Un-effing-believable (PGT) - Page 4 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

JeffViggiano · 03-07-2011, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalmations202

We lose 2 games in the last ~20 and both come on buzzer beaters, and the posters here call RC a bad coach, think the world is coming to an end, and are consistently griping..

no man,the stupid substitution of RC are bad every game.but we are a really good team ad we win more and more game anyway...

dude1394 · 03-07-2011, 10:25 AM

Didn't realize how many orebs the grizzlies got. It's our achilles heal I expect. Chicago beats us that way as well. I don't believe we played a lot of zone last night...maybe should have.. but we need to address that stuff..

dude1394 · 03-07-2011, 10:26 AM

Can we have an official RC is an idiot thread so that all of the RC is an idiot posters can feel at home.

DevinHarriswillstart · 03-07-2011, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffViggiano

no man,the stupid substitution of RC are bad every game.but we are a really good team ad we win more and more game anyway...

Here is my issue with this....

If Carlisle plays a tight rotation then everyone will complain that some of the young guys don't get minutes.

If Carlisle plays a loose one then everyone will complain about the substitutions.

I really didn't see anything last night that reeked of poor substitutions. I couldn't bare to watch Peja, but he did only play 12 minutes. Brewer played. Roddy played. Ian played. He even squeezed in Deshawn. It's a tough job trying to get everyone minutes.

Tell me how you would work out the substitutions?

dude1394 · 03-07-2011, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Here is my issue with this....

If Carlisle plays a tight rotation then everyone will complain that some of the young guys don't get minutes.

If Carlisle plays a loose one then everyone will complain about the substitutions.

I really didn't see anything last night that reeked of poor substitutions. I couldn't bare to watch Peja, but he did only play 12 minutes. Brewer played. Roddy played. Ian played. He even squeezed in Deshawn. It's a tough job trying to get everyone minutes.

Tell me how you would work out the substitutions?

I imagine it would be something like...

Roddy 48

All the rest doesn't really make much difference.

Underdog · 03-07-2011, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Can we have an official RC is an idiot thread so that all of the RC is an idiot posters can feel at home.

Official thread for idiots crying about Rick Carlisle

dude1394 · 03-07-2011, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Official thread for idiots crying about Rick Carlisle

Thanks dog.

JeffViggiano · 03-07-2011, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

I imagine it would be something like...

Roddy 48

All the rest doesn't really make much difference.

really funny post hahhahah

i would that RC don't make substitution with che clock.if kidd sucks jj will plays more minutes,it isn't a problem.
the blowout in the 3rd quarter was been terrible.no excuses for RC.

roddy 12pts in 6minutes...and then???out of game for 10minutes(25minutes of "real" time),good idea for make roddy ice cold.

this is my opinion.

Underdog · 03-07-2011, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffViggiano

really funny post hahhahah

i would that RC don't make substitution with che clock.if kidd sucks jj will plays more minutes,it isn't a problem.
the blowout in the 3rd quarter was been terrible.no excuses for RC.

roddy 12pts in 6minutes...and then???out of game for 10minutes(25minutes of "real" time),good idea for make roddy ice cold.

this is my opinion.

How exactly does Roddy's explosive offense keep Memphis from scoring 41 points in the 3rd??

JeffViggiano · 03-07-2011, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

How exactly does Roddy's explosive offense keep Memphis from scoring 41 points in the 3rd??

our defence was been a big problem yesterday,no doubt about this.
but our offensive plays in the 3rd were horrible,or not?

Underdog · 03-07-2011, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffViggiano

our defence was been a big problem yesterday,no doubt about this.
but our offensive plays in the 3rd were horrible,or not?

If we'd scored 14 points, sure, but scoring 23 points is a respectable quarter in the NBA - giving up 41 points isn't...

We didn't lose this game on the offensive end.

Bayliss · 03-07-2011, 11:28 AM

Those 41 points were not so much of the defense as it was the turnovers. I imagine at least 10-15 points were because of stupid turnovers.

