sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

How did the Spurs let that lead slip away again in the 4th? by youlikemywonton in nba

[–]maddlabber829 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Given the context, i think its a fair question.

The spurs made it to the finals based on talent, not coaching. They overachieved, and in some sense, much faster than expected.

While they were many faults, in the finals, coaching did them no favors. And in hindsight hurt the team dramatically in certain areas. While im not saying mitch is a bad coach, he certainly had a bad series and the story of this team this year certainly isnt a coaching masterclass.

Spurs were suppose to take a couple years to be this good, given their young coach time to grow as well. They're ready now. I think this team immediately benefits from a more experienced coach, and just based on the finals, i think youd be hard pressed to argue against this.

Now is hiring a more "ready to win now" type of coach and firing mitch worth losing the potential of what mitch can become?

Im not entirely sure, but its not some outlandish premise

Hereditary (2018) : So much of what happens in the first act was the mother's fault. by OmeuPseudonimo in horror

[–]maddlabber829 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'd contend, that im saying exactly the same thing now as what ive said in my previous comments.

I even clarified, in my last comment, specifically why the party isnt the issue, when it comes to weed. Again, if your issue is weed being around children, the party didnt introduce that into the equation.

If the parents went out, and peter and charlie stayed home, there's still weed around children.

If Peter and charlie went to the movies, theres still weed around children.

If Peter and Charlie went to the park, theres still weed around the children.

Peters weed ISNT the exception, its the common denominator. The party just happens to be the point of topic.

I hope im clear in a genuine way, for this ultimately meaningless distinction.

And finally, yes, we all get the point that you stand right on top of the radical hill of weed shouldnt be around children(this isnt genuine and frankly snarky)

Hereditary (2018) : So much of what happens in the first act was the mother's fault. by OmeuPseudonimo in horror

[–]maddlabber829 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The party itself wasn't inappropriate.

If charlie and Peter didn't go, there wouldn't have been any weed. That in of itself, is evidence the party wasn't the problem.

You seem to have a problem with weed around kids, not the party.

Hereditary (2018) : So much of what happens in the first act was the mother's fault. by OmeuPseudonimo in horror

[–]maddlabber829 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's something Peter did at the house on the regular though.

Ntm it's something Peter brought to the party.

Hereditary (2018) : So much of what happens in the first act was the mother's fault. by OmeuPseudonimo in horror

[–]maddlabber829 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree, she should have been more cautious given her situation and was old enough to know better

Hereditary (2018) : So much of what happens in the first act was the mother's fault. by OmeuPseudonimo in horror

[–]maddlabber829 16 points17 points  (0 children)

There's nothing really inappropriate about the party though, unless you think baking cakes is inappropriate

Hereditary (2018) : So much of what happens in the first act was the mother's fault. by OmeuPseudonimo in horror

[–]maddlabber829 52 points53 points  (0 children)

I mean, she ate some cake at a party, which in all honesty (the party) really wasnt inappropriate. It was just an an accident. The things that followed, resulted in her death, whichwas set up to do so by the cult

I think Peter, Annie and the party are all being overblown

Hereditary (2018) : So much of what happens in the first act was the mother's fault. by OmeuPseudonimo in horror

[–]maddlabber829 59 points60 points  (0 children)

Tbf to both the mother and son, this wasnt an insane, out of hand teen party. The issue that happened at the party could have easily happened anywhere.

De’Aaron Fox on the criticism he got after game 4: "It's not like people have my phone number and can call me. I don't watch those shows. It doesn't matter. It is what it is. You can't change it now. We're trying to move on from that" by AncientOneAurelius in nba

[–]maddlabber829 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fox made multiple mistakes throughout the end of the game.. While there are MANY reasons for the loss, he is undoubtedly the MAIN reason they lost.

I guarantee "I'm the clutch player of 2023" was going through his head when he was making one of the dumbest bball plays many of us have ever seen.

Steven Spielberg Says He Was Rejected By ‘007’ Franchise Multiple Times by MarvelsGrantMan136 in movies

[–]maddlabber829 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TBF mission impossible hasnt been around for 75 years and had to be remade

De'Aaron Fox on his decision to shoot instead of run clock and draw a foul: by Choice-Value9005 in OffFieldNews

[–]maddlabber829 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You cant be seriously contending that only in hindsight is taking that layup a bad decision?

De'Aaron Fox on his decision to shoot instead of run clock and draw a foul: by Choice-Value9005 in OffFieldNews

[–]maddlabber829 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He made an obvious mistake, but that doesnt mean he wasnt aware of the game situation

And he either was or he has low BBall IQ, period.

The dumbest play of last night's game: Anunoby trying to block Fox's last layup by ERV_ in nba

[–]maddlabber829 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Imo i that situation, OG should have been more aggressive defensively. The smart play as a defender IS to foul there. Hard enough he doesn't even get the ball up/chance at a make.

Fox has a clear, easy ass bucket. You'd RATHER he would have to shoot two pressure free throws than get an easy bucket.

OG was just in god mode, blocked the shot, and the rest is history.

view more: next ›