Official Randy Wittman Thread - It's Playoff Randy Time LOL

closg00 · Post #661 » by **closg00** » Sat Mar 7, 2015 9:11 pm

hands11 wrote:Randy does not suck as a HC

Recalling the early days of this Randy Wittman Appreciation Thread

hands11 · Post #662 » by **hands11** » Sat Mar 7, 2015 10:55 pm

closg00 wrote:
hands11 wrote:Randy does not suck as a HC

Recalling the early days of this Randy Wittman Appreciation Thread

And what does that have to do with today ?

OMG. Grow up and stop stalking me. I really don't care to occupy so much space in your mind.

Is that what you want? You want me to follow you around every thread you post in and post something obnoxious every time you post ? And dig up things you thought 3 years ago and try to make something of it ? And every time you start a thread I should bump one from 2 years ago that might be something kind of similar or ohhh.. I can always IBTL or as the mods to lock the thread.

You are making zero points bringing this up. I'm not running from it and I still post even today that I have no problem with them keeping him after he took over for Flip and that I still appreciate the things he brought to the team. Hell, I just did a pretty detailed post on that the other day. So what is your Fing point ?

You have none. How about this, stop stalking members of the board. I'm pretty sure the mod posted something not to long ago as reminder for people not to do pretty much exactly what you are doing.

Now on the off chance you actually want to exchange about the Wizards with me, dude, I'm all in for it. I have no problem letting the past be the past and moving on. But the hell if I'm going to stand quiet while you keep this crap up.

dckingsfan · Post #663 » by **dckingsfan** » Sat Mar 7, 2015 11:53 pm

I read 80sballboy's point as it doesn't balance this unbalanced roster or add talent.

We have a center piece of John Wall - do we have greyhounds running with him or old guys, firing Randy doesn't bring us greyhounds or wing stoppers? Our wings are Beal (still trying to figure it out), Porter (still trying to figure it out), Pierce (who should be playing stretch 4), Butler (reverting to the mean) and Temple (also has reverted to the mean).

We have had poor backup PGs for years. Does that change with firing Randy?

For this to be fixed it needs to start with a new GM and then trickle down.

Dark Faze · Post #664 » by **Dark Faze** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 12:01 am

Really starting to despite Leonsis

Post #665 » by **pineappleheadindc** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 12:12 am

The only thing keeping Randy from equaling the record of Red Auerbach is the fact that, often, the squad just needs to play harder and their lack of effort saddles Randy's record with too many losses.

Boo players.

:nonono:

closg00 · Post #666 » by **closg00** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 1:01 am

dckingsfan wrote:I read 80sballboy's point as it doesn't balance this unbalanced roster or add talent.

We have a center piece of John Wall - do we have greyhounds running with him or old guys, firing Randy doesn't bring us greyhounds or wing stoppers? Our wings are Beal (still trying to figure it out), Porter (still trying to figure it out), Pierce (who should be playing stretch 4), Butler (reverting to the mean) and Temple (also has reverted to the mean).

We have had poor backup PGs for years. Does that change with firing Randy?

For this to be fixed it needs to start with a new GM and then trickle down.

+1000

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

closg00 · Post #667 » by **closg00** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 1:54 am

hands11 wrote:
closg00 wrote:
hands11 wrote:Randy does not suck as a HC

Recalling the early days of this Randy Wittman Appreciation Thread

And what does that have to do with today ?

OMG. Grow up and stop stocking me. I really don't care to occupy so much space in your mind.

Is that what you want? You want me to follow you around every thread you post in and post something obnoxious every time you post ? And dig up things you thought 3 years ago and try to make something of it ? And every time you start a thread I should bump one from 2 years ago that might be something kind of similar or ohhh.. I can always IBTL or as the mods to lock the thread.

You are making zero points bringing this up. I'm not running from it and I still post even today that I have no problem with them keeping him after he took over for Flip and that I still appreciate the things he brought to the team. Hell, I just did a pretty detailed post on that the other day. So what is your Fing point ?

You have none. How about this, stop stocking members of the board. I'm pretty sure the mod posted something not to long ago as reminder for people not to do pretty much exactly what you are doing.

Now on the off chance you actually want to exchange about the Wizards with me, dude, I'm all in for it. I have no problem letting the past be the past and moving on. But the hell if I'm going to stand quiet while you keep this crap up.

Whoa! Defensive and hysterical overreaction which was all over the place. I am well within the board rules, I said nothing "obnoxious"

It is ironic that the creator of the Randy Wittman Appreciation thread is now at the head of the line calling for his head. It's ok to be wrong Hands.

