No Technical(ity)

[Worm Guts]

Then I'd have to argue you haven't read the thread, or at least a word of what I've written.

I'd have to argue that you calling me clueless repeatedly and referencing my armchair isn't a compelling argument for your case.

[john2jer]

Not surprised.

My argument, or stance, or case, or whatever the hell you want to call it is, and has been:

1. The four lowest teams in technicals in the NBA happen to be 4 of the worst teams. I'm not surprised, it demonstrates a lack of effort, lack of caring, and 4 teams just going through the emotions nearly all season long. Never once did I argue the Wolves would win 50+ if Rambis led the league, like Worm is trying to pigeon hole me into. That's just stupid. I do argue if the Wolves displayed maybe an ounce of desire, passion, or drive this season that they would have won 20+. Now obviously winning 15 is better than 20+ for this squad when you consider the draft, but just going through the motions and not caring isn't going to lead to play-off runs.

2. I stated on a personal level that I've intentionally drawn a technical as a way to fire up my team, especially my current high school group, as there's kind of a bond with these kids. They take offense to it, and it fires them up. There's also a few other "tactics" that I've used over the years. Another good one is if the opposing coach introduces himself to my assistant and shakes his hand, while ignoring me. I'm 29 years old, but I look much younger than I am. So I constantly get looked over. It happens, I don't give a rip. I mention the slight to my players, it pisses them off because while I've been their coach for 6 years now, we've also been like family. I get texts or calls from at least one of them almost daily about non-basketball stuff. Work, school, whatever issues they're running into. We're a tight-knit group. Worm's argument is that he doesn't believe it, having never been there he feels comfortable stating a team would turn it around with or without the motivating factor. Having coached for 11 years, and due to fall, regular, and spring seasons, plus coaching 2 teams at the same time some years, I've been involved with 45+ teams. You get to know how players react to different situations, tactics, etc... Since he didn't provide much for evidence or even support for his argument, my assumption is that if a coach doesn't even show up for a game, it's going to have no effect on a team's performance.

3. It is quite possible to motivate your team and express your displeasure with the way a game is being called, without being a tool, disrespectful, and without insulting an offical. shrink's stance seems to be you just bend over and take it, however the world wants to give it to you. That it's disrespectful to question someone's shoddy performance because EVERYONE is ALWAYS giving it all they got. I'm not saying being a prick for no reason, like shrink is trying to pigeon hole me into, I'm saying calling someone on not living up to expected norms, especially when it's obvious they're doing it intentionally.

4. There was some other magically delicious point I was going to make, and I promise it would have wowed you, but shrink's comment about Arby's got me hungry, so I went and grabbed lunch. Didn't know Arby's had a $1 menu. Wish I'd gotten curly fries.

[john2jer]

Then I'd have to argue you haven't read the thread, or at least a word of what I've written.

I'd have to argue that you calling me clueless repeatedly and referencing my armchair isn't a compelling argument for your case.

So what you're saying is you didn't actually read any of it? Ok, no worries. But I stand by either you're clueless, or intentionally grabbing an opposing view and being obtuse and abusing the hyperbole.

[Klomp]

Guys, do your arguing via PM please. K thanks, bye

[john2jer]

Guys, do your arguing via PM please. K thanks, bye

Can you have 4 person PM discussions? And I think we're only allowed to respond to moderators, not intiate, or PM non-mods.

[Klomp]

And I think we're only allowed to respond to moderators, not intiate, or PM non-mods.

You should be able to PM mods...

[Steve_Holiday]

It would be interesting to see if coach technicals actually do motivate teams, and to see this motivation quantified into points.

j2j is obviously convinced, but like Worm and Krap, I'm highly skeptical. I would tend to put this in the bucket with clutch hitting and streak shooting. We see causation when in fact, there is none.

[Krapinsky]

Guys, do your arguing via PM please. K thanks, bye

Can you have 4 person PM discussions? And I think we're only allowed to respond to moderators, not intiate, or PM non-mods.

I'm going to go ahead and call a triple technical here. Worm and J2J for having a baseless argument and Klomp for klomping an argument before any of us got a chance to see it escalate into something more entertaining. On the bright side, hopefully this motivates team Jerkstore, aka J2J's guys (Devils, Esohny, backwards Fran), into rallying around him and successfully making a come back and putting big WORM in his place with regard to this technical issue that no one cares about.

[Worm Guts]

Not surprised.

My argument, or stance, or case, or whatever the hell you want to call it is, and has been:

1. The four lowest teams in technicals in the NBA happen to be 4 of the worst teams. I'm not surprised, it demonstrates a lack of effort, lack of caring, and 4 teams just going through the emotions nearly all season long. Never once did I argue the Wolves would win 50+ if Rambis led the league, like Worm is trying to pigeon hole me into. That's just stupid. I do argue if the Wolves displayed maybe an ounce of desire, passion, or drive this season that they would have won 20+. Now obviously winning 15 is better than 20+ for this squad when you consider the draft, but just going through the motions and not caring isn't going to lead to play-off runs.:

Your argument implies the Wolves would have more wins if Rambis got more technicals. 50 wins was intentionally over the top to prove my point.

