To have your comment vote count, you must put #YES or #NO somewhere in the body of your comment, exactly once. Please don’t vote more than once; it is rude and makes work for me.
(It is getting way too hard for me to count the votes, thanks to large volume of your excellent comments. I’m trying this new process out on Chiozza as the odds were very very low that he would have been elected. So far there has been exactly one valid comment vote.)
Pin one message that is a "Yes" message, and one that is a "No" message. To vote, the commenter likes the message that contains the right vote.
You (EA) only need to look one place, and you automatically prevent double-voting. And the 'like counter' does the tabulation for you.
Edit: I know you don't want to lose the comments with the reasoning, but the commenters can still say they voted no, and why in a comment ... they just need to do a like, in addition (not a big deal).
Makes sense to me. I click on one heart or another, scroll down past the two pinned yes or no statements, then comment under the third pinned comment called discussion, or why, or whatever. Easy peasy for Eric and comments so easy to read.
I get what EA is saying though (didn't at the time). It's just reinventing the wheel. If I had remembered that Substack had a polling feature, I wouldn't have suggested my kludge to duplicate one.
I just scroll by all those internet poll things so I totally forgot about them (and that he had included a poll in the article). That's just me, though.
Hmmm, that means everyone would have to scroll through many many votes to get to the substantive votes. Also, some people enjoy unveiling their votes in a dramatic way in their comment. So my idea is one that I hope is least disruptive.
Collapse is a feature. Also you can reply immediately off your comment, and replies go to the top, so it's easy to vote. Then you collapse the thread to get to the substantive discussion.
Chiozza is a clear no (I'll refrain from hashtaging it to pile on to the poor guy). I thought he was a fine contributor as to what was expected from the 2way spot, which is not much. He made Quinn Cook look like an all-star in comparison. I usually was not in a good mood whenever he was in, but I appreciate him being able to provide some minutes for the team. Silver lining, his failure to impress made it so we never had to shake our fists and wish he were eligible to play in the postseason.
Sad my efforts to get Otto above Oubre in the ranking failed. Oh well. Hey Otto is still young, who knows, maybe we haven't seen the last of him yet.
Edit: random thing in regards to Otto. I really like the guy, and I don't think it's exagerration to say the Warriors might not have won without him. So in that way, he is a legendary figure in this whole Warriors story. And I think the old criteria (rooting for a player) was much more favorable than just straight up asking to be in the prestigious halls of DNHQ royalty. But for some reason, even under the old criteria, I'm not sure if I'll really be rooting for him when he's not a Warrior. I don't know, maybe I need to see what it's like this year. I certainly never had a strong opinion of him before he was a Warrior. I'm rooting for him to be a Warrior again someday. And while he has a great attitude and is generally likeable, he doesn't rise to the charisma level of someone like a Javale who you feel compelled to root for. He also doesn't have the underdog angle of a JTA or Damian Lee, since he was drafted high and got a max deal before coming here. In that way Otto is almost like if Wiggins had been traded after 2020-21 season -- people might be sad to see him go, but he wouldn't have had time to accumulate enough commraderie to really be invested in his future.
Running a completely arbitrary but highly DNHQ inspired HWfL checklist for Chris Chiozza:
Major contributions to playoff run or championship: no
Compelling personal story: no
Congruence to Warriors team culture: don't know/maybe?
I did enjoy referring to him for the entire season as "The Chiozzan One" whenever he did something good, but that's all I got, and it doesn't seem like nearly enough.
Yep. The FIBA World Cup has 12 total games as part of these qualifiers. 3 back in Feb, 3 in July that JK couldn't attend b/c of Visa, 3 that just happened. And 3 more in Feb again, exactly 1 year after the first 3.
Fascinating format. I guess it's only held once every several years with a format like this. Also, JK mentioned that the Congo team is relatively new, so maybe this is their first time in the tourney?
I hate to see players injured but Gallinari was 7th or 8th man at best for the Celtics. More likely 9th. If Brogdon can stay healthy the team is still significantly improved from last season.
This. He played 36 games last season, 56 the year before, 54, the year before. In a six-season career, he's averaged like 55 games per season. I guess it depends which 55 he's healthy for...
