The championship is tainted

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

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]Hey Majic, why don't you do a trick that would add 1 more banner on the rafters of Staples. That way Jack Nicholson and the rest of Laker nation would be "tricked" into believing the Lakers have 17 championships.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    I don't have to. It's you who recognized the Lakers' 17 championships. You spelled it out for us: 17 championships since 1947-48. So your spelling put the Celtics in 2nd place...


     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : WOW - you have deep, deep, deep problems.  Too many to address here.  So here are a couple, don't bother responding as it will be a waste of your time - no answer from me: BUT - here are a few tidbits for you - http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/grammarlogs4/grammarlogs595.htm Normally, when we use the past tense of "quit" to mean "stopped," it is spelled that way, as in "He quit bugging his sister." But if you mean "left," the past tense form "quitted" would be acceptable, at least in England: "Her finances dried up and she quitted the area, moving to Montana." In the U.S., you'd undoubtedly be better off using "left." From Garner's Modern American Usage by Bryan Garner. Copyright 2003 by Bryan A. Garner. Published by Oxford University Press, Inc., www.oup-usa.org , and used with the gracious consent of Oxford University Press So, unless you mean the lakers LEFT the playoffs, using quitted is incorrect.  Please do not come back with a dictionary, I never said it was not a word, you just used it incorrectly. I will not get into records, but no one keeps track of how many times one loses, except Cubs fans, and maybe those who follow the Glasgow Rangers.  No one cares how many times you lost, only how many you've won.  Boston 17, lakers of Minneapolis plus Inglewood plus LA 16. Comprehension 101 - I never said anything about Bynum playing in the playoffs.  What I said was this - until he got hurt, the lakers did not pursue Pau Gasol from the Griz.  AFTER he got hurt, they made an offer.  And since CHI had an offer of Noah, Nocioni and Deng, the fact the lakers got him for Kwame Brown and some stiffs ( please don't tell me they knew Marc Gasol would be good, he had ZERO experience) is highly suspect. Lastly, I can tell you are not a gambler.  The Miami Heat are the FAVORITES already to win next year............that means if they don't, they choke.  The odds will not change if they get down 3-2, or if they have HCA.  They are the favorites to win, and all they can do is choke.  The lakers were the favorites last year - and they didn't choke.  Boston's winning would have been an upset, so they could not choke.  I know that is very difficult for you, but Vegas would not give you your money back if you team makes it to the Finals and gets down 3-2.  That has nothing to do with it.  MIA choked this year, Dal didn't.  LAL were favorites last year, and they won.....................deal with it. Any other problems you have, you really need therapy for, as I can do no more for you!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11[/QUOTE]

    I don't know what you are smoking, but your dream that you defined the English language really make me laugh.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/quit

    — vb  , chiefly  ( US ) quits , quitting , quitted , quit
    ...
    4.     to desist or cease from (something or doing something); break off: quit laughing

    Pray tell, why shouldn't I come back with a dictionary? at least a dictionary is more creditable than you are.

    Now, enough English lesson.

    1) No one cares how many times you lose? It's funny that someone here keep emphasizing the Lakers' 16-15 finals record and "Celtics own you". Right. No one cares how many times you lose when it's the Celtics' losses. You only count wins, so the Celtics must be winning the championships in 2011. They had 5 wins in the playoffs, and no one count losses...

    2) You never said Bynum playing in the playoffs? really? if so, then what implication is "no Bynum injury no Gasol" means to the Celtics' luck of not facing Bynum in the playoffs? whether it is true or not Bynum's injury caused Gasol's trade, it has no bearing on the finals. Then when we use the Bynum injury excuse in 2008, your mention of "no Bynum injury, no Gasol" is just gibberish with no meaning, oui?

    2a) and you can never prove that the Lakers would not have pursued Gasol had Bynum not injured, not with a team sitting in 5th place in the conference.

    "Why didn't the Lakers make an offer before Bynum got hurt?" you ask?

