12/23 | G32: Minnesota Timberwolves at Oklahoma City Thunder - 7PM CST

[bondom34]

adams was fine there. russ is bouncing around like a mad man as usual.

You realize when you literally post the video we all have proof right?

Like Adams is half way down the bench helping to Schroder's man, it's right there. He's 10 feet away. You can't just pull something out of nowhere when you post visuals

he's 10 feet away from towns? lol. ok dom. i see westbrook digging at towns, swiping for the ball unnecessarily, jumping at his man for no reason, and getting beat.

Good night J. I'll send you money for lasik, your eyes are done.

[NaturalThunder]

1-5 before that? hot hand theory? get brewer back at this point? this is bad, dom. you can't believe all this lol.

I do believe that Abrines is useless. I do believe they can find a player for a minimum contract who could replace what he does. it's not 1-5 tonight, it's not missing 2 of the same shot in the same situation, it's being a bad shooter this year who's been a slightly above average career shooter on relatively low volume who does absolutely nothing else at an nba level.

He's at this point near Patterson level useless and quickly approaching it.

i mean that's all fine but i don't see how any of that justifies your commentary on the shot quality we got on the last possession. schroder? really? that makes no sense.

abrines deserves criticism for his play this year just like patterson and just like westbrook. these guys are all stinking up the joint in various ways relative to reasonable expectation. i'm with you that abrines should be replaced if a better player can be acquired (i.e. not corey brewer lol). i'm not with you that all of this somehow magically means we ignore percentages. schroder taking a wide open shot over abrines is patently absurd.

At what point was bondom ever more critical about the shot we got at the end of the game than he was about Abrines in general? I don't even think he ever explicitly criticized the shot we got at the end of the game. He, like everyone else that's criticizing Abrines, used that moment to vent about our frustration with Abrines as a whole this season.

You've just decided to do the following:

1.) You initially wanted to make the point that it was a good shot because of Abrines' career 3P% even though no one was arguing about the quality of the shot we got at the end.

2.) Then, once bondom and others (including myself) started quoting you and calling you out, you've repeatedly moved the goalposts in order to fit your agenda which missed the point from the very beginning.



At no point as bondom, myself, or anyone else tried to argue that the quality of shot that Abrines got at the end of the game was bad/poor/low quality. Yet, that's what you keep coming back to and it's just stupid at this point.

[slick_watts]

But now you just don't care because the play you were talking about all along was completely different than the play I was talking about and you wrongly quoted me aobut it because you had a different play in mind all along.

i don't care because even though the saric three wasn't well contested it's a little glib to assign blame to anyone for it considering the lead up to the attempt.

[Dn4sty]

But now you just don't care because the play you were talking about all along was completely different than the play I was talking about and you wrongly quoted me aobut it because you had a different play in mind all along.

i don't care because even though the saric three wasn't well contested it's a little glib to assign blame to anyone for it considering the lead up to the attempt.

Stop please.

[slick_watts]

1.) You initially wanted to make the point that it was a good shot because of Abrines' career 3P% even though no one was arguing about the quality of the shot we got at the end.

2.) Then, once bondom and others (including myself) started quoting you and calling you out, you've repeatedly moved the goalposts in order to fit your agenda which missed the point from the very beginning.

At no point as bondom, myself, or anyone else tried to argue that the quality of shot that Abrines got at the end of the game was bad/poor/low quality. Yet, that's what you keep coming back to and it's just stupid at this point.

no, what's stupid is making a claim that a provably worse shooter should attempt the shot instead of abrines.

what i say the shot is a high quality shot i'm also including the information on the shooter attempting it. that was a high quality look for the thunder. regardless of what fleeting emotional reaction there is to abrines being 1-4 at that point.

[slick_watts]

You realize when you literally post the video we all have proof right?

Like Adams is half way down the bench helping to Schroder's man, it's right there. He's 10 feet away. You can't just pull something out of nowhere when you post visuals

he's 10 feet away from towns? lol. ok dom. i see westbrook digging at towns, swiping for the ball unnecessarily, jumping at his man for no reason, and getting beat.

Good night J. I'll send you money for lasik, your eyes are done.

you can lead a horse to water.

[Dn4sty]

I do believe that Abrines is useless. I do believe they can find a player for a minimum contract who could replace what he does. it's not 1-5 tonight, it's not missing 2 of the same shot in the same situation, it's being a bad shooter this year who's been a slightly above average career shooter on relatively low volume who does absolutely nothing else at an nba level.

He's at this point near Patterson level useless and quickly approaching it.

i mean that's all fine but i don't see how any of that justifies your commentary on the shot quality we got on the last possession. schroder? really? that makes no sense.

abrines deserves criticism for his play this year just like patterson and just like westbrook. these guys are all stinking up the joint in various ways relative to reasonable expectation. i'm with you that abrines should be replaced if a better player can be acquired (i.e. not corey brewer lol). i'm not with you that all of this somehow magically means we ignore percentages. schroder taking a wide open shot over abrines is patently absurd.

At what point was bondom ever more critical about the shot we got at the end of the game than he was about Abrines in general? I don't even think he ever explicitly criticized the shot we got at the end of the game. He, like everyone else that's criticizing Abrines, used that moment to vent about our frustration with Abrines as a whole this season.

You've just decided to do the following:

1.) You initially wanted to make the point that it was a good shot because of Abrines' career 3P% even though no one was arguing about the quality of the shot we got at the end.

2.) Then, once bondom and others (including myself) started quoting you and calling you out, you've repeatedly moved the goalposts in order to fit your agenda which missed the point from the very beginning.



At no point as bondom, myself, or anyone else tried to argue that the quality of shot that Abrines got at the end of the game was bad/poor/low quality. Yet, that's what you keep coming back to and it's just stupid at this point.

