POP: gasol deal incomprehensible

[ambchang_]

Because you can come up w/evidence supporting your claim that the Spurs tanked, albeit circumstantial.
I admit that tampering is hard to prove. In the case of L.A. tampering with Shaq, and in the absence of anything concrete to support either position, I look at the "most likely" scenario.
Is it really hard to believe that L.A. dumped salary in order to go after the premier FA in the league? Is it fishy that Shaq signed with the Lakers for more money than Orlando offered? Considering the disdain that Shaq has had for Jerry Buss the last few years, might he not have mentioned recently that L.A. tampered with him before he left Orlando for the Lakers?
Maybe Shaq was tampered with by the Lakers, but considering it was pretty much common knowledge that Shaq wanted out, I don't see any reason for L.A. to have tampered to get Shaq.
Anyway, we can go round-and-round all day, so I'll just leave it at that.

You certainly have your reasons, and I think that you make a great case with some of your anedoctal evidence, but I would contend that Shaq would ruin his own reputation in the process if he revealed the tampering, and given that the incident was so many years ago, it would have done little to harm Buss. In fact, it would harm Jerry West's reputation much more and we all know Shaq is quite fond of the logo.

As for the Spurs tanking, I am still waiting for any circumstantial evidence, I have so far received none, unless you want to take Steel Dog's evidence that he saw a couple of games back then and it was "obvious" to him that the Spurs were tanking.

Ah, the classic "kill the messenger, ignore the argument" defense. I saw an interview that Popovich gave criticizing the Gasol trade and he definitely wan't laughing or smiling. Maybe it was a different interview than the one Rome is talking about, but Pop was crying just the same.

Pop was joking around in his classic sarcastic tone. Yes, I was trying to find the clip on youtube but couldn't. But Jim Rome has been KNOWN to be a weak "analyst" (in fact, ESPN in general), and his reputation preceeds him.

 

[Renz]

Huh? Nobody is raising a "kill the messenger" defense here--although that's not a bad idea! Jim Rome is pretty much a dick regardless of his views.

Regarding the interview you're speaking of, do you have some sort of link or source to share for this? Because the comments actually in question (i.e. those referenced in the title of this thread) were made before the Knicks game. And Pop was definitely kidding. There's no "messenger" at all here, just the collective hive mind of a lazy press corps that cuts and pastes comments like Pop's without providing the slightest context clue. People like Rome then read the comments on the whirl why innerwebs and use them to justify whatever petty, preconceived opinion they had about whomever said them. But that's practically to be expected with Jim Rome, at least, who is hardly a journalist in anyone's sense of the word.

In case you think that's NOT the case here, then you should probably alert the authorities regarding what I wrote in the first paragraph. Jim Rome's life is in grave danger!

I saw an interview with Popovich talking about the Gasol trade on SportsCenter and he seemed genuinely pissed off as I remember it. I don't have a link.

Do you have a link to the interview that Rome is referencing?

BTW - Regardless of what anyone thinks of Rome, and personally I'm not a big fan although I find him entertaining much of the time, he is correct in his assessment about Popovich's outrage over the Gasol trade.

If Memphis was fleeced by Charlotte or New York, Pop wouldn't care one iota. He is pissed because the trade hurts the Spurs, not because it hurts the league, just as Rome said.

 

[Covert Rain]

I showed you minutes played, improving records, players going on surgeries. You were the one asserting that the Spurs had questionable substitution patterns, not me. Your only prove to your assertion was that "I watched several Spurs game that year".

Why would your assertions be held as truth before I can disprove them, and yet you can conveniently ignore my assertions WITH prove attached?

How does showing me minutes and injuries disprove his substitution patterns or that the Spurs may have kept guys out longer then needed? It's my opinion based on the game that I watched that POP's substitutions were suspect at best. If you deny that or don't agree that's your right.

Until I see prove otherwise that opinion will not change.

