Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

NBA: Jordan Leading the Bobcats to the promised land.

15556586061101

Posts

  • SabreMauSabreMau Still featuring glasses. Registered User regular
    Huh. They have Utah with 9% chance against the Spurs, but only 2% against the Thunder?

    1yrxP.jpgmXcqC.jpgtYRm1.jpg
  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    SabreMau wrote: »
    Huh. They have Utah with 9% chance against the Spurs, but only 2% against the Thunder?

    The Spurs are a paper tiger.

  • PhonehandPhonehand Registered User regular
    SabreMau wrote: »
    Phonehand wrote: »
    The Jazz are a big team, especially when they play Millsap at the 3. A lot of people were expecting them to flip at least one of their extraneous bigs for more backcourt depth, but it still hasn't happened.

    While they're comparable to the Grizzlies in roster makeup, they're nowhere close in quality. Last year's Grizzlies team was better than their regular season record, while this year's Jazz team is way worse.

    Don't forget that in the lockout-shortened season, not every team plays every other team the same number of times according to conference and division, which makes Strength of Schedule (SOS) stats that much more telling. The Jazz have had a very easy schedule and are almost certainly worse than teams that have had a rougher go of it, like the Rockets and Suns.

    Check out the strength of schedule stats yourself.

    The teams that have had the hardest schedules are at the top, while the teams with the lower SOS are at the bottom.

    Note that Dallas and the Lakers have had the toughest schedules, while the Bobcats had the second-easiest. Yes, the second easiest schedule while still notching only 7 wins. They are just that bad.

    And of course, right at the top you see Phoenix and Houston, two scheduling casualties that would have been shoo-ins during a long season, or if they played in the Eastern conference. A shame, really.

    How have the Jazz had a very easy schedule? They are still in the top half of the league and right behind Houston and Phoenix. All three of these teams are very similar and I wouldn't say that any of them are shoo-ins.

    Some might disagree but I feel like they've underachieved. Their frontcourt situation is troubling and Ty Corbin has not had the best handle on it. Injuries have forced him to play an extremely effective big lineup (Millsap-Favors-Jefferson) in the last month. According to David Locke: "Now with the big lineup the Jazz defense has been beyond comprehension. With Millsap at the 3 the Jazz have outscored opponents 304 to 232 in 148 minutes."

    SOS is a verrry picky stat. Look carefully at those numbers. Even 0.001 difference is meaningful, and represents a quantifiable, easier schedule than any team that is 0.001 higher. No joke.

    While we're on the subject, I also think it's significant that the Jazz have not beaten a top tier playoff team on the road at all this season, save for once against the Lakers on March 18th at Staples. That's really, really bad. In fact, you could count their number of road wins against playoff teams on one hand this season.

    Still, I don't read "underperforming" into any of this. In fact, I think they have wildly overachieved given the youth of their roster and how poorly they were playing after Corbin took over mid-season last year. It's astonishing that Corbin could construct ANY kind of useable lineup out of that PF-heavy roster, let alone one that is dominant in limited minutes.

    I'm mostly just satisfied that we managed to take only one year off from the playoffs instead of the three years we were out after losing Stockton and Malone. This time, we've coming off a year where we lost Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Mehmet Okur, Andrei Kirilenko, Kyle Korver, Ronnie Brewer, Wesley Matthews, Ronnie Price, and Jerry Sloan. Only CJ Miles and Paul Millsap remain from the 2010 playoff team.

    Make no mistake, I absolutely think the Jazz will lose, but out of all the 8 seed candidates, I think they are most likely to pull an upset because they most closely resemble last year's Memphis squad. Tony Parker will annihilate them though.

    pmdunk.jpg
  • TheBigEasyTheBigEasy Registered User regular
    But in a game at Staples? I think it's a different story. He will ride a frantic wave of emotion created by a Clippers crowd that has not had the chance to go to a Clippers playoff game in decades.

    Well, technically that crowd had the chance in 2006, they even got to the 2nd round. But other than that, yeah it has been a while since they were in the playoffs and never really had any success at all, ever.

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    But in a game at Staples? I think it's a different story. He will ride a frantic wave of emotion created by a Clippers crowd that has not had the chance to go to a Clippers playoff game in decades.

