Utah Jazz 2008-09 season preview - Discounting the Jazz
by Basketball John on Oct 28, 2008 4:59 AM MDT
16 comments
The NBA preview season is almost done and the regular season is upon us. I'm used to the Jazz hating. It happens every year. I'm usually numb to it by now. But this set me off for whatever reason. So well done, Matt. Mission accomplished.
Before our opening preview, I wanted to say how much I respect Jerry Sloan and the Jazz organization. It's easy for a system that's been around for a million years to grow stagnant, to try and force the players to the system. Sloan has engineered a winning tradition with roots in both fundamentals and versatility that fits the personnel. That's hard to do, and to have done it with the class and respect that Sloan has for so long is simply incredible.
This is like saying, "I'm not a _______, but..." This means everything you hear after this statement will be totally opposite of the prelude.
Click through to read the rest of the lengthy rebuttal.
HP: "But they went to the Western Conference Finals two years ago!"
Stop. Stop right there. They beat the Rockets in seven games. Congratulations. Five other teams have bounced McGrady in the first round. We typically don't celebrate teams for making it out of the first round. Oh, but they beat the Warriors! Riddle me this. How many times has an eight seed beaten a number one seed? Off the top of my head, I think the answer is not too damn many times. Why is that, you think? Because the eigth seed isn't very good, that's why. The Warriors were a fun, feisty, near-psychotic team that was perfectly matched to beat a mentally-fragile Dallas team and got served that matchup. Anybody really think that that Mavs team, you know, the one that won 67 games, that team was going to lose to Carlos Boozer and Andrei Kirilenko? Anybody? No? Okay, then.
SLCDunk.com: I don't think you'll find many that will say that the Jazz didn't overachieve by reaching the WCF. And yes, they were handed a gift when the Warriors beat Dallas. The recurring theme of lame arguments is to take away someone's strengths and accomplishments and to then to argue against that. That is exactly what is done here and throughout the rest of the article.
The point of this paragraph seems to be that the Jazz got lucky, and that's it. You know, because winning a seven-game series on the road is easy, especially when it's the first playoff series for a lot of your players. The Warriors were the hottest team in basketball at that time. Not only had they beat the Mavs in the first round, but they had finished the season 9-1 to get into the playoffs. The Jazz ran with Golden State when most thought Utah was going to suffer the same fate as Dallas.
And the Jazz wouldn't have stood a chance against the Mavs, right? Weird thing is, the Jazz took 2 out of 3 games against Dallas that year. They beat them by 22 and 15 points respectively. The lone Mavs win was a three point blowout. I also like how he conveniently leaves out Deron Williams in that discussion as well. Do you see the theme?
Last year they beat a Rockets team without Yao Ming, without Rafer Alston for much of it, and with a banged up Tracy McGrady. And it still took them six games! Do you think the Spurs would have toyed around with the Rockets for six games? The Rockets? The Lakers? They won, congrats.
Here we discount the first round win again against the Rockets because they were seemingly undermanned. First, does it matter if McGrady was banged up? He averaged 27 points in those 6 games. This was also the same Rockets that won 22 straight and 12 of those without Yao. Not to mention that Boozer, yes Carlos Boozer, owned Yao in the playoff series the year before. And Rafer Freaking Alston? Are you kidding me? If you're throwing him in to strengthen your argument, maybe you should just start over.
It's funny, because all the people that talk about how the Jazz could win an NBA championship are the same people that needed about fourteen seconds to decide the Lakers would stomp the hell out of them. Which they pretty much did. Oh, what's that? It took six games? It took a five point and eight point overtime victory at home where the Jazz are "unbeatable" just to extend that series before the Lakers spit them out. Oh, yeah, at home.
I don't know what the point was here. Did anyone pick the Jazz to beat the Lakers last year? The Lakers were the worst possible matchup for the Jazz. LA ended Utah's 19-game home winning streak. And in case you didn't notice, the Lakers beat everyone else in the West last year as well. I don't see how this precludes the Jazz from being contenders any more than it does any other team in the West.
