or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread - Page 491

post #7351 of 27226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post

Damn, thats 2 games the Lakers should have won and lost. That happened in the finals last year to Miami.
Lakers worked really hard but got tired. Frankly, you can blame Kobe for taking bad shots. He did hit a few but he tried to be a hero, Phil Jackson would have never let that happen. The inside game was effective. Why they went away from it was senseless.

I noticed Kobe chucking shots a lot and that is typical Kobe but that is also typical Mike Brown (see Lebron). And they went away from Bynum because he got fronted. If you see the replays you'll noticed once Perkins or Ibaka fronts him, the play becomes broken because no one knows what to do after getting the ball to Bynum failed. So they end up with the typical last second shots on almost every possession.

Overall it was a team loss but that last play by Pau was key. He was wide open, he can shoot in that range at a high percentage. Take the shot, it's simple as that.
post #7352 of 27226
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Come on Steve, I was starting to play along with you because you haven't been as obnoxious, don't be a dumbass now. I posted that shit even before the Lakers game, stop being an idiot just because I've proven you talk shit out of your ass sometimes. Thats a fact that CP3 will be a Clippers next year.
You really have no idea about basketball dawg. Your knowledge baffles me. Griffin flops like a bitch but dude proved today that dude could score, he isn't consistent yet but dude is in his second year and first playoff year. Plus dude gets beat up inside, flop or not, dude gets raped in the paint and still keeps attacking. Pau can't even take a wide open shot with no one around him. Like I said before, a liability at times.
Again, stop while your ahead. When the Spurs got sweeped last year, I didn't act like a bitch that you are, I simply asked for you to honor the bet you lost. You barely believed on the Spurs in the beginning of this season and just started to voice out when the Spurs started playing well in the middle of the season. At least Jet and I supported and believed the Lakers could make another run and I believed at the Clips and they got to the second round in what, first time in 20 years? They did well considering VDN is a terrible coach and CP3, Blake & Caron are all hurt as fuck.
You want to be a dick, I get it, that's fine but at least stop with the stupid statements, which just proves you know almost nothing about basketball other than what you hear Barkley says (which a terrible analyst btw). We've been through that, so don't remind us for your benefit
.

Come on mang anyone who follows this thread pretty much knows steve doesn't really know jack shit about nor watches basketball it's more of just taunting the old man. He had all but disappeared until spurs started winning like you said LOL!

That's two games LA should have won and should've been up 3-1.
post #7353 of 27226
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

Come on Steve, I was starting to play along with you because you haven't been as obnoxious, don't be a dumbass now. I posted that shit even before the Lakers game, stop being an idiot just because I've proven you talk shit out of your ass sometimes. Thats a fact that CP3 will be a Clippers next year.
You really have no idea about basketball dawg. Your knowledge baffles me. Griffin flops like a bitch but dude proved today that dude could score, he isn't consistent yet but dude is in his second year and first playoff year. Plus dude gets beat up inside, flop or not, dude gets raped in the paint and still keeps attacking. Pau can't even take a wide open shot with no one around him. Like I said before, a liability at times.
Again, stop while your ahead. When the Spurs got sweeped last year, I didn't act like a bitch that you are, I simply asked for you to honor the bet you lost. You barely believed on the Spurs in the beginning of this season and just started to voice out when the Spurs started playing well in the middle of the season. At least Jet and I supported and believed the Lakers could make another run and I believed at the Clips and they got to the second round in what, first time in 20 years? They did well considering VDN is a terrible coach and CP3, Blake & Caron are all hurt as fuck.
You want to be a dick, I get it, that's fine but at least stop with the stupid statements, which just proves you know almost nothing about basketball other than what you hear Barkley says (which a terrible analyst btw). We've been through that, so don't remind us for your benefit.

If you'll look at the post you will see I saw the error of my ways and changed it. I don't know as much about basketball as you do, but that doesn't mean I don't know anything at all. And Griffin needs a jump shot. The Spurs just sat back and let him fire away in the 2nd half. BTW I missed whole first quarter and figured I'd have to take some serious shit. And then...

Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

OKC just seems like a team of destiny this year. They are literally the only team left in the playoffs that I am interested in. Although the perverse side of me kind of hopes for a Spurs-Pacers final, because it would be a fitting end to a shitty, shitty year of NBA basketball and would make David Stern cry.[/q]

Selig and Goodell suck too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jet View Post

Come on mang anyone who follows this thread pretty much knows steve doesn't really know jack shit about nor watches basketball it's more of just taunting the old man. He had all but disappeared until spurs started winning like you said LOL!
That's two games LA should have won and should've been up 3-1.