    You are really funny. Just the Lakers didn't make an offer in December means they wouldn't have made an offer in February? Here is a penny, buy some common sense...

    3) Funny you are playing this pitiful underdog again. History is definitely not your cup of tea. Of course you want to tell us that a team that had a 4-2 historical trend in their favor is an underdog, simply because for the Celtics, losing is expected, winning is a show of their heart and courage.

    Funny that's a far cry from constant predictions here that 2010-11 was their #18...

    Now, to your disclaimer "don't bother responding as it will be a waste of your time - no answer from me". I won't bet on it. Knowing that you have been smarting over your losses in argument over the last two years, you know what you'll do. I have no expectation that you'll give up this "No Bynum injury no Gasol" illusion anytime soon.





     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted  HAHAHA!!!
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    HAHAHA what?

    You are the one that counted the Lakers' NBL season. Do you regret now?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Lakers

    Championships  17
    NBL: 1 (1948)
    BAA/NBA: 16 (1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2009, 2010)

    That's why I don't understand why you pitch that big fat hanging curveball...



     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : I don't know what you are smoking, but your dream that you defined the English language really make me laugh. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/quit — vb  , chiefly  ( US ) quits , quitting , quitted , quit ... 4.     to desist or cease from (something or doing something); break off: quit laughing Pray tell, why shouldn't I come back with a dictionary? at least a dictionary is more creditable than you are. Now, enough English lesson. 1) No one cares how many times you lose? It's funny that someone here keep emphasizing the Lakers' 16-15 finals record and "Celtics own you". Right. No one cares how many times you lose when it's the Celtics' losses. You only count wins, so the Celtics must be winning the championships in 2011. They had 5 wins in the playoffs, and no one count losses... 2) You never said Bynum playing in the playoffs? really? if so, then what implication is "no Bynum injury no Gasol means" to the Celtics' luck of not facing Bynum in the playoffs? whether it is true or not Bynum's injury caused Gasol's trade, it has no bearing on the finals. Then when we use the Bynum injury excuse in 2008, your mention of "no Bynum injury, no Gasol" is just gibberish with no meaning, oui? 2a) and you can never prove that the Lakers would not have pursued Gasol had Bynum not injured, not with a team sitting in 5th place in the conference. "Why didn't the Lakers make an offer before Bynum got hurt?" you ask? You are really funny. Just the Lakers didn't make an offer in December means they wouldn't have made an offer in February? Here is a penny, buy some common sense... 3) Funny you are playing this pitiful underdog again. History is definitely not your cup of tea. Of course you want to tell us that a team that had a 4-2 historical trend in their favor is an underdog, simply because for the Celtics, losing is expected, winning is a show of their heart and courage. Funny that's a far cry from constant predictions here that 2010-11 was their #18... Now, to your disclaimer "don't bother responding as it will be a waste of your time - no answer from me". I won't bet on it. Knowing that you have been smarting over your losses in argument over the last two years, you know what you'll do. I have no expectation that you'll give up this "No Bynum injury no Gasol" illusion anytime soon.
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Quitted is a word, it is in there, you just used it wrong.

