RealGM

dhsilv2 wrote:https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=combined&lg_id=NBA&team_seed_cmp=eq&opp_seed_cmp=eq&year_min=1977&is_range=N&game_num_type=team&game_result=W&c1val=1&order_by=wins

They're second to LA by a hair since they joined the league.

I'm not too sure I trust that result, as the database at BB Ref is doing something goofy. When I follow that link, the table makes no sense, showing all the teams with a # of games equal to the # of wins... and of course, very uneven # of games..

pad300 wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=combined&lg_id=NBA&team_seed_cmp=eq&opp_seed_cmp=eq&year_min=1977&is_range=N&game_num_type=team&game_result=W&c1val=1&order_by=wins

They're second to LA by a hair since they joined the league.

I'm not too sure I trust that result, as the database at BB Ref is doing something goofy. When I follow that link, the table makes no sense, showing all the teams with a # of games equal to the # of wins... and of course, very uneven # of games..

It is only showing games where the team won, so losses are not included in how I did the search. So games and wins should be 1 to 1.

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

CoP wrote:Oh ok cool. Glad I could correct it for you.

You know what they say about broken clocks

https://www.basketball-reference.com/

Ha this is a great interaction. "I know my stats were wrong somehow and theres a stat website that has the official numbers, but I'm going to continue to do it my way, the wrong way. thanks though."

I wonder why most people found the Spurs boring.
Its been so long since the Spurs were relevant on a championship level, I can't even remember if I found them boring or not.
But I remember they moved the ball very well, and maybe passing is boring

HEAT33 wrote:Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

While I agree he wouldn't have been what he was offensively had his career started today even at the age of 40 he was one of the best defensive centers in the NBA.

The basketball was not boring it was the players everyone knows how good they were but their personalities kind of suck.

P.s the Tim Duncan (I didn't do anything) face was the most annoying thing in sports for a while that and the tony Parker flop years.

bonbons wrote:

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:You know what they say about broken clocks

https://www.basketball-reference.com/

Ha this is a great interaction. "I know my stats were wrong somehow and theres a stat website that has the official numbers, but I'm going to continue to do it my way, the wrong way. thanks though."

You're missing the context of CoP being a giant douche, which is not a term I use lightly.

For not having that context I'll reserve judgement, but word of advice: don't be like him.

12footrim wrote:

HEAT33 wrote:Prime Duncan wouldn’t be effective in to modern game

While I agree he wouldn't have been what he was offensively had his career started today even at the age of 40 he was one of the best defensive centers in the NBA.

He wouldn’t have adjusted his game... he developed his low-post game because that’s what big men did back then. Had he grown up in this era, he would’ve shot a bunch more 3’s and long jumpers and gone down that road instead.

Ben Simmons wrote:I wonder why most people found the Spurs boring.
Its been so long since the Spurs were relevant on a championship level, I can't even remember if I found them boring or not.
But I remember they moved the ball very well, and maybe passing is boring

See 2003 and 2005. Both are notorious for being the most boring championship series in the modern era.

The Spurs during the Duncan prime years were elite defensive teams which were average on offense. 2003 was basically Duncan on offense and a young Tony Parker. They rarely made the highlight reels. 2005 had a more established Manu Ginobli, but the team finsihed dead last in points per game.

This was also during a time, where you had Kobe/Shaq, Sacromento Kings, Allen Iverson, Dirk, Nash and the Dantoni offense. All of those were wayy more fun to watch then Duncan work on the post while the Spurs suffocate the opponent on defense.

TheSspurs later evolved into a more 3pt oriented team in the mid 2010s and focused more on a modern offense as they realized that it was harder for an aging Duncan to anchor an elite defense. Duncan was still elite on defense but the team's focus wasn't to keep the score and pace down to 89 ppg.

But the early mid Spurs were boring. No great highlights, no emotion, no drama. Just elite defense and overall sound basketball.

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

bonbons wrote:

CoP wrote:https://www.basketball-reference.com/

Ha this is a great interaction. "I know my stats were wrong somehow and theres a stat website that has the official numbers, but I'm going to continue to do it my way, the wrong way. thanks though."

You're missing the context of CoP being a giant douche, which is not a term I use lightly.

For not having that context I'll reserve judgement, but word of advice: don't be like him.

How this thread went: I corrected a small mistake in your OP and you got snippy and made personal attacks.

It is OK, though. I forgive you and am STILL willing to check www.basketball-reference.com whenever you need me to audit your data entries in Excel. Just say the word and I'll be there!

