cgf wrote:RHODEY wrote:boomershadow wrote:He is saying what we are thinking
I was thinking he needed a pacifier.
He's just making sure they get the home-cooking in games 3 & 4
Yep. That's what this is about.
Moderators: cupcakesnake, infinite11285, Dirk, Harry Garris, ken6199, zimpy27, bwgood77, bisme37, KingDavid, Domejandro
cgf wrote:RHODEY wrote:boomershadow wrote:He is saying what we are thinking
I was thinking he needed a pacifier.
He's just making sure they get the home-cooking in games 3 & 4
doogie_hauser wrote:Weird Flex. The Josh Hart shove on Haliburton was a legit compliant, but I also thought the refs let a log on Knicks players being fouled on multiple occasions tonight (ie DiVo and Josh Hart)
RC and the Pacers had a legit beef and criticsm of the refs in game 1, tonight the Knicks did earn their win through sheer amazing will power and grit.
Brunson's heroics tonight is something I will remember for a long, long time, The Knicks version of The Terminator.
cgf wrote:RHODEY wrote:cgf wrote:
He's just making sure they get the home-cooking in games 3 & 4
Right, but at the expense of making his team look weak.
I dunno. He didn't come off all whiny like Nurse did. That reminded me more of a classic Phil Jackson officials rant.
Capn'O wrote:I wonder what Paul Reed's feelings are about metal bats.
RHODEY wrote:They also earned the game 1 win. Not our fault Haliburton only scored 6 points.reload141 wrote:blueNorange wrote:sounds like a loser that knows his team, that plays no defense, is dead in the water
knicks have to win 2 more, pacers need to win 4
The push on Haliburton was a pretty big miss.
Game 1, yeah I agree the refs favored the Knicks pretty hard.
But at the end of the day, Knicks earned this win through being the tougher and no-quit mentality as they have demonstrated throughout the playoffs.
I’ll need to check the maths on how many games each team needs to win though…
reload141 wrote:RHODEY wrote:They also earned the game 1 win. Not our fault Haliburton only scored 6 points.reload141 wrote:
The push on Haliburton was a pretty big miss.
Game 1, yeah I agree the refs favored the Knicks pretty hard.
But at the end of the day, Knicks earned this win through being the tougher and no-quit mentality as they have demonstrated throughout the playoffs.
I’ll need to check the maths on how many games each team needs to win though…
I mean… yeah it’s not your fault, but even you can admit if the refs called it both ways in Game 1 this series could easily be 1-1.
There’s no real issue here, game 2 was all fair
RHODEY wrote:reload141 wrote:RHODEY wrote:They also earned the game 1 win. Not our fault Haliburton only scored 6 points.
I mean… yeah it’s not your fault, but even you can admit if the refs called it both ways in Game 1 this series could easily be 1-1.
There’s no real issue here, game 2 was all fair
No I cant admit that. We had the same amount of call go against us.
RHODEY wrote:reload141 wrote:RHODEY wrote:They also earned the game 1 win. Not our fault Haliburton only scored 6 points.
I mean… yeah it’s not your fault, but even you can admit if the refs called it both ways in Game 1 this series could easily be 1-1.
There’s no real issue here, game 2 was all fair
No I cant admit that. We had the same amount of call go against us.
Nuntius wrote:RHODEY wrote:reload141 wrote:
I mean… yeah it’s not your fault, but even you can admit if the refs called it both ways in Game 1 this series could easily be 1-1.
There’s no real issue here, game 2 was all fair
No I cant admit that. We had the same amount of call go against us.
Well, you also recently called Haliburton "Michael Carter-Williams 2.0" and claimed that a player who has been a 40% shooter throughout his entire career will, from now on, be a 30% shooter. So, you know, maybe it doesn't matter whether you can admit something or not
Nuntius wrote:RHODEY wrote:reload141 wrote:
I mean… yeah it’s not your fault, but even you can admit if the refs called it both ways in Game 1 this series could easily be 1-1.
There’s no real issue here, game 2 was all fair
No I cant admit that. We had the same amount of call go against us.
Well, you also recently called Haliburton "Michael Carter-Williams 2.0" and claimed that a player who has been a 40% shooter throughout his entire career will, from now on, be a 30% shooter. So, you know, maybe it doesn't matter whether you can admit something or not
RHODEY wrote:Nuntius wrote:RHODEY wrote:
No I cant admit that. We had the same amount of call go against us.
Well, you also recently called Haliburton "Michael Carter-Williams 2.0" and claimed that a player who has been a 40% shooter throughout his entire career will, from now on, be a 30% shooter. So, you know, maybe it doesn't matter whether you can admit something or not
Even Micheal Carter Williams was capable of a resurgent game when playing half a team minus its best defenders. But Game 1 and the start of this game proved me right....which is why you were nowhere to be seen at that time.
blueNorange wrote:Nuntius wrote:RHODEY wrote:
No I cant admit that. We had the same amount of call go against us.
Well, you also recently called Haliburton "Michael Carter-Williams 2.0" and claimed that a player who has been a 40% shooter throughout his entire career will, from now on, be a 30% shooter. So, you know, maybe it doesn't matter whether you can admit something or not
pretty wild that the knicks played without their pg in the first half, and the pacers played without their pg in the 2nd half.
KOA wrote:I hope the league responds back to Rick and his tapes with their own tapes of Siakam bricking 2 FTs and 3 3s.
Dude's not taking any accountability for being a **** coach. TJ was +11 and got the Pacers back into the game so Rick brings in Nembhard who was -21 and getting cooked by Brunson all day.
Obi Toppin scored 20 points in 20 mins and was +9. Where was he in crunch time?
Capn'O wrote:We're the recovering meth addict older brother. And we've been clean for a few years now, thank you very much. Very uncouth to bring it up.