The Official NBASupes, Sothron, and theCampster Insider Thread - NBA 2022-23 Season

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Just now, JayBirdHawk said:

AHoli and JHoli? Naaaa too long.

I might add the "i" like you do.

I need a decent nickname for Aaron, like I came up with Solo.  I'll think of something.

[sturt]

5 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Example: a guy is hot but it's his time to exit....so out he comes.

Someone... I don't think you, honestly, but maybe.... made this point the other day during a game saying, essentially, "Welp, DJ's hot, so of course, Nate's already pulled him."

We won that game, and as I recall some question was asked in the presser that prefaced Nate happening to mention (paraphrasing), "Yeah, I thought it was going to be important to have DJ for the full 4th quarter, so I knew I needed to give him a breather earlier in the game."

 

But don't let reason get in the way of a good fan conclusion... the head coach is always wrong.

[sturt]

5 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

I might add the "i" like you do.

I need a decent nickname for Aaron, like I came up with Solo.  I'll think of something.

Nah.

Again, if you like Ahole and Jhole, you're the boss of you, not me.

But/and am I wrong for bringing up my observation? It's just an observation.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

5 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

8,9,10 players? 

My overall point is this....Nate goes into a game with a specific game plan and more often than not he is slow to adapt to in game conditions. He has no give or flexibility on his lineups/rotations....he doesn't coach with instinct or feel for the ebb and flow of the players and the overall game. 

Example: a guy is hot but it's his time to exit....so out he comes.

 

It's like a pattern to an old video game.

 

 

What I look at are the bench minutes.  We know the starters are going to come back in and out of the game at set times.  But I look for if someone on the bench has their minutes extended when they're playing well.  The only time it may happen, is when we have a starter + Bogi out.

Otherwise, the minutes are the minutes.  Forget that AJ had 10 points in the 4th quarter of one of those games. A game that was very tight.  Nope, he has to come out because God forbid a 19 year old kid plays more than 12 straight minutes on the floor.

[sturt]

  

  

2 hours ago, sturt said:

We all get this choice constantly in life... will I assume the best or the worst, as it could go either way. Some of us choose the former, some of us choose the latter. I just urge people to do what they'd like done to them. Golden rule and all that.

Nate is a good man by almost anyone's account. Nate is not stupid. I start there in how I decode what's going on.

 

41 minutes ago, sturt said:

Few people, seemingly, start their assessment of Nate's decisions from the perspective, "in the choice between giving a benefit of a doubt and not, I'm choosing to give it," and from the perspective, "Nate's not stupid. He has reasons for what he chooses to do, and sometimes if not often those reasons are well-grounded... he relatively rarely would seem to go with his gut."

So. That to say. When Nate said "we aren't in development," one can interpret him as stupid, as-if unaware that "you can't stop developing players"... or that Nate should have been interpreted, perhaps, as saying "we're well beyond the time when our priority was developing players over winning games."

Nate, I believe we all can agree, sees winning games as paramount. And when that's the case, the in-game decision-making is going to follow that you play the guys you have most confidence are going to help you win that game on that day.

Does he take it to an extreme? Maybe so, but it's not my job and my legacy on the line. He's paid to win. And either the in-development players contribute enough when they get their shot that they get more minutes, or they won't.

 

I believe all this.

 

And so, in the choice between fan wisdom... even fans I otherwise respect... of how a game should be run versus how a head coach of many years decides to run a game... assuming I want the team to win, given that premise, and not that I care about developing players... I feel like logic compels me to choose the latter.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

10 minutes ago, sturt said:

Nah.

Again, if you like Ahole and Jhole, you're the boss of you, not me.

But/and am I wrong for bringing up my observation? It's just an observation.

First off . . I don't add the "e"

Second . .

[sturt]

2 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

I don't add the "e"

Oh. So... you pronounce it "Jay-Haul"  and "A-Haul" then? Forgive me. I presumed too much. There's nothing disrespectful then, even by my prudish standard. Never mind.

