What if Brooklyn signs Durant this Summer.

[MBunge]

I didn't write the article.  I thought it was relevant because it counters a lot of the "Brooklyn has no hope" nonsense.  They play in a huge market, have a couple decent players and cap space.  I wouldn't bank on those picks amounting to much.  They have no incentive to lose.

You started a new thread

I saw this article about Durant potentially signing with Brooklyn.   I shared it on this forum, because we own their draft picks.   I'm not going to apologize to you for following the Celtics closely and all stories related to them.

You shared it because

See above.  Relevant article was relevant.  Relevant article deserved to be shared.

You didn't share the article because it was relevant.  You ADMITTED you started this thread because you think some other fans are too optimistic about the Nets picks and you feel it's your job to correct them.

What is relevant is your pattern of being persistently negative about the Celtics while being at times bizarrely positive about other teams and non-Celtics players.  You are not nearly as clever as you think you are and gave yourself away by dumping on Celtics like Smart while being almost giddy about the potential of garbage like Nik Stauskus and Anthony Bennett.

Mike

[LarBrd33]

The moral of the story is

The moral of THIS story is that you come here and deliberately provoke and antagonize people and are now whining about people giving you back the same treatment.  I mean, if you at least denied it then the excuse could be made that you don't know what you're doing.  But you openly confessed here that you were just trying to stir up some nonsense.

Mike

False. 

I post about the Celtics.  I speak to their mediocrity, because they are mediocre... people take offense to it.   

  the thing is LB, you talk about every other team as though they're all vastly superior to the C's in some manner. 

That's not at all true, though.  It's just a myth that some of these trolls like to perpetuate.  I post a thread months ago that asks if we'd be better off trading the #16 pick for someone like Nik stauskas and months later my fanboys take it out of context by saying, "Omg lb wanted to trade the entire team for Nik stauskassss nooOooooo he's so baaaaad".   Btw, I still think it's a genuine question... Who will have more long term potential... Stauskas or rozier.   Stauskas is sure as heck outplaying him this season.  It was a question worth asking and if you read the original thread, I merely ask if we would be better off moving the pick for an admittedly undervalued buy low "bust" who might have more potential than what was available at 16.  Edit:  I hadn't gotten to the post yet, but right on cue, check out the troll above for a classic example of someone taking my stauskas post out of context.  That dude is keenly aware of the context surrounding my stauskas suggestion, but he's blatantly ignoring it to be dramatic and instigate an argument. That's pure trolling.   

Like a lot of people here, I create trade idea threads.  Unlikely a lot of people here, I have people follow me around from thread to thread holding these trade idea threads over my head like I'm purposely being dramatic by suggesting that Id sell high on someone like Thomas or crowder to buy low on someone like Kevin love.  If I genuinely believe Nerlens Noel is a better long term bet than Marcus smart, I don't just say it to upset people... I say it because I believe it's true.

[LarBrd33]

He's admitted to being a pessimist by nature and thus has a hard time believing positive outcomes will occur

The problem is that there is a no consistency to his pessimism. When it comes to the C's, the glass is half-empty. However, the rest of the league gets a glass half-full vibe from him. I would actually respect his opinion, and I imagine he would receive less backlash , if he was consistent in his overall negativity. The irritating thing is that he's very optimistic about teams that we have a rivalary with (Sixers and Lakers) or have valued picks from (Nets) and these thoughts echo from post to post and thread to thread ad nauseam. He knows what he does and it's his motives that are questioned as it screams of being purposely antagonistic in order to cause a rise from other forum members.

Ed, I actually read most of that.

I like Philly's assets more than boston's. I'll ride and die with that.  It clearly upsets you. You believe I like Philly's assets more than Boston's assets BECAUSE it upsets you.  That sums up the core reason you and I have conflict. You follow me around from thread to thread calling me a philly fan (to which you got suspended for). You follow me around from thread to thread essentially trolling me, because you believe I'm a troll. 

I like Nerlens Noel as a prospect more than Marcus smart. This is because Noel is a better prospect.
I like the unprotected Philly 1st (projected #1) more than the unprotected Brooklyn 1st.  This is because of math.