Of course there is, Elliott playing 36 games the following season is prove, Robinson having his career diverted and limited after that season is prove, and yet even though you said that there is no way to prove or disprove that, you freely used that as "evidence" that the Spurs tanked. I can see a bright future for you as a lawyer.

Right because that's the only supporting argument.

 

[BeeBeard]

I saw an interview with Popovich talking about the Gasol trade on SportsCenter and he seemed genuinely pissed off as I remember it. I don't have a link.

Do you have a link to the interview that Rome is referencing?

You mean aside from actually seeing him make the comments on television? Of course. What did you think, I just go around pretending to have seen make-believe interviews to support my points? Here, here's what I found with 3 seconds of Google searching.

http://larrybrownsports.com/basketball/gregg-popovich-rips-pau-gasol-trade/

BTW - Regardless of what anyone thinks of Rome, and personally I'm not a big fan although I find him entertaining much of the time, he is correct in his assessment about Popovich's outrage over the Gasol trade.

If Memphis was fleeced by Charlotte or New York, Pop wouldn't care one iota. He is pissed because the trade hurts the Spurs, not because it hurts the league, just as Rome said.

You mean to say that...a good trade that makes a conference rival better is not something that Gregg Popovich approves of? ...And?

That's hardly insightful! But it does qualify as insight for an idea thief like Jim Rome, who goes around regurgitating the opinions he reads beforehand on the net when he does his little shows. If you're a fan of Rome's, that's fine. You have a right to like whatever you like for whatever reasons you like. But just know that this particular "Pop doesn't like trades that hurt his team" stunning conclusion was something plenty of respected sportwriters had already talked about long before lil' Jimmy got on his soapbox.

 

[Renz]

You mean aside from actually seeing him make the comments on television? Of course. What did you think, I just go around pretending to have seen make-believe interviews to support my points? Here, here's what I found with 3 seconds of Google searching.

http://larrybrownsports.com/basketball/gregg-popovich-rips-pau-gasol-trade/

Maybe I'm missing something here. Is there a video somewhere in that link that shows Popovich "laughing and joking" about the Gasol trade? The printed quotes in that story only back up what Rome was saying.

 

[abomb]

Pops was not joking around;

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/rumors/post/Popovich-quot-Gasol-trade-beyond-comprehension?urn=nba,66109

Popovich: "Gasol trade beyond comprehension''
Monday, Feb 11, 2008 7:31 am EST

It has been 10 days since the Pau Gasol trade, but reactions are still trickling in. Count San Antonio Coach Gregg Popovich among those who disapproved of it according to the Los Angeles Times.

"What they did in Memphis is beyond comprehension," he told SI.com "There should be a trade committee that can scratch all trades that make no sense. I just wish I had been on a trade committee that oversees NBA trades. I'd like to elect myself to that committee. I would have voted no to the L.A. trade."

Popovich was then told that Memphis General Manager Chris Wallace had challenged NBA executives to criticize the deal publicly instead of spreading unattributed opinions comparable to what Wallace called "pillow talk."

Said Popovich: "Well, there you go. I'm on the record."

Source: Los Angeles Times

 

[BeeBeard]

Maybe I'm missing something here. Is there a video somewhere in that link that shows Popovich "laughing and joking" about the Gasol trade? The printed quotes in that story only back up what Rome was saying.

You must be joking? You have to see the actual video for context or else you think that Pop was literally wanting to appoint himself to a committee and overturn trades?? Aahahahaha!!

You Lakers fans are awesome. I'm not going to bother ripping the video of the Spurs feed for you, but I will point you to the comments of somebody who you might respect who had this to say about Pop's comments:

"I think it was tongue-in-cheek, or either cheek-in-tongue," he said. "I don't think you can take that statement for face value."

That was this gentleman's take on the comment without even seeing the actual Knicks pre-game. I wonder...I wonder who could have said that?? It was Phil...somebody. Phil Smith? No wait, I know...it was Phil Jackson. Does that name mean anything to you?

