Hangout BBall Internal Dialectic: Eddie's Mistakes

You use your tongue purtier than a $20 w****.

As an aside , I don't think starting Eddie and letting him play right now could be Loss-Loss...I am of the overall opinion that it would be Win-Win. He looks to be ready, and I don't see him making a lot of frequent mistakes. Certainly no more than Kenny.

In terms of me "leanings", I am a middle of the roader on the Hangout, and a middle of the roader-extremist here.

 

**** kicker!

 

My head hurts

My response with references and stats to follow soon

 

I don't have anything substantive to add to this particular discussion, but RE: Griff, how about this painful passage from the NY Post (Kevin Kernan) today:

Do you think The Kid ever daydreams about pinpoint bounce passes from The Kidd?

 

Hardly a fair comparison considering the Rockets have had a LOT of injuries up to this point, as opposed to New Jersey this season. Also, NJ hasn't done nearly as well lately after that quick start. They might still win their division, but I don't think they have more overall talent than Houston (healthy and unhealthy).

 

I am going to pull a Derrida and say that my theories are being misused.

I prefer the original Hegel to Adorno's negative dialectic on any day. Of course dialectical materialism is oh so nice...

heypartner thinks he is being sweet to little ol me by not confusing me with those scary basketball terms. A sport about which I know nothing. He, however, is trying to fool you all.

heypartner does not want to admit that he is in the evil loss-loss category, speaking of The Death of the Point Guard and other fascistic rumblings.

If he quit following the bouncing ball, however, he would understand that the dialectic is a spiral and does not mean exclude. Adapt, incorporate, continue. Holons emerge, holons struggle, holons include, holons expand, holons evolve.

He further does not want to admit that he is an extremist, a polemicist at heart. You are either "with him" and right or "against him" and wrong. He does not understand the complex middle ground.

So I get to play along. I think letting Eddie mix it up, without excluding everyone else on the team is not only possible but desireable. heypartner seeks to "wow" you with talks of interfering with sets, motion, and cleavage. Don't be fooled. He is evil. He wants you to think that every motion offense parks the power forward at the 3 point line and that there is no room for anything more complex. He does not want you to know that motion offense can be run with almost any set:  3out-2in, 1-3-1, 1-2-2, 1-4, 4out-1in, etc. He also does not want you to know that he smells funny. It is true, though, he does.

In any event, I firmly agree that we should trade Mobley for AJ Guyton and then Moochie for Calbert Cheaney. Then they could teach Francis how to run a super-cool Bobby Knight motion set.

Then again, Rudy tells me that is not wise...so I will just defer to him. I hear that he was a great PG in his day.

Lacan said it bes when he said, "Wo Es war, soll Ich werden." This translates to, "rimmy could school devilpartner." It was quite cryptic at the time, but is now understood.

 

Raven,

sure health is good but the Nets know all about injuries.
do you really think we are more talented
lets compare

PG - Francis v Kidd - I give this to Kidd cause he makes his teammates better, hopefully Steve will learn
SG - Cat v Kittles - Cat not even close
SF - Rice v KVH - van Horn by a mile
PF - Mo v KMart - Before this season i would give it to Mo, but Kidd has made KMart much better offensively, on top of his very good rebounding and defense as opposed to Mo.
C - Cato v MaCulloch - 4.6 pts and 5.3 rebs for Cato and 10.5 pts and 5.4 rebs, gotta give it to Todd for his finishing

Benches
Kenny, Mooch, Walt, Oscar, Willis and Griffin v Jefferson, A Williams, Harris, Dial, Armstrong and Collins

Give it to the Rockets but Jefferson has been great.

So all in all I'm not sure

 

That's the best post rimmy has ever written. He dropped bs German philosophy in a basketball forum w/o appearing even mildly pretentious. Ahhhh... bs philosophy, how it gave me comfort... until I found out how other disciplines offer more concrete answers, e.g. frost mug to 19 degrees, etc. etc.

p.s. cwispee, don't consider me an extremist... consider me a lighthouse for those times you feel the queer mood to make Mobley heartthrob threads that have to detract from other Rocket players. It's those times that I feel the urge to play games such as "can one hate Rudy?" (incidentally the reliance upon bs basketball makes it easy to criticize Rudy, but...). I understand Steve isn't the best point... I understand that Cuttino will tend to make stupid decisions at the end of games (oh but that's not your point), but I feel it's also important to remind you that everything you base your analysis on (i.e. beg the question that Rudy is right and every other analysis you make flows from that assumption) is pertinent to question too.

What is your #1 rhetorical question when someone asks why KT does x, or why the lineup is y? Invariably you ask "oh, but your questioning Rudy's coaching"... as if this is some hallow ground that no sane person would even encroach upon. "Oh but that's what God tells us"... "Oh, your questioning Rudy's coaching". Uh, yeah... we're questioning Rudy's coaching. Our team is boring to watch. Our team is losing to the dregs of the league. I don't think I need to know how to determine the exact atp expenditure to shoot a bball 34' away from the basket when a 6'9" player is 1' in front of me to know that I don't like what I see.

So keep up your centrist 'Mobley can do no wrong', 'Francis "I want him to hog it" has a poor asst/to ratio and it has nothing to do w/ the recipients of his passes' objectivism. It's rather enlightening. Meanwhile, I will salute the city of Houston's foresight in realizing there are other things to do on a game night... hmmm, like... brushing your kitty's teeth. And when we hit 20 losses before 10 wins, I'll look to the standings to make sure that we're beating the Jazz yet on a different front.

 

HEB's post is so much easier to read than crispee's. Its probably just me, but it seems that shrooms had a key role in the creation of this thread...

