Since this is a Celtics forum

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    these Laker fans are so entertaining.....anything to get a rise out of a Celtic fan.....when you are number two....you will do anything to try to gain an advantage....the funny thing is that they don't seem to realize just how desperate they make themselves out to be....then again, most of them are probably just kids....it's really funny when you think about it...
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from vertmont. Show vertmont's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    Go Celtics. Can not wait until the season starts. Sounds like on paper we are not going to win this year. As far as paper goes you either read it,write on it or wipe with it.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from vertmont. Show vertmont's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    http://www.piehole.net/leakers.html
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Red-16Russ-11 comment:

    Exactly right - he WILL move to the 4, but until then he will play the 5!  Very simple, and thanks once again for proving my point


    You can keep thanking me for proving you wrong. He was brought in to play alongside Bynum, PROJECTED TO BE IN MARCH!!!! and thus definitely in the playoffs.

    So your "no Bynum injury, no gasol trade" doesn't wash whatsoever...
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Fiercest34 comment:

    Are you really that dumb? The Celts have the most championships compared to any other NBA team from the east, that's a fact!

    [/QUOTE]

    The Lakers had 13 championships against better eastern team vs the Celtics' 8 against better western teams, i.e. the 13-8 gap is bigger than the 9-3 gap. That's a FACT!!!




     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Duke4 comment:

    regarding Lakers 13-8 over Celtics at 9-3.....not sure how you are computing the math...13-8 is a winning percentage of .619....9-3 is a winning percentage of .750...

    also not sure where this 13-8 comes from....Lakers are 16-15...3-9 vs Celtics...so that actually leaves them in a better position at 13-6 vs teams not named the Celtics....that is a winning percentage of .684.....still Boston comes in at 8-1 vs teams not named Lakers...that is a winning percentage of .888



    Duke, when you don't know what 13-8 means, just ask. I am glad to teach you.

    Celtics championships vs the Lakers: 9
    Lakers championships vs the Celtics: 3

    Lakers championships vs other (better than Celtics) eastern teams: 13
    Celtics championships vs other (better than Lakers) western teams: 8

    It's not a winning % against (teams of whatever criteria), so I don't know how you can calculate a winning pct.

    So, the gap of Celtics vs Lakers in direct competition in the final: 6
    the gap of Celtics vs Lakers NOT in direct competition in the final: 5

    In other words, the indirect gap of 5 is bigger than the direct gap of 6. Since in the gap of 6, at least the Lakers are in the finals. In the gap of 13-8, let's see how far apart they are. That would be depressing for you folks. Let's use this convention (Celtics beat Lakers in the final, it's Celtics > Lakers, Lakers beat the Magic that beat the Celtics in the 2nd round, then it's Lakers > Magic, Lakers >> Cavaliers, Lakers >>> Celtics).

    1949 Lakers >>>> Celtics (missed playoffs)
    1950 Lakers >>>> Celtics (missed playoffs)
    1951 Lakers >>> Celtics (DSF)
    1952 Lakers >> Celtics (DF)
    1953 Lakers >> Celtics (DF)
    1957 Lakers (DF) << Celtics
    1960 Lakers (DF) << Celtics
    1961 Lakers (DF) << Celtics
    1964 Lakers (DSF) <<< Celtics
    1972 Lakers >> Celtics (CF)
    1974 Lakers (CSF) <<< Celtics
    1976 Lakers (missed playoffs) <<<<< Celtics
    1980 Lakers >> Celtics (CF)
    1981 Lakers (1st round) <<<< Celtics
    1982 Lakers >> Celtics (CF)
    1986 Lakers (CF) << Celtics
    1988 Lakers >> Celtics (CF)
    2000 Lakers >>>>> Celtics (missed playoffs)
    2001 Lakers >>>>> Celtics (missed playoffs)
    2002 Lakers >> Celtics (CF)
    2009 Lakers >>> Celtics (CSF)

    So Celtics vs Lakers in direct head to head: +6
    Celtics vs Lakers in all other championships: -15

    So, depends on how you want to count.