    Well, technically that crowd had the chance in 2006, they even got to the 2nd round. But other than that, yeah it has been a while since they were in the playoffs and never really had any success at all, ever.

    I'm going to guess without looking that that was a forgettable team led by Chris Caveman, probably Sam Cassell before he shed his human shell and returned to the mothership, and a bunch of journeyman castoffs who didn't give two shits about the franchise.

    Now I'm going to check to see if there was a long playoff drought before that. OK, yes. Basketball Reference says yes.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/

    So this is going to be just the second time in 15 years that the Clippers have made the playoffs, not the first. Eww.

    Then it looks like they barely sneaked into the playoffs in 97 even though they finished 10 games under .500 in the West (??). I vaguely remember that. That team evidently featured a lot of washed up veterans better known for playing on other teams, like Kevin Duckworth.

    Then you have to go back to the Ron Harper era before that, before he got fed up with that team and fled to the Bulls.

    Alright, clicking those links is depressing, like reading an obituary page. Man, that franchise sucks. There's no halcyon age they can point to where they had overwhelming success, either. No Stockton age. No Jordan age. This poor, poor team. :(

  • TheBigEasyTheBigEasy Registered User regular
    Thats why I said "technically" and "they never really had any success at all, ever". I think you can count their playoff appearances in the past 30+ years on one hand.

    If there ever was a team more in need of an owner change it is the Clippers. If the NBA would ever seriously talk contraction, the Clippers would have to be in the conversation (along with Minnesota, Toronto and Charlotte - 3 other franchises with zero success so far). Lets hope Chris Paul leads them to some success this and next year and Sterling decides to sell high or something.

    And yes - I know this is a pipedream. Then again, what do I care - the Hornets just sold and are on their way to a name change and maybe some respectability and maybe even success. Somehow I have a gut feeling Stern will rig the lottery for us and we'll pull the same stunt like Cleveland last year.

    Speaking of pipedreams ...

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    @TheBigEasy

    Things are looking up for that Hornets team, definitely. They've got a nice stake in the Unibrow Sweepstakes, and new ownership is looking to reboot the team with a new name and logo in the next few seasons. And then Charlotte takes back the Hornets name, instead of the stupid, uninspired "Bobcats" name their first owner came up with. That's the plan, anyway. And then the New Orleans team won't be the Hornets anymore, they'll be <blank>. Nobody knows yet.

    They want the Jazz name back, is what they REALLY want. But that won't happen, I think the people of Utah have grown accustomed to it. I humbly submit "The New Orleans Vipers." Rock some black and gold unis just like the Saints.

  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    Vipers? Really?

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Elldren wrote: »
    Vipers? Really?

    Vipers, really, really? You realize you have to actually come up with better names of your own before you can make any sort of meaningless, two-word critique of your own, right? This contrarian bullshit is just getting super sad and transparent now.

    My wish for you: Clippers in four, and Zach Randolph is banned and ostracized from the league after involuntarily pooping his pants on national TV after a Blake Griffin posterizing dunk. Rudy Gay then slips on the refuse and is out for the rest of the series. Marc Gasol laughs so hard that his beard hair falls out in clumps, sticking to the black morass of sweat and poop on the court. We only see some of this televised, as Mike Breen hastily cuts to commercial, himself bent over hysterically laughing. Cell phone video of the incident nevertheless goes viral on YouTube. Griffin's handiwork is referred to from that point on as The Dunk and becomes one of the defining moments in NBA history.

    Essentially, put up or shut up. Let those creative juices flow, like a runny, involuntary Zach Randolph deuce. You're tasked with finding good, appropriate new names for the New Orleans NBA basketball team. You even have the benefit of thinking about this for hours or days on end, instead of just in 10 seconds or so as I did. Ready set go.

    It's been a challenge for ownership themselves to do it. "Jazz" was so on the nose, "Saints" was pretty great too. But I'm sure you'll have no problem. Ready set go, forums poster Elldren! :P

    Form of Monkey! on
  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    New Orleans Nutria

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    Elldren wrote: »
    New Orleans Nutria

    Oh, the fearsome and relentless nutria?

    Okay, you win.

    :bz

  • TheBigEasyTheBigEasy Registered User regular
    They want the Jazz name back, is what they REALLY want. But that won't happen, I think the people of Utah have grown accustomed to it.