THIS YEAR I been here all along. Lakers: Shoulda woulda coulda. Now they're gonna befishing.

BTW Barkley wwon an Emmy. Says something about his analyst abilities.
post #7354 of 27226
Lakers Baby Lakers
post #7355 of 27226
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post


I think OKC v Indiana would be a great finals.

 

+1

post #7356 of 27226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post


BTW Barkley wwon an Emmy. Says something about his analyst abilities.

He won the Sports Emmy, which was voted on by his peers. It's popularity contest, not because he is actually great.


Quote:
Charles Barkley, Emmy Award Winner

The Sports Emmys were last night in New York, and for a gathering of media people eager to congratulate themselves, nobody really seemed to care. (Just one person was livetweeting the results, the only realtime coverage of the event.) But one winner filtered out into the general consciousness: Charles Barkley won the award for best studio analyst for his NBA work on TNT. Charles wasn't there; he was working. (If the Sports Emmys would like to be relevant—and once upon a time, they used to be televised—they shouldn't go up against two leagues' playoffs. At least the ESPYs pick a day without any competition.) Ernie Johnson accepted on Barkley's behalf.

It's almost pointless to debate whether a person or show "deserves" these awards, since, what does that even mean? Barkley is universally beloved, and the closest thing sports media has to someone who's bulletproof. But no one could believe he offers better actual game analysis than, say, fellow nominees Kirk Herbstreit or Harold Reynolds or Trent Dilfer. At least Barkley beat out Skip Bayless, who was also nominated.

(It's hard to argue with most of the other winning personalities. Joe Buck, Bob Costas and Cris Collinsworth also took home statuettes, and Michelle Tafoya was judged as the sideline reporter who least detracts from the viewing experience.

What are the Sports Emmys? Like any awards show, they exist for the industry to pat itself on the back. And that's fine. Every industry deserves something like that. But while no award show deigns to consider itself a reflection of the masses' preferences, it's hard to argue that the Sports Emmys represents a true yardstick of the sports media's own valuations. The "Blue Ribbon Panel of industry peers" that votes on the winners is a randomly chosen cross-section of the industry. A jury room might consist of an on-air talking head, a sound guy who doesn't care about sports, an executive who only worries about the bottom line of his network's sports unit, and someone who makes commercials. And they're supposed to judge something like "Outstanding New Approach to Sports Event Coverage." (The PGA Championship web broadcast won that one, by the way.)

So congrats to Chuck. He's definitely a peerless "sports personality," as the Emmys put it. There's no sense getting wound up about any of these, unless you really have it in you to argue that "Fanwiches, Proposal, Towel Around the World" got snubbed for "Outstanding Sports Promotional Announcement—Institutional."


Stop reading too much into all these analysis and what Barkely says and watch the games yourself and do your own analysis. Better yet, pick better analyst but only use it as a guideline on what you should look for. These analyst aren't perfect, almost everyone picked the Heat to win it all and the Spurs to a last position place in the playoffs. We both know how that went.

You didn't see the first quarter where the Clips led 33-11, Blake was doing fade away jumpshots like he was Kobe. He was also banking shots like he was Duncan. He was getting to the basket, turning and spinning. He was insane in that quarter scoring 14pts and getting more rebounds than the first 2 games in the series combined.

Nothing to take away from the Spurs, they are indeed playing great basketball but to be honest, they haven't been tested. Look at the two teams they faced. Utah who was just plain awful with their PG struggling. And now the Clippers, first time playoff appearance in half a decade with a whole new core in a shortened season which just lessened their chances to gel better. Clips beat the team nobody wanted to play in the playoffs while being hurt, I think we can all at least give them credit for that. Their chances are bleak now and the Spurs has exposed how bad they could but they also showed how good they could be, they just couldn't do it for 48min straight.

