Actually, the five who picked SA are much more respected names in terms of basketball analysis. 3 of the 5 listed by du_suns_fans built their entire careers around jock sniffing. Not exactly credible proof.
As you pointed out, Jackson is the worst of a bad lot.
I forgot - no Spurs fans ever spoke about those suspensions or gloated at the fact Mike D'Antoni ran 6 guys ragged that game and lost it in the end.
It's not like it was the pivotal game in the only series that offered the Spurs legitimate contention on their path to the le.
No one else ever spoke about it, either. Dan Patrick never interviewed David Stern... moron
Hmm, the Suns couldn't beat the Spurs with a guy who does the best job of defending Duncan around, they sell him, James Jones and the draft picks off and bring in Grant Hill's antler hooves to replace them and they're the favorites?
The only way Phoenix is getting out of the West is if Dallas beats San Antonio for them. The Suns would probably beat the Mavs in a seven-game series, but they're NOT getting past San Antonio with their current roster.
Ah, I see da_dumbass posted 06-07 predictions. Point still stands, the Suns took a step back this offseason. They had better hope Dallas meets San Antonio before they do.
Last edited by Findog; 09-25-2007 at 02:15 PM.
James Jones is a ing scrub. Grant Hill is a big upgrade over him, even if he isn't healthy the entire season. And while losing Thomas is tough, having him guard Duncan isn't one of the biggest keys for us to beating the Spurs (it's Amare staying out of foul trouble). We pretty much stayed where we were, nothing really killed us, and we didn't get better either.
da_suns_fan leans on Bill Simmons for his sports picks.
Hey DSF, where do you get your news? The Colbert Report?
Anyway, Findog is right. Phoenix could win the championship if someone else would take care of the Spurs for them.
Since this guy has been glossed to death by his fellow posters, I thought I might as well prove that I can own his ass too.
This will be easy because he went to the FinDog school of chrery-picking his data.
First of all, his criteria for what counts as wins and losses is so screwed up he should get a job with the BCS. Phoenix defeats Dallas in 2005, but they both get 1-1 records for that year even though Phoenix proved they were the superior team. Phoenix wins their 2007 first round matchup and Dallas does not, yet Phoenix gets an 0-1 record for 2007 while Dallas STAYS PERFECT (0-0) even though they lost to a team that DIDN'T win 50 games. As you can see, his analysis starts to take on a life of his own.
Cleveland isn't penalized NOT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS in 2005. Miami isn't docked for losing in the first round this year either.
Its also interesting how he selects "elite" teams. His test group consists of teams that have been to the conference finals multiple times or have reached the finals. He doesn't just select "conference finals" because that would mean he would have to include the Jazz who would be 0-1. He doesn't select "team who have been to multiple conference finals" because that would eliminate the Mavericks and the Cavaliers. He doesn't select "teams that have reached the finals" because that would eliminate the Suns! You could argue that he's pushing for a larger test group, yet he doesn't let the Rockets in even though a win again them count just as much as a win against the Spurs.
Basically, his analysis is just stupid. I could make an analysis of teams records against fellow conference teams that have made the finals over the past three years, and the ranks would be Dallas (1-0), Phoenix (1-3) and San Antonio (0-1).
Since the Suns added Nash, they've only put up a WINNING RECORD against every other team in the NBA minus the Spurs. They've had a book written about them and how they're changing the NBA. They've gone fighting for any type of recognition to the maximum number of national tv appearances allowed. This past year, they took the NBA Champions further than any other team, and would have won had it not been for suspensions to their front court for a game 5 that they earned the right to play at home during the regular season.
FROMWAYDOWNTOWN is just another bitter Spurs fan. Bitter the Suns continue to be America's team while San Antonio is labeled as either "boring" or "the team with Eva's husband". But like I said, don't be angry at the Suns, its not their fault everybody loves them.
That was easy....who's next?
All the Suns did in the past 2 years was beat the teams they were supposed to beat.
FinDog, how many times have I owned you THIS week? My last count was three.
Shall we make it four?
FROMWAYDOWNTOWN stated that the Suns have never been the favorites to win the championship. So I brought up links from this past year where several experts from Sports Illustraded and ESPN picked them to win the championship.
I can't argue that the Suns were favored to win in the past based off picks for them to win in the future. This is such a stupid idea I honestly have no idea why you bother even posting anymore.
YOU KNOW Im going to embarrass you! Why do you keep asking for more?
What else you got? Want to go for five, BROTHA!!! (bolded statement is for monosylab1k).
Who cares about the Suns. A bad defensive team has managed to get even worse. This year they'll slide downhill and -'Antonio will be history.
A lot of people do.
Wrong -- Phoenix gets a 1-1 record for the playoffs in 2005 because while they beat a 50+ win team in Dallas, they also lost to a 50+ win team in San Antonio. Dallas gets a 1-1 record for the playoffs in 2005 because they beat a 50+ win team in Houston and lost to a 50+ win team in Phoenix. San Antonio gets a 3-0 record for the playoffs in 2005 because they beat 50+ win teams in Seattle, Phoenix, and Detroit.
