Celtics vs. Lakers - The Final Chapter: michaeljohn wins by concession and logic

[rexhamer]

Edit micheljohn: BackdoorJesus is of the opinion below this thread should have been posted in the smack talk thread. Since he didn't merge them, I won't either. Instead, we will let rexhamer have his 15 minutes of fame. My refutation of his new article follows below.

In order to “stay on point” regarding this discussion of Celtics vs. Lakers, I figure it is best to simply start a new thread. I am sure many of you have little interest in this debate, but an accusation of lying has been made towards me and I take that seriously. In addition, given the number of insults MJ has thrown my way, I will take great satisfaction in administering the coup de grace to his cherished Lakers argument here in front of everyone at Webrats. I am not sure of the posting capacity, and there is a lot of info to come, so I will post in small increments.

The accusation of lying is based on the fact that both of us have claimed victory. Therefore it should be simple to conclude that whoever is the clear victor in this debate is telling the truth, and whoever is the clear loser is the liar. I shall be vindicated in this manner.

And just to be clear for everyone – there were five separate and lengthy blogs posted one the “other” site, alternating between MJ and me. To avoid confusion, I will refer to them by number and author; i.e., the first blog is Blog 1(MJ), the second would be Blog 2(Rex), etc.

[rexhamer]

When I was first formulating this reply, I thought about going point-by-point with a few rebuttals, but it is clear that nobody is interested in that level of detail. I thought about showing a few examples of MJ’s flaccid argument, such as the fact that his “scorecard” includes Lakers advantages of more wins and fewer losses in conference championships, yet only show Finals wins as an advantage for the Celtics. Where are the Finals losses of the Lakers? Clearly, the results of the NBA Finals carry much more significance than the conference championships.

I also thought about pointing out the fact that MJ has teased us with his new concept of the Inevitable Exception to the Rule (IETTR). I presumed he was going to provide some examples of exceptions that disprove “rules” that he claims I stated. However, even though he references the IETTR a few times (even here at Webrats he posted something about it), he never actually provides a single exception to any rule! Not a one. He says there out there, but the self-proclaimed king of Internet research cannot provide any examples!

I was thinking of pointing out that he is incorrect when he claims I have refuted the majority of the categories of his scorecard (and let us not forget – this is HIS scorecard, based on categories that are relevant in HIS opinion). I have not dismissed them; I have just diminished their importance as many of them deal with regular season results that have not translated into championship results. MJ has even concurred with this notion regarding the relevance of 60-win seasons. Instead of addressing the point at hand, he ignores it and weakly offers a criticism of my use of the term “gaudy”.

And I was also thinking of noting that he does not include the Celtics significant 9-2 edge in head-to-head as it is just my opinion. But let’s all note how often MJ and other Lakers fans have proclaimed during the course of this season that they wanted to meet the Celtics in the Finals. Not just that they wanted to win a championship, but they wanted it to be against their dominant rival. Even yesterday, on the eve of the Finals, Euro-weenie Sasha Vucovich was quoted, “We wanted the Celtics”. Lakers fans and even Lakers players themselves are all cognoscente of wanting to put a dent in 9-2.

I could easily have gone though MJ’s entire final blog and refuted all his points for the third time if I chose to. But I will demonstrate that it is completely unnecessary.

[rexhamer]

It has been obvious from the start that neither MJ nor I were going to have our minds changed or concede this argument. And on the other site, with more activity than Webrats, Celtics and Lakers fans fall predictably in line with their team’s allegiances (except for one Lakers fan who has alternated between his support for the Celtics and the Lakers. I don’t know what to make of him!). The true measurement of success in this argument can only be derived from examining the conclusions of neutral fans in their replies to our separate blogs. These neutral fans are objective and unbiased, with no preconceived attachment to either side of this argument. Even MJ agrees with this. But more on that in a moment.

To that end, I have reviewed the replies to all five blogs and compiled a tabulation of the number of responses that have taken a specific position for either MJ’s case or mine. I have discounted trolls, replies of smack talk only, anyone who merely replied “Go Lakers” or “Go Celtics” without indicating their opinion of the question at hand (these were equal anyway). I have also discounted any Lakers fans who merely said the Lakers have been more successful in the last 40 years without expressing an opinion of the full history of the NBA. This debate is not about the last 40 years.

