Canes Hoops (men and women) have an overseas trip to Italy in August 2019. (Great for recruiting)

[Consigliere]

Again, you're still hung up on bullchit that isn't there. You continue to porst from tangentland.

Funny, you didn't seem shocked to me at all. Just typically sarcastic. You made a vaque statement and called me a marone. Yes? smh

1. I was shocked. I was shocked that someone could make such predictions based on the improvement of other big men during Coach L's era at Miami. I was shocked that someone could put up such stats and not play half the game.

2. Marone' isn't an insult. It isn't a name. It is a way to say "shock" or oh my god. So when I said..."If he isn’t playing half a game and is putting up those numbers, marone."

I am SHOCKED that someone could have that production, that you predicted, and didn't play half the game.

3. So the combination of your confusion of an insult, plus another word for shock, confused you. Great. I bet we're still going to be hung up on this as we continue.

4. If you don't understand a post, ask. Instead of confusing things and NOT responding to it.

5. Again, you received a response on topic. You NEVER responded to said response on topic.

In any event, we need players that are better than Nysier Brooks. We need game altering talent not just average talent. Average talent is all over. Brooks will not determine whether we make the tournament or not. If he were a season changer he'd be in the NBA right now, so would most of the transfer portal players.

1. This has NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING, to do with my post.

2. Everyone wants better talent than Brooks. We want the best talent. Who would say the opposite?

3. What does any of this have to do with Brooks or making predictions for Rodney?

If coach L hasn't applied for a waiver there has to be a good reason. A good reason that both he and Nysier have agreed to. We do need bodies.

By game changing talent I mean somebody who can dominate some facet of the game against other talented players.

Can you provide a logical reason?

I am unclear as to why you discuss game changing talent, does someone NOT want game changing talent?

 

[Consigliere]

Being "short handed" at the 4/5 was barely acceptable last year, and completely unacceptable this year. L has known for months about the injury status and waiver status of his bigs and is sitting on 2 open scholarships.

Simple roster management issues.

 

[hotshot]

Think its Madonn' (from Madonna, mother of Jesus)! To express surprise and shock in Italian slang usage. Not Marone, whatever that would mean.

 

[HurikaneMarc]

Again, you're still hung up on bullchit that isn't there. You continue to porst from tangentland.



1. I was shocked. I was shocked that someone could make such predictions based on the improvement of other big men during Coach L's era at Miami. I was shocked that someone could put up such stats and not play half the game.

2. Marone' isn't an insult. It isn't a name. It is a way to say "shock" or oh my god. So when I said..."If he isn’t playing half a game and is putting up those numbers, marone."

I am SHOCKED that someone could have that production, that you predicted, and didn't play half the game.

3. So the combination of your confusion of an insult, plus another word for shock, confused you. Great. I bet we're still going to be hung up on this as we continue.

4. If you don't understand a post, ask. Instead of confusing things and NOT responding to it.

5. Again, you received a response on topic. You NEVER responded to said response on topic.



1. This has NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING, to do with my post.

2. Everyone wants better talent than Brooks. We want the best talent. Who would say the opposite?

3. What does any of this have to do with Brooks or making predictions for Rodney?



Can you provide a logical reason?

I am unclear as to why you discuss game changing talent, does someone NOT want game changing talent?

You know what this conversation has spanned 3 separate threads. It's not just about what you said 3 pages ago here or what I said in another thread.

It started with something as simple as you saying we need another 5 and me saying that we shouldn't add bodies just for the sake of adding bodies. You argue with me on that point but then state that Stone isn't going to help because he isn't "proven and quality" which is exactly what I am saying. Don't bring in dead wood just to fill up space. Then it spun off into you telling me what a real big man is and why each player we had did not meet your definition. smh

You're all over the place.

Lets just end this at you don't like our front court guys, we need more front ourt players from the portal and you think that Rodney will suck right? because if I shocked you by saying he'd average between 5-9ppg well you must be thinking 1ppg or -2ppg.

And no I don't know what marone means. I'm not responsible for that word in an English speaking conversation. But I'll take the hit for that. I ignored it anyway. At least I didn't respond to it.

Now what question did I not answer. I want to answer it now.

 

[Consigliere]

Tangent, tangent, tangent...Marc is on a tangent. You really are a consistent porster.

You know what this conversation has spanned 3 separate threads. It's not just about what you said 3 pages ago here or what I said in another thread.

Stick to one topic, one thread. If you want to respond to a different post, in a different thread, respond to that post in that thread.

So let's end this tangent.

1. You received a response (#54)

2. Said response was on topic.

3. You didn't respond.

This is over.

It started with something as simple as you saying we need another 5 and me saying that we shouldn't add bodies just for the sake of adding bodies.

1. Not relevant.

2. Respond to that post in that thread.

3. In this thread, we (as in me and you) were discussing Rodney's production. Cool beans? Remember, the post you failed to respond to. Then you went on a diatribe about not getting a response. Then you thought I called you a name. Wrong, wrong and wrong.

You argue with me on that point but then state that Stone isn't going to help because he isn't "proven and quality" which is exactly what I am saying. Don't bring in dead wood just to fill up space. Then it spun off into you telling me what a real big man is and why each player we had did not meet your definition. smh

1. Not relevant.

2. Respond to that post in that thread.

3. In this thread, we (as in me and you) were discussing Rodney's production. Cool beans? Remember, the post you failed to respond to. Then you went on a diatribe about not getting a response. Then you thought I called you a name. Wrong, wrong and wrong.

You're all over the place.

1. I am not. I've been consistent. You're unable to understand. Rather than ask for clarification, you go on a tangent.

2. Tangent. Look at where this conversation has gone. You received a response on topic, then you ignored it. Then you claimed to not receive a response. Then you continued on a tangent .

3. Instead of combining several posts, respond to said posts in said threads.

Lets just end this at you don't like our front court guys, we need more front ourt players from the portal and you think that Rodney will suck right?

I think everyone with a brain thinks we need more front court guys. Guys who are proven and quality.

because if I shocked you by saying he'd average between 5-9ppg well you must be thinking 1ppg or -2ppg.

Congrats Marc, you finally responded with something relevant and on topic. Are you done with your tangents? Acknowledge the above and we can move on and discuss something pertinent.

And no I don't know what marone means. I'm not responsible for that word in an English speaking conversation. But I'll take the hit for that. I ignored it anyway. At least I didn't respond to it.

I don't care what you know. Why not ask? If you don't understand, ask. I know you didn't respond. Then you claimed I didn't respond.

Now what question did I not answer. I want to answer it now.

If you want to discuss Rodney's production and my thoughts, great. Acknowledge the above and we can move on. If you want to continue on a tangent, cool beans?

 

[HurikaneMarc]

Tangent, tangent, tangent...Marc is on a tangent. You really are a consistent porster.



Stick to one topic, one thread. If you want to respond to a different post, in a different thread, respond to that post in that thread.

So let's end this tangent.

1. You received a response (#54)

2. Said response was on topic.

3. You didn't respond.

This is over.



1. Not relevant.

2. Respond to that post in that thread.

3. In this thread, we (as in me and you) were discussing Rodney's production. Cool beans? Remember, the post you failed to respond to. Then you went on a diatribe about not getting a response. Then you thought I called you a name. Wrong, wrong and wrong.




1. Not relevant.

2. Respond to that post in that thread.

3. In this thread, we (as in me and you) were discussing Rodney's production. Cool beans? Remember, the post you failed to respond to. Then you went on a diatribe about not getting a response. Then you thought I called you a name. Wrong, wrong and wrong.




1. I am not. I've been consistent. You're unable to understand. Rather than ask for clarification, you go on a tangent.

2. Tangent. Look at where this conversation has gone. You received a response on topic, then you ignored it. Then you claimed to not receive a response. Then you continued on a tangent .

3. Instead of combining several posts, respond to said posts in said threads.



I think everyone with a brain thinks we need more front court guys. Guys who are proven and quality.




Congrats Marc, you finally responded with something relevant and on topic. Are you done with your tangents? Acknowledge the above and we can move on and discuss something pertinent.




I don't care what you know. Why not ask? If you don't understand, ask. I know you didn't respond. Then you claimed I didn't respond.



If you want to discuss Rodney's production and my thoughts, great. Acknowledge the above and we can move on. If you want to continue on a tangent, cool beans?

LOL!! Guess you're the winner then!!

I suppose that you think you're agitating me with the whole "tangent, porster" thing? Not at all friend. As a matter of fact I know when you go there its likely that you've been triggered by something I said(or anyone for that fact).

And no you have not been consistent. You've been unnecessarily argumentative to anyone who doesn't see things your way and even when they do you argue anyway.

No I'm not going to ask you what you meant because truthfully you're notorious for making snide remarks when you're challenged. Just like the whole porster tangent thing. Why should I assume otherwise?

I'll ask again what question of yours did I not answer so that i can answer it now.

 

[Consigliere]

LOL!! Guess you're the winner then!!

I suppose that you think you're agitating me with the whole "tangent, porster" thing? Not at all friend. As a matter of fact I know when you go there its likely that you've been triggered by something I said(or anyone for that fact).

I don't care if I am agitating you. It isn't my intent. I am pointing out that, in this thread, you're a porster who goes on tangents.

As a matter of fact I know when you go there its likely that you've been triggered by something I said(or anyone for that fact).

Another tangent. It is nice to know that you've developed theories about me. Sad.

And no you have not been consistent. You've been unnecessarily argumentative to anyone who doesn't see things your way and even when they do you argue anyway.

The tinfoil is too tight Marc.

No I'm not going to ask you what you meant because truthfully you're notorious for making snide remarks when you're challenged. Just like the whole porster tangent thing. Why should I assume otherwise?

I am "notorious". OMG. Sad Marc, sad.

I'll ask again what question of yours did I not answer so that i can answer it now.

What are you talking about?

 

[HurikaneMarc]

I don't care if I am agitating you. It isn't my intent. I am pointing out that, in this thread, you're a porster who goes on tangents.



Another tangent. It is nice to know that you've developed theories about me. Sad.



The tinfoil is too tight Marc.



I am "notorious". OMG. Sad Marc, sad.




What are you talking about?

BRILLIANT!!

 

[Da_Lucky_One]

Canes Hoops: Recapping the Team’s Summer Trip to Italy

Three games, three wins, three cities, but a lifetime of memories as Hurricanes say ciao to Italy.

www.stateoftheu.com

 

[Da_Lucky_One]

Still bonding for a good cause.