    1) A championship is a championship, nothing else matter. So it's 17-16, nothing for you to write home about. It's too close to call. Given that the Celtics championships are front-loaded (during the bush league era of the league), the Lakers' back-loaded 10-4 (since the merger and the goldern era of the NBA) and 7-1 (since the Celtic drought) are more commendable.

    2) "We are 9-3 against you head to head", you say?

    We are 13-8 over you in non-head-to-head championships, and the gap is a much bigger +15 in terms of rounds. So what about your head-to-head?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    One more thing Duke, you can use this reasoning:

    "we give credit to the Celtics for missing the playoffs or losing early in the playoffs, thus they don't have to lose to the Lakers in the finals in those 13 years when they won the championships against the better eastern teams.

    YOU DON'T GET THE HEAD-TO-HEAD ADVANTAGE AGAINST US IN THOSE YEARS!!!!"

    You really should try it...

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    this discussion is a ranking of two greats with multiple championships.....in considering which was of the two is better.....we can just use the boxing analogy....

    how did your fighter fare in the ring against my fighter.....?   .....well, my fighter dominated yours in the championship prize fights....just simply dominated him...but in your opinion, your guy was better.....good luck taking that theory into a bar some evening....
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to KingShaq's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Red-16Russ-11 comment:


    Exactly right - he WILL move to the 4, but until then he will play the 5!  Very simple, and thanks once again for proving my point

    You can keep thanking me for proving you wrong. He was brought in to play alongside Bynum, PROJECTED TO BE IN MARCH!!!! and thus definitely in the playoffs.

    So your "no Bynum injury, no gasol trade" doesn't wash whatsoever...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Of course it does, irritating one................he was brought in to play center until Bynum returned.............projections mean nothing......and  now this will be tough for you, TRUE or FALSE - he wasn't traded for until AFTER the Bynum injury?

    Thanks, that's all I need-  have a nice life!!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Lakerstroll. Show Lakerstroll's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Duke4 comment:

    this discussion is a ranking of two greats with multiple championships.....in considering which was of the two is better.....we can just use the boxing analogy....

    how did your fighter fare in the ring against my fighter.....?   .....well, my fighter dominated yours in the championship prize fights....just simply dominated him...but in your opinion, your guy was better.....good luck taking that theory into a bar some evening....


    Duke, you are a babbling idiot. You make no sense at all and it's not even worth the effort typing. No amount of logic will penetrate that empty skull of yours. A couple of years ago when I first came to this board, I had at least a modicum of respect for you but soon after sensed something not right about you, especially with all this "pal, my friend" and all the other superficial bs of yours. Now I see that I was right. You are a very shallow and unhappy person,  just like Fierce and red/russ or whatever he wants to call himself today. I can now understand why even Sam left this board.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Lakerstroll's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Duke4 comment:

    this discussion is a ranking of two greats with multiple championships.....in considering which was of the two is better.....we can just use the boxing analogy....

    how did your fighter fare in the ring against my fighter.....?   .....well, my fighter dominated yours in the championship prize fights....just simply dominated him...but in your opinion, your guy was better.....good luck taking that theory into a bar some evening....


    Duke, you are a babbling idiot. You make no sense at all and it's not even worth the effort typing. No amount of logic will penetrate that empty skull of yours. A couple of years ago when I first came to this board, I had at least a modicum of respect for you but soon after sensed something not right about you, especially with all this "pal, my friend" and all the other superficial bs of yours. Now I see that I was right. You are a very shallow and unhappy person,  just like Fierce and red/russ or whatever he wants to call himself today. I can now understand why even Sam left this board.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Feel free to join him if you want - you will not be missed.  Calling someone a babbling idiot, then ridiculing people for not "respecting " the lakers???? You are a fraud and a joker.  It's YOU we don't respect.  We have great respect for the lakers and thier accomplishments.  It's "fans" who come on other teams websites, and ruin good discussions that are the problem here.  I have reported your comment as vulgar and obscene, and I shall continue to report any personal attacks you make on me or Duke, until you are where you belong - banned!!
    Have a nice day!!
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to kobedaman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Feel free to join him if you want - you will not be missed.  Calling someone a babbling idiot, then ridiculing people for not "respecting " the lakers???? You are a fraud and a joker.  It's YOU we don't respect.  We have great respect for the lakers and thier accomplishments.  It's "fans" who come on other teams websites, and ruin good discussions that are the problem here.  I have reported your comment as vulgar and obscene, and I shall continue to report any personal attacks you make on me or Duke, until you are where you belong - banned!!
    Have a nice day!!
    [/QUOTE]
    Son you want to get banned again, keep it up!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I didn't know you were in charge of that.................and what is AGAIN??
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Lakerstroll's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Red-16Russ-11 comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Lakerstroll's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Duke4 comment:

    this discussion is a ranking of two greats with multiple championships.....in considering which was of the two is better.....we can just use the boxing analogy....

    how did your fighter fare in the ring against my fighter.....?   .....well, my fighter dominated yours in the championship prize fights....just simply dominated him...but in your opinion, your guy was better.....good luck taking that theory into a bar some evening....


    Duke, you are a babbling idiot. You make no sense at all and it's not even worth the effort typing. No amount of logic will penetrate that empty skull of yours. A couple of years ago when I first came to this board, I had at least a modicum of respect for you but soon after sensed something not right about you, especially with all this "pal, my friend" and all the other superficial bs of yours. Now I see that I was right. You are a very shallow and unhappy person,  just like Fierce and red/russ or whatever he wants to call himself today. I can now understand why even Sam left this board.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Feel free to join him if you want - you will not be missed.  Calling someone a babbling idiot, then ridiculing people for not "respecting " the lakers???? You are a fraud and a joker.  It's YOU we don't respect.  We have great respect for the lakers and thier accomplishments.  It's "fans" who come on other teams websites, and ruin good discussions that are the problem here.  I have reported your comment as vulgar and obscene, and I shall continue to report any personal attacks you make on me or Duke, until you are where you belong - banned!!
    Have a nice day!!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The Snitch strikes again, and the Burbank Buffoon re-emerges.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Aww - you really hurt me with that one........
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Lakerstroll's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Duke4 comment:

    this discussion is a ranking of two greats with multiple championships.....in considering which was of the two is better.....we can just use the boxing analogy....

    how did your fighter fare in the ring against my fighter.....?   .....well, my fighter dominated yours in the championship prize fights....just simply dominated him...but in your opinion, your guy was better.....good luck taking that theory into a bar some evening....


    Duke, you are a babbling idiot. You make no sense at all and it's not even worth the effort typing. No amount of logic will penetrate that empty skull of yours. A couple of years ago when I first came to this board, I had at least a modicum of respect for you but soon after sensed something not right about you, especially with all this "pal, my friend" and all the other superficial bs of yours. Now I see that I was right. You are a very shallow and unhappy person,  just like Fierce and red/russ or whatever he wants to call himself today. I can now understand why even Sam left this board.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I once had a conversation with lakerstroll.  He told me the "problem" he had with me was that I didn't show the lakers the proper respect, and that I referred to Mr. Bryant as koME.  He said he would show proper respect for me and my team, and cease to refer to me as a buffoon if I did so.  I have not used the term koME in about 2 years now, have great respect for the lakers, just none for their fans.
    Think this man will keep his word?  Not on your life, as he is a liar and a fraud!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    Lakerstroll.....a day or so ago I responded to what I thought was one of your better posts....I gave you a little insight regarding my thoughts and feelings......that post was evidently ignored by you...and that's fine......

    Now you resort to name calling and verbal abuse.....and that is fine as well.....what I don't get is that you don't explain why you think my opinion is so off the wall....it can't be just because you are a Laker fan/Celtic hater.....there are several Laker fans that have told me time and again that they think I make good points......in fact, we are even facebook friends...