It'll be interesting to see how the Spurs does against the Lakers/OKC because that is going to be their biggest challenge yet, benefits of being a first seed, which they earned. I just don't think it'll be a cakewalk after the Clips.
post #7357 of 27226
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

He won the Sports Emmy, which was voted on by his peers. It's popularity contest, not because he is actually great.
Quote:
Charles Barkley, Emmy Award Winner

The Sports Emmys were last night in New York, and for a gathering of media people eager to congratulate themselves, nobody really seemed to care. (Just one person was livetweeting the results, the only realtime coverage of the event.) But one winner filtered out into the general consciousness: Charles Barkley won the award for best studio analyst for his NBA work on TNT. Charles wasn't there; he was working. (If the Sports Emmys would like to be relevant—and once upon a time, they used to be televised—they shouldn't go up against two leagues' playoffs. At least the ESPYs pick a day without any competition.) Ernie Johnson accepted on Barkley's behalf.
It's almost pointless to debate whether a person or show "deserves" these awards, since, what does that even mean? Barkley is universally beloved, and the closest thing sports media has to someone who's bulletproof. But no one could believe he offers better actual game analysis than, say, fellow nominees Kirk Herbstreit or Harold Reynolds or Trent Dilfer. At least Barkley beat out Skip Bayless, who was also nominated.
(It's hard to argue with most of the other winning personalities. Joe Buck, Bob Costas and Cris Collinsworth also took home statuettes, and Michelle Tafoya was judged as the sideline reporter who least detracts from the viewing experience.
What are the Sports Emmys? Like any awards show, they exist for the industry to pat itself on the back. And that's fine. Every industry deserves something like that. But while no award show deigns to consider itself a reflection of the masses' preferences, it's hard to argue that the Sports Emmys represents a true yardstick of the sports media's own valuations. The "Blue Ribbon Panel of industry peers" that votes on the winners is a randomly chosen cross-section of the industry. A jury room might consist of an on-air talking head, a sound guy who doesn't care about sports, an executive who only worries about the bottom line of his network's sports unit, and someone who makes commercials. And they're supposed to judge something like "Outstanding New Approach to Sports Event Coverage." (The PGA Championship web broadcast won that one, by the way.)
So congrats to Chuck. He's definitely a peerless "sports personality," as the Emmys put it. There's no sense getting wound up about any of these, unless you really have it in you to argue that "Fanwiches, Proposal, Towel Around the World" got snubbed for "Outstanding Sports Promotional Announcement—Institutional."
Stop reading too much into all these analysis and what Barkely says and watch the games yourself and do your own analysis. Better yet, pick better analyst but only use it as a guideline on what you should look for. These analyst aren't perfect, almost everyone picked the Heat to win it all and the Spurs to a last position place in the playoffs. We both know how that went.
You didn't see the first quarter where the Clips led 33-11, Blake was doing fade away jumpshots like he was Kobe. He was also banking shots like he was Duncan. He was getting to the basket, turning and spinning. He was insane in that quarter scoring 14pts and getting more rebounds than the first 2 games in the series combined.
Nothing to take away from the Spurs, they are indeed playing great basketball but to be honest, they haven't been tested. Look at the two teams they faced. Utah who was just plain awful with their PG struggling. And now the Clippers, first time playoff appearance in half a decade with a whole new core in a shortened season which just lessened their chances to gel better. Clips beat the team nobody wanted to play in the playoffs while being hurt, I think we can all at least give them credit for that. Their chances are bleak now and the Spurs has exposed how bad they could but they also showed how good they could be, they just couldn't do it for 48min straight.
It'll be interesting to see how the Spurs does against the Lakers/OKC because that is going to be their biggest challenge yet, benefits of being a first seed, which they earned. I just don't think it'll be a cakewalk after the Clips.
I heard Griffin shot well in the first half, but what happened in the 2nd? And as a rule in this Series, so why point at 24 mins of basketball instead of 120? The first half was a freak.
Did it ever occur to you that the Spurs haven't been challenged because they're that good?
The people who are paid to report sports for a living gave Barkley an Emmy. Sorry, but I'll trust their judgment over yours.
And to Jet:
Hopping in every 2 weeks or so to post Lakers Baby Lakers isn't even intelligent discourse, much less a sign of being a true fan for your team.
post #7358 of 27226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post

The people who are paid to report sports for a living gave Barkley an Emmy. Sorry, but I'll trust their judgment over yours.

And it's like you don't even read the article I posted. It clearly states there is no merits int he award, the judges are random. It could be a janitor working at ESPN. It clearly states it can be someone who knows nothing about sports and they can still vote. That really validates that Emmy given to Barkley? You such a sheep of the media and that is why it's hard to give you credit with anything you say that is basketball related.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post


Did it ever occur to you that the Spurs haven't been challenged because they're that good?

