Reply With Quote
damn....
RIP
RIP Cliff Robinson
damn....
RIP
why u butthurt about dem balkan bois son? if that was the banana boat crew youd be framing it and putting it up on your wall tbh
Cliff, Duckworth and Kersey are gone, that’s pretty much their frontline minus Buck Williams
edit . not a big but add Drazen to the list
Yea, that's crazy. I didn't know Cliff had drug problems. Stern must've been doing the 80s Rockets play on them.
No doubt
Funny how the 8 seeds both got backdoor swept. Never bet against the Company Men.
or maybe its just the fact that the #1 seeds were far superior teams
Why do you even watch the NBA? I'm confused...
For the most part I don't tbh. If we're talking about the percent of playoffs I've watched thus far this year.
My best estimate would be 2-5 percent of actual game time I've watched.
I would think that would rise going forward with better match-ups and later games in series.
But I largely don't support them unless you think that that percent matters so greatly.
Why are you concerned? Are you enjoying the show?
Game 1's said otherwise, tbh.
and what about games 2 3 4 and 5?
What I already said, slob.
so losing game one makes you the inferior team, even if you completely dominate the opponent the next 4 games?
great logic as usual derp
You're moving goalposts, making it about who is better or not.so losing game one makes you the inferior team, even if you completely dominate the opponent the next 4 games?
great logic as usual derp
My argument was clearly too much for you, snowflake.
you implied help from external sources was needed for the #1 seeds to win 4 straight because they lost game one.
I disagree, I think those teams were simply way better
Sure that's why the Lakers needed 20 extra free throws in the first half of Game 3.
The Bucks wouldn't have gotten their asses beat so badly in Game 1 if they were so much better either.
League needs its "stars" for ratings. Do you not understand how this works, slob?
Truth about LAL benefiting many free throw calls - seemed to cause Blazers spirits to unravel then came the big injury. Lakers are a very good team but will get beat IMO and likely before finals.
or maybe they simply had a bad game 1 and thereafter played their usual higher level of basketball that they had played all season that helped each team win at a 60+ win pace. is that not possible?
Lakers are the tiest 60+ win team in the history of the league, tbh.
I get it; you're a fanboy, slob.
neat. you didn't answer the question though.
lol two people living rent free for the price of one
I have concerns about Lakers ...
Butvpretty silly statement when 60 win teams have lost in round one ...wouldnt they be the tiest based on results?
Or is this some arbitrary subjective argument?
tiest 60 win team in league history...
I was going to say maybe the 2007 Mavs since they lost in the first round to a 42-40 Warriors squad because Don Nelson Darth Vadered both Dirk and Avery. But then again, that was a good Mavs team with the league MVP that just got out-psychologized.
So I thought maybe it’s the 2015 Atlanta Hawks. They didn’t lose in the first round, but that team came out of nowhere to win 60 and didn’t come close again. The East as usual was . That season only 5 EC teams had winning records so the few good EC teams there were cleaned up. Hawks franchise player was probably Paul Millsap, a complementary and secondary player on any other playoff team. 33 year old Kyle Kroger was a starter. DeMarre Carroll put up a career season. They did make it to the ECF in that conference, but that’s not saying much. They’re probably the tiest 60 win team in league history.
Agreed. That Hawks team wins 41 in the west...maybe
03 Pacers might be in there as well
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
