bigstrads wrote:

bada wrote:99% of the time I dont agree with what he is saying, but I always appreciate his efforts.

How can you not agree with it if its backed up by stats and facts? arent stats and facts........well, stats and facts?

That is EASY! You can ALWAYS find stats and facts that back your case but then ignore cases that dont back your argument. I call it "selective fact dictation" LOL

8th ave wrote:if you dont like davids post, simply ignore it. you say its harder than it looks, but i be on this board just as much as yall do, so whatever i can do you can do too...

seriously man... stop the bitchin... it doesnt do anything to contribute to the board...

i agree. can we please stop concentrating on trying to get one member banned. it's seemed to become a trend this off-season that a bunch of people gang up on one member at a time to try and rid of him. if theres a troll, its a different story...but as david at least talks warrior basketball (despite it always being about nellie) can we please just let it be? ignore him if you dont want to talk to him.

David wrote:

coltraning wrote:

David wrote:If you'll notice, the rookies who got to play a lot a few years ago, for the most part, have been 4 year college players. Guys who weren't kids without basketball training.

The rookies coming in now are would-be college sophmores, with little, actual, basketball training. They have to get their training on-the-job. If your team is trying to make the playoffs, all players have to earn their playing time.

If the Ws play their rookies, just because, then the Ws aren't trying to make the playoffs. They're playing for the future, like the Sonics did last year.

I don't think you can cry about playing the rookies and expect to, realistically, make the playoffs. IMO, if you think a team can be a contender with college sophmores in the lineup, not name Jordan, KG, LBJ or Magic, your delusional.

The gaps in Nelson's coaching career without rookies, Nelson was out of coaching or didn't have rookies, or in the case of recently, didn't have rookies capable of playing on a playoff contender.

What does "WAN'T GOOD ENOUGH" mean in English?

David,

I saw your name and thought to myself 100-1 odds it is about Nelson. You never disappoint. Of your posts thus far, what percentage do NOT involve a defense of Don Nelson? Is there any other aspect to this game or team that interests you? You seem like a bright enough guy, but your focus is incredibly narrow. I bet you cannot do 10 posts in a row without defending Nelson directly or indirectly...I know you are not Don Nelson (you write too well) but seriously. Are you a friend, a relative, or just a Stan-style fan?

I hope you're not another one of those people who tries to control the posts of others besides themselves. I'd be disappointed that there's another one.

Let me point something out, that you probably haven't noticed. I'm responding to something. I didn't just start a thread about how great Don Nelson is. I'm trying to address a misconception, or an instance of misinformation. The subject, that I, didn't start, was Don Nelson. I'm not sure why it's cool to express irrational hate for someone but uncool to offer a rebuttal to that irrational hate.

For every post that I'm defending Nelson, that means there's a post that prompted me to respond, yet I'm considered narrowly focused. What about the people I'm responding to? Aren't they just as narrowly focused or are there several I'm responding to? Am I the one making things up and throwing it out there or am I the one looking things up to offer an informed opinion?

If you're wondering how many of my posts are about Nelson, do a search by name. You might be surprised.

David, I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU, so am the last person who would try to control what you write. You are not obscene, racist or infantile, so while it looks to me like you are a little obsessed with defending Don Nelson, it hurts no one. I take you at your word that many of your posts are not in defense of Don Nelson, I just must have missed them. So what are your thoughts on the Warriors moves so far other than how they relate to Don Nelson?

sfsfsfgiants wrote:

bigstrads wrote:

sfsfsfgiants wrote:

StuckInSoCal wrote:Wow, SFx3, I've flown off the handle here before and been asked to chill... man, I respect your opinions but there's no need for that.

Was it out of line, maybe. I am not taking back what I said, though. He is no more than a troll.

Dont worry man, Nellie, and as such David, are retiring soon.

Hopefully, we can fire him before, but since that isnt happening, we have to deal with both of them for another year.

Seriously man. Why the hate? David makes good posts and doesn't get rude with people. He likes Nellie, you hate him. I don't see why how that makes him a troll. If Nellie's the reason he follows the Warriors that's fine with me. I like Nellie too. Can't we all just get slong?

cladden wrote:Can't we all just get slong?

cladden wrote:

sfsfsfgiants wrote:

bigstrads wrote:

sfsfsfgiants wrote:

StuckInSoCal wrote:Wow, SFx3, I've flown off the handle here before and been asked to chill... man, I respect your opinions but there's no need for that.

Was it out of line, maybe. I am not taking back what I said, though. He is no more than a troll.

Dont worry man, Nellie, and as such David, are retiring soon.

Hopefully, we can fire him before, but since that isnt happening, we have to deal with both of them for another year.

Seriously man. Why the hate? David makes good posts and doesn't get rude with people. He likes Nellie, you hate him. I don't see why how that makes him a troll. If Nellie's the reason he follows the Warriors that's fine with me. I like Nellie too. Can't we all just get slong?

That's true. I mean, it's not like he's attacking someone. He's simply saying what he sees in HIS eyes, not any one else's. While many may find his posts annoying, lets face it... he's done nothing wrong. To be honest, if anything, we're all looking ridiculous ganging up on him. He's defending someone that we're all not a fan of. But he's said nothing wrong. So if anything, this all needs to just stop and move on.

I can some what relate with David because i was one of the very few who actually liked Mikael Pietrus. I learned that you cannot make othe rpeople love someone. Especially on this board David wants everyone to love and respect Coach Nelson. He needs to leave it alone and let people form their own opinion about them. In my case, I stopped trying to defend the attacks on Pietrus when I realized he was just the flavour of the week. First it was Dunleavy and then Pietrus. tomorrow it will be someone else. Facts and stats mean nothing when you don't like someone.

