He won't score 25 points in a game in this entire career.

[sirkickyass]

Believe whatever you want, there, eh, Kicky? As I've said before, even though you don't know it, your "beliefs" do NOT dictate truth and fact.

Despite your exhortations of this principle, you apparently do not feel that the nexus between your recollections and objective reality are similarly bounded.

Are you at least willing to spot that your recollection is just as likely to be inaccurate, particularly given your lack of memory of a number of relevant details?

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Believe whatever you want, there, eh, Kicky? As I've said before, even though you don't know it, your "beliefs" do NOT dictate truth and fact.

What you post and claim to recollect do not dictate truth and fact. Unless what you think the definition of what "not" is proves to be different from mine.

 

[Hopper]

I was there. I know what happened. If Kicky wasn't, or was, and doesn't recall it, that changes nuthin.

Except for him. He wants ever so badly to call me a liar. It aint uncommon. Every blowhard thinks that everything he doesn't already know doesn't exist and that every fact counter to his rigid dogmatic premises is "impossible."

 

[Hopper]

It could well have been around the time of the RMR, I don't recall exactly. It may have been after a few preseason or regular season games. I said that Deron (like virtually any NBA player will, on a given night) likely score 25 or more points on occasion. This was probably in response to a common refrain at the time that Deron simply "couldn't shoot."

One specific detail I recall is that somebody said the closest Deron would ever come to 25 would be passin the ball to number 25. I don't even know who wears that number, or did at that time, but it mighta been CJ.

This comment was hastily "co-signed" and given many a "this" post by the crowd. And of course I was told that I had just been thoroughly "pwned." They were high fives all around, each blowhard congratulatin the other on their indisputable victory.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I saw Superman kissing Batman. True story. I was there. I saw what happened. If Kicky wasn't, or was and didn't recall, changes nothing.

Except for him. He wants ever so badly to call me a liar. It isn't uncommon. Every Hopper thinks that everything he doesn't already know doesn't exist and that every fact (?) counter to his rigid dogmatic (lol) premises is "impossible."

 

[Hopper]

Well, aint that special, eh?

I guess when ya see the puppy dawg pack back in action, ya feels a little left out, eh, Sharpie?

 

[Darkwing Duck]

That's what some of the know-it-all-blowhards on this board said about Deron when he was drafted. They said he would be nuthin more than a journeyman point guard and lucky to average 5 assists a game, too.

Where they at now, I wonder?

Deron is now 13th in the league in scorin (21.6, which just went up a little) AND 10 assists/game.

I still see a crapload of "he will never" posts about Jazz players on a regular basis round this here joint. And they often seem to be taken by others as a legitimate statement of fact. Go figure, eh?

Well, ain't that special?

 

[Hopper]

Despite your exhortations of this principle, you apparently do not feel that the nexus between your recollections and objective reality are similarly bounded.

Are you at least willing to spot that your recollection is just as likely to be inaccurate, particularly given your lack of memory of a number of relevant details?

Were you there, Kicky? If you had some specific recollection of this, I would consider your version. Eyewitnesses can be wrong, but that doesn't mean that some guy shootin up smack in an alley 1000 miles away is "just as likely" to know what happened at a particular event as the eyewitness.

Nor does it mean, except perhaps for solipsists like yourself, that if you didn't see it it couldn't have happened.

 

[sirkickyass]

I was there. I know what happened. If Kicky wasn't, or was, and doesn't recall it, that changes nuthin.

In other words, while my recollection isn't worth anything yours is perfect.

But you know, I'm the rigid and dogmatic one.

Except for him. He wants ever so badly to call me a liar. It aint uncommon. Every blowhard thinks that everything he doesn't already know doesn't exist and that every fact counter to his rigid dogmatic premises is "impossible."

I note you put the word impossible in quotes. However a quick review of this thread indicates that I never said it was impossible. Then again, misquoting is hardly a new tactic of yours.

Instead I've said that I don't recall that occurring and for a number of reasons relating to a) timing of Deron scoring 24 points very early in the season, b) my recollection that frustration was largely with Sloan for not playing Deron, and c) the statistical benchmark you claim is inconsistent with the specific criticisms that the pearl levied and he's the only person you've cited as the possible spokesperson.

I've even named a particular poster that I might believe made such a claim. What I certainly doubt is that thsi was anything close to a widely held belief and you were the sole bulwark of reasonableness against a tide of reactionaries. That's certainly the impression your initial post seeks to give.

That you're unable to substantiate your claim at all is, to say the least, unsurprising.

One specific detail I recall is that somebody said the closest Deron would ever come to 25 would be passin the ball to number 25. I don't even know who wears that number, or did at that time, but it mighta been CJ.

Keith McLeod wore #25 in 2005. Is it possible that the person you remember might have been Coach? Another poster who was roundly mocked for being, um, a bit partial towards a specific player. I sort of doubt the narrative if you're painting a picture of a vast legion of coach/McLeod supporters.

19-13.

 

[sirkickyass]

Were you there, Kicky?

Yes I was here. One of the reasons I declared myself to be "bulletproof" to this specific claim is because I was either the first or among the very first to champion the cause of the Jazz drafting Deron Williams in or around December of 2004. Long-timers remember this.

If you had some specific recollection of this, I would consider your version. Eyewitnesses can be wrong, but that doesn't mean that some guy shootin up smack in an alley 1000 miles away is "just as likely" to know what happened at a particular event as the eyewitness.

