Author Topic: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics  (Read 10565 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #30 on: July 18, 2018, 08:08:53 PM »

Offline GreenWarrior

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3275
  • Tommy Points: 228
this guy was/is a turd of the highest standard.

if he didn't get injured he still wasn't worth what he was thinking he was, and this is why he's a bitter fool because he doesn't realize this. anyone else believing he was needs to stay the hell away from this team.

this isn't why he's a turd though, he's a turd for putting this on the Celtics. yes he was dealt a bad hand with the injury and his sister's death. but the Celtics weren't actively shopping him - the cavs called us.

we'll never know for certain if we would've payed him but i'd be surprised if we would have. all signs do point to ownership and danny seeing that IT led team was a dead end team going no where though.

IT's got a bad case of Dwight Howard going on.

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #31 on: July 18, 2018, 08:09:07 PM »

Offline ausbacker

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 388
  • Tommy Points: 39
IT isn’t wrong. Neither is DeRozan. “Loyalty” is a one-way Street. Players are expected to give “home town discounts”, while teams show no loyalty to players.
Players get paid what the market says they're worth at that very moment. Teams are constantly looking to upgrade which frankly, is well within their right.

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #32 on: July 18, 2018, 08:41:31 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
IT is still bitter that he got traded.  It is understandable he would feel that way but I don't feel it represents a lack of loyalty by the Celtics that goes beyond the level of loyalty of any trade.  The Celtics got IT for Marcus Thornton and the Cleveland Cavaliers' 2016 first-round draft pick.  Was that trade disloyal too?

Teams have to make trades in order to get better.  Are some trades more disloyal than others?  How do you measure the level of disloyalty?

Now if Toronto made some sort of promise that they wouldn't trade Derozan, that wasn't very smart for either party.  They have no-trade clauses.  I have a feeling this conversation was not as cut and dried as that but if Toronto made that promise, that aspect is not very honest.

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #33 on: July 18, 2018, 09:51:26 PM »

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804
Quote
Loyalty isn't a one way street.

Of course it is, and there’s an obvious reason for it: the fans only hold one side accountable.

If a team is “disloyal” by trading / waiving a player, the fans inevitably side with management.  They want the best product on the floor, period. It doesn’t matter if a player played hurt, took less in the past, etc.  Fans have a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. In other words, fans by and large don’t want franchises to be loyal.

On the other hand, fans take a “how dare he leave” attitude if he goes to another franchise. It’s as if they expect a player to sign for less just to be a Celtic. You see it in some of the criticisms of Marcus Smart, and you see it in continued attacks on Ray Allen. Players get called “traitors”, teams are admired for making nonsentimental decisions.

so what you're saying is that fans opinions of something makes something a case of loyalty or disloyalty? it doesn't matter what side fans take (FANATIC), it's either being disloyal or it isn't. Don't forget the millions of fans that side with the players, you know, the fans of that player! You're only looking at the fans who side with the organization because it fits your narrative.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #34 on: July 18, 2018, 10:06:56 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58540
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
Loyalty isn't a one way street.

Of course it is, and there’s an obvious reason for it: the fans only hold one side accountable.

If a team is “disloyal” by trading / waiving a player, the fans inevitably side with management.  They want the best product on the floor, period. It doesn’t matter if a player played hurt, took less in the past, etc.  Fans have a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. In other words, fans by and large don’t want franchises to be loyal.

On the other hand, fans take a “how dare he leave” attitude if he goes to another franchise. It’s as if they expect a player to sign for less just to be a Celtic. You see it in some of the criticisms of Marcus Smart, and you see it in continued attacks on Ray Allen. Players get called “traitors”, teams are admired for making nonsentimental decisions.

so what you're saying is that fans opinions of something makes something a case of loyalty or disloyalty? it doesn't matter what side fans take (FANATIC), it's either being disloyal or it isn't. Don't forget the millions of fans that side with the players, you know, the fans of that player! You're only looking at the fans who side with the organization because it fits your narrative.

Fans drive sports.  Without them, there are no giant stadiums, no billion dollar revenues.  So yes, their opinion (collectively) is the most important thing in professional sports.

If fans valued loyalty from their organizations of choice, then organizations would be more loyal.  But, in that regard, fans generally aren't short-sighted.  Most fans value winning over loyalty, which is a completely valid choice.