Again, have you read what I wrote? Utah sucked big time and even I gave them credit that in beginning but just played terrible. I gave the Spurs credit (read my post again) but no one even pegged the Clips beating the Spurs other than me. But come on, the Spurs hasn't been challenged and you know it. If for some reason the Lakers/OKC gives them a good challenge (close games and even a chance they might lose) would you admit it in the whole world that you don't know shit? Are we ever going to get you to admit that? That all you bball knowledge is from whatever crap you read from ESPN.com.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post

I heard Griffin shot well in the first half, but what happened in the 2nd?
And as a rule in this Series, so why point at 24 mins of basketball instead of 120? The first half was a freak.

In the second, he cooled off or just isn't consistent yet. That was beside the point, the initial discussion was you dumb comparison of Paus softness in comparison to Blakes. And I backed it up that dude played with heart and actually did well and that he could do it while hurt.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post


And as a rule in this Series, so why point at 24 mins of basketball instead of 120? The first half was a freak.
And what the fuck is 120? You do know there are only 48 minutes in a basketball game, right? Again, just proof that you are clueless at times. I mean seriously, 120?



Like I said bro, the Spurs are dominating and you can gloat when they win the chip but for now, shut up because you are sounding more and more clueless every time you type. Quit while your ahead, you'll get your chance if the Spurs wins it all this year. Just be happy about that.
post #7359 of 27226
I think the "120 minutes" he is talking about is the 4 games minus the previously mentioned 24.
post #7360 of 27226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

I think the "120 minutes" he is talking about is the 4 games minus the previously mentioned 24.

But shouldn't he have said "point out 24mins instead of 144" (which are only 3 games btw)? I mean why take away the 24 minutes he played well and just leave out the 120min that he sucked? And why would he mention the first half being "freak" in the next sentence if he was talking about the whole series? That last sentence implied he was talking about a game.

Either way, the way he wrote it just didn't make much sense.
post #7361 of 27226
Yes 3 games is what I meant, not 4. Not defending the rest of what he said, which I actually didn't read.

This thread is much more contentious than the other sports threads for some reason. Has a Current Events vibe almost.
post #7362 of 27226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

Yes 3 games is what I meant, not 4. Not defending the rest of what he said, which I actually didn't read.
This thread is much more contentious than the other sports threads for some reason. Has a Current Events vibe almost.

I've never been to that forum so I wouldn't know but to be honest if Steve stayed on the "Spurs Baby Spurs" kind of gloating like Jet does, it isn't a problem and all just for fun. But dude decides to spews garbage from whatever source he reads/watches that as long as it's printed on paper or is televised, he deems it correct than any other. Not to mention dude talks about stuff he knows nothing about and then just gets mad and off track when he is proven wrong.

For an old man, he really needs some growing up at times.
post #7363 of 27226
Thread Starter 
In other news, Heat are just... I don't even know what to call it... sucking really hard right now?
post #7364 of 27226
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFX45 View Post

I noticed Kobe chucking shots a lot and that is typical Kobe but that is also typical Mike Brown (see Lebron). And they went away from Bynum because he got fronted. If you see the replays you'll noticed once Perkins or Ibaka fronts him, the play becomes broken because no one knows what to do after getting the ball to Bynum failed. So they end up with the typical last second shots on almost every possession.
Overall it was a team loss but that last play by Pau was key. He was wide open, he can shoot in that range at a high percentage. Take the shot, it's simple as that.

#1 - Kobe was heisting all game

#2 - Credit OKC for inventing this new thing called 'fronting' - who knew this was possible? So you can excuse a team full of professional athletes and coaches for not being able to make an adjustment.
post #7365 of 27226
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post

#1 - Kobe was heisting all game
#2 - Credit OKC for inventing this new thing called 'fronting' - who knew this was possible? So you can excuse a team full of professional athletes and coaches for not being able to make an adjustment.

No excuses at all. Like I said, the team as a whole lost. But by not taking the shot, Pau gave away their chance at winning. He was wide open, he has hit that shot numerous times so why pass and cause a turnover? It's really as simple as that.

In Kobes defense, he was playing well in the game until that last few minutes. Trust me, I was yelling at the tv screen to not let the time run out on Kobes hand because he will chuck it up and it'll be a forced shot. To be fair he made a couple but it still wasn't the highest percentage of shots. In the end, Brown didn't tell Kobe to stop shooting or to pass it in the inside or tell Bynum post up differently. And the time Kobe passes to Pau, he choked and passed the ball. He had a Lebron moment. Team missed lots of free throw too.

BTW, I blame Kobe for that game 2 loss too so it really isn't a biased opinion. I say it as I see it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread