First of all I never called you unintelligent. You were acting like it was lunacy for me to ask you conceptualize an idea.

I'm not even asking you to agree with my opinion. I'm trying to get you to understand where my argument is coming from which apparently is useless. Ever since we've established that there is a threshold for immunity, I've chalked the rest up to difference of opinion.

quote:
You are saying they are not comparable

Again. Reading comprehension. I never said that. Just because there's a flaw in the comparison doesn't mean they aren't comparable. Like I said, every single comparison ever has a flaw. Doesn't mean it's not useful.

quote:
You are simply taking the parts of the comparison you like and using those while ignoring th aspects of the comparison that prove your argument irrelevant.

I'm not ignoring them. IVE OPENLY RECOGNIZED THE PARTS THAT DO NOT SUPPORT MY ARGUMENT MANY TIMES. I do not feel they out weigh the parts that do support my argument. You feel differently. It's a difference of opinion. Not a contradiction.

quote:
No we never changed the criteria. You chose kobe to compare him to and that situation is not the same as Kyries potiential situation with the Knicks nor is his star level anywhere near Kobes. The criteria is the same but the criteria doesn't make any sense as plenty of people have pointed out to you.

There's only been one person to argue this aspect and you didn't even argue it. The criteria has been and still is when was Kobe on a bad team. He's been on more than one bad team.

quote:
At some point you have to start blaming your self instead of everyone else.

On this one I'm only blaming you. Everybody else has come to understand it

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by wildtigercat93

Member since Jul 2011

112489 posts

Posted on 7/28/17 at 1:17 pm to Weagle25

quote:
m not asking you to do any work besides comprehend an idea

"Hey there's a lower level than Kobe but I'm not going to provide any proof or evidence of someone being below that level and keeping the same level of stardom and I'm gonna expect you to just take my word that it would work the same for Kyrie even tho nothing proves that it would"

quote:
First of all I never called you unintelligent. You were acting like it was lunacy for me to ask you conceptualize an idea.

You have heavily implied that I am too unintelligent to conceptialize your idea whenever you can't communicate your idea with evidence to back it up. If you have an opinion, please have some reason or evidence to back it up or just stop arguing it so hard.

quote:
I'm not even asking you to agree with my opinion. I'm trying to get you to understand where my argument is coming from which apparently is useless. Ever since we've established that there is a threshold for immunity, I've chalked the rest up to difference of opinion.

You've said Kyrie has reached this line of immunity but you have given no reason or proof or similar example of someone of his stature keeping that level of stardom in a similar situation. So why would anyone agree with your opinion on this when you've constructed it so poorly without any research or back up except for one player example which CLEARLY doesn't fit the situation?

quote:
Again. Reading comprehension. I never said that. Just because there's a flaw in the comparison doesn't mean they aren't comparable. Like I said, every single comparison ever has a flaw. Doesn't mean it's not useful.

Again you blame everyone else.

If you agree there is a massive flaw in that comparison than why use it alone? Why not come up with more examples? Why not create a solid connection between the argument your making and a solid level of evidence to back it up?

You are admitting the flaws but accepting the results absolutely any way. you only see what you want to see to fit your argument

quote:
I'm not ignoring them. IVE OPENLY RECOGNIZED THE PARTS THAT DO NOT SUPPORT MY ARGUMENT MANY TIMES. I do not feel they out weigh the parts that do support my argument. You feel differently. It's a difference of opinion. Not a contradiction.

Yet you keep using the comparison absolutely. Give me more, do more, be better at this. Don't just say "everyone else can't read, I'm obviously the smartest person in the room and everyone else is too simple minded to grasp it"

Clearly there is something missing on your end. The world isn't against you, you just haven't properly conveyed your opinion with viable proof or situations outside of one that you yourself are admitting is not a good comparison.

quote:
There's only been one person to argue this aspect and you didn't even argue it. The criteria has been and still is when was Kobe on a bad team. He's been on more than one bad team.

And how many bad teams have the Knicks had the past 10-20 years? Comparing the Knicks situation to the 2000 lakers is just obtuse.