Wait a second... How could you say Wade got his coach fired, when he was nothing less of spectacular under Stan Van Gundy? At the same time, how could you say Vince has yet to get his coach fired, when he had been under 4 different coaches with the Raptors? (Butch Carter, Lenny Wilkins, Kevin O'Neill, and Sam Mitchell)
Originally posted by Lord Evolution😆 I felt the same way during the Finals, as I was rooting for Dallas.
We all know Wade received a lot of help from the refs all throughout the playoffs, not just the finals.Every time he went to the foul line I squeezed the hell out of a pillow, in attempt to subdue my anger to prevent me from breaking my TV.
You know....that really grinds my gears.
But I still give Wade a lot of credit for taking over. He was definitely the MVP. His aggressive intent helped himself some calls, although I thought a little too many.
It is not good to contradict your own statements when you are trying to make a point. And it certainly does not appear you know what you are talking about when in just two posts you contradict yourself and claim things that are not true.
"Mr. Wade just got his head coach fired"
In this quote, it is implied that you are actually talking about Riley being fired since you said Wade "just got his head coach fired." Riley didn't get fired, he took a leave of absence for surgery (which the timing seems a little more than coincidental) but he is still expected to come back and him temporarily sitting out had nothing to do with Wade wanting him too.
If you just mis-phrased your statement and meant Van Gundy, then you are still wrong. Riley is the reason Stan is gone, not Wade.
You also said Wade cheated, which Darth Martin already pointed out that "cheated" is the wrong choice of words for what happened.
Lastly, you seem to think it is good to contradict yourself, which again shows you don't know what you are talking about.
I think you're confused between contradicting yourself and being open minded. When you're open minded, then you come up with good suggestions, make reasonable points, and overall have a nice, clean, and easy debate. Contradicting yourself, only makes you look foolish and brings the argument nowhere, because when you claim something, and then claim its opposite in order to defend the initial claim, then that's not an argument, it's being silly.
Being open minded is like saying that both arguments are plausible during a debate.
Contradiction is like saying, "Defense is most important in determining who's MVP," and then saying, "Steve Nash deserves to be MVP, because he is a great offensive player."