| . |
 |
Contributor
As I said on Twitter, I take no special pleasure in this. At the same time, he should've taken the $40 million. While I'm extremely glad he didn't. We would surely not be as well positioned now as we would if he had.
Griffin, Nelson, the beefed up facility, Gayle's financial support, Zion...it's possible none of it comes if Cousins doesn't miss that FT.
Lakers fans weren't expecting that.. I get it's a fan board but I think it's best to resist the urge to generalize.Originally Posted by Pelicanidae
Just because you haven't personally seen them doesn't mean they don't exist. There have been plenty of Lakers fans arguing precisely that.
Sure, not every single Lakers fan was saying that, I'll concede that, but there has been more than a handful of Lakers fans running around on Twitter and Instagram insisting that Cousins was going to come back, more than a full year removed from his Achilles injury, and be a 20/10/4 guy again, stretching the floor, and saving AD from playing centre. There was a journalist who said yesterday that a ''close to 100%'' Boogie (whatever close to 100% means for a guy who has ruptured an Achilles and torn a quad) turned the Lakers into the absolute favourites for the title, and that this injury was devastating to them because without him, it made the NBA ''even more'' wide open, as if him being healthy somehow closed things down in favour of the Lakers.
Basketball.
#Lakers. Can #Melo play Center?
— Dr. Robert Klapper (@DrRobertKlapper) August 16, 2019
Lakers please do this
.
Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk
Remember those times that AD's team lost a center to injury and AD sacrificed himself to help the team? Yeah, he's still refusing on the Lakers.
It's just so baffling. He's such a mismatch at centre, it makes complete sense for him to play there against at least 25 teams in the league. He's 6'11.5'', 250lbs, 7'5'' wingspan, he's definitely big enough. With how light most teams are today on real low post monsters, it's not like he's going to get abused most nights.
Didn't he play centre for at least SOME of the time after Cousins went down? That was when he went absolutely nuclear and launched himself into the MVP voting with barely three months to go in the season.
It's really lame of him not to do it. Especially in today's game where positions don't actually matter THAT much half the time.
Don't want to pile on, but anyone who thinks AD isn't as soft as Charmin (especially between the ears) is nuts.
I really need this to happen pic.twitter.com/IWQhsAO2tX
— PhilJFry (@PhilJFry5) August 16, 2019
Please happen.
My point is you paint a picture that's non existent with those kind of generalizations. Not to insult you personally but I always find it juvenile when individuals are discussing sports and they do the "Blank fans are ____" comments.. or "Blank fans believe _____".. There are plenty of Lakers fans who didn't want Boogie anywhere near the Lakers, and didn't expect him to give no more than 10 to 12 minutes per game of moderate production.
Okay, sure. That's almost certainly true.
My posts are long enough without the necessary list of disclaimers to point out when something is being used in the common, figurative usage versus the literal definition. It's obviously not literally the case that all Lakers fans think X or Y. They are not (despite how it sometimes appears) a complete hivemind.
It's just also the case that we all know what is being meant when someone refers to X fans or Y fans, and it's unwieldy, unnecessary, and overly long to go into detail attaching asterisks to the end of otherwise general statements that absolutely everyone understands functionally, for the sake of an offhand comment.
I would be extremely surprised if anyone read my post that said ''Lakers fans'' and took that to mean each and every individual who ever has supported the Lakers in specific.
This explanation is exactly why generalizations are silly. They don't mean anything. Since you've acknowledged that it only targets a percentage of a whole. And since you aren't doing any scientific polling you might be highlighting the viewpoints of a minority and building a narrative around it. If that's how you get down that's your prerogative, I just think it's juvenile. Saying "blank fans believe ___" knowing that you have no clue as to how many actually believe what you're saying they believe, makes no sense.
Last edited by Nichols; 08-16-2019 at 08:38 PM.
Fine, I'll fix the statement.
''Some unknown percentage of Lakers fans, based upon a flawed sample size done with absolutely zero professional polling and based only upon samples drawn from Instagram and Twitter over the period over around two weeks, seem to have put too much on his shoulders, with some of them appearing to be expecting him to come back in something closely resembling his top form (although admittedly there is also some dispute as to exactly what that represents, both in terms of his overall career, and in terms of his career when adjusting for the severe injuries he has sustained), to help their - in my estimation- woeful squad and now he's just out probably for the year, given the nature of his injury. All of this is of course based upon subjective evaluations of limited sample sizes, and should in no way be taken to represent a larger data size in terms of the time period being covered (pre-Cousins signing, for example) or be taken to represent the entirety of the Lakers fandom from the time of the team's inception until today.''
That better?
