Minnesota Sports Forum

crazy-canuck wrote: (better if we had a rubio type as our starting pg).

There are a number of people on this team that would benefit from a "Rubio" type PG...

Jester1534 wrote:Anyone know if Wiggins or butler is playing tonight yet? I'm up $750 on football bets last night was thinking of letting it ride on the wolves to lose to the lakers. The wolves are favored by a point to win right now.

Butler is feeling good and definitley playing. Wig practiced yesterday but still is iffy. I loved your Bucks bet last week, but I would be cautious about this one, jester...especially if the Wolves are getting points as ESPN has them right now. Butler was clearly at half speed with his virus last game, and the defense will be much better tonight. And the Lakers just aren't that good. I guess I would lean Lakers if I had to make a bet, but I wouldn't roll all my football winnings on a line that looks about right.

longstrangetrip wrote:

Jester1534 wrote:Anyone know if Wiggins or butler is playing tonight yet? I'm up $750 on football bets last night was thinking of letting it ride on the wolves to lose to the lakers. The wolves are favored by a point to win right now.

Butler is feeling good and definitley playing. Wig practiced yesterday but still is iffy. I loved your Bucks bet last week, but I would be cautious about this one, jester...especially if the Wolves are getting points as ESPN has them right now. Butler was clearly at half speed with his virus last game, and the defense will be much better tonight. And the Lakers just aren't that good. I guess I would lean Lakers if I had to make a bet, but I wouldn't roll all my football winnings on a line that looks about right.

I bet 200 you guys talked me out of it. The line is moving now Lakers are at -2 now.

If Jester wins, he has to bring the donuts for the next three Thursdays.

(I like sprinkles BTW)

Q12543 wrote:If Jester wins, he has to bring the donuts for the next three Thursdays.

(I like sprinkles BTW)

As long as there are donuts that do not involve Chocholate I'm in.

monsterpile wrote:

Q12543 wrote:If Jester wins, he has to bring the donuts for the next three Thursdays.

(I like sprinkles BTW)

As long as there are donuts that do not involve Chocholate I'm in.

I'll bring Krispy Kreme's home. I forgot how much I love these donuts lol

Q12543 wrote:

Camden wrote:I'm sure practically everyone that's been on this forum for a couple years knows that khans and I have a history of getting into heated debates here, but khans does tend to consistently have solid points -- right or wrong -- and plenty of supporting data to back himself up, which is completely respectable. He adds plenty of value to the overall direction of most topics and I feel confident that he knows the game of basketball as well as the overall landscape of the NBA.

Now, take all of what I just said and try to apply it to Jason and you will come up empty. Whether it's a half-assed rebuttal, a weirdly incorrect stance [like Eric Gordon not being a good 3P-shooter] or making up past opinions of the opposing poster in an attempt to gain SOME credibility, you never know what you're going to get with this guy. His activity here is as eradic his basketball takes. Not to mention the uncalled-for passive aggressive insults within the majority of his comments. I could do without another exchange with him and I'm confident that I'm not the only one here that feels that way.

Paint me as the bad guy and argue that I'm attacking someone. That's fine with me. I'll end with this, though. One of the two posters involved in that recent Eric Gordon debate had sound reasoning and a past of being right about some things, and the other person is Jason -- all over the place.

Khans has a tendency to stick a flag in the ground and then He. Will. Not. Budge. Jason tends to be very creative and....er...obscure, but yeah, eventually things seem to always devolve into insults with him. This dates back years. I will never forget the time he mocked me for referencing a stat in 82games and now he's the one referencing it! The further irony is that no one really uses 82games anymore...

Back to the Houston deal with or without Gordon. Count me as sufficiently on the fence with this one. Khans and Lip both make compelling arguments.

I remember you pointing out to me what I had said in the past about 82games. I then remember apologizing. I then remember you recommending another site, but at the same time warning me that they liked guys who ran back and forth without really creating stats like Mickael Gelable, then I remember saying that any site that likes Gelable must have a bronze statue of Trenton Hassel in front of their headquarters, then I remember exchanging "lol"'s and thinking that was the end of it.

If I imagined all that, let me apologize. 82games is a good resource and I should have been using it all along. I think they main reason people stopped using it is they don't do in-season updates anymore and just do a end-of-year wrap-up.

As far as the other stuff, let me just say this: In person, I simply don't let people talk to me that way. I haven't had a ton of people attempt it, but when it does, I squash it. Pointing out how terribly average Eric Gordon is as a 3P shooter, and below average as an entire player, and fragile on top of that, even if I was completely wrong, is not "BITCHING". 56 games a year, 8 3p attempts, 3 makes, 3 boards, 3 assists. Not worth 2yrs/$27m. If the Wolves end up with him to match the salaries and get the picks they want, fine. But it's not the difference between winning and losing.

I hope my apology frees you to confront people who accuse you of "bitching" rather than me.