As a reminder, the five blogs go, 1 to 5: MJ-Rex-MJ-Rex-MJ. First off I will list overall supporters, even if they are identified as a fan of either team. This was made possible either from information in their public profile (which lists favorite teams) or could be reasonably deduced from how they replied. I have not counted multiple replies to the same blog. However, I have counted each respondent per blog as consistent support (or lack thereof) is a consideration. (Since I first examined this months ago for Blog 1(MJ), the numbers have changed a bit due to additional replies and the fact that I was better able to identify Lakers and Celtics fans.) The results, by blog:

Blog 1 2 3 4 5
Lakers 10 – 2 – 3 – 1 – 1 Total = 17
Celtics 9 – 8 – 5 – 7 – 8 Total = 37

Yikes! 37 – 17 is a rout! I realize these numbers are not extensive in their quantity, but in the immortal words if Bill Belichick – “they are what they are”. And remember – I should put an asterisk next to the Lakers figure for Blog 4(Rex) as that is the one where MJ made not two, as I thought earlier, but FIVE separate pleas to his fellow Lakers fans on their home page to come and submit a reply to show support for his case.

[rexhamer]

Here’s how they went:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

1) 2/27/09 - Meanwhile, I am tearing [Rex]'s blog apart. He is trying to set the rules of the debate. Anything goes! Find his blog, it's linked in mine, bookmark it, and back me up. I will win this for us!
2) 2/27/09 - Guys don't forget to support me as I destroy [Rex]'s blog. Add a comment, it's full of Celtics fans. He thinks he is beating me, and he isn't! I am exposing him left and right!
3) 2/28/09 - Please show your support for me fellow Lakers fans in his blog with your replies of encouragement. I am winning and will win this for us.
4) 3/1/09 - Hey Lakers fans! I am continuing the fight to prove the Lakers are the most successful franchise in the history of the NBA by refuting [Rex]'s blog. ….. You guys are invited to give me and the Lakers support in his blog.
5) 3/1/09 - Meanwhile, I am busy destroying [Rex]'s blog. Have a look and reply with support for the Lakers!

Five separate pleas for help over 3 days, and the result: not a single Lakers fan responded. That’s right – zero, zilch, zip, none, nil, nada, a goose egg, the big donut, a complete whitewash, a shutout! MJ says there was plenty of support for him on the Lakers home page. Well, if there was, apparently they were not that supportive to take a few moments and a few keystrokes to show it! And in classic MJ fashion, he posts this on the Lakers page after I pointed out to him that it was obvious no Lakers fan was going to make the small effort to show their support:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

3/2/09 - Have look if you wish, but don't reply. We don't want [Rex] to think I am desperate for support, I will win this on my own!

What a joke! Let’s not forget how MJ bragged after his first blog that Celtics fans had not come forward to debate him in his blog. Therefore, we will hold Lakers fans to the same standard. If they did not come forward and reply to a blog, but meekly stayed in the comfortable confines of the Lakers pages, they cannot be counted.

I will also note for the record that not one single time did I go on the Celtics pages to recruit support. I have not been a member long enough to develop such relationships, and frankly, I would never stoop that low. I made one post each time to notify members that my blogs were available. Nothing more.

[rexhamer]

But let’s take another look at those results:

Blog 1 2 3 4 5
Lakers 10 – 2 – 3 – 1 – 1 Total = 17
Celtics 9 – 8 – 5 – 7 – 8 Total = 37

Notice a trend here? As we proceed from Blog 1(MJ) to his last blog, not only is Lakers support falling off to almost nothing while Celtic support remains strong, the drop-off of Lakers support begins significantly with my introduction to this argument with Blog 2(Rex). What happened to all those Lakers fans who showed support for Blog 1(MJ)? Obviously, when faced with an argument full of common sense, logic, facts and historical data, they saw the light!

To be even more fair and objective, let’s only count a respondent one time, even if they posted over multiple blogs:

Blog 1 2 3 4 5
Lakers 10 – 2 – 2 – 1 – 1 Total = 16
Celtics 9 – 5 – 3 – 5 – 5 Total = 27

27-16, it’s still a rout! The multiple replies indicate strong and consistent support from Celtics fans. MJ can only wish he had the same from his Lakers brethren.

[rexhamer]

But now let’s take a look at the smoking gun of this debate. When we exclude Lakers or Celtics fans from the above count of replies, and examine only “neutral” replies, we get this:

Blog 1 2 3 4 5
Lakers 2 – 0 – 0 – 1 - 1 Total = 4
Celtics 3 – 4 – 2 – 4 - 5 Total = 18

Yikes again! 18-4! Another rout! And we know this hits home with MJ, because he has indicated his willingness to let neutral observers express their opinion as he said this:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

I was relying on the masses to see through your biased statistics and take my side.”

And then this just recently regarding his vaunted “scorecard”:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

At any rate, a list like this allows a neutral fan to compare and make a decision.

So before MJ can warm up his response to dismiss these results of neutral observers, he must reconcile the fact that he was counting on neutral observers to justify his case. Well, neutral fans have spoken and they clearly did not take his side. And I would point out the irony that 18-4 is the first multiple of 9-2! Once again, when the Celtics and Lakers go head-to-head, the ratio of victory for the Celtics is 9-2! MJ can run outside at any time to scream his frustration.

[rexhamer]

And here is the coup de grace I promised. Take note of the results of neutral observers to Blog 5(MJ). This is the blog he claims has refuted all my points. My examples noted above aside for the moment, you will find that neutral replies have come in at 5-1 for the Celtics. That’s 5 out of 6, that’s 83% in favor of the Celtics after reviewing and evaluating Blog 5(MJ). MJ has repeatedly whined that I haven’t refuted his blog.

I DON’T NEED TO!

He’s doing my job for me; i.e., winning converts over to the Celtics cause! What do you call a blog that has the exact opposite affect of its author’s intent? A complete and utter failure! It must be painfully obvious to MJ that nobody is buying what he is selling. (Even GM salespersons are doing better these days!) I should probably thank him for doing my job for me. In fact, I should encourage him to write another blog, maybe the results will be 10-1 in favor of the Celtics!

[rexhamer]

Now MJ will probably try to say many of these respondents have concluded that it is all about championships and the Celtics lead the Lakers. It is MJ’s basic premise that 17-14 is so close we must look elsewhere. But if neutral observers are rejecting MJ’s basic premise, they are rejecting his entire argument (and not all of them claim merely the championship lead as the reason for their opinion, many of them have rejected other facets of his argument).

He may also point out that none of these respondents have provided a point-by-point rebuttal. One does not need to provide a point-by-point rebuttal to disagree with something. For instance, MJ may post a 5,000 word blog “proving” the world is flat. An interested reader may simply review all the relevant points, weigh their validity, and come to an intelligent and common sense conclusion that they disagree. A lengthy rebuttal is not necessary.

The figures I have provided are an honest, accurate, undeniable and irrefutable tabulation of all the replies to the blogs. There is no opinion or speculation relevant to theses results. They are not “misleading stats”, in fact, they are just the opposite.

So after 5 blogs, tens of thousands of words, dozens of replies, endless points and counter-points, the votes are in and the polls are closed. The jury of neutral observers has weighed the evidence and the verdict is clearly in favor of the Celtics by an 18-4 margin. I can accurately and confidently proclaim that there is overwhelming consensus on the Internet that the Boston Celtics are the most successful franchise in NBA history.

So when the results of any contest are 18-4, it is clear that when the team/person with the “18” claims victory, they are telling the truth. When the team/person with only “4” claims victory, they are either delusional or lying. I’ll let others be the judge of making that determination.

Game, set, match: Rexhamer!

I rest MY case.

[BackdoorJesus]

Are you fucking kidding me? You're still on this pedantic rant?

Wow...you sure spend a lot of time rehashing this bullshit.

Have fun with that while the rest of us enjoy watching the Lakers crush Orlando in the Finals.

