Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Go Back   Dallas-Mavs.com Forums > Mavs / NBA > Around the NBA

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-28-2006, 12:23 AM   #41
Dtownsfinest
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,832
Dtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant futureDtownsfinest has a brilliant future
Default

Damn. New Jersey is playing great ball right now. Amare's gonna come back slow. I think everyone expected that. Because he went scoreless against a New Jersey team doesn't mean a damn thing to me. If this is how he's going to play in the playoffs than he's going to do more hurting than helping for the Suns.
Dtownsfinest is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-28-2006, 12:23 AM   #42
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sike
Jesus, baby or all growns up, loves it when the Mavs enemy goes down in flaming fury....

man, you need to get to know Jesus!
Jesus is, if nothing else, a gentleman. He prefers to face his opponent at full strength, so that both worthy foes can hold their heads high honor when the duel is done.

At least...I think that was Jesus.

Dude-- Wouldn't it be poetic justice if the Mavs oust the Spurs on their way to a smashing of the Nets, just as it should have been three long years ago?
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 12:26 AM   #43
sike
The Preacha
 
sike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Rock
Posts: 36,066
sike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond repute
Default

"At least...I think that was Jesus."

I think you have Jesus and Samurai mixed up

unless you think Jesus is Samurai....that could be a sweet movie.
__________________

ok, we've talked about the problem of evil, and the extent of the atonement's application, but my real question to you is, "Could Jesus dunk?"
sike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 01:05 AM   #44
sike
The Preacha
 
sike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Rock
Posts: 36,066
sike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond reputesike has a reputation beyond repute
Default

oh yea....and the Wiz beat the Warriors by 18 tonight........*sigh
__________________

ok, we've talked about the problem of evil, and the extent of the atonement's application, but my real question to you is, "Could Jesus dunk?"
sike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:03 AM   #45
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Checked the box for the Nets-Suns game. Reminded me a little bit of the Steve Nash of old. Obviously it's an extreme example, but I think that we'll see more down-to-earth lines from Nash once the Suns face off against the Kings and Mike "Nash-killer" Bibby in the post-season. The Suns are toast.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:11 AM   #46
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

If it "reminded [you] of the Steve Nash of old," then you are a band wagon jumper of the highest degree. I'm sorry, but there is no other way to characterize that. Anyone who was around the whole time recognizes no resemblance between that line and the Steve Nash of old. I admire your love of the current Mavs incarnation, but your lack of respect for the Mavs of years gone by rubs this long-time fan the wrong way.

Check the box when he goes off for 20-something and shoves it up the Mavs' ass, like he's been doing since he left here.

Last edited by chumdawg; 03-28-2006 at 03:16 AM.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 04:25 AM   #47
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

I may not have watched Mark Aguirre play but I've been around long enough to remember (and be reminded of) games like these:

2001 - Western Conference Semifinals

G1: Spurs 94 - 78 Mavs
2 pts (0-4), 6 asts, 2 rebs

G2: Spurs 100 - 86 Mavs
10 pts (4-9), 7 asts, 4 rebs

G3: Spurs 104 - 90 Mavs
11 pts (4-12), 4 asts, 3 rebs

G4: Mavs 112 - 108 Spurs
10 pts (4-11), 14 asts, 5 rebs

G5: Spurs 105 - 87 Mavs
11 pts (4-7), 3 asts, 2 rebs

Mavs eliminated 4-1

2002 - Western Conference Semifinals

G1: Kings 108 - 91 Mavs
12 pts (4-12), 5 asts, 5 rebs

G5: Kings 114 - 101 Mavs
12 pts (4-9), 9 asts, 4 rebs

Mavs eliminated 4-1

2003 - Western Conference Finals

G2: Spurs 119 - 106 Mavs
12 pts (4-11), 8 asts, 4 rebs

G3: Spurs 96 - 83 Mavs
10 pts (4-9), 9 asts, 4 rebs

G5: Mavs 103 - 91 Spurs
14 pts (5-11), 6 asts, 4 rebs

G6: Spurs 90 - 78 Mavs
6 pts (3-10), 11 asts, 4 rebs

Mavs eliminated 4-2

2004 - First Round

G1: Kings 116 - 105 Mavs
13 pts (5-14), 8 asts, 2 rebs

G2: Kings 83 - 79 Mavs
13 pts (6-20), 9 asts, 5 rebs

G3: Mavs 104 - 79 Kings
7 pts (3-6), 5 asts, 5 rebs

G4: Kings 94 - 92 Mavs
11 pts (4-11), 9 asts, 7 rebs

Nash upped his production heroically in G5, as all of our players did. But we lost a Sacramento series 4-1 that you know and I know we could have won. Resultant? Sufficient doubt was planted within the organization of the Mavericks' (in)ability to move forward with Nash as our PG and we let him walk. Look, I loved Stevie as much as anybody (you included) when he was here. But Steve didn't return that love chum - he crashed and burned when we needed him most - consistently. It's not a lack of respect on my part, it's a recognition of the reality that Nash just did not cut it for us.

