Re: [討論] 林書豪真的是豪神嗎?已回收
※ 引述《ghghfftjack (老衲)》之銘言:
: 某些人:沒有rondo 老賽更強
: 某些人:沒有西河守住KD KD要解放了
: 某些人:沒有Lin 火箭要起飛了
: 真的是很奇怪的邏輯
: 打個幾場球賽就可解釋沒有誰比較好
: 之前鬍子不再兩場火箭大勝 也有再說沒有鬍子火箭要起飛了
: 照戰績二分法的結果論 沒有鬍子跟Lin 火箭就完全起飛成西區第一了吧
: 沒有rondo 老賽的後場非常虛弱
: 沒有西河 KD一個人獨木難撐
: 沒有Lin 頂多就是火箭影響沒有那麼大 還打得下去
: 因為火箭這季後場的板凳實力不錯 SG的鬍子也還在
: 特別是比佛利 CP值很高
: 但是少了Lin真的沒差嗎? 肯定有差
: 拜託不要再整天發結果論了
沒有LIN真的沒差? 拜託當然有差 火箭不是連贏兩場了嗎?
McHale用被林迷砲整季的三分雨打法,贏了兩場,
證明這打法沒林迷說的那麼不堪,他調度也沒林迷說的那麼差,
或許這戰術真的不適合LIN,教練也不夠重用LIN,
這戰術和調度能幫助球隊贏球繼續這樣有不對嗎?
林迷罵起隊友和教練明明也很惡毒,
但是其他人說林不好就是酸,這什麼道理啊!
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 203.163.194.17
推
05/02 13:25, , 1F
05/02 13:25, 1F
→
05/02 13:26, , 2F
05/02 13:26, 2F
→
05/02 13:27, , 3F
05/02 13:27, 3F
噓
05/02 13:27, , 4F
05/02 13:27, 4F
→
05/02 13:27, , 5F
05/02 13:27, 5F
→
05/02 13:27, , 6F
05/02 13:27, 6F
推
05/02 13:27, , 7F
05/02 13:27, 7F
→
05/02 13:27, , 8F
05/02 13:27, 8F
→
05/02 13:27, , 9F
05/02 13:27, 9F
→
05/02 13:27, , 10F
05/02 13:27, 10F
噓
05/02 13:28, , 11F
05/02 13:28, 11F
噓
05/02 13:28, , 12F
05/02 13:28, 12F
推
05/02 13:28, , 13F
05/02 13:28, 13F
→
05/02 13:28, , 14F
05/02 13:28, 14F
噓
05/02 13:28, , 15F
05/02 13:28, 15F
→
05/02 13:28, , 16F
05/02 13:28, 16F
→
05/02 13:28, , 17F
05/02 13:28, 17F
→
05/02 13:28, , 18F
05/02 13:28, 18F
推
05/02 13:28, , 19F
05/02 13:28, 19F
→
05/02 13:29, , 20F
05/02 13:29, 20F
沒溪河就能贏 第三戰怎麼輸的 某人在場上 落後一大堆 一下去 追了20分
回來 要怎麼解釋
※ 編輯: padaa 來自: 203.163.194.17 (05/02 13:30)
噓
05/02 13:29, , 21F
05/02 13:29, 21F
推
05/02 13:30, , 22F
05/02 13:30, 22F
噓
05/02 13:30, , 23F
05/02 13:30, 23F
噓
05/02 13:30, , 24F
05/02 13:30, 24F
推
05/02 13:31, , 25F
05/02 13:31, 25F
→
05/02 13:31, , 26F
05/02 13:31, 26F
→
05/02 13:31, , 27F
05/02 13:31, 27F
噓
05/02 13:31, , 28F
05/02 13:31, 28F
→
05/02 13:31, , 29F
05/02 13:31, 29F
推
05/02 13:32, , 30F
05/02 13:32, 30F
→
05/02 13:32, , 31F
05/02 13:32, 31F
噓
05/02 13:32, , 32F
05/02 13:32, 32F
→
05/02 13:32, , 33F
05/02 13:32, 33F
→
05/02 13:32, , 34F
05/02 13:32, 34F
推
05/02 13:32, , 35F
05/02 13:32, 35F
→
05/02 13:32, , 36F
05/02 13:32, 36F
→
05/02 13:33, , 37F
05/02 13:33, 37F
→
05/02 13:33, , 38F
05/02 13:33, 38F
還有 116 則推文
還有 1 段內文
→
05/02 14:16, , 155F
05/02 14:16, 155F
→
05/02 14:17, , 156F
05/02 14:17, 156F
推
05/02 14:17, , 157F
05/02 14:17, 157F
→
05/02 14:17, , 158F
05/02 14:17, 158F
→
05/02 14:17, , 159F
05/02 14:17, 159F
→
05/02 14:18, , 160F
05/02 14:18, 160F
→
05/02 14:18, , 161F
05/02 14:18, 161F
→
05/02 14:19, , 162F
05/02 14:19, 162F
→
05/02 14:20, , 163F
05/02 14:20, 163F
→
05/02 14:20, , 164F
05/02 14:20, 164F
→
05/02 14:21, , 165F
05/02 14:21, 165F
→
05/02 14:22, , 166F
05/02 14:22, 166F
→
05/02 14:31, , 167F
05/02 14:31, 167F
推
05/02 14:32, , 168F
05/02 14:32, 168F
→
05/02 14:33, , 169F
05/02 14:33, 169F
→
05/02 14:36, , 170F
05/02 14:36, 170F
→
05/02 14:37, , 171F
05/02 14:37, 171F
→
05/02 14:38, , 172F
05/02 14:38, 172F
噓
05/02 14:38, , 173F
05/02 14:38, 173F
噓
05/02 14:57, , 174F
05/02 14:57, 174F
噓
05/02 15:02, , 175F
05/02 15:02, 175F
→
05/02 15:03, , 176F
05/02 15:03, 176F
→
05/02 15:04, , 177F
05/02 15:04, 177F
→
05/02 15:05, , 178F
05/02 15:05, 178F
推
05/02 15:08, , 179F
05/02 15:08, 179F
推
05/02 15:08, , 180F
05/02 15:08, 180F
噓
05/02 15:09, , 181F
05/02 15:09, 181F
→
05/02 15:27, , 182F
05/02 15:27, 182F
→
05/02 15:27, , 183F
05/02 15:27, 183F
推
05/02 15:31, , 184F
05/02 15:31, 184F
推
05/02 15:46, , 185F
05/02 15:46, 185F
噓
05/02 15:47, , 186F
05/02 15:47, 186F
推
05/02 15:49, , 187F
05/02 15:49, 187F
噓
05/02 16:02, , 188F
05/02 16:02, 188F
噓
05/02 16:56, , 189F
05/02 16:56, 189F
推
05/02 17:22, , 190F
05/02 17:22, 190F
推
05/02 18:05, , 191F
05/02 18:05, 191F
推
05/02 20:05, , 192F
05/02 20:05, 192F
推
05/02 21:47, , 193F
05/02 21:47, 193F
→
05/03 10:34, , 194F
05/03 10:34, 194F
討論串 (同標題文章)