My problem is that people look at the success this team has had and think that they're in the upper cusp of the West. And they're not. It seems like, essentially because of a ripple effect from the Warriors upsetting the Mavs in a once-in-a-lifetime perfect storm. But they haven't proven they belong in a Western title discussion. And that was before the Rockets, Hornets, and Blazers all improved. These guys look like shining examples of a new era. In reality, they're a cheap trick that had the good fortune of pounding a whelp that shocked a mentally unstable championship contender one year. Take away that win over the Warriors and what do you have? A one and done team that does nicely in the regular season, gets past an easy first round opponent, and then wilts when the real teams come to play. Congratulations, you're the Orlando Magic of the Western Conference. Don't forget to tip your waitresses.
More of the same argument. Let's take away the past two years of success and then compare. He makes it sound like they've had one series win against the North Salt Lake Jr. Jazz 12-year olds. Tell me exactly who were the upper cusp of the West last year? We had the closest race in league history, where losing two or three games meant the difference between a 1 seed and a 6 or 7 seed. Any one of the 1-7 teams last year could have won the West. Is that going to be any different this year? Not likely. If there was an upper cusp last year, it was only one team.
How about the actual makeup of this team? Deron Williams? Okay. Deron Williams is awesome. Trying to argue he sucks or is overrated is so insane it's not even worth talking about. The only thing more insane than trying to talk about Deron Williams not being that good is trying to talk about Deron Williams being better than Chris Paul.
Oh, I'm sorry, does that get your attention?
Sometimes I feel like Jazz fans are the angry mob, just wandering around trying to find something to get mad about. They're angry disciples of a religion that's led them astray, and they have to defend their prophets without question. They're incapable of relishing in the fact that Deron Williams is good, it's not enough. He has to be better than Chris Paul. Because he beats him heads up! Yeah, that's relevant when Williams has size on Paul and none of the matchups on the floor favor him! It's just sad. Blazers fans love Brandon Roy. They would marry Brandon Roy if given the opportunity. But they don't go around saying he's better than Kobe. Nuggets fans love Melo, but they're not saying LeBron sucks if the Nuggets beat the Cavs. You know why? Because they recognize that their player is great and that's all that matters. But Jazz fans live off the inferiority complex.
But again, as far as his game goes, he's untouchable.
I can't believe I still argue this point. Most Jazz fans don't think that Deron Williams is greater than Chris Paul. What irritates fans is that most people somehow believe that Williams couldn't carry Paul's jockstrap.
Let's see, Paul shot 48.8%, 37% from three and averaged 21.1 points, 11.6 assists, and 2.7 steals. Deron's line was 50.7%, 39.5% from three and averaged 18.8 ponits, 10.5 assists, and 1.1 steals. So that's not even in the neighborhood? Nevermind that the Jazz have more scorers than the Hornets. The top three Utah scorers had 4,300 points compared to the Hornets' top three with 4,511. And that pesky assist stat. The Jazz as a team had 2,165 assists to New Orleans' 1,785. Williams accounted for 40% of the team's assists while Paul was responsible for a whopping 52%. Sorry, I just had to discount Paul a bit. See how that works?
And while we're at it, let's play down Deron's size advantage over Paul. It's not fair to say that Williams has owned #3 throughout his whole career. From college, to the All-Star skills challenge, to head-to-head matchups. Those shouldn't count for Pete's sake. Paul can beat up on the rest of the league's inept point guards, but when he goes up against the best, he has difficulty. But once again, we'll throw out Williams' strengths and then make comparisons. Does Duncan have to switch off of KG? Did Jordan switch off of anyone because he couldn't guard him? If you can't guard a worthy counterpart, then that lowers your value in my book.
The other player comparisons above? Give me a break. Williams and Paul were taken 3-4 in the draft. Both are PGs. Does anyone else in the league compare Roy to Kobe? Or LeBron to Melo? Only when you're trying to discount the Williams/Paul matchup.
The rest of the crew? Weeeelll...
Get a quarter. Go on, I'll wait. Get a quarter.
Okay, now flip it. There, Andrei Kirilenko just scored 17 points, had 12 boards and six assists. Your team won. Collect $200 dollars.
Now flip the quarter again. There, Andrei Kirilenko just went 2 of 14 from the floor for 4 points, 4 rebounds, 1 block, and 6 fouls. Do not collect $200, do not pass Go, go directly to FAIL.
I'd say that someone needs to get into AK's head to straighten him out but you'd end up going through an endless series of doors that go nowhere. Much like the Jazz's playoff hopes.
A small forward, probably playing out of position, that shoots 50%, 38% from downtown, and 4 assists a game. Not to mention he's your only defensive-minded big on the team. Yeah, that sucks.
But let's not leave out Memo! How could we? You know, in a conference that features Yao Ming, Tim Duncan, Amare Stoudemire, Andrew Bynum, Pau Gasol, Greg Oden, Marcus Camby, Al Jefferson, Erick Dampier, and Tyson Chandler, you know what I want? I want a center that hates playing down low and only rebounds when his coach chains him to the goal like a chompers thing from Mario Brothers. That guy drifts outside like there's an endless supply of Nutter Butters out there. And everytime it leads to a bad offensive position for the Jazz, you see Sloan yelling at him and Okur looking back like "What? What was I supposed to do?"
Memo is a seven-foot big that can spread the offense for Williams and Boozer. He can stroke the three and also take the ball to the hoop. And despite playing with rebounding machines Boozer and Millsap, he still average 7.7 a game and 10.7 after the All-Star break. Yeah, let's get rid of him.
Ronnie Brewer and Paul Millsap are nice. Can you tell me when they'll be back from their permanent vacation in 2007?
I don't get this one. Brewer's 12 points, 2 steals and 56% shooting is a vacation? Millsap's 50% shooting and 14 & 10 per 36 isn't enough for you?
But of course where would we be without Betrayal Skull Dude? I'm not even going to bother telling you about why you should hate the guy over screwing over the Cavs. Because in about, oh, seven months you'll have a whole new owner he'll have dicked over to hate him for. No, I'm going to talk about Boozer's penchant for challenging players much, much bigger and better than him. Last season I paid particular interest in the Utah versus San Antonio matchup on April 16th. Seeing how teams deal with the perennial title contenders late in the season can be an insight to the team's makeup. Utah had spanked the Spurs during a slump 90-64 the last time they met. So with the playoffs approaching, this one should be tough, eh? The Spurs walked in the door, dragged the Jazz out through the saloon doors by their hair, threw them in the street and executed them. Then walked inside and took their poker money. It was brutal. But what caught me was three times, Boozer attempted to challenge Tim Duncan inside. I found myself pausing it, and replaying it over and over again. The look of determination on Boozer's face. The half-yawn as Duncan swatted him away. The anguished look from Boozer as if to say "How could this possibly happen?!" I desperately want Yahoo! to start tracking and publishing the Blocks Allowed stat for the season, not just for the nightly box score. I have a feeling Boozer is the All-Star that leads in "number of times has had sh*t rocked."
Above, he discounts Williams' head-to-head matchups with Paul but then uses Duncan's head-to-head against Boozer as a point? You can't have it both ways. Again, most PFs fail against Duncan. That's why he's freaking Tim Duncan. So by this logic, Chris Paul sucks! By the way, the entire Spurs team has owned the Jazz. But we have to discount that 20 & 10 every night some way. Oh, and we were a decent series from Carlos Boozer away from knocking off the Lakers.
You want the summation of why to hate this Jazz team? Because in May, pundits are going to be telling you to watch out! The Jazz are coming! Run and hide! This team is on a mission! And then it's going to run into the same problems it always has when it's not the regular season. They're easily solvable. That happens when you don't defend well. Don't buy the hype. Hate the Jazz.
You damn well better watch out.
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Yeah, that's even
The reasons to love section was like a fourth of what the reasons to hate section was. Ooookkaaaaay.
by mcjazzman32 on Oct 27, 2008 7:20 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Oh John.
Every rebuttal you’ve offered here is accurate and responsible and a fair reaction. Your representation of the article, however, is a bit off.
While I definitely believe all the things I wrote, I don’t hate the Jazz. But for ALL of our season previews, we provided reasons to love and hate the teams. It’s the same for every single team in the league. I wasn’t any more unfair towards this team than we were towards any other. But when I saw the Jazz pop up consistently on pundits’ (particularly KD) lists of championship contenders, I wanted to put forth an argument to dispute it. But this is a ridiculously talented team.
And I have to say, I am offended at the implication of my opening paragraph. First off, I don’t like being compared to a racist. At all. I don’t appreciate and it’s beneath you.
I genuinely believe the Jazz organization is a first class one and that Jerry Sloan never gets the credit he deserves for the work he’s done there. To degrade my implication of it was rude and thoughtless.
