Damn Getitindone what did you do get yourself ignored by WF ;_;
^Probably just being himself ;0
[quote]scj119 wrote:
BTW Laker fans: the seeding could not be better for you. [/quote]
The bracket looks good for LAL no doubt
[quote]randman wrote:
Like I said, I think Miami also matches up much better with them now without Perkins banging down low and could potentially upset them. The Perkins trade was that big of a deal.[/quote]
I think that Perkins deal all but ensures that Durant and Westbrook get a ring or two.
Somewhat unrelatedly, I fully expect Durant to eclipse Kareem’s record before its all said and done…
I think WF out me on ignore because he couldn’t take anyone critising his defiant statement that Kobe is like a top 3 dunker or something in NBA history. He was so adamant that Kobe could dunk better than MJ. Then I pointed out how even someone like JRich can better better than Kobe and that was the last straw apparently --not that I give a shit.
Randman is just mad now because most aren’t agreeing with what he’s writing. He doesn’t like raj or scj but he has a sweet spot of dislike for me from baggage that carries over multiple season, especially last year’s. Actually I don’t even know if it’s hate, more like me being a target he directs all his build up rage about who knows what.
This season has been so unpredictale and I think it’s going to carry over to the playoffs. Even the NCAA tournament this year was wild and chaotic. There’s something in the air, it’s going to be one of those seasons where you can’t take any team for granted and guarantee anything. Maybe not for the first round but beyond that don’t be shocked if a team like the Mavs makes a serious push. I really think I can say that because there’s really been no team that stood out significantly distancing themselves from the rest. The closest team with that hungry mentality has been the bulls but with them you have the inexp tradeoff.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Damn Getitindone what did you do get yourself ignored by WF ;_;[/quote]
He sealed the deal by saying that Kobe Bryant is just a decent dunker in NBA annals, and that Iguodala and Brent Barry - you read that right: BRENT FUCKING BARRY - are in the same league as dunkers. The guy has never made a valid point in his entire time not only on these NBA threads but the entire forum, and it’s just easier for me to not have to sift through the shit that are his posts.
[quote]randman wrote:
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
[quote]randman wrote:
But based on the most recent prognosis on Bynum, even a 50% Bynum in the Western conference finals I think would be enough to eke by the Thunder still.[/quote]
I agree with this. Bynum isn’t so much important statistically as he is for being a big body who can neutralize guys like Perkins, which allows Gasol to work uninhibited.
At least that’s what I noticed in the Finals vs. the Celtics last year, where an also injured Bynum was good enough to let Gasol do well whenever he was on the court. When he wasn’t there Gasol had trouble and the Lakers lost.
But I disagree with the prediction of the Celtics making the Finals. They’re already beat up, getting tired, missing their two best defensive players from last year [Perkins, and Tony Allen]. The two guys replacing Perkins role are asscheeks. And they have to get by New York, and Miami–who at least have shown in their last match up that they will play rough too, and the Celtics didn’t know how to handle it that night. I think they’ll get past those teams, but they’ll be tired by the time the Bulls [who have it much easier] will face them. [/quote]
This is the one I’m most waffling on. I want to pick the Bulls now but I have to stick with my original prediction. It’s ever since Ainge traded away Perkins which I still can’t understand. This has to be the most controversial trade for a team that was positioned to possibly win the championship to now seriously undermining that potential.
Like I said, I think Miami also matches up much better with them now without Perkins banging down low and could potentially upset them. The Perkins trade was that big of a deal.[/quote]
Agreed. Miami was looking fearless the last time the faced each other, and while a part of that was that the Heat are gelling and getting better, part of that was also Perkins being gone.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Im pretty excited for the Knicks to be back in the playoffs, 2004 does not count, I dont expect them to win but I do believe we are gonna be a tough out…Celtics in 6, but we are gonna make em sweat…KG DICK![/quote]
This might sound crazy, but the two first round series that have the biggest potential for upsets [to me] is NYK/BOS and OKC/DEN. Boston gave up so much defensively and NY has so much firepower that it might get interesting, and I like how Denver matches up with OKC. Long, athletic, tons of scorers and they’re deep. Not saying either of these teams will get the upset, just saying I think there’s a shot.[/quote]
Some people are even talking about Dallas-Portland being a potential upset. To be honest I don’t think I’ve watched a Portland game all season and don’t know how the match up is.
What do you think about that series?
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Damn Getitindone what did you do get yourself ignored by WF ;_;[/quote]
Brent Barry - you read that right: BRENT FUCKING BARRY -[/quote]
LOL I like getinitdone for the most part, but there was that one time he called me a racist for not including Manu Ginobli in the league elite players.
Get, sometimes you have make your point in a less incendiary manner.
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Damn Getitindone what did you do get yourself ignored by WF ;_;[/quote]
Brent Barry - you read that right: BRENT FUCKING BARRY -[/quote]
LOL I like getinitdone for the most part, but there was that one time he called me a racist for not including Manu Ginobli in the league elite players.
Get, sometimes you have make your point in a less incendiary manner.[/quote]
Lol I remember that. That part was a joke man… I was making the point (I think) that a lot of european/euro style players don’t get the recognition they deserve.
