Reply With Quote
That's creepy...
Good job Solid D!
Solid contribution to the game blog thread.
That's creepy...
"highest FG%"
My $10 bet is invalid on a technicality, a grammar mistake!
Seriously, had Pacers shot the _higher_ FG%age, I would have paid up, but nobody took me up on it, nor was there a "higher" FG%age, anway.
This was really looking weird early on, with Pacers shooting almost 60% and behind to Spurs with under 50%, like a rare game that would be the exception to the rule that higher FG%age wins.
Spurs were damn lucky to get a win. It was a very evenly played game, because both teams played the game well on both ends of the court, plus the coaching.
The same night we are @PHX in 2 weeks, IND will be @MIA for their first game of 4.
Last edited by boutons; 01-07-2005 at 09:31 AM.
OK boutons, let's make a deal. You give 10 bucks for the victims of the tsunami. I think this would be fair. Anyone agrees?
Technically both the Spurs and Pacers had the highest and lowest FG% since they were the same %."highest FG%"
My $10 bet is invalid on a technicality, a grammar mistake!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