Boom shaka laka, Lakers fan. This is the last time I do your busy work for you.

 

[nashman]

I think some people just don't think you should be able to basically sell off your team for nothing. And the fact Memphis turned down other deals that were offered as though Gasol wasn't available but then turned around and traded him for squat. Strange trade but LA benefits obviously from the GM's stupidity in Memphis.

 

[Renz]

You must be joking? You have to see the actual video for context or else you think that Pop was literally wanting to appoint himself to a committee and overturn trades?? Aahahahaha!!

You Lakers fans are awesome. I'm not going to bother ripping the video of the Spurs feed for you, but I will point you to the comments of somebody who you might respect who had this to say about Pop's comments:

That was this gentleman's take on the comment without even seeing the actual Knicks pre-game. I wonder...I wonder who could have said that?? It was Phil...somebody. Phil Smith? No wait, I know...it was Phil Jackson. Does that name mean anything to you?

Boom shaka laka, Lakers fan. This is the last time I do your busy work for you.

The "committee" part was probably tongue-in-cheek, or maybe not, but Rome was right about Pop's whining about the trade. He's just pissed that L.A. got better and his protestations about the trade are as transparent as your juvenile responses.

PS- You won't bother posting a video of Pop's interview because you don't have one.

 

[D-Dogg]

Boom shaka laka, Lakers fan. This is the last time I do your busy work for you.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1622062&postcount=106



D'OH!!!

 

[BeeBeard]

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1622062&postcount=106



D'OH!!!

It's weird that you would even present this as some sort of evidence (TWICE, no less), because it's probative of absolutely nothing at all.

Oh no, you mean he's displeased by a trade that hurts his team!?! Wait, and his displeasure is on record?!!? (whatever the hell that even means.) That must also mean that he literally wants to found and chair a committee that voids any trade that disadvantages his team! What a tyrant! What a Hitler or Napoleon! DEATH TO GREGG POPOVICH!

Yes. That logically follows. It absolutely makes sense. You're going to have to ramp it up here, unless you just insist that I just become stupider and more pliable by getting drunk right now or something. That's about the only way I'm not going to laugh off these insanely irrelevant arguments and links by the Lakers faithful.

Tell me now just so I'll know. Sarcasm or tongue-in-cheek verbage are not the kinds of things intelligent Lakers fans understand? What about colloquial expressions? Euphemisms? Similes? Onamotapoeia? At what point are you allowed to depart from reason and just think "Hur...Hur...He said what he said! Hur hur! The words is what they is!!" What happens if you're reading poetry or something? Do you just throw whatever you're reading against the wall in frustration?

Inform me.

 

[ambchang_]

How does showing me minutes and injuries disprove his substitution patterns or that the Spurs may have kept guys out longer then needed? It's my opinion based on the game that I watched that POP's substitutions were suspect at best. If you deny that or don't agree that's your right.

Follow me here. YOU came up with the argument that the Spurs had fishy substitution patterns to prove that they were tanking, the onus is on YOU to show that it actually did happen.

I came up with minutes played, injuries and improving records to show that show that the Spurs did not tank, and I showed you the numbers.

I didn't deny it, but in an argument, I would need to get some sort of evidence for me to believe you. You may have the great virtue of believing every single thing that was said to you, but I am, by nature, and suspicious person, I can't help it.

BTW, using your logic, I believe the Suns paid good money just so that they could make the playoffs last year, it had absolutely NOTHING to do with Nash's offensive prowess, great finishers in Marion and Stoudemire, a juggernaut offensive system, contributions from Bell, Barbosa and Diaw. I threw out this baseless accusation from the meetings I have with D'antoni and Sarver that I said I have attended.

Until I see prove otherwise that opinion will not change.

Feel free to continue to ignore the facts and hang on to your opinion because you don't agree with the substition patterns of the Spurs in 97. I didn't agree with substitution patterns of Popovich THIS year, they MUST be tanking.

