I knew we were underdogs, but...

Havlicek17 · Post #1 » by **Havlicek17** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:57 am

Here's the latest Hollinger's power rankings on ESPN

Chances of winning the title based on computer projection

Team Odds of winning title:

Cleveland 31.3
L.A. Lakers 19.3
Orlando 15.7
Portland 11.8
Denver 4.4
Boston 4.1
Houston 4.1

He picks Orlando to beat us without KG, and has Orlando, Portland and Denver ranked higher.

Clearly, this joker has no idea what he is doing...

BRUNiNHO91 · Post #2 » by **BRUNiNHO91** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:13 am

It's US AGAINST THE WORLD BABY...ain't no thang....

ANYTHING'SSSS POSSIBLEEEEEE!!

Post #3 » by **wetsthebed** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:30 am

It's Hollinger. That's how he rolls. Idiotically.

Al-Haqq · Post #4 » by **Al-Haqq** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:55 am

Well it will be very hard to get by Orlando without KG. Not sure why people have an issue with that.

greenbeans · Post #5 » by **greenbeans** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:58 am

He crunches numbers until he comes out with what espn wants. Can't hate em, we'd all do the same thing if we could get paid what he does.

GreenMachine · Post #6 » by **GreenMachine** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:03 am

Havlicek17 wrote:Here's the latest Hollinger's power rankings on ESPN

Chances of winning the title based on computer projection

He picks Orlando to beat us without KG, and has Orlando, Portland and Denver ranked higher.

Clearly, this joker has no idea what he is doing...

Clearly you have a problem with thinking about the words that come out of your mouth.

I'm really not trying to start anything... but you called him a 'joker' - but just make yourself look like the joker.

And did the rest of you who replied not even READ the OP?

BASED ON A COMPUTER PROJECTION.

'HE' didn't pick Anyone over Anyone. A computer did.

Post #7 » by **canman1971** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:07 am

Still not sure why anyone cares what a paid hack or computer says about a team that most of us watch for every game of in a season. Here is an idea: don't read it.

Havlicek17 · Post #8 » by **Havlicek17** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:11 am

No, he did pick one team over another. Here's the link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/ ... iem-090417

Joker? Decide for yourself.

GreenMachine · Post #9 » by **GreenMachine** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:16 am

Havlicek17 wrote:No, he did pick one team over another. Here's the link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/ ... iem-090417

Joker? Decide for yourself.

OK. Well then why did you LIE to us. We are all C's fans... no need to lie.

You said, whether it's true or not "based on a computer projection".

So you're not a Joker (my bad)... just a Lier.

(just teasing!)

s1ickd · Post #10 » by **s1ickd** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:36 am

I don't think we're going to miss KG that much against Orlando. The magic don't have any slashers. they have size, bulk, and outside shooting. The personel on this playoff roster as constituted actually matches up with that very well defensively.

KG is our main cog when it comes to our defense rotating and helping agianst slashers like lebron, Kobe, Wade, etc. That's what I'm concerned about. Davis and Powe are pretty bad when it comes to weakside defensive help. That puts a lot of pressure on gaurds to keep guys in front of then.

15th overall · Post #11 » by **15th overall** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:42 am

I'm pretty sure Hollinger rated us higher before the Ray and KG trades.

That's easily enough to call him full of ****.

Dirty Water · Post #12 » by **Dirty Water** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:48 am

15th overall wrote:I'm pretty sure Hollinger rated us higher before the Ray and KG trades.

That's easily enough to call him full of ****.

Before 06-07 season he predicted us 4th in the conference. End of discussion.

Zin5 · Post #13 » by **Zin5** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:18 pm

Why does Hollinger even bother writing articles? All they are are "Here's what my stat says, here's who my stat says is going to win, oh here's a computer projection based off MY stat." He either knows nothing about the game or has completely watered down his interest in favor of his overrated statistical interpretations.