It becomes a one-way street, though, when you see the general contempt by fans for players who are "disloyal".  You don't see burned Wyc Grousbeck jerseys when he doesn't pay what a player wants, but you sure do if an important player leaves for a better situation.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #35 on: July 18, 2018, 10:07:52 PM »

Offline bogg

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 817
  • Tommy Points: 51
this guy was/is a turd of the highest standard.

if he didn't get injured he still wasn't worth what he was thinking he was, and this is why he's a bitter fool because he doesn't realize this. anyone else believing he was needs to stay the hell away from this team.

this isn't why he's a turd though, he's a turd for putting this on the Celtics. yes he was dealt a bad hand with the injury and his sister's death. but the Celtics weren't actively shopping him - the cavs called us.

we'll never know for certain if we would've payed him but i'd be surprised if we would have. all signs do point to ownership and danny seeing that IT led team was a dead end team going no where though.

IT's got a bad case of Dwight Howard going on.

Certain Celtics fans deserve to watch Irving walk to New York for a Durant team-up, I'll say that much.

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #36 on: July 18, 2018, 10:11:11 PM »

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804
IT isn’t wrong. Neither is DeRozan. “Loyalty” is a one-way Street. Players are expected to give “home town discounts”, while teams show no loyalty to players.

I agree, they are right, but you and they need to stop pretending that players are loyal. They want their pay and/or minutes and a large role or they leave! It's a business and there is no loyalty on both sides! How loyal was IT4 when he signed in Phx then immediately starting crying about his role pretty much forcing his way out?

This is revisionist.  It never happened that way.  Dragic is the one who complained publicly and frequently.   Everyone expected Dragic to be traded.  It was a shock when PHO traded both of them.  Thomas was only traded because Danny dangled a 1st round pick for a guy McDonough mistakenly thought of as a bench player.   IT never asked to be traded from PHO and if anything was expecting to get more minutes once Dragic was traded.

And Roy never asserted that players are loyal so it's a straw man to tell him to stop pretending such.   

And your assertion that they want such-and-such "or they leave" ignores the reality that players can't simply leave unless they are free agents.  Which only occurs under certain circumstances once or twice very briefly in the typical player's career.   Outside of those brief moments, most players have no control over 'leaving' their situation whereas teams for the most part almost always at least have the ability to trade most players.

All of this is your opinion and mine, we weren't there, but I do know I saw IT4 complaining in a lot of videos that season. If he was so willing to speak his mind in interviews, he probably spoke it to the people in charge. They didn't accept what he thought he was and they moved on! Again, when players get what they want, they expect loyalty, when they don't get what they want they move on. When the organization doesn't get what they want they move on. It isn't about being loyal. IT4 wasn't happy with the Cavs (didn't cater to his play), he wanted out, if it isn't about him and the way he wants it, he's done or makes a fuss so the organization will ship him out. But it's disloyalty when the organization employs the same tactic, okay.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #37 on: July 18, 2018, 10:28:13 PM »

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804
Quote
Loyalty isn't a one way street.

Of course it is, and there’s an obvious reason for it: the fans only hold one side accountable.

If a team is “disloyal” by trading / waiving a player, the fans inevitably side with management.  They want the best product on the floor, period. It doesn’t matter if a player played hurt, took less in the past, etc.  Fans have a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. In other words, fans by and large don’t want franchises to be loyal.

On the other hand, fans take a “how dare he leave” attitude if he goes to another franchise. It’s as if they expect a player to sign for less just to be a Celtic. You see it in some of the criticisms of Marcus Smart, and you see it in continued attacks on Ray Allen. Players get called “traitors”, teams are admired for making nonsentimental decisions.

so what you're saying is that fans opinions of something makes something a case of loyalty or disloyalty? it doesn't matter what side fans take (FANATIC), it's either being disloyal or it isn't. Don't forget the millions of fans that side with the players, you know, the fans of that player! You're only looking at the fans who side with the organization because it fits your narrative.

Fans drive sports.  Without them, there are no giant stadiums, no billion dollar revenues.  So yes, their opinion (collectively) is the most important thing in professional sports.