As for the lakers... Likewise, they have a better pick than us right now.  I'd take dangelo Russell over smart in a heartbeat.  I'd still take smart over randle.   You choose to ignore the fact that I'd take smart over randle. Instead, you assume that my opinion of Russell is based on my interest in upsetting you.  You can't even comprehend the possibility that Russell is a better prospect.  It's an impossibility to you.  You have convinced yourself that I don't actually have that opinion.... I do, Ed.  I really do.  I'd gladly take Russell over smart.  I'm sorry that upsets you, but I don't say it to upset you.

If I relay my envy of our rival's assets it's not because I love our rivals... It's because I'm envious of our rivals assets.  I hope some day you understand this so you stop derailing every thread I post in.  The way things are currently going, if the lakers end up with Ben Simmons I'll post something months from that that says, "I like Ben Simmons more than (guy we end up drafting)" and you will add that to your internal list or evidence that larbrd33 hates the Celtics. 

[celticsclay]

The moral of the story is

The moral of THIS story is that you come here and deliberately provoke and antagonize people and are now whining about people giving you back the same treatment.  I mean, if you at least denied it then the excuse could be made that you don't know what you're doing.  But you openly confessed here that you were just trying to stir up some nonsense.

Mike

False. 

I post about the Celtics.  I speak to their mediocrity, because they are mediocre... people take offense to it.   

  the thing is LB, you talk about every other team as though they're all vastly superior to the C's in some manner. 

That's not at all true, though.  It's just a myth that some of these trolls like to perpetuate.  I post a thread months ago that asks if we'd be better off trading the #16 pick for someone like Nik stauskas and months later my fanboys take it out of context by saying, "Omg lb wanted to trade the entire team for Nik stauskassss nooOooooo he's so baaaaad".   Btw, I still think it's a genuine question... Who will have more long term potential... Stauskas or rozier.   Stauskas is sure as heck outplaying him this season.  It was a question worth asking and if you read the original thread, I merely ask if we would be better off moving the pick for an admittedly undervalued buy low "bust" who might have more potential than what was available at 16.  Edit:  I hadn't gotten to the post yet, but right on cue, check out the troll above for a classic example of someone taking my stauskas post out of context.  That dude is keenly aware of the context surrounding my stauskas suggestion, but he's blatantly ignoring it to be dramatic and instigate an argument. That's pure trolling.   

Like a lot of people here, I create trade idea threads.  Unlikely a lot of people here, I have people follow me around from thread to thread holding these trade idea threads over my head like I'm purposely being dramatic by suggesting that Id sell high on someone like Thomas or crowder to buy low on someone like Kevin love.  If I genuinely believe Nerlens Noel is a better long term bet than Marcus smart, I don't just say it to upset people... I say it because I believe it's true.

When you say stuff like this it comes off like you lack a basic understanding of salary cap structure, depth charts and the natural progressions of players career.

Rozier is in the d league because he is a combo guard behind a lottery pick from last season that has shown flashes and has a clearly defined team role (defense), IT who may make the all-star game and bradley who is a starting quality NBA player.

Rozier has put up decent numbers in the d-league (I am not saying this is super important, but better than crappy ones) and hasn't really had his value decline or increase in value this season.
He is in the first year of a rookie contract that pays him a million less next year and 2 million less the following season than Stauskas.

Stauskas is a shooting guard that is shooting 35% from the field and doesn't really do anything else. He has nearly as many turnovers as assists and has been called out many times for  his defense by the coach (which i can't recall having anyone else do on the 76ers). I know the salary cap is not what it used to be, but this is guy scheduled to make 3 million next year, and then would have an option that would have to be picked up for 4 million. Right now he is not worth that contract and is running out of time to prove that he is. That makes him a net negative asset at this point.

Why you want to trade a rookie that is behind 3 quality NBA starters and has looked solid in the d-league 4 months into his career, for a guy that seems likely to be placed on waivers in 4 months really reeks of you wanting to be right about something rather than any actual NBA value (and is personally hard to believe you really believe).

