Reply With Quote
It changes things when Aldridge is 5-6 from 3P. He was 4-13 on his 2-pointers.
They owed DET an a** whooping.What makes you think they can win a game?
It changes things when Aldridge is 5-6 from 3P. He was 4-13 on his 2-pointers.
I like it. Lamarcus on the outside, freeing up Demar on the inside. Hopefully that trend continues, and we can even mix it up. We may make some noise this year.
Piston have lost 6/7,spurs needed this dub at home
What's the over/under on when we'll see Lonnie get minutes again? 5 games? Pop must be seething that the Spurs were successful with him in instead of Beli.
Obvious fluke game though, we'll see how they play when he's 1-6.
Yeah, I'm not ready to start a write-in campaign for him to be in the 3P contest on All Star Weekend.
Great game!
What has Carroll done to not even warrant garbage time? Felt bad watching him on bench while everyone got up around him n left him there.
LMA 5/6 from three?
This timeline is weird.
He sucks, man.
I hate to say it but he's looked like crap in the few minutes he has gotten. There is a reason he is riding the bench at this stage in his career.
The question is why he was signed in the first place. Spurs could use a live body at his height. Could got some young guy for less money.
Poop really screwed that one up.
The fukin arrogance of Pop. Media and fans are beneath this guy I guess.
Marco and Bryn are better for the team, I don't care if they're shooting 20% have you seen their plus minus?
Tom fantastic question. Credit to this reporter.
Last edited by Slippy; 12-29-2019 at 06:47 AM.
Dang the rankings still have us in 9th
great that lonnie played but I guess the spurs win the game in the same fashion if marco had played instead ... damn
I was not a big fan of signing Carroll. I posted back after the news broke that in the DVRd games I had he looked kind of like trash. He probably does suck.
But ...
Because of recent events, I don't think it's fair to say that if he's riding the bench there's a reason.
Lonnie has ridden the bench nearly all year, Murray and White almost never play together, and Bertans has exploded with the offensive genius of Scott Brooks coaching him.
So I'd need more than a few minutes to be certain that he's even worse than Marco for example.
Haha . Marco could only dream of making the plays Lonnie made last nightgreat that lonnie played but I guess the spurs win the game in the same fashion if marco had played instead ... damn
because 14-19 is a better record than 13-18. If you add a 0.500 record to a negative record it increases the winning percentage. Simple math
the reverse jinx worked
What? What does adding a .5 record have to do with it? Its total games played (33 in portland case) divided by 14 which as u stated is higher than 13/31 for SA. I just couldn't believe it at first glance...usually when i looked at standings it appeared losses hurt more than wins but perhaps it was misperception
It's the other way around: divide number of wins by total games to get winning percentage. 14/33 = 0.42424, 13/31 = 0.41935.
If the Spurs go 1-1 in their next two games, the 0.500 win% in those games will raise their current 0.41935 up to 0.42424.
It doesn't matter anyway, all teams will have played 82 games by the end of the season, unless you get some funky cancelled game.
Wins have a bigger effect on Losing teams while loses have a bigger effect on winning teams. This with the Spurs usually winning it could be why you have seen this. It has bigger moves toward the 50% then away.
For what? To get destroyed in the first round.
You play to win the game?
Now that ball and favors are back from injury NOLA is making a little run. They very well could surpass us in the standings.
And okc has beaten a couple difficult teams...those losers just won't go away
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions