2021 NBA regular season thread

[msgkings322]

glad its not Kuminga and Ball. What an epic swing and miss.

but even Kuming and Ball wouldnt touch Mobley and Garland. Mobley has All NBA written all over him. Garland isnt too too far behind.

And yet. Future Warriors titles: more than one. Likely with Mobley on the Warriors.

Future Cavs titles: less than one

 

[WiggyRuss]

And yet. Future Warriors titles: more than one. Likely with Mobley on the Warriors.

Future Cavs titles: less than one

the mere fact that you keep repeating this does not make it true. It is absolutely not based in anything except your own delusion.

 

[msgkings322]

the mere fact that you keep repeating this does not make it true. It is absolutely not based in anything except your own delusion.

Now that right there children is an example of what we call "irony" ^^^^^

The fact that my repetition of it rustles your jimmies is ever so enjoyable however.

 

[Shanemansj13]

And yet. Future Warriors titles: more than one. Likely with Mobley on the Warriors.

Future Cavs titles: less than one

Future titles for GS = 1 or less.
They had a very small chance at Mobley so I’m not sure why that is even stated.
Cavs will likely win the same or more titles in the next 7-8 years imo so that’s all that matters. Keep daydreaming

 

[trojanfan12]

Also Simmons could hurt this chemistry, this locker room is close knit

Honestly, if I'm the Cavs, I would weigh this extremely heavily. Imo, that chemistry is a big part of why they look to be arriving early. They look like a team that likes playing together.

 

[msgkings322]

Future titles for GS = 1 or less.
They had a very small chance at Mobley so I’m not sure why that is even stated.
Cavs will likely win the same or more titles in the next 7-8 years imo so that’s all that matters. Keep daydreaming

Attaboy, keep your chin up!

They have a very strong chance to bring Mobley in as an FA when he's ready to win a title.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Now that right there children is an example of what we call "irony" ^^^^^

The fact that my repetition of it rustles your jimmies is ever so enjoyable however.

nothing to do with reputation, etc.

it has to do with the fact that there is simply no kind of evidence to back up this statement at all.

it reminds me of the legal axium- if the law is against you- use the facts. If the facts are against you- use the law. If you dont have the facts or the law pound on the table and yell like hell.

your yelling is just plain delusion.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'd love to rate this joke well, but it's not that good. GS isn't the place to joke about people leaving to win titles. That's where they go to win titles. But I respect the attempt.

That's why the joke was that Cleveland's core would be playing for other teams in 5 years.

 

[msgkings322]

That's why the joke was that Cleveland's core would be playing for other teams in 5 years.

Oops. I completely missed that LOL. Thought you meant GS

 

[msgkings322]

nothing to do with reputation, etc.

it has to do with the fact that there is simply no kind of evidence to back up this statement at all.

it reminds me of the legal axium- if the law is against you- use the facts. If the facts are against you- use the law. If you dont have the facts or the law pound on the table and yell like hell.

your yelling is just plain delusion.

Keep rustlin', I love it.

I get you have to do this, but deep down you know I'm right.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Keep rustlin', I love it.

I get you have to do this, but deep down you know I'm right.

I mean again-

just a bunch of bullshit. Not anything to actually back up this statement- and there never has been. It makes you look like a loudmouth fool and an idiot.

the easiest way you know when someone is beat is that they do everything they can to avoid the actual issue- which is what you do over and over and over again.

but have fun with Wiseman leading that surge. lol.

 

[msgkings322]

I mean again-

just a bunch of bullshit. Not anything to actually back up this statement- and there never has been. It makes you look like a loudmouth fool and an idiot.

the easiest way you know when someone is beat is that they do everything they can to avoid the actual issue- which is what you do over and over and over again.

but have fun with Wiseman leading that surge. lol.

I'm a little embarrassed to admit your crying has given me a semi-erection here.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I'm a little embarrassed to admit your crying has given me a semi-erection here.

and again. lol.

when this type of thing happened in class during law school to a student by a professor the rest of the room would get so uncomfortable and feel a mix of pity for the person and relief.

 

[msgkings322]

and again. lol.

when this type of thing happened in class during law school to a student by a professor the rest of the room would get so uncomfortable and feel a mix of pity for the person and relief.

You've already surrendered, you don't have to keep doing it.

 

[The Q]

would you rather have Gary Harris or Ross?

Im thinking Ross, but Harris would be an interesting guy as well.

I just would not make a big deal and trade Okoro or Love or Osman unless it was a no-brainer.

Neither

But can I interest you in a Josh Richardson? Lol

 

[The Q]

Well, he is a working lawyer after all...

Lawyers are the scummiest people on earth

 

[The Q]

glad its not Kuminga and Ball. What an epic swing and miss.

but even Kuming and Ball wouldnt touch Mobley and Garland. Mobley has All NBA written all over him. Garland isnt too too far behind.

I disagree on this to an extent.

Ball has the chance to be Bigger chris Paul good. That’s huge in todays nba

 

[msgkings322]

Lawyers are the scummiest people on earth

And the subset of lawyers who are Cavs fans is the real bottom of the barrel.

 

[msgkings322]

I disagree on this to an extent.

Ball has the chance to be Bigger chris Paul good. That’s huge in todays nba

Yep. Ball is obviously better than Wiseman now, and probably always will be. But Ball had no place on the current Ws. If they drafted him instead of Wiseman, is he putting up these numbers there?

 

[dtgold88]

It is pretty clear why I said it. You are ignoring the context of the conversation that post was taken from. And I don’t care to rehash it.

I was defending myself against an unproved recall of an old post.

You take it as shade because you take everything as shade.

Ignoring the context? The context was calling you out for some comments that turned out to be beyond foolish about Garland (whether he needed to do that or not is a different story). I took it as shade because instead of just owning you were wong about Garland you threw unnecessary shade. No worries as it is what so many do when they are wrong. Can't just be "my bad, I was way off" it's that then make sure you either point out something that person did wrong in the past or come up with something to take away and/or be critical of his/her team. You chose the latter. No biggie.