[TheFlex]

Lar -- perhaps you would be less annoyed with the poster(s) you're invoking if you responded to poster(s) besides Eddie20 and others. In all of your threads you only seem to care about the opinions of a few who may or may not respond to whatever you've posted to incite them. That is to say, I don't think the topic in general is all that inciteful, but you know full well the type of crowd you'll draw by posting such a topic.

I and others posted a much more reasonable response to your OP in comparison to some of the ridicule you received for such a post. I'm waiting for you to continue that conversation, but you only appear interested in contesting with those whom you claim are annoying to contest with.

[mctyson]

Interesting article on ESPN about the potential of Brooklyn signing Kevin Durant:  http://espn.go.com/blog/brooklyn-nets/post/_/id/23429/examining-a-seemingly-implausible-scenario-durant-to-nets

Probably unlikely, but speaks to one of the reasons I don't value those future Brooklyn picks all that much. They play in Brooklyn and will have cap space... you can't rule out the possibility of them building a competent team regardless of having no draft picks.

This season is panning out wonderfully, though.  Gotta love the potential to add a top 5 pick from them this Summer.

I generally agree with your point that Brooklyn can get back into the ranks of contention quicker than most think, because they have an owner who will spend and is an attractive destination.

If there is anything to critique in this tread it's the bolded statement above.  You say that Durant signing there is 'unlikely' then continue with how you don't value the future Brooklyn picks.  If Durant signing there is unlikely, that means it is unlikely that any superstar would sign there.  That means Brooklyn will have to overpay for 2nd or even 3rd tier FAs, who would be great fits on contenders but will exposed as the primary option on a depleted Brooklyn team.  And that means Brooklyn will struggle to contend in the immediate future, when we have their picks, which is GREAT for us.

It's fine being pessimistic but there needs to be some realism.  A lot of teams, including Boston, will have ample cap space.  That will make it hard for Brooklyn to reload. 

[wiley]

Lar -- perhaps you would be less annoyed with the poster(s) you're invoking if you responded to poster(s) besides Eddie20 and others. In all of your threads you only seem to care about the opinions of a few who may or may not respond to whatever you've posted to incite them. That is to say, I don't think the topic in general is all that inciteful, but you know full well the type of crowd you'll draw by posting such a topic.

I and others posted a much more reasonable response to your OP in comparison to some of the ridicule you received for such a post. I'm waiting for you to continue that conversation, but you only appear interested in contesting with those whom you claim are annoying to contest with.

This my gripe too.  He ignores specific Bball questions too often and goes full on bombast.  I think he adds a lot of good things to the blog, overall.  Spices it up.  But LarBrd don't act like you don't dish it out too, mainly in the form of condescension. 

[wiley]

Interesting article on ESPN about the potential of Brooklyn signing Kevin Durant:  http://espn.go.com/blog/brooklyn-nets/post/_/id/23429/examining-a-seemingly-implausible-scenario-durant-to-nets

Probably unlikely, but speaks to one of the reasons I don't value those future Brooklyn picks all that much. They play in Brooklyn and will have cap space... you can't rule out the possibility of them building a competent team regardless of having no draft picks.

This season is panning out wonderfully, though.  Gotta love the potential to add a top 5 pick from them this Summer.

I generally agree with your point that Brooklyn can get back into the ranks of contention quicker than most think, because they have an owner who will spend and is an attractive destination.

If there is anything to critique in this tread it's the bolded statement above.  You say that Durant signing there is 'unlikely' then continue with how you don't value the future Brooklyn picks.  If Durant signing there is unlikely, that means it is unlikely that any superstar would sign there.  That means Brooklyn will have to overpay for 2nd or even 3rd tier FAs, who would be great fits on contenders but will exposed as the primary option on a depleted Brooklyn team.  And that means Brooklyn will struggle to contend in the immediate future, when we have their picks, which is GREAT for us.

It's fine being pessimistic but there needs to be some realism.  A lot of teams, including Boston, will have ample cap space.  That will make it hard for Brooklyn to reload.

I don't have a lot of hopes for the 2018 pick being better than pick 10 or so.  But I think next year's could easily be as good if not better than this year.  That's why I had a problem with KG Legend's excellent hypothetical of trading # 5 and future Brooklyn picks for Ingram.  I just don't know. (leaning towards not due to belief in 2017 pick possibly being top 3.  But I love Ingram.

