Random NBA Observations 2021 - 2022

[tremonthustler1]

I honestly never thought about where he was from before

sorry @tremonthustler1

The Esplash Hermano showed out in front of the nation tonight

@TradePascalSiakam O Canada Duarte won't joiiiiin youuuuuuurrrrr teeeeeaaammm

 

[Don Homer]

Why make that play a point of emphasis and not his entire game? Did he have an overwhelming amount of bad plays to good plays like Wiggins did? He dropped 40 points, and everyone else struggled to even get double digits; Klay, Wiggins and Poole shot a combined 12-39, yet somehow, all your energy is directed at Steph and that one play. One play. One play. One play. Are you that blind to your own agenda that you can't see this?

GIL, BECAUSE IT WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAY OF THE GAME!

I literally shytted on the entire team for shooting like shyt. U are arguing semantics. The WHOLE TEAM is a fukking joke right now. THE WHOLE TEAM is looking like a bunch of pretenders, THE WHOLE TEAM looks like the 2015 ATL Hawks

 

[LezJepzin]

They did Terrance Davis dirty

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

GIL, BECAUSE IT WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT PLAY OF THE GAME!

I literally shytted on the entire team for shooting like shyt. U are arguing semantics. The WHOLE TEAM is a fukking joke right now. THE WHOLE TEAM is looking like a bunch of pretenders, THE WHOLE TEAM looks like the 2015 ATL Hawks

The entire game is important; no play is intrinsically more important than the other.

Yet you single out ONE play, but can't speak about his game as a whole. Why single out one [bad] play of Steph's, yet not speak about him being the only reason that the game was even a contest? How can you not see you're nit-picking some bullshyt about his performance, yet don't have the same energy for Wiggins, who played horrendously? Did that defensive miscue from Steph have more affect on the result than Wiggins barely cracking double-digits and not being aggressive at any point? How many times do I need to point this out before you acknowledge so?

 

[Chabot College]

@Chabot College

Do you finally see what I've been saying about this team now?

It’s getting spooky but I’m going to wait and see how this plays out these next few months

 

[Don Homer]

The entire game is important; no play is intrinsically more important than the other.

Yet you single out ONE play, but can't speak about his game as a whole. Why single out one [bad] play of Steph's, yet not speak about him being the only reason that the game was even a contest? How can you not see you're nit-picking some bullshyt about his performance, yet don't have the same energy for Wiggins, who played horrendously? Did that defensive miscue from Steph have more affect on the result than Wiggins barely cracking double-digits and not being aggressive at any point? How many times do I need to point this out before you acknowledge so?

what a crock of shyt.

Small errors can decide games. If gregg popovich Keeps tim duncan in the game in the 2013 finals, they win. He didnt, and it led to OT, and they lost. That was a mistake

We didnt have room for error with the way the team was playing.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I shytted on the WHOLE team!
ONCE AGAIN, YOU ARE ARGUING SEMANTICS

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

what a crock of shyt.

Small errors can decide games

AND ONCE AGAIN, I shytted on the WHOLE team!
ONCE AGAIN, YOU ARE ARGUING SEMANTICS

You say the whole team, but you don't mention Wiggins once, and you single out Steph for one bad play (even have the nerve to mention him twice). Anyone who's paying attention knows what you're doing.

 

[Don Homer]

You say the whole team, but you don't mention Wiggins once, and you single-out Steph for one bad play. Anyone who's paying attention knows what you're doing.

I mentioned wiggins before that post. Wiggins was getting cooked for his play tonight, and I agreed.

ONCE AGAIN, YOU ARE ARGUING SEMANTICS.

I said he played like shyt in Minnesota also.

ONCE AGAIN, YOU ARE ARGUING SEMANTICS

 

[CHICAGO]

Please respect the allstar starter

SHOOTING BETTER
THAN STEPH FROM
THE FIELD AND THE 3P
WHILE ALSO BEING THE
BETTER DEFENDER.

WOULDNT BE CALLING
FOR SCREENS WITH A 5'8
DEFENDER ON HIM EITHER.

​

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

SHOOTING BETTER
THAN STEPH FROM
THE FIELD AND THE 3P
WHILE ALSO BEING THE
BETTER DEFENDER.

WOULDNT BE CALLING
FOR SCREENS WITH A 5'8
DEFENDER ON HIM EITHER.

​

Shameless.

 

[Don Homer]

SHOOTING BETTER
THAN STEPH FROM
THE FIELD AND THE 3P
WHILE ALSO BEING THE
BETTER DEFENDER.

WOULDNT BE CALLING
FOR SCREENS WITH A 5'8
DEFENDER ON HIM EITHER.

​

Shameless.

@CHICAGO ur trolling

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

ONCE AGAIN, YOU ARE ARGUING SEMANTICS.

There's no semantics about it. Even your own fan base knows what you're doing. You even went and edited your post putting "Andrew Wiggins wasting time on the court". What a way to keep the same energy...

 

[CHICAGO]

@CHICAGO ur trolling

WIGGINS WOULDNT
TAKE SYKES INTO THE POST
AND GET EASY BUCKETS?



​

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

WIGGINS WOULDNT
TAKE SYKES INTO THE POST
AND GET EASY BUCKETS?



​

Wiggins had countless opportunities to score against a mismatch in that game, but couldn't. He gave up the ball multiple times when he couldn't create for himself. Rinse and repeat every game.

 

[Don Homer]

WIGGINS WOULDNT
TAKE SYKES INTO THE POST
AND GET EASY BUCKETS?



​

not tonight, nope