    I am not on here to be "likeable" to trolls......I am on here to discuss issues with intelligent posters and to "agree to disagree" when it is appropriate.....I do not go to other team's forums and try to "spread the word"....I stay here with friends to discuss my team....when trolls infest the board I sometimes feel the need to help "defend our home turf"....

    that said, I suggest you simply ignore my posts....if they hit home and bother you it's one thing....if you think I am a "babbling idiot" why bother.....?  .....just move on to the next post... 



     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Fiercest34 comment:
    [QUOTE]
    WRONG AGAIN!!!

    You didn't know that only 2 teams beat the Celtics in the Finals? The St. Louis Hawks and the Lakers are the only 2 teams that have beaten the Celtics in the Finals. And since the Hawks are already in the east, the Celtics only lost to one western team, the Lakers.


    [/QUOTE]

    You obviously have no clue what's being argued.

    You didn't know that the Celtics won only 8 championships against other teams from the west (other than the Lakers)?

    The Lakers won 13 championships against other teams from the east (other than the Celtics).

    That's how you get the Lakers' 13-8 edge in non-head-to-head championships, with an advantage of 15 rounds.

    Thus the Lakers' 13-8 edge is bigger than the Celtics' 9-3 head-to-head edge (with an advantage of 6 rounds).



     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Fiercest34 comment:

    Celtics vs. Lakers 

    9-3 = .750 Celtics

    Lakers vs. Other Teams

    13-8 = .619 Lakers



    More ignorance? .619 Lakers? against whom?

    [QUOTE]
    Just because the western conference was weak in the 80s it doesn't mean the Lakers were dominant. Seriously, the Lakers beat a Sonics team with a losing record in the west finals in 1987. And that Sonics team had Dale Ellis, Tom Chambers, and Xavier McDaniel as their Big 3.  [/QUOTE]

    The Western conference was weak? was that a fact verified by the NBA or was it your wishy washy?

    Since it's not a fact, I don't worry about it.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Duke4 comment:

    this discussion is a ranking of two greats with multiple championships.....in considering which was of the two is better.....we can just use the boxing analogy....

    how did your fighter fare in the ring against my fighter.....?   .....well, my fighter dominated yours in the championship prize fights....just simply dominated him...but in your opinion, your guy was better.....good luck taking that theory into a bar some evening....



    Well, this analogy is childish. What are you bragging when you aren't even good enough to make it to the ring? i.e. knocked out in the first round.

    You can take your theory to the bar, or to Tom Brady (about the SB loss):

    ā€œIā€™d rather come to this game and lose than not get here.ā€™ā€™








     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to Red-16Russ-11 comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Of course it does, irritating one................he was brought in to play center until Bynum returned.............projections mean nothing......and  now this will be tough for you, TRUE or FALSE - he wasn't traded for until AFTER the Bynum injury?

    [/QUOTE]
    Umm... still smarting on the argument? See, I over-estimate you, I thought you could hide for a week.

    Projection mean nothing? according to whom? If that's you, then you have no evidence.
    So the Lakers pay him tens of millions of $ to play center only for 2 months? Did the Lakers dump him after Bynum recovered? I bet you'll dodge that again...

    So he was traded after the Bynum injury == "no Bynum injury => no Gasol trade"?

    You think you can get away with this cheap stunt?




     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: Since this is a Celtics forum

    In response to KingShaq's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Red-16Russ-11 comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Of course it does, irritating one................he was brought in to play center until Bynum returned.............projections mean nothing......and  now this will be tough for you, TRUE or FALSE - he wasn't traded for until AFTER the Bynum injury?

    [/QUOTE]
    Umm... still smarting on the argument? See, I over-estimate you, I thought you could hide for a week.

    Projection mean nothing? according to whom? If that's you, then you have no evidence.
    So the Lakers pay him tens of millions of $ to play center only for 2 months? Did the Lakers dump him after Bynum recovered? I bet you'll dodge that again...

    So he was traded after the Bynum injury == "no Bynum injury => no Gasol trade"?

    You think you can get away with this cheap stunt?




     

    [/QUOTE]

    Not my argument, I wish you'd stay on topic.
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share