Over 4 seasons, from 2001-2004, the Mavericks exited the playoffs to the tune of 4-1, 4-1, 4-2, 4-1. Look at Nash's stats chum, do they look at all familiar? (Remembering, obviously, that I had stated that Nash's NJ line was an extreme example). I have listed 15 out of the 21 playoff games Nash has played in since 2001. No 0 pts, 0 asts, but you do not have much recourse if you're going to try and argue that Nash's numbers don't look downright awful.

Your status as a Nash apologist is well-documented and you can label me a band wagon jumper all you like - but history supports me in demonstrating that when the spotlight's on and the season is on the line - Steve Nash will fail. He'll put up decent numbers in the regular season, and he might even do well in a playoff game or two...but you put a Jason Kidd or Mike Bibby on him, and you will watch a disappearing act worthy of Vegas. The Suns steamrolled through last year's playoffs because they played Memphis (Jason Williams?) and Dallas (Jet?). It's not surprising they were on cruise control. But chum, the sooner you realize that Nash leaving is a positive, the sooner you can stop lamenting his absence and start focusing on the fact that this Mavs squad is better off as a result.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - Steve Nash leaving the Dallas Mavericks could very well be a key reason for our winning an NBA Championship in the very near future. And I will call it now; you wait and see - if the Suns play the Kings in the First Round, they lose the series. Mike Bibby will absolutely smother Steve Nash and we will all be reminded of why (and be thankful of the fact that) Steve Nash is no longer a Dallas Maverick.

Last edited by orangedays; 03-28-2006 at 04:27 AM.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 05:02 AM   #48
Thespiralgoeson
Guru
 
Thespiralgoeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 10,288
Thespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
Over 4 seasons, from 2001-2004, the Mavericks exited the playoffs to the tune of 4-1, 4-1, 4-2, 4-1.
You know, I already knew that, but I never really thought about it. That's pretty bad. Ugh, no wonder the Mavs got no respect. I think you're being just a little harsh on Nash, Orange, but I agree in principle. He did have a way of being quite inconsistent during the playoffs.

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment that Nash always fails in the playoffs, at least not anymore. At the end of the regular season last year, I really didn't feel that he deserved to be the MVP at all, but he won me over in the playoffs in a big way. He just tore us a new one. That buzzer beating three in game 6 still haunts me. I think he was without question the best player in the playoffs last year. Yeah the ended up getting whooped by the Spurs, but I think that was the result of the Spurs simply being the better team rather than any choking on Nash's part.

But again, I agree with you in principal in that I feel that Nash's departure was ultimately in our best interests, and obviously his. I've said this before, and I know most people around here don't seem to agree with me, but I honestly feel that Dirk would not be quite the player he is now if Nash hadn't left.

Last edited by Thespiralgoeson; 03-28-2006 at 06:01 AM.
Thespiralgoeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 05:42 AM   #49
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

I agree with you - a topic I chose not to touch on in my previous post in favor of brevity is the obvious fact that Phoenix Nash is a completely different player from Dallas Nash. I admit I was harsh on Nash with regards to the 'always failing' - chum pushed my buttons a bit with the whole band wagon deal. In my post I was focusing entirely on Nash's tenure with the Mavs (and when I said failure, I meant failure with the Mavs, not the Suns). Also, I didn't mean to come across as shortchanging Nash's accomplishments in last year's playoffs - the guy took it up a notch and demonstrated why he was All-NBA First Team - no doubt in my mind (the story would have been different, in my opinion, had he played against Bibby, or gotten the chance to play against Kidd).

But, he didn't do that (or anything near that for that matter) while he was with us. His best efforts? 2003 - All-NBA Third Team, 2002 - All-NBA Third Team. And a slew of ignomious playoff exits as I have outlined above. It frustrates the hell out of me that Nash didn't perform with the Mavs as he does today with the Suns, but I also think that it is pointless for people to point to what he has accomplished today and say "if only..." Nash had the opportunity to do what he is doing with the Suns...with the Mavs. He was here for 6 seasons. He came into his own in 2000-01 and already had Dirty and Filthy running full-steam alongside him. And yet he waited until he hit 30 to have the two best years of his career. Figures huh?

The old Steve Nash was good, but by no stretch of the imagination was he great.

Last edited by orangedays; 03-28-2006 at 06:02 AM.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 06:03 AM   #50
Thespiralgoeson
Guru
 
Thespiralgoeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 10,288
Thespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Oh I whole-heartedly agree. I really can't help but wonder why Nash is on another level in Phoenix than he was here in Dallas.
Thespiralgoeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 09:35 AM   #51
Bookit
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,307
Bookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud ofBookit has much to be proud of
Default

Nash can't defend. This is the problem. However, it is rare that you can find a guy that can shoot absolutely lights out and have the ability to make spectacular passes as well. He is fun to watch that is for sure.
Bookit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 12:47 PM   #52
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Over those four years of playoff games, the guy averaged 15.9 points, 7.5 assists, and 3.7 rebounds. I'm not sure I understand your beef with that.

