ISAIAH THOMAS Official Thread (Shams: Lakers plan to sign 10-Day)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 72, 73, 74 ... 100, 101, 102  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
LandsbergerRules
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Aug 2004
Posts: 11197
Location: The Other Perspective

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 5:33 pm    Post subject:

Jesusdelonla wrote:
This guy should not be on the team next year.

U r not Kobe dude. Randle was wide open under the beasket

He is a chu wa wa who thinks he is a bull dog


Am I crazy for thinking Kobe would've passed it to the wide open guy under the basket if he was in the same situation?
_________________
"Chick lived and breathed Lakers basketball…but he was also fair and objective and called every game the way it was played."
-from Chick: His Unpublished Memoirs and the Memories of Those Who Knew Him
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 5:38 pm    Post subject:

Andre2K wrote:
Treble Clef wrote:
Andre2K wrote:
He ruined everything being too egotistical. Ruined the game tonight along with team chemistry. He’s has probably cost himself even more money. Can’t believe I’m saying this but I’m done with him.

http://i63.tinypic.com/mw3b5l.jpg


Was a funhouse mirror filter applied to that pic? It looks all distorted


I don’t even know what a funhouse mirror filter is lol


It's a bended mirror that you'd find at carnivals in the old days that would make your face or body look funny depending out on how it was bent. The backboard is all twisted relative to the foreground, so that's why the person asked if someone shopped it for effect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chad09
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Feb 2011
Posts: 6738
Location: Studio City

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:17 pm    Post subject:

That pic has clearly been messed with. The goal looks like it’s turning to look at IT. That would have helped that shot going in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 6:39 pm    Post subject:

IT so reminds me of Kevin Hart. Both are clearly talented but after a while it’s a big hit or miss with them. After eagerly watching some of Hart’s stuff initially I’m so annoyed by his antics now.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
CervantesRises
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Jun 2016
Posts: 3914

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:25 pm    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
CervantesRises wrote:


Midget ain't even CLOSE to real derogatory slurs...that we'll avoid so hard core that we use a single letter to reference it. Could you imagine some saying 'The M Word' for this. Lol.


LPA issues statement to abolish the "m" word
September 2015

Little People of America, the world’s oldest and largest dwarfism support organization and an international, membership-based organization for people with dwarfism and their families, advocates to abolish the use of the word “midget”. The word “midget” was never coined as the official term to identify people with dwarfism, but was created as a label used to refer to people of short stature who were on public display for curiosity and sport. Today, the word “midget” is considered a derogatory slur. The dwarfism community has voiced that they prefer to be referred to as dwarfs, little people, people of short stature or having dwarfism, or simply, and most preferably, by their given name.

When we surveyed our community about the usage and overall impact of the word “midget”, over 90% of our members surveyed stated that the word should never be used in reference to a person with dwarfism. As an advocacy organization, our charge is to take the lead in providing accurate and current information to the public when the “m” word is used erroneously, and often carelessly, as a description of a person with dwarfism. Whether the intention of the user of the word is used to bully and to demean, or just as a synonym for small, our collective experience shows us that language has the power to cause permanent damage to one’s self-esteem and identity.

We have made great strides in our advocacy with effective results. For example, major media venues, like the New York Times, have stopped using the term “midget” to refer to people with dwarfism. Over the years, LPA has educated politicians, sports figures and people in the entertainment industry regarding the improper and hurtful use of this word. Further, we have been in contact with schools around the country whose sports teams and/or mascots have the word “midget” in their names, encouraging them to change it. The word “midget” in use today has a negative, degrading, and mean-spirited feel and identity.

LPA can provide further educational materials about the history of the word “midget” and its evolution, advocacy resources, and support for you to help in the effort to remove “midget” from the everyday vernacular. Our collaborative efforts will put the word “midget” into permanent retirement, and have it join the ranks of other antiquated and hurtful terms that are not used anymore.


Thurgood Jenkins approves of this message.

The little people are gonna need to get in line for the severity of derogatory words...last in line.

they don't like go be called midgets...great...I didn't call them midgets...I called IT a midget.

Of all the causes to get behind...this one falls short.

Be you...I'll be me...and together we'll let this go right here...midget is a word...and it ain't no where near as derogatory as they claim...know how I know?

They had to write a freaking commentary press release to get it out there...think a black dude has to do that for the word so bad that it is only identified by a single letter? Think a gay man has to explain why homosapien without the sapien is hurtful?

GTHOH with this PC drivel. Y'all made this WAY bigger than something so miniscule ever needed to ever be.

Peace...IT is an NBA midget and I don't feel that I'm hurting little people by saying it...because I am a freaking midget!
_________________
"If You're Afraid To Fail...Then You're Probably Going To Fail."
- Kobe

#BannersOverBillboards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kobe_luver
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2008
Posts: 11644
Location: LA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:48 pm    Post subject:

CervantesRises wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
CervantesRises wrote:


Midget ain't even CLOSE to real derogatory slurs...that we'll avoid so hard core that we use a single letter to reference it. Could you imagine some saying 'The M Word' for this. Lol.


LPA issues statement to abolish the "m" word
September 2015

Little People of America, the world’s oldest and largest dwarfism support organization and an international, membership-based organization for people with dwarfism and their families, advocates to abolish the use of the word “midget”. The word “midget” was never coined as the official term to identify people with dwarfism, but was created as a label used to refer to people of short stature who were on public display for curiosity and sport. Today, the word “midget” is considered a derogatory slur. The dwarfism community has voiced that they prefer to be referred to as dwarfs, little people, people of short stature or having dwarfism, or simply, and most preferably, by their given name.

When we surveyed our community about the usage and overall impact of the word “midget”, over 90% of our members surveyed stated that the word should never be used in reference to a person with dwarfism. As an advocacy organization, our charge is to take the lead in providing accurate and current information to the public when the “m” word is used erroneously, and often carelessly, as a description of a person with dwarfism. Whether the intention of the user of the word is used to bully and to demean, or just as a synonym for small, our collective experience shows us that language has the power to cause permanent damage to one’s self-esteem and identity.

We have made great strides in our advocacy with effective results. For example, major media venues, like the New York Times, have stopped using the term “midget” to refer to people with dwarfism. Over the years, LPA has educated politicians, sports figures and people in the entertainment industry regarding the improper and hurtful use of this word. Further, we have been in contact with schools around the country whose sports teams and/or mascots have the word “midget” in their names, encouraging them to change it. The word “midget” in use today has a negative, degrading, and mean-spirited feel and identity.

LPA can provide further educational materials about the history of the word “midget” and its evolution, advocacy resources, and support for you to help in the effort to remove “midget” from the everyday vernacular. Our collaborative efforts will put the word “midget” into permanent retirement, and have it join the ranks of other antiquated and hurtful terms that are not used anymore.


Thurgood Jenkins approves of this message.

The little people are gonna need to get in line for the severity of derogatory words...last in line.

they don't like go be called midgets...great...I didn't call them midgets...I called IT a midget.

Of all the causes to get behind...this one falls short.

Be you...I'll be me...and together we'll let this go right here...midget is a word...and it ain't no where near as derogatory as they claim...know how I know?

They had to write a freaking commentary press release to get it out there...think a black dude has to do that for the word so bad that it is only identified by a single letter? Think a gay man has to explain why homosapien without the sapien is hurtful?

GTHOH with this PC drivel. Y'all made this WAY bigger than something so miniscule ever needed to ever be.

Peace...IT is an NBA midget and I don't feel that I'm hurting little people by saying it...because I am a freaking midget!


You were told by LS (a mod) that no one here was to use that word here @ LG again and you ignored them and did it again in this post....repeatedly.

Only you are trying to compare which is worse/more insulting....the "M" word or the "N" word. Both are equally wrong/are meant to be offensive and should never be used.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Alexisonfire26
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 1322
Location: NorCal

PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:08 pm    Post subject:

Anyone else catch his Q&A on Twitter? I noticed he answered a Boston question and then deleted it after a Laker fan said something about not saying things like that as a Laker. He looked like he was in damage control at the end answering Lakers fans. https://ibb.co/eUefZc . Heres the full Q&A from Lakers twitter but you notice that one question he answered was left out https://twitter.com/i/moments/975565657742835712
_________________
"I was just letting the shots fly. You know, I don't leave any bullets in the chamber." -Kobe

Lakers, Rams, Giants, UCLA, Galaxy, Everton, USMNT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 8:41 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
IT so reminds me of Kevin Hart. Both are clearly talented but after a while it’s a big hit or miss with them. After eagerly watching some of Hart’s stuff initially I’m so annoyed by his antics now.


Sizeism! Haha.

