Thoughts on Jordan McRae this season

[Sandvol]

How does posting the entire post of babble change the portion I quoted? You blatantly say above McRae looked better than Hubbs as a freshman (which is patently wrong), then denied saying it, and now your apparently attempting to redefine the definition of "looked better".

How is my argument getting any weaker? It hasn't changed, unlike your constant waffling. If there is some other way for me to interpret the phrase, "McRae looked better as a freshman than Hubbs has so far", then please, I'm all ears.

But I clarified what I meant in the next sentence that you chose to ignore because it destroys your argument and you can't change what I said to fit your template. And, your argument is getting weaker because you stated Hubbs is just a luxury this year and that isn't true because he has to be more than a luxury for this team because if he's not they don't have a chance to make the tournament. So your statement that Hubbs is just a luxury is patently false. I'm waiting.

 

[cncchris33]

But I clarified what I meant in the next sentence that you chose to ignore because it destroys your argument and you can't change what I said to fit your template. And, your argument is getting weaker because you stated Hubbs is just a luxury this year and that isn't true because he has to be more than a luxury for this team because if he's not they don't have a chance to make the tournament. So your statement that Hubbs is just a luxury is patently false. I'm waiting.

"McRae looked better as a freshman than Hubbs has so far. He looked more athletic."

Please explain how your second sentence clarifies the first. They are two separate and completely independent thoughts. If you meant to say McRae simply looked more athletic than Hubbs as a freshman, then why make two separate declarations?

Surely you can remove yourself from your desire to simply "be right" and see how that appears to be a case of revisionist history. In other words, you can't change what you wrote, so you just tag the line, "What I meant was...".

Even if it really is what you meant, it sure doesn't appear that way to me, and apparently anyone else.

As for Hubbs, I do think he is a luxury. You don't have to agree with me, but his minutes played and the fact that he isn't starting seems to suggest that CCM sure isn't leaning heavily on him. That may change down the road, and he may become a more integral part of the game, especially offensively. But right now, he isn't being heavily relied on to shoulder the load anywhere. He has been a role player for nine games. Having a 5* freshman as a role player seems like a luxury to me, and I'm still not sure how that "weakens my argument". Few teams in the country can claim that.

 

[Sandvol]

"McRae looked better as a freshman than Hubbs has so far. He looked more athletic."

Please explain how your second sentence clarifies the first. They are two separate and completely independent thoughts. If you meant to say McRae simply looked more athletic than Hubbs as a freshman, then why make two separate declarations?

Surely you can remove yourself from your desire to simply "be right" and see how that appears to be a case of revisionist history. In other words, you can't change what you wrote, so you just tag the line, "What I meant was...".

Even if it really is what you meant, it sure doesn't appear that way to me, and apparently anyone else.

As for Hubbs, I do think he is a luxury. You don't have to agree with me, but his minutes played and the fact that he isn't starting seems to suggest that CCM sure isn't leaning heavily on him. That may change down the road, and he may become a more integral part of the game, especially offensively. But right now, he isn't being heavily relied on to shoulder the load anywhere. He has been a role player for nine games. Having a 5* freshman as a role player seems like a luxury to me, and I'm still not sure how that "weakens my argument". Few teams in the country can claim that.

Talking about being right you're the one that gets into these multi-paragraph diatribes. Also, you made the argument that Hubbs was getting so many more minutes than McRae did and all the points he has scored compared to McRae. Now you're backtracking. And, also Hubbs has to be more than a luxury because the team is losing the important games. What they're doing isn't working. He needs to become more of the equation to help the team out.

 

[cncchris33]

Talking about being right you're the one that gets into these multi-paragraph diatribes. Also, you made the argument that Hubbs was getting so many more minutes than McRae did and all the points he has scored compared to McRae. Now you're backtracking. And, also Hubbs has to be more than a luxury because the team is losing the important games. What they're doing isn't working. He needs to become more of the equation to help the team out.

I made the argument that Hubbs has been exponentially better as a freshman than McRae was by detailing just how little McRae even played as a freshman as a rebuttal to your "McRae looked better than Hubbs as a freshman" comment. A comment that you are trying to redefine.

You are trying to draw a correlation between two different beliefs (1. my belief that Hubbs is a luxury, and 2. my belief that Hubbs has had a better freshman year already than McRae did), when the two clearly are not mutually exclusive.

Let's assume for argument sake, that you really did just mean McRae looked more athletic than Hubbs in the whole 53 minutes over 10 games you saw him play as a freshman. In that case, I'll neither agree nor disagree because 53 minutes isn't a large enough sample size for me to make that assessment with any conviction. I will still stand by my belief that Hubbs is a luxury until Cuonzo Martin proves me wrong by playing him in key situations and running the offense through him. You can agree to disagree, or you can continue your endless crusade to expose my "weakened argument", prove I'm backtracking, or further exhaust yourself trying to correlate two independent ideas that in no way supplement each other. In either case, my time spent trying to convince you otherwise has been for naught, so I'll politely move on.

 

[xfactorutk]

I read the OP before reading the date and panicked. I was thinking, when did this happen!?!