On the series results, is it your contention that Nash is more responsible for those than anyone else, anyone else like...say...Dirk?
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 01:32 PM   #53
Five-ofan
Guru
 
Five-ofan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 10,016
Five-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond reputeFive-ofan has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Nash was a hell of alot more responsible for those losses than dirk was. Just going from memory i believe dirk tied the nba record with a streak of 4 straight games of 30+points and 15 boards though one of them was the 42 and 18 game against SA that we lost. Murph you are the king of the dirk playoff stats and im gonna guess that you have them saved since you bring them up all the time, you feel like posting them again?
Five-ofan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 02:39 PM   #54
Milles
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 179
Milles will become famous soon enoughMilles will become famous soon enough
Default

Regarding the game last night, I read that was the first time in 5 years that Kidd's team has beaten Nash's team. I found it interesting that during that period, Kidd was always said to be the best PG and yet, he had no wins during that time against Nash.

In one week Kidd got a win vs the Mavericks and a win vs Nash.
Milles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 02:56 PM   #55
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chumdawg
Over those four years of playoff games, the guy averaged 15.9 points, 7.5 assists, and 3.7 rebounds. I'm not sure I understand your beef with that.

On the series results, is it your contention that Nash is more responsible for those than anyone else, anyone else like...say...Dirk?
chum, the original argument was not about series averages - it was about your contention that I was "a band wagon jumper of the highest degree," because (and this is the fact pattern):

(1) I stated that Nash's N.J. line reminded me "a little bit of the Steve Nash of old," referring to the fact that I recalled games in the past where Nash's line had been mediocre if not downright bad.
(2) You called me out and stated that there is "no resemblance between that line and the Steve Nash of old".
(3) I provided evidence specifically from the playoffs (not the regular season, where the games do not matter) of games where Nash had lines that are irrefutably reminiscent of Nash's N.J. line.

That's my beef.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:11 PM   #56
George Gervin
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 534
George Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
chum, the original argument was not about series averages - it was about your contention that I was "a band wagon jumper of the highest degree," because (and this is the fact pattern):

(1) I stated that Nash's N.J. line reminded me "a little bit of the Steve Nash of old," referring to the fact that I recalled games in the past where Nash's line had been mediocre if not downright bad.
(2) You called me out and stated that there is "no resemblance between that line and the Steve Nash of old".
(3) I provided evidence specifically from the playoffs (not the regular season, where the games do not matter) of games where Nash had lines that are irrefutably reminiscent of Nash's N.J. line.

That's my beef.

1. Can't you cherry pick games to prove any point you want about a player? doesn't cevery player have a bad line now and then?


2. It would be more fair to compare his avg as opposed to his bad game..to then search out other bad games..

3. providing evidence means a full picture not what you want people to see..

old man
George Gervin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:17 PM   #57
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Gervin
1. Can't you cherry pick games to prove any point you want about a player? doesn't cevery player have a bad line now and then?


2. It would be more fair to compare his avg as opposed to his bad game..to then search out other bad games..

3. providing evidence means a full picture not what you want people to see..

old man
(1) 15 out of 21 playoff games from 2000-04 is not cherry-picking. We call that history GG.

(2) The discussion was not about averages, the discussion is about a single game (Suns v. Nets) reminding me about other...single games.

(3) The evidence provided covered 71% of the playoff games Nash played in from the 2000-04 seasons. That's...a big percentage. Get it?

(4) Again, I am 22-years old. Frightening, isn't it, how much smarter than you I am already? Extrapolate that...damn...you're f*cked. Now just say it...out loud...say..."I wanna be orangedays." C'moooon...
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:26 PM   #58
George Gervin
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 534
George Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
(1) 15 out of 21 playoff games from 2000-04 is not cherry-picking. We call that history GG.

(2) The discussion was not about averages, the discussion is about a single game (Suns v. Nets) reminding me about other...single games.

(3) The evidence provided covered 71% of the playoff games Nash played in from the 2000-04 seasons. That's...a big percentage. Get it?

(4) Again, I am 22-years old. Frightening, isn't it, how much smarter than you I am already? Extrapolate that...damn...you're f*cked. Now just say it...out loud...say..."I wanna be orangedays." C'moooon...


right.... frightening that you actually believe that.. what you want to be is accepted..but you cannot find that here ..by the way your a young guy that has alot to learn..lesson 1 whenever you think you've firgured something out you then realize you never knew anything at all to begin with..i chalk up your silliness to you being immature..