 

Finally, a discussion I can understand! Enough of this high 14, 4 out, 7 up, whatever, let's talk meta basketball! But I think we've strayed into the realm of memetic evolution. The interesting question is, WHY is there such a fierce struggle for survival among the win-win and lose-lose theories? And the answer is, because there must be. Competing ideas about Griff have evolved and eliminated competition from earlier forms. Now competing memes are struggling for scarce resources in the form of neurons and seconds of the fleeting American attention span. Else they would both die out and be replaced by a more successful meme, like whether we should blame all our troubles on Keith Jones.

And if they did, what would be the consequence? None at all. Just as biomass remains static despite the extinction of a species, the BBS oeuvre complet would not suffer from the extinction of a Griffin meme. If you'll pardon the pedestrian Shakespeare reference, it's much ado about nothing. Or perhaps a more obscure Tom Lehrer: full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

To crispee and rimbaud, I say: <i>si hoc legere scis nimium eruditiones habes.</i>

BTW crisp, when you have two binary choices, you have four outcomes, not three, and <b>you forgot the fourth outcome: win-lose.</b> Here's my theory: By starting Griffin, we immediately improve as a team, His sporadic shooting steadies, his shot blocking alters games, his soaring dunks on the break excite the crowd, attendance increases, the team plays better in front of the home crows, we get back to .500, etc. <b>Win.</b>

But what happens when he hits the rookie wall, or is injured? The player he displaced in the starting lineup has lost minutes and is mad at Rudy and the team and won't be playing as well. The team's more active offense is beyond Glen Rice's ability, and starts to fall apart when he enters the game. bad chemistry ensues. When Steve returns, he's in the middle of a power struggle and trying to run an unfamiliar offense. Next summer, chaos ensues when both Mo Taylor and Glen Rice demand trades and we lose Kenny for next to nothing in the free agent market. Or do we have an option? Never mind. We start 2002-03 even less organized than we did 2001-02. Steve eventually goes to Washington and Griff to New Jersey. <b>Lose.</b>

By the way, like any argument where I don't use my real name, this is just a game. I'm firmly in the win-win camp, and I'm a lurker in the hangout, so I guess that supports crispee's theory, after all.

P.S. to rimbaud: "I am going to pull a Derrida and say that my theories are being misused"? As Pat Paulsen said, "Of course, the last person who was REALLY misquoted was running against Hitler." The only reason Derrida's theories were misused was because no one understands them. I'd place the number of people who understand Derrida at less than half the number who understand quantum mechanics, or around seven.

P.P.S. to crispee: It was such a passing reference, I may have miscontrued your meaning, but I believe you should re-read Sartre.

 

That is funny, I almost used that against you, but decided not to be so petty as to ask if you still dribble in the exact form as shooting...jump-shooting at the ground, as it were. If only you understood. And what do theories and original thought have to do with beating you on the court?

So me thinking that Griffin should be incorporated into the post offense is less original than you thinking we should go for a "4 out 1 in" type motion and increased fast-break offense? Funny how that works.

You still have given no legitimate answer, other than thinking that people are advocating the development of Griffin to the detriment of all others. Where is your original theory? What is your stance on win-win, lose-win, etc...careful not to expose yourself and your valuable thoughts.

Also, what you do not realize is that you are a particular type of hangout poster in disguise and that is quite un-original.

Lol, you made fun of art critics.

heb,

You flatter me, but misunderstood the point. I am merely playing hp's game, providing what he wants. There is no intent for solid posting on my part and I can only hope that there is none on heypartner's as well. Every now and then he has to get this out of his system and I just go along with it. It is amusing for us both, I think.

Here is an interesting question:

Are the BBS games heypartner plays more important than the basketball games the Rockets play?

 

Ricealum:

Derrida's theories, like Nietzsche's, can be appropriated any number of ways. This is the result of Derrida's 'postmodern know-nothing' philosophical approach. So Derrida's wrong to say his theories were misused, because the 'misuse' is really just a particular interpretation is easily consistent with his theories, though perhaps not put forth specifically by him. Derrida loves to be coy, and the reason no one 'understands' him is because of that coyness. If he thought he was being misused, it was his own fault.

Similarly, Tmo sometimes likes to be coy, and if he thinks RT's misusing him, it may be because of that very coyness. It's his own fault. He should stop being so coy.

 

<i>Originally posted by Tmo</i>

Precisely. If you want to have it both ways yourself, and define your own terms entering the argument, don't complain when someone else does the same. I considered saying something like that, but was getting too long winded already. You said it better than I would have, anyway.

Personally, I would love to have the time to apply Richard Dawkins' theories to the current state of the NBA. That might be more enlightening than piulling poor Jacques or poor dead Jean-Paul into it.

After all, as Derrida <i>might</i> have said, "technological complicity by contextual phenomenology subverts metaphysical complicity." For more, see the Derridan Manifesto Generator.

Don't let's even <b>start</b> on Kant's <i>Critique of Pure Reason</i> as crispee seems poised to do ...

 

Is this 'Masterpiece BBS' and where the hell is George Plimpton?

 

Originally posted by crispee

I post, therefore I am? I am that I am that I am?

I missed it, alas, but didn't someone already post one on the front page a while back?

 

What Dawkins would say about the rockets:

Individually, Cato and Rice's seem to have grown extra flesh to the point of detriment, like the preposterous lengths of tails on certain doomed birds of paradise. Sadly, their genes seem unaware that neither points not replication will result from this technique.

Tmo, Griffin, Williams and others seem to have bought into Dawkins' formulation of the prisoner's dilemma--they have tried and miserably failed at enacting a 'domestic bliss' strategy by playing passively against other teams.

Conclusion--the rockets have defective genes