Actually a pretty good analogy though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978

PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:25 pm    Post subject:

Alexisonfire26 wrote:
Anyone else catch his Q&A on Twitter? I noticed he answered a Boston question and then deleted it after a Laker fan said something about not saying things like that as a Laker. He looked like he was in damage control at the end answering Lakers fans. https://ibb.co/eUefZc . Heres the full Q&A from Lakers twitter but you notice that one question he answered was left out https://twitter.com/i/moments/975565657742835712


Thanks for that... good read. Who could blame him for missing Boston... he had his best two years there. Still said he wanted to be in LA, but why burn bridges if he knows the 2 max might be coming.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 21365

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:26 am    Post subject:

CervantesRises wrote:


Peace...IT is an NBA midget and I don't feel that I'm hurting little people by saying it...because I am a freaking midget!


Just wanna say that munchkin could also serve as the M word. If you ban midget, you gotta ban that.
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
non-player zealot
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 21365

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:39 am    Post subject:

Sentient Meat wrote:
kobe_luver wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
It wasn’t a bad shot for Thomas but there was no way in hell he was going pass the ball, that wasn’t an option in his mind. We were going to live or die with his shot. Which is why I hope we don’t see him in the game the last 5 minutes of the 4th.


That might be true but I'm not sure. Many games he's passed the ball to the open man (usually Randle) in the 4th Q more than shooting it himself.


The hate for IT reminds me of some friends who hated the casting of Daniel Craig for James Bond. He wasn't as handsome or as tall as other Bond's... so even though Casino Royale was way better than the past several Bond movies... they just b*tched and b*tched about it to no end... and felt vindicated when Quantum of Solace wasn't very good.

It's funny how men care so much about how their heroes look... even when they are completely straight and don't have a gay bone in their body.


That seems to me to have started with Jordan and I say that because Larry Bird served as a superstar right before him. Visual appeal wasn't as important until Mike made us notice. In his early NBA years, Larry retained the redneck garbage man look that he had when he quit the Hoosiers to join the French Lick Sanitation Dept. I wonder if Larry stood the cans back on the curb or if he just threw them, but that's one of those things we'll probably never know. Larry relished the redneck look even though John Cougar Mellencamp and David Lee Roth came from Bloomington, Indiana during the same time period. It was a conscious choice for Larry to slum as hard as he did, especially when he started making NBA money. That's contrary to the way he's always portrayed as po' white trash ignorant to his own station in documentaries. By 1979, you didn't have to be a hick if you didn't want to, even in Indiana. By 1987, Larry matured, got rid of the mullet and dressed more like he had attained a speck of worldliness after 7 years of travel, nice homes/cars/restaurants, and less and less interaction with the little folk.

Mike was savvy enough even in those ancient times to effect a certain "cool" or "fresh" (84 term) appearance in terms of how he wore his product. Nike had a yuge hand in that by hitting a home run with his first shoes in bold colorways that the NBA literally tried to whitewash and with snazzy 1984 off court gear. Note he wore that crap during his first dunk contest instead of the Bulls uni. He wore his gold chains, armband, leg cuff, socks in certain manner, and finally relented to shaving his head unlike Clyde and many other balding players of the day. He became the Ken doll of NBA players. His fans "fetishistically" enjoyed his look down to his gait (walking style) and tongue wagging and chewing his gum like a cow chewing cud.

Kobe became the next obvious player who amassed fetishists. That became evident with threads in years past showing pictures of his sweaty calves after a workout and people whining about a stint in 04 where he curiously wore floppy socks for the only time in his career (conspiracy theorists think he was hiding an ankle tracker). Others complained about his haircuts, his muscle mass or lack thereof, the bagginess of his jersey, his butterfly tattoo, etc. Others have sounded a lot like they hate that his wife exists.
_________________
GOAT MAGIC REEL
SEDALE TRIBUTE
EDDIE DONX!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26090

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 5:42 am    Post subject:

kobe_luver wrote:
levon wrote:
He only plays for himself.


That is totally untrue!

Even Luke has said what a professional IT has been and how he's working hard to help the team and the young players.


IT plays bad, they hate him, IT Plays well they are either happy, or they fear having to pay him so they hate him.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:23 am    Post subject:

non-player zealot wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
kobe_luver wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
It wasn’t a bad shot for Thomas but there was no way in hell he was going pass the ball, that wasn’t an option in his mind. We were going to live or die with his shot. Which is why I hope we don’t see him in the game the last 5 minutes of the 4th.


