If I was tinman, since you can't really prove that teams got better after SAR left, try to prove that they didn't get worse.
dude ok, you can point out the zit on Eva Longoria, doesn't mean she's bad looking. Teams got better after he left. don't say because they hired blah blah blah or because times change and people move on. its because he left. it took time. I mean, you get a divorce, and you are in a couple years in a slump, but you are better off without that biznatch right?? look at the Grizzles: Year Lg W-L Regular Season Playoffs 2005 NBA 45-37 4th, Southwest Division Lost West Conf 1st Rd 2004 NBA 50-32 4th, Midwest Division Lost West Conf 1st Rd 2003 NBA 28-54 6th, Midwest Division * increased 5 games in wins! 2002 NBA 23-59 7th, Midwest Division *consistency without SAR 2001 NBA 23-59 7th, Midwest Division *they won 1 more game without SAR 2000 NBA 22-60 7th, Midwest Division *SAR's last year see the divorce, eventually netted positive results. eventually your ex wife gets fat and ugly, and you roll away with the supermodel in a couple of years. let me give you a visual analogy: let's say the Grizzlies are Tom Arnold. WITH SAR: A couple years after SAR:
Dude, we are 0-8 without Tmac. I dont even have to post this because I know you know this. but i will cause i'm the greatest and gracious member of clutchfans. Have you seen our record without Yao? without Yao and Tmac? we don't have anyone on our roster who makes SAR money and has NEVER BEEN TO PLAYOFFS AFTER 700 games! this is the dude that they thought would take them FURTHER into the playoffs after Webber. They are taking them further fishing with Kenny and Charles.
The Kings suck now, they didn't suck before SAR. that's a great and easy stat for you. when KT comes in , and the Kings dominate a top team in the West, than means something. look at the 96 draft, and how many players made the playoffs in 1st round. i'll mark the one who didn't make it. 1996 NBA Draft Round 1 Pick Team Name 1. PHI Allen Iverson, Georgetown 2. TOR Marcus Camby, Massachusetts 3. VAN Shareef Abdur-Rahim, University of California 4. MIL Stephon Marbury, Georgia Tech 5. MIN Ray Allen, University of Connecticut 6. BOS Antoine Walker, Kentucky 7. LAC Lorenzen Wright, Memphis 8. NJN Kerry Kittles, Villanova 9. DAL Samaki Walker, Louisville 10. IND Erick Dampier, Mississippi State you know how long ago this was? 1996? people were listening to Garth Brooks!
Your information is wrong; Abdur-Rahim wasn't traded before the start of the 2000-01 season; he was traded after the end of it. And after they traded him, they finished with the exact same record (23-59) as they had the year before, even after acquiring "better" players. The very notion that you ignore the impact that Hubie Brown had on that team renders your opinion inconsequential. That team got better because of Hubie F. Brown, period. Hubie turned those players around; without his influence, they'd probably still be mediocre at best. They got better players after trading Abdur-Rahim, and they were still awful. They got better after getting a new head coach, not after trading Abdur-Rahim. Oh yes they have. The Kings have "sucked," so to speak, since February 23, 2005; 28-29 since trading Chris Webber. And, if you really want to split hairs, we've sucked since May 8, 2003, when Webber went down in Game 2 against the Mavericks; everything else was just a smokescreen. "Top teams" don't go 3-7, strawman. And, that "top team" wouldn't even have home court advantage if the playoffs started today; by the end of the month, they might not even be in the top eight. Do you have any notion of how to make a real argument, strawman? Everybody and their brother knows that Abdur-Rahim isn't a leader; that still doesn't prove that teams get better without him. You can keep repeating things which no one has disputed as often as you want to, and continue to distract people with your visual sleight-of-hand, and none it is going to change the fact that you still haven't proven that teams that Abdur-Rahim played for got better after he left, let alone that his leaving is the reason why they got better. What the hell; I am hereby proclaiming that the Rockets got better after they traded Kenny Thomas, that he was the real reason why they didn't make the playoffs while he was in Houston. And I'm going to predict, right now, that because the Rockets got rid of Kenny Thomas in 2002, they are going to win another championship. And, if they don't win it all this year, then I'll just predict the same thing again next season, and continue that pattern until they eventually do. And then, I'll be able to say that the real reason they won the title was because they got better after getting rid of Kenny Thomas. And, according to tinman logic™, I'll be right. A "witty" one-liner doesn't make you right, and neither does a goofy picture; I'm still waiting for your proof.