[LooseCannon]

He's admitted to being a pessimist by nature and thus has a hard time believing positive outcomes will occur

The problem is that there is a no consistency to his pessimism. When it comes to the C's, the glass is half-empty. However, the rest of the league gets a glass half-full vibe from him. I would actually respect his opinion, and I imagine he would receive less backlash , if he was consistent in his overall negativity. The irritating thing is that he's very optimistic about teams that we have a rivalary with (Sixers and Lakers) or have valued picks from (Nets) and these thoughts echo from post to post and thread to thread ad nauseam. He knows what he does and it's his motives that are questioned as it screams of being purposely antagonistic in order to cause a rise from other forum members.

I'd say he is consistently pessimistic.  How can someone be pessimistic towards the Celtics and the Nets at the same time?

[LooseCannon]

The moral of the story is

The moral of THIS story is that you come here and deliberately provoke and antagonize people and are now whining about people giving you back the same treatment.  I mean, if you at least denied it then the excuse could be made that you don't know what you're doing.  But you openly confessed here that you were just trying to stir up some nonsense.

Mike

False. 

I post about the Celtics.  I speak to their mediocrity, because they are mediocre... people take offense to it.   

  the thing is LB, you talk about every other team as though they're all vastly superior to the C's in some manner. 

That's not at all true, though.  It's just a myth that some of these trolls like to perpetuate.  I post a thread months ago that asks if we'd be better off trading the #16 pick for someone like Nik stauskas and months later my fanboys take it out of context by saying, "Omg lb wanted to trade the entire team for Nik stauskassss nooOooooo he's so baaaaad".   Btw, I still think it's a genuine question... Who will have more long term potential... Stauskas or rozier.   Stauskas is sure as heck outplaying him this season.  It was a question worth asking and if you read the original thread, I merely ask if we would be better off moving the pick for an admittedly undervalued buy low "bust" who might have more potential than what was available at 16.  Edit:  I hadn't gotten to the post yet, but right on cue, check out the troll above for a classic example of someone taking my stauskas post out of context.  That dude is keenly aware of the context surrounding my stauskas suggestion, but he's blatantly ignoring it to be dramatic and instigate an argument. That's pure trolling.   

Like a lot of people here, I create trade idea threads.  Unlikely a lot of people here, I have people follow me around from thread to thread holding these trade idea threads over my head like I'm purposely being dramatic by suggesting that Id sell high on someone like Thomas or crowder to buy low on someone like Kevin love.  If I genuinely believe Nerlens Noel is a better long term bet than Marcus smart, I don't just say it to upset people... I say it because I believe it's true.

I would take a random player taken in the non-lottery part of the first round over Stauskas.  I wouldn't trade a second round pick for Stauskas.  Rozier is still a pig in a poke with a higher ceiling.

[CelticPride2016]

I didn't write the article.  I thought it was relevant because it counters a lot of the "Brooklyn has no hope" nonsense.  They play in a huge market, have a couple decent players and cap space.  I wouldn't bank on those picks amounting to much.  They have no incentive to lose.

You started a new thread

I saw this article about Durant potentially signing with Brooklyn.   I shared it on this forum, because we own their draft picks.   I'm not going to apologize to you for following the Celtics closely and all stories related to them.

You shared it because

See above.  Relevant article was relevant.  Relevant article deserved to be shared.

You didn't share the article because it was relevant.  You ADMITTED you started this thread because you think some other fans are too optimistic about the Nets picks and you feel it's your job to correct them.

What is relevant is your pattern of being persistently negative about the Celtics while being at times bizarrely positive about other teams and non-Celtics players.  You are not nearly as clever as you think you are and gave yourself away by dumping on Celtics like Smart while being almost giddy about the potential of garbage like Nik Stauskus and Anthony Bennett.

Mike

Isn't this the same guy who kept referring to Rozier as Hosier or some other way of making fun of the rookie? That was before I think he even played.

If I had predicted Brooklyn with 35-40 wins and had some long-winded spin on how great and healthy Embiid was, I'd apologize to everyone for being completely wrong.