That might be true but I'm not sure. Many games he's passed the ball to the open man (usually Randle) in the 4th Q more than shooting it himself.


The hate for IT reminds me of some friends who hated the casting of Daniel Craig for James Bond. He wasn't as handsome or as tall as other Bond's... so even though Casino Royale was way better than the past several Bond movies... they just b*tched and b*tched about it to no end... and felt vindicated when Quantum of Solace wasn't very good.

It's funny how men care so much about how their heroes look... even when they are completely straight and don't have a gay bone in their body.


That seems to me to have started with Jordan and I say that because Larry Bird served as a superstar right before him. Visual appeal wasn't as important until Mike made us notice. In his early NBA years, Larry retained the redneck garbage man look that he had when he quit the Hoosiers to join the French Lick Sanitation Dept. I wonder if Larry stood the cans back on the curb or if he just threw them, but that's one of those things we'll probably never know. Larry relished the redneck look even though John Cougar Mellencamp and David Lee Roth came from Bloomington, Indiana during the same time period. It was a conscious choice for Larry to slum as hard as he did, especially when he started making NBA money. That's contrary to the way he's always portrayed as po' white trash ignorant to his own station in documentaries. By 1979, you didn't have to be a hick if you didn't want to, even in Indiana. By 1987, Larry matured, got rid of the mullet and dressed more like he had attained a speck of worldliness after 7 years of travel, nice homes/cars/restaurants, and less and less interaction with the little folk.

Mike was savvy enough even in those ancient times to effect a certain "cool" or "fresh" (84 term) appearance in terms of how he wore his product. Nike had a yuge hand in that by hitting a home run with his first shoes in bold colorways that the NBA literally tried to whitewash and with snazzy 1984 off court gear. Note he wore that crap during his first dunk contest instead of the Bulls uni. He wore his gold chains, armband, leg cuff, socks in certain manner, and finally relented to shaving his head unlike Clyde and many other balding players of the day. He became the Ken doll of NBA players. His fans "fetishistically" enjoyed his look down to his gait (walking style) and tongue wagging and chewing his gum like a cow chewing cud.

Kobe became the next obvious player who amassed fetishists. That became evident with threads in years past showing pictures of his sweaty calves after a workout and people whining about a stint in 04 where he curiously wore floppy socks for the only time in his career (conspiracy theorists think he was hiding an ankle tracker). Others complained about his haircuts, his muscle mass or lack thereof, the bagginess of his jersey, his butterfly tattoo, etc. Others have sounded a lot like they hate that his wife exists.


It's true what you say about fetishists and marketing... A corollary story to Video Killed the Radio Star... A lot of the ugly bands from the sixties would never have made it during the video era. Not saying Jordan and Kobe weren't great players... they were... but a lot of fans became enamored with the whole image of the athlete beyond simply the play as it was during the Magic/Bird era.

Gotta give Nike credit... gotta be the shoes... be like Mike... all that branding bullsh*t works. It's how we get such sh*tty presidential candidates now too. All about advertising and less about content of character.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:34 am    Post subject:

Sentient Meat wrote:
kobe_luver wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
It wasn’t a bad shot for Thomas but there was no way in hell he was going pass the ball, that wasn’t an option in his mind. We were going to live or die with his shot. Which is why I hope we don’t see him in the game the last 5 minutes of the 4th.


That might be true but I'm not sure. Many games he's passed the ball to the open man (usually Randle) in the 4th Q more than shooting it himself.


The hate for IT reminds me of some friends who hated the casting of Daniel Craig for James Bond. He wasn't as handsome or as tall as other Bond's... so even though Casino Royale was way better than the past several Bond movies... they just b*tched and b*tched about it to no end... and felt vindicated when Quantum of Solace wasn't very good.


I don't get the comparison.

The concern about IT's size is that his size impacts his ability to play the game, especially on the defensive end. It's a legtimate concern about whether to invest resources in a guy who has inherent limitations because of his size.

The Daniel Craig Bond thing sounds simply like your friend's personal perception about what James Bond should look like. And since Craig's Bonds movies have been very successful, I'd say it's a minority opinion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:11 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
kobe_luver wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
It wasn’t a bad shot for Thomas but there was no way in hell he was going pass the ball, that wasn’t an option in his mind. We were going to live or die with his shot. Which is why I hope we don’t see him in the game the last 5 minutes of the 4th.


That might be true but I'm not sure. Many games he's passed the ball to the open man (usually Randle) in the 4th Q more than shooting it himself.