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

bonbons wrote:
Ha this is a great interaction. "I know my stats were wrong somehow and theres a stat website that has the official numbers, but I'm going to continue to do it my way, the wrong way. thanks though."

You're missing the context of CoP being a giant douche, which is not a term I use lightly.

For not having that context I'll reserve judgement, but word of advice: don't be like him.

How this thread went: I corrected a small mistake in your OP and you got snippy and made personal attacks.

It is OK, though. I forgive you and am STILL willing to check www.basketball-reference.com whenever you need me to audit your data entries in Excel. Just say the word and I'll be there!

I stand by the personal attack, which was grounded in a long history of revealing interactions. If nothing else I'm an excellent judge of character. But don't worry, I also believe in redemption. I believe in you CoP. I think you needed to hear that.

dho4ever wrote:

Ben Simmons wrote:I wonder why most people found the Spurs boring.
Its been so long since the Spurs were relevant on a championship level, I can't even remember if I found them boring or not.
But I remember they moved the ball very well, and maybe passing is boring

See 2003 and 2005. Both are notorious for being the most boring championship series in the modern era.

The Spurs during the Duncan prime years were elite defensive teams which were average on offense. 2003 was basically Duncan on offense and a young Tony Parker. They rarely made the highlight reels. 2005 had a more established Manu Ginobli, but the team finsihed dead last in points per game.

This was also during a time, where you had Kobe/Shaq, Sacromento Kings, Allen Iverson, Dirk, Nash and the Dantoni offense. All of those were wayy more fun to watch then Duncan work on the post while the Spurs suffocate the opponent on defense.

TheSspurs later evolved into a more 3pt oriented team in the mid 2010s and focused more on a modern offense as they realized that it was harder for an aging Duncan to anchor an elite defense. Duncan was still elite on defense but the team's focus wasn't to keep the score and pace down to 89 ppg.

But the early mid Spurs were boring. No great highlights, no emotion, no drama. Just elite defense and overall sound basketball.

Yep now I remember why I found them boring, same reason why I find most of today's teams boring, no highlights, just basic shots.
Golden State would be boring too, if they didn't have Curry taking difficult shots

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:
You're missing the context of CoP being a giant douche, which is not a term I use lightly.

For not having that context I'll reserve judgement, but word of advice: don't be like him.

How this thread went: I corrected a small mistake in your OP and you got snippy and made personal attacks.

It is OK, though. I forgive you and am STILL willing to check www.basketball-reference.com whenever you need me to audit your data entries in Excel. Just say the word and I'll be there!

I stand by the personal attack, which was grounded in a long history of revealing interactions. If nothing else I'm an excellent judge of character. But don't worry, I also believe in redemption. I believe in you CoP. I think you needed to hear that.

I am impressed that you are willing to continue standing behind a personal attack of a poster who humbly corrected a simple data error that you made. Rather than just say thank you and move on, you lost your temper and called me a douche. That shows great resolve, or something. Anyway, thanks for believing in me. The opinion of a random on RealGM means lots.

Meantime, don't be a stranger. Any new threads planned, make sure you let me know so I can double check your Excel data entry grunt work by performing a search on bbref that takes 30 seconds.

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

CoP wrote:How this thread went: I corrected a small mistake in your OP and you got snippy and made personal attacks.

It is OK, though. I forgive you and am STILL willing to check www.basketball-reference.com whenever you need me to audit your data entries in Excel. Just say the word and I'll be there!

I stand by the personal attack, which was grounded in a long history of revealing interactions. If nothing else I'm an excellent judge of character. But don't worry, I also believe in redemption. I believe in you CoP. I think you needed to hear that.

I am impressed that you are willing to continue standing behind a personal attack of a poster who humbly corrected a simple data error that you made. Rather than just say thank you and move on, you lost your temper and called me a douche. That shows great resolve, or something. Anyway, thanks for believing in me. The opinion of a random on RealGM means lots.

Meantime, don't be a stranger. Any new threads planned, make sure you let me know so I can double check your Excel data entry grunt work by performing a search on bbref that takes 30 seconds.

You can call it whatever you want, but that doesn't make it true. We both understand the angle from which you approached this thread, which was grounded in the conclusion of our last discussion. You exhibit symptoms of an unfortunate psychological complex, but I'll keep my assessment to myself. Word of advice though: those who exhibit genuine humility don't require gratitude for their (perceived) good works.