Last edited by George Gervin; 03-28-2006 at 03:29 PM.
George Gervin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:29 PM   #59
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

And to answer Five-o's question:

From the 2001-2004 playoffs:

Dirty
25.9 ppg (.455 FG%, .420 3p%), 11.1 rpg, 1.8 apg, 1 bpg

Filthy
18.9 ppg (.415 FG%, .379 3P%), 5.2 rpg, 3.1 apg
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:30 PM   #60
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Gervin
right.... frightening that you actually believe that.. what you want to be is accepted..but you cannot find that here ..by the way your a young guy that has alot to learn..lesson 1 whenever you think you've firgured something out you then realize you never knew anything at all to begin with..i chalk up your silliness to you being immature..
You believe that in light of my facts, and your conjecture...that I am being silly?

*nods*

Fair enough. Can't argue with what you've got.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:36 PM   #61
George Gervin
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 534
George Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
You believe that in light of my facts, and your conjecture...that I am being silly?

*nods*

Fair enough. Can't argue with what you've got.

your cherry picked stats? comparing one bad to another bad game? i bet i can find a couple of good nash games and blow your petty argument out of the water.. but why try you know everything already.. i don't waste my time arguing because that means neither side is willing to reason with the other..so you go right on and argue with yourself silly boy.. please save the your newly learned vocabulary for someone it may impress..
George Gervin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:49 PM   #62
sixeightmkw
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 1,560
sixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of light
Default

I think GG got kicked off the Spurs forum for being a jackass and had to turn to the Mavs website.
__________________
sixeightmkw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 03:53 PM   #63
George Gervin
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 534
George Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sixeightmkw
I think GG got kicked off the Spurs forum for being a jackass and had to turn to the Mavs website.

actually my username is george gervin's afro on spurstalk.com (as i hear orangedays run to the website)... but don't let anything in the way of truth get in your way

mavtalk definition of jackass-
1. not a mavs homer
2. does not believe dirk is the best player ever
3. don't buy that the media conspiracy between the mavs and the national media
4. anything derogatory concerning the mavs..

then find me guilty!

Last edited by George Gervin; 03-28-2006 at 03:56 PM.
George Gervin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 04:08 PM   #64
sixeightmkw
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 1,560
sixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of lightsixeightmkw is a glorious beacon of light
Default

Of course 99% of the people here love the Mavs and are Homers, just Like you are probably a Spur Homer. Nothing bad about that.
No, I doubt most of the people on here don't think Dirk is the best player ever, but he sure could be one of the best once his career is over. He is the most amazing player I have seen in a long time.
I believe there is something with the media, not a conspiracy, but a lack of respect, which I understand since they haven't won the whole thing yet. But how many teams have won the whole thing over the last few years and get so much more positive media attention, eh em Miami.
And just read the game day threads when the Mavs play like crap. We are our biggest critics.
__________________
sixeightmkw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 04:13 PM   #65
George Gervin
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 534
George Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these partsGeorge Gervin is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sixeightmkw
Of course 99% of the people here love the Mavs and are Homers, just Like you are probably a Spur Homer. Nothing bad about that.
No, I doubt most of the people on here don't think Dirk is the best player ever, but he sure could be one of the best once his career is over. He is the most amazing player I have seen in a long time.
I believe there is something with the media, not a conspiracy, but a lack of respect, which I understand since they haven't won the whole thing yet. But how many teams have won the whole thing over the last few years and get so much more positive media attention, eh em Miami.
And just read the game day threads when the Mavs play like crap. We are our biggest critics.


you know the irony of all of the banter that has occurred here the last couple of days i have never been disrespectful towards the mavs. i have said since day one they, mavs have as good a chance of anyone of winning the title.. and this may be thier year to get past the spurs..
George Gervin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 04:44 PM   #66
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
chum, the original argument was not about series averages - it was about your contention that I was "a band wagon jumper of the highest degree," because (and this is the fact pattern):

(1) I stated that Nash's N.J. line reminded me "a little bit of the Steve Nash of old," referring to the fact that I recalled games in the past where Nash's line had been mediocre if not downright bad.
(2) You called me out and stated that there is "no resemblance between that line and the Steve Nash of old".
(3) I provided evidence specifically from the playoffs (not the regular season, where the games do not matter) of games where Nash had lines that are irrefutably reminiscent of Nash's N.J. line.

That's my beef.
Yes, I understand that was your original observation. I found it ridiculous then, and I find it even more ridiculous now that you have posted the stats you found. Sorry, maybe it's just me, but those numbers don't remind me much of zero points scored. They aren't in the same ballbark. Hell, they aren't even in the same sport!

