Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked


    So it is 4-0-1 in my favor just today.

    Let's look back at the past:

    Boozer issue - Draw (for 3 more weeks), while I and others here know my points for Chicago keeping Boozer over selling a great draft pick to be rid of his last year were better, Fierce still has 3 weeks before the deadline to hope this 'very good' possible trade idea of his happens.

    No chance now that Deng was dealt (wasn't that the better Bulls trade Fierce? Didn't you say they would trade Boozer for an expiring to extend Deng? Woops! Wrong AGAIN).

    Celtics were right to draft Melo over my guy Moultrie b/c Melo fit a team positional need better. Melo a bust, moultrie showed a lot of promise before an injury. - Fierce wrong

    Moultrie was not a fit because he was redundant with Jeff Green. Even back in college Moultrie was a rebound machine stretch 5 in the Bosh/Ibaka mold. he rarely shot beyond 15-18" Green has played some SG and is an athletic wing. - Fierce wrong

    The Celtics lost in 2010 because they did not average over 40 rebounds a game and it was inevidable b/c of that stat and hoe historic it was (stats don't lie). I called bogus on that. It was just a matter of time. The Heat won in 2013 averaging less rebounds a game than the 2010 Celtics. - Fierce wrong

    The Celtics lost the finals in 2010 more b/c they were a bad rebounding team than b/c of injuries. The Celtics were up 3-2 when minutes into game 6 their starting C and best rebounder was injured. That should be enough evidence right there. Need more? They would have closed it out at home if Ray made two 3's (his career average %) in game 3 and could not b/c Artest hurt took his legs away. The 2012 playoffs KG was DOMINANT on the boards. He was still recovering in 2010. He wasn't old and washed up as 2012 proved, he was hurt. - Fierce wrong

    I will reluctantly give Fierce the 'Sully should not be traded for Varejao' victory b/c Sully has met my expectations for his entire career much quicker and it was too much to gamble on Varajao being the missing link even before he and Rondo both ended up hurt for the second half of last season.

    However, I will not concede that a team with a small title window should not consider trading a rookie who could be a future all-star for a veteran who greatly increased their title chances. I am sure the '87 or '88 Celtics would have given up Reggie Lewis (or the pick they used on him) to add Mychel Thompson or Adrian Dantley. Those players were both veterans who put the Lakers and Pistons over the top those years (years they beat the Celtics who were the 2nd and 3rd best teams). If Fierce disagrees he would be wrong.

    Fierce was wrong to say I could not discuss objectively and make a case for Rondo and Wallace to Indiana for Hill, Granger, two draft picks and tons of $ savings was 'fair' value.

    Fierce is wrong to continue to say that I feel the player swap of Rondo for Hill is fair. That is a LIE and I never said that.

    Fierce was right once is some argument over a trade I wanted with Phoenic involving Dragic and Dudley being possible b/c of some new salary cap condition i was unaware of. 

    Totals before today:

    6-2 Ram (75%)

    Totals after today:

    10-2 Ram (83%)

    Totals when Boozer is not traded in 3 weeks:

    11-2 Ram (85%)

    Totals if Fierce says that under no circumstances should a contender with a small championship window trade a likely future all-star for a 30ish veteran who makes them a title favorite.

    12-2 Ram (87%)

    Then we'll just have to wait until Gordan Hayward gets over 11.5 million a year this summer and/or Olynyk develops into an all-star/playoff teams 2nd best player to determine who won our other disagreement.

    Do you have other examples of where you 'won' Fierce?

    I mean it will shorty be at 85% on the 13 examples I provided. I said 70-80% before today's beating. So there must be at least 1-2 more out there where you won. Remember, my trade speculation are never predictions, so you can't get me there.

    I guess if the Celtics do not win 32 games I will have lost that one. Probably will. Remember I said they will win 36 with this current roster and no minor trades that weaken it. 32 with minor trades that weaken the team (Lee and Craw for Bayless/Anthony weakened it), 28 games if they make a trade of a guy like Green, Bass or Bradley and 24 games if they trade Rondo.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Please provide an example where right now the Knicks GM can get on the phone and trade his 2015 or 2017 1st rd pick.

