Many people on this board: "It'S oKaY tHaT sMaRt Is OuT fOr ThE fIrSt RoUnD dUe To A dUmB dEcIsIoN tO pLaY hIm In A mEaNiNgLeSs GaMe! We'Ll HaNdLe InDy WiThOuT hIm!" We should still win this series, but people thinking this would be a cakewalk without Smart are crazy.
We clearly are struggling without that secondary playmaker out there in Smart. It might be time to start Hayward over Tatum, as he can provide you with Tatum's scoring while also providing the passing and playmaking to allow Kyrie to play off the ball, which neither Brown nor Tatum can provide you. And I prefer Brown at the 2 rather than going big with one of Tatum or Hayward there, as I don't think they are quick enough to guard as 2's.
Yes, that's what everyone that disagrees with you is thinking. Everyone that doesn't think you should sit everyone for the last two games is actually thrilled that Smart got injured, we love seeing guys not play
I mean, what? lol
First, no, literally - not figuratively, literally - many people on here were saying just this thing. It's not me speculating; this is literally what people here were saying, i.e. that Smart is not a big loss for this series due to it being Indy and us still having more overall talent.
Second, again, this is another fallacy - specifically a strawman this time - to say that I think that people are "actually thrilled that Smart got injured." That's asinine. I certainly don't think that. I just think that people are clearly wrong based on rationalizations that they are creating in order to protect Brad.
Sorry, was your post NOT a strawman? Is your insistence that Smart shouldn't have played not just based on Smart getting injured? Because, sorry, I can't see anyone making a big deal about Smart playing in that game if he hadn't gotten hurt
I get annoyed with everyone here insisting that, because Brad didn't do exactly what they would have done exactly when they would have done it, he's an idiot/a bad coach. No one here wants to face the possibility that they could be wrong
And I'm not saying that Brad is never wrong - I'm saying that people act like, if they ever disagree with Brad, the only possibility is Brad being wrong. It can't be that both are right (but have different philosophies), or that a freak accident happened and no one is to blame, or that both sides alert wrong. The only possible answer is that Brad is wrong and the fan is right. It's one of the reasons that >50% of the game thread posts are some variation of "Brad doesn't know what a timeout is!" and botching about literally every lineup that is or could be put on the floor
If you want to use Brad as your dumping ground for everything bad that happens, go ahead. But don't try to drag down everyone that disagrees with you based on some absurd opinions you assign us all
Also, I generally like your posts, but pointing out logical fallacies in people's posts instead of actually responding to them just makes you look like a prick. You of all people know that an argument having a fallacy doesn't automatically make it wrong (and that dismissing something just because there is a fallacy is itself a fallacy)
Again, what I'm arguing is not a strawman, as it's literally what people were saying, as people generally do not fully appreciate's Smart's effect on this team, especially his huge effect this year. That's pretty much the exact opposite of what a strawman argument is.
Also, your argument that my argument is a strawman that is based only on Smart actually getting injured is so off-base. The reason I am so p---ed about Smart's injury is because I was *literally* calling for the starters and main guys to rest the final two games as soon as Indy lost that game and we secured the 4 seed, because I wanted to avoid this exact scenario. Seriously, go back and look at the game thread for evidence, or even look at the thread announcing Smart's injury, as I posted there all of the posts in the game thread that were calling to sit the players prior to Smart's injury. This isn't me just reacting to an unfortunate circumstance; this is me livid with Brad for having a brainfart that cost us a significant injury to an integral player for literally no benefit at all.
Finally, your comment about logical fallacies is true (at least in some cases), but where have I ever proclaimed that simply because of the presence of a logical fallacy that someone is wrong? All I have done is pointed out the existence of the logical fallacy, shown why that argument is fallacious and unsound, and asked for some valid logical reasoning to justify Brad's decision, yet nobody has been able to offer up an argument without a fallacy to this point. Hence, that's why earlier I posted: "Yeah, this is what they call reductio ad absurdum, a logical fallacy. The fact that people can't make an argument to protect Brad for this decision without committing a logical fallacy kind of highlights exactly how it was a costly mistake on his part."
But enough of this discussion in the game thread. We don't need to bore the others with this argument, and we don't need to miss out on this playoff game arguing about this.
Topic: Pacers (0-0) at Celtics (0-0) Round 1 Game 1 4/14/19 (Read 74176 times)