Patterns · Post #14 » by **Patterns** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:09 pm

Zin5 wrote:Why does Hollinger even bother writing articles? All they are are "Here's what my stat says, here's who my stat says is going to win, oh here's a computer projection based off MY stat." He either knows nothing about the game or has completely watered down his interest in favor of his overrated statistical interpretations.

If you want pure opinions, then read the articles from the other 8 ESPN writers. If you want a different way of looking at basketball, then read Hollinger. If you want a combination of both, then read them all.

Why the hate?

chakdaddy · Post #15 » by **chakdaddy** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:34 am

Come on...that is pretty accurate. Honestly, the good record we had without Garnett is pretty illusory IMO - without him, we are merely a pretty good team, a lower tier playoff team, 5/6 seed. The schedule at the end of the season was weak, we barely won a lot of the games, and barely showed up on defense...and it sounds like that pattern pretty much continued today. I think the bubble kind of burst today.

tranjSAIC · Post #16 » by **tranjSAIC** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:32 am

s1ickd wrote:I don't think we're going to miss KG that much against Orlando. The magic don't have any slashers. they have size, bulk, and outside shooting. The personel on this playoff roster as constituted actually matches up with that very well defensively.

Maybe you guys should worry more about Chicago than us...

return2glory · Post #17 » by **return2glory** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:22 am

What's wrong it what he said. We have no chance of winning a title this year without KG much less beating the Magic.

Zin5 · Post #18 » by **Zin5** » Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:48 pm

Patterns wrote:
Zin5 wrote:Why does Hollinger even bother writing articles? All they are are "Here's what my stat says, here's who my stat says is going to win, oh here's a computer projection based off MY stat." He either knows nothing about the game or has completely watered down his interest in favor of his overrated statistical interpretations.

If you want pure opinions, then read the articles from the other 8 ESPN writers. If you want a different way of looking at basketball, then read Hollinger. If you want a combination of both, then read them all.

Why the hate?

Because he has no integrity as a sports writer at all. Make his stat a blurb on another article or as a reference in his own, but I just don't see what his worth in writing about his stat is. We get it, it exists, the numbers then speak for themselves.

Patterns · Post #19 » by **Patterns** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:09 am

Zin5 wrote:
Patterns wrote:
Zin5 wrote:Why does Hollinger even bother writing articles? All they are are "Here's what my stat says, here's who my stat says is going to win, oh here's a computer projection based off MY stat." He either knows nothing about the game or has completely watered down his interest in favor of his overrated statistical interpretations.

If you want pure opinions, then read the articles from the other 8 ESPN writers. If you want a different way of looking at basketball, then read Hollinger. If you want a combination of both, then read them all.

Why the hate?

Because he has no integrity as a sports writer at all. Make his stat a blurb on another article or as a reference in his own, but I just don't see what his worth in writing about his stat is. We get it, it exists, the numbers then speak for themselves.

Everyone hates on Hollinger because his stats don't make their teams look good. What were your thoughts on him when he had the Celtics ranked #1 last year in his power ranking all year long?

Zin5 · Post #20 » by **Zin5** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:19 pm

Patterns wrote:
Zin5 wrote:
Patterns wrote:---
If you want pure opinions, then read the articles from the other 8 ESPN writers. If you want a different way of looking at basketball, then read Hollinger. If you want a combination of both, then read them all.

Why the hate?

Because he has no integrity as a sports writer at all. Make his stat a blurb on another article or as a reference in his own, but I just don't see what his worth in writing about his stat is. We get it, it exists, the numbers then speak for themselves.

Everyone hates on Hollinger because his stats don't make their teams look good. What were your thoughts on him when he had the Celtics ranked #1 last year in his power ranking all year long?

That was around the same time his stat put Milwaukee as the fifth best team in the league. I'm not a fan of power rankings in general and just don't have much respect for Hollinger's, regardless of what it says about the Celtics.