• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About bgassassin

  • Rank
    Hall of Famer
  • Birthday 02/20/1978

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Memphis, 10SC

Recent Profile Visitors

5,841 profile views
  1. ^ Yeah I'm not understanding what they are doing with him. Better coach, better system, veteran presence. I've also seen him called Mo Harmless. I've been paying close attention to the kid since I've known about him. Honestly I don't see any known available SF getting the Grizzlies over the hump so I'll take the one that won't complain about the lack of minutes or shots, has a low cost, and can be a future piece for this team.
  2. bgassassin

    Let Me Make This Clear: It's Not Just Zbo Being Out

    I agree with this. When the core is healthy it can be overcome at times, though he still needs to be aggressive. When one of them is out, he needs to accept being the 3rd option. Taking six shots when one of the main three is out is not going to cut it.
  3. Sounds like you're looking for this guy. EDIT: Replaced with the one showing his blocks in that game. Better quality also.
  4. I hate to tell you this, but your knees and ankles can get ashy if you don't lotion them.
  5. bgassassin

    Grizzlies & Rockets - 12/26/2014

    Maurice Harkless would like to have a word with you.
  6. So the first results came out this morning. Hopefully he can hold on. This picture was taken from Paul Garcia's twitter.
  7. bgassassin


    Yeah. And even before that game, one of the team stats I heard mentioned by Gary Parrish when Kobe is on the court and off the court was interesting. There was a decent-sized positive swing in performance when he was off the court. First I didn't say no loss is irrelevant. I said a small losing streak, where three games make up 3.7% of the season and 10.7% of the games they've played so far especially when other teams are losing and will lose, is irrelevant. And those few games definitely aren't enough to draw future conclusions from. Also a six-game losing streak is not the same as a three-game losing streak. Losing six in a row would definitely be relevant. However the Grizzlies haven't lost six games in a row since 09-10. To even consider that comes off as paranoia. And sure most wouldn't expect Utah to win. Most wouldn't think the Lakers would get wins 7 and 9 against SA and GS. Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, good teams take bad losses. For me relevant losses are the ones that determine tiebreakers. I'm not sure how the Spurs got singled out when I mentioned every top seven team except for Portland whom I forgot (durn flu). I will say though that I mentioned in another thread that SA started this season 3-3. The last time they did that was the season where all eight teams in the West won 50 games. They finished 7th and got swept in the second round by Phoenix. Unfortunately I can't read the article, but with the one paragraph I did see I don't see how it supports what you are talking about. That paragraph talks about fatigue, like other posters have mentioned, and you made this post earlier. The only tangible evidence we have for this streak is the fatigue resulting from that prior run of games. To look for other evidence when the tangible evidence seems to be the most obvious is creating worry for no reason. The Grizzlies are going to lose more games, just like other teams in the West are going to lose more games. And just like the Grizzlies some of the those teams will have losing streaks due to fatigue. Starting 21-4 was awesome, but it's not logical to expect the Grizzlies or any other team to continue to win at an 84% clip. History suggests at least 13 more losses are coming for the Grizzlies, and that's from the perspective of a #1 seed. And history also suggests some of those future losses will be viewed by people as bad losses.
  8. Yeah I saw that. I'd be fine with waiting.
  9. bgassassin


    Well I didn't call anyone a chicken little, but this three-game losing streak is irrelevant in the grand scheme. It only looks bad because some are taking a insular view of it. The Spurs lost four straight with two of them being home losses. They are also 3-6 in the last nine game with losses to Utah and the Lakers as well. The Lakers also just owned Golden State. Dallas and the Clippers are on two-game losing streaks and Houston just ended theirs. Atlanta has beat all three recently. To say the Grizzlies need to win the next three just to remain in the top four is blindly assuming everyone else is going to keep winning. We have to look at what the other teams are doing as well to properly evaluate the impact of a losing streak. And I think it's safe to say all teams will have other losing streaks in the future.
  10. I think I'd rather have Wright than Green.
  11. bgassassin


    This also ignores this Grizzlies team's history of performing well in the second half of the season.
  12. bgassassin


    ^ Nothing wrong about talking about faults. But if there are possible reasons to the faults, they should be acknowledged as well. Think about it. You're comparing how they played when players were missing. And in all comparisons losing was the common theme. Seems to me the answer to your question is that the Grizzlies are better with their core guys being healthy and on the court at the same time. Shouldn't really be that difficult. If I remember correctly, it was said that there was a wreck on the highway in Memphis and the team didn't get to Philly till around 4:30 in the morning. It would definitely explain why they were sluggish that game. And four of those losses came to teams that won 42, 41, 35, and 21 games that season. So even they didn't beat teams they were supposed to beat.
  13. bgassassin


    Are you seriously trying to compare one game to an injury period last season and a playoff game that Zach also happened to miss? That or some held a low standard for the team that they are exceeding, so when a couple of losses happen those particular persons use the losses to try and justify their view.