If fans valued loyalty from their organizations of choice, then organizations would be more loyal.  But, in that regard, fans generally aren't short-sighted.  Most fans value winning over loyalty, which is a completely valid choice.

It becomes a one-way street, though, when you see the general contempt by fans for players who are "disloyal".  You don't see burned Wyc Grousbeck jerseys when he doesn't pay what a player wants, but you sure do if an important player leaves for a better situation.


LOL. There are no Wyc jerseys but I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't like him so much so that they would burn them if there were. You are telling me PP's fans don't think Wyc and DA are traitors, you know all his fans that moved on when he did? For every fan that said LBJ wasn't loyal to the Cavs, there is a fan that is mad at the Cs for not being loyal to it4 (well maybe less because Cavs have more fans). When you acknowledge that fans side with who they root for, the better off you will be. It doesn't matter whether its fans of a team or player, people will feel wronged. It doesn't mean that they were. This isn't a business of loyalty, no matter how crazy WE fans get. I know I was p---ed at LA when they chose Kobe, it didn't matter why they did it, it mattered that I was a fan of Shaq. BTW during that time I would have burned down the arena if I could have gotten away with it but I definitely wished that all hell would rain down on that organization.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 10:34:01 PM by ImShakHeIsShaq »
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #38 on: July 18, 2018, 10:53:04 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58540
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
Loyalty isn't a one way street.

Of course it is, and there’s an obvious reason for it: the fans only hold one side accountable.

If a team is “disloyal” by trading / waiving a player, the fans inevitably side with management.  They want the best product on the floor, period. It doesn’t matter if a player played hurt, took less in the past, etc.  Fans have a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. In other words, fans by and large don’t want franchises to be loyal.

On the other hand, fans take a “how dare he leave” attitude if he goes to another franchise. It’s as if they expect a player to sign for less just to be a Celtic. You see it in some of the criticisms of Marcus Smart, and you see it in continued attacks on Ray Allen. Players get called “traitors”, teams are admired for making nonsentimental decisions.

so what you're saying is that fans opinions of something makes something a case of loyalty or disloyalty? it doesn't matter what side fans take (FANATIC), it's either being disloyal or it isn't. Don't forget the millions of fans that side with the players, you know, the fans of that player! You're only looking at the fans who side with the organization because it fits your narrative.

Fans drive sports.  Without them, there are no giant stadiums, no billion dollar revenues.  So yes, their opinion (collectively) is the most important thing in professional sports.

If fans valued loyalty from their organizations of choice, then organizations would be more loyal.  But, in that regard, fans generally aren't short-sighted.  Most fans value winning over loyalty, which is a completely valid choice.

It becomes a one-way street, though, when you see the general contempt by fans for players who are "disloyal".  You don't see burned Wyc Grousbeck jerseys when he doesn't pay what a player wants, but you sure do if an important player leaves for a better situation.


LOL. There are no Wyc jerseys but I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't like him so much so that they would burn them if there were. You are telling me PP's fans don't think Wyc and DA are traitors, you know all his fans that moved on when he did? For every fan that said LBJ wasn't loyal to the Cavs, there is a fan that is mad at the Cs for not being loyal to it4 (well maybe less because Cavs have more fans). When you acknowledge that fans side with who they root for, the better off you will be. It doesn't matter whether its fans of a team or player, people will feel wronged. It doesn't mean that they were. This isn't a business of loyalty, no matter how crazy WE fans get. I know I was p---ed at LA when they chose Kobe, it didn't matter why they did it, it mattered that I was a fan of Shaq. BTW during that time I would have burned down the arena if I could have gotten away with it but I definitely wished that all hell would rain down on that organization.

It’s no about individual fans, it’s about vocal majorities.  Those majorities are more likely to side with management, whether it be in labor disputes or contract negotiations.

I still hold a grudge that the Sox didn’t re-sign Roger Clemens. My individual opinion means nothing. Collectively fans consider him a villain, instead of chirping about loyalty.

I think we’re in agreement that the “its a business / I’ll act in my own interest” standard should be applied to both teams and players. That’s not how the narratives usually work, though. Good players who leave are scorned; teams that cut ties with former heroes are largely forgiven so long as the team still wins.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #39 on: July 18, 2018, 11:03:50 PM »

Offline ImShakHeIsShaq

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7739
  • Tommy Points: 804
Quote
Loyalty isn't a one way street.

Of course it is, and there’s an obvious reason for it: the fans only hold one side accountable.

If a team is “disloyal” by trading / waiving a player, the fans inevitably side with management.  They want the best product on the floor, period. It doesn’t matter if a player played hurt, took less in the past, etc.  Fans have a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. In other words, fans by and large don’t want franchises to be loyal.

On the other hand, fans take a “how dare he leave” attitude if he goes to another franchise. It’s as if they expect a player to sign for less just to be a Celtic. You see it in some of the criticisms of Marcus Smart, and you see it in continued attacks on Ray Allen. Players get called “traitors”, teams are admired for making nonsentimental decisions.

so what you're saying is that fans opinions of something makes something a case of loyalty or disloyalty? it doesn't matter what side fans take (FANATIC), it's either being disloyal or it isn't. Don't forget the millions of fans that side with the players, you know, the fans of that player! You're only looking at the fans who side with the organization because it fits your narrative.

Fans drive sports.  Without them, there are no giant stadiums, no billion dollar revenues.  So yes, their opinion (collectively) is the most important thing in professional sports.

If fans valued loyalty from their organizations of choice, then organizations would be more loyal.  But, in that regard, fans generally aren't short-sighted.  Most fans value winning over loyalty, which is a completely valid choice.

It becomes a one-way street, though, when you see the general contempt by fans for players who are "disloyal".  You don't see burned Wyc Grousbeck jerseys when he doesn't pay what a player wants, but you sure do if an important player leaves for a better situation.


LOL. There are no Wyc jerseys but I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't like him so much so that they would burn them if there were. You are telling me PP's fans don't think Wyc and DA are traitors, you know all his fans that moved on when he did? For every fan that said LBJ wasn't loyal to the Cavs, there is a fan that is mad at the Cs for not being loyal to it4 (well maybe less because Cavs have more fans). When you acknowledge that fans side with who they root for, the better off you will be. It doesn't matter whether its fans of a team or player, people will feel wronged. It doesn't mean that they were. This isn't a business of loyalty, no matter how crazy WE fans get. I know I was p---ed at LA when they chose Kobe, it didn't matter why they did it, it mattered that I was a fan of Shaq. BTW during that time I would have burned down the arena if I could have gotten away with it but I definitely wished that all hell would rain down on that organization.

It’s no about individual fans, it’s about vocal majorities.  Those majorities are more likely to side with management, whether it be in labor disputes or contract negotiations.

I still hold a grudge that the Sox didn’t re-sign Roger Clemens. My individual opinion means nothing. Collectively fans consider him a villain, instead of chirping about loyalty.

I think we’re in agreement that the “its a business / I’ll act in my own interest” standard should be applied to both teams and players. That’s not how the narratives usually work, though. Good players who leave are scorned; teams that cut ties with former heroes are largely forgiven so long as the team still wins.


You don't think that's because there are more fans of a team than of an individual player? You are on a team's site and there are no sites for a player that can even compare. The vocal you "hear" is because of where you are.
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #40 on: July 18, 2018, 11:13:28 PM »

Offline playdream

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1665
  • Tommy Points: 88
this guy was/is a turd of the highest standard.

if he didn't get injured he still wasn't worth what he was thinking he was, and this is why he's a bitter fool because he doesn't realize this. anyone else believing he was needs to stay the hell away from this team.

this isn't why he's a turd though, he's a turd for putting this on the Celtics. yes he was dealt a bad hand with the injury and his sister's death. but the Celtics weren't actively shopping him - the cavs called us.

we'll never know for certain if we would've payed him but i'd be surprised if we would have. all signs do point to ownership and danny seeing that IT led team was a dead end team going no where though.

IT's got a bad case of Dwight Howard going on.
This, He is demanding Max when he is going to worth 2M, what is Danny supposed to do? GM isn't charity

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #41 on: July 18, 2018, 11:14:57 PM »

Offline GreenWarrior

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3275
  • Tommy Points: 228
this guy was/is a turd of the highest standard.

if he didn't get injured he still wasn't worth what he was thinking he was, and this is why he's a bitter fool because he doesn't realize this. anyone else believing he was needs to stay the hell away from this team.

this isn't why he's a turd though, he's a turd for putting this on the Celtics. yes he was dealt a bad hand with the injury and his sister's death. but the Celtics weren't actively shopping him - the cavs called us.

we'll never know for certain if we would've payed him but i'd be surprised if we would have. all signs do point to ownership and danny seeing that IT led team was a dead end team going no where though.