[Diesel]

1 hour ago, marco102 said:

Explain him not wanting to play AJ.

I need context.

 

[marco102]

2 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I need context.

 

See Sothron's post.

[sturt]

5 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I need context.

Right. But. Of course, you're not going to get that.

 

  

2 minutes ago, marco102 said:

See Sothron's post.

Even the report itself by Soth's friend was a paraphrase of whatever was actually said, fraught with whatever nuances might have been added or subtracted naturally. And then, Soth's report, as far as I would assume, wasn't verbatim of that friend's paraphrase. And who knows whether Soth's friend was actually in the room when these things were being said, or if Soth's friend is hearing it from someone who was.

 

So, you're/we're left with giving the benefit of a doubt, or not.

And. Left with the question, "Is Nate stupid?"

Answers to those two propositions necessarily will decide how one interprets the paraphrase for any one of us.

 

[marco102]

4 minutes ago, sturt said:

Right. But. Of course, you're not going to get that.

 

  

Even the report itself by Soth's friend was a paraphrase of whatever was actually said, fraught with whatever nuances might have been added or subtracted naturally. And then, Soth's report, as far as I would assume, wasn't verbatim of that friend's paraphrase. And who knows whether Soth's friend was actually in the room when these things were being said, or if Soth's friend is hearing it from someone who was.

 

So, you're/we're left with giving the benefit of a doubt, or not.

And. Left with the question, "Is Nate stupid?"

Answers to those two propositions necessarily will decide how one interprets the paraphrase for any one of us.

 

Please don't discuss this with me further.

You have your opinion on it which is fine. I have mine. You're not going to change it. Sothron can come in and clarify and that's the only person that's going to change my mind about what he meant by what he said. 

[Diesel]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Nate has difficulty playing more than 9. I'm glad the rest of the staff at least understand the importance of playing the bench. Nate's 'we aren't in development' still rings from last season. You can't stop developing players. Even Trae still needs development.

"We aren't in development" can be translated so many different ways... I think you may be using the wrong one.  When I hear that I hear him saying... My marching orders are to win games, get to the playoffs and win there.    Not that players "don't need to be developed."

We have a very bad context problem on this board because  we're hearing pieces and parts of the story but not the whole story.

My questions... 

1.  What were his marching orders?

2.  What was the expectation of him playing young players? 

3.  Who did he have to answer to in all of this?

 

We take rumors as "Facts" and we run with it.   I don't know if that's the way to go. 

Secondly... and this is what gets me..

some coaches are hot hand coaches.

some coaches are stable minutes coaches. 

I have heard players beg for both.  For Years. 

But the fans here...  thinks that everybody ought to be a hot hand coach until the hot hand isn't your favorite player. 

If Bogi gets the hot hand and Nate decided to continue to play him until he went cold and shot us out of the game, yall would be bitching about that. 

If Bogi gets the hot hand and Nate pulls him and gets AJ some run... Yall probably won't bitch about that. 

I'd rather you just tell the truth and stop making up stuff... you just want to see your favorites play more.  You don't care if they have the hot hand or not. 

 

 

[sturt]

3 minutes ago, marco102 said:

Please don't discuss this with me further.

You have your opinion on it which is fine. I have mine. You're not going to change it. Sothron can come in and clarify and that's the only person that's going to change my mind about what he meant by what he said. 

No coffee yet, Grumpy?

Not discussing it with you.

Discussing, rather, on the merits.

Point out where my logic fails. Or where my facts are erroneous.

If you want. Or don't.

But as I've had reason to say for a completely different reason recently numerous times in this thread... I'm not the boss of you, nor you me.

  

9 minutes ago, sturt said:

Even the report itself by Soth's friend was a paraphrase of whatever was actually said, fraught with whatever nuances might have been added or subtracted naturally. And then, Soth's report, as far as I would assume, wasn't verbatim of that friend's paraphrase. And who knows whether Soth's friend was actually in the room when these things were being said, or if Soth's friend is hearing it from someone who was.