If you are going to see those playoff lines as "irrefutably reminiscent" of his zero-point NJ line...well, we just aren't ever going to have a fruitful discussion.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 06:51 PM   #67
Thespiralgoeson
Guru
 
Thespiralgoeson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 10,288
Thespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond reputeThespiralgoeson has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Chum, I think the only thing Orange meant at all was that Nash is a better player now than he was as a Maverick. I think we can all agree to that, yes?
Thespiralgoeson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 07:27 PM   #68
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I guess it is true--and quite remarkable, at that--that the guy is actually improving as he ages, counter to what Mark Cuban expected. But still and all, I don't think that's all that OD meant. I think he meant that he sucked back then just like he sucked last night.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 07:37 PM   #69
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chumdawg
I guess it is true--and quite remarkable, at that--that the guy is actually improving as he ages, counter to what Mark Cuban expected. But still and all, I don't think that's all that OD meant. I think he meant that he sucked back then just like he sucked last night.
chum, take the time to reread my original post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
Reminded me a little bit of the Steve Nash of old. Obviously it's an extreme example.
What about that don't you understand? Did I say he sucked? No. I said...very clearly...that the line Nash exhibited was an extreme example of what he has done in the past.

This is not even a matter of opinion, the discussion has yet to even progress to that point. This is a matter of semantics and of your inability or refusal to understand what I am saying. Come on chum, you're better than that.

2 pts on 0-4 shooting? 6 pts on 3-10 shooting? Those aren't in the same ballpark? Please.

Last edited by orangedays; 03-28-2006 at 08:06 PM.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 07:39 PM   #70
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Gervin
your cherry picked stats? comparing one bad to another bad game? i bet i can find a couple of good nash games and blow your petty argument out of the water.. but why try you know everything already.. i don't waste my time arguing because that means neither side is willing to reason with the other..so you go right on and argue with yourself silly boy.. please save the your newly learned vocabulary for someone it may impress..
Dude, you are the very definition of a clown. You don't waste your time arguing? That's all you've been doing with your time.

Just like high school...nobody likes you. Scat.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 08:08 PM   #71
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
2 pts on 0-4 shooting? 6 pts on 3-10 shooting? Those aren't in the same ballpark? Please.
Well, I guess it's a case of selective memory, then. If a guy averaged 15 or 16 points in the playoffs, and also was not known to routinely score 30+ in those games, it's reasonable to assume that two- and six-point outings are outliers. And the outliers don't generally form the impressions you remember about a player.

But even moreso than that, the impression I got from your post wasn't that you were talking about the playoffs in specific--since the NJ game wasn't a playoff game, especially. You may be right that this is a misunderstanding caused by differing semantics, but I remain painfully aware that there is a considerable, and often quite vocal, contingent that likes to disparage Nash now that he is gone. Kinda like when the hot chic dumps you and you tell yourself, not to mention anyone else who will listen, that she wasn't that great anyway.

But yes, you did say it was an extreme example. Still, I found the observation disrespectful to not only Nash but also to every Maverick and every Mavericks team from the Nash days. I prefer to hold franchise stalwarts in higher regard.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 10:02 PM   #72
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chumdawg
Well, I guess it's a case of selective memory, then. If a guy averaged 15 or 16 points in the playoffs, and also was not known to routinely score 30+ in those games, it's reasonable to assume that two- and six-point outings are outliers. And the outliers don't generally form the impressions you remember about a player.

But even moreso than that, the impression I got from your post wasn't that you were talking about the playoffs in specific--since the NJ game wasn't a playoff game, especially. You may be right that this is a misunderstanding caused by differing semantics, but I remain painfully aware that there is a considerable, and often quite vocal, contingent that likes to disparage Nash now that he is gone. Kinda like when the hot chic dumps you and you tell yourself, not to mention anyone else who will listen, that she wasn't that great anyway.

But yes, you did say it was an extreme example. Still, I found the observation disrespectful to not only Nash but also to every Maverick and every Mavericks team from the Nash days. I prefer to hold franchise stalwarts in higher regard.
Look, simply put, the 0 pts, 0 asts line reminded me of Nash's mortality. You will note that I was very careful to say that "it reminded me a little bit" of Mavs Nash and that it was an extreme example. Yes, 10-11 pts aren't 0 pts, but c'mon you can't tell me you don't see what I'm trying to say: that the shooting star that is Steve Nash "MVP" was brought hurtling down to earth that one night. We saw in place of the unstoppable offensive juggernaut the media lick their chops over, a too-slow, defensively-inept PG who had his hands bound and couldn't lead his team to victory despite his best efforts. THAT is what reminded me of the old Steve Nash. We can argue over the stats all night long and probably never see eye-to-eye, but I hope I've clarified what I am saying.

Today, when Nash scores 10-11 pts, it's considered an off-night. That was the norm in the games that I cited - games that are representative of Nash's performance with the Mavs (15 of the 21 playoff games he's been in for us since 2001). What would people be saying about Nash if he averaged 15-16 a night for the Suns? Whenever he went off for 20+ pts or 10+ asts with us, it was a monster night - now that he's in Phoenix, that has become the norm. My impression of Nash while he was here is that he was a good PG - comparable to players such as Jason Kidd, Mike Bibby - but since he's left he's taken it to another level. He was not great here. He wasn't a 0 pts, 0 asts player, but neither was he a 25 pts, 10 asts player.

Furthermore, while I am decidedly of the mindset that we are better off without Nash, I have certainly never "disparage(d) Nash now that he is gone". Don't include me in the Nash-bashing set. There is little, if any, point in debating the merits of a player who is no longer here - it's a waste of time and energy. Any fan would have to be ignorant of basketball not to recognize the fact that Nash was a good player - and in his current incarnation, a great one. But that doesn't change the fact that this Mavs team is a stronger team and a more competitive team in his absence - an assertion that I hope we prove to people like yourself in the coming weeks.

Your hot chick analogy doesn't fit. Nash was cute when he was here, maybe that track girl who hadn't filled out yet. But by no stretch of the imagination was he hot. After Nash left for Phoenix - he got a boob job, he changed his hairstyle, maybe got highlights, he got a tan...whatever...he's hot Now, he wasn't then. Nash is the girl I dumped because I thought she was too plain and I could do better, who then came back with a pair of double-D's and made me regret ever leaving her. Nash is our very own "She's All That".

I get that you're a big Nash fan. No problem - but don't let that cloud how you read and interpret my post.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 10:35 PM   #73
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Except that it is generally regarded in the basketball-stats community that point guard is far and away the hardest position to quantify. You can throw out 4-for-11 shooting stats all day long, and that isn't going to convince me that the guy wasn't doing a whole hell of a lot to help the team win--which, of course, they were doing a whole hell of a lot of.

You say he "was not great here," in bold and all. I say you are horribly mistaken. Horribly. He was, as some high-placed scouts put it, the straw that stirs the drink, the topping on the enchilada. He was the engine that drove those (very good) Mavs teams. He was the reason we were a serious threat, because--among other things--he was the guy who could get Dirk Nowitzki off. Now, then, Dirk is getting off by himself...in the regular season, anyway. You saw what I saw last postseason, which was Dirk being more or less emasculated in the postseason.

You like to point to Nash's postseasons struggles against Mike Bibby and/or Tony Parker, but you don't seem to want to include in your analysis Dirk's struggles against Tracy McGrady and/or Shawn Marion.

Point is, I will always believe that the Mavs needed to keep that two-headed monster together. If they can get there without Nash, it will be a huge testament to Dirk. But I'm not holding my breath just yet. I think the Mavs have a great chance to get through the playoffs this year, or in the next few. But I also know that they might not. And if they don't, I surely won't make such a fool of myself as to blame Dirk for all that.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 10:52 PM   #74
dude1394
Guru
 
dude1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
dude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond reputedude1394 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I think I'm done talking about nash...Edit...I'm taking all of the "imo"s out, it's all my opinion.

Cubes took a huge gamble letting nash go. It is yet to be seen if it was a good one or not. There are too many other changes that went with it. I didn't like it and still don't like it. The only positive is that it might have pushed nellie out and it was time for him to go.

We still have point guard issues on this team. If devin comes on great, but you could easily say it has been a wasted two years that we could have conceivably won two championships.

We also enabled our competition that had the best record in the league last year. Another stupid move.

So bottom line he conceivably gave up two potential championships as I see it (two years of dirks career) on a very big gamble, a gamble that was wrong so far. His gamble was that steve was breaking down, not so far he hasn't.
__________________
"Yankees fans who say “flags fly forever’’ are right, you never lose that. It reinforces all the good things about being a fan. ... It’s black and white. You (the Mavs) won a title. That’s it and no one can say s--- about it.’’

Last edited by dude1394; 03-28-2006 at 10:54 PM.
dude1394 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 11:03 PM   #75
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

"They were doing a whole hell of a lot of (winning)."

We were winning in the regular season chum, something you dismiss yourself as not very important in your second paragraph. This is something we can agree on - winning in the regular seasons means, at the end of the day, absolutely nothing.

4-1, 4-1, 4-2, 4-1

In 21 playoff games we won 5. That's a .238 winning-percentage. Decidedly not a whole lot of winning.

"Now, then, Dirk is getting off by himself...in the regular season, anyway."

"You like to point to Nash's postseasons struggles against Mike Bibby and/or Tony Parker, but you don't seem to want to include in your analysis Dirk's struggles against Tracy McGrady and/or Shawn Marion."

You mean to qualify, in part, Nash's legacy by pointing to his past ability to get Dirk looks. Then you dismiss Dirk's present success because it is in the regular season? Are we to forget that Dirk averaged 21 pts and 9 rebs against Tracy McGrady and the Rockets last year? That he averaged 26.5 pts and 11.5 rebs against Shawn Marion and the Suns? Sure, you can say he 'struggled', but that term is used relatively. Dirk still did a damn fine job against those two players. And I guarantee you, he will get off in this year's playoffs too, just you wait.

This is the same argument that alot of people use to dismiss Shawn Marion's present play. "Marion is good because of Nash...", "Before Nash came along, Marion was on the trading block", etc. etc. The argument holds no water in Marion's case, and it holds even less when it is used on Nowitzki.

