ImageImage

PG: We'll meet again in the finals!

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25

User avatar
Baddy Chuck
RealGM
Posts: 49,595
And1: 22,661
Joined: Apr 18, 2006
 

Re: PG: We'll meet again in the finals! 

Post#121 » by Baddy Chuck » Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:55 pm

CanadaBucks wrote:One guy I kind of like(and this would be in addition to Monta not instead of)is Gerald Henderson from Charlotte. Now what I would be willing to part with and what Charlotte would take...I don't know

I wouldn't mind him I guess but would you be willing to go even MLE type money to keep him after this season? I think he'd get more and at that price I'd let him walk.
John Henson wrote:This lady just asked me who I play for and I said the Milwaukee Bucks, she quickly replied “oh the highschool across the street?”
User avatar
blkout
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 31,689
And1: 1,914
Joined: Dec 12, 2005
Location: Melbourne
 

Re: PG: We'll meet again in the finals! 

Post#122 » by blkout » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:38 am

JimmyTheKid wrote:Anyway, how would that be considered an "agenda?" There are a lot of people who like Brandon Jennings' game.


You're right, it's not an agenda to have a positive opinion about someone. Just as the absolute reverse of that isn't an agenda either. There are people who don't like his game, or people who don't like Monta's, or people who don't like Ersan's etc... that's all it is, opinions. You label them agendas because you disagree with them.

Myself included. I'm not trying to break the bank for him but he deserves a contract much like the one Jrue Holiday just received.


Nope.

You seem to confuse agendas with people just flat out not liking a player's game, or being a harsh critic of what they do on the court. An agenda suggests people have some sort of motive or meaning behind it, like the motive behind their opinion isn't basketball related. What are these people trying to gain with the "agendas" you are accusing them of having?
Image
User avatar
blkout
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 31,689
And1: 1,914
Joined: Dec 12, 2005
Location: Melbourne
 

Re: PG: We'll meet again in the finals! 

Post#123 » by blkout » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:39 am

CanadaBucks wrote:
Ayt wrote:You don't need to have an "agenda" to think Monta sucks at basketball. I'm appalled he's on my team playing major minutes. I can't stand his game.


But to say he sucks at basketball is factually incorrect. He would get minutes with any team in the NBA. But you certainly don't have to like him, his game or like him being on your team.


No one in the NBA "sucks at basketball" in the literal sense, that's just semantics.
Image
User avatar
AussieBuck
RealGM
Posts: 41,670
And1: 19,705
Joined: May 10, 2006
Location: Bucks in 7?
 

Re: PG: We'll meet again in the finals! 

Post#124 » by AussieBuck » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:17 am

There's a few 7 footers that suck at basketball.
emunney wrote:
We need a man shaped like a chicken nugget with the shot selection of a 21st birthday party.


GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:
if you combined jabari parker, royal ivey, a shrimp and a ball sack youd have javon carter
giraldo5
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,553
And1: 109
Joined: Feb 22, 2010

Re: PG: We'll meet again in the finals! 

Post#125 » by giraldo5 » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:36 pm

blkout wrote:Would like a conclusive list of all the Golden State fans please

Always loved them but didn't like Monta. Now with arguably one of my favorite players instead of Monta they are my 2nd favorite team easily.
GHOSTofSIKMA
RealGM
Posts: 21,667
And1: 7,962
Joined: Jan 21, 2007
Location: NC
     

Re: PG: We'll meet again in the finals! 

Post#126 » by GHOSTofSIKMA » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:44 pm

blkout wrote:
JimmyTheKid wrote:Anyway, how would that be considered an "agenda?" There are a lot of people who like Brandon Jennings' game.


You're right, it's not an agenda to have a positive opinion about someone. Just as the absolute reverse of that isn't an agenda either. There are people who don't like his game, or people who don't like Monta's, or people who don't like Ersan's etc... that's all it is, opinions. You label them agendas because you disagree with them.


it becomes an agenda when you grind an axe over it. saying jennings is a star or saying jennings sucks in every 2nd post when jennings name comes up is an agenda.

we all have opinions. and we all make them known. its an agenda when you act like a dick about it every time a name resurfaces. and thats especially if your the one constantly bringing up that name in general discussion.

Return to Milwaukee Bucks