Rose makes Hollingers stats look like a piece of crap. Hollinger gets payed by ESPN for calculating these retarded stats. According to his stats, Rose is just a normal good player. If Rose wins MVP, which he probably will, no one will take his starts seriously(only a handfull of people do), and he would probably be no use to ESPN. The guy never watches games, he looks at the stat sheets and works on his calculations based upon that.
Here is what Bleach Report writer Kelly Scaletta said:
I honestly don't get Hollinger's obvious personal animosity for Rose (or for his snide dismissals of people who point out the obvious personal animosity). I think it's that Hollinger doesn't like the way that Rose basically proves his entire foundational argument about basketball is wrong.
Hollinger wants to argue that certain things matter more than others because those things help teams win. Rose proves the argument wrong because he doesn't perform well in Hollinger's made up stats so he has to contort himself into a completely illogical position that gives literally every one on the team EXCEPT Rose credit. Then he gets all prickly when someone suggests he's anti-Rose.
It's great when something like this becomes a black and white argument. If you're not for Rose as MVP then you must think he's a horrible basketball player, there's absolutely no in between. Heaven forbid if you actually think someone else should be MVP.
Why are Rose fans so defensive? Who cares what the media thinks, especially someone like Hollinger who caters to a very specific crowd? Rose will probably win MVP, isn't that good enough for you?
It's just so hilarious to me that people will be so quick to rail on ESPN or certain writers, yet it's clear that they are still reading it often enough and closely enough to take offense when they disagree about a point.
Also, citing Bleacher Report is like citing Ed from the water cooler at work. It's a glorified blog.
Why are Rose fans so defensive? Who cares what the media thinks, especially someone like Hollinger who caters to a very specific crowd? Rose will probably win MVP, isn't that good enough for you?
It's just so hilarious to me that people will be so quick to rail on ESPN or certain writers, yet it's clear that they are still reading it often enough and closely enough to take offense when they disagree about a point.
Also, citing Bleacher Report is like citing Ed from the water cooler at work. It's a glorified blog.
It's not about being defensive, its the truth.
The guy obviously has no clue about basketball, he shouldve probably been a physics professor or something. He wont be a ESPN writer for long, I could tell you that much.
Here is what Bleach Report writer Kelly Scaletta said:
I honestly don't get Hollinger's obvious personal animosity for Rose (or for his snide dismissals of people who point out the obvious personal animosity). I think it's that Hollinger doesn't like the way that Rose basically proves his entire foundational argument about basketball is wrong.
Hollinger wants to argue that certain things matter more than others because those things help teams win. Rose proves the argument wrong because he doesn't perform well in Hollinger's made up stats so he has to contort himself into a completely illogical position that gives literally every one on the team EXCEPT Rose credit. Then he gets all prickly when someone suggests he's anti-Rose.
quoting bleacher report does nothing to enhance any arguement
Why the hell do any of yall care what some guy who probably doesn't even watch basketball care about? Didn't yall learn last year not to listen to those retarded talking heads on espn? I swear it's like you all go out looking for someone "hating" on Rose
Or are we only supposed to be fans of lebron or Kobe?
for every 10 good fans, u get guys like evilmonkey and griffmoney/hulk hogan that take "fan" to another level. we just remember these guys more cuz they cause more controversy so the good fans get unoticed
Truth: Why Hollinger is a Rose hater