Right because that's the only supporting argument.

Huh?

 

[Renz]

It's weird that you would even present this as some sort of evidence (TWICE, no less), because it's probative of absolutely nothing at all.

Oh no, you mean he's displeased by a trade that hurts his team!?! Wait, and his displeasure is on record?!!? (whatever the hell that even means.) That must also mean that he literally wants to found and chair a committee that voids any trade that disadvantages his team! What a tyrant! What a Hitler or Napoleon! DEATH TO GREGG POPOVICH!

Yes. That logically follows. It absolutely makes sense. You're going to have to ramp it up here, unless you just insist that I just become stupider and more pliable by getting drunk right now or something. That's about the only way I'm not going to laugh off these insanely irrelevant arguments and links by the Lakers faithful.

You keep changing the focus of the argument. Take the whole "committee" thing out of it and Rome's premise remains just as valid. Pop is using his "outrage" about the Gasol trade being bad for the league as a smokescreen because he is really upset that the trade is bad for his team.

That is Rome's whole point. Pop's protestations about the trade just make him look like a whiner, which he is.

 

[ambchang_]

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1622062&postcount=106



D'OH!!!

?

Because the title says so? This must be one of the weirdest "evidence" I have seen in a long time.

Hold on while I create a blog that says "Pop was joking around" as evidence that he actually was.

 

[Renz]

Hold on while I create a blog that says "Pop was joking around" as evidence that he actually was.

Just re-post one of BeeBeard's posts. That seems to be the basis for his argument.

 

[ambchang_]

You keep changing the focus of the argument. Take the whole "committee" thing out of it and Rome's premise remains just as valid. Pop is using his "outrage" about the Gasol trade being bad for the league as a smokescreen because he is really upset that the trade is bad for his team.

That is Rome's whole point. Pop's protestations about the trade just make him look like a whiner, which he is.

And Jim's whole point would be blown if Pop was in fact joking. I don't think it really takes Jim Rome to tell me that the trade benefits the Lakers and hurts their opponents, that is a GIVEN. Jim Rome's rant (whine seems to be your preference to describe these situations) adds NOTHING to the whole situation, and just because he said it does not make it a fact that Pop was "outraged" by it.

I am curious, could you show me other instances where Pop whined to the media? You seem to know quite a bit about it.

 

[ambchang_]

Just re-post one of BeeBeard's posts. That seems to be the basis for his argument.

I am sorry, it linked to aBomb's post ...

 

[BeeBeard]

PS- You won't bother posting a video of Pop's interview because you don't have one.

I assure you that nobody ever says anything, anywhere in a humorous, or conversely, a serious context unless it's on video that I can easily upload. In case you're wondering, I don't have video of Lincoln giving the Gettysburg address, either, so you should probably assume that never happened.

Oh and resorting to ad hominem attacks by calling my arguments "juvenile" is really just you raising the white flag for arguing so foolishly. I'm sorry your beloved hero, Phil Jackson, disagrees with your crazytalk and I-don't-understand-sarcasm face value evaluations of what people say to reporters.

But hey, you can't win em all. Maybe next time, I'll be the one saying something absolutely stupid and untenable as a Suns fan, like "Brian Skinner should be an All-Star" and you can be all "Ah HAH!!" and show me just how wrong I am.

 

[Renz]

And Jim's whole point would be blown if Pop was in fact joking. I don't think it really takes Jim Rome to tell me that the trade benefits the Lakers and hurts their opponents, that is a GIVEN. Jim Rome's rant (whine seems to be your preference to describe these situations) adds NOTHING to the whole situation, and just because he said it does not make it a fact that Pop was "outraged" by it.

"What they did in Memphis is beyond comprehension," he told SI.com "There should be a trade committee that can scratch all trades that make no sense. I just wish I had been on a trade committee that oversees NBA trades. I'd like to elect myself to that committee. I would have voted no to the L.A. trade."