I looked at Chiozza as the price the Dubs had to pay to get Kenny Atkinson. Cheese was given a 2-way within days of the announcement of Atkinson's hiring. He must have liked him a lot in Brooklyn.
Why? Why would Atkinson need/want Chiozza if he didn't think he was good? I know we got him at Atkinson's suggestion, but that doesn't make it charity. I don't even think it was a wrong decision. He was on a 2-way fer christ's sake. The odds that whomever else we'd got on a 2-way were better were pretty damn low last season (this season we have better options). Not only that, he did what he was asked to do to the best of his ability, never complained and, by all accounts, was a good teammate. They didn't put a sub NBA level player on a 2-way on purpose to appease Atkinson (again, why would they do that? and why would he need appeasing?). They did it because they thought he would fill a need. He did his best and just wasn't really good enough.
All that being said, I vote no for HWFL. I mean even using the old criteria (which I liked by the way) I am in a hazy area between "sure, he was a good guy. I'd like to see him do well" and "oh yeah, he was that 2-way player that tried pretty hard. whatever". I can't actually think of any of the more recent criteria he meets at all. Arguing that he contributed to a championship is an uber reach. Didn't play for long. No real NBA level skills. Not well loved (a bit unfairly, but still).
Reportedly he was a good bench presence. Which is a valuable asset for a two way. I just wish they would have focused more on utilizing that aspect of his game.
I think it worked out admirably. Better, arguably than Mulder the year before. Chiozza was a serviceable 3rd string PG and he got to play in 34 games at almost 11 MPG. For a 2-way contract 3rd string PG, I think it worked out exactly as intended.
Was he a prospect that we'd want to hold onto so that he can blossom into a rotation spot in the future? I think the Dubs have enough of those, and the one that was available last year, Nico, was obviously not up to the task nor available.
The contributions of a 34 reg. season game 3rd string PG are insufficient for HWFL, but I think that's pretty obvious to almost everyone.
You're right, for a 2-way he was OK. I'm wrong to say he didn't work out.
I don't have any hard and fast criteria.
To some degree, I guess I was a little disappointed that an Atkinson recommendation wasn't a better player. I think that's probably a better way of phrasing what I was trying to say.
But, this is an assumption, and perhaps not fair to either Atkinson or Chiozza.
Yah, the recommendation could have been as simple as:
Steve: "Well, Kenny, it looks like Bob has most of the roster set. We're just looking at the 15th slot as a competition between Gary and Avery, and the two-ways. If we take Gary, I think I'd like to bring in a more traditional PG for a 2-way, as I'll need a backup ball handler."
Kenny: "Hey, there's this kid Cheese that I worked with way back when. He wasn't bad. We can bring him in for a try-out."
To have your comment vote count, you must put #YES or #NO somewhere in the body of your comment, exactly once. Please don’t vote more than once; it is rude and makes work for me.
(It is getting way too hard for me to count the votes, thanks to large volume of your excellent comments. I’m trying this new process out on Chiozza as the odds were very very low that he would have been elected. So far there has been exactly one valid comment vote.)
#NO
Another suggestion:
If you can pin two messages:
Pin one message that is a "Yes" message, and one that is a "No" message. To vote, the commenter likes the message that contains the right vote.
You (EA) only need to look one place, and you automatically prevent double-voting. And the 'like counter' does the tabulation for you.
Edit: I know you don't want to lose the comments with the reasoning, but the commenters can still say they voted no, and why in a comment ... they just need to do a like, in addition (not a big deal).
Makes sense to me. I click on one heart or another, scroll down past the two pinned yes or no statements, then comment under the third pinned comment called discussion, or why, or whatever. Easy peasy for Eric and comments so easy to read.
I get what EA is saying though (didn't at the time). It's just reinventing the wheel. If I had remembered that Substack had a polling feature, I wouldn't have suggested my kludge to duplicate one.
I just scroll by all those internet poll things so I totally forgot about them (and that he had included a poll in the article). That's just me, though.
Ingenious, but I would rather encourage people to comment fully. People can do the equivalent of a “like” vote by voting in the actual poll.
If we vote in the poll are we also supposed to #No in here?
You are free to vote in the poll and the comments
Fair enough ... if you're willing to do the tabulation, certainly the comments are very entertaining to read.
