Re: [轉錄][圓球城市]朱彥碩 寫在2007-08球季前(1)
也不是每個人都罵AK啦,HOOPSWORLD有篇文章:
http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_23398.shtml
就主張AK應該值得更多。
這篇文是從陣容切入,認為AK最適合的位置還是
大前鋒,他的最佳表現也是在大前鋒位置上得到的。
不過在爵士有兩點不巧:
一個是爵士有比他更強的大前鋒布瑟,所以他只
好被安排去打相對來說比較不適合他的小前鋒。
二不巧是爵士系統中小前鋒是輔助角色而非主攻
角色,所以他會「感覺」在進攻端的地位滑落。
而且他還不如歐庫兒一樣、擁有無可取代的外線
技術,所以想要偷幾個球投,還不容易。
更何況AK不像Kobe。Kobe是幾乎擁有了全隊所有
的資源、還要求更多。AK是明顯發現他正在失去某些
東西之後,才出聲示警。
所以這不是誰對誰錯的問題,是不適合的問題。
以AK的身手與球風,或許去別隊打大前鋒會更好。
==
感想:這篇說得不錯,相當溫和且中肯。我相信
AK的原意差不都就是這樣,但我不喜歡AK為了表達他
的「不適合」,卻把爵士系統以及史龍通通拖下水。
還齜牙裂嘴搞得一副跟爵士仇深似海貌。
那篇文章跳過AK的情緒,直指問題核心,是很有
價值的。但AK不甚高明的放話內容、傷害了球隊與球
迷的感情,為了這點罵他兩句,其實也不算冤枉他。
--
http://blog.pixnet.net/Actus
我的猶他爵士部落格,歡迎參觀~
最近文章:鋒線話題 (5之1) 戰爭與和平
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 218.167.184.203
推
09/26 17:30, , 1F
09/26 17:30, 1F
推
09/26 17:30, , 2F
09/26 17:30, 2F
推
09/26 17:31, , 3F
09/26 17:31, 3F
推
09/26 17:31, , 4F
09/26 17:31, 4F
→
09/26 17:31, , 5F
09/26 17:31, 5F
推
09/26 17:32, , 6F
09/26 17:32, 6F
推
09/26 17:32, , 7F
09/26 17:32, 7F
→
09/26 17:32, , 8F
09/26 17:32, 8F
→
09/26 17:33, , 9F
09/26 17:33, 9F
→
09/26 17:34, , 10F
09/26 17:34, 10F
推
09/26 17:36, , 11F
09/26 17:36, 11F
推
09/26 17:36, , 12F
09/26 17:36, 12F
推
09/26 17:35, , 13F
09/26 17:35, 13F
→
09/26 17:36, , 14F
09/26 17:36, 14F
→
09/26 17:36, , 15F
09/26 17:36, 15F
→
09/26 17:37, , 16F
09/26 17:37, 16F
推
09/26 17:37, , 17F
09/26 17:37, 17F
→
09/26 17:38, , 18F
09/26 17:38, 18F
→
09/26 17:38, , 19F
09/26 17:38, 19F
→
09/26 17:39, , 20F
09/26 17:39, 20F
推
09/26 17:41, , 21F
09/26 17:41, 21F
→
09/26 17:42, , 22F
09/26 17:42, 22F
推
09/26 17:43, , 23F
09/26 17:43, 23F
→
09/26 17:43, , 24F
09/26 17:43, 24F
→
09/26 17:44, , 25F
09/26 17:44, 25F
→
09/26 17:44, , 26F
09/26 17:44, 26F
推
09/26 17:48, , 27F
09/26 17:48, 27F
→
09/26 17:48, , 28F
09/26 17:48, 28F
推
09/26 17:49, , 29F
09/26 17:49, 29F
→
09/26 17:49, , 30F
09/26 17:49, 30F
→
09/26 17:50, , 31F
09/26 17:50, 31F
推
09/26 17:50, , 32F
09/26 17:50, 32F
→
09/26 17:51, , 33F
09/26 17:51, 33F
→
09/26 17:52, , 34F
09/26 17:52, 34F
推
09/26 17:52, , 35F
09/26 17:52, 35F
→
09/26 17:52, , 36F
09/26 17:52, 36F
→
09/26 17:52, , 37F
09/26 17:52, 37F
→
09/26 17:52, , 38F
09/26 17:52, 38F
→
09/26 17:53, , 39F
09/26 17:53, 39F
→
09/26 17:54, , 40F
09/26 17:54, 40F
→
09/26 17:54, , 41F
09/26 17:54, 41F
推
09/26 20:40, , 42F
09/26 20:40, 42F
→
09/26 20:41, , 43F
09/26 20:41, 43F
→
09/26 20:43, , 44F
09/26 20:43, 44F
→
09/26 20:44, , 45F
09/26 20:44, 45F
推
09/26 21:30, , 46F
09/26 21:30, 46F
推
09/26 22:26, , 47F
09/26 22:26, 47F
推
09/26 22:33, , 48F
09/26 22:33, 48F
推
09/27 00:17, , 49F
09/27 00:17, 49F
→
09/27 00:18, , 50F
09/27 00:18, 50F
→
09/27 00:19, , 51F
09/27 00:19, 51F
→
09/27 00:20, , 52F
09/27 00:20, 52F
→
09/27 00:20, , 53F
09/27 00:20, 53F
→
09/27 00:21, , 54F
09/27 00:21, 54F
→
09/27 00:23, , 55F
09/27 00:23, 55F
→
04/21 01:41,
5年前
, 56F
04/21 01:41, 56F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文:
完整討論串 (本文為第 2 之 4 篇):