Camden wrote:I'm sure practically everyone that's been on this forum for a couple years knows that khans and I have a history of getting into heated debates here, but khans does tend to consistently have solid points -- right or wrong -- and plenty of supporting data to back himself up, which is completely respectable. He adds plenty of value to the overall direction of most topics and I feel confident that he knows the game of basketball as well as the overall landscape of the NBA.

Now, take all of what I just said and try to apply it to Jason and you will come up empty. Whether it's a half-assed rebuttal, a weirdly incorrect stance [like Eric Gordon not being a good 3P-shooter] or making up past opinions of the opposing poster in an attempt to gain SOME credibility, you never know what you're going to get with this guy. His activity here is as eradic his basketball takes. Not to mention the uncalled-for passive aggressive insults within the majority of his comments. I could do without another exchange with him and I'm confident that I'm not the only one here that feels that way.

Paint me as the bad guy and argue that I'm attacking someone. That's fine with me. I'll end with this, though. One of the two posters involved in that recent Eric Gordon debate had sound reasoning and a past of being right about some things, and the other person is Jason -- all over the place.

Ok. Let's pump the brakes here. Some guy accuses anyone who disagrees with him as "bitching". I go at him, tell him he 100% full of crap and nowhere near that important, and you chose to...back him up?

As far as I know, you and I are complete strangers. Therefore, there is NOTHING I could have done to make it so you would agree with someone who accuses you of "bitching". If there is, and I feel it's worthy of an apology, I will. Otherwise grow some pride.

JasonIsDaMan wrote:

Camden wrote:I'm sure practically everyone that's been on this forum for a couple years knows that khans and I have a history of getting into heated debates here, but khans does tend to consistently have solid points -- right or wrong -- and plenty of supporting data to back himself up, which is completely respectable. He adds plenty of value to the overall direction of most topics and I feel confident that he knows the game of basketball as well as the overall landscape of the NBA.

Now, take all of what I just said and try to apply it to Jason and you will come up empty. Whether it's a half-assed rebuttal, a weirdly incorrect stance [like Eric Gordon not being a good 3P-shooter] or making up past opinions of the opposing poster in an attempt to gain SOME credibility, you never know what you're going to get with this guy. His activity here is as eradic his basketball takes. Not to mention the uncalled-for passive aggressive insults within the majority of his comments. I could do without another exchange with him and I'm confident that I'm not the only one here that feels that way.

Paint me as the bad guy and argue that I'm attacking someone. That's fine with me. I'll end with this, though. One of the two posters involved in that recent Eric Gordon debate had sound reasoning and a past of being right about some things, and the other person is Jason -- all over the place.

Ok. Let's pump the brakes here. Some guy accuses anyone who disagrees with him as "bitching". I go at him, tell him he 100% full of crap and nowhere near that important, and you chose to...back him up?

As far as I know, you and I are complete strangers. Therefore, there is NOTHING I could have done to make it so you would agree with someone who accuses you of "bitching". If there is, and I feel it's worthy of an apology, I will. Otherwise grow some pride.

"Otherwise grow some pride"

Jason these kinds of statements come across as insults.

monsterpile wrote:

JasonIsDaMan wrote:

Camden wrote:I'm sure practically everyone that's been on this forum for a couple years knows that khans and I have a history of getting into heated debates here, but khans does tend to consistently have solid points -- right or wrong -- and plenty of supporting data to back himself up, which is completely respectable. He adds plenty of value to the overall direction of most topics and I feel confident that he knows the game of basketball as well as the overall landscape of the NBA.

Now, take all of what I just said and try to apply it to Jason and you will come up empty. Whether it's a half-assed rebuttal, a weirdly incorrect stance [like Eric Gordon not being a good 3P-shooter] or making up past opinions of the opposing poster in an attempt to gain SOME credibility, you never know what you're going to get with this guy. His activity here is as eradic his basketball takes. Not to mention the uncalled-for passive aggressive insults within the majority of his comments. I could do without another exchange with him and I'm confident that I'm not the only one here that feels that way.

Paint me as the bad guy and argue that I'm attacking someone. That's fine with me. I'll end with this, though. One of the two posters involved in that recent Eric Gordon debate had sound reasoning and a past of being right about some things, and the other person is Jason -- all over the place.

Ok. Let's pump the brakes here. Some guy accuses anyone who disagrees with him as "bitching". I go at him, tell him he 100% full of crap and nowhere near that important, and you chose to...back him up?

As far as I know, you and I are complete strangers. Therefore, there is NOTHING I could have done to make it so you would agree with someone who accuses you of "bitching". If there is, and I feel it's worthy of an apology, I will. Otherwise grow some pride.

"Otherwise grow some pride"

Jason these kinds of statements come across as insults.

Sorry. This whole thing set me off. It's more important to come at me than someone who says you're bitching? I don't get it.