    I have not yet lost an argument to you, because you don't argue.  You post completely irrelevant facts and opinion that you expect others to blindly follow.  It is YOU who cannot prove the lakers would have MADE the trade for Gasol.  I have done my research on the topic and  "it was not a viable option for them until Bynum got hurt."  Spin it all you want.  I am not smarting from anything - you haven't proven anything or beaten me in any way.
    Again, Quitted is a word (not used much in this country, it's more an England - thing), so to quote a dictionary is pointless, that only tells you if it is a word or not, and it IS a word..  Okay, it IS a word - you just used it incorrectly.  Hey, it happens!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : You know the difference between Celtic fans and Laker fans? Celtic fans said 2010-11 was their #18 while Laker fans said 2010-11 was their #17.  I am 16 going on 17 I know that i'm naive Fellows I meet may tell me I'm sweet And willingly I believe I am 16 going on 17 innocent as a rose Bachelor dandies Drinkers of brandies What do I know of those Totally unprepared am I To face a world of men Timid and shy and scared am I  Of things beyond my ken I need someone Older and wiser Telling me what to do You are 17 going on 18  I'll depend on you  HAHAHA!!!
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    You need to get off the coke, Fharts, er ah, Fierce.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : HERE COMES THE DRUNK AVENGER! "Ah wuz drunk." Re: This Board is out of Control posted at 6/16/2011 8:20 PM EDT www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=f2794b1580cdb88590b781a2ba13f2ce&plckUserId=f2794b1580cdb88590b781a2ba13f2ce " /> lakersavenger Posts: 223 First: 4/22/2011 Last: 6/23/2011 In Response to  Re: This Board is out of Control : In Response to Re: This Board is out of Control : Means nothing to you? WRONG! Another Boston game 7 collapse just hours away... posted at 6/15/2011 11:24 AM EDT www.boston.com/community/persona.html?UID=f2794b1580cdb88590b781a2ba13f2ce&plckUserId=f2794b1580cdb88590b781a2ba13f2ce " /> lakersavenger Posts: 182 First: 4/22/2011 Last: 6/16/2011 One of my great joys in life is seeing Boston get tantalyzingly close to a title of any kind and see it wither away at the last moment. Tonight I will be enjoying my Scotch as I celebrate another Boston game 7 finals loss 2 years in a row. Hey, after tonight, you call all say you got back-to-backs. We can call it a rebeat. MUHOOHAHAHAHAHA! TONIGHT YOU GONNA GET CANUCKED Posted by Fiercest34 Ah wuz drunk.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]


    I don't know - do you feel saying "I was drunk" should exonerate you from posting/doing anything stupid, then refusing to admit you're wrong?

    Cleraly, I don't !
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : Quitted is a word, it is in there, you just used it wrong. [/QUOTE]
    Not according to the dictionary, so you are wrong here. But don't despair. It's not your first time to be wrong. And it won't be your last...

    See, you are not going to reply? you can't even skip ONE post. Why do you think this stunt of "don't bother responding as it will be a waste of your time - no answer from me" will work is really a mystery...

    [QUOTE]
    I have not yet lost an argument to you, because you don't argue.  You post completely irrelevant facts and opinion that you expect others to blindly follow.  It is YOU who cannot prove the lakers would have MADE the trade for Gasol. [/QUOTE]

    You said "No Bynum injury no Gasol", and you beg me to prove otherwise? That's a claim you made. You do nothing, I do nothing. It's still your unsubstantiated claim.

    The Lakers traded for Gasol, a fact. You speculated A, I speculated !A. 

    A's reasoning of the day? If they didn't trade for Gasol before Bynum's injury (say, in December), then they wouldn't have traded for Gasol after Bynum's injury (in February). 

    You are getting more and more innovative. So what's your next reason that the Lakers wouldn't have traded for Gasol?

    [QUOTE]
     I have done my research on the topic and  "it was not a viable option for them until Bynum got hurt."  Spin it all you want. [/QUOTE]
    Your research? "no Bynum injury no Gasol". Fortunately America's future is not based on "research" like this...




     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : You know the difference between Celtic fans and Laker fans? Celtic fans said 2010-11 was their #18 while Laker fans said 2010-11 was their #17.  I am 16 going on 17 I know that i'm naive Fellows I meet may tell me I'm sweet And willingly I believe I am 16 going on 17 innocent as a rose Bachelor dandies Drinkers of brandies What do I know of those Totally unprepared am I To face a world of men Timid and shy and scared am I  Of things beyond my ken I need someone Older and wiser Telling me what to do You are 17 going on 18  I'll depend on you  HAHAHA!!!
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Well, I don't care what the Lakers fan say. But a particular Celtic fan keeps emphasizing the Lakers had won 17 championships, and demotes the Celtics' 17-48 to 2nd place. That's the gem of the day...