Why not just require that all votes be a single word reply to a single pinned comment by you? #YES, #NO only. All other comments go down thread.
Hmmm, that means everyone would have to scroll through many many votes to get to the substantive votes. Also, some people enjoy unveiling their votes in a dramatic way in their comment. So my idea is one that I hope is least disruptive.
Collapse is a feature. Also you can reply immediately off your comment, and replies go to the top, so it's easy to vote. Then you collapse the thread to get to the substantive discussion.
#NO
My guess is that that that one vote is going to hold up.
#NO
#NO. A "yes" for Cheese would in effect lower the bar to anybody who got playing time in a ring season. Can't go for that.
Chiozza walks into the HWFL Club and says "Ow!" #No
I vote #Yes on Chiozza. Needed a player to pile on all your frustrations, Chiozza was the man. I think that makes him a Warrior for Life in my book
Post of the day. But, I thought that was what we had Austin Rivers for?
#NO
Sorry Cheese, you seem like a good bloke and all
HWSFL…. Honorary Warrior Scapegoat For Life
Chiozza is a clear no (I'll refrain from hashtaging it to pile on to the poor guy). I thought he was a fine contributor as to what was expected from the 2way spot, which is not much. He made Quinn Cook look like an all-star in comparison. I usually was not in a good mood whenever he was in, but I appreciate him being able to provide some minutes for the team. Silver lining, his failure to impress made it so we never had to shake our fists and wish he were eligible to play in the postseason.
Sad my efforts to get Otto above Oubre in the ranking failed. Oh well. Hey Otto is still young, who knows, maybe we haven't seen the last of him yet.
Edit: random thing in regards to Otto. I really like the guy, and I don't think it's exagerration to say the Warriors might not have won without him. So in that way, he is a legendary figure in this whole Warriors story. And I think the old criteria (rooting for a player) was much more favorable than just straight up asking to be in the prestigious halls of DNHQ royalty. But for some reason, even under the old criteria, I'm not sure if I'll really be rooting for him when he's not a Warrior. I don't know, maybe I need to see what it's like this year. I certainly never had a strong opinion of him before he was a Warrior. I'm rooting for him to be a Warrior again someday. And while he has a great attitude and is generally likeable, he doesn't rise to the charisma level of someone like a Javale who you feel compelled to root for. He also doesn't have the underdog angle of a JTA or Damian Lee, since he was drafted high and got a max deal before coming here. In that way Otto is almost like if Wiggins had been traded after 2020-21 season -- people might be sad to see him go, but he wouldn't have had time to accumulate enough commraderie to really be invested in his future.
#NO
Running a completely arbitrary but highly DNHQ inspired HWfL checklist for Chris Chiozza:
Major contributions to playoff run or championship: no
Compelling personal story: no
Congruence to Warriors team culture: don't know/maybe?
I did enjoy referring to him for the entire season as "The Chiozzan One" whenever he did something good, but that's all I got, and it doesn't seem like nearly enough.
Chiozza - #NO (just so non-notable, never played)
OPJ - yes. For his crucial part and excellent play in this legendary playoff run
read the pinned comment.
#NO If being an adequate two-way is enough for HWFL, that bar is so low a turtle can easily get over it.
Lol #NO
#NO. Duh. Loved his sweaters. Glad he helped calm Dray in finals. But NO.
#NO
If I wasn't a regular reader of this site, I probably wouldn't know what a Chiozza was. So that's an easy #NO vote.
Wow. Suddenly very glad we didn’t sign Gallinari.
https://theathletic.com/3544293/2022/08/28/danilo-gallinari-knee-injury-celtics/?source=user_shared_article
Boston Celtics forward Danilo Gallinari tore his left meniscus while playing for Italy in a FIBA World Cup qualifying game Saturday.
One reason why I wish Kuminga were back in the fold.
Only 3 games in this part of the FIBA qualifying round, I read this morning, so JK has done his part for Congo.
Yep. The FIBA World Cup has 12 total games as part of these qualifiers. 3 back in Feb, 3 in July that JK couldn't attend b/c of Visa, 3 that just happened. And 3 more in Feb again, exactly 1 year after the first 3.
https://www.fiba.basketball/basketballworldcup/2023/african-qualifiers/team/Congo-DR#|tab=games_and_results
Fascinating format. I guess it's only held once every several years with a format like this. Also, JK mentioned that the Congo team is relatively new, so maybe this is their first time in the tourney?