You do recall Orlando, right? Those are the guys that knocked your candyass Celtics out in the fucking semifinals. No problem for the Lakers though it appears.

See ya next year...when your team might matter again.

Oh and as far as your "case" goes; you can rest it, but the jury says you lose.

[michaeljohn]

Oh my stars and garters. This will be so easy to refute. I'll address it point by point shortly.

rexhamer, prepare to have your ass handed to you! The biggest flaw in his argument above was one I already warned him about, and I said I was prepared for. He is basing his "victory" on the replies. this is akin to saying Orlando won last night because they were ahead 24-22 after one quarter. All will be explained. rexhamer was proven to use flawed logic in our debate, and he doesn't even address any point where I proved it. He ignores a continued argument that I have him beat in because he simply quit the debate. He has been invited to continue it, and has refused.

Also, there is a deleted post right above mine, made by a mod. I would appreciate it if it was restored.

[BackdoorJesus]

hahaha fine I'll restore my post, even though I think it should have gone in the smack talk thread...but since you asked so nicely...

[michaeljohn]

Originally Posted by BackdoorJesus

Are you fucking kidding me? You're still on this pedantic rant?

Wow...you sure spend a lot of time rehashing this bullshit.

Have fun with that while the rest of us enjoy watching the Lakers crush Orlando in the Finals.

You do recall Orlando, right? Those are the guys that knocked your candyass Celtics out in the fucking semifinals. No problem for the Lakers though it appears.

See ya next year...when your team might matter again.

Oh and as far as your "case" goes; you can rest it, but the jury says you lose.

Thanks to BDJ for restoring his post. He has seen the debate, and knows I won it. This is the first time he has offered an opinion here. my refututation to follow promptly.

[michaeljohn]

Before I get started, Let’s summarize what’s wrong with rexhamer’s new article:

One: Flawed logic. (Just like his last blog!)
Two: An uneducated conclusion based upon collection and interpretation of data in violation of strict and set standards and principals. (His naivety with how he blindly presents his case is very sad indeed!)

What’s even more remarkable and is rexhamer’s claim here that he has overwhelming internet support the Celtics are superior! This is something he accused me of earlier at another site, but we agreed to disagree on it. His statement will be utterly and completely refuted.

I will show I won both the other debate and now this one. I won the first by exposing his flawed logic and “Cherry Picked” statistics by creating a scorecard free from bias and his speculation. We all know how rexhamer is against speculation yet as shown below, he insists in keeping his speculation and theory in the argument! I have never seen such hypocrisy in my life!

What really constitutes an internet debate? Side A makes a point, side B offers a rebuttal. Eventually, one side comes out on top on each point when the other side either has no answer or concedes that issue. If an observer offers an opinion at a stage of the debate when the full argument isn’t seen, can we trust an opinion like that? We can’t, it’s unreliable. Try sending a jury to reach a verdict before the defense has presented its case! Sorry, mistrial. rexhamer relies on this flawed logic to prove his case. It’s like declaring the Orlando Magic winners of game 1 vs. the Lakers in the current NBA finals after one quarter because they were ahead 24-22. We all know the game isn’t over until it’s over! rexhamer wants you to believe otherwise!

Once again, rexhamer wants to set the rules for the debate. He seems to think that he can just ignore what I say and claim refutation by offering up more flawed logic, in short, this latest article!

See, I provided evidence rexhamer’s arguments in his last blog were all based upon flawed logic and speculation and he has done nothing to counter this notion. In fact, he avoids this entirely and presents us with what? A new argument filled with more flawed logic! My last article refuted his last one entirely point by point and remains unchallenged. He ran away! What kind of debating partner is he? Well for one, he is uneducated on the key point of his new argument! I am sure anyone that is familiar with the topic I will address later will simply cringe when they see his claims! rexhamer has proven one thing without a doubt: He is an embarrassment to the fan base of the Boston Celtics!