I don't like Coach Nelson because in the last view years he hasn't played our rookies very much. That's my opinion, David. I have a right to that. I think Coach Nelson has been given too much credit for taking the Warriors to the playoffs. He didn't take them, the players took them. Coach Montgomery or Coach Mussleman didn't have Baron Davis, Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington, Monta Ellis, Andres Biedrins, or Kaleena Azubuike. I don't think Caoch Nelson could take Eric Dampier, Adonyl Foyle, Speedy Claxton, or Nick Van Excel to the playoffs.

What's annoying is that David refuse to believe that Coach Nelson has flees on him too. He's not perfect. Maybe that's what the HOF voters saw and did not selct him into the hall od fame. I think David will be happier if he just acknowledge that Coach Nelson is not perfect and let be have their own OPINION about him. I know I was when I gave up trying to defend Mikael Pietrus because people kept calling him dumb. I realized it wasn't worth the stress.

Oh yeah David, Quirt correcting everyone grammatical errors. i have big fingers and type fast and don't prove read. Who are Daniel Webster?

I believe montgomery did have Baron, but didn't know how to use him. but he did have murphy and dunleavy, so he did not have the same team. But lets be realistic, muscle head and monty did not know how to coach NBA players, and that was their problem

Nellie was the second highest paid coach in the league and led us to another lottery pick, fricking Musselman could of done that plus a DUI. BD, last time I checked was a Clipper, so who cares that he will be best point guard ever, the job is Monta for at least a year unless Mullin decides on some lame brain sign and trade. The trade for Heinrich makes sense because they can split point guard duties (Ellis and Heinrich) and moving Harrington alllows (forces) Nellie to play the younger players. The bottom line, for Nellie fans at least ... if he has a great team and develops the youngsters .... contract extension. If he chokes (where is Sprewell?) he will get canned and if he wins with a short bench ... still getting canned. For fans of non-brick basketball ... the BD departure was a blessing. We dumped five perimeter gunners (Dunleavy, Murphy, Richardson, Pietrus, and BD) and hopefully we can get a team that will hit a shot besides a bunny or trei.

jimbob631 wrote:omfg david stfu already. Like Colt said, when I saw ur name I knew right away it was a post having to do with Nelson. Try posting about something else for once in ur life.

How about worrying about what "jimbo631" posts and quit trying to control what someone else posts. That's why there's individual profiles so we each can post our own thoughts.

bigstrads wrote:Good points...........but the prooblem is that David never concedes any faults of Nellies..........even the ones Nellie admits himself.

This right here, is a lie. I don't argue against something that's the truth.

Do you know anybody who doesn't have faults? How could I possibly claim that Nelson has no faults? That might be the way you conduct your business, but not me.

People get in a huff over something that's untrue and base their feelings on that lie. That's my point. Rather than refute what I'm saying with facts, I get attacked based on something else that's not true.

If you, and some of you others, want me to stop defending Nelson, quit telling lies. It's that simple. Are you capable of doing that?

i have tried to stay out of this thread as it is a bit messy.

i do have a couple of points that may help. first off david , i like nellie
and think he has helped the team i like how he shows off to the media and thean fans as he tries to be witty.....i like how he is old school and makes the young guys learn from the school of hard knocks instead of hanging on their jocks and helping to ruin the character of the young up and comer......

so your takes on nellie give this board a balance.....

but balance is key and imo you are a alot off balance , i would think someone with your understanding would be more well rounded in your contributions....we would all bennifit from your non nellie insights...


as for the other side....

dudes that gang in with one another in hammering a poster kinda sucks..
imo a poster like david is over the top nellie but not really disrespecting and typically supports his thoughts.

when gangs form it pushes potentialy good posters away from making this board even better.

in closing this is a tight board and all good posters make it better lets not drive away good or potentialy good posters

we all could use good posters more than we could use pissed off people

David, I dont think the majority of these "Nellie does not play rookies" posts are LIES. There is a middle ground here.

When people say Nellie does not play rookies, that is not an ABSOLUTE statement. They are not claiming that never in his life has he ever played a rookie, but yet that is kind of the angle you are taking in your posts.

It is more they are saying it is not his preference and all things being equal, he will play a veteran over a rookie. That is pretty much undisputable considering those are words right out of his mouth.

Just last week Nellie said (I am paraphrasing) "I dont play rookies but things are changing here and I realize I have to get the kids on the court"

Last season after Biedrins got hurt and Wright played well in his absence decided to go back to giving MP minutes over Wright saying "Wright has played well and deserves the minutes but I am going to play the veterans over him". these are quotes directly from his mouth.

Yes, there are exceptions.... we are just saying it is not his preference and if there are two pretty equal players, we will play the veteran over helping the rookie develop.

JOEL wrote:when gangs form it pushes potentialy good posters away from making this board even better.

And people that are on here that add nothing to this board, saying nothing in particular, but continuing to post are making even more people leave. Not singling David out on this because he isnt the worst, but it brings up a point. The couple of times I've left for a week or two are because of complete idiots on here.

I wonder how many of these David vs The World threads we actually have in this entire forum...

Seems like there's always one on the main page... regular members jousting with our board's resident Texan over some trivial fault about Don Nelson that David usually isn't able to admit. I'd wager there's probably somewhere between 20-25 of these identical threads.