What's new
By:

2016-17 NBA PLAYOFFS THREAD

DownUnder said:
course it is, in terms of what he makes. You can't tell me you wouldn't like to deliver such a flamboyant rant to your bosses ??
Click to expand...

I tend to do it for a lot less, mostly just costs me a chance at any overtime or higher duties...
 
Ron Mexico said:
h3tI0T.png
Click to expand...

Clippers side sums up to 37%. 101% one of those teams will advance. I agree.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Instant classic IMO.


So many funny bits. Like the pause before he finished where somone says in the background "Alright, thank you", then he finished it off with "Take that for DATA!"


Click to expand...

Are you sure you don't need help telling what is FUNNY from what is basically an EPIC OWNAGE?
 
addictionary said:
Clippers side sums up to 37%. 101% one of those teams will advance. I agree.
Click to expand...

That is a bad sign for the Jazz.

I will never forget the ESPN predictor after Game 4 of the Finals. Warriors were given a 96% chance of winning.

Man, Cleveland, Brexit, Cubbies, Trump.

What a year :)
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
No, if anything they should change the first round to a 5 game series.

Sent from my A0001 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Yuck. Isn't there a little too much variance.

I think it was Seattle losing one year to a number 8 seed in a best of 5 that made me hate it for eternity.

I still hate it in the baseball.

If you''re going to have such a long regular season, chance should be reduced as much as possible.

I know I know. If you lose 3 games against a lower ranked opponent, that is not considered chance - but reality.
 
Et tu Brute said:
Yuck. Isn't there a little too much variance.

I think it was Seattle losing one year to a number 8 seed in a best of 5 that made me hate it for eternity.

I still hate it in the baseball.

If you''re going to have such a long regular season, chance should be reduced as much as possible.

I know I know. If you lose 3 games against a lower ranked opponent, that is not considered chance - but reality.
Click to expand...
Basketball's one huge negative is lack of variance. There is like 80% likelihood we see the same finals matchup 3 years in a row.

Sent from my A0001 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
ONE LOVE said:
Wow.. David Fritzdale just BLEW UP in the press conference... LOL... "They're not gonna ROOK us!"



$35,000 fine coming his way fo sho.



Here's the video just for laughs.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSw_LjYzRkA
Click to expand...

I think that's great. He's hoping to get an edge on the officials and start getting some calls. He's hoping to spark his players. If it works, it's genius. Even if it fails, and they get swept. . . I guarantee that every guy in Memphis loves his coach right now.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Basketball's one huge negative is lack of variance. There is like 80% likelihood we see the same finals matchup 3 years in a row.

Sent from my A0001 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Increased variance = increased luck. Not sure that is great. But I get the sentiment of unpredictability...

Irony though if it is Warriors v Cavs. Because 3 in a row (between same teams) has never happened.
 
Et tu Brute said:
Increased variance = increased luck. Not sure that is great. But I get the sentiment of unpredictability...

Irony though if it is Warriors v Cavs. Because 3 in a row (between same teams) has never happened.
Click to expand...

I think it is. it is one of the reasons that the NFL is more popular IMO. Greater chance to different teams to win. Having routine and predictable finals year after year hurts the product. Keeps some fans from tuning in. For example. I won't watch another Cavs/Warriors finals. No interest for me. But if it was say Rockets/Wizards or Raptors/Spurs I would watch some games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top