    Not only that, but Stern bascially ruled it out in the press conference last week (the same presser btw where he shut down an ESPN guy for asking questions about the Saints).

    Vipers is lame. I'd actually prefer "Krewe of New Orleans", but that probably won't happen either. Voodoo is another name thats floating around.

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    They want the Jazz name back, is what they REALLY want. But that won't happen, I think the people of Utah have grown accustomed to it.

    Not only that, but Stern bascially ruled it out in the press conference last week (the same presser btw where he shut down an ESPN guy for asking questions about the Saints).

    Vipers is lame. I'd actually prefer "Krewe of New Orleans", but that probably won't happen either. Voodoo is another name thats floating around.

    Krewe is poor. If outsiders have to Google your name to figure out what the hell it even is, or else dismiss it as a trying-too-hard-to-sound-cool alternate spelling of another word, then it's not a good name. But Voodoo sounds baller.

    Form of Monkey! on
  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    I'd like (and a whole lot of other people, too) for Memphis to be the Blues but Stern kiboshed that years ago.

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    It's baffling. Let these teams call themselves what they want to be called. It makes extra sense when you have these situations where the team has moved, and the name was logical only in the old town. The Grizzlies and Jazz are probably the two biggest current offenders.

    As a historical note, the Lakers were too, to some extent--their old home in Minnesota was the "Land of 1000 Lakes"--but have since made the name their own. So it is doable, just not common.

  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    If the NBA would ever seriously talk contraction, the Clippers would have to be in the conversation (along with Minnesota, Toronto and Charlotte - 3 other franchises with zero success so far). Lets hope Chris Paul leads them to some success this and next year and Sterling decides to sell high or something.

    The Clippers wouldn't be a contraction candidate, because they're profitable every year. The Clippers sell tickets and make money even when they stink. They were 15th in attendance last year while going 30-52. And this year, when they've actually been good? They have better attendance than the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, Thunder, and Spurs.
    http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/sort/homePct

    If you want a candidate for contraction, look at Indiana - a team that can't sell tickets despite being a top 3 seed in the East. Or Atlanta, another team that has no fan support despite playing .600 ball. Both teams are hemorrhaging cash, despite putting a quality product on the floor.

    The NBA is a business before it's a sport.

    BubbaT on
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    the reality is that most sports team names sound dumb unless there's an actual team that's been normalizing their use for 10+ years, and even then a lot of them sound dumb. What the hell kind of a name for a sports team is the Jazz, even if they didn't play in utah?

    Soccer has it right if you ask me (european soccer, anyway); just use the team's area of origin as their name

    the one exception to this rule is the Sharks, but I'm pretty sure that's because 75% of movies about fictitious sports leagues have a team named the Sharks.

    gkcmatch_zps97480250.jpg
    'we got hella people, they got helicopters'
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    Elldren wrote: »
    Vipers? Really?

    Vipers, really, really? You realize you have to actually come up with better names of your own before you can make any sort of meaningless, two-word critique of your own, right? This contrarian bullshit is just getting super sad and transparent now.

    My wish for you: Clippers in four, and Zach Randolph is banned and ostracized from the league after involuntarily pooping his pants on national TV after a Blake Griffin posterizing dunk. Rudy Gay then slips on the refuse and is out for the rest of the series. Marc Gasol laughs so hard that his beard hair falls out in clumps, sticking to the black morass of sweat and poop on the court. We only see some of this televised, as Mike Breen hastily cuts to commercial, himself bent over hysterically laughing. Cell phone video of the incident nevertheless goes viral on YouTube. Griffin's handiwork is referred to from that point on as The Dunk and becomes one of the defining moments in NBA history.

    Essentially, put up or shut up. Let those creative juices flow, like a runny, involuntary Zach Randolph deuce. You're tasked with finding good, appropriate new names for the New Orleans NBA basketball team. You even have the benefit of thinking about this for hours or days on end, instead of just in 10 seconds or so as I did. Ready set go.

    It's been a challenge for ownership themselves to do it. "Jazz" was so on the nose, "Saints" was pretty great too. But I'm sure you'll have no problem. Ready set go, forums poster Elldren! :P

    Craw Daddies and the logo can be a craw daddy wearing a white pimp suit.

  • TheBigEasyTheBigEasy Registered User regular
    BubbaT wrote: »
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    If the NBA would ever seriously talk contraction, the Clippers would have to be in the conversation (along with Minnesota, Toronto and Charlotte - 3 other franchises with zero success so far). Lets hope Chris Paul leads them to some success this and next year and Sterling decides to sell high or something.

    The Clippers wouldn't be a contraction candidate, because they're profitable every year. The Clippers sell tickets and make money even when they stink. They were 15th in attendance last year while going 30-52. And this year, when they've actually been good? They have better attendance than the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, Thunder, and Spurs.
    http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/sort/homePct

    If you want a candidate for contraction, look at Indiana - a team that can't sell tickets despite being a top 3 seed in the East. Or Atlanta, another team that has no fan support despite playing .600 ball. Both teams are hemorrhaging cash, despite putting a quality product on the floor.

    The NBA is a business before it's a sport.

    I was strictly speaking from a sports perspective and on-court success. That is why I named those 4. And outside of the Clippers I don't think many people would care all that much if the Timberwolves, Bobcats and Raptors went away.

  • TelMarineTelMarine Registered User regular
    Anyone else find it amusing that TNT is broadcasting the Knicks/Charlotte game?

  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    TelMarine wrote: »
    Anyone else find it amusing that TNT is broadcasting the Knicks/Charlotte game?

    It's one of the few games today that matter at all, so why not?

  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    BubbaT wrote: »
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    If the NBA would ever seriously talk contraction, the Clippers would have to be in the conversation (along with Minnesota, Toronto and Charlotte - 3 other franchises with zero success so far). Lets hope Chris Paul leads them to some success this and next year and Sterling decides to sell high or something.

    The Clippers wouldn't be a contraction candidate, because they're profitable every year. The Clippers sell tickets and make money even when they stink. They were 15th in attendance last year while going 30-52. And this year, when they've actually been good? They have better attendance than the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, Thunder, and Spurs.
    http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/sort/homePct

    If you want a candidate for contraction, look at Indiana - a team that can't sell tickets despite being a top 3 seed in the East. Or Atlanta, another team that has no fan support despite playing .600 ball. Both teams are hemorrhaging cash, despite putting a quality product on the floor.

    The NBA is a business before it's a sport.

    I was strictly speaking from a sports perspective and on-court success. That is why I named those 4. And outside of the Clippers I don't think many people would care all that much if the Timberwolves, Bobcats and Raptors went away.

    Ah, okay. But that sounds more like a relegation concept than contraction, like what they do in soccer leagues.

    Plus, there are teams that have had longer dry spells than the Wolves, Bobcats, and Raptors. Like the
    Pacers
    Suns
    Kings
    Nets
    Cavaliers
    Sixers
    Nuggets
    Warriors
    Jazz
    Thunder/Sonics
    Knicks
    Blazers

    None of those teams have won a title since the Wolves, Raptors, or Bobcats were created, and they all predate the Wolves, Raptors, and Bobcats. So why should they get a pass for their lack of on-court success?

  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    the reality is that most sports team names sound dumb unless there's an actual team that's been normalizing their use for 10+ years, and even then a lot of them sound dumb. What the hell kind of a name for a sports team is the Jazz, even if they didn't play in utah?

    Soccer has it right if you ask me (european soccer, anyway); just use the team's area of origin as their name

    the one exception to this rule is the Sharks, but I'm pretty sure that's because 75% of movies about fictitious sports leagues have a team named the Sharks.

    Let's name them all the Wildcats or Tigers, like in college sports.

  • EddyEddy pale Gengars I loved beside Cerulean CaveRegistered User regular
  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    Elldren wrote: »
    TelMarine wrote: »
    Anyone else find it amusing that TNT is broadcasting the Knicks/Charlotte game?

    It's one of the few games today that matter at all, so why not?

    Yup. If Charlotte loses, they'll be the worst NBA team of all time, with a .106 winning percentage. The current record is .110, held by the 1972-73 Sixers.

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    Eddy wrote: »
    I really like "New Orleans Pelicans".

    I'm more partial to the New Orleans New Yorkers.

    That was almost the new name chosen for the New Jersey Nets after they completed their move to Brooklyn next season. They would have been the Brooklyn...New Yorkers.

    I like their whole creative vibe with the naming, but the Nets went a different direction at the last minute and kept the same name.

    That means "New Yorkers" is still available!

  • TheBigEasyTheBigEasy Registered User regular
    BubbaT wrote: »
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    BubbaT wrote: »
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    If the NBA would ever seriously talk contraction, the Clippers would have to be in the conversation (along with Minnesota, Toronto and Charlotte - 3 other franchises with zero success so far). Lets hope Chris Paul leads them to some success this and next year and Sterling decides to sell high or something.

    The Clippers wouldn't be a contraction candidate, because they're profitable every year. The Clippers sell tickets and make money even when they stink. They were 15th in attendance last year while going 30-52. And this year, when they've actually been good? They have better attendance than the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, Thunder, and Spurs.
    http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/sort/homePct

    If you want a candidate for contraction, look at Indiana - a team that can't sell tickets despite being a top 3 seed in the East. Or Atlanta, another team that has no fan support despite playing .600 ball. Both teams are hemorrhaging cash, despite putting a quality product on the floor.

    The NBA is a business before it's a sport.

    I was strictly speaking from a sports perspective and on-court success. That is why I named those 4. And outside of the Clippers I don't think many people would care all that much if the Timberwolves, Bobcats and Raptors went away.

    Ah, okay. But that sounds more like a relegation concept than contraction, like what they do in soccer leagues.

    Plus, there are teams that have had longer dry spells than the Wolves, Bobcats, and Raptors. Like the
    Pacers
    Suns
    Kings
    Nets
    Cavaliers
    Sixers
    Nuggets
    Warriors
    Jazz
    Thunder/Sonics
    Knicks
    Blazers

    None of those teams have won a title since the Wolves, Raptors, or Bobcats were created, and they all predate the Wolves, Raptors, and Bobcats. So why should they get a pass for their lack of on-court success?

    The Jazz were in the finals twice, so were the Nets and Knicks. Cavs, Sixers, Thunder/Sonics, Blazers, Pacers once. Suns, Kings, Nuggets were/are perennial playoff teams. Yes, we are getting into hairsplitting territory - but the Raptors, Bobcats and Timberwolves haven't achieved squat so far - neither have the Clippers and the Warriors actually.

    Relegation might actually be a great idea. Create a second league out of all the D-League franchises and some of the worst NBA franchises and have them relegate each year. Great system that works pretty much anywhere outside of American Pro Sports. It will never happen - but it would be a great idea.

  • UnknownSaintUnknownSaint Registered User
    Lol @ the ESPN picks for Rookie of the Year. (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/ROY-2012/2011-12-rookie-year)

    It's a sea of Kyrie Irving-face, until you spot Alfredo Berrios from ESPN Deportes picking Ricky Rubio.

  • EddyEddy pale Gengars I loved beside Cerulean CaveRegistered User regular
    Eddy wrote: »
    I really like "New Orleans Pelicans".

    I'm more partial to the New Orleans New Yorkers.

    That was almost the new name chosen for the New Jersey Nets after they completed their move to Brooklyn next season. They would have been the Brooklyn...New Yorkers.

    I like their whole creative vibe with the naming, but the Nets went a different direction at the last minute and kept the same name.

    That means "New Yorkers" is still available!

    Which is hilarious because Knickerbocker Ave is in... Brooklyn.

  • jackisrealjackisreal Registered User
    BubbaT wrote: »
    TheBigEasy wrote: »
    If the NBA would ever seriously talk contraction, the Clippers would have to be in the conversation (along with Minnesota, Toronto and Charlotte - 3 other franchises with zero success so far). Lets hope Chris Paul leads them to some success this and next year and Sterling decides to sell high or something.

    The Clippers wouldn't be a contraction candidate, because they're profitable every year. The Clippers sell tickets and make money even when they stink. They were 15th in attendance last year while going 30-52. And this year, when they've actually been good? They have better attendance than the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, Thunder, and Spurs.
    http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/sort/homePct

    If you want a candidate for contraction, look at Indiana - a team that can't sell tickets despite being a top 3 seed in the East. Or Atlanta, another team that has no fan support despite playing .600 ball. Both teams are hemorrhaging cash, despite putting a quality product on the floor.

    The NBA is a business before it's a sport.

    How do the Bulls have 105.9% attendance?

    And it doesn't seem totally legit to say that the Clippers have higher attendance than the Lakers...the Clippers just pack more people into the building.

    DolphinMechSig.jpg
  • WankWank Registered User regular
    Brad Miller's last game ever and they're gettin thrashed =(

  • y2jake215y2jake215 I found a girl and brought her back, because that's what a daddy do. Stay wild, blap blap blap. Registered User regular
    edited April 2012
    Meant to say this the other day but I feel like Memphis beats Clippers

    Clippers don't have a lot to go to late game except CP3. A lot of possessions end up with him literally dribbling around until he gets an open shot or fouled

    y2jake215 on
    G2Dcf.jpg
    maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
  • y2jake215y2jake215 I found a girl and brought her back, because that's what a daddy do. Stay wild, blap blap blap. Registered User regular
    and while that's been working, I don't know if it works in the playoffs

    G2Dcf.jpg
    maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    y2jake215 wrote: »
    and while that's been working, I don't know if it works in the playoffs

    It's not going to work well against the Grizzlies, who lead the league in steals and forced turnovers.

  • Form of Monkey!Form of Monkey! Registered User regular
    Elldren wrote: »
    y2jake215 wrote: »
    and while that's been working, I don't know if it works in the playoffs

    It's not going to work well against the Grizzlies, who lead the league in steals and forced turnovers.

    They'll probably put Tony Allen on Chris Paul, which is going to royally suck for Chris Paul.

    But basically now that the Grizzlies have home court, I think they're a lock to advance. The theory is that Memphis is good enough and experienced enough to advance with or without home court (though it's always helpful), but that the Clippers are basically sunk without it.

    It's still going to be entertaining, I just don't realistically see how the Clippers beat the Grizzlies four times first, outside of injuries or flukes.

    Show, us Clips! Come on Griffin. Heretofore unknown extra gear you've been saving this whole time. Go. Do it! If not for us, then at least for the fine people at Kia Motors.

  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    Elldren wrote: »
    y2jake215 wrote: »
    and while that's been working, I don't know if it works in the playoffs

    It's not going to work well against the Grizzlies, who lead the league in steals and forced turnovers.

    They'll probably put Tony Allen on Chris Paul, which is going to royally suck for Chris Paul.

    But basically now that the Grizzlies have home court, I think they're a lock to advance. The theory is that Memphis is good enough and experienced enough to advance with or without home court (though it's always helpful), but that the Clippers are basically sunk without it.

    It's still going to be entertaining, I just don't realistically see how the Clippers beat the Grizzlies four times first, outside of injuries or flukes.

    Show, us Clips! Come on Griffin. Heretofore unknown extra gear you've been saving this whole time. Go. Do it! If not for us, then at least for the fine people at Kia Motors.

    They'll definitely put TA on CP3. There are two things TA does best: defense and being crazy

  • balerbowerbalerbower Registered User regular
    just gonna throw some playoff predictions out there cause why not

    clippers will get consumed by marc gasol and the grizzlies, angry clippers mob will carry out del negro's head on a stick, hopefully donald sterling will have a stroke and die cause fuck that guy so hard.

    bynum will explode in the playoffs and put up major points/boards like he's pulling a shaq, kobe will miss a fuck ton of shots but make the ones that really count at the end of the stretch, lakers will make it past the talented and great but inexperienced Thunder to the WCF, but get beaten by the Spurs 4-2

  • ElldrenElldren 3067-6294-6208Registered User regular
    Right now I'm praying and hoping against hope that the Jazz come out on top of the Spurs

    because that would be a much easier matchup for the Grizz come round 2

  • y2jake215y2jake215 I found a girl and brought her back, because that's what a daddy do. Stay wild, blap blap blap. Registered User regular
    Haven't thought extremely hard about this but I'm gonna say...

    Bulls in 4
    Knicks in 7
    Pacers in 5
    Celtics in 6

    Spurs in 5
    Thunder in 5
    Lakers in 6
    Grizzlies in 5

    G2Dcf.jpg
    maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
  • y2jake215y2jake215 I found a girl and brought her back, because that's what a daddy do. Stay wild, blap blap blap. Registered User regular
    though a D-Rose leg injury will make a sweep a little tougher

    G2Dcf.jpg
    maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
This discussion has been closed.