As far as the length of the section, you’ll have to talk to Holly MacKenzie. All the HP writers contributed different parts to this and some of the pieces were short and some were long. Pretty much everything I write is longer than the rest because I’m the primary writer. I also went on to write glowing things at the end of the article about different parts of the Jazz. If I’d written the “Reasons to Love” piece it would have been just as long and just as thorough.
As far as AK, one of the biggest things I got from Jazz fans last year was their frustration with his incosistency. That’s from reading your site, My Utah Jaz (now True Blue Jazz), and others. The same with the perception that Deron Williams is superior.
Furthermore, in accounting your assist rates, you’re not accounting for pace. That’s a huge factor in all the comparisons. That said, your offense is positively lethal and you’ll find me saying that throughout this season.
I appreciate your honesty, but every other fanbase has understood what the “reasons to hate” pieces are, but in typical fashion, the Jazz fans overreact. Just kidding! :)
Keep up the good work, thanks for reading.
Enjoy your season. I look forward to it ending in May.
Ridiculous Upside: All the "Almost NBA" info you can handle!
by Ridiculous Matt on Oct 27, 2008 7:27 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
He didn't call you a racist.
He compared you to a racist, pointing out that your “statement will be totally opposite of the prelude.” Which it was. But even if it is wrong to “tangentially” call you a racist,
it must be totally okay for you to trash an entire fanbase by saying “They’re angry disciples of a religion that’s led them astray, and they have to defend their prophets without question.” What does that have to do with basketball. At least John’s comparison had a point. Maybe you aren’t a racist, Matt. But you acted like a religious bigot when you wrote that line. And you didn’t even tangentially refer to mormons as misguided. You stated it as fact.
Not to mention that your piece was so mean spirited, more mean spirited than any other teams you wrote about. Tell me this: what team would have beaten the Jazz last year in the playoffs besides the Lakers? The Jazz would have beat NO without home court. We match up too well with them. And we can beat up on a spurs team with a 50% Manu Ginobili too. How is being the 2nd best western team last year making us overrated? Other than the Celtics, we played the best of anyone who played the Lakers. And Deron Williams will be an MVP candidate this year.
The more you try to erase me, the more that I appear.
by clarkpojo on Oct 27, 2008 10:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
In case he doesn't post it himself...
Here was Matt’s response to my post on hardwood paroxysm:
"I seriously did not make the Mormon connection. I should have thought about that before I wrote it, but it wasn’t the intent behind it. I apologize to any LDS readers. I have a healthy respect for the LDS Church, and would never want to belittle any religion. I sincerely apologize for that unfortunate analogy.
Now, I would say that my hate piece was actually less mean-spirited than most of the ones Corn posted. There wasn’t any wish for anyone to have sex with themselves or anything. But if that’s how it came off, well, sorry, it’s a hate piece. It’s supposed to.
The Spurs would have bounced you in five, the Hornets would have ejected you in six, and the Mavs would have the advantage in seven.
Them’s the facts, kids."
The more you try to erase me, the more that I appear.
by clarkpojo on Oct 27, 2008 11:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll give him the ignorance on the religious piece.
I guess. I don’t know how you make a “Utahns following a false religion” comment without intending to belittle the LDS church in some facet, but maybe it was an honest mistake.
But to say we would have lost to those teams he listed in the playoffs, is just ridiculous Matt being, well, ridiculous. That ends the dialogue for me, because if you truly believe that Utah wouldn’t have beat the Hornets even in NO in last year’s playoffs or that we wouldn’t have beat the Spurs with a busted Ginobili, then, well, you must think the Jazz are overrated or something.
The more you try to erase me, the more that I appear.
by clarkpojo on Oct 27, 2008 11:17 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I deleted the paragraph
out of respects for your concern. It really was an honest mistake. Having nearly married a LDS member, I’ve got a pretty good feel for how members would react to that kind of comparison.
The thing is, the Hate pieces were meant to be funny pieces of vitriol, not honest analysis.
Now, even the people that think you are a championship contender this year will tell you you would not have beaten any of the top three seeds. They were just better. But if you want an honest analysis from an outsider’s perspective, I can tell you that I think the Utah Jazz can beat 26 teams in a seven game series. But the gap between you and the other six is rather wide.
