It isn't random commentary. It isn't useful. It isn't insightful. It is just typing out part of what already exists on the boxscore. Most of us know how to use the internet. We know where to find the boxscore. We know how to read the boxscore. I guess you can take credit for putting a "smiley" after posting a stat.
So posting statistics is now a negative. Great, I'd much rather just hear opinions that aren't based on statistics. "Nate sucks". That's insightful. Also, do you do anything other than criticize posts on this board and berate people in the OT forum? I wouldn't call this list of insults "insightful", but that's just me. http://sportstwo.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1553696
Upset because he stole your activity? As for Miller's game yesterday, one portion I noticed of usefulness was a succession where Westbrook was being physical with Blake, and Blake could do nothing to stop him. Miller was inserted at that point, and Westbrook instantly wasn't able to have his way in the post. Small thing, but was nice to slow him down for a moment, and not let him gain more confidence, and continue to score more.
Literally his last 10 posts have been directly attacking the opinion of another poster. Miller stinks right now. That's my opinion. As I've posted, I'm sure he will turn it around. Instead of talking about how wonderful Miller did against Westbrook, which is fine, I pointed out he had the worst +/1 on the team, which is a statistic. I found blazerboy's post to be pretty generic and not at all "insightful". I haven't seen him post anything "insightful" recently, but again, that's just my opinion. Also, what is my "activity" other than being attacked for posting raw data regarding the game in the game thread? I find it immature for posters to take out their frustrations regarding Miller on posters factually posting about his play.
What do you expect when you post: It is right up there with Kingspeed's posts. How do you want somebody to respond? Say, "Yes PapaG. You're absolutely correct! Miller had zero assists in 20 minutes tonight. Great observation!" ?