I have shared with you a number of specific recollections. For example, what some of pearl's specific arguments were at the time, the tenor of the conversation about Sloan/Williams in the 05-06 season, and a specific poster who was strongly against drafting Williams.

To put it lightly, I was involved in this discussion because in 2005-2006 I was in the same position as honz presently is with Gordon Hayward: I was the most visible regular poster that had taken a strong stance on a particular draft pick prior to the draft. Of course, it turned out better for me that it currently is for honz.

Nor does it mean, except perhaps for solipsists like yourself, that if you didn't see it it couldn't have happened.

Again, you are in the position of claiming that my recollection is worth zero and yours is absolute. It is difficult for me to believe that you do not see the irony in labeling me as rigid, dogmatic, and now as a solipsist given your present position.

 

[Hopper]

In other words, while my recollection isn't worth anything yours is perfect.

But you know, I'm the rigid and dogmatic one.

"Your recollection?" I thought you already made it abudantly clear that you have no recollection of this event, eh, Kicky?


But wait, I forgot. If anything ever happened, you would know it. Whether you were there or not is irrelevant. You know all things. If someone makes a claim about something that you don't already know, then it can't be true.

 

[Hopper]

Again, you are in the position of claiming that my recollection is worth zero and yours is absolute. It is difficult for me to believe that you do not see the irony in labeling me as rigid, dogmatic, and now as a solipsist given your present position.

You're just makin yourself look more and more foolishly solipsistic, I'm afraid, eh, Kicky?

What I certainly doubt is that thsi was anything close to a widely held belief and you were the sole bulwark of reasonableness against a tide of reactionaries. That's certainly the impression your initial post seeks to give.

Hardly surprisin that you take your severe misreadin of a post as bein the post itself, eh, Kicky? Aint nuthin new there, neither.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

But wait, I forgot. If anything ever happened, you would know it. Whether you were there or not is irrelevant. You know all things. If someone makes a claim about something that you don't already know, then it can't be true.

Pure gold, right here.

I don't even think a common reference to pots and kettles is appropriate here. Need to say something more. Maybe, "It's like a used car salesman calling a lawyer seedy."

See what I did there.

 

[Hopper]

One of the reasons I declared myself to be "bulletproof" to this specific claim is because I was either the first or among the very first to champion the cause of the Jazz drafting Deron Williams in or around December of 2004. Long-timers remember this...


To put it lightly, I was involved in this discussion because in 2005-2006 I was in the same position as honz presently is with Gordon Hayward: I was the most visible regular poster that had taken a strong stance on a particular draft pick prior to the draft. Of course, it turned out better for me that it currently is for honz.

Again, you are in the position of claiming that my recollection is worth zero....

Everything is always all about you, aint it, Kicky? From the git-go, you have treated my post as if it were an allegation against you personally, which you are out to refute.

Good to know that you detailed the "basis" for your recollection and understanding of the facts "lightly," eh? If that were presented as being anywhere near a strong (or even weak) basis for your conclusions it would be laughable.

But, wait....that IS the sole basis for your conclusions, my bad.

 

[LogGrad98]

I am still waiting to hear who all the people were who said Deron would never be more than a journeyman. Guess it is just another ainthopper smoke and mirrors show.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Everything is always all about you, aint it, Kicky? From the git-go, you have treated my post as if it were an allegation against you personally, which you are out to refute.

Good to know that you detailed the "basis" for your recollection and understanding of the facts "lightly," eh? If that were presented as being anywhere near a strong (or even weak) basis for your conclusions it would be laughable.

But, wait....that IS the sole basis for your conclusions, my bad.

Well, Kicky isn't the only one in this thread that has questioned the validity of your opening post. It's pretty much every single poster here that has questioned your recollection of the facts.

Except me of course. I'll just follow the crowd, though, to say you're full of hot air.

 

[Hopper]

Don't forget to high-five yo puppy dawg homeys, now, eh, Sharpie?

 

[Get Down]

i think my favorite part of this thread is hopper's mounting frustration and breaking from character after being logically embarrassed once again, but my second favorite part is the "puppy" rationale, like a delusional child who shouts out bizarre non sequitors in a packed movie theater, finding himself a machiavellian puppet master because everyone turns around to tell him to shut the **** up

edit: lol no, maybe it's hopper awkwardly dropping "solipsist" after reading the wikipedia article on philosophy yesterday

 

[One Brow]

And yes, I've been here for more time than Deron has. It's possible someone said that hyperbolically but to act like there was a large swell of people who were seriously advocating that Deron would never, ever, score 25 points per game is counter to my memory and probably reality.

I don't recall Hopper claiming anyone was "seriously advocating" this about Williams.

Deron scored 25+ points for the first time on March 17, 2006. So the window for this statement logically has to fall somewhere between draft day 2005 and then.

Because no one would be talking about it before the draft? March-August 2006 seems like a much more likely timeframe.

Not too mention, the caution/criticism in the OP that posters are beign too quick to judge young talent seems to have been bypassed entirely.

I seem to recall that there posters who advocated for Felton and/or Jack, not to mention Paul, being better PG propects than Williams.

 

[Chad Feldheimer]

sounds like the old religion argument of: You can't prove it's true, but you can't prove it isn't true.