Ridiculous Upside: All the "Almost NBA" info you can handle!
by Ridiculous Matt on Oct 28, 2008 12:24 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
And when I compared your other hate pieces
To this one, this one seemed from the heart. It’s not like it’s the first Jazz hit piece you’ve put out. So hence, the reponse.
by Basketball John on Oct 28, 2008 4:35 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously I didn't mean you were a racist
But I can see how it could be taken that way. I could have put, “I’m not a ________, but…” Anyway, you did your job getting everyone riled up. Glad to see we got some people posting because of it.
Thanks for getting me pumped for the season.
by Basketball John on Oct 28, 2008 4:32 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
boring!
So lame. Who responds to that kind of blog response except someone with no time? If you wanted respect for your appraisal, the “reasons to love” section should have been comparable, not one-fourth the size. It made the entire piece look like a hate piece.
by mcjazzman32 on Oct 27, 2008 9:14 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Again
all the HP writers had complete control over how long the pieces they submitted were. Holly tended to go short. I did it that way to allow the writers spontaneity. I’m sorry that you didn’t get more love, but if SLCDunk and it’s contributing writers would like to pen a “Reasons to Love” response, I’d be more than happy to run it.
Thanks for such in depth criticism as “So lame” and questioning how I spend my time on the internet. That’s productive.
Ridiculous Upside: All the "Almost NBA" info you can handle!
by Ridiculous Matt on Oct 27, 2008 9:25 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Duncan vs. Boozer
This is a really good point and I should have done a better job expressing what I was trying to, which is IF you’re looking for reasons to hate the Jazz, one of them is the fact that Boozer in particular has problems with challenging guys when he should rely on his footwork and range.
I can see how you took it as a direct comparison though, and that makes it a weak argument.
Not that I was actually forming a thesis here, as evidenced by the gigantic CAPITAL LETTERS INDICATING I WAS JUST CONJURING REASONS TO HATE THEM.
Ridiculous Upside: All the "Almost NBA" info you can handle!
by Ridiculous Matt on Oct 27, 2008 9:52 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
re: AK . . . and the wishy washy way Jazz fans see him
It’s really sad, some really emotional jazz fans love and hate their players based on the swing of a pendulum. They loved and hated Karl. They currently love and hate Boozer, and pretty much love TO hate AK. It’s silly.
Almost as silly as some theory that HE is the source of his own inconsistency. It’s his playing time that is . . . check it
by AllThatJazzBasketball on Oct 27, 2008 10:26 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Matt's points, distilled to their essence:
1) The Jazz are overrated, because people overrate them, so you shouldn’t do that.
2) Most people don’t think they’re overrated. Those are the people who are overrating them.
3) They got lucky in their playoff matchups.
4) They should have beaten the Rockets by more and shouldn’t have lost the series to the Lakers at home where they aren’t supposed to lose.
5) They are at best one of the top 4 teams in the Western Conference, and might not even be that good.
6) Chris Paul is better than Deron Williams.
7) Andrei Kirilenko is maddeningly inconsistent.
8) Mehmet Okur doesn’t play in the post like a true center.
9) Ronnie Brewer and Paul Millsap are nice but don’t matter.
10) Carlos Boozer is a dick and Tim Duncan is better.
11) In summary, the Jazz are overrated because people overrate them, and you shouldn’t do that.
Some of those I might not disagree with. Maybe.
I am interested in which six teams you think are across this “rather wide” gap from the Jazz. I have to assume at least the Celtics, Lakers, Spurs, and Hornets.
I will give you the Celtics and Lakers — the Jazz are not better than those two.
The Spurs simply have a mental block over the Jazz, and probably always will until the end of the Duncan era.
After that, I just don’t agree. The CP3-led Hornets have historically not fared well against the D-Will-led Jazz. Call it matchups or luck or whatever. That is a matter of record. Posey may make up the difference, but that is yet to be proven.
The Rockets are your true Lords of Overrated-land, being bounced in the first round after being highly touted to start the season, year after year after year. At some point, you can’t keep making excuses via injury, thinking that if everyone was healthy, the Rockets would roll. Well, they’re never healthy. Ever. Being injury-prone is as valid a weakness as a poor outside shot, or slow defense. It can be overcome, just like a bad shooter can have a 10-for-10 night. But you wouldn’t say, “Oh, it’s so unfortunate that Player A didn’t shoot well” if Player A rarely shoots well. Why would you then say, “Oh, it’s so unfortunate that Tracy McGray wasn’t healthy” when, historically, Tracy McGrady has rarely been healthy?
Maybe Artest pushes the Rockets over the top. It’s possible. I have my doubts.