2. I stated on a personal level that I've intentionally drawn a technical as a way to fire up my team, especially my current high school group, as there's kind of a bond with these kids. They take offense to it, and it fires them up. There's also a few other "tactics" that I've used over the years. Another good one is if the opposing coach introduces himself to my assistant and shakes his hand, while ignoring me. I'm 29 years old, but I look much younger than I am. So I constantly get looked over. It happens, I don't give a rip. I mention the slight to my players, it pisses them off because while I've been their coach for 6 years now, we've also been like family. I get texts or calls from at least one of them almost daily about non-basketball stuff. Work, school, whatever issues they're running into. We're a tight-knit group. Worm's argument is that he doesn't believe it, having never been there he feels comfortable stating a team would turn it around with or without the motivating factor. Having coached for 11 years, and due to fall, regular, and spring seasons, plus coaching 2 teams at the same time some years, I've been involved with 45+ teams. You get to know how players react to different situations, tactics, etc... Since he didn't provide much for evidence or even support for his argument, my assumption is that if a coach doesn't even show up for a game, it's going to have no effect on a team's performance.

My argument was never that it's impossible for a team to get motivated from technicals. You know your team, if you say your team plays better when you get technical, I'm in no position to argue. My point has been that in 25 years of watching all sorts of basketball, getting technical very rarely makes a difference. There's plenty of times where a team will get a technical, then run off 4-6 points, and the announcers start attributing that run to the technical, but typically if there is a run, it seems to be short.

[john2jer]

1. My argument implies nothing besides exactly what I said. I guess if you're going to draw implications from someone's argument that aren't there, then it's pointless to discuss anything with you. Read exactly what's written, don't try to twist a person's words so they're easier for you to argue with. I never once said that the Wolves or any team would be a better team because of techincals. I said they'd win more games if they played with more passion, more desire, and quit just going through the motions. I also said that in my experience, getting a technical can cause that because it wakes a team up.

See, here's exactly my point. You spent the whole time arguing a debate that wasn't even there.

And again with the 4-6 points. The example I used was the 17 points that Cleveland was down and their 23-5 run they went on to start the 4th.

I suppose it's a lot easier to argue with someone when you just make shiz up.

[Esohny]

I'm going to go ahead and call a triple technical here. Worm and J2J for having a baseless argument and Klomp for klomping an argument before any of us got a chance to see it escalate into something more entertaining. On the bright side, hopefully this motivates team Jerkstore, aka J2J's guys (Devils, Esohny, backwards Fran), into rallying around him and successfully making a come back and putting big WORM in his place with regard to this technical issue that no one cares about.

I'm on a "team" now? I couldn't care less about "The Technical Conundrum," but that statement seems like an attempt to start an argument on a different issue. Bored?


edit: Can we get uniforms?

[john2jer]

I'm going to go ahead and call a triple technical here. Worm and J2J for having a baseless argument and Klomp for klomping an argument before any of us got a chance to see it escalate into something more entertaining. On the bright side, hopefully this motivates team Jerkstore, aka J2J's guys (Devils, Esohny, backwards Fran), into rallying around him and successfully making a come back and putting big WORM in his place with regard to this technical issue that no one cares about.

I'm on a "team" now? I couldn't care less about "The Technical Conundrum," but that statement seems like an attempt to start an argument on a different issue. Bored?

If anything, Esohny is clearly the anti-j2j(k). He's my shelbyville counter-part. One of us is the evil version of the other, not sure which.

LOL, anyways. I'm just going to let this one die, as I tried to above when I said Worm and I could just agree to disagree.

I do think the "no end zone dances" point by shrink was a laughable one, though.

[Worm Guts]

1. My argument implies nothing besides exactly what I said. I guess if you're going to draw implications from someone's argument that aren't there, then it's pointless to discuss anything with you. Read exactly what's written, don't try to twist a person's words so they're easier for you to argue with. I never once said that the Wolves or any team would be a better team because of techincals. I said they'd win more games if they played with more passion, more desire, and quit just going through the motions. I also said that in my experience, getting a technical can cause that because it wakes a team up..

BS. You're argument is that technicals inspire passion and better play. You pointed to the lack of technicals on bad teams to prove that point. If you follow that argument, it means that the Wolves would have more wins if they have more technicals.

And again with the 4-6 points. The example I used was the 17 points that Cleveland was down and their 23-5 run they went on to start the 4th.

I suppose it's a lot easier to argue with someone when you just make shiz up.

That was my argument from watching games. The announcers are quick to jump on the idea that technicals inspire better play. It had nothing to with your arguments.

[john2jer]

And it continues.

[Krapinsky]

I'm going to go ahead and call a triple technical here. Worm and J2J for having a baseless argument and Klomp for klomping an argument before any of us got a chance to see it escalate into something more entertaining. On the bright side, hopefully this motivates team Jerkstore, aka J2J's guys (Devils, Esohny, backwards Fran), into rallying around him and successfully making a come back and putting big WORM in his place with regard to this technical issue that no one cares about.

I'm on a "team" now? I couldn't care less about "The Technical Conundrum," but that statement seems like an attempt to start an argument on a different issue. Bored?


edit: Can we get uniforms?

I must have some new tell that I'm not aware of. It's true, this forum has had little to offer lately. Why do you think I made that ridiculous offseason game that took me like 45 minutes to put together?

[john2jer]

The forum has been filled with whining about guys that we "missed" on, and a billion and a half scenarios of Turner+.

De-railing threads until May 18th is the only fun part now.

[casey]

I think it's fair to say a lack of technicals comes from a lack of passion (along with other things too, of course). And a lack of passion results in a lack of wins. I would guess that historically bad teams have lower technical totals. I'll give it a look when I get home if nobody wants to before then.

[Esohny]

I must have some new tell that I'm not aware of. It's true, this forum has had little to offer lately. Why do you think I made that ridiculous offseason game that took me like 45 minutes to put together?

I have to agree, there has been far too little random off topic around here lately. Well...


Soda Popinski: closet drunk, or just a guy who takes Sprite commercials far too literally?

[john2jer]

I've always wondered if he was mixing.