504, Venreader, Selim, and Canadian, I never call out other readers and commenters, but I just have to say that your critique of McNamara and Schwan on this podcast is beyond crazy. I read all these comments before I listened to the podcast and expected Vasquez and Lopez to be bashed unmercifully. Instead, I actually listen to the podcast and 75% of what they said about both men was positive, and their critiques were very well reasoned, with supporting evidence, and even acknowledgement of areas where they could realistically get better. Then, you guys all call them haters, biased, etc etc. What to you want- all positives? This team was 5-22 heading into this week. 5 and 22! If you all had your way, we would have two guys on here talking about how everyone is fantastic, including the starting PG and C on a 5-22 team, and never lighten up the mood whatsoever with any sarcasm. I am imagining that you all were the same type of fans calling Dan Dickau and Lee Nailon future foundation pieces because they filled the stat sheet for our 04-05 team that went 18-64, which I might point out is a higher winning percentage than the 6-23 this team prior to Gordon's return. These guys give their opinions and write dozens of articles per week backed with facts, data, observations, and historical relevance, while you guys just say- "Hey, this guy is good because he got one weekly award or his one stat is this high." It's unbelieveable. Why not just start your own blog and see how it competes with Hornets247's wealth of information, fact, and reasoned opinion. I know I won't be reading it, but good luck to you all
Chad, I don't know about the others you have lumped me with, but the main difference between your posts and mine is that I don't lie. (When you say I called anyone a hater or biased that is a lie. And there were other misstatements in your post above.) Nor do I demean others my making up stuff about them. ( Your "I am imagining that you all were the same type of fans calling Dan Dickau and Lee Nailon future foundation pieces" is a demeaning fantasy.) And the facts I offer are relevant. (When you talk about what was said about Lopez and Vasquez elsewhere in the podcast has nothing to do with my point about Rivers. I said: "Is it possible focussing on Rivers small moments of success is overstating his positives?") I offer a respectful opinion that may or may not agree with a writer at Hornets 24/7. I often post that I am in complete agreement with an article. Yet, Michael and I have had posts in multiple articles respectfully disagreeing about something where there can be multiple points of view. You could learn a lot about appropriate tone and relevant supporting facts from reading those posts. Clearly you are new to this site and haven't read many of my posts. I have been posting here for years, with relevant factual support for my opinion. Everyone is entitled to have an opinion, including you and I, but I believe you need to rethink about how you are going about presenting yours.