[michaeljohn]

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

The words “any fan” presumes “every fan”. The words “so prominent in any fan’s discussion”, means I can pick “any fans” or you can pick “any fans” and interview them to see what they talk about! ……. Furthermore, since he claims it will happen and be “prominent in any fan’s discussion”, he is determining their relevance by…drum roll please…..SPECULATION!

Originally Posted by rexhamer

You claim my use of the terms “any’ and “all” is speculation as there is no proof that any and all fans agree with me. You are confusing a speculative statement with a generalization.

Quit twisting things. You said they are prominate in any fans' discussion. Any fan, means every fan, and that's why they belong as relevant categories in the scorecard. That means you are speculating. Look above where I quoted your reply to my blog, that your first has evidence to restore them as primary categores? Where is this proof? You just love to duck the questions, don't you? You are guilty of speculation and hypocrisy. You can speculate but I can't. You owned yourself again by calling it a speculative statement. A speculative statement is still speculation, and that's what you call it. you admit you are a speculator! 9-2, 17-3, and 14-15 are now forever removed as speculation. You don't have to refute my refutations of them now.

It would not be speculation for me to say “Any fan would rather be a champion than a runner-up”. Nor is it speculation to say “All fans would prefer to defeat their traditional rival in a playoff series than lose to them”. I do not have to go to forums to prove these statements. These are logical generalizations that do not need backup evidence. Same with my statements.

I have previously noted that Lakers fans near-automatic response to which team was better in the 80’s has always been “Lakers, 5-3 in championships and 2-1 head-to-head.” You don’t think when fans of the Giants, Cowboys and 49er’s get together to determine who has been more successful, the subject of their respective head-to-head playoff meetings does not come up? You don’t think the Steelers are extremely proud of their 6-0 record in the Super Bowl and the Bills are a little embarrassed about being 0-4? Logical generalizations such as these matter when developing relevant categories.

I am sure you have read through the replies to the Hollinger article. There are numerous references to 9-2, 17-3 and 14-15. I would say that refutes this statement:

It refutes it? LOL, you are an idiot! That's one example. According to you, it will be in every discussion. I already pointed out I saw several sites that listed titles and few if any talked about 9-2, 17-3, and 14-15.

Tell me the last time you were at a basketball forum that talked about a year-by-year analysis of the performance of two teams? Yet you include this in your scorecard. This is just more evidence of the bias of your scorecard. You have based the relevant categories on YOUR opinion. Once again we note the hypocrisy of a statement of yours.

I'll tell you the last time a forum talked about it. Actually, I won't, but let me say this, there are a huge number of unhappy Celtics fans right now because they now realize it's 37-24 Lakers, not 9-2 Celtics. The creation of the topic 37-24 is my "invention" and it's time the world sees it! 9-2 is unfair "Cherry Picking". Your stubborness has caused me to spread the word! It's all your fault I am smacking Celtics fans around quite a bit now. Such a great fan you are. I noted above I need a new arguing foe, you just don't have what it takes to best me.

Your scorecard categories have all been determined by YOUR opinion!

My opinion? Yes, and as I pointed out, an unbiased one at that! My opinion of the historical categories is unarguable fact. You can only argue #8 with a few years of research.