so fewer games to injury... Toronto is #3. Miami is #4. OKC is #6. Indy is #7.
Granted, every team has different types of guys who miss games. Losing Chase Budinger isn't the same as losing Ricky Rubio. But other teams weren't built on a proverbial house of cards that if one key guy was out... trouble was looming. That's one of the reasons why some guys predicted a bad season for the Wolves.
Too much had to go just right for this team to be competitive. With average injuries, they became a bad team. With a ton of injuries... they become a terrible team. We know that. But it was pretty obvious this team lacked the depth to withstand much turmoil at all.
I understand that having Harden makes a difference for Houston. He might win the MVP. But I think there's a bigger issue at play here. Houston knows who it is... and how they're going to play. Thus, when a guy gets hurt, they aren't seeking a new style or a new way to fit them in or trying to change on the fly. They've embraced their identity (for better or worse) and continue to thrive. I've said all year that I wished Flip was working on building an identity of some sort here. I don't think he really has and that's been disappointing.
I'll put in the order for this year's wins prediction trophy, which the committee has decided to award to both you and Q. You can proudly display on your mantles this year's trophy that will have this enscribed on it.
"To the forecasting champions who ALMOST got within 50% of the correct answer!"
Camden0916 wrote:We have an identity, it's just a poor one.
Weak defense and inefficient offense.
We're the best at that!
To me it's because we lack competent PF and C play. I like the trio of Wiggins, LaVine, and Rubio going forward. At bare minimum I wish we had bigs that could play defense and rebound. We don't even have that.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Q predicted the Wolves would be 25 - 57. I predicted 26 - 56.
Seems like we were right. (although still too optimistic) But with how Cool dictates we can and cannot judge who's right (for him it's instantaneous... for us it's (xx months/years), I guess I have to wait for further proof that I might just know what I'm talking about more often than not...
So be it. But playing the board's resident asshole doesn't have to be his gimmick entirely. Others can play that role too when they grow tired of a 50+ year old man acting like a spoiled teenybopper.
To be fair not a single person guessed we'd have half the team down with injuries for a big chunk of the year, especially the top 3 players going into the year. Because of those injuries I put absolutely 0 stock into those guesses including my own and simply throw that whole thing out.
Exactly, Grey. I find it humorous that we are talking about who was most correct on predicting wins, when the "winners" were more than 50% off in their prediction! Claiming the title this year is kind of like bragging about being the tallest midget in the room (can we still say midget?).
The Wolves' games lost to injury this season were so ridiculously beyond any other team, this year's contest has no validity whatsoever.
Always a disclaimer.
By the way, the Rockets lost only 22 or so fewer games to injury... Toronto is #3. Miami is #4. OKC is #6. Indy is #7.
Granted, every team has different types of guys who miss games. Losing Chase Budinger isn't the same as losing Ricky Rubio. But other teams weren't built on a proverbial house of cards that if one key guy was out... trouble was looming. That's one of the reasons why some guys predicted a bad season for the Wolves.
Too much had to go just right for this team to be competitive. With average injuries, they became a bad team. With a ton of injuries... they become a terrible team. We know that. But it was pretty obvious this team lacked the depth to withstand much turmoil at all.
I understand that having Harden makes a difference for Houston. He might win the MVP. But I think there's a bigger issue at play here. Houston knows who it is... and how they're going to play. Thus, when a guy gets hurt, they aren't seeking a new style or a new way to fit them in or trying to change on the fly. They've embraced their identity (for better or worse) and continue to thrive. I've said all year that I wished Flip was working on building an identity of some sort here. I don't think he really has and that's been disappointing.
I'll put in the order for this year's wins prediction trophy, which the committee has decided to award to both you and Q. You can proudly display on your mantles this year's trophy that will have this enscribed on it.
"To the forecasting champions who ALMOST got within 50% of the correct answer!"
You're kind of proving my point I posted early.
People are quick to jump on Q's analysis of LaVine or whatever because the kid has shown some good improvements over the past few weeks as the team loses almost every game.
But when he was the most accurate one on the board in a more macro sense at predicting how far this team still was away from being legit... it's all met with sarcasm, disclaimers and other excuses. It's having the cake and eating it too situation.
"Q is wrong about this. LOL at him. Yeah, he was pretty astute about that other stuff, but it doesn't matter because I say so."
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Q predicted the Wolves would be 25 - 57. I predicted 26 - 56.
Seems like we were right. (although still too optimistic) But with how Cool dictates we can and cannot judge who's right (for him it's instantaneous... for us it's (xx months/years), I guess I have to wait for further proof that I might just know what I'm talking about more often than not...
So be it. But playing the board's resident asshole doesn't have to be his gimmick entirely. Others can play that role too when they grow tired of a 50+ year old man acting like a spoiled teenybopper.
To be fair not a single person guessed we'd have half the team down with injuries for a big chunk of the year, especially the top 3 players going into the year. Because of those injuries I put absolutely 0 stock into those guesses including my own and simply throw that whole thing out.
Exactly, Grey. I find it humorous that we are talking about who was most correct on predicting wins, when the "winners" were more than 50% off in their prediction! Claiming the title this year is kind of like bragging about being the tallest midget in the room (can we still say midget?).
The Wolves' games lost to injury this season were so ridiculously beyond any other team, this year's contest has no validity whatsoever.
Always a disclaimer.
By the way, the Rockets lost only 22 or so fewer games to injury... Toronto is #3. Miami is #4. OKC is #6. Indy is #7.
Granted, every team has different types of guys who miss games. Losing Chase Budinger isn't the same as losing Ricky Rubio. But other teams weren't built on a proverbial house of cards that if one key guy was out... trouble was looming. That's one of the reasons why some guys predicted a bad season for the Wolves.
Too much had to go just right for this team to be competitive. With average injuries, they became a bad team. With a ton of injuries... they become a terrible team. We know that. But it was pretty obvious this team lacked the depth to withstand much turmoil at all.
I understand that having Harden makes a difference for Houston. He might win the MVP. But I think there's a bigger issue at play here. Houston knows who it is... and how they're going to play. Thus, when a guy gets hurt, they aren't seeking a new style or a new way to fit them in or trying to change on the fly. They've embraced their identity (for better or worse) and continue to thrive. I've said all year that I wished Flip was working on building an identity of some sort here. I don't think he really has and that's been disappointing.
Which of those teams you mentioned subbed in 7+ first and second year players when their injuries occurred? The answer is none of them. You can't establish an identity when half your team is still learning how to play in the league at a basic level, let alone within a specific system in a specific way. All of those teams had multiple veterans to fall back on. We had Mo and Thad who aren't on the team anymore which has left us with only Martin since the latest round of the Rubio/Pek injury cycle. 1 veteran is not enough. To compare how good they have been to us with similar injuries is a joke because the players each team had available after the injuries has us being in the worst position by a landslide.