See, you're making an argument here that is entirely different from my argument. Please do try to keep up. My point was that Phoenix has only won 1 playoff series in the last 3 years against a team that won 50+ games -- the aforementioned 2005 WCSF series against Dallas. Because my question isn't how many series a team has won in total, but how many series a team has won against other teams that bothered to win 50+ games, there's no reason to penalize Dallas in 2007. You're right, they didn't even play a team that won 50 games; but that doesn't change the fact that in the last 3 years, the Mavs have won more playoff series against clubs that won 50+ games in the regular season than the Suns have since 2005.
It's not as if 50 wins is some arbitrary number, given that the 50 win mark tends to separate good teams from those who are just good enough to make the playoffs.
Again, I'm not trying to come up with some sort of wholesale analysis of playoff success in recent years; I'm simply trying to show that the Suns haven't beaten a good team -- a team that won 50+ regular season games -- in a playoff series since 2005. You can't refute that fact.
Trying to penalize Cleveland or Miami is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Cleveland has beaten as many 50+ win teams in playoff series as the Suns have and Miami has beaten one more, not to mention having bothered to win a le. The Cavs have played 6 series in that time; the Suns have played 8.
I was trying to find a representative sample, a key part of any statistical analysis. You don't like my definition of the criteria? Try this one -- let's look at all teams that have played more than 5 playoff series in the last 3 years.Its also interesting how he selects "elite" teams. His test group consists of teams that have been to the conference finals multiple times or have reached the finals. He doesn't just select "conference finals" because that would mean he would have to include the Jazz who would be 0-1. He doesn't select "team who have been to multiple conference finals" because that would eliminate the Mavericks and the Cavaliers. He doesn't select "teams that have reached the finals" because that would eliminate the Suns! You could argue that he's pushing for a larger test group, yet he doesn't let the Rockets in even though a win again them count just as much as a win against the Spurs.
SAS -- 10
DET -- 10
PNX -- 8
MIA -- 8
DAL -- 7
CLE -- 6
Well, look at that!! It's exactly the same teams! Amazing!
But if you want me to include the Jazz and their 3 playoff series during that time, then congratulations -- your team has as many series wins agianst 50+ win teams as the Jazz do since 2005 (since the 2007 Jazz beat the 52-win Rockets in the First Round in 2007). Though Utah, at 1-1 against 50+ win teams actually has a better record.
Actually, my analysis shows that the Suns have struggled to beat quality teams playoff series since 2005. If I had wanted to prove absolutely nothing, I might have chosen to go with your analysis, but I'm far more interested in using statistics and history to find fact -- I'm not really here to disparage other teams and their fans.
But they still haven't beaten anyone worth a damn at playoff time in at least 2 years.
You didn't really read Seven Seconds or Less if you think that's what it's about. In any event, you keep returning to irrelevancies that can't overcome rock-solid facts.
Another way to do that would be to beat someone good at playoff time -- something that, I guess I should repeat, they haven't done in at least 2 years.
Boo-freakin-hoo. Don't leave the bench -- the rule is written in black and white. In any event, you are right in that my analysis didn't try to consider moral victories (like being the most compe ive opponent of the eventual champion) in assessing playoff successes, but that's probably because I don't consider a moral victory to be a playoff success.
As long as the Spurs are labeled CHAMPIONS -- something that's happened twice in the period covered by my survey -- I couldn't care less about what anyone thinks of the Spurs. And frankly, I couldn't care less about what anyone thinks of the Suns, either. The issues concerning which team is better are settled on the basketball court, not in the court of public opinion (as you would apparently prefer). You could call the Spurs anything you wanted to and I wouldn't care. But when you start making qualitative assessments that are susceptible of quan ative measurement and your assessments are demonstrably wrong, I will call you out.
Yawn. There's that whole popularity = championships thing again.
Your lack of substance is quite telling -- lather, rinse, repeat
Indeed -- having dispensed with you again, I should start looking for my next target. This isn't even sporting . . . .
0FinDog, how many times have I owned you THIS week?
Learn to count.My last count was three.
The next one will be one.Shall we make it four?
It doesn't really matter what "experts" like Scoop Jackson or Bill Simmons think. I wasn't even contesting that the Suns are a trendy pick to do things they're not capable of. My only point was that the only way Phoenix can win a le is for Dallas to beat San Antonio for them. You can't contest that. Dallas and Phoenix is a 50/50 proposition, whereas San Antonio owns Phoenix.FROMWAYDOWNTOWN stated that the Suns have never been the favorites to win the championship. So I brought up links from this past year where several experts from Sports Illustraded and ESPN picked them to win the championship.
You're descending into incoherence again.I can't argue that the Suns were favored to win in the past based off picks for them to win in the future. This is such a stupid idea I honestly have no idea why you bother even posting anymore.
Because I appreciate irony.YOU KNOW Im going to embarrass you! Why do you keep asking for more?