That's perfectly fine that you continue to believe in the "two-headed monster", I am not trying to discourage your belief in any way. But, sir, you are well over-stepping yourself by suggesting that I made a fool of myself.

This debate started with you misinterpreting what I said. We have now progressed to you accusing me of blaming Nash for our lack of success? The closest thing I said to that was asserting that Nash simply was not good enough to take us to the promised land. I didn't say it was his fault, I just said he couldn't do it - an irrefutable fact seeing as how Dallas has yet to bring home an O'Brien Trophy.

You are being entirely too defensive and bringing topics to the fore that I have not even addressed, simply because you think I'm using this forum to attack Nash - which is certainly not the case. I usually like your posts chum, but you need to check that Nash-love at the door because it is impairing your ability to understand what I am trying to say.

Last edited by orangedays; 03-28-2006 at 11:05 PM.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2006, 11:22 PM   #76
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangedays
The closest thing I said to that was asserting that Nash simply was not good enough to take us to the promised land. I didn't say it was his fault, I just said he couldn't do it - an irrefutable fact seeing as how Dallas has yet to bring home an O'Brien Trophy.
This is certainly, beyond question--to borrow a term you seem to like to use, irrefutably--NOT a fact. Let me repeat. This is NOT a fact. Again for you, I will say it one...more...time: This is NOT a fact.

The Mavs took a twelve- or thirteen-point lead (I cannot remember which) to the fourth quarter in Game Six of the Western Conference Finals in 2003. They would have been decided favorites against New Jersey if they had won the series.

Given those two propositions--well, one is a "fact" and one is a proposition, but a well-founded one--what do you expect the statistical likelihood was of the Mavs winning the series against the Spurs and then going on to win the series against the Nets? I'm certain it was at least 25%, and I'm fairly confident it was closer to one-third, if not greater.

If you want to disparage Steve Nash, please do not do it on the basis that the Mavs did not beat the Spurs in 2003, clearly the year that they were best poised to win the conference and, in turn, the league championship. For all the talk you do about Nash getting his ass whipped by Bibby, the Mavs beat the Kings that year--and might I add that Bibby chipped in there with a well-time airball in the last minute of a close game.

If Dirk struggles "relatively," Nash struggles relatively. It is a well-established fact that individual, and thusly also team, statistics drop off in the postseason as compared to the regular season because the opposition is filtered. This is nothing new. Yet you find a way to champion Dirk while disparaging Nash.

If you want to retract what you said and say that you appreciate Nash's contributions to the team, and that he helped WAY more often than he hurt (if he ever did), you can expect a "fair enough" from me. But if you continue to paint Nash as an ineffective performer, playoffs or otherwise, you will continue to get a counterargument from this end. And if you persist in saying that we are better off without an All-NBA player than with an All-NBA player...well, I will just have to shake my head and question your sanity.

You characterize a one-third chance that didn't get there as "could not." Not in my world, buddy. In my world, a one-third chance "can," and does so, in fact, one time in three.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2006, 12:51 AM   #77
EricaLubarsky
Inactive.
 
EricaLubarsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 41,686
EricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond reputeEricaLubarsky has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Suns couldnt defend an ant with 2 legs tonight.
EricaLubarsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2006, 01:22 AM   #78
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chumdawg
This is certainly, beyond question--to borrow a term you seem to like to use, irrefutably--NOT a fact. Let me repeat. This is NOT a fact. Again for you, I will say it one...more...time: This is NOT a fact.

The Mavs took a twelve- or thirteen-point lead (I cannot remember which) to the fourth quarter in Game Six of the Western Conference Finals in 2003. They would have been decided favorites against New Jersey if they had won the series.
Your inability or refusal to understand what I am saying is beginning to puzzle me. It's not a fact that Nash didn't lead us to the promised land? It's not a fact that Nash didn't win us a championship? It's not a fact that Dallas has yet to be graced by the O'Brien Trophy? No chum. It is a fact. An irrefutable one. We can sit by the fire and talk all night about how the Mavs (or any number of Western Conference teams that year for that matter) would have beaten the Nets had they made it past the Spurs but the point is moot. No statistic will change the fact that we did not win the championship. The Mavs did not make it past the Spurs. That is a fact.

You pin your argument to the 2003 victory over Sacramento and you accuse me of selective memory? It took us 7 hard-fought games to get past the Kings. What happened the next year? 4-1. That is significant. And using a single air-ball to characterize the play of Mike Bibby is just a poor effort.

Quote:
If Dirk struggles "relatively," Nash struggles relatively. It is a well-established fact that individual, and thusly also team, statistics drop off in the postseason as compared to the regular season because the opposition is filtered. This is nothing new. Yet you find a way to champion Dirk while disparaging Nash.
A well-established fact which has no bearing on the premise. With the exception of 2001, Dirk improved upon his numbers from the regular season to the playoffs. With the exception of the 2002 playoffs, Nash's numbers declined in the playoffs. The evidence makes it very easy for me to champion Dirk while (I hate to use this word but you seem to love it) 'disparaging' Nash.

