Around the NBA part 4

pj0tr · Post #101 » by **pj0tr** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 2:10 pm

How about this: Since you're so convinced that the Bulls' defense is a "gimmick" and that they are a certain 1st round exit, how about a ban bet?

If the Bulls are healthy (meaning no injuries, regardless if Rose is a certain percent of his former self):

- If the Bulls get out of the first round, you request a ban from the admins from this site forever.
- If the Bulls lose in the first round, I'll request a ban from this site forever.

What say you? You agree?

knicks94 · Post #102 » by **knicks94** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 3:49 pm

The Bulls were the team with the greatest bandwagon fans in the 90's. NY had its share of bandwagon Bulls fans that would purposely root against the Knicks whenever they saw them in the playoffs. After Michael Jordan retired the bandwagon fell apart and Michael Jordan fans became Kobe Bryant fans. You'll have a very small amount of people that will say that they're still Bulls fans dating back to the Jordan era but haven't watched a single Bulls game since 1998. And I am sure that if the Bulls make it all the way to the NBA finals you will see all these bandwagon fans come out of hiding just like how all the 49ers bandwagon fans of the Joe Montana era came out of hiding when the 49ers were in the SuperBowl this year.

frogfood · Post #103 » by **frogfood** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:24 pm

HakeemKnicks wrote:
fdr2012 wrote:
Not only the Bulls, but yes. I'm not wrong though. Bulls are headed towards a first round exit.

Thibs is the Mike D'antoni of defense. Overloading the strong side is a gimmicky way playing defense and it gets exposed in the payoffs.

Seriously?

yea, fdr generally doesn't know what he's talking about at all.

fdr2012 · Post #104 » by **fdr2012** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:34 pm

pj0tr wrote:Nice hedging of your statistics right there.

Try again. You've got no basis at all for what you are saying.

Apparently every defense is a gimmick if it works against your team, right?

Since you're a worthless troll, I will end it here.

Teams generally score less in the playoffs, but they score more against the Bulls.

Not every defense is a gimmick. Just those with glaring holes which get exposed in the playoffs.

frogfood · Post #105 » by **frogfood** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:35 pm

fdr, put your $ where your mouth is.
BAN BET with this Bulls fan.

fdr2012 · Post #106 » by **fdr2012** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:39 pm

pj0tr wrote:How about this: Since you're so convinced that the Bulls' defense is a "gimmick" and that they are a certain 1st round exit, how about a ban bet?

If the Bulls are healthy (meaning no injuries, regardless if Rose is a certain percent of his former self):

- If the Bulls get out of the first round, you request a ban from the admins from this site forever.
- If the Bulls lose in the first round, I'll request a ban from this site forever.

What say you? You agree?

You will be banned long before the playoffs.

Bulls are not getting past Indiana or the Nets. The injury excuse is pathetic since teams always have injuries.

fdr2012 · Post #107 » by **fdr2012** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:47 pm

frogfood wrote:fdr, put your $ where your mouth is.
BAN BET with this Bulls fan.

I would gladly do it with YOU.

frogfood · Post #108 » by **frogfood** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:48 pm

OK. If Bulls make it out of the 1st round you will be banned forever. If not, I will be.

Post #109 » by **Capn'O** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:51 pm

This kind of puts a damper on our sig bet :-(

fdr2012 · Post #110 » by **fdr2012** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:53 pm

frogfood wrote:OK. If Bulls make it out of the 1st round you will be banned forever. If not, I will be.

Here are the rules:

First round must be against either Pacers or Nets. No injury excuses.

Works?

frogfood · Post #111 » by **frogfood** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 4:57 pm

fdr2012 wrote:
frogfood wrote:OK. If Bulls make it out of the 1st round you will be banned forever. If not, I will be.

Here are the rules:

First round must be against either Pacers or Nets. No injury excuses.

Works?

I thought you said first round general and now you changing it? Scared?

Whatever, I'll take this bet regardless.

fdr2012 · Post #112 » by **fdr2012** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:03 pm

frogfood wrote:
fdr2012 wrote:
frogfood wrote:OK. If Bulls make it out of the 1st round you will be banned forever. If not, I will be.

Here are the rules:

First round must be against either Pacers or Nets. No injury excuses.

Works?

I thought you said first round general. Whatever, I'll take this bet regardless.

These are the LIKLEY matchups. The problem is that the Bucks/Celtics are vastly inferior and that's not the point of the bet.

ChicagoStrong · Post #113 » by **ChicagoStrong** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:04 pm

fdr2012 wrote:Teams generally score less in the playoffs, but they score more against the Bulls.

This is false.

In 2010-11 the Bulls gave up 91.3 PPG in the regular season.

