jrodmc wrote:Jeez, team's doing well for once since 2013 and instead of giddy happiness, we're getting cat fights.
For the record, martin, normally when someone "buggers up" someone else's post, they use strikeouts and "Fixed".

But I understand you and fish seem to have a unique relationship. LMAO.

"Feel free to mute me and bugger off" Sig worthy gold stuff, from the king of Christmas decorations.

Wow, didn't know fish was British...

Cant just have the team get better.. sometimes it has to be THEIR way. Gustav hated Thibs hiring and wasnt a big Randle fan (at least not before being coached by Thibs, maybe since the offseason his opinion has changed) Otherwise its not clear why this guy is tilting over this.

jrodmc wrote:Jeez, team's doing well for once since 2013 and instead of giddy happiness, we're getting cat fights.
For the record, martin, normally when someone "buggers up" someone else's post, they use strikeouts and "Fixed".

But I understand you and fish seem to have a unique relationship. LMAO.

"Feel free to mute me and bugger off" Sig worthy gold stuff, from the king of Christmas decorations.

Wow, didn't know fish was British...

jrod....did I mention that the The TB Bucs were World Champions? Eli aint comin' through that door!

jrodmc wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

jrodmc wrote:Jeez, team's doing well for once since 2013 and instead of giddy happiness, we're getting cat fights.
For the record, martin, normally when someone "buggers up" someone else's post, they use strikeouts and "Fixed".

But I understand you and fish seem to have a unique relationship. LMAO.

"Feel free to mute me and bugger off" Sig worthy gold stuff, from the king of Christmas decorations.

Wow, didn't know fish was British...

jrod....did I mention that the The TB Bucs were World Champions? Eli aint comin' through that door!

Now that actually made me laugh. You calling them the Bucs, when they're actually the TBradys!

And Eli aint comin back, but hey we got.... franchise tagged ... ummmm... Leonard Williams!

LOL, we win one more and they just might do that. We franchised Chris Godwin. Means we're breaking the bank for Shaq Barrett. Looks like Jameis is going to be taking over the Saints. If Sean Payton can get Winston to cut down on the ints, he should run for Governor, lol.

Jameis's first and last pass as a Buc was picked off.

If this team was in the condition that almost every other exec has dealt with since Isiah left. The turnaround would not have been nearly as fast. To deny that is to deny reality. Perry played an outsized role in that. How do I know? Look at the moves Mills made before he was hired. Like night and day.

We win a Chip' Rose will be the one everyone credits, and it will be true. Absolutely no good reason to play down the work that was put in before he got there. The KP and Melo trade, if done the usual way, would still be fing up this franchise. The cubbbard would be bare. Most of Rose's time right now would be cleaning up the mess of the previous regime. Hard to believe some have forgotten that so soon.

GustavBahler wrote:Very much against whitewashing the work that was put in before Rose was hired.

martin wrote:I am confused as to why an article written by an author whose intent was to look at Leon and what Rose has added to the team and some of the in's and out's of that needs to include anything about Perry?

martin wrote:I am confused as to why an article written by an author whose intent was to look at Leon and what Rose has added to the team and some of the in's and out's of that needs to include anything about Perry?

As for the OP and propaganda regarding this FO who is giving them a pass? Who is saying "we have arrived"? I dont hear or see that anywhere. I think we are seeing good things. All that can change very quickly. If we stay the course over the short term we got into the offseason with a handful of good young players who are all trending upward in Randle/Mitch/RJ/Obi/IQ. Knox/Rivers are the other two also under contract leaving us with a huge amount of cap space, a solid group of young players and what should be 3 decent draft picks as we have two #1s and Detroits #2 which looks great.

Its about as wide open as it can get which is both exciting and nerve wracking

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:I am confused as to why an article written by an author whose intent was to look at Leon and what Rose has added to the team and some of the in's and out's of that needs to include anything about Perry?

If you write an article about the team being "rebuilt" by Rose (and only Rose) after a few months on the job. It becomes grade A BS, if the writer declines to mention who assembled and drafted most of those players. Who created the cap space to pursue more.

Otherwise it looks like the FO equivalent of being born on 3rd base and bragging about hitting a home run. Rose just got here, why are we suggesting that it all happened under his watch? Its dishonest, to put it nicely.

It's not dishonest. It's your assumptions that are wrong.

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:I am confused as to why an article written by an author whose intent was to look at Leon and what Rose has added to the team and some of the in's and out's of that needs to include anything about Perry?

If you write an article about the team being "rebuilt" by Rose (and only Rose) after a few months on the job. It becomes grade A BS, if the writer declines to mention who assembled and drafted most of those players. Who created the cap space to pursue more.

Otherwise it looks like the FO equivalent of being born on 3rd base and bragging about hitting a home run. Rose just got here, why are we suggesting that it all happened under his watch? Its dishonest, to put it nicely.