IT's got a bad case of Dwight Howard going on.

Certain Celtics fans deserve to watch Irving walk to New York for a Durant team-up, I'll say that much.

 ::)

I don't know where to go with this. are you ultimately saying IT is better than kyrie? if so, I really don't have the time to tell you how wrong you are.

if you're just being bitter like IT you're looking at the whole situation the wrong way. me personally I will be upset if/when kyrie should leave... but we do have him at least for this yr.

I see kyrie coming here and playing at least 2 seasons as found money. he literally dropped in our lap and all we had to do was give up a bunch of scrubs. we couldn't find a better deal even if we were playing a video game.

and if all we get is 2 seasons then so be it, again we didn't lose anything worth keeping. everyone of those players we got rid of needed to go, they maxed out and got as far as they were going.

and honestly if kyrie wants to go to NY or wherever he's not looking at things clearly either. he'll be 28 when he leaves(in his prime) and on a bad wheel. he'll have a real small window and his career will end abruptly. if he stays here he'd likey get a chance to extend his career and win more championships over a long period of time.


Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #42 on: July 18, 2018, 11:25:10 PM »

Offline mr. dee

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7828
  • Tommy Points: 597
Quote
Loyalty isn't a one way street.

Of course it is, and there’s an obvious reason for it: the fans only hold one side accountable.

If a team is “disloyal” by trading / waiving a player, the fans inevitably side with management.  They want the best product on the floor, period. It doesn’t matter if a player played hurt, took less in the past, etc.  Fans have a “what have you done for me lately” attitude. In other words, fans by and large don’t want franchises to be loyal.

On the other hand, fans take a “how dare he leave” attitude if he goes to another franchise. It’s as if they expect a player to sign for less just to be a Celtic. You see it in some of the criticisms of Marcus Smart, and you see it in continued attacks on Ray Allen. Players get called “traitors”, teams are admired for making nonsentimental decisions.

so what you're saying is that fans opinions of something makes something a case of loyalty or disloyalty? it doesn't matter what side fans take (FANATIC), it's either being disloyal or it isn't. Don't forget the millions of fans that side with the players, you know, the fans of that player! You're only looking at the fans who side with the organization because it fits your narrative.

Fans drive sports.  Without them, there are no giant stadiums, no billion dollar revenues.  So yes, their opinion (collectively) is the most important thing in professional sports.

If fans valued loyalty from their organizations of choice, then organizations would be more loyal.  But, in that regard, fans generally aren't short-sighted.  Most fans value winning over loyalty, which is a completely valid choice.

It becomes a one-way street, though, when you see the general contempt by fans for players who are "disloyal".  You don't see burned Wyc Grousbeck jerseys when he doesn't pay what a player wants, but you sure do if an important player leaves for a better situation.


LOL. There are no Wyc jerseys but I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't like him so much so that they would burn them if there were. You are telling me PP's fans don't think Wyc and DA are traitors, you know all his fans that moved on when he did? For every fan that said LBJ wasn't loyal to the Cavs, there is a fan that is mad at the Cs for not being loyal to it4 (well maybe less because Cavs have more fans). When you acknowledge that fans side with who they root for, the better off you will be. It doesn't matter whether its fans of a team or player, people will feel wronged. It doesn't mean that they were. This isn't a business of loyalty, no matter how crazy WE fans get. I know I was p---ed at LA when they chose Kobe, it didn't matter why they did it, it mattered that I was a fan of Shaq. BTW during that time I would have burned down the arena if I could have gotten away with it but I definitely wished that all hell would rain down on that organization.

It’s no about individual fans, it’s about vocal majorities.  Those majorities are more likely to side with management, whether it be in labor disputes or contract negotiations.

I still hold a grudge that the Sox didn’t re-sign Roger Clemens. My individual opinion means nothing. Collectively fans consider him a villain, instead of chirping about loyalty.