dude i've given you more proof that you can make a CSI episode out of it. SAR isn't Radja Bell or Dave Jamerson. He makes crazy loot, and he gets paid that much to make teams better. He gets traded cause the team no longer thinks that he can help them. look at the grizzlies, they went to the playoffs the last 2 years. they did get better given time (you love to omit this). Look have you seen those weight gain/loss or proactive commercials? those fat and zitty people got better, but it wasn't overnight. Give the Hawks and Blazers a couple years after SAR and they will be good. Im waiting for SAR to go 1000 games without being in the playoffs or being traded or demanding to be traded (SAR loves to do this when others are better than him). here's the example: given sometime after SAR, the teams below got into better shape:
I don't know why people still get baited into arguments with tinman. All he ever does is repeat his warped line of reasoning over and over again. When he runs out of things to say, he starts to post dumb pictures to piss you off. It's the same thing every time...yet every week he's able to sucker someone else into it. Citrus...just stop talking and don't let him get to you.
Dude I said given TIME, you know that thing Culture Club sang about. After you breakup with your girlfriend, do you hook up with a girl the next day? No you aren't that good looking. Dude, Hubie Brown is a great coach but did you hear him say 'Hey I wish I had that soft overrrated PF Sharif back on this team, do you ?' Its not like Phil Jackson saying hey, 'I wish Kobe didn't run Shaq out of town'. I mean dude every team in the NBA changes every year. Dude TIME TIME TIME. They got better right? Given a couple of years and better Powerforwards, the Grizz got way better and NOT HAVING SAR has something to do with it. This is a really stupid point because, you make it seem that no one on this board knows that coaches are a major part of a team. Hubie Brown was hired by Jerry West, and Jerry West isn't dumb enough to get SAR on his team. Ok, how about this? Grizz with SAR (Hubie Brown =TV Commentator). Grizz without SAR (Hubie Brown makes miraculous return to the NBA). Uh, they still MADE IT to the PLAYOFFS after the Webber trade. Have they or will they make it to the playoffs with SAR?? Answer that one Minute Maid. DONT EVEN DISS ON THE CLIPPERS. I'll bet you the Clippers make the playoffs. You know anyone who disses on Sam Cassell is most likely not to make it to the kingdom of Heaven. They are doomed to purgatory because they dissed on a hero of all Houston Rockets fans. Dude, how dare you diss on the Wizard of Oz. You are calling yourself a piece of fruit. Why don't you mess with some yogurt and ice cubes to make a smoothie? dude you lost it. Did I say anything about KT and the Rockets? At least KT teams make it to the playoffs, The Sixers, the Kings before SAR (FACTs). Plus, why are you picking on KT? he got attack by dogs. My logic has been correct, I said that the Clippers would do well after getting Sam and I predicted the Kings would do bad after getting SAR. Lets say they got Kevin Garnett instead of SAR, you think they'd be this bad? Hell, ROBERT HORRY is better than SAR. He's a team player. SAR makes Derrick Coleman look like Karl Malone.