It's not dishonest. It's your assumptions that are wrong.

Not my assumption, your assumption about this article.........................is wrong.

Why praise Rose and include a reference to Mills and Perry feuding? You write an article about the team being "rebuilt". The only thing you write about the current GM is that he got into a squabble with the last team president? Really?

Whats the motivation? As you said, why mention him at all, if thats all you're going to write about him. What does this accomplish in an article about the team's current success? Except suggest that its all been about Rose. Sounds very "Dear Leader".

You are trying to make the article about what you want to discuss

Author chose a topic and his own timeline. This is nearing Don Quixote and his windmill, have at it.

Oh, also know that typically editors make a separate decision on what titles go on top of the article, not the author of said article. You can figure out how your "Rebuilt" fits

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:I am confused as to why an article written by an author whose intent was to look at Leon and what Rose has added to the team and some of the in's and out's of that needs to include anything about Perry?

If you write an article about the team being "rebuilt" by Rose (and only Rose) after a few months on the job. It becomes grade A BS, if the writer declines to mention who assembled and drafted most of those players. Who created the cap space to pursue more.

Otherwise it looks like the FO equivalent of being born on 3rd base and bragging about hitting a home run. Rose just got here, why are we suggesting that it all happened under his watch? Its dishonest, to put it nicely.

It's not dishonest. It's your assumptions that are wrong.

Not my assumption, your assumption about this article.........................is wrong.

Why praise Rose and include a reference to Mills and Perry feuding? You write an article about the team being "rebuilt". The only thing you write about the current GM is that he got into a squabble with the last team president? Really?

Whats the motivation? As you said, why mention him at all, if thats all you're going to write about him. What does this accomplish in an article about the team's current success? Except suggest that its all been about Rose. Sounds very "Dear Leader".

You are trying to make the article about what you want to discuss

Author chose a topic and his own timeline. This is nearing Don Quixote and his windmill, have at it.

Oh, also know that typically editors make a separate decision on what titles go on top of the article, not the author of said article. You can figure out how your "Rebuilt" fits

You're right about the title. Whats left out of an article can be just as, or more important than what's in it. This writer chose gossip about Perry, when discussing substantive change in the direction of the franchise. Thats what this writer choose to talk about. I choose to comment on that slight.

Those windmills come a-charging

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:I am confused as to why an article written by an author whose intent was to look at Leon and what Rose has added to the team and some of the in's and out's of that needs to include anything about Perry?

If you write an article about the team being "rebuilt" by Rose (and only Rose) after a few months on the job. It becomes grade A BS, if the writer declines to mention who assembled and drafted most of those players. Who created the cap space to pursue more.

Otherwise it looks like the FO equivalent of being born on 3rd base and bragging about hitting a home run. Rose just got here, why are we suggesting that it all happened under his watch? Its dishonest, to put it nicely.

It's not dishonest. It's your assumptions that are wrong.

Not my assumption, your assumption about this article.........................is wrong.

Why praise Rose and include a reference to Mills and Perry feuding? You write an article about the team being "rebuilt". The only thing you write about the current GM is that he got into a squabble with the last team president? Really?

Whats the motivation? As you said, why mention him at all, if thats all you're going to write about him. What does this accomplish in an article about the team's current success? Except suggest that its all been about Rose. Sounds very "Dear Leader".

You are trying to make the article about what you want to discuss

Author chose a topic and his own timeline. This is nearing Don Quixote and his windmill, have at it.

Oh, also know that typically editors make a separate decision on what titles go on top of the article, not the author of said article. You can figure out how your "Rebuilt" fits

You're right about the title. Whats left out of an article can be just as, or more important than what's in it. This writer chose gossip about Perry, when discussing substantive change in the direction of the franchise. Thats what this writer choose to talk about. I choose to comment on that slight.

Those windmills come a-charging

I’m with Martin here. Mostly because this isn’t whitewashing the merits of what came before. I really wouldn’t care who collected all the grains of sand on a beach. It’s the person who builds the sandcastle that gets the credit.

The fact that this nearly same roster was a floundering mess last year and this year looks like a semi-competent team this year is credited to the new management.

The fact that they inherited the youngest roster in the NBA, a pile of draft picks but nearly no useful veterans doesn’t glorify the prior front office. The Knicks were widely projected to be the worst team in the league. The fact that those lemon’s are tasting like lemonade is a testament to the guy who mixed the drink, not the guy who bought lemons.

You cannot re-characterize the KP trade either. Perhaps a different FO retains KP, puts him on load management, signs a healthy Kevin Durant and wins a championship. Maybe KP gets healthy and is a key component to the Mavs winning a chip this year rendering our draft pick much less worthy. Maybe the FO drafts Kevin Knox 3.0 instead of Quickley. Martin’s windmills are everywhere. I’m looking for the half-starved horse.

I’m gonna go sip my lemonade KoolAid on the beach.