Re: Since this is a Celtics forum
posted at 9/21/2012 7:53 AM EDT
In response to Fiercest34's comment:
We're only talking about the Finals here, not the playoffs.
Like I said, when you lose an argument, you move the entire field.
And why are you only talking about the Finals? You mean the NBA seasons are only about the finals? Then how are the finalists determined? flipping coins?
When your argument is totally shot, just cherry pick a small part of it: we only talk about the finals, we don't talk about anything else before that.
"The Celtics only played in the NBA for 21 seasons".
See, you may want to ignore the Celtics' 45 seasons of futility, but do you think I'll let you?
[QUOTE]The Spurs went to the Finals 4 times and they won 4 times. Clearly a dominant team.
I mean you can say if the Spurs make it to the Finals, they will surely win.
So fill in the blanks:
If the Spurs don't make it to the Finals, _____________
If the Celtics don't make it to the Finals, ______________
Don't forget, the Spurs/Celtics fail to make it to the finals more often than not. Now, you are trying to use a non-representative sample (small minority) to illustrate your point. But knowing your ignorance, can't blame you for that....
[QUOTE]But if you're only 5-3 in the Finals, it's not a sure thing that you'll be champs because it has been proven that you lost to 3 different east teams in the Finals.
The Celtics only lost to the Lakers and the St.Louis Hawks in the Finals.
Your Lakers even have a losing record to the Knicks in the NBA Finals.[/QUOTE]
But it's not a sure thing that the Celtics will make it to the finals. As a matter of fact, it's a long shot. Its odds (31.8%) are even less than the Lakers winning in the finals (51.6%). So in other words, I like the chance of the Lakers winning in the finals than the Celtics making it to the finals.