I think we’re in agreement that the “its a business / I’ll act in my own interest” standard should be applied to both teams and players. That’s not how the narratives usually work, though. Good players who leave are scorned; teams that cut ties with former heroes are largely forgiven so long as the team still wins.

You are taking this out of the context. Leaving a team to be a man on the other is one thing. Leaving a team you are leading then join a stacked team for easy rings is another.

Nobody blamed Stoudamire when he left for New York, Alonzo with Miami or Shaq with the Lakers because those teams weren't exactly ready to compete until they came.

Lebron and KD, on the other hand joined teams with established alphas and team. This is why I don't hold much grudge against Lebron this time around when he joined the Lakers but he's pretty much the pioneer of FA super teams.

Because of them, most players would rather join a stack team and win an easy ring and put blood and sweat to legitly earn it. No more spirit of competition with these players.

I never hold grudge with Tony Allen leaving for Memphis because I know he is just looking for himself. Neither did on Rondo or Bass for joining the Lakers.

Forget loyalty to the team. But at least be loyal to the fans who supported you through thick and thin of team.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 11:38:56 PM by mr. dee »

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #43 on: July 18, 2018, 11:28:05 PM »

Offline playdream

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1665
  • Tommy Points: 88
this guy was/is a turd of the highest standard.

if he didn't get injured he still wasn't worth what he was thinking he was, and this is why he's a bitter fool because he doesn't realize this. anyone else believing he was needs to stay the hell away from this team.

this isn't why he's a turd though, he's a turd for putting this on the Celtics. yes he was dealt a bad hand with the injury and his sister's death. but the Celtics weren't actively shopping him - the cavs called us.

we'll never know for certain if we would've payed him but i'd be surprised if we would have. all signs do point to ownership and danny seeing that IT led team was a dead end team going no where though.

IT's got a bad case of Dwight Howard going on.

Certain Celtics fans deserve to watch Irving walk to New York for a Durant team-up, I'll say that much.
If Kyrie leave no one will call him a traitor, just disappointing for him to make the wrong choice

People don't call Allen a traitor because of him leaving, it's because him joining the enemy and slap his teammates in the face, shows his snake personality

Re: Isaiah Thomas takes veiled shot at Celtics
« Reply #44 on: July 18, 2018, 11:34:02 PM »

Offline bogg

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 817
  • Tommy Points: 51
this guy was/is a turd of the highest standard.

if he didn't get injured he still wasn't worth what he was thinking he was, and this is why he's a bitter fool because he doesn't realize this. anyone else believing he was needs to stay the hell away from this team.

this isn't why he's a turd though, he's a turd for putting this on the Celtics. yes he was dealt a bad hand with the injury and his sister's death. but the Celtics weren't actively shopping him - the cavs called us.

we'll never know for certain if we would've payed him but i'd be surprised if we would have. all signs do point to ownership and danny seeing that IT led team was a dead end team going no where though.

IT's got a bad case of Dwight Howard going on.

Certain Celtics fans deserve to watch Irving walk to New York for a Durant team-up, I'll say that much.

 ::)

I don't know where to go with this. are you ultimately saying IT is better than kyrie? if so, I really don't have the time to tell you how wrong you are.

if you're just being bitter like IT you're looking at the whole situation the wrong way. me personally I will be upset if/when kyrie should leave... but we do have him at least for this yr.

I see kyrie coming here and playing at least 2 seasons as found money. he literally dropped in our lap and all we had to do was give up a bunch of scrubs. we couldn't find a better deal even if we were playing a video game.

and if all we get is 2 seasons then so be it, again we didn't lose anything worth keeping. everyone of those players we got rid of needed to go, they maxed out and got as far as they were going.

and honestly if kyrie wants to go to NY or wherever he's not looking at things clearly either. he'll be 28 when he leaves(in his prime) and on a bad wheel. he'll have a real small window and his career will end abruptly. if he stays here he'd likey get a chance to extend his career and win more championships over a long period of time.

What I'm saying is that Boston has a fringe of bad fans who don't really deserve the success they get to experience, and that the minority of people who got themselves all hysterical over a guy who played a primary hand in pulling the franchise out of Piece and KG's shadow and it putting in the place it is today asking for a commensurate paycheck need to stop celebrating injuries. A guy destroying his body for the betterment of the Cs isn't something to be smug about.