Wolves worse than winless Nets?

Post #1 » by **The J Rocka** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:19 pm

According to....Hollinger

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/ ... iem-091201

Post #2 » by **Calinks** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:22 pm

I can only read the first few sentences but I agree. I look at the nets roster and see some talented scorers and a few good defenders. Wolves have no offense and no defense. I definitely think the Nets are the better team right now.

Wolves2011 · Post #3 » by **Wolves2011** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:27 pm

J_Era_3 wrote:According to....Hollinger

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/ ... iem-091201

This was written Before, the day before the wolves won game 2.

Esohny · Post #4 » by **Esohny** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:28 pm

Meh. We're both terrible, so it's splitting hairs.

deeney0 · Post #5 » by **deeney0** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:28 pm

The way I'd judge it is that the Wolves played better in their two wins and in a couple of their losses than the Nets have all season. The Wolves have also played worse in several of the losses than the Nets have all season.

Post #6 » by **The J Rocka** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:33 pm

Wolves2011 wrote:
J_Era_3 wrote:According to....Hollinger

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/ ... iem-091201

This was written Before, the day before the wolves won game 2.

But he updates it, edits everything

Wolves2011 · Post #7 » by **Wolves2011** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:33 pm

Who would you rather build around

Lopez
Harris
Yi
Douglas Roberts
Lee

or

Jefferson
Love
Rubio
Flynn
Sessions

with any of those pieces being tradeable assets.....

Post #8 » by **The J Rocka** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:39 pm

Wolves2011 wrote:Who would you rather build around

Lopez
Harris
Yi
Douglas Roberts
Lee

or

Jefferson
Love
Rubio
Flynn
Sessions

with any of those pieces being tradeable assets.....

If im a star FA, MN is looking more solid

and we will add Wall, Aldrich, or Turner to that mix as well

RD&KG2 · Post #9 » by **RD&KG2** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:40 pm

Looking at those players with my Timberwolves colored glasses I have to say I like our building blocks better. Its just that beyond those guys we have a handful of players that arguably don't belong in the NBA.

cpfsf · Post #10 » by **cpfsf** » Tue Dec 1, 2009 11:47 pm

Can't we all just agree we're the worst two teams.

sfernald · Post #11 » by **sfernald** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:32 am

RD&KG2 wrote:Looking at those players with my Timberwolves colored glasses I have to say I like our building blocks better. Its just that beyond those guys we have a handful of players that arguably don't belong in the NBA.

Forget the glasses. What are you guys smoking?

You got two PFs and three PGS!! LOL!!

Esohny · Post #12 » by **Esohny** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:56 am

sfernald wrote:
RD&KG2 wrote:Looking at those players with my Timberwolves colored glasses I have to say I like our building blocks better. Its just that beyond those guys we have a handful of players that arguably don't belong in the NBA.

Forget the glasses. What are you guys smoking?

You got two PFs and three PGS!! LOL!!

And you're the guy that thinks that trading all our cap space for Jeffries, a bench player and a 2nd rounder is the best use of our resources.

You're a joke!! LOL!!

sfernald · Post #13 » by **sfernald** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 1:02 am

Esohny wrote:
sfernald wrote:
RD&KG2 wrote:Looking at those players with my Timberwolves colored glasses I have to say I like our building blocks better. Its just that beyond those guys we have a handful of players that arguably don't belong in the NBA.

Forget the glasses. What are you guys smoking?

You got two PFs and three PGS!! LOL!!

You're a joke!! LOL!!

Attacking me personally just reflects your insecurity. And changing the subject doesn't change the fact you have a pretty good poker hand there - full house - point guards over power forwards... If you draw John Wall, then you have got yourself four of a kind!!

Esohny · Post #14 » by **Esohny** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 1:07 am

I attack your ridiculous ideas, of which there are many. I do like the hypocritical accusations after your opener:

sfernald wrote:Forget the glasses. What are you guys smoking?

And changing the subject doesn't change the fact you have a pretty good poker hand there - full house - point guards over power forwards... If you draw John Wall, then you have got yourself four of a kind!!

I know, sadly for us, the NBA doesn't allow trades to be made between teams. Wait, they do. You're still a joke.

sfernald · Post #15 » by **sfernald** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 1:09 am

Esohny wrote:I attack your ridiculous ideas, of which there are many. I do like the hypocritical accusations after your opener:

sfernald wrote:Forget the glasses. What are you guys smoking?

And changing the subject doesn't change the fact you have a pretty good poker hand there - full house - point guards over power forwards... If you draw John Wall, then you have got yourself four of a kind!!

I know, sadly for us, the NBA doesn't allow trades to be made between teams. Wait, they do. You're still a joke.

I'm not arguing with you. please leave me alone.

big3_8_19_21 · Post #16 » by **big3_8_19_21** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 9:34 am

It looks like we have found ourselves a troll with low self-esteem :lol:

jade_hippo · Post #17 » by **jade_hippo** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 10:42 am

i think the fact the wolves may very well begin next season with only Flynn, Jefferson, Love as the only guys on the roster from this years opening day speaks volumes about where the wolves expected to be this year. at the most we'd have Flynn Sessions Brew Ellington Gomes Love Jefferson Hollins next year. still leaving 4-7 open roster spots and some HUGE holes to fill at SG/SF/C

the nets, are only going to lose a couple of guys this summer. Simmons, Hassel and Hayes being their only expirings if my brain is working right. They are pretty set in their roster and are hoping that it grows and gets better, and hope they add a piece or two to agument. I think they are hoping the starting lineup they have will be contending for a playoff spot.

lobishome · Post #18 » by **lobishome** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:02 pm

I think that to be better team than NETS is a stupid solace,

GopherIt! · Post #19 » by **GopherIt!** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 1:21 pm

Ridiculous question. Nets have zero wins, Wolves have two.

0/2 = 0

We're at least zero times better than the Nets right now.

Post #20 » by **Worm Guts** » Wed Dec 2, 2009 1:28 pm

Shouldn't it be 2/0? The Wolves are an undefined amount better than the Nets