The hate for IT reminds me of some friends who hated the casting of Daniel Craig for James Bond. He wasn't as handsome or as tall as other Bond's... so even though Casino Royale was way better than the past several Bond movies... they just b*tched and b*tched about it to no end... and felt vindicated when Quantum of Solace wasn't very good.


I don't get the comparison.

The concern about IT's size is that his size impacts his ability to play the game, especially on the defensive end. It's a legtimate concern about whether to invest resources in a guy who has inherent limitations because of his size.

The Daniel Craig Bond thing sounds simply like your friend's personal perception about what James Bond should look like. And since Craig's Bonds movies have been very successful, I'd say it's a minority opinion.


I've no problem with people who rationally bring up his defensive liabilities... it's an important part of the game, and an important part of this team's particular vision. I get those who react strongly towards anyone who might compromise this vision. However, notice how many people include a derisive ad hominem attack in addition to his play. Often the team will be underperforming on defense as a whole... say, allowing 20 points in 6 minutes before IT even comes in... and then as soon as he enters they will start calling him trash even though the reality shows the team's defense was worse even before he came in.

If he cannot score at the elite level and efficiency that he did in Boston... he is not worth keeping. He must shoot well, and have a good assist/turnover ratio to justify his cost on defense. I've been a big defender of his on these boards, yet I cannot justify him if he shoots at an average level. He must perform well, both as a scorer and as a playmaker.

I have promoted him solely as a backup plan to PG and LBJ. I wouldn't sign him over an elite two way player... however, I might sign him over a mediocre one. What is better, an elite offensive player who is a liability on defense... or an average player who is unexceptional at both? Obviously it's a complex question that might require several analytics experts to truly unravel... but it's at least a question.

The Daniel Craig analogy was just a throwaway comment on a night where IT had just cost us a game, and the trolls were out in full force against him.
It wasn't his failure people seemed to focus on, but more his person, how this short statured player had no business even trying to be a basketball player. I would have had no problem if people called him out that night... I was angry too, as it had been the third game he lost for us and right after he declared he wasn't a sixth man. But it wasn't his play that was the brunt of his comments, it was his size. It just reminded me of those who hated the casting of James Bond back then... they didn't care about the quality of the work... they just cared that DC didn't look like Bond.

And it wasn't a majority... but a vocal minority... in the same way right now we have a vocal minority that was recently outvoted by Boston fans on his twitter post asking whether they'd want him back in Boston.

1500 people liked a tweet asking if they'd want IT back.

67 liked one saying that they didn't want him.

Hopefully our fans would be equally knowledgeable given the same poll.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:13 am    Post subject:

If you ask whether you'd want IT back at the expense of 2 max I'd wager that it would be a different response.

It's a generic fan poll that is oblivious to technicalities like cap space, etc., which we hardcore fans are more aware of.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:16 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
If you ask whether you'd want IT back at the expense of 2 max I'd wager that it would be a different response.

It's a generic fan poll that is oblivious to technicalities like cap space, etc., which we hardcore fans are more aware of.


You know I have no problem with our fans who prefer the two elites... I'm only arguing with those who claim he has no value period.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:19 am    Post subject:

Sentient Meat wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
If you ask whether you'd want IT back at the expense of 2 max I'd wager that it would be a different response.

It's a generic fan poll that is oblivious to technicalities like cap space, etc., which we hardcore fans are more aware of.


You know I have no problem with our fans who prefer the two elites... I'm only arguing with those who claim he has no value period.


He has some value, but it's all relative.

We know for certain that this FO has placed cap flexibility/star power FA as it's priorities. IT long-term, I don't see how they fit into these priorities, especially when he has said he is not a 6th man.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:21 am    Post subject:

Sentient Meat wrote:

And it wasn't a majority... but a vocal minority... in the same way right now we have a vocal minority that was recently outvoted by Boston fans on his twitter post asking whether they'd want him back in Boston.

1500 people liked a tweet asking if they'd want IT back.

67 liked one saying that they didn't want him.

Hopefully our fans would be equally knowledgeable given the same poll.


Fans are fans. Some are knowledgeable about players and business matters, some are not. Some are logical, many are emotional. Their opinions can change quickly, and then change back again.

The opinions that fans express about free agents have no impact on what teams do. Polls about what fans think have no purpose other than to fill a slow news day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 46492

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:25 am    Post subject:

If IT wants Boston, hopefully we can find a way to accomplish a S&T and get a valuable asset.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:28 am    Post subject:

Inspector Gadget wrote:
If IT wants Boston, hopefully we can find a way to accomplish a S&T and get a valuable asset.


