CF NEWS 13: Redick Bides Time On Bench For Magic

mhectorgato · Post #101 » by **mhectorgato** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:31 pm

fuz wrote:You know, I was looking for those pics the other day and couldn't find them. Those threads were classic.

Wasn't the Theg "scram kid" part of that series?

Post #102 » by **Devin 1L** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:39 pm

Looks like someone wants to have it both ways...

mhectorgato · Post #103 » by **mhectorgato** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:57 pm

devin3807 wrote:Looks like someone wants to have it both ways...

Glad it's not just me...

But then again, I'm probably not intelligent enough to discern this on my own.

Isn't "Acceptance" the first step for the road to recovery for me?

maginno · Post #104 » by **maginno** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:11 pm

mhectorgato wrote:-
If you so vehemently feel that JJ has the potential play in the NBA, then to me that's a part of a "good" track record.

and hence the lack of logic. If jj ends up staying on the bench and then walks when he gets the chance what good would his potential do for the Magic? Otis is the architect of the team. he built it and so far that team has JJ riding the bench, his pick, and now recently the pick is talking about getting out of here when he can. Didn't Darko have potential too? You judge a draft by the results for that team. Get the regular pals here to agree with you because one thing is certain - any lurker with common sense can see my point on this. JJ can have mad talent if it materializes somewhere else and we get little or nothing from that pick - it would still be a wasted pick.

Other teams apparently showed a desire to trade for him, which would indicate that he's an asset for the organization - another reason why to me he's part of a "good" track record.

that s just silly. A track record is a record of the past and there you have his trade which hasn't happened part of the track record. When we trade JJ for something of equal or greater value then the pick we used for JJ then you can put it in there as a track record. Get it?. If he never plays and then walks or gets traded for some garbage again how does that add to the GMs performance? Geez this line of reasoning is even denser than normal.

It all depends on the scope of ones viewpoint and definition of a good pick.

It all depends on elementary common sense. Every first round pick in the draft has "potential". What determines a good track record for the Gm is how that potential materializes for his team. If the potential continues to sit on the bench (JJ), refuses for years to sign (Fran) or walks for nothing (Darko) it ain't a good track record. Now if things change then you update the record but in absolute silliness my admission that IF things change I would in fairness change my opinion is taken as trying to have it both ways. :crazy:

But anyway, since I have the inability to have a discussion at your level, I'm done. I'd much rather have an unintelligent conversation with fuz anyways

Totally agree because at this point I am very confident that you see exactly what I am saying but unlike when I had the opportunity to withdraw a misunderstanding in another thread and didn't hesitate to do so you don't have what it takes to suck it up and do the same. Now who has the bigger ego that you claim I have ?

Yes, I know you know exactly what I am saying and you also see where it is perfectly consistent so clocks ticking - will you withdraw it or show your real stuff?

maginno · Post #105 » by **maginno** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:36 pm

cougar13 wrote: When it was reported as just a tumor that was big, but it could have been worse this is worse if the local Roanoke paper is right.

http://www.roanoke.com/sports/etc/wb/154098

That link doesn't say he has cancer just a tumor so you are saying the local print paper now is reporting it s cancer?

MagicalMan · Post #106 » by **MagicalMan** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:20 pm

mhectorgato wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Glad it's not just me...

But then again, I'm probably not intelligent enough to discern this on my own.

Isn't "Acceptance" the first step for the road to recovery for me?

acceptance is step 5

denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

edit: unless of course you were being sarcastic. Im not very good at discerning context on internet forums.

mhectorgato · Post #107 » by **mhectorgato** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:48 pm

MagicalMan wrote:acceptance is step 5

denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

edit: unless of course you were being sarcastic. Im not very good at discerning context on internet forums.

Where does "it's everyone else's fault" fit in?

MagicalMan · Post #108 » by **MagicalMan** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:49 pm

^^ sounds a lot like denial

mhectorgato · Post #109 » by **mhectorgato** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:50 pm

MagicalMan wrote:^^ sounds a lot like denial

I thought denial was "I don't have a problem."

This is "I have a problem. But the reason I have it is because someone/everyone else failed me".

fuz · Post #110 » by **fuz** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 8:29 pm

mhectorgato wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Wasn't the Theg "scram kid" part of that series?

I'm not sure, but I'm thinking so. If someone bookmarked any of those threads, it would be great to see them again.

maginno · Post #111 » by **maginno** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 8:45 pm

MagicalMan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

acceptance is step 5

denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

Well then Gato is definitely at step 1. Is there a 1.5?

BassMaster · Post #112 » by **BassMaster** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:52 pm

maginno wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

That link doesn't say he has cancer just a tumor so you are saying the local print paper now is reporting it s cancer?

If you google JJ Redick it still says that David Redick has cancer, but it looks like someone in the family corrected the local paper and the website changed to just say that he has a tumor.
I am very happy that the paper over assumed that he had cancer because he had a tumor. That is my thinking. That is why the link changed, but the first headline is still showing up at Google.