Kinda makes you wonder if it was worth even saying right?? Which validates the point I'm trying to get you to understand. Like I said, it's your prerogative. I just get teenage facebook poster vibes whenever I see "blank fans think"..
Would also like to add that I find your insights interesting and well thought out. Statements about fans in general just seem beneath you.
Well, as I said, it was a throwaway comment. The fact that it seemed to really irk you is actually pretty beyond me, for precisely the reason that if it's of questionable worth to say, it's probably of questionable worth to quibble over.
I just assumed everyone is aware that when you say ''X fans'' you're referring to a generic convention of that fan that everyone understands to possess certain traits, who is not necessarily representative of every individual within that fanbase but is generally representative of certain trends within it. That's not even limited to sports, almost everyone does it, regularly, regarding all kinds of things.
And it's almost always a bad idea to generalize in all circumstances. You can reference human history for examples of how doing so led to numerous atrocities.
I'm not irked, I just wanted you to see how silly it is to generalize a fanbase. The fact that you can acknowledge that it isn't representative of a whole, or that you can't articulate a rough percentage illustrates the reason why doing it is pointless.
It stuck out in your post because, as I've said before, I believe you're a quality poster. It just didn't fit with what I'm accustomed to seeing from you.
I'm going to give you a favour and pretend that you didn't just compare offhandedly referring to a bunch of Laker fan idiots as ''Lakers fans'' to ''numerous atrocities'' in history. Cause you know that's silly.
Like I said, and this is all I'm going to say on the matter, because if you don't agree with me then you just won't agree with me here:
''when you say ''X fans'' you're referring to a generic convention of that fan that everyone understands to possess certain traits, who is not necessarily representative of every individual within that fanbase but is generally representative of certain trends within it.''
Edit: removed a long digression, since it's not worth it and doesn't actually help end the back and forth.
If you disagree, and you think that we should only ever speak in literalist language, then cool, but I'm not going to debate it any further in this thread, since it's already gone off topic enough. If you want to talk more about this stuff, then send me a PM or something, cause I'm done with this in the thread.
Last edited by Pelicanidae; 08-16-2019 at 07:21 PM.
Now you're trying to re-frame the argument. No one is suggesting that you have to always speak in a literal fashion. I think you know that. I think you also know that you're wrong, but you're muddling the discussion by introducing aspects of language that have nothing at all to do with the very simple point I made to you. Generalizing in a sports forum is for little kids.
You also don't have to do me any favors. I didn't compare human atrocities to banter in a sports forum, to intimate that I did is disingenuous. The broader point was that generalizing is foolish, we have a plethora of examples to choose from that makes this apparent.
Contributor
I respectfully disagree with you Pelicanidae. I don't even think he was even going to start for them. I don't think people (casual fans maybe) honestly thought he would contribute "top form" or preinjury boogie. That's just unrealistic, he also didn't look awful at all in the playoffs couple games imo, he honestly looked pretty good in some games. His legs are giving out, not his I.Q. or his skillset only his ability to perform at lesser level is the only adjustments he needed to make.
Side note, Boogie gained mad respect from me when he decided to bet on himself. Sure it's a risk and boy did he crap out like a bad night at Harrah's, but as a man in this world the only person that know's your exact worth IS YOU. So I cant put on a cape and pretend to be captain hindsight cause homie did what he thought would benefit him and his family in the long run.
There was a sizable percentage, close to maybe more than half, that I saw on Lakersground that took it as common knowledge he would be substantially better for the Lakers than he was for GS during the playoffs. They were not just citing the extra recovery time for the achilles but also posting pictures of how much weight he lost and how much more cut he was looking. A good number had him slotted as the starting center as he had a rapport with AD and his style meshed better with him then McGee's does.
I'm a member of Lakersground.. Many didn't want him on the team, once free agent options dwindled it was thought that he'd be an okay cheap option for 1 year as a back up. His thread is open on Lakersground if anyone wants to check smh..
Last edited by Nichols; 08-17-2019 at 12:45 AM.
They definitely are divided over there - some swore off him as an injury risk others were saying he would put up 20/10. Reading his thread from page 30-35 will show some suggesting caution and others asking how can they afford him after he balls out this year. After that is discussing what to do after the injury.
Yea.. think about it. A lot of guys here aren't sold on Ingram, but they're optimistic and have reasoned, because of that optimism that he would be better under different circumstances. I've always harbored a strong dislike for Cousins, I think he's a jerk. But when the Lakers signed him, I hoped he could at least be 70% of what he once was. A lot of what you saw on LG is guys being optimistic because he's on our team, hoping for a best case scenario.
I would never wish that kind of injury on anyone. But if it has too happen too someone (Behind AD), Demarcus would be my choice.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