 

So, you're/we're left with giving the benefit of a doubt, or not.

And. Left with the question, "Is Nate stupid?"

Answers to those two propositions necessarily will decide how one interprets the paraphrase for any one of us.

I contend all of this is accurate and reasonable.

[marco102]

4 minutes ago, sturt said:

No coffee yet, Grumpy?

Not discussing it with you.

Discussing, rather, on the merits.

Point out where my logic fails. Or where my facts are erroneous.

If you want. Or don't.

But as I've had reason to say for a completely different reason recently numerous times in this thread... I'm not the boss of you, nor you me.

Yeah, but what you can do is stop quoting me about something I have said I don't want to discuss with you further. 

I acknowledge you have a point.  There doesn't seem to be much more discussion after that. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by marco102

[Diesel]

10 minutes ago, marco102 said:

See Sothron's post.

You mean.. I heard from somebody close to the situation that Nate said...  kind of stuff??

Come on Marco...   Let me  hear it from the horses mouth.. not from the horse standing next to the horse standing next to the horse standing next to the gotdamn horse's mouth. 

 

[sturt]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

I'm not the boss of you, nor you me.

 

[marco102]

1 minute ago, Diesel said:

You mean.. I heard from somebody close to the situation that Nate said...  kind of stuff??

Come on Marco...   Let me  hear it from the horses mouth.. not from the horse standing next to the horse standing next to the horse standing next to the gotdamn horse's mouth. 

 

Well that's the context I was using. 

That's why I said how can you look at AJ and decide I don't want to play that. 

@Sothron did not mention AJ in his post.  It very well could have been at the beginning of the season Nate did not want to play AJ.

I give Nate credit for seeing AJ is good and giving him more playing time, but the fact that he had to be forced to do it is a problem in itself. 

[sturt]

6 minutes ago, Diesel said:

1.  What were his marching orders?

 

Probably the most disturbing thing I've read this morning is this.....................

 

 

[sturt]

Quote

the fact that he had to be forced to do it is a problem in itself

(Note, someone said this... doesn't really matter who...)

I agree with this.

 

But there's only one interpretation of that that also allows for Nate to be an intelligent human being... ie that he was upset he was "forced to do it" by virtue of the fact the front office had traded away KVon, and didn't get an asset in return that was comparable.

[Diesel]

Just now, marco102 said:

Well that's the context I was using. 

That's why I said how can you look at AJ and decide I don't want to play that. 

@Sothron did not mention AJ in his post.  It very well could have been at the beginning of the season Nate did not want to play AJ.

I give Nate credit for seeing AJ is good and giving him more playing time, but the fact that he had to be forced to do it is a problem in itself. 

Let me tell you a little story Marco....

A few decades ago in the infancy of Hawksquwk.. we had a segment called "Ask the GM".  Squawkers made up intelligent question and Pete Babcock was supposed to come on and answer a few.   And everything went well.  Babcock was a perfect guest and answered a few questions of Hawks fans on the #1 messageboard of the Hawks.

I happened to run into Babcock a few months later in Hartsfield.   We were both going to Pittsburgh.   I said to him, that was a great thing you did on Hawksquawk.net.   He looked at me all beady eyed and said.. "Hawksquawk.net  What's that?"

I take a lot of the "my sources" stuff as entertainment.   Because there are some people who get a rise out of making themselves feel important enough to be in the know.   I don't call anybody a liar because I don't know, it could be truth.   However, even if it's true, how do we know that the source is not getting a rise?  And how do we know if the source is not putting their own spin on stuff?  What if the source really wants Nate fired.   How easy would it be for the source to drop rumor about Nate on the #1 messageboard for the Hawks that they know that many media sources partake.. to get rumor out.    People are lazy Marco.  There are very few journalist in this day and time.   Instead of getting it from somebody standing next to the man, standing next to the man, standing next to the man...  I would just rather here it from THE MAN.