Popovich was then told that Memphis General Manager Chris Wallace had challenged NBA executives to criticize the deal publicly instead of spreading unattributed opinions comparable to what Wallace called "pillow talk."

Said Popovich: "Well, there you go. I'm on the record."

Personally, I don't think Popovich would go "on the record" against the trade and in favor of a trade committee if he was "joking".

Again, and for the last time, the whole "Popovich-is-against-the-Gasol-trade" is funny only because of Pop's dishonesty. He wants us all to believe that he has the league's best interest in mind when he is really only looking after the Spurs' best interest.

 

[Renz]

I assure you that nobody ever says anything, anywhere in a humorous, or conversely, a serious context unless it's on video that I can easily upload. In case you're wondering, I don't have video of Lincoln giving the Gettysburg address, either, so you should probably assume that never happened.

Oh and resorting to ad hominem attacks by calling my arguments "juvenile" is really just you raising the white flag for arguing so foolishly. I'm sorry your beloved hero, Phil Jackson, disagrees with your crazytalk and I-don't-understand-sarcasm face value evaluations of what people say to reporters.

But hey, you can't win em all. Maybe next time, I'll be the one saying something absolutely stupid and untenable as a Suns fan, like "Brian Skinner should be an All-Star" and you can be all "Ah HAH!!" and show me just how wrong I am.

So you admit that you can't back up your claim that Pop was "joking". Thanks for finally clearing that up.

Game. Set. Match. Renz.

 

[Covert Rain]

Follow me here. YOU came up with the argument that the Spurs had fishy substitution patterns to prove that they were tanking, the onus is on YOU to show that it actually did happen.

Now follow me. Someone had brought it up and I agreed with them. It is of my opinion that they did in fact TANK the season. It's based on my own observations, stories in the media that year and everything else I had seen.

Again MY OPINION. If you don't agree great. However, if your trying to convince me otherwise then it is on YOU to prove me otherwise. Until then I will continue to believe my opinion just like you have the right to believe yours. I have seen nothing posted here that would dismiss it otherwise.

I came up with minutes played, injuries and improving records to show that show that the Spurs did not tank, and I showed you the numbers.

Again, will say it again. Minutes played doesn't mean jack. Pop could control when guys were in and out of games. The games that I watched he was emptying his bench when games were close and sitting starters. That to me says TANK.

I would need to get some sort of evidence for me to believe you. You may have the great virtue of believing every single thing that was said to you, but I am, by nature, and suspicious person, I can't help it.

I am not trying to convince you. In fact I would say that the very prospect of convincing a homer is next to impossible.

BTW, using your logic, I believe the Suns paid good money just so that they could make the playoffs last year, it had absolutely NOTHING to do with Nash's offensive prowess, great finishers in Marion and Stoudemire, a juggernaut offensive system, contributions from Bell, Barbosa and Diaw. I threw out this baseless accusation from the meetings I have with D'antoni and Sarver that I said I have attended.

Can't comment on this pointless drivel. Comparing games I have watched to fantasy meeting you say you had with D'Anotoni and Sarver to make a point are beyond stupid...even for a homer.

Feel free to continue to ignore the facts and hang on to your opinion because you don't agree with the substition patterns of the Spurs in 97. I didn't agree with substitution patterns of Popovich THIS year, they MUST be tanking. Huh?

At least he is not going to the end of the bench and pulling his starting 5 this time.

 

[ambchang_]

Personally, I don't think Popovich would go "on the record" against the trade and in favor of a trade committee if he was "joking".

Again, and for the last time, the whole "Popovich-is-against-the-Gasol-trade" is funny only because of Pop's dishonesty. He wants us all to believe that he has the league's best interest in mind when he is really only looking after the Spurs' best interest.

What does "go on record" means anyways? I go on the record to say that this is the best board in the universe. Oh crap, it just meant that I am not joking.

And dishonesty? You mean when Pop said it, he doesn't know that people will be able to see that this trade benefits the Lakers and hurt the Spurs chances at the championship? I would go on record and say that if Jim Rome didn't say it, I would never have came to that conclusion!