And of course you don’t have any problems with me. Out of these entire NBA threads (and forum I should add) the only posters that seem to have beef with me are randman and WF.
And is it any coincidence they’re both Laker fans. It seems Gett and the Laker nation just don’t mesh.
Although I’ll say with randman the closest analogy to our relationship that I can think of would be like a on and off couple. Sometimes we get along great but then we’ll fight and it’ll usually get messy. Nasty messy sometimes. WF, I can’t stand how he sucks Kobe’s dick all day long.
Btw this is real stupid and a waste of time. E-drama - fuck that. Lets just talk about basketball…
Playoffs start tomorrow… Finally it is almost here. I’ve been waiting for this years playoffs since before the season started.
Predictions:
First round:
San Antonio
Lakers
OKC
Portland (I think Dallas could find a way to blow this series ad Aldridge is a beast)
&
Chicago
Miami
Orlando
Boston (although I think this series is the most likely to be an upset)
Second round:
Lakers
OKC (Im not really sure about this one but with their age and Manu’s injury I don’t feel confident taking SAS)
&
Chicago (could be a rough series against the Magic)
Boston (they’ve been there before but they’re beat up and have no Perk… I just can’t pick Miami)
Conference Champs:
Lakers
&
Bulls
NBA Champs:
Lakers (beating Chicago, phils old team, en route to his 12th ring, Kobe getting his 6th by beating the Bulls in Chicago and tying MJ’s number of championships, Ron attest says something wild in his post game interview, randman cries… It’s a beautiful thing. The End)
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Im pretty excited for the Knicks to be back in the playoffs, 2004 does not count, I dont expect them to win but I do believe we are gonna be a tough out…Celtics in 6, but we are gonna make em sweat…KG DICK![/quote]
This might sound crazy, but the two first round series that have the biggest potential for upsets [to me] is NYK/BOS and OKC/DEN. Boston gave up so much defensively and NY has so much firepower that it might get interesting, and I like how Denver matches up with OKC. Long, athletic, tons of scorers and they’re deep. Not saying either of these teams will get the upset, just saying I think there’s a shot.[/quote]
Some people are even talking about Dallas-Portland being a potential upset. To be honest I don’t think I’ve watched a Portland game all season and don’t know how the match up is.
What do you think about that series? [/quote]
Man, I can’t call it at all. I can say though now that I’ve lived in Portland for the last 2 months that the Blazers have HANDS DOWN the worst announcers I’ve ever heard. They’re just awful. The Blazers have some serious horses on the wings, but as someone else mentioned Camby stays injured and Aldridge can’t guard his own shadow. But, I really think losing Butler is gonna hurt Dallas a great deal in the long run. That and Dallas’ habit of not showing up when they need to makes this a potentially interesting series. Guess we’ll see here soon enough.
[quote]randman wrote:
[quote]scj119 wrote:
[quote]randman wrote:
Another article that rips apart all of Hollinger’s analysis rankings PER and power rankings.
All you have to do is go to google and type “Hollinger’s power rankings flawed” and go through the mountainous volume of articles debunking this idiot’s prowress of a basketball analyst trying to dehydrate basketball into pure “stats”. Yes, I’m talking to u sjc119 Aka the guy who laughs at player injuries.[/quote]
LMAO. The article you posted has the following paragraph:
“Hollinger decides to try to explain a playerÃ?¢??s worth first with the PER (a massive combination of stats equalled out after some long division and subtraction/addition (not a math major here. . .I think in simple terms) and then by his Power Rankings (all the PERs together amongst other things).”
He doesn’t have the SLIGHTEST clue how EITHER stat is calculated he just knows they are wrong. That’s like saying “I don’t know physics but I know gravity is false”
laugh at player injuries? Sorry, were you using a stat like Win-Loss record that accurately reflects player injuries? Oh wait that reflects them even worse (at least the Power Rankings are indirectly affected because they weight recent games more than old ones, so bad play shows up more quickly).
They aren’t perfect - and he says they aren’t - they are merely meant to show something more accurate than win-loss record, and I think they are better than won-loss record. I would rather have a team that won by 20 points 3 times and lost in overtime once than have a team that won by 1pt 4 straight times.[/quote]
Actually if you read the whole article in detail the author does have a very good clue as to how Hollinger calculates power rankings. You can also go peruse the other hundred articles criticizing his power rankings. A team’s wins are almost negligible in his overall calculation (especially home wins).
Pulling out one paragraph to debunk the whole article’s criticism or that of any of the other article’s valid criticisms is a VERY WEAK defense of the buffoon named Hollinger.
[/quote]
I did read the whole article and it is just laughably wrong on nearly every point. I don’t mean subjective points like “x is better than y”, I mean purely objective points you can fact check, like when he says PER goes into Power Rankings (it doesn’t).
You are looking only for articles that prove your point. Google search “problems with won-loss record” or something and you’ll find plenty of articles as well.