Indiana averaged 90.2 PPG against the Bulls in the 5 games.
Atlanta averaged 85.7 PPG in 6 games.
Miami averaged 89.4 PPG in 5 games when they beat the Bulls.

The gave up on average 88.3 in the 2010-11 playoffs.

In 2011-12 the Bulls gave up 88.2 PPG in the regular season, the 76ers averaged 86 PPG against the Bulls in the series they won.

The Bulls offense is what the problem is playoff time, the Bulls only have one shot creator and they struggle to score playoff time.

frogfood · Post #114 » by **frogfood** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:09 pm

fdr2012 wrote:These are the LIKLEY matchups. The problem is that the Bucks/Celtics are vastly inferior and that's not the point of the bet.

Gotcha. I'm not aiming for no wuss bet like that. Pacers/Nets only.

pj0tr · Post #115 » by **pj0tr** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:10 pm

fdr2012 wrote:
frogfood wrote:OK. If Bulls make it out of the 1st round you will be banned forever. If not, I will be.

Here are the rules:

First round must be against either Pacers or Nets. No injury excuses.

Works?

lmao...

You're a joke. Even your fellow Knick fans think you're a dumbass.

BTW Bulls fan above me: only stat that matters to fdr is "ppg with respect to pace" in the playoffs... Your stats mean nothing :lol:

knicks94 · Post #116 » by **knicks94** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:17 pm

fdr2012 wrote:
pj0tr wrote:How about this: Since you're so convinced that the Bulls' defense is a "gimmick" and that they are a certain 1st round exit, how about a ban bet?

If the Bulls are healthy (meaning no injuries, regardless if Rose is a certain percent of his former self):

- If the Bulls get out of the first round, you request a ban from the admins from this site forever.
- If the Bulls lose in the first round, I'll request a ban from this site forever.

What say you? You agree?

You will be banned long before the playoffs.

Bulls are not getting past Indiana or the Nets. The injury excuse is pathetic since teams always have injuries.

I dislike the Bulls just as much as anyone else does but let's not drink any Bulls-Haterade, Chicago might have lost in the playoffs the last few years but that didn't stop them from bullying the Knicks three times this season and I would hate to be the team that they bully in the first round once they're fully healthy.

Coach Thibedeau is responsible for helping two teams make it past the Eastern Conference finals and is probably the Larry Brown of his generation of coaches. You can't call making two NBA finals appearances and one eastern conference appearance 2 years ago a gimmick. You might as well say the '99 Knicks run was pure luck. If you want to say that Mike D'antoni's offense or the success of the Brooklyn Nets is a gimmick then you might have a case, but until the Bulls fall short of making any type of run in the playoffs then I don't think anyone has a right to diminish their success.

fdr2012 · Post #117 » by **fdr2012** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:20 pm

ChicagoStrong wrote:This is false.

In 2010-11 the Bulls gave up 91.3 PPG in the regular season.

Indiana averaged 90.2 PPG against the Bulls in the 5 games.
Atlanta averaged 85.7 PPG in 6 games.
Miami averaged 89.4 PPG in 5 games when they beat the Bulls.

The gave up on average 88.3 in the 2010-11 playoffs.

In 2011-12 the Bulls gave up 88.2 PPG in the regular season, the 76ers averaged 86 PPG against the Bulls in the series they won.

The Bulls offense is what the problem is playoff time, the Bulls only have one shot creator and they struggle to score playoff time.

Wrong comparison. Compare it to what the same teams averaged against the Bulls in the regular season. Overall, Bulls allowed more points despite a slower pace.

That goes against the trend of most teams allowing less points. Nevermind. We'll see what the excuse is when you get your early exit. I'm guessin you will blame Roses injury.

ChicagoStrong · Post #118 » by **ChicagoStrong** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:29 pm

It would still be a false statement, Indiana averaged 90.8 PPG against the Bulls in the regular season in 2010-11 and Miami 90.3 PPG.

Atlanta was the only one that scored less at 80.0 PPG. Which would bring it down to 87.4 PPG against those teams, which is a minor difference from 88.3.

The Bulls have been the 23rd, 28th, and 27th ranked teams in pace since Thibbs took over, so the pacing really doesn't matter either as the Bulls are one of the slowest teams in the league already.

If the Bulls lose, they will lose.

knicks94 · Post #119 » by **knicks94** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:36 pm

I feel bad for the casual Real GM poster who comes into this thread thinking they will see posts about what's happening around the NBA but instead see debates about former Knicks and about teams that are challenging the Knicks for the number 1 seed in the East.

frogfood · Post #120 » by **frogfood** » Tue Feb 5, 2013 5:37 pm

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/891 ... perfection

no no no, you see, Chicago just overloads the strong side.

So we good fdr? On our bet?