TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!
rangers via dolan executive order
Moderators: dakomish23, mpharris36, j4remi, NoLayupRule, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, HerSports85, Deeeez Knicks
TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!
TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!
TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!

TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!

thebuzzardman wrote:TheGreenArrow wrote:Spoiler:
Exceedingly gay. Expected nothing less from the Mets.

thebuzzardman wrote:Clyde_Style wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:
I don't expect a 2nd year, 20 year old player to put in that kind of consistency.
If RJ has even 2 very strong outings in this series I'd consider that a big plus, maybe even a deciding factor. What's significant to me is he's getting playoff experience at age 20. Randle had to wait until he was 26.
Yup. Anything else is gravy.
Also, I'm just posting a lot so people have to see the KD Vagina avatar.
robillionaire wrote:NewKnicks wrote:Spot31 wrote:
The Hawks are playing with house money despite what Vegas says. All the pressure is on NY and Tom but we got this.
Agreed. Now that the national media is putting the Knicks back on a pedestal, they'll be thrilled to knock the Knicks off that pedestal if they go down to the Hawks.
There is no doubt at all who the pressure is on in this series. It's 100% Knicks. No one is talking about an Atlanta team that's gone 27-11 under McMillan, and won 7 out of their last 8. All the focus and all the pressure is on the Knicks. I'm sure the Hawks are loving it as well. They can play the underdogs even though they've won 27 out of their last 38 games.
That’s impressive but the knicks won something like 24 of the last 38 with a tougher schedule in the 2nd half of the season. And we have home court and are 3-0 against the Hawks. Really the series should be considered a toss up
Clyde_Style wrote:ESPN Predictions Round-Up
New York Knicks (4) vs. Atlanta Hawks (5)
Jerry Bembry: Knicks in 6
Nick DePaula: Knicks in 6
Nick Friedell: Knicks in 6
Kirk Goldsberry: Knicks in 6
Tim Legler: Knicks in 6
Zach Lowe: Hawks in 6
Tim MacMahon: Knicks in 6
Bobby Marks: Knicks in 7
Dave McMenamin: Knicks in 6
Monica McNutt: Knicks in 6
Kevin Pelton: Knicks in 7
Omar Raja: Knicks in 7
Jorge Sedano: Knicks in 7
Ramona Shelburne: Knicks in 5
André Snellings: Hawks in 6
Marc J. Spears: Knicks in 6
Royce Young: Hawks in 7
Ohm Youngmisuk: Knicks in 7
Bring me the head of Zach Lowe!
stuporman wrote:Spot31 wrote:NewKnicks wrote:
This is a great point. First time in a long time that the Knicks are not the 'underdog'. It's going to be interesting to see how they handle this new position as the favorite.
I think I saw the Hawks are 27-11 under McMillan. Too much overconfidence in this thread. The Hawks are a dangerous team. And when you have a player like Trae Young who can light it up at any moment, that adds a different dynamic to the series.
Pressure is on the Knicks to win game 1. Hawks have nothing to lose. They know if they could steal one game in NY, they'll take back home court advantage. We CANNOT lose game 1.
The Hawks are playing with house money despite what Vegas says. All the pressure is on NY and Tom but we got this.
The Knicks are playing with house money, too, this is all gravy now. The pressure that will be on the Knicks the rest of the way is from their coach and themselves.
TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!
newyorker4ever wrote:Clyde_Style wrote:ESPN Predictions Round-Up
New York Knicks (4) vs. Atlanta Hawks (5)
Jerry Bembry: Knicks in 6
Nick DePaula: Knicks in 6
Nick Friedell: Knicks in 6
Kirk Goldsberry: Knicks in 6
Tim Legler: Knicks in 6
Zach Lowe: Hawks in 6
Tim MacMahon: Knicks in 6
Bobby Marks: Knicks in 7
Dave McMenamin: Knicks in 6
Monica McNutt: Knicks in 6
Kevin Pelton: Knicks in 7
Omar Raja: Knicks in 7
Jorge Sedano: Knicks in 7
Ramona Shelburne: Knicks in 5
André Snellings: Hawks in 6
Marc J. Spears: Knicks in 6
Royce Young: Hawks in 7
Ohm Youngmisuk: Knicks in 7
Bring me the head of Zach Lowe!
Do you also want Ramona Shelburne to perform Fellatio on you if she's right with Knicks in 5??
HarthorneWingo wrote:BKlutch wrote:cgf wrote:Bingo. This is exactly why just getting vaccinated yourself doesn't mean you can pretend the virus isn't still out there. As long as there are enough unvaccinated people out there passing the virus around, the risk of it evolving in a way that would render current vaccines useless against it, exists.
This is what medical science says, but then of course, most of the issues around getting vaccinated and wearing masks are political.
I wonder how that happened?