     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : You really think if I tell Dr. Jerry Buss that the Lakers have 17 championships he will add 1 more banner on the rafters of Staples? HAHAHA!!!
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    At least you should try. Your argument is so convincing. I don't think he had thought about that angle yet (the 1947-48 NBL championship)...


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : Stop! Hold it right there! You don't care what other Laker fans say but you care about what a Celtic fan has to say? Are you Ron Artest?
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Of course, a Celtic fan forced the Lakers into 1st place ahead of the Celtics, how can I refuse?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from rampageimt23. Show rampageimt23's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : Who's the favorite here? Since the NBA reverted to the 2-3-2 format in 1985, up to game 6 of 2010, the lower seed leading 3-2 were 4-2 in game 6 (W: 1985, 1993, 1998, 2006, L: 1988, 1994). Counting this past two years, the lower seed is 5-3. So, pray tell, why were the Lakers favorites? Don't you realize the team leading 3-2 is a bigger favorite than the higher seed with HCA? Of course, knowing you guys always like to play that pitiful underdog after losing, that's not a surprise. Dumb facts like the lower seed was 4-2 in that situation? or dumb fact like the team with a 4-2 historical trend still being the underdog?
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Oh now you are using historical facts to back your aguements?  Wow, the hypocrisy.  I thought historical facts didn't matter to you.  Like you only count the championships the Celtics won since the merger.  Historically, the Celtics have 17 and the Lakers have 16.  So I will take a page out of your book and give a fact and say well the higher seed is 2-0 because it happened in 1988 and 1994.  I don't count 1985, 1993, 1998 & 2006 because I said so.  It is a fact. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : Oh now you are using historical facts to back your aguements?  Wow, the hypocrisy.  I thought historical facts didn't matter to you.  Like you only count the championships the Celtics won since the merger.  Historically, the Celtics have 17 and the Lakers have 16.  So I will take a page out of your book and give a fact and say well the higher seed is 2-0 because it happened in 1988 and 1994.  I don't count 1985, 1993, 1998 & 2006 because I said so.  It is a fact. 
    Posted by rampageimt23[/QUOTE]

    Hate to burst your bubble? Any of the historical fact (the 4-2 record favoring the lower seed leading 3-2) I mentioned happened before the Magic/Bird era?

    Well, when you have to resort to "because I said so", my time is well spent...




     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from rampageimt23. Show rampageimt23's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : LOL, you sound just like him!!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11[/QUOTE]

    He has been served!!!....LOL
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rampageimt23. Show rampageimt23's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : Hate to burst your bubble? Any of the historical fact (the 4-2 record favoring the lower seed leading 3-2) I mentioned happened before the Magic/Bird era? Well, when you have to resort to "because I said so", my time is well spent...
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Well your retort made no sense.  Kind of like the rest of your posts.  First off, are you questioning whether or not you are trying to hate bursting my bubble?  Not sure what the question mark is for at the end of that first sentence.    Anywho,  I stated a fact didn't I?  The higher is seed is 2-0 in those two years right?  That is true.  Those other years don't matter just like apparently the Celtics other 13 championships don't matter to you because you want to make it look like the Lakers are the better franchise.  I am simply doing what you are doing just better. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Jayco. Show Jayco's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : So are you going to retract that the Lakers quitted in game 6 of the 2008 final? can't quit if you are not the favored team, can't quit if you are not about to clinch... You don't recognize contradiction when it hits you on the face.
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    Quitted?
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from rampageimt23. Show rampageimt23's posts

    Re: The championship is tainted

    In Response to Re: The championship is tainted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The championship is tainted : Quitted?
    Posted by Jayco[/QUOTE]

    Hahahaha....yes quitted.  What an idiot.  The guy can't even spell Magic right.
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share