After abandoning the 2 max plan?
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:28 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:

And it wasn't a majority... but a vocal minority... in the same way right now we have a vocal minority that was recently outvoted by Boston fans on his twitter post asking whether they'd want him back in Boston.

1500 people liked a tweet asking if they'd want IT back.

67 liked one saying that they didn't want him.

Hopefully our fans would be equally knowledgeable given the same poll.


Fans are fans. Some are knowledgeable about players and business matters, some are not. Some are logical, many are emotional. Their opinions can change quickly, and then change back again.

The opinions that fans express about free agents have no impact on what teams do. Polls about what fans think have no purpose other than to fill a slow news day.


Boston fans are among the most knowledgeable in sports. If 96% like a player... I think there probably is a good reason why. Obviously, it's not an exact science but it should tell you something if one of the harshest fan bases still wants him back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:31 am    Post subject:

Sentient Meat wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:

And it wasn't a majority... but a vocal minority... in the same way right now we have a vocal minority that was recently outvoted by Boston fans on his twitter post asking whether they'd want him back in Boston.

1500 people liked a tweet asking if they'd want IT back.

67 liked one saying that they didn't want him.

Hopefully our fans would be equally knowledgeable given the same poll.


Fans are fans. Some are knowledgeable about players and business matters, some are not. Some are logical, many are emotional. Their opinions can change quickly, and then change back again.

The opinions that fans express about free agents have no impact on what teams do. Polls about what fans think have no purpose other than to fill a slow news day.


Boston fans are among the most knowledgeable in sports. If 96% like a player... I think there probably is a good reason why. Obviously, it's not an exact science but it should tell you something if one of the harshest fan bases still wants him back.


You really think IT will go back to Boston after what went down, especially to be Irving's back up? Boston apparently fired most of its training staff after the IT fiasco.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:35 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:

And it wasn't a majority... but a vocal minority... in the same way right now we have a vocal minority that was recently outvoted by Boston fans on his twitter post asking whether they'd want him back in Boston.

1500 people liked a tweet asking if they'd want IT back.

67 liked one saying that they didn't want him.

Hopefully our fans would be equally knowledgeable given the same poll.


Fans are fans. Some are knowledgeable about players and business matters, some are not. Some are logical, many are emotional. Their opinions can change quickly, and then change back again.

The opinions that fans express about free agents have no impact on what teams do. Polls about what fans think have no purpose other than to fill a slow news day.


Boston fans are among the most knowledgeable in sports. If 96% like a player... I think there probably is a good reason why. Obviously, it's not an exact science but it should tell you something if one of the harshest fan bases still wants him back.


You really think IT will go back to Boston after what went down, especially to be Irving's back up? Boston apparently fired most of its training staff after the IT fiasco.


He was asked on Twitter if he'd go back and he said anything's possible.

To this one tweeter said like this tweet if you want IT back in Boston

Another tweeted that he didn't want him

The IT back tweet got 1500 plus likes

The don't want IT back tweet got 67 likes.

It wasn't a serious discussion about him coming back... he was just doing an informal Q and A with fans.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 10:50 am    Post subject:

Sentient Meat wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Sentient Meat wrote:

And it wasn't a majority... but a vocal minority... in the same way right now we have a vocal minority that was recently outvoted by Boston fans on his twitter post asking whether they'd want him back in Boston.

1500 people liked a tweet asking if they'd want IT back.

67 liked one saying that they didn't want him.

Hopefully our fans would be equally knowledgeable given the same poll.


Fans are fans. Some are knowledgeable about players and business matters, some are not. Some are logical, many are emotional. Their opinions can change quickly, and then change back again.

The opinions that fans express about free agents have no impact on what teams do. Polls about what fans think have no purpose other than to fill a slow news day.


Boston fans are among the most knowledgeable in sports. If 96% like a player... I think there probably is a good reason why. Obviously, it's not an exact science but it should tell you something if one of the harshest fan bases still wants him back.



Thomas was popular in Boston -- he's a fun, overarchieving player who made the all-star team. I would expect a generic poll of whether they wanted him back would get a yes. Does that say anything about what will actually happen with him or what the Lakers should do? Nah ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 72, 73, 74 ... 100, 101, 102  Next
Page 73 of 102
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB