As we will see, This next post is the one where YOU throw the first cheap shot!

ohhah, don't think I don't have a response to your reply above. But unlike many, I don't just come with hollow rhetoric, like "If we played uptempo everything would have been fine" or "any other coach could have done better." I come with evidence and substance and I just don't have the time yet to put it all together..


********

oohah

So after you take the first shot, here is my reply. Please tell me where you find an insult or anything like it, the closest you can find is my "Stephon on the Grassy Knoll" comment. Methinks you should not be insulted by that after your previous comment.


***

I'm sorry, I don't recall writing anything like: "If we played uptempo everything would have been fine".

***

I did not write that either. I did write that any coach could have done as bad.

***

Evidence of what? Stephon, Stephon, Stephon...

***

Instead of posting excerpts of articles that place Stephon on the grassy knoll, why not just talk about what we have all seen?

***

Seriously, I don't care about Marbury. He can be traded tomorrow for all I care. So please, if you are thinking I am a SM defender, don't. But I do see you working very hard to come up with a SM stuff, why not post some of the LB stuff too?

***

What does this have to do with what happened on the court that we could all see?

***

It is incredible to blame the worst month on a remark. Lots of things were happening at that very time. Or, please tell me how that remark caused the worst month ever! It was simply a stupid, ill-timed remark. Classic Stephon.

We all know what Marbury is. We have seen what he brings. Stephon did not change. The coach changed. The big change this season was the coach. It ws coaching that made the team extra-bad instead of just regular bad.

oohah


****

oohah

And then you had to increase the testiness and insults again:


Ohhah, your efforts seem to being almost dullardly simplistic.

On the level that we went from 33 wins to 23 wins and thus percentage wise our team took a step backwards nobody can argue with you, on that level. but when one allows for additional complexity it's not as simple as you'd have it. Why does it all fall on the coach? For instance when the 16-13 Wilkens team immediately plummeted to 2-15 would you argue that Wilkens became that much worse of a coach in that moment?

Why aren't you asserting that Isiah or Marbury, (or the victim of your choice) did 33% worse a job from last year to this, why just Brown? And why do you repeatedly dismiss numerous reports of this team in turmoil spanning two seasons with little more than the waive of an incredulous hand?

Nate McMillan was a hot commodity for utilizing a peppy up-tempo system to get the Sonics to overachieve, yet this year with a different cast of characters he had all the travails of brown and ended with a worse record. Was it because he simply blew it this year and did everything wrong? When Lawrence Frank took over for the struggling Byron Scott and got off to a 14-0 start do you really think it was because he made instant and radically appropriate changes, or do you think that Kidd went all out for him whereas he did not for Byron?

Sorry, but just divorcing everything from contextual reality and focusing solely on the record and declaring everything else a "red herring" while dumping that record solely at the feet of the coach is beyond simplistic and insulting to someone's intelligence, be it ours or yours.


******

oohah

http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=15949&page=2

Obviously you could not get me off your mind, because 1 day later you were still thinking about me posting in the above thread


This could spoil a wonderful post I was constructing for ohhah....


******

oohah



[Edited by - oohah on 05-31-2006 03:40 AM]

its a quarter to 4am and you're still going? WOW LOL!

Because I proved you 10000% wrong, in the next post you lose all control, insulting my character, calling me a cheap-shot artist, sleazy and numerous other things. Considering your behavior in seeking me out 2 weeks later I find this to be remarkable.

Ohhah, I like you, you're a fierce competitor.

That said, there are a few things I'm not so keen on, not the least of which is your propensity to resort to hyperbole and cheap-shots. You remind me of Bill Laimbeer who'd get dirty with the best of 'em, but then got all whiney and "why me?" when they got retribution or foul calls.

Oh aren't you clever, you're effectively calling me a liar AGAIN for equating the phrase "making things up" with "lying."

***

Shocking that weeks later those words were remembered as being called a liar, or are you just trying to sleaze your way through on a formality?

