Game Thread: Preseason Game Thread: 2016-17 Season

[LAD]

"Last nights Warrior game was a perfect example of why I've been saying all off-season that Klay doesn't need to change his game at all with the addition of Durant"

i think someone miiiiiiightve slipped a little LSD in your coffee this morning since those 2 statements are 100% contradictory. PLEASE try and tell me they are not. LOL.

My god...has someone hacked your brain today???

 

[LAD]

"Last nights Warrior game was a perfect example of why I've been saying all off-season that Klay doesn't need to change his game at all with the addition of Durant"

I NEVER SAID A PRESEASON GAME MEANT ANYTHING.


can you at least explain to us how these two statements don't directly contradict each other?

Russy- that statement shouldn't need a SPECIAL explanation. It only requires comprehension.

 

[CitySushi]

what you just wrote means absolutely nothing and 100% dodges the total 100% complete contradictory statements.

Which one is it?

do you agree with me the preseason means nothing like your later statements?

or like your earlier statements- do you believe that 20 minutes during game 2 of the preseason is evidence that Klay will be just fine in getting his distribution of shots?

this is a one or the other- its not- lets ride the fence and try and cover my ass after directly contradicting myself.

The fact that you can't distinguish any difference in what I said leads me to believe that this conversation is going nowhere but circles.

Here, I'll put it this way. If any poster out there, just one, believes that any of what I said is contradictory, I'll just admit you were right and we can move on. Just one poster.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

"Only Lakers and Heat fans think Wiggy is a moron" - Todd

 

[WiggyRuss]

The fact that you can't distinguish any difference in what I said leads me to believe that this conversation is going nowhere but circles.

Here, I'll put it this way. If any poster out there, just one, believes that any of what I said is contradictory, I'll just admit you were right and we can move on. Just one poster.

maybe i am not as smart as you - but i am having a helluva time trying to figure out how these 2 statements you made do not contradict eachother.


"Last nights Warrior game was a perfect example of why I've been saying all off-season that Klay doesn't need to change his game at all with the addition of Durant"

"I NEVER SAID A PRESEASON GAME MEANT ANYTHING."



I mean- is there something i am missing- in the first statement you quote from 20 minutes of preseason game #2 as evidence Klay will be just fine getting his share of shots. In the subsequent statement- you say that the same presason game you cited as evidence that Klay will get his shots- means nothing.

do you not see how those dont jive? I mean- at least stick by your opinion...if you think 20 minutes of preason game #2 is evidence of somthing- thats cool man. I on the other hand that thats pure lunacy. Deep down i think you know its pure lunacy as well. As i siad- you could make a 16 billion other more cogent arguments than cherry picking 20 minutes from a preseason game as to why the Warriors and in particulr Klay, should have no problem getting his shots---- and i would probably tend to give credence ot many of those argumets.

however, citing 20 minutes of preseason game #2- especially after they all sucked in preseason game #1? (that i hate to even mention because preseason game #1 means nothing at all either- but if you are gonna make the argument on #2- its even more idiotic to just ignore the other game) is just pure lunacy.

 

[bksballer89]

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. I really do.

Wiggy doesn't deserve it

 

[WiggyRuss]

Russy- that statement shouldn't need a SPECIAL explanation. It only requires comprehension.

i just dont understand how you cite a preseason game as evidence that Klay will have no problem getting his shots- and in the next post say that the preseason means nothing. Isnt that the definition of contradictory?

Maybe you can explain that to me LAD as CS has failed/chosen not to do so.

no? no takers....yah i wouldnt want to have to try and break that one down either. lol

CLEARLY those 2 statements directly contradict eachother. Any help would be greatly appreciated as clearly i do not have the foggiest idea and obviously lack the intelligence to derive the nuance between the two statements.....


"Last nights Warrior game was a perfect example of why I've been saying all off-season that Klay doesn't need to change his game at all with the addition of Durant"

"I NEVER SAID A PRESEASON GAME MEANT ANYTHING."



- i mean- its IN THE SENTENCE--- "perfect example"--- so - it was a "perfect example"------ but it "means nothing".

i just am not smart enough to untie that knot.

 

[CitySushi]

i just dont understand how you cite a preseason game as evidence that Klay will have no problem getting his shots- and in the next post say that the preseason means nothing. Isnt that the definition of contradictory?

Maybe you can explain that to me LAD as CS has failed/chosen not to do so.

Someone doesn't understand what "example" means.

Which is hard for me to believe, since you seem like a smart guy.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Someone doesn't understand what "example" means.

Which is hard for me to believe, since you seem like a smart guy.

so you are using something as a "perfect example"---- but it doesnt mean anything? what? again-- not smart enough to figure out how those statements do not directly contradict eachother. I anxiously await your explanation though as I cannot imagine its creativity.

 

[CitySushi]

so you are using something as a "perfect example"---- but it doesnt mean anything? what? again-- not smart enough to figure out how those statements do not directly contradict eachother. I anxiously await your explanation though as I cannot imagine its creativity.