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:
I stand by the personal attack, which was grounded in a long history of revealing interactions. If nothing else I'm an excellent judge of character. But don't worry, I also believe in redemption. I believe in you CoP. I think you needed to hear that.

I am impressed that you are willing to continue standing behind a personal attack of a poster who humbly corrected a simple data error that you made. Rather than just say thank you and move on, you lost your temper and called me a douche. That shows great resolve, or something. Anyway, thanks for believing in me. The opinion of a random on RealGM means lots.

Meantime, don't be a stranger. Any new threads planned, make sure you let me know so I can double check your Excel data entry grunt work by performing a search on bbref that takes 30 seconds.

You can call it whatever you want, but that doesn't make it true. We both understand the angle from which you approached this thread, which was grounded in the conclusion of our last discussion. You exhibit symptoms of an unfortunate psychological complex, but I'll keep my assessment to myself. Word of advice though: those who exhibit genuine humility don't require gratitude for their (perceived) good works.

Oh, no gratitude required or expected, so no worries there. I was a tad surprised that you resorted to calling me a douche just for pointing out a data error, but perhaps you could perform a psychological self-assessment to determine the reason behind that.

Either way, I am always glad to walk you through how to do simple searches on bbref. Perhaps it could save you enough time to do psychological assessments on other RealGM posters. That would be cool.

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

CoP wrote:I am impressed that you are willing to continue standing behind a personal attack of a poster who humbly corrected a simple data error that you made. Rather than just say thank you and move on, you lost your temper and called me a douche. That shows great resolve, or something. Anyway, thanks for believing in me. The opinion of a random on RealGM means lots.

Meantime, don't be a stranger. Any new threads planned, make sure you let me know so I can double check your Excel data entry grunt work by performing a search on bbref that takes 30 seconds.

You can call it whatever you want, but that doesn't make it true. We both understand the angle from which you approached this thread, which was grounded in the conclusion of our last discussion. You exhibit symptoms of an unfortunate psychological complex, but I'll keep my assessment to myself. Word of advice though: those who exhibit genuine humility don't require gratitude for their (perceived) good works.

Oh, no gratitude required or expected, so no worries there. I was a tad surprised that you resorted to calling me a douche just for pointing out a data error, but perhaps you could perform a psychological self-assessment to determine the reason behind that.

Either way, I am always glad to walk you through how to do simple searches on bbref. Perhaps it could save you enough time to do psychological assessments on other RealGM posters. That would be cool.

freethedevil wrote:

CoP wrote:

GeorgeMarcus wrote:
You can call it whatever you want, but that doesn't make it true. We both understand the angle from which you approached this thread, which was grounded in the conclusion of our last discussion. You exhibit symptoms of an unfortunate psychological complex, but I'll keep my assessment to myself. Word of advice though: those who exhibit genuine humility don't require gratitude for their (perceived) good works.

Oh, no gratitude required or expected, so no worries there. I was a tad surprised that you resorted to calling me a douche just for pointing out a data error, but perhaps you could perform a psychological self-assessment to determine the reason behind that.

Either way, I am always glad to walk you through how to do simple searches on bbref. Perhaps it could save you enough time to do psychological assessments on other RealGM posters. That would be cool.

the douchiness is unparalleled

CoP wrote:Oh, no gratitude required or expected

4 separate posts after not being thanked once:

CoP wrote:You're welcome.

CoP wrote:Glad I could help.

CoP wrote:Glad I could correct it for you.

CoP wrote:Glad to help bud

At least it makes for good comedy material.

GeorgeMarcus wrote:

freethedevil wrote:

CoP wrote:Oh, no gratitude required or expected, so no worries there. I was a tad surprised that you resorted to calling me a douche just for pointing out a data error, but perhaps you could perform a psychological self-assessment to determine the reason behind that.

Either way, I am always glad to walk you through how to do simple searches on bbref. Perhaps it could save you enough time to do psychological assessments on other RealGM posters. That would be cool.

the douchiness is unparalleled

CoP wrote:Oh, no gratitude required or expected

4 separate posts after not being thanked once:

CoP wrote:You're welcome.

CoP wrote:Glad I could help.

CoP wrote:Glad I could correct it for you.

CoP wrote:Glad to help bud

At least it makes for good comedy material.

Boi, you're dragging this.

freethedevil wrote:Boi, you're dragging this.

And CoP offering spreadsheet tutorials isn’t? My first response (which was cordial) should have killed the conversation.

I could see where you’re coming from if you thought he was trying to be helpful, but he wasn’t.