Rhody15 wrote: ↑5 months ago
PeterRamTime wrote: ↑5 months ago
"We've played other teams with injury problems, sometimes without their best player. If we were totally healthy and the teams we played were totally healthy, I actually think our record would be worse than it is now."
This is the quote. I didn't exactly remember it right!
And I wasn't just talking about injuries, I of course include not having DG available.
All I did was make a point about how our roster was never able to reach its full potential because guys were either hurt or not available.
Not that we would be a GOOD team, but Judy pointing out that 11 new players plus player availability OBVIOUSLY MADE IT WORSE.
It's a fucking fact. Everyone attacking me for pointing out the obvious is braindead.
The end!
lol yea, 99.9% of people agree on something, you’re the only one with your opinion, but ya sure, you’re right and everyone else is dead wrong.
Nah blue man is on my side and anyone outside of this forum.
Not having DG for half a year, ankle, illness
Fuchs concussion, ankle
Zek shoulder
Cam missed a game
Bilau only played 6 games and was our best big. Best defender, best rebounder according to Archie.
Ways missed a bunch (not a big deal but still)
Weston death in the family, hand injury
Not JUST the injuries, but that much flux on a BRAND NEW roster, 11 new players, made everything worse than it would have been. How in the actual hell can anyone say it did not?
And it's not like I wasn't very critical of the defense, the effort and everything else wrong. Just pointing out that extenuating circumstances made it worse. In all likelihood, we wouldn't have been as bad. How much better? Who knows. We don't know how all of that affected the chemistry, the development, the confidence of the players etc.
Literally the only time I've seen so many people think player availability have nothing to do with team failures in the history of sports