If you're presenting a legal case against someone, and have a single example as evidence, is that enough to establish a pattern or frequency?

 

[WiggyRuss]

If you're presenting a legal case against someone, and have a single example as evidence, is that enough to establish a pattern?

did you just ask if one instance is indicative of a pattern? uhhhhhhh - yah probably not. Although- when do you have to prove a pattern?----

although- if you were being prosecuted for white collar crime and the prosecutor brought up even ONE prior incident when you covered up/stole/engaged in fraud previously- that is definitely not good and is without a doubt relevant and probative evidence.


i have no clue how that goes into explaining how "preseason games dont mean anything"- while previously saying "20 minutes of playing time in preseason game #2 is a perfect example of how this will work going forward".....

i mean- am i missing something?--- how can you say the preseason means nothing- and also cite preseason game #2 as a "perfect example" of something. I mean- do you realize how crazy that is?



also- it appears I will not be disappointed in the 'creativity" that i expected and you are employing here, LOL.



im really curious now though---- which do you think it is?

do you really think 20 minutes of preseason game #2 showed you something relevant to the regular season??? or do you think it doesnt mean much of anything?

 

[LAD]

i just dont understand how you cite a preseason game as evidence that Klay will have no problem getting his shots- and in the next post say that the preseason means nothing. Isnt that the definition of contradictory?

Maybe you can explain that to me LAD as CS has failed/chosen not to do so.

no? no takers....yah i wouldnt want to have to try and break that one down either. lol

CLEARLY those 2 statements directly contradict eachother. Any help would be greatly appreciated as clearly i do not have the foggiest idea and obviously lack the intelligence to derive the nuance between the two statements.....


"Last nights Warrior game was a perfect example of why I've been saying all off-season that Klay doesn't need to change his game at all with the addition of Durant"

"I NEVER SAID A PRESEASON GAME MEANT ANYTHING."



- i mean- its IN THE SENTENCE--- "perfect example"--- so - it was a "perfect example"------ but it "means nothing".

i just am not smart enough to untie that knot.

I think you're reading too much into it.

Klay isn't new to this team- so the initial thought of some when KD was brought in was that maybe it would change Klay's role on offense. What CS is saying is that from watching KLAY in particular, that doesn't appear to be the case.

In terms of the pre season not meaning anything- the reference is to how the team would play TOGETHER as a UNIT. How they defend collectively- how they run plays collectively.

Does this help??

 

[Bulletz]

 

[WiggyRuss]

I think you're reading too much into it.

Klay isn't new to this team- so the initial thought of some when KD was brought in was that maybe it would change Klay's role on offense. What CS is saying is that from watching KLAY in particular, that doesn't appear to be the case.

In terms of the pre season not meaning anything- the reference is to how the team would play TOGETHER as a UNIT. How they defend collectively- how they run plays collectively.

Does this help??

soooooo...what you are saying is- INDIVIDUALLY the preseason means something- but overall for the team the preseason means nothing?

 

[WiggyRuss]

I think you're reading too much into it.

Klay isn't new to this team- so the initial thought of some when KD was brought in was that maybe it would change Klay's role on offense. What CS is saying is that from watching KLAY in particular, that doesn't appear to be the case.

In terms of the pre season not meaning anything- the reference is to how the team would play TOGETHER as a UNIT. How they defend collectively- how they run plays collectively.

Does this help??

LAD- I agree with your paragraph there for the most part------ except for the fact that he was citing 21 minutes of preseason game #2 as a "perfect example"---- which i think is insane--- and then subsequently says the preseason means nothing

i just totally fail to understand and am obviously not smart enough to reconcile how you can cite 21 minutes of preseason game #2 as a "perfect example" of how things will work- but then say that the preseason doesnt mean anything. I mean- WTF? lol.

 

[LAD]

soooooo...what you are saying is- INDIVIDUALLY the preseason means something- but overall for the team the preseason means nothing?

I think you're playing semantics- like you typically do.

If you want to say that individually it means something- then sure it does. But keep in mind we're not assessing something new in terms of Klay's abilities- only observing if his game would change at all.

 

[CitySushi]

did you just ask if one instance is indicative of a pattern? uhhhhhhh - yah probably not. Although- when do you have to prove a pattern?----

although- if you were being prosecuted for white collar crime and the prosecutor brought up even ONE prior incident when you covered up/stole/engaged in fraud previously- that is definitely not good and is without a doubt relevant and probative evidence.


i have no clue how that goes into explaining how "preseason games dont mean anything"- while previously saying "20 minutes of playing time in preseason game #2 is a perfect example of how this will work going forward".....

i mean- am i missing something?--- how can you say the preseason means nothing- and also cite preseason game #2 as a "perfect example" of something. I mean- do you realize how crazy that is?



also- it appears I will not be disappointed in the 'creativity" that i expected and you are employing here, LOL.



im really curious now though---- which do you think it is?

do you really think 20 minutes of preseason game #2 showed you something relevant to the regular season??? or do you think it doesnt mean much of anything?