80sballboy · Post #668 » by **80sballboy** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 4:33 am

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2387 ... ng-wizards

AFM · Post #669 » by **AFM** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 6:22 am

You should stop stocking him though.

keynote · Post #670 » by **keynote** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 6:53 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/wi ... story.html

“Some nights you just don’t make shots,” Wittman lamented.

noworriesinmd · Post #671 » by **noworriesinmd** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 1:21 pm

pineappleheadindc wrote:The only thing keeping Randy from equaling the record of Red Auerbach is the fact that, often, the squad just needs to play harder and their lack of effort saddles Randy's record with too many losses.

Boo players.

Some forward-looking individuals believe that is the coach's job.

Induveca · Post #672 » by **Induveca** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 1:38 pm

AFM wrote:You should stop stocking him though.

Post #673 » by **pineappleheadindc** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 4:38 pm

noworriesinmd wrote:
pineappleheadindc wrote:The only thing keeping Randy from equaling the record of Red Auerbach is the fact that, often, the squad just needs to play harder and their lack of effort saddles Randy's record with too many losses.

Boo players.

Some forward-looking individuals believe that is the coach's job.

Sorry -- I shoulda put my original post in green font. That was my intent - sarcasm.

My bad.

Post #674 » by **montestewart** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 4:58 pm

pineappleheadindc wrote:
noworriesinmd wrote:
pineappleheadindc wrote:The only thing keeping Randy from equaling the record of Red Auerbach is the fact that, often, the squad just needs to play harder and their lack of effort saddles Randy's record with too many losses.

Boo players.

Some forward-looking individuals believe that is the coach's job.

Sorry -- I shoulda put my original post in green font. That was my intent - sarcasm.

My bad.

Really, you call yourself a mod? That misleading post completely misled everyone into being misled into believing that you literally thought Randy Wittman equal to Red Auerbach, and that the only discernible difference between the two was the fact that the Celtics under Auerbach had better players than the Wizards under Wittman.

Shame on you. Say what you really mean, in plain English. There is no room on this board for irony, sarcasm, parody, satire, etc. This is serious business here. One person's obviousness is another person's not obviousness, and the Constitution says all men are created equal, and this has been upheld by the Superior Court of the United States on numerous occasions countless times previously in multiple threads (see for example Paul Pressey v. Ferguson, Missouri).

PS: The only difference between Ernie Grunfeld and Red Auerbach is the players they acquired. Other than that, EG is just as good as Auerbach.

Post #675 » by **pineappleheadindc** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 9:59 pm

^
Wow, Monte. Your post, above, sure had a lot of words.

gambitx777 · Post #676 » by **gambitx777** » Sun Mar 8, 2015 10:06 pm

80sballboy wrote:http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2387 ... ng-wizards

This shows how stupid the front office is.

Post #677 » by **nate33** » Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:40 pm

After a month of bitching about the lack of 3-point shoots in the offense, it looks like Randy is starting to get the hint.

In the first 60 games of the season, the Wizards shot more than 20 3PA's on just 7 occasions.
In the past 8 games, they've launched more than 20 3PA's 4 times.

tontoz · Post #678 » by **tontoz** » Tue Mar 17, 2015 3:06 pm

keynote wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/wi ... story.html

“Some nights you just don’t make shots,” Wittman lamented.

That is the type of wisdom that you can only get from an elite coach.

Post #679 » by **LyricalRico** » Tue Mar 17, 2015 4:02 pm

nate33 wrote:After a month of bitching about the lack of 3-point shoots in the offense, it looks like Randy is starting to get the hint.

In the first 60 games of the season, the Wizards shot more than 20 3PA's on just 7 occasions.
In the past 8 games, they've launched more than 20 3PA's 4 times.

I was just thinking that last night - wow, lots more three's lately. Thanks for pulling the numbers. Gooden as the first big off the bench lately has played a role in that IMO. Let's see what happens with Hump gets back.

dckingsfan · Post #680 » by **dckingsfan** » Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:04 pm

LyricalRico wrote:
nate33 wrote:After a month of bitching about the lack of 3-point shoots in the offense, it looks like Randy is starting to get the hint.

In the first 60 games of the season, the Wizards shot more than 20 3PA's on just 7 occasions.
In the past 8 games, they've launched more than 20 3PA's 4 times.

I was just thinking that last night - wow, lots more three's lately. Thanks for pulling the numbers. Gooden as the first big off the bench lately has played a role in that IMO. Let's see what happens with Hump gets back.

I know that this has been touched on before - but is there any reason that Humphries should shoot 3s?