Possibly. Basketball is not the big sport anywhere in Africa so it's all a learning process, I would imagine.
Just amazing that he got as good as he did. Win-win.
Much relieved
I hate to see players injured but Gallinari was 7th or 8th man at best for the Celtics. More likely 9th. If Brogdon can stay healthy the team is still significantly improved from last season.
I'm not convinced that Brogdon on his own makes them that much better, but we'll see how it goes.
Brogdon is rarely healthy for an entire season.
This. He played 36 games last season, 56 the year before, 54, the year before. In a six-season career, he's averaged like 55 games per season. I guess it depends which 55 he's healthy for...
The Celtics-got-better-over-the-offseason narrative just took a hit.
I looked at Chiozza as the price the Dubs had to pay to get Kenny Atkinson. Cheese was given a 2-way within days of the announcement of Atkinson's hiring. He must have liked him a lot in Brooklyn.
You're right. He was a house warming gift for Atkinson for sure. More a gift basket than a small appliance or bedding, meaning, ultimately disposable.
A complimentary cheese basket.
Why? Why would Atkinson need/want Chiozza if he didn't think he was good? I know we got him at Atkinson's suggestion, but that doesn't make it charity. I don't even think it was a wrong decision. He was on a 2-way fer christ's sake. The odds that whomever else we'd got on a 2-way were better were pretty damn low last season (this season we have better options). Not only that, he did what he was asked to do to the best of his ability, never complained and, by all accounts, was a good teammate. They didn't put a sub NBA level player on a 2-way on purpose to appease Atkinson (again, why would they do that? and why would he need appeasing?). They did it because they thought he would fill a need. He did his best and just wasn't really good enough.
All that being said, I vote no for HWFL. I mean even using the old criteria (which I liked by the way) I am in a hazy area between "sure, he was a good guy. I'd like to see him do well" and "oh yeah, he was that 2-way player that tried pretty hard. whatever". I can't actually think of any of the more recent criteria he meets at all. Arguing that he contributed to a championship is an uber reach. Didn't play for long. No real NBA level skills. Not well loved (a bit unfairly, but still).
Reportedly he was a good bench presence. Which is a valuable asset for a two way. I just wish they would have focused more on utilizing that aspect of his game.
I think the Atkinson comment was tongue-in-cheek?
I definitely didn't read it that way. My bad if it was.
I think it's more that Atkinson convinced Kerr and others that Chiozza could be good. Not sure what he saw (would be interesting to hear).
Regardless, it didn't work out. He was a good teammate, and I bear him no ill will, but I can't see him getting out of the G-League again.
What's your criteria for it working out?
I think it worked out admirably. Better, arguably than Mulder the year before. Chiozza was a serviceable 3rd string PG and he got to play in 34 games at almost 11 MPG. For a 2-way contract 3rd string PG, I think it worked out exactly as intended.
Was he a prospect that we'd want to hold onto so that he can blossom into a rotation spot in the future? I think the Dubs have enough of those, and the one that was available last year, Nico, was obviously not up to the task nor available.
The contributions of a 34 reg. season game 3rd string PG are insufficient for HWFL, but I think that's pretty obvious to almost everyone.
You're right, for a 2-way he was OK. I'm wrong to say he didn't work out.
I don't have any hard and fast criteria.
To some degree, I guess I was a little disappointed that an Atkinson recommendation wasn't a better player. I think that's probably a better way of phrasing what I was trying to say.
But, this is an assumption, and perhaps not fair to either Atkinson or Chiozza.
Yah, the recommendation could have been as simple as:
Steve: "Well, Kenny, it looks like Bob has most of the roster set. We're just looking at the 15th slot as a competition between Gary and Avery, and the two-ways. If we take Gary, I think I'd like to bring in a more traditional PG for a 2-way, as I'll need a backup ball handler."
Kenny: "Hey, there's this kid Cheese that I worked with way back when. He wasn't bad. We can bring him in for a try-out."
Steve: "Let's do it. Tell Bob."
Kenny: 👍🏼
I think you mean consumable, like a cheese basket.
Nope on Chiozza.