I think what it comes down to is perspective. Without perspective, you cannot have a rational conversation with someone.

If you believe I'm full of shit, go ahead and say it and be done with it. I'm not defending myself anymore because I've pointed out everything I could to repeatedly say that the pre-season game isn't indicative of what will happen during the regular season, only that it is a nice example of what it could be. I further clarified it saying my definition of example means that it's not something that I immediately see as sustainable or even setting up a pattern of frequency, meaning the game in the big scheme of things is pointless.

Let me put it this way, if you said Kyrie was going to be the MVP of the league this year and in his second pre-season game he dropped 70 points, you could say this is a nice example of what you were saying we could look forward to. I could say that the pre-season game is meaningless and you could argue that you don't believe it's meaningful, you were just pointing out an observation on how it could potentially happen. If you laid it out like that I would have no arguments with you because I could see where you are coming from in that it was just nice to see and that you weren't promoting it like it was a given or even expected to happen again all year. Again, this is probably me just giving you the benefit of the doubt, where you clearly will not give me.

I think what it boils down to is I'm reasonable in that if you state a position and clarify it within reason (which I believe I have) I would give you the benefit of the doubt and say that's probably right. You for some reason, do not seem to want to provide the same courtesy on my part.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I think what it comes down to is perspective. Without perspective, you cannot have a rational conversation with someone.

If you believe I'm full of shit, go ahead and say it and be done with it. I'm not defending myself anymore because I've pointed out everything I could to repeatedly say that the pre-season game isn't indicative of what will happen during the regular season, only that it is a nice example of what it could be. I further clarified it saying my definition of example means that it's not something that I immediately see as sustainable or even setting up a pattern of frequency, meaning the game in the big scheme of things is pointless.

Let me put it this way, if you said Kyrie was going to be the MVP of the league this year and in his second pre-season game he dropped 70 points, you could say this is a nice example of what you were saying we could look forward to. I could say that the pre-season game is meaningless and you could argue that you don't believe it's meaningful, you were just pointing out an observation on how it could potentially happen. If you laid it out like that I would have no arguments with you because I could see where you are coming from in that it was just nice to see and that you weren't promoting it like it was a given or even expected to happen again all year. Again, this is probably me just giving you the benefit of the doubt, where you clearly will not give me.

I think what it boils down to is I'm reasonable in that if you state a position and clarify it within reason (which I believe I have) I would give you the benefit of the doubt and say that's probably right. You for some reason, do not seem to want to provide the same courtesy on my part.

well i know that you have deflected from the only question that i asked with nonsense and throwing the question to other posters.

I was just asking you to explain how those 2 statements are not directly contradictory because I have absolutely ZERO clue how you can say that 21 minutes of preseason game #2 is "perfect example" of how things will work going forward- but then subsequently say the preseason doesnt mean anything.

I realize you are going to write long paragraphs to distract from that very narrow issue becuase you have no intention of actually admitting the blatnatly obvious----- that to say 21 minutes of game 2 of the preseason is a "perfect example"- but then to say that hte preseason does no mean anything just does not equate.

Which one do you think it is?

Do you think that 21 minutes of Game 2 of the preseason showed oyu something that will be relevant to the NBA season? Or does the preseason mean nothing. Those are mutually exclusive options and no matter how much you wiggle and squirm taht will not change.

Personally- if you are asking my opinion- I think there is a very good chance that Klay will be just fine in the offense as you said---- but I would never cite 21 minuntes of preseason game #2--- ESPECIALLY after the whole team shot and looked like shit in preseason game #1- that i HATE even bringing up because it doesnt mean dick either. How you can bring up one without another is a blatant case of cherry picking.



seriously though- to settle it-

do you think that you saw a "perfect example" of how Klay will play from 21 minutes of preseason game #2....or do you think the preseason doesnt mean anything? I am very interested in which one you actually think is true- becaus as i said- those are mutually exclusive options.

 

[LAD]

LAD- I agree with your paragraph there for the most part------ except for the fact that he was citing 21 minutes of preseason game #2 as a "perfect example"---- which i think is insane--- and then subsequently says the preseason means nothing

i just totally fail to understand and am obviously not smart enough to reconcile how you can cite 21 minutes of preseason game #2 as a "perfect example" of how things will work- but then say that the preseason doesnt mean anything. I mean- WTF? lol.

Well- because without enough data how can one have an analysis? However, having watched 21 minutes (I'm not even sure where that number came from- but none-the-less we'll go with it) that would appear to be enough to use for the this purpose.

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

Clippers look much better tonight @Mecca

Yeah...but, they couldn't look worse.

The fact that you can't distinguish any difference in what I said leads me to believe that this conversation is going nowhere but circles.

Here, I'll put it this way. If any poster out there, just one, believes that any of what I said is contradictory, I'll just admit you were right and we can move on. Just one poster.