 

[abomb]

What does "go on record" means anyways? I go on the record to say that this is the best board in the universe. Oh crap, it just meant that I am not joking.

MEM GM Chris Wallace speculated that many other teams were upset about the move, but were keeping their displeasure as whispers. Pop went on record with a reporter. Doesnt get much more serious than that.

 

[ambchang_]

Now follow me. Someone had brought it up and I agreed with them. It is of my opinion that they did in fact TANK the season. It's based on my own observations, stories in the media that year and everything else I had seen.

Again MY OPINION. If you don't agree great. However, if your trying to convince me otherwise then it is on YOU to prove me otherwise. Until then I will continue to believe my opinion just like you have the right to believe yours. I have seen nothing posted here that would dismiss it otherwise.

And I did, I showed mpg to show that the best players got the most minutes, I showed injury histories to backup the legitimacy of the injuries suffered in 97, and I showed the Spurs record continually improving throughout the season. You chose to ignore/disagree with them.

Again, will say it again. Minutes played doesn't mean jack. Pop could control when guys were in and out of games. The games that I watched he was emptying his bench when games were close and sitting starters. That to me says TANK.

And please do show me, I take a geniune interest to this, but so far, you have showed nothing to back it up.

I am not trying to convince you. In fact I would say that the very prospect of convincing a homer is next to impossible.

Perhaps because you never went so far as to say "I saw the games"?

Can't comment on this pointless drivel. Comparing games I have watched to fantasy meeting you say you had with D'Anotoni and Sarver to make a point are beyond stupid...even for a homer.

The whole point for the stupidity is to show your level of credibility. I mean, I can't talk Calculus to a bunch of Grade 2 students learning the multiplication table.

At least he is not going to the end of the bench and pulling his starting 5 this time.

How does a lineup of Ginobili, Jacque Vaugh, Horry, Elson and Bonner sound?

 

[BeeBeard]

So you admit that you can't back up your claim that Pop was "joking". Thanks for finally clearing that up.

Game. Set. Match. Renz.

"So you admit it!!!" You are truly hilarious, that's for sure! This may come as a surprise to you, but as somebody who wishes the Spurs every kind of evil in the world, I don't actually record Spurs games. I also don't even record Bucks games, Clippers games, Timberwolves games...hmm, no games at all! What kind of NBA fan am I!?!

And yet...hmm...and yet, I specifically saw Popovich make the exact comments in dispute, with my own eyes, thanks to the magic of FSN Sports. And not only that, but I saw the exact context in which the comment was made.

Now, I suppose I could send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to FSN along with a check and a letter asking that they mail me a tape or DVD of the pre-game show on the particular date in question. I suppose I could. I don't want to hurt your feelings, but I think that's more of a commitment than I'm willing to make to you. Honestly, after having dressed you down for having such foolish ideas, poor debating skills, and an inability to detect on its face any kind of linguistic subtlety, would you really expect me to make some sort of financial commitment to this as well? I mean don't you know enough to retreat and go lick your wounds?

Now look, you're just going to have to come to grips with the fact that the rest of the world understands sarcasm and tongue-in-cheek humor, but you do not. You don't get it, but that's OK. Even your hero, Phil Jackson--who has every reason to make disparaging remarks about the Spurs--can detect sarcasm when he sees it. But not you, and that's OK. Even Jim Rome is probably bright enough to detect sarcasm, but he has different motives and mouths off about things like this because it makes for a good story. But you don't understand sarcasm, and again, that's OK.

Given what you've posted, continuing on would be like me tripping a fat, helpless kid with Down's or something. There's just nothing to be gained from it, and it just makes me feel like a bully. Are you sure you don't have like an older brother or a spokesperson or somebody who can step in in your place and can lay down some information that isn't childish and poorly-worded? Because I'm going to have to invoke the mercy rule here if you don't.