I like to write a lot, so I can't really attack him for his long posts. I just don't read them. If someone can write and write forever on things so wrong, and then when proven wrong, he doesn't go wow sorry I was way off, who has time for that?

If he's trying to get a rise out of people, apparently it works. If that's his objective, then what more can be said?

[slamtheking]

The moral of the story is

The moral of THIS story is that you come here and deliberately provoke and antagonize people and are now whining about people giving you back the same treatment.  I mean, if you at least denied it then the excuse could be made that you don't know what you're doing.  But you openly confessed here that you were just trying to stir up some nonsense.

Mike

False. 

I post about the Celtics.  I speak to their mediocrity, because they are mediocre... people take offense to it.   

  the thing is LB, you talk about every other team as though they're all vastly superior to the C's in some manner. 

That's not at all true, though.  It's just a myth that some of these trolls like to perpetuate.  I post a thread months ago that asks if we'd be better off trading the #16 pick for someone like Nik stauskas and months later my fanboys take it out of context by saying, "Omg lb wanted to trade the entire team for Nik stauskassss nooOooooo he's so baaaaad".   Btw, I still think it's a genuine question... Who will have more long term potential... Stauskas or rozier.   Stauskas is sure as heck outplaying him this season.  It was a question worth asking and if you read the original thread, I merely ask if we would be better off moving the pick for an admittedly undervalued buy low "bust" who might have more potential than what was available at 16.  Edit:  I hadn't gotten to the post yet, but right on cue, check out the troll above for a classic example of someone taking my stauskas post out of context.  That dude is keenly aware of the context surrounding my stauskas suggestion, but he's blatantly ignoring it to be dramatic and instigate an argument. That's pure trolling.   

Like a lot of people here, I create trade idea threads.  Unlikely a lot of people here, I have people follow me around from thread to thread holding these trade idea threads over my head like I'm purposely being dramatic by suggesting that Id sell high on someone like Thomas or crowder to buy low on someone like Kevin love.  If I genuinely believe Nerlens Noel is a better long term bet than Marcus smart, I don't just say it to upset people... I say it because I believe it's true.

troll aren't making it up LB.  they read your posts, become irritated/agitated/annoyed/incited (pick a word you like better if you choose) which is what you're going for and then act all hurt and/or surprised you're on the receiving end of the vitriol and then go on the attack yourself. 

you can continue to push the troll angle but most of the longtime posters here are familiar with the schtick and some call you out on it.  sometimes I fall into that group (like today) but people calling you out for what you've said aren't trolls.

[tarheelsxxiii]

Why do folks care so much? If you believe Lar is trolling, then when why are you feeding the troll? It's Internet 101. If no one entertains it, the impact is lost.

There seem to be plenty here that believe he contributes to the forums AND has a tendency to mass-troll at times (intentional or not), too. If you appreciate a good contribution, then engage in those discussions and simply let the "inciteful" bit pass along naturally.

[slamtheking]

Why do folks care so much? If you believe Lar is trolling, then when why are you feeding the troll? It's Internet 101. If no one entertains it, the impact is lost.

There seem to be plenty here that believe he contributes to the forums AND has a tendency to mass-troll at times (intentional or not), too. If you appreciate a good contribution, then engage in those discussions and simply let the "inciteful" bit pass along naturally.

tp for the dose of common sense.  I'll do my best to apply it

[MBunge]

Why do folks care so much? If you believe Lar is trolling, then when why are you feeding the troll? It's Internet 101. If no one entertains it, the impact is lost.

There seem to be plenty here that believe he contributes to the forums AND has a tendency to mass-troll at times (intentional or not), too. If you appreciate a good contribution, then engage in those discussions and simply let the "inciteful" bit pass along naturally.

I freely admit that one of the things that gets my goat is people acting like the smartest one in the room when they clearly aren't.  It would be easier for me to let LarBrd's nonsense slide if he didn't frame it as him needing to "correct" other fans for being too optimistic/unrealistic, then offering up frequently lame if not ridiculous arguments to do so.

And if he was all troll/all the time it would be simpler as well.

Mike