When Vancouver traded Abdur-Rahim in 2001, he was making $10.1M. Overpaid? Yeah, probably. So they traded his $10.1M salary and two second-round picks to Atlanta for Lorenzen Wright ($5.5M), Brevin Knight ($4.5M) and the rights to Pau Gasol. That's the proof that your argument is flawed. Getting rid of Abdur-Rahim didn't free up money for them down the line, because that money was deferred to three smaller contracts. And the three players that they got for Abdur-Rahim didn't make them better because they had the same record after they traded him. The actual salary relief that they got was after Bryant Reeves' $11.5M contract came off their books; that gave them the flexibility to sign James Posey and Wesley Person (whom they later traded for Bonzi Wells). That's where the money to get better players came from; not from losing Abdur-Rahim, but from losing Reeves. As I have already proven, the players that they got for Abdur-Rahim didn't immediately make them better, so you can't use it as proof that they got better without him. I did not omit Memphis' playoff appearance two years after the fact. In fact, I have already made the case that the Grizzlies made the playoffs because of the guidance of head coach Hubie Brown, a case that you have tried and failed to disprove, and not because of a lack of Abdur-Rahim. The Hawks have had "a couple of years." And they're still sorry. And the Blazers will be, too. And this is why I made the comment about the tinman theory™. "Give it time" is a Post Hoc argument. If you wait long enough, every team, no matter how bad it is, will eventually get better. That doesn't mean that they got better because they traded some guy five years ago; just because one thing happens before a second thing happens, that doesn't mean that the first thing is the cause of the second thing. Contrary to your misguided opinion, strawman, you don't have to wait 2-3 years to determine whether or not a trade made a team better: the Nets got better immediately after trading Marbury for Jason Kidd. The Celtics got better immediately after trading the rights to Joe Barry Carroll and Ricky Brown for Robert Parish and the rights to Kevin McHale. You do not have to wait years to see if trading a player makes the team better. Not every team that qualifies for the playoffs deserves to make it to the playoffs; we still sucked, and we proved it when we got worked by a team that went on to get worked by a real team less than two weeks later... And, we suck right now; and if we didn't have Abdur-Rahim, we'd still suck. You said that the Clippers are a "top team." Top teams do not go 3-7. Refute that, if you think you can. So, still no proof, huh?
#2 in the division by 1.5 games is considered TOP TEAMS see, there's this thing called numbers. there's 1, 2 then 3, 4 etc. there is no imaginary team between 1 and 2. PACIFIC W L PCT GB HM RD CONF DIV PF PA DIFF STRK L10 Phoenix 19 11 .633 - 10-6 9-5 11-8 3-2 104.1 97.8 +6.3 Lost 1 6-4 LA Clippers 17 12 .586 1 ½ 10-4 7-8 8-5 3-1 96.0 95.8 +0.2 Won 1 3-7 Golden State 17 14 .548 2 ½ 9-7 8-7 7-7 1-3 99.7 99.6 +0.1 Won 3 4-6 LA Lakers 15 15 .500 4 6-8 9-7 7-10 0-2 96.3 94.3 +2.0 Lost 4 5-5 Sacramento 12 17 .414 6 ½ 8-9 4-8 7-11 2-1 99.6 99.8 -0.2 Won 2 5-5
what kind of logic is that? its not about 'deserving'. its about wins and losses. obviously they qualified and made it. does tony parker deserve this? does yao deserve this?
Utah is a #2 team in their division by 0.5 games; are they a "top team," too? Every team that qualifies for the playoffs isn't a good team. The Kings weren't good when we went to the playoffs last year, and we proved it when we got abused by Jerome "Trash Man" James. The rest of your tripe is not worthy of comment. No wait, I do have a comment: I'm still waiting on proof.
Dude, why are you still arguing? He's just jacking around with you to provide us all with (admittedly funny) entertainment. He's never going to provide any "proof" because, in reality, there is no real "argument" going on here. I'm just giving you a pointer, since we all know tinman's MO by now. If you want to continue this argument, then do so, by all means. It's amusing. I'm just tryin' to help a bit. No need to waste a decent bit of debating on this thread.
no, they have less than .500 winning percentage. obviously to be a top 8 team in their conference. Don't forget they had some dude name Ray Allen, aka Jesus Shuttlesworth. I guess you forgot Seattle won their division last year and played the Spurs well. dude Steve Wonder could tell you that you're blind. there's plenty of proof, look at the records of the team SAR was on, and look how happy they are now since he's gone. You must be on that OJ Jury, since your name is CITRUS. since you are so disillusioned, i'll help you solved your other problems, cause I'm so gracious. 1. The Earth is round. 2. Pamela Anderson's boobs are fake. 3. Santa Clause is not real. 4. King Kong would never beat Godzilla cause Godzilla can burn his fur with his fireballs.
ALRIGHT! Now this thread is getting somewhere! Somewhere like southern Louisiana bayous! The only thing that could make this thread better is if someone got so angry that they forgot the original topic but kept on slammin'! Suffice it to say we are discussing two servicable journyemen PF's who will NEVER be inducted into the HOF.