Underdog · 03-07-2011, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bayliss

Those 41 points were not so much of the defense as it was the turnovers. I imagine at least 10-15 points were because of stupid turnovers.

But they weren't Jason Terry turnovers, so what difference would Roddy have made?

BGMaverick9 · 03-07-2011, 11:32 AM

MMB recap
http://www.mavsmoneyball.com/2011/3/...n-104-103-loss

dude1394 · 03-07-2011, 11:34 AM

None...The 6 to's in the 3rd were bad..the 4 in the fourth were killers..

Also man...look at Memphis's shot chart. It's a testament to a team kicking another teams ass physically.
http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/shotch...meId=310306006

jthig32 · 03-07-2011, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bayliss

Those 41 points were not so much of the defense as it was the turnovers. I imagine at least 10-15 points were because of stupid turnovers.

Ten points exactly. So even without those ten points it's a very bad defensive quarter.

SMC0007 · 03-07-2011, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Didn't realize how many orebs the grizzlies got. It's our achilles heal I expect. Chicago beats us that way as well. I don't believe we played a lot of zone last night...maybe should have.. but we need to address that stuff..

yep, the zone would have surely kept them from the OREBS!

BGMaverick9 · 03-07-2011, 11:49 AM

Also, I blame Dwain Price for the loss...he ruined my routine mojo during the pre-game interviews.

DevinHarriswillstart · 03-07-2011, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

I imagine it would be something like...

Roddy 48

All the rest doesn't really make much difference.

Your Roddy comments are getting as tiresome as people who want Roddy to play more.

SMC0007 · 03-07-2011, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

How exactly does Roddy's explosive offense keep Memphis from scoring 41 points in the 3rd??

Well they would be forced to sit back and 'just look at it'.. while Roddy went off.

dude1394 · 03-07-2011, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Your Roddy comments are getting as tiresome as people who want Roddy to play more.

no doubt...but it doesn't seem to be slowing those roddy comments down any.

DevinHarriswillstart · 03-07-2011, 12:13 PM

I think fans will just have to deal with it because Roddy does have somewhat of an irrational following (myself admittedly included). The free roddy b flood gates will almost certainly open once Terry has a bad game. Let's just hope Terry stays awesome to the finals and that should hopefully tame it a bit.

LonghornDub · 03-07-2011, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

And more often than not they haven't.

And I think you know that.

Right. And I'm predicting that it would happen this time.

It'd be easy to take chalk and say "the Mavs would sweep cause they're the favorites," but that's not what I think would happen. Mavs in 6.

JHT · 03-07-2011, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

-Roddy does need more minutes, but the issue is that he and Terry essentially provide the same thing...all offense and no anything else really.

Not really true. Roddy was actually playing pretty good defense on Connelly in the first half, the guy didn't go off while Roddy was on him.

DevinHarriswillstart · 03-07-2011, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHT

Not really true. Roddy was actually playing pretty good defense on Connelly in the first half, the guy didn't go off while Roddy was on him.

Yeah but he still has defensive assignment troubles. He is going to have to guard the waterbugs like Connelly or his minutes will stay low. Roddy does well against quick guards that are smaller than him but otherwise has issues.

JeffViggiano · 03-07-2011, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

But they weren't Jason Terry turnovers, so what difference would Roddy have made?

the point is not,only,roddy-terry.
the first half of JJ was been great.maybe after 4-5minutes he could enters the game for a tired kidd.

i hate the RC's rotation in general...

mavsmanfromohio · 03-07-2011, 04:30 PM

were killings ourselves on defense. dirk wont consider crashing the boards or getting physical until the playoffs...and peja should b at the end of the bench if he isnt hitting, just too much of a liability on both ends of the floor. once roddys conditioning improves you bet RC is going to push his minutes up.

Usually Lurkin · 03-07-2011, 04:34 PM

you don't play Roddy for winning the games now. You play him so you don't have to rely on Terry winning games in the playoffs.