The scientists/epidemiologists are now saying that we probably won't get to "herd immunity" via vaccination (bc not enough people are getting vaccinated), which means that we'll be living with forms of COVID for a while, at least. We're still dealing with the influenza from 1918 (or whenever) but we have it down to about 40,000 deaths per year. That number could go way down if people wear their masks during flu season. I think that there were something like only 1,000 deaths from influenza which borders on eliminating it just based on masks and social distancing. I know that come the flu season this year, I'll be wearing my N95 masks when I go into stores and/or crowded areas. I have about 20 of them in a package sitting in the rear of my SUV.
aq_ua wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:BKlutch wrote:This is what medical science says, but then of course, most of the issues around getting vaccinated and wearing masks are political.
I wonder how that happened?
The scientists/epidemiologists are now saying that we probably won't get to "herd immunity" via vaccination (bc not enough people are getting vaccinated), which means that we'll be living with forms of COVID for a while, at least. We're still dealing with the influenza from 1918 (or whenever) but we have it down to about 40,000 deaths per year. That number could go way down if people wear their masks during flu season. I think that there were something like only 1,000 deaths from influenza which borders on eliminating it just based on masks and social distancing. I know that come the flu season this year, I'll be wearing my N95 masks when I go into stores and/or crowded areas. I have about 20 of them in a package sitting in the rear of my SUV.
To be fair, it’s not just vaccination percentages - it’s also the increased contagiousness of the virus as it mutates.But as vaccines were developed and distribution ramped up through the winter and into the spring, estimates of the threshold began to rise. That is because the initial calculations were based on the contagiousness of the original version of the virus. The predominant variant now circulating in the United States, called B.1.1.7 and first identified in Britain, is about 60 percent more transmissible.
As a result, experts now calculate the herd immunity threshold to be at least 80 percent. If even more contagious variants develop, or if scientists find that immunized people can still transmit the virus, the calculation will have to be revised upward again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/health/covid-herd-immunity-vaccine.html
An upward moving target like that is not only tough to hit but increasingly difficult to mobilize a whole population around. This doesn’t even consider the reality that
this threshold has to be reached globally, not just in the developed economies as it is today. So, I sort of applaud the practicality of the scientific approach now to view the vaccination as a way to slow down and make the disease manageable rather than expect to entirely eliminate it.
I live in apart of the world where there is practically zero tolerance, so the slightest uptick in cases triggers lockdowns. With the world being interconnected the way it is, it’s been difficult to grasp how the apparent end goal of elimination of cases meshes with the likelihood of either full isolation from the rest of the world or global elimination of the virus. These decision trees and the ultimate “correct path” will be something worth digging through 10-15 years from now.
Im Coming Home wrote:TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!
Smh, how the Mets gonna support the Nets.
Nets are in a seperate category from Mets/Jets/Islanders. There are actual New Yorkers fans of those 3 teams, aint **** no one a fan of the New Jersey Nets.. sad to see this.
louisorr wrote:Im Coming Home wrote:TheGreenArrow wrote:
Damn none of the other ny teams are with us!!!!
**** them then!!!!!!
All we got is is!!!!!
NEW YORKKKKKKK!!!!!!
WE HERE!!!!!!!!!
Smh, how the Mets gonna support the Nets.
Nets are in a seperate category from Mets/Jets/Islanders. There are actual New Yorkers fans of those 3 teams, aint **** no one a fan of the New Jersey Nets.. sad to see this.
Colorado Rockies sorry, Devils fans maybe....what I don't get is whats up with this Brooklyn solidarity hash tagging. You're from Queens!!
Im Coming Home wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:TheGreenArrow wrote:Spoiler:
Exceedingly gay. Expected nothing less from the Mets.
Its 2021, we still using gay as a negative/derogatory term? Nice bro.....![]()
![]()

It's kinda obvious why Knicks get ridiculed so much it's because of Dolan before him Knicks were better team and more respected organization.TheGreenArrow wrote:louisorr wrote:Im Coming Home wrote:Smh, how the Mets gonna support the Nets.
Nets are in a seperate category from Mets/Jets/Islanders. There are actual New Yorkers fans of those 3 teams, aint **** no one a fan of the New Jersey Nets.. sad to see this.
Colorado Rockies sorry, Devils fans maybe....what I don't get is whats up with this Brooklyn solidarity hash tagging. You're from Queens!!
Only thing I can think of is that the other teams owners hate Dolan!!!!

Knick4Real wrote:IN OTHER NEWS:
Clippers COLLAPSED at home against Dallas and looked like absolute dog sh*t. Their play was so lackadaisical it looks like they don't even want it.