Bottom line is in every sport, scoring margin has been shown to have more PREDICTAVE value than won-loss record, and therefore is a better measure of a team’s true talent. All Hollinger does is take scoring margin, weight home wins differently than away wins (evens out for every team who has an equal number of home vs. road games) and then weight the recent part of the schedule more heavily. It’s really not rocket science and makes logical sense when OBJECTIVELY evaluating a team’s strength.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Im pretty excited for the Knicks to be back in the playoffs, 2004 does not count, I dont expect them to win but I do believe we are gonna be a tough out…Celtics in 6, but we are gonna make em sweat…KG DICK![/quote]
This might sound crazy, but the two first round series that have the biggest potential for upsets [to me] is NYK/BOS and OKC/DEN. Boston gave up so much defensively and NY has so much firepower that it might get interesting, and I like how Denver matches up with OKC. Long, athletic, tons of scorers and they’re deep. Not saying either of these teams will get the upset, just saying I think there’s a shot.[/quote]
Some people are even talking about Dallas-Portland being a potential upset. To be honest I don’t think I’ve watched a Portland game all season and don’t know how the match up is.
What do you think about that series? [/quote]
Man, I can’t call it at all. I can say though now that I’ve lived in Portland for the last 2 months that the Blazers have HANDS DOWN the worst announcers I’ve ever heard. They’re just awful. The Blazers have some serious horses on the wings, but as someone else mentioned Camby stays injured and Aldridge can’t guard his own shadow. But, I really think losing Butler is gonna hurt Dallas a great deal in the long run. That and Dallas’ habit of not showing up when they need to makes this a potentially interesting series. Guess we’ll see here soon enough.[/quote]
Portland in 6.
Simmons echoed my feelings when he said “Dallas has the best player in the series but Portland has like the next 4 best players after Dirk”.
Who is going to score for Dallas? Roddy Buckets is injured, Terry’s been garbage, Kidd could be guarded by any human on earth 6’4" or taller that just stands next to him on the 3pt line.
I hate to say it as a Celtics fan but I think you’re right Cuban the Knicks could give them some trouble. But I still think the C’s will take in 6.
FYI: While I’m confident on my East picks, I would not be surprised at all if I got 3/4 series wrong in the West - Dallas, Denver, and yes even Memphis has a chance (they match up really well and Ginobli is hurt). Memphis is so long and defensively good, they are like a team of octopi - there’s just arms everywhere. In passing lanes, driving lanes, contesting shots, etc.
[quote]johnman18 wrote:
I hate to say it as a Celtics fan but I think you’re right Cuban the Knicks could give them some trouble. But I still think the C’s will take in 6.[/quote]
People want the Knicks to have a chance because it’s a great story they’re relevant again. Unfortunately they aren’t really that good.
Celts in 5.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Damn Getitindone what did you do get yourself ignored by WF ;_;[/quote]
Brent Barry - you read that right: BRENT FUCKING BARRY -[/quote]
LOL I like getinitdone for the most part, but there was that one time he called me a racist for not including Manu Ginobli in the league elite players.
Get, sometimes you have make your point in a less incendiary manner.[/quote]
Lol I remember that. That part was a joke man… I was making the point (I think) that a lot of european/euro style players don’t get the recognition they deserve.
[/quote]
Yeah I know, I was just using it as an example of your penchant for controversy. We’re cool.
But yeah, let’s just talk ball.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]LarryDavid wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Im pretty excited for the Knicks to be back in the playoffs, 2004 does not count, I dont expect them to win but I do believe we are gonna be a tough out…Celtics in 6, but we are gonna make em sweat…KG DICK![/quote]
This might sound crazy, but the two first round series that have the biggest potential for upsets [to me] is NYK/BOS and OKC/DEN. Boston gave up so much defensively and NY has so much firepower that it might get interesting, and I like how Denver matches up with OKC. Long, athletic, tons of scorers and they’re deep. Not saying either of these teams will get the upset, just saying I think there’s a shot.[/quote]
Some people are even talking about Dallas-Portland being a potential upset. To be honest I don’t think I’ve watched a Portland game all season and don’t know how the match up is.
What do you think about that series? [/quote]
Man, I can’t call it at all. I can say though now that I’ve lived in Portland for the last 2 months that the Blazers have HANDS DOWN the worst announcers I’ve ever heard. They’re just awful. The Blazers have some serious horses on the wings, but as someone else mentioned Camby stays injured and Aldridge can’t guard his own shadow. But, I really think losing Butler is gonna hurt Dallas a great deal in the long run. That and Dallas’ habit of not showing up when they need to makes this a potentially interesting series. Guess we’ll see here soon enough.[/quote]
haha that’s too bad about the play-by-play guys.
We’ll have to see but I guess either way who ever comes out of that series is done in the second round.
[quote]Cuban32 wrote:
I am looking for others that agree with me, some think i am crazy, I feel the KNICKS HAVE A LEGITIMATE CHANCE OF TAKING OUT THE CELTICS IN THE FIRST ROUND. Celtics are old, can they hang with amarie and carmelo for a serious, DO NOT COUNT THE KNICKS OUT ON THIS ONE.
[/quote]
Stop yelling sir :D, many people have said that series has upset potential. I still feel like Boston will get past them and the Heat, they’ll just struggle with it and then lose the the Bulls.