And I love your kind. You employ that old-school hypocrisy of accusing me of "making stuff up" on one hand while on the other chiding me for evidencing my assertions with quotes, stats, published reports, etc. When cheap-shot artists like yourself stop accusing me of "making stuff up" I'll feel far less compelled to evidence all I assert. Of course I'm aware I could just traipse my way thru utilizing little more than hyperbole, rhetoric and hypocrisy, like so many do (even perhaps, you?) but that's just not my style.


Now we see you like to be very acurate to the letter of a phrase, don't you? Yes... except when you prefer to simply try to twist things to your favor, as you do here:

****

And what did Brown think while watching the kids play hard and up-tempo?

***

Suddenly VERBATIM from players and coach means nothing here. No, DODGE & SPIN is the name of the game now. Nice cheap-shot.

Let's watch you operate once again:

Look at yourself. Your next cheap-shot is to accusing me of trying to pass myself off as an insider!!! How low will you stoop?

Never have I claimed anything close to that, and why would I go to such pains to evidence everything I say with published sources if I was pawning it off as "inside info?" And that aside, you really can't tell he's not utilizing a telephone sized playbook (a term i chose because it was said that Flip Saunder's is that size) when he's utilizing a HANDFUL of sets overall and just TWO options on breaks? You're really just killing your own credibility like this.

You're trying to equate SCORES to TEMPO? Do you realize that the score of the last night's Dallas vs Phoenix game was 95-88, well within the range of many of those games? We happened to be playing defense at that point of the season too, as well as turning the ball over a lot, it led to inconsistent scores is all.

But again, with all that, it was our 2nd or 3rd most winningest month of the season in spite of the players not having familiarity with each other, or not knowing what brown wants, and all the usual complaints, because the EFFORT was there.

And, tempo is all relative. At the beginning of the season we were much faster than the year before, but slower than the win streak in January. there is no certain pace or score that constitutes "up-tempo", but I'll tell ya, all you gotta do is watch tapes of games under Lenny and Herb during and after our 2-17 skid to see "down-tempo."

Now all you've done in this post is to continue to attempt to impugn my character instead of dealing with the major issues head on.

If Brown was so down on tempo why did he always put in the kids to hustle and up-tempo us back into games that the downtrodden vets had squandered? Why was he so effusive in his praise of Marbury and co. during our up-tempo win streak? Why did he give Nate more Burn than Q, Jalen and Francis? Why did he give Frye more burn than Mo and Malik? Why did Marbury say he could do whatever he wanted if he played defense? Etc, etc. Just read some old articles and you'll see that Brown was most pleased with the team when our effort and tempo was high and most upset when effort and temp was low, and don't kid yourself otherwise until you do.

Listen, I'm keeping this post relatively short for now because I'm fixing to write a thesis level paper on the whole goddamn last season when I get a day to myself some dog-day in July. This post was just to evidence your cheap-shots so as to keep this and future conversations on topic. If you can't debate the issues just don't reply, no need to get sleazy. I don't "make stuff up", pose as an "insider", or get my opinions from the papers, I simply go the distance to evidence my assertions in the face of those who don't, wont or cant.

My point isn't that Brown was flawless, but I try to illustrate the conditions that Brown was operating under - the malaise and indifference that coaches have been fighting since at least Steph uttered "I'm The Best" day, whether it's Steph's fault or not - because it's relevant to Lenny, Herb, Larry, and whoever comes in next, be they coach, GM or player.

With or without brown, the rookies were chosen specifically because of the character and energy they could bring to the equation, and they brought it, they did their job in that regard, they just couldn't exceed the effect of the veteran leaders. Not the present leaders anyway, and certainly not in year one....

****

oohah

Then in this next post you admit to throwing the first insult

I'm not going to go go point/counter point over this. a) I can't sustain my interest very long in pure drama, whether it's provoked by myself or otherwise, b) Your responses are so long they exceed the quote functions capacity, and c) I'd really prefer to stay on topic of the knicks.


However, lets just address one thing about this business you're going to town on regarding my use of the term "lie" vs your phrase of "making stuff up and presenting it as fact."

It's called a "paraphrase."

par·a·phrase P Pronunciation Key (pr-frz)
n.
A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.

Paraphrasing involves putting a passage from source material into your own words. A paraphrase must also be attributed to the original source. Paraphrased material is usually shorter than the original passage, taking a somewhat broader segment of the source and condensing it slightly.

I think "liar" was an apt paraphrasing and condensation of your much longer attacks. You feel otherwise? That's fine, but all the rhetoric, drama and hyperbole over it rather than staying with the basketball issues these conversations are attempting to address... it's just not that compelling and only distracts from the basketball issues at hand. I stated that Brown's playbook was "not large" and evidenced that he was utilizizing but a handful of plays and your still having conniptions over it?

You don't consider my evidence compelling yet you offer little to none to substantiate your own, and then consider yourself the better man for it?

Now you consider this a cheap shot?

***

Okay, if you do then you can say I started it, at least in that thread.

You're not above punchy comments yourself, like: "Seriously, you would argue that anyone in the backcourt was a more significant contributor, or "fared better" than Marbury? That is ridiculous."

There's nothing ridiculous at all. The season started with Marbury far and away the lead PG and Jamal coming off the bench. At this point Jamal has just as good a chance at being our lead PG as Marbury. Marbury's stock has fallen while JC's has risen, therefore he's fared better.

Here's another one:

Dogsh.t? Mental gymnastics? Easy there big fella.

And no, if you'd read what I wrote I did not say that "Brown intentionally tried to expose stars as not stars." I said that he tried to allow the veterans to be the key guys and leaders but they failed miserably, and they revealed themselves as unworthy. Which veterans, stars or high paid players do you think distinguished themselves?

BTW, if I wanted to play this ohhah style I'd say: 'show me where I said "Brown intentionally tried to expose stars as not stars." You're making stuff up!!! This is why you have no credibility and are one of the biggest exaggerators I've dealt with in a long time.'

That's the ohhah style of basketball discussion.

Another item you seem indignant about is my use of term "coup d'etat" with regards to Marbury's resistance of Brown. Again, you just want to get bogged down in rhetoric. On some occasions i've called it a mutiny, or a resistance, or a passive-resistance, or recalcitrance. Whatever, there's probably no term in there you will accept, but the vast majority of fans saw what Marbury was about this year and it was primarily in opposition of Brown's system in favor of his own, and to deny that as a team leader that did not drive a wedge between the team and the coach is naive at best, IMO. I'd ask you or anyone to consider how successful you think a team like phoenix would be if Nash were constantly having trouble to get on board with his coach. That team goes nowhere without him giving 100% and we are no different.

Now with a wife and kid and an old house I have precious too little time for the topics at hand. If you want to continue or escalate the drama here you can, I stand by my posts and posters may judge me as they see fit. Meanwhile I intend to put what time I do have into cracking the code of the knicks and evidencing my interpretations to the best of my ability. I still have a lot of thoughts on the subject and more evidence to substantiate them. My aim is to assemble them into a cogent piece with some continuity, and getting hung up in minor skirmishes over grammatical correctness only only deters from that goal.

If there were anything I'd ask of you it would be to do the same. Instead of splintering other's posts into toothpicks I'd love to read one from you that holds a linear progression of it's own and offers something to substantiate your assertions. You might have a little more respect for my efforts after you do. Or the least you could do would be to answer the many questions I've asked of you that you dodge while you pursue every other personal, gramatical or dramatic angle available.


******

oohah

WOW! I don't think my dissertation proposal was that long!

Bro, all I did was explain to you, as a man would to another man, that what Blueseats and I were discussing had nothing to do with basketball, but with his personal vendetta on me. You did in fact chime in with comments backing him and disparaging me, and I explained to you frankly that he doesn't need help in his personal attack on me. You were not commenting on the thread topic, you were commenting on his tirade. This is very poor etiquette in the society we live in.Just go back and read the posts.

I agreed with Blue, absolutely. I also pointed out that this is a PUBLIC message board and if you wanted to fight it out with Blue, just between you and him you should go to the off topic forum and title a thread just form you and him. This is still a basketball thread and anything in it is up for grabs when it comes to posting.

quote: Blue is posting the best facts he can short of saying he is LB and this is what is happening. You are taking Blue's facts and are teisting them more than Chubby Checker.

And the few posts I have seen from you to blueseats have been friendly and complimentary, that was all I meant about his being your friend. So now who is overreacting?

I made no comments towards you that can be considered as riled up until you started with this 'meds' stuff. Now you have decided to insult me several more times, so go ahead and get mad when I answer you in kind, I really don't care.

Play the innocent if you want, just about everyone who reads this thread knows where this started.

In no way am I defending anyone just agreeing with an opinion. You take my comments as a personal slight don't. It isn't. I don't know you, and if this is actually your personality, I really don't think I'd care to.

Go back and read your post, then read the chain of posts I am about to post. Your commentary had nothing to do with the topic of the thread, but the personal vendetta that blueseats hijacked the thread with. Just go back and read and all will be revealed.

If you are the type of person who feels the need to be the peanut gallery in the altercations of other persons whom he does not know, whether it be on a public street or a public forum, you are not the type of person I would like to know. So if you don't want to know me, no loss there.

I agreed with Blue and I said he presented facts....you didn't, you took off on hypotheticals such as-to paraphrase-if he can make the playbook smaller, it is obviously too big.

And what would that be? The meds comment? The meds comment in regards to the "fact" that I like Blueseats?

What do Meds have to do with your like of blueseats? You simply overreacted. Why did that get your ears up so quick? Maybe you should examine that. So you responded with an insult plain and simple. If you feel strong enough about your insult to commit it to type, you should feel strong enough to own up to it.

Ok....here is my first post.

quote:Originally posted by Bonn1997:

Is anyone actually reading this stuff (besides Oohah and Blueseats)? I need the cliffnotes!


Cliffnotes Version: Alot of sound an fury signifying nothing.

It's absolutely amazing that you two can make the Mo Taylor man-up thread look like Kindergarten stuff....

For the record I agree with Blue....I applaud you for having poet lauret' caliber interest in this. There is alot of twisting and turning in this thread that is now seems to be boiling down to Larry's playbook had to be unquantifiably big because he was able to break it down, which is faulted logic-but hey it sounds good.

Now yours....

Wrong Joe, The main point is blueseats' argument are mostly based on what he feels and few actual facts.

oohah

My response...

Bro, facts are something quantifiable. If you are looking for what is technically referred to as facts, well, this is a message board for fans and noone in the Knick organization posts here (to our knowledge). So hardcore facts are not goijng to be found here. Our facts are published reports of any sort.

Blue is posting the best facts he can short of saying he is LB and this is what is happening. You are taking Blue's facts and are teisting them more than Chubby Checker.

So far from what I read ( I read to about halfway down page 3 when you decided to quote every sentence-BTW, 99% of the posters on this board can not respond to posts like that for no other reason it is tedious and time consuming) the only one presenting "facts" is Blue. You are just taking what Blue brings up and just casting it in the different light of your opinion.

So far no insults, unless you want to overreact to the Chubby Checker line that is hardly even a real insult or name calling. To me it looks like you are only taking facts presented to you and twisting them around.

No back to you

Joe, I'm not sure what your interest is in jumping into this back and forth between Blueseasts and I, but it goes back to another thread. From your responses, it is pretty obvious you don't recall what was said on that thread, nor are you aware that this recent exchange had absolutely nothing to do with basketball, but with blueseats trying to rub my nose in something...incorrectly.

I have seen from comments on this thread and the other thread that you like blueseats and that is fine, but he is a big boy who does not need a bodyguard and you should let him handle his own business.