Quote:
If you want to retract what you said and say that you appreciate Nash's contributions to the team, and that he helped WAY more often than he hurt (if he ever did), you can expect a "fair enough" from me. But if you continue to paint Nash as an ineffective performer, playoffs or otherwise, you will continue to get a counterargument from this end. And if you persist in saying that we are better off without an All-NBA player than with an All-NBA player...well, I will just have to shake my head and question your sanity.
I'm not looking for a "fair enough" from you chum. This entire conversation has been you (1) misconstruing what I said and me pointing that out to you and (2) you throwing out various unfounded assertions and me providing evidence and commentary to the contrary. Whether or not you choose to see that evidence is certainly up to you. Nash was a good player, but Nash was not the piece we needed to move forward. History tells us that. Your argument is based entirely on conjecture - that we would be a better team with Nash. My argument is based on reality - Nash did not lead us to an NBA Championship. Nash led us to a 60-win season. And...that is a pace we are set to break this year. So...until the playoffs begin and we do indeed go deeper than Nash ever took us, I will simply point to our regular season record and say that we are a better team without Nash than we ever were with him. Question my sanity all you want, you will find that those who choose to stay in the dark are rarely able to see the world around them.

Quote:
You characterize a one-third chance that didn't get there as "could not." Not in my world, buddy. In my world, a one-third chance "can," and does so, in fact, one time in three.
Wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. This is the most fallacious statement you have made thus far. In statistics, yes, if you flip a coin you have a 50-50 chance of getting heads of tails. In basketball, having a one-third chance to win means absolutely nothing. If the Mavs had a one-third chance of winning the Championship in the 4 years that Nash were here, then we would have won at least one. Right? A probability of one in three with a sample of four? Your world is skewed because it refuses to recognize the difference between the court and the spreadsheet. Statistics are a tool chum, they are not the final word.

Last edited by orangedays; 03-29-2006 at 01:26 AM.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2006, 01:46 AM   #79
chumdawg
Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cowboys Country
Posts: 23,336
chumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond reputechumdawg has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I know you are a smart guy, OD, but you are either being rather obtuse here or you aren't near as smart as I thought you were.

To wit: if you believe that whoever wins the NBA championship each year is far and away the greatest team that season and that no other team was even close, I pity you. I flat pity you, because you will live the rest of your life with a dire misunderstanding of how things work in the real world.

An exercise for you:

On a sliding 100-point scale, something like 75/25, how do you rate:

The Spurs against the Pistons last year?
The Lakers against Portland in 2000?
The Lakers against the Kings in 2002?
The Spurs against Dallas in 2003?

You come across as though those were absolute certainties--else why would you trumpet that Nash was holding the Mavs back all these years?--but the truth is that if the Blazers don't break down at the foul line in the fourth quarter, not to mention fall prey to some very susceptible calls, they beat the Lakers in 2000. The truth is that if a ball doesn't miraculously bounce to Robert Horry the Lakers face a huge uphill battle against the Kings in 2002 and probably do not win the series, and then the championship. The truth is that the Spurs were at best--AT BEST--70% favorites to win the game against Detroit last year. Just as they were to win it all in 2003. If you don't think a 30% or more chance represents something more than terribly overmatched, the kind of overmatched where you blow up your team, then I just don't know how we are ever going to see eye to eye here. Would you also recommend that Chauncey Billups, or Rip Hamilton, or Ben Wallace, or Rasheed Wallace, or Tayshaun Prince demonstrably needs to go because the Pistons clearly could not beat the Pistons with that player on the roster? News for you, OD: the Mavs were as close, for all intents, as the Pistons were last year. The Pistons didn't blow it up, and look where they are this year.

You said that with the exception of 2001 Dirk's numbers improved in the playoffs. (Not sure why you would except one of the years, but that's neither here nor there.) Well, last year and without Nash, his numbers declined dramatically, didn't they? In fact, I remember reading a study that had Dirk near the bottom of the bunch in terms of players whose stats declined in the regular season as compared to the regular season. What say you? I mean, this is when he is supposed to be getting better, right? This is when Nash is finding an entirely new level. For Dirk to tank while Nash excels is rather embarrassing for the Mavs, and rather damaging to your argument.

And finally, if you think a 33% chance means you should definitely win once in four tries, then you show absolutely no understanding of statistics--despite your otherwise more than competent intelligence, I will grant you that--and you should go ahead and back out of this debate now. We are operating on entirely different planes, and you have some work to do.
chumdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2006, 01:48 AM   #80
orangedays
Platinum Member
 
orangedays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,938
orangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant futureorangedays has a brilliant future
Default

Your pity is lost on me because you are pitying me for something I've never said. More to come as I read your reply.
orangedays is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.