obviously somebody does since they said it, and that's what I was responding too but yeah, that's enough of that
Fair enough, but I didnt take his comment that way. IMO usually when a starter gets hurt its that guys that have no business playing extended roles are forced into extended roles. I’ll move on.
I wish @SlyPokerDog would've closed the thread. I saw none of the insults. But I find it insulting that someone brought up advanced stats for a 3 game sample size. What a kingspeed post. This is pretty much it right here. How poor was Portland's defense before they traded for Nurk and how good was it after the trade? There were more factors than just Nurk joining the team. But at the end of the day it was one player who changed the course of that season. Still lost it round 1, so take it for what it's worth. But at the end of the day I believe Collin's impact on the overall team would've been enough to keep Portland in the running for HCA right now. You can't really dispute that belief because we only got to see him in THREE GAMES. With all the posters buying into the hype about Simons and how nauseating it was to read how great of a player he was going to be THIS SEASON. How dare I make a claim about Collins. Shame on me. What was I thinking? You know what, I wasn't thinking! Yeah the last part of my post isn't so nice but whatever. I think it's silly to try and have a debate on a player who played in THREE GAMES. Not even three games, he went down in what the 2nd quarter of game 3?........................... Which is why I told Torey to have a nice day, as I had no interest in a back and forth. But alas this is the internet.
I wouldn't have disputed that claim because it's completely vague (I guess maybe I shouldn't say that because sometimes, if I'm bored enough, I might even argue with a possum....and I'd bring stats!). Besides that, Portland is still "in the running for HCA" even with the record they have. Seems unlikely, but it's a long way from impossible but that's not the claim you made, and it's not the claim that got me engaged in the discussion wut?? YOU are the one who started the 'debate' about Zach by making the claim he would have been worth a 15-5 record if he hadn't been injured. Apparently you just wanted to make the claim, then close off discussion about it afterward? I don't think that is how this place works...you may have bowed out of the thread but your claim stayed here by the way, "THREE-GAMES"-Zach played over 24 minutes in the 3rd game and was injured late in the 3rd Q. I get that you're a big fan of Collins and that's fine. What triggered me was a claim that just went miles past any statistical logic I'm aware of. That's essentially what Bones Jones said, in many less words than me. And it ignored what Zach was doing at the time. What killed Portland in the first 17 games of the year was their 1) bad perimeter defense; 2) their poor passing & offensive motion; 3) and their anemic rebounding, especially defensive rebounding. Those are the areas where Portland was failing, and Zach would not help much in any of those areas. 1) Zach is a good interior defender, especially in help defense, but he's over-matched defensively when he's on the perimeter, and that's often how he gets in foul trouble; 2) he's not a ball-handler and a facilitator; and 3) he's a mediocre rebounder, at best. He wouldn't really have plugged any of those leaks obviously, I can't prove you're wrong because I'm not friends with Mr. Peabody and his WABAC machine. And if I was, I'd have other priorities about messing with alternative pasts. Like slapping the shit out of myself before proposing to my first ex-wife
If Zach got hurt in game 3 of last season and missed 4 months, I'm not sure our record would've been any different. At worst I'd guess it would cost us about 3 games. This year however Zach's absence is compounded by the absence of Nurk as well. If Nurk was healthy then losing Zach for 4 months is just a minor setback but because Nurk is also out Zach might've been the 2nd most important player to this team heading into the season. Since Skal isn't playing any minutes at the 4, Zach is our only big that can capably play both the 4 and 5 spots. He's also our best overall defender. I've also been of the opinion that Zach is the type of player that is never going to have eye popping stats but does things that helps a team win ball games. We've also seen how one player that shouldn't really make a huge positive impact if you only look at previous stats with both Nurk Fever and now Melo Mania (hopefully!) can greatly impact the trajectory of a team's season and win total. Out of the Blazers 12 losses only 2 have been by double digits. I absolutely think it's likely having Zach in some of those games would've been the difference between winning and losing. Especially when you consider that Whiteside has missed 3 games as well. All 3 of those games were losses, two of which we win easily (IMO Philly and Cleveland) if just one of Zach or Hassan is available for. What does all that mean to me? I think we're looking at 10-10 as a worst case scenario right now if Zach had played in every game. 10-10 would put us in the 8th spot currently and just a half a game behind the Wolves for 7th and 3.5 games out of 4th place if we're talking home court advantage. They could've also been a little higher than that too but in this particular season the team couldn't afford to lose a guy like Zach right off the bat.
See it's posts like this is why I put people on ignore. First off anyone is allowed to drop a comment and not be forced into a debate like you seem to think they should be. No one is forced to respond to anyone on here. That's how this place works. That's how the internet works. Trying to tell someone otherwise like you just did, is just going to make me laugh at you. The only time it's different is if someone says something that could have repercussions on them irl. Simply because the anonymity of the internet is basically gone. I responded to Torey the way I did because I had no interest in debating something that was such a small sample size. Because no one could prove to be right in a debate. At best you could bring up last years stats, but Eric said it pretty well in his post. At worst someone would start making Kingspeed statements. You've been around long enough, you have to know what those are right? If not well sucks to be you I'm not explaining it. Btw that's what you did. Right now the top 6 teams in the West have 6 losses. I made the claim that Collins not getting injured(as you took the time to find out how many minutes he actually played in game 3. Cool on you) 24 minutes into game 3. That Portland would have only 5 losses right now. Which is in the running for HCA. Wow amazing. Split hairs much? fwiw I'm not that big of a fan of Collins. You make a lot of assumptions. Collins was doing the little things that lead to W's. These things don't show up on stats normally, let alone a 2 game and 24 minute sample size. I don't debate with opossums. Had one in my backyard Tuesday night. My dogs were going potty and surrounded it. I got it's attention and it started hissing at me. Got my dogs inside and walked away from it. If it comes back it's a dead opossum though. As I will smash it.
then for fucksakes, just put me on ignore without the useless threat; and also without trying to waterboard me into seeing the virtues of your way and the errors of mine. When you reply with that kind of insulting opening, there's no point in reading further, and I didn't....I see that and ignore the rest. To quote yourself: have a nice day!
ok...at least that's an argument with some reasoning. And I'd agree there was nothing really behind Zach. It was a roster hole that got exposed. I'm not sure he'd have been worth two more wins, but maybe. He didn't play very well in the 3 games he did play, but he could have improved with a little more time in the role
It's probably good you didn't read the rest, as it seems to me threats got worse. I found his remarks to be quite ugly.
Boy that McCollum dude is such a horrible player right fellas? Even while having a very solid game last night there were some of the " forum experts" sarcastically dising on him in the game thread. Such great fans some of you are.
"What, you would prefer our players to play in a way that would help our team win more games ? You are such a bad fan !"
Threats? Now I'm positive if I threatened someone @SlyPokerDog would've deleted the post as well as I would've got a DM from him. As that's what happened in the past for members who threatened members of S2. Those members are now banned as they repeated such action. Being that's not what happened... As I didn't threaten anyone. Whatever you're entitled to your opinion, have a nice day.
I'm guessing he's talking about the possum reference at the end. I found it to be rather benign, personally.
