« Last post by manl_lui on Today at 10:41:01 AM »
I was just thinking if we can lowball him 7-8 mil...then I did the math and it came out to be your title LOL. So yes, I think he will get/offered a 4 year @ 28 mil
Has anyone seen the New York Post cover today?
It features three stills from the shooter's video -- which, I guess, KGLiving Legend thinks is fake? -- including a muzzle flash and the anchor's reaction.
First guy I ever remember seeing shatter a backboard (not live though, many years after the fact).
Then I learned he was one of the few to go straight from high school to the NBA. Straight outta high school, shattering backboards left and right, he must have been an unstoppable beast.
Finally got a hold of his stats sometime in the mid-90's, so disappointed to find out he was just an electrifying role player. I was expecting him to be a step behind Wilt, at least on Shaq or Moses Malone's level. Personalities like him are what help keep the game fun though.
Hopefully he just went back to his home planet Lovetron.
but muh 2nd amendment.
I'm not sure this is a good place to go right now. Guns will never be 100% banned, and even if they were, crazy people like this shooter would still find a way to wreak havoc.
As for this incident, absolutely horrible. Those affected are in my prayers.
It's apparently never a good place to go.
But I'm glad to know we have 10,000 people die a year for the benefit of a "well-regulated militia."
There are always two sides to any argument.
The problem I see is, where do you draw the line? You can't ban guns completely from civilians, because some people (those who live on farms, hunters, competition shooters, etc) have a genuine reason for having them.
You could do what we did here in Australia and only ban certain types of guns - for example restrict civilians to semi automatic only, and limit them to certain calibers.
But even then, does that change the outcome of a scenario like this?
Of course not - he could have been using the weakest caliber handgun on the planet, and the end result would have likely been the same given the nature of the situation.
You can ban guns completely, and that will surely make it harder for people to get a hold on them - it will limit availability, push up prices, etc. But those who REALLY want them will find a way to get them, and how does this affect farmers and other people who really do need those weapons for protection against wildlife threats?
Sadly i don't know what the true answer is, but I don't feel that banning guns is it. Unfortunately it's the messed up people (not the guns) that are the problem. If you take away the guns then they will use explosive, or they'll use knives, or they'll use Molotov cocktails - people who are truly messed up with find a way.
have you seen contracts lately? big true 7 footers are hard to come by, hes 25, would avg 18 and 10 with 1 blk per 36min, shot 55%FG last year, good FT shooter, and commits little turnovers. hes got to become more aggressive under the rim on defense though. 6-8 million/year is pretty much back up money now
Because in our minds we have no evidence at all of what he did (and actually we have a strong denial) but we do have evidence of what she did (or I suppose didn't do). So rather than speculate on what we can't know we focus more on what we definitely know.
I think it's fair to wonder why no criminal charges have been filed.
I think it is fair and understandable to wonder that.
My question is -- why is THAT the thing we've been focusing on here in this thread? Why is THAT the primary topic here, and not what Derrick Rose may have done, or why he did it, or why our justice system might make it easy for him to get away with it?
Why, in a thread about Derrick Rose being accused of rape, are we talking first and foremost about what the WOMAN in question did?
This is why, when I see people scoff at the notion that "rape culture" is real, I can only shake my head.
1. So, do you believe that 90%+ of people who identify as victims of rape or sexual assault are making it up?
2. Because there's no "evidence" of the kind you seem to require in the vast majority of cases, and the overwhelming majority of people who commit sexual violence never spend any time in a cell for it.