Well I feel like Lanny is being disrespectful, and I explained it in my last post. Most times, if I come at someone like that it's because I feel like they're being disrespectful. If you don't see it, it can come across as me being disrespectful. That's fine. I don't like the way he was sarcastic, and his sarcasm seemed rather trollish. You won't see what I'm talking about but that's fine. That's what I took exception to. Maybe I shouldn't, it annoys me when people make sarcastic, blanket statements and put words in peoples mouth's just because they disagree. That's what he did. You'll never defend me to anyone, and if there's ever a disagreement you'll always side against me. It's whatever. Pels won it, they played great. We also failed in many areas that we could've done a better job in, and to point out the fact doesn't make you any less of a fan, like you just implied.
Just saying, that's how it came across and that's why I asked if you were trolling. Maybe I read too much into it. I'm fine with lightening it up. My cat of 12 years might've ran off and died today, so I'm tense as it is.
Implying someone is a troll is the very definition of a personal attack. If we stick to discussing the post and not the poster then there can never be a personal attack. My comments were directed at the general case hopefully avoiding an attack on you. Your last two sentences were too difficult for me to figure out but I sensed they weren't wishing me a happy day.
The implication that I was a troll was apparent to me. How else could I interpret it and if so why not express your true intent more directly?
I asked you if you were trolling... I didn't claim you were a troll. I troll sometimes. If you're trolling, it's fine. I literally asked you though, so how is that an insult? You and others have been clumping those who want Stotts into the a group, referring to the same "6 or 7 people that want him gone", then applying sarcastic, blanket statements to that group while making up thoughts and feelings that the group as a whole apparently has.
You were being sarcastic, and making blanket statements, while implying that the group of us was angry and unreasonable.. Therefore, it was a justified question.
The implication was clear to me as it was to others. However, I've virtually always taken a man at his word (the exceptions being Nixon and Trump) so I'll gladly take you at yours.
I was implying that your post came across as trollish, not that you, yourself, were a troll. Are you denying that your post came across as trollish?
No, it wasn't justified. That sort of response never turns out well. The only guys I assert are trolls overwhelmingly prove it in virtually all of their posts. Hence, I would never accuse you of being a troll. And that's about all the time I can spend on this. Talk to you later.
Maybe you should IGNORE all the people involved in this argument. Watchout, they might be closet Laker fans.
I don't think Terry will be replaced...I think he'll be here at least until his next contract comes around and if we're successful he'll probably still be around..I like the guy...I trust his demeanor....never wanted coach with a volatile temper for the Blazers...Terry is a player's coach and seems to handle the team without drama..I think he's a keeper. Front office likes him, players praise him....that speaks volumes to me.
I still think you're not understanding the difference between a trollish post and being a troll of a poster. Two very different things. I trolled earlier in this thread.. It wasn't very good though as it was taken seriously. I'm not very good at trolling... Or I'm too good at it. I dunno. But you're not a troll.. I didn't like that post though and it came across as a trollish post. That's all I have to say. This isn't a big deal and everything's good my man.
If we can overhaul our offense like Toronto did this year and focus more on the pass as well as try to make more adjustments defensively depending on our offensive opposition, I think we'll be absolutely fine and Stotts would be fine as our coach. If he can improve those areas, then he's fine. There's smaller things such as mis-timed timeouts, struggles out of timeouts, etc. but those main two things are why I think we struggle in playoffs (especially this year). It's been of my belief that he won't improve in those two areas, but I'm going to try to take the more optimistic route and hope he improves, since it's pretty obvious he's not going anywhere and I don't want to argue about whether he should be fired all summer. How we can get better and play a better style is probably a much better discussion to have.
Hire Steve Nash or Andre Miller as passing coaches....hire Mark Price as a shooting coach...get Nurk to workout with the guy Meyers worked out with last summer.
But is it our lack of skill in terms of passing (and is that the players' fault and not Terry's) or is it something to do with our coaching philosophy and the over-empowerment of players in regards to them pounding the ball?
Lack of skill in terms of passing....our best passers don't handle the ball much...if I were looking to improve that, I'd bring in a passing coach...for our streaky shooters, I'd bring in a shooting coach...as I said...Nurk needs to work with the guy who got Meyers dunking the ball for once.
But Turner got 5 assists per game in Boston and that's been cut in half. He was a great passer under Brad Stevens, so what happened there? Nurk showed very good passing his first 20 games here and it regressed and disappeared this year. Those reasons make me believe Stotts is at least partly to blame.
Is Stotts open to hiring guys who may question what he is doing? Is he even interested in guys who might teach fundamentals? I haven't heard anything that makes me think he is.