The Blazers are young. That might not mean everything, but it certainly counts for something. They have a great roster, but we need to see a 50-win season from them first.
The Pistons play a style of basketball that plays right into the Jazz’s hands. The Jazz have historically been very good on the road against Detroit (one of the few places Utah plays well, admittedly). I don’t see the Jazz losing a seven-game series against them.
The Cavs are always a threat. I personally think the Jazz have too much offense for them. But I could see how you might put Cleveland ahead.
After that, things are even shakier. Mavs? Kidd’s too old, Dirk’s too inconsistent, and Howard’s too stoned. Suns? Nash and Shaq are too old, and the team doesn’t run the same way any more. Sixers? Same with the Blazers — show me on the court first.
The lowest I will accept the Jazz to start the season is fifth. And maybe you’re right, the gulf between that top tier and the one the Jazz inhabit may be wide indeed. But fifth in the league is still a dandy position to start from, and one worthy of respect.
One last thought (and this is entirely my opinion, and it isn’t my intention to open a different can here): Thanks for your sensitivity regarding the “prophet” remark. I initially had to re-read that section to make sure that wasn’t a veiled jab, and I’m satisfied that it was just an honest mistake. (I’m sure you’re now breathing a sigh of relief at my absolution.) But you’re not wrong about Jazz fans “living off the inferiority complex.” Because we do live off it.
We have massive chips on our shoulders, because as Utahns (or even as fans of something Utahn) we feel constantly maligned. I think much of that does stem from the prominent LDS religion: either we’re weary of the incessant, willfully inaccurate, and unfunny misconceptions associated with our faith, or we’re sick of being automatically attached to that faith simply because of our proximity to it. (Case in point: a Deadspin piece this weekend that mentioned BYU quarterback Max Hall throwing four touchdown passes, “one for each future wife.” Not that Deadspin holds anything sacred, which is fine, but it’s seriously low-hanging fruit, and unworthy of such funny writers. And that sort of thing happens all the time. Of course, BYU is a Mormon school, so it sets itself up for it. But the Jazz, and Jazz fans, have to deal with the same thing.)
Does that make us a little defensive sometimes? More than a little. Does it bleed over into our fandom? Absolutely. So we whine about CP3’s press, and we scream about head-to-head matchups, and we make a big deal because it’s one of the few ways we can get back at everyone for needling us all the time. That’s how I feel sometimes, anyway.
No beef about the length or how you spend your internet time from me, though. I appreciate your willingness to debate us here, even if I happen to disagree with every last angry word you’ve said about my team. :) Cheers, brother.
I'll make it.
by Shums on Oct 28, 2008 3:07 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Really guys
if you read HP (my favourite blog btw) regularly you know there is always a LOT of hate there towards e.g.: the lakers or the spurs (allez! f**k them both :D) and since the shaq trade, my suns… oh, and, other 27 teams of the association. people rarely complain about basketbawfuls take, though it is much harsher (and great also). so, lighten up, this is not not irrational hate, it’s what HP often does to all teams. I agree with some of the analysis, i am honestly surprised about how many experts think Utah is 2nd-3rd best team in the West… (then again, they are experts for a reason) anyway, just lighten up, really. this is just fun, HP is about fun and basketball, often in that order.
Once upon a time the Suns got out on the break... and along came Steve sucKerr
by Murcy on Oct 28, 2008 10:32 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
You're right. Everyone should just stop blogging.
It isn’t the writer who makes good art, or in this case, a good blog; it is the critics. Why do you think hardwood paroxysm, or any blog for that matter exists? Is it solely to spread information? Is it just to entertain? Is it to change man’s thinking? You and I know very well that Matt and other HP bloggers write their pieces to infuriate and incite others and cause dialogue. It is what a lot of good writing does. All good writing should create dialogue between people. Don’t kid yourself, Matt is sitting at his computer, as pleased as ever that he got the reaction he did from Jazz fans. That’s why he put http://hardwoodparoxysm.blogspot.com/2008/10/it-appears-lakes-are-salted-from-their.html up within 20 minutes of discovering our complaints. It is what his blog is about. Writers love the accolades AND the complaints about their writing because it validates their work. If a blogger falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? No.
The more you try to erase me, the more that I appear.
by clarkpojo on Oct 28, 2008 12:53 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on SLC Dunk
Related FanShots on SLC Dunk
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
