Posted by RemBee76:

This "lowstandards" nonesense is the biggest straw man of all, Bip.

So the fans who thought we should keep Larry Brown on had "low standards" because they were "ok" with a 23 win team?

Just asking.

Posted by RemBee76:

This "lowstandards" nonesense is the biggest straw man of all, Bip.

So the fans who thought we should keep Larry Brown on had "low standards" because they were "ok" with a 23 win team?

Just asking.

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Is 45 and 46 between/in the range of 45-50wins? And is 46wins that far away from 50wins? I thought you said you were'nt going to ahhhhhhh nevermind.

I only responded because you are stretching the truth. If you are going to say that someone said something there's no need to embelish what that person actually said to make them seem way off base. To answer your question, we are talking about the top of someones range and then you added another 4 wins. To say that you think a team can win between 41 and 46 games IS different than saying 45-50 wins and you know that.

Posted by RemBee76:

Posted by Bippity10:
Settling is attacking a fan that is upset with Curry's lack of defense or rebounding. Settling is making excuses for two straight years. Settling is saying it was okay for the team to quit last year because they hated LB.

And you say I'm just trying to be combative?

Point out where I "attacked" a fan for criticizing Curry's defense or rebounding. Point out where I made excuses for Larry Brown (ok, you can't, but I assure you I didn't...but I can point out posts from today from your compatriots that do) Point out where I said it was ok for the team to quit on anything.

You see what you want to see, the undermanned team of '97 can be looked on as a romantic ideal because they were championship contenders. This years team, which played undermanned at numerous times during the season, are a bunch of sissies because they only won 33 games.

I didn't see a team that laid down and died because they had some injuries to some key players, they just didn't have the talent to win without them. But maybe I'm seeing what I want to see.

Just don't tell me I have low standards, or I'm not being tough enough on Curry (as though he is reading and absorbing our diatribes against him on a message board) or that I love light beer.

This team has been sorely mismanaged, but even Kam can see that’s turning around. So we can rail on about what we shoulda done in 2003, how fans are happy with 33 wins, how we have no Nowitzki and Zaza is better than Curry, or how we gonna be bad like the Hawks for ten years, but then...who is really being controversial?

I can address your posts one by one:

Rembee not once did I mention your name in that post. So not sure what you are talkign about. As a matter of fact I have no idea what your opinions are so I don't comment on them. I will not point out where YOU DID THESE THINGS, because I was not referring to you. So maybe it is you who see what you want to see. I am however commenting on a group of fans here that will call you a Nets fan if you criticize Curry for averaging 7 rebounds a game this year, and 5 last year.

As for the compatriot tag. Who exactly are my compatriots? Since you seem to know, why don't you tell me what my opinion on LB appears to be? Judging by this post I can guarantee you have no idea what my opinion is and have thus lumped me in with a large group of other posters simply because I don't hate LB. Or blame everything on him.

As for the only winning 33 games and calling them sissies. REad my post again. I even said that the collapse at the end was okay. I have no problem with struggling to win without your players. So once again don't lump me in a category. All rational fans know that injuries will affect your team. AS we all knew that losing the guys in '97 would affect our chances of winning. This is not rocket science. But a winning organization ignores this and fights anwyay. No excuses. You bust asse, you go 3-15 and keep your mouth shut. Losing because you are undermanned is not a bad thing. Losing and whining and blaming refs and injuries and home fans that boo you is what brings about more losing. When we rid ourselves of excuses you will see us start winning some of these big "must win" games that we continually bomb in.

Again, I don't know your opinion on Curry and will not comment on them. But there are clearly people on this board that will come after you should you even remotely mention that Curry is averaging 3-5 rebounds less than he is capable of. That is settling in my view. My question to them is, am I wrong? Is seven rebounds where Eddie should be? Is my point flawed, or are they just upset because I appear to be mean to Eddie?

As for the zaza vs. Curry debate. Read the post again. I chose not to address teh Curry vs. Pachulia argument because I thought it was just someone using the time to bash Curry. An opinion I disagree with. If you reread my post I challenge you to find some bashing or something unfair about Curry in the post. My advice is for you to read the names next to the posts before you lump my opinions in with everyone else.

Point out where I "attacked" a fan for criticizing Curry's defense or rebounding. Point out where I made excuses for Larry Brown (ok, you can't, but I assure you I didn't...but I can point out posts from today from your compatriots that do)

How about this. Have your arguments with my "compatriots" and leave me out of them. If someone says that you made excuses for Larry Brown address that with them. I have nothing to do with that so why are you bringing me into that argument? I'm not even sure I understand where this sentence is coming from.

As for seeing the team turnaround. Again, judging by your post, you haven't a clue what my opinion of the team is. I can guarantee based on your lumping me in with my "compatriots" that what you know of my opinion is completely off base. So why don't you tell me what it is?

Posted by RemBee76:

Compatriot: A person from one's own country, i.e. this message board. Relax, man.

Sorry if I took the text within a message you wrote directly addressing a point I made in the post directly previous to yours to be addressed to me.

Won't happen again.

Posted by Bippity10:
Where has this attitude gone? When did it become acceptable for a center to average 3-5 rebounds under what he should be averaging and still have fans demanding he not be criticized for it? When did this start?

Point out where I "attacked" a fan for criticizing Curry's defense or rebounding. Point out where I made excuses for Larry Brown (ok, you can't, but I assure you I didn't...but I can point out posts from today from your compatriots that do) Point out where I said it was ok for the team to quit on anything.

Posted by RemBee76:

Posted by Bippity10:
My question is where did that come from? Where did I say you did?

Asked and answered. You wrote a post following mine, quoting my previous post, and addressing the point I made in that post.

You want to say it wasn't addressed to me? Cool. Just don't make up some BS about how I'm just "one of those" being combative because I thought it was.

peace.

Posted by nixluva:

I only responded because you are stretching the truth. If you are going to say that someone said something there's no need to embelish what that person actually said to make them seem way off base. To answer your question, we are talking about the top of someones range and then you added another 4 wins. To say that you think a team can win between 41 and 46 games IS different than saying 45-50 wins and you know that.