    You can't.

    They can't.

    You are wrong

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    But you can swap 1st round picks with the Knicks in 2015 and 2017, right?

    You just have to be creative.

    [/QUOTE]

    Are you this ignorant?

    Please explain to me how swapping picks... WHICH I ALREADY SAID IN MY ORIGINAL POST WAS ON THE TABLE... is proof that NY can 'trade' a 1st rd pick before 2018.

    Swaps are not trading a pick. They are trading places in the same draft.

    How do you not get this simple concept?

    Again, you were WRONG about NY's draft pick situation and have yet to be a man and admit it. How pathetic. You also continue proving you are wrong in your understanding of what it means to 'swap picks' a very easy concept.

    So you have been wrong twice. Ouch

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from vtfanofcs. Show vtfanofcs's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    In response to rameakap's comment:

    Hahaha, it is all the fault of myself and employee? Not the fault of 50 post a day board bully who was banned for this stuff and other crimes on this board?

    Here are two examples of Fiercy's hijacking:

    First

    1. I post that the Knicks can't trade a 1st rd pick until 2018. I post the link where I got that info.

    2. Fiercy instantly responds that they can trade a pick before then and tells me to do research.

    3. It takes 5-6 more posts but I provide the proof that I was right. Fiercy tries to move the goal posts, talks about 'the right to swap pick' that has nothing to do with trading them.

    4. In the end he is wrong but has yet to admit it or apologize for the snarky/immature way he attempted to hijack the point of the thread (Rondo/Knicks trade) over a minor issue

    Second

    1. I make a suggestion (not preditcion) that trading Olynyk and 1-2 first rd picks for Hayward would be a good move. This forum is a place to voice opinions like that.

    2. Fiercy immediately makes THREE bullying, hijacking, attacking posts in a row after my fun, casual trade speculation with RallyC and Hedley:

    - WOW! Another ultimate pipe dream! HAHAHA

    - Trade Olynyk even if he hasn't completed one full season with the Celts? Some don't learn from past mistakes.

    - Hayward and Bradley on the same team? HAHAHA

    3. The polite trade speculation between three of this forum's best and most respected contributors is hijacked by an immature bully who laughs at and demeans others ideas.

    There is the proof folks!!!!

    'Fiercy' the board bully whose banning 90% of this forum celebrated a month ago IS THE REASON THREADS GET HIJACKED.

    That was just in the last 24 hours. Think of the dozens and dozens of examples of Fiery's snotty immature bullying and sad desperate need to be right and to prove others wrong ruining and hijacking threads here. 

     

     

     

     



    I read the First thread.  Fiecys is ridiculous.  HHAAAHHHAAAAHHHHAAAAAAAAA

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    In response to vtfanofcs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rameakap's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Hahaha, it is all the fault of myself and employee? Not the fault of 50 post a day board bully who was banned for this stuff and other crimes on this board?

    Here are two examples of Fiercy's hijacking:

    First

    1. I post that the Knicks can't trade a 1st rd pick until 2018. I post the link where I got that info.

    2. Fiercy instantly responds that they can trade a pick before then and tells me to do research.

    3. It takes 5-6 more posts but I provide the proof that I was right. Fiercy tries to move the goal posts, talks about 'the right to swap pick' that has nothing to do with trading them.

    4. In the end he is wrong but has yet to admit it or apologize for the snarky/immature way he attempted to hijack the point of the thread (Rondo/Knicks trade) over a minor issue

    Second

    1. I make a suggestion (not preditcion) that trading Olynyk and 1-2 first rd picks for Hayward would be a good move. This forum is a place to voice opinions like that.

    2. Fiercy immediately makes THREE bullying, hijacking, attacking posts in a row after my fun, casual trade speculation with RallyC and Hedley:

    - WOW! Another ultimate pipe dream! HAHAHA

    - Trade Olynyk even if he hasn't completed one full season with the Celts? Some don't learn from past mistakes.