Here's another way to restate that "We wouldn't have won anyway if we replaced Terry's production with Roddy's" point:
"We lost with Terry anyway, so why not play Roddy."

SMC0007 · 03-07-2011, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

you don't play Roddy for winning the games now. You play him so you don't have to rely on Terry winning games in the playoffs.

Here's another way to restate that "We wouldn't have won anyway if we replaced Terry's production with Roddy's" point:
"We lost with Terry anyway, so why not play Roddy."

wat

Usually Lurkin · 03-07-2011, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMC0007

wat

I'll act like this isn't facetious and clarify.

A couple of people have said it's dumb to have wanted Roddy to get more minutes in last nights game, because those minutes would have come at Terry's expense, and since Terry didn't do poorly, it wouldn't have helped us win the game.

But by the same (abuse of) logic, since Terry's production didn't help us win the game, it couldn't have hurt to play Roddy for those minutes.

mac222b · 03-07-2011, 04:55 PM

I'm still a fan of bringing in D-Steve when the defensive intensity wanes. Was a year ago even, when he couldn't hit a shot to save his life. RC should deploy him as instant defensive energy ala Lindsey Hunter.
Also I thought a real key to the 3rd quarter was Hollins deciding to press Kidd. It really got to him and he committed a couple turnovers which lead to easy buckets and didnt allow us to get into our offense. Mayo's a really good defender when his heads in the game.

jthig32 · 03-07-2011, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

I'll act like this isn't facetious and clarify.

A couple of people have said it's dumb to have wanted Roddy to get more minutes in last nights game, because those minutes would have come at Terry's expense, and since Terry didn't do poorly, it wouldn't have helped us win the game.

But by the same (abuse of) logic, since Terry's production didn't help us win the game, it couldn't have hurt to play Roddy for those minutes.

All you need to take advantage of this "logic" is a crystal ball.

Underdog · 03-07-2011, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

I'll act like this isn't facetious and clarify.

A couple of people have said it's dumb to have wanted Roddy to get more minutes in last nights game, because those minutes would have come at Terry's expense, and since Terry didn't do poorly, it wouldn't have helped us win the game.

But by the same (abuse of) logic, since Terry's production didn't help us win the game, it couldn't have hurt to play Roddy for those minutes.

You suck at debate.

Usually Lurkin · 03-07-2011, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

All you need to take advantage of this "logic" is a crystal ball.

right. Terry did great. So it wouldn't have helped to put in Roddy.

If the criteria for Roddy's play is Terry's production & Today's game result, you're stuck with predicting the future.

Usually Lurkin · 03-07-2011, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

You suck at debate.

sorry to bother you. Please don't eat all the crayons.

jthig32 · 03-07-2011, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

right. Terry did great. So it wouldn't have helped to put in Roddy.

If the criteria for Roddy's play is Terry's production & Today's game result, you're stuck with predicting the future.

No, what you're left with is common sense, as in "Roddy's not going to get a ton of minutes if Jet is playing great, since they play the same position".

Underdog · 03-07-2011, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

sorry to bother you. Please don't eat all the crayons.

No your best post ever, but at least it isn't another logical fallacy...

Usually Lurkin · 03-07-2011, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

No, what you're left with is common sense, as in "Roddy's not going to get a ton of minutes if Jet is playing great, since they play the same position".

How do you know Terry's going to play better than Roddy before Terry plays those minutes?

more to my point - the outcome of today's game isn't the criteria by which RC should be deciding whether Roddy should play. It should be about which minutes will best prepare Roddy to take over Terry's role in the playoffs.

Usually Lurkin · 03-07-2011, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

No your best post ever, but at least it isn't another logical fallacy...

. . . especially after putting them in your nose like that. It's gross.

jthig32 · 03-07-2011, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

How do you know Terry's going to play better than Roddy before Terry plays those minutes?

more to my point - the outcome of today's game isn't the criteria by which RC should be deciding whether Roddy should play. It should be about which minutes will best prepare Roddy to take over Terry's role in the playoffs.

Those minutes don't exist, because it's not going to happen.