- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2010
- Posts:
- 9,505
- Liked Posts:
- 1,733
Don't make shitty posts.
How about you actually explain why my words are "shitty" before you label them as such?
Don't make shitty posts.
I'm not ignoring how well he shotos threes. What you seem to be ignoring is that you are somehow calling a player that shoots 42% from the field an effiecient scorer and had the idiocy to bring him up in discussing Carmelo fucking Anthony.He "somehow" ends up at that "measley" percentage because that percentage accounts for how efficient he is shooting his three-point attempts, which you are conveniently ignoring altogether.
How about you actually explain why my words are "shitty" before you label them as such?
I'm not ignoring how well he shotos threes. What you seem to be ignoring is that you are somehow calling a player that shoots 42% from the field an effiecient scorer and had the idiocy to bring him up in discussing Carmelo fucking Anthony.
No, but your subsequent "argument" does.
Your line of arguing is intolerable. Having someone constantly say "Thats not what I said" when they are being direct-quoted is ridiculous. To claim someone is misinterpreting your comments when there can only be one interpretation is asinine. I gave up having an actual discussion with you long ago, because that wasn't YOUR intent.
38% from three is VERY efficient.
45% from two is sufficient (and very good as a SG)
88% from the line is VERY efficient.
You are ignoring clear facts.
Here is what actually occurs:
I make a blanket statement, and instead of being asked to further explain my comments... FT automatically assumes he knows exactly what I am saying and exactly what I believe.
Subsequently, I am forced to dismiss his allegations about what I believe, and at the same time, attempt to say what I really believe. And that is usually responded to by FT with more presumptions and (most likely) insults.
41-43%
Not effiecient.
You are ignoring clear stats
Basically you say "generally Special person" things..then end up breaking it down into more "specifically Special person" things.
that pretty much proves that player is a very good or better scorer.
Nope.
You're being blatently Special person now.
I never said Martin was a "bad scorer". I said he's inefficient at doing it. Martin gets his points. Yes. He's a "good scorer" but he's inefficient at the practice.
Allen Iverson was a tremendous scorer..but ridiculously ineffiecient at it. Being a good scorer and being efficient aren't mutually exclusive.
Quit being a pud
Yes.
Yes it does.Just because your net FG% is somewhat below the NBA average doesn't mean that you are an "inefficient scorer."
No.You wouldn't multi-quote me on everything else I said in that post because you know I am right.
I've already proven my point.Saying "yes it does" does not prove your point, nor does it change that you are wrong.
No. Fucking. Way.And FG% is a term that combines 3P% and 2P%.
I've already proven my point.
What do you want me to do? Post his absurd FG %'s again?
And why exactly is Martin's FG% "absurd?"
Because it is?