If that’s the play, then at this point I’m far more comfortable with George or Grant taking that shot than Abrines.

[bondom34]

he's 10 feet away from towns? lol. ok dom. i see westbrook digging at towns, swiping for the ball unnecessarily, jumping at his man for no reason, and getting beat.

Good night J. I'll send you money for lasik, your eyes are done.

you can lead a horse to water.

And sadly you being called out by about 4 people itt can't make you drink

[slick_watts]

Good night J. I'll send you money for lasik, your eyes are done.

you can lead a horse to water.

And sadly you being called out by about 4 people itt can't make you drink

video evidence and common sense are on my side, here. westbrook blew it defensively on that play, and there's no way you can advocate for schroder to take an open three over abrines with a straight face.

[NaturalThunder]

But now you just don't care because the play you were talking about all along was completely different than the play I was talking about and you wrongly quoted me aobut it because you had a different play in mind all along.

i don't care because even though the saric three wasn't well contested it's a little glib to assign blame to anyone for it considering the lead up to the attempt.

I never assigned blame to anyone on the Saric three. I thought you were (wrongly) assigning blame to Westbrook because you quoted a post of mine that talked about the Saric three and blamed Westbrook for a completely different play that was never the one I was talking about in the first place.

Again, I think you'd be a lot better off if you'd just take a deep breathe and say the following, which I'm guessing would be the first time in your life:


"I, Justin _________ (whatever your last name is), am wrong."

[Dn4sty]

So It’s not a big sample size, but the jury is really out of whether Schroder is capable of being a 2nd unit/backup PG. He’s had some flashes of playing well with starters (@GSW), but I’m not sure he’s cut out for the role that this team needs him to play.

His abilities are definitely a nice asset to have on this team, as there are times where his scoring ability is needed, but I don’t think he will be ok with what role is best for this team.

[slick_watts]

I thought you were (wrongly) assigning blame to Westbrook because you quoted a post of mine that talked about the Saric three and blamed Westbrook for a completely different play that was never the one I was talking about in the first place.

you were incorrect to assume i was blaming westbrook for the saric three. why would i do that? he wasn't even involved.

[bondom34]

you can lead a horse to water.

And sadly you being called out by about 4 people itt can't make you drink

video evidence and common sense are on my side, here. westbrook blew it defensively on that play, and there's no way you can advocate for schroder to take an open three over abrines with a straight face.

Dude, stop the act. You posted a video where you can clearly see Westbrook help to KAT, Adams well away, and Schroder needing help from Adams. And yes, I'd rather Schroder or PG take an open 3. Sorry but at this point you're doing the act again and I continuously wonder how you're so totally different here than other places. I'm tired, and shouldn't have even started to discuss because you've jumped through so many hoops you've dragged the game thread on with everyone and nobody can just make you admit you're wrong. Because you're dead wrong

[NaturalThunder]

1.) You initially wanted to make the point that it was a good shot because of Abrines' career 3P% even though no one was arguing about the quality of the shot we got at the end.

2.) Then, once bondom and others (including myself) started quoting you and calling you out, you've repeatedly moved the goalposts in order to fit your agenda which missed the point from the very beginning.

At no point has bondom, myself, or anyone else tried to argue that the quality of shot that Abrines got at the end of the game was bad/poor/low quality. Yet, that's what you keep coming back to and it's just stupid at this point.

no, what's stupid is making a claim that a provably worse shooter should attempt the shot instead of abrines.

what i say the shot is a high quality shot i'm also including the information on the shooter attempting it. that was a high quality look for the thunder. regardless of what fleeting emotional reaction there is to abrines being 1-4 at that point.

From the very beginning of all of this no one's point was that the quality of the shot was bad or that the person shooting the shot was a bad option; nor was anyone ever....EVER....trying to argue that another player on the roster would've been a better option for that shot. I never, at any point, said someone else should've taken the shot instead of Abrines. I'm not even sure what part of the thin air you're pulling that out of.

[slick_watts]

Dude, stop the act. You posted a video where you can clearly see Westbrook help to KAT, Adams well away, and Schroder needing help from Adams.

and westbrook over committed, over stayed his welcome, and bit on covington's fake. this is westbrook's defensive mistake here, even if we're granting the initial help as necessary.

And yes, I'd rather Schroder or PG take an open 3.

paul george? duh. schroder? untenable. indefensible. there is no way you believe this, unless you are completely abandoning reason.

[slick_watts]

it's bedtime. later guys! natural thunder is in charge while i'm away.

[bondom34]

Dude, stop the act. You posted a video where you can clearly see Westbrook help to KAT, Adams well away, and Schroder needing help from Adams.

and westbrook over committed, over stayed his welcome, and bit on covington's fake. this is westbrook's defensive mistake here, even if we're granting the initial help as necessary.

And yes, I'd rather Schroder or PG take an open 3.

paul george? duh. schroder? untenable. indefensible. there is no way you believe this, unless you are completely abandoning reason.

He went back instantly after just tagging KAT. So sure, he certainly could have let KAT to the rim, or could have teleported back to Covington, but the first was a bad option and the second defies physics

[bondom34]

it's bedtime. later guys! natural thunder is in charge while i'm away.

You could admit you're wrong on occasion instead of just being smug.

Why are you so cool on DT and do this here? Is it just to annoy people?

[NaturalThunder]

it's bedtime. later guys! natural thunder is in charge while i'm away.

Sweet!

I have no choice but to assume that is you're backwards a** way of, to some extent, admitting you were wrong this whole time.

[Old Man Game]

Regardless of the percentages on the season I would have given you 100 to 1 odds against Alex making that shot. It sucks to say that as a long time Alex fan.

Sent from my Pixel using RealGM mobile app