First paragraph I have no problems with, but when you are telling me to not be a "bodyguard" because I "like" Blueseats and are telling me to not post on this thread because it is between you and Blue, I take exception. Once again this is a PUBLIC FORUM. You want to hammer it out with Blue do it in the off-topic section or make a thread that is clearly only for the two of you. You two crying to each other has ruined this thread, because noone can get any continuity after they have to go through page after page of bickering.

quote: That's called hijacking bro when noone can post an opinion on a thread because you to want to have a little lover's quarrel (oh...um, no offense, because you know I like Blueseats)

BRO, hijacking is what your homegirl blueseats did. The topic he brought onto this thread was a personal gripe that had nothing to do with the thread topic. Your chiming in on his personal gripe had nothing to do with this thread. Get it?

Ooooo.....gay jokes in ebonically correct terms....I did not chime on a personal gripe. I agreed with someone on this topic...you brought the personal gripe crap to my doorstep.

quote: Really...you don't recall? ok, let me help you...

Jog the ol' memory?

If you feel the need to jump in on a topic that has nothing to do with the thread topic, a topic that is a personal tirade against me from blueseats, disparaging me in the process while pumping him up, that is acting like you are his bodyguard. My suggestion to you is in all walks of life, let other people who are arguing a personal issue that is none of your affair argue without your help.

Does that sound reasonable?

Once again you brought the personal issues to my door. I kept it on target. Blue had facts, in my opinion, you twisted them, once again in my opinion. You brought up the gripe between you and Blue in our (and I use this term loosely) conversation.
You would be the LAST person I take some life advice from, save it for someone who might respect it.

quote: I have a problem with noone, this is a free exchange of ideas. Oh, BTW, thanks for not insulting my "sissy" behavior of apparently piggybacking of arguments that I guess I do alot because you know, if you actually said I behaved in a "sissy" way that can be taken as an insult, but you don't do insults so I guess I'm okay.

Like I have written so many times, once you insult, don't cry when it comes back to you. You want to go there with this 'meds' stuff, don't be upset when I point out chiming in on other folks personal arguments is sissy behavior. And it is sissy behavior.

As I posted before, you calling me a "bodyguard" and telling me not to post in a public forum, and saying I like Blue when I can count on one hand the number of his posts I responded to is what I took exception to. And that was before any self percieved insult I lobbed.

quote: Um....ok....never called anyone out, don't have to get in a pissing contest (no challenge), once again stating ideas so um...posting an idea qualifies standing with my "joint out" I guess....ok...well....other than all that, I guess this sentence is 100% correct.

In fact you did you just edited it out later...for some reason:

quote:I am responding to posts on this thread just like 5 other guys have who you apparently don't feel like calling out, so do what you do bro.

Yeah, because that line has nothing to do with anything, but it is the truth, 5 other guys chimed in, you pick NYK4ever and me to have your "war of wits"...

I had a feeling that blueseats would just let it rest, but you had to stir it all up again.

And you are right, there is no challenge between us in a pissing contest, a battle of the wits, or any other event...I win.

Right..Since you game me some advice I'll never take let me give you some back. A fool always wins in a "war of wits" because an intellectual is never drawn into one. And a 3 legged man always wins a pissing contest.

quote: Dood...your at a like 11 on the roid rage meter....we need you at more of a 4 or 5....


Wow, posting topless pictures of your significant other just to get me? How far will you go? Does it hurt when it goes in?

oooo....another gay joke from ooohah.....will the wonders never cease? Did you fill your quota for the day? Gay jokes are never played out, huh? It's a good thing you are so "witty", and I mean that......really....no sarcasm here....oh damn you might take that as an insult too!

Posted by djsunyc:

where's dido when you need him?

ROFL! This is making any disputes I ever had with Islesfan look like nothing!

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 05-31-2006 10:04 AM]

This is awesome. But one thing is bothering me. Blueseats please stop sending me instant messages about Oooh aahs family members. Dear ooh ahh the preceding sentence was a lie(or in normal speak a joke). Lighten up my friend.