    - Hayward and Bradley on the same team? HAHAHA

    3. The polite trade speculation between three of this forum's best and most respected contributors is hijacked by an immature bully who laughs at and demeans others ideas.

    There is the proof folks!!!!

    'Fiercy' the board bully whose banning 90% of this forum celebrated a month ago IS THE REASON THREADS GET HIJACKED.

    That was just in the last 24 hours. Think of the dozens and dozens of examples of Fiery's snotty immature bullying and sad desperate need to be right and to prove others wrong ruining and hijacking threads here. 

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I read the First thread.  Fiecys is ridiculous.  HHAAAHHHAAAAHHHHAAAAAAAAA

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yup

    Now he is trying to say that because;

    A.  The Knicks can trade a 2017 pick starting after the 2016 draft concludes (29 month from now)

    or

    B. That the Knicks can trade for a1st rd pick in '14, '15, or '16 (have they done that already?) and then be able to trade a pick before 2018.

    That he is justified in telling me I am wrong in my reponse to a poster who said the Knicks could trade their '15 pickl in a current Rondo trade and I said they could not trade any picks until 2018.... clearly talking about currently and not the summer of 2016.

    How pathetic he will be in the lengths he goes to deny being wrong. His response to me was wrong. There is no way for him to snake his way out of it with references to what they can do in the summer of 2016. Shameful BS from the straw man.

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    In response to Fiercy's comment:

    rame

    You can't handle me 1 on 1 so now you're asking for vtfanofcs' help?

    HAHAHA



    I handled you pretty easily.

    So which was is Fiercy?

    Too ignorant and out of it to realize the topic of the thread and that posters were talking about what the Knicks currently could offer for Rondo? Were you so clueless you thought we were talking about Knicks summer of 2016 plans in a 2014 Rondo to NY trade thread?

    Or are you just so warped, sick in the head and nasty that you did know what we were talking about but still felt the need to hijack an entire thread so that in your pettiness you could make sure everyone knew that even though the Knicks can't trade a pick NOW until 2018, which is what EVERYONE was discussing... that you, Fiercy, needed to tell us you are 'creative' and know that come the summer of 2016 NY can trade their 2017 pick.

    Which is it?

    Super dumb or snotty, disturbed and obnoxious person?

    It is one or the other. But in both cases you are wrong.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    That's what I mean, when Mployee and rameakap get frustrated and lose the argument, they resort to name calling, insults, and mockery.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hahahaha

    That's what I mean. When Fierce loses the argument, he doesn't answer the questions asked of him, he cries about people calling him names. Awww... waaaaaaah, are the hypocrite board bullies feelings hurt by some names:-(

    How about you answer the question.

    Were you so out of it mentally and confused that you thought the Rondo to the Knicks trade thread was discussing draft pick trades that could only happen in the summer of 2016?

    Or were you aware that we/I was discussing trades the Knicks could only make now, in 2014, and therefore were being obnoxious, hijacking a thread, and trying to start a fight?

    Which was it Fierce?

    You are wrong either way.

    You lost. Get it?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkiller. Show greenkiller's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    rame

     

    Why are you going ballistic when this is only a friendly discussion?

    I'm only presenting my case.

    Why all the paragraphs and short stories?

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh poor Fungy. He needs a hug...

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    If this were a prizefight, a merciful ref would have stopped it long ago because one of the fighters failed to answer the bell.

    Pud

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaileyPowe. Show BaileyPowe's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    fierce, i can see you're busy with yeoman's work, but could you please answer me a question? did you ever go by adams here back in the day, say '09 or thereabouts? get back to me. thanks.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaileyPowe. Show BaileyPowe's posts

    Re: Reason Why Threads Get Hijacked

    In response to Fiercy's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Nope.

     

    I started here as Fierce34 back in December of 2009.

     

    But before this board started in 2005, I was here.

    Back then it was a chat room, not a forum.

    BDC then shutdown the chat room after 2003.

     

    After the chat room was shutdown, I was inactive and only started posting here in December of 2009.

    [/QUOTE]

    no? okay. adams was a c-a-t-b-i-r-d.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share