The Spurs are boring and the Suns get good ratings.What else you got?
Last edited by Findog; 09-25-2007 at 10:38 PM.
James Jones can stay healty, play defense and hit the outside shot, three things Grant Hill cannot do. Hill will help them in the locker room, can run the offense when Nash is getting a breather, and right now I'd say they would beat Dallas in a seven-game series. However, getting killed on the boards and having no answer for Duncan is why Phoenix can't get past the Spurs. Phoenix is only coming out of the West if they face Dallas and not San Antonio.
And the winner of this month's "Using a Bazooka on a Butterfly" award goes to . . .
Welcome to Who Gives a , Population you. That whole "changing the NBA" thing, what are you, 12? Are you too young to remember Run TMC or Showtime?Since the Suns added Nash, they've only put up a WINNING RECORD against every other team in the NBA minus the Spurs. They've had a book written about them and how they're changing the NBA. They've gone fighting for any type of recognition to the maximum number of national tv appearances allowed. This past year, they took the NBA Champions further than any other team, and would have won had it not been for suspensions to their front court for a game 5 that they earned the right to play at home during the regular season.
That was probably the biggest ownage I've ever seen on here.
da_suns_fan gets owned everytime he hits "submit reply." He could say that the earth is round and the sky is blue and still managed to get owned.
That was probably the biggest ownage I've ever seen on here.
He's been owned many many times but FWD just flat out raped him in all his holes.
haha what's to be bitter about? Spurs are 4 time champs and the class of professional sports teams.Since this guy has been glossed to death by his fellow posters, I thought I might as well prove that I can own his ass too.
This will be easy because he went to the FinDog school of chrery-picking his data.
First of all, his criteria for what counts as wins and losses is so screwed up he should get a job with the BCS. Phoenix defeats Dallas in 2005, but they both get 1-1 records for that year even though Phoenix proved they were the superior team. Phoenix wins their 2007 first round matchup and Dallas does not, yet Phoenix gets an 0-1 record for 2007 while Dallas STAYS PERFECT (0-0) even though they lost to a team that DIDN'T win 50 games. As you can see, his analysis starts to take on a life of his own.
Cleveland isn't penalized NOT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS in 2005. Miami isn't docked for losing in the first round this year either.
Its also interesting how he selects "elite" teams. His test group consists of teams that have been to the conference finals multiple times or have reached the finals. He doesn't just select "conference finals" because that would mean he would have to include the Jazz who would be 0-1. He doesn't select "team who have been to multiple conference finals" because that would eliminate the Mavericks and the Cavaliers. He doesn't select "teams that have reached the finals" because that would eliminate the Suns! You could argue that he's pushing for a larger test group, yet he doesn't let the Rockets in even though a win again them count just as much as a win against the Spurs.
Basically, his analysis is just stupid. I could make an analysis of teams records against fellow conference teams that have made the finals over the past three years, and the ranks would be Dallas (1-0), Phoenix (1-3) and San Antonio (0-1).
Since the Suns added Nash, they've only put up a WINNING RECORD against every other team in the NBA minus the Spurs. They've had a book written about them and how they're changing the NBA. They've gone fighting for any type of recognition to the maximum number of national tv appearances allowed. This past year, they took the NBA Champions further than any other team, and would have won had it not been for suspensions to their front court for a game 5 that they earned the right to play at home during the regular season.
FROMWAYDOWNTOWN is just another bitter Spurs fan. Bitter the Suns continue to be America's team while San Antonio is labeled as either "boring" or "the team with Eva's husband". But like I said, don't be angry at the Suns, its not their fault everybody loves them.
That was easy....who's next?
Trust us man, maybe it is because the cali garbage rubs off on you cali wannabes...but we couldn't give two s about popularity contests.
We go on American idol and we are that 40 yr old guy who can sing with the best of them but has no marketing potential. Suns go on American Idol and well.....we all saw Sanjia (sp)
When is Kori going to step up to the plate and can these losers?
I just owned a TEAM of Texans!!!
FinDog, Im proud of you for not backpedalling and trying to come with new definitions for words like "past" etc. the way youve done in the past.
FROMWAYDOWNTOWN, youre definately no Hollinger. Your "analysis" was flawed in so many ways (as I proved) but you aren't enough of a man to just admit that it was STUPID! Your whole point was to try to judge team success over the past three years, but your arguments had so many holes Im guessing your hero is Michael Moore. Why penalize Dallas for losing in the first round while attempting to gage team success when that doesn't support your argument, right?
A lot of conspiracy theorists do this. They pick a theory and throw out all data that doesn't support that theory!
Nice try Texas. Who's next?
Oh, my God. FWD, the ownage you inflicted was absolutely beautiful. It was as though all suck and fail had been viciously raped by win and awesome. In the butt.
What a STUPID analogy, in past three years SA went to finals 2 times and Dallas went once. So this should be 2-1 (lost to Dallas once and never lost to anyone in other times). SA was the last team standing in these 2 times.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