I repeat his entire new article, excepting a portion that won’t be needed, it was totally destroyed. Brevity is a good thing.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

In order to “stay on point” regarding this discussion of Celtics vs. Lakers, I figure it is best to simply start a new thread. I am sure many of you have little interest in this debate, but an accusation of lying has been made towards me and I take that seriously. In addition, given the number of insults MJ has thrown my way, I will take great satisfaction in administering the coup de grace to his cherished Lakers argument here in front of everyone at Webrats. I am not sure of the posting capacity, and there is a lot of info to come, so I will post in small increments.

Yep, I already posted proof of rexhamer’s lies. His lies will be explained below. First off, let’s separate lies from smack. If I say I kicked his ass in the debate, that’s smack and open to interpretation. That’s also the Webrats philosophy, and how we post here. However, there is one key point I made in our debate that I can claim victory in, and rexhamer has confirmed it. He never fails to own himself! 20 years ago, it was no contest who was the better franchise between the Lakers and the Celtics, it was Boston. Today, opinion is mixed, it’s open for debate. I stated repeatedly that the fact I made it an argument was something I was proud of. rexhamer’s own collected statistics prove people agree with me on that point!

Originally Posted by rexhamer

The accusation of lying is based on the fact that both of us have claimed victory. Therefore it should be simple to conclude that whoever is the clear victor in this debate is telling the truth, and whoever is the clear loser is the liar. I shall be vindicated in this manner.

Let’s get the lying part out of the way. I posted it in the smack talk thread, so certainly he should have seen it. He is incorrect in where the lying part is to be found.

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

This part really made me laugh:

Originally Posted by rexhamer

Besides - nobody else cares anyways. You just cannot stomach the thought that you were bested in an Internet argument, so you keep trying to find an audience that might be taken in by speculation, misinformation and faulty logic.

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

Dude, you had your ass handed to you on a platter, and you lie through your teeth. I took all speculation out, and proved how all of your logic was flawed many times over! These are things I can prove. You cannot prove what I quoted of you. It's impossible and you know it.

rexhamer will be owned in this matter. He also got it wrong separating what is lying, and what is smack. More flawed logic on his part. Also, my replies below will show there is a clear loser, and it’s him, despite of his victory claim! His conclusion is not one at all. This has been explained above, and will be again in detail later.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

And just to be clear for everyone – there were five separate and lengthy blogs posted one the “other” site, alternating between MJ and me. To avoid confusion, I will refer to them by number and author; i.e., the first blog is Blog 1(MJ), the second would be Blog 2(Rex), etc

.

Thanks for this clarification, it will help me destroy your argument.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

When I was first formulating this reply, I thought about going point-by-point with a few rebuttals, but it is clear that nobody is interested in that level of detail. I thought about showing a few examples of MJ’s flaccid argument, such as the fact that his “scorecard” includes Lakers advantages of more wins and fewer losses in conference championships, yet only show Finals wins as an advantage for the Celtics. Where are the Finals losses of the Lakers? Clearly, the results of the NBA Finals carry much more significance than the conference championships.

Gee, the Celtics hold only one advantage, that’s why only their title edge is listed. I refuted the 17-3, 9-2, and 14-15 individually with logic and proved they also didn’t belong as they are speculation on his part! He still hasn’t argued with me on that!

Originally Posted by rexhamer

I also thought about pointing out the fact that MJ has teased us with his new concept of the Inevitable Exception to the Rule (IETTR). I presumed he was going to provide some examples of exceptions that disprove “rules” that he claims I stated. However, even though he references the IETTR a few times (even here at Webrats he posted something about it), he never actually provides a single exception to any rule! Not a one. He says there out there, but the self-proclaimed king of Internet research cannot provide any examples!

Well, in my article, I sure did. rexhamer really lacks reading comprehension. Does he want to tell them how many other things I wrote that he ignored? I had to repeat myself many times! Here it is again, *sigh*

One well known example of how the IEttR came into play in a trial was during the O.J. Simpson murder trial. Detective Mark Fuhrman was asked if he ever used or called someone the “N” word. He said no (as in never). The defense then came in with the IEttR and blew his credibility right out of the water. That was the fly in the ointment and Detective Mark Fuhrman was painted into a corner.

See, my whole point of IEttR is because rexhamer makes his points using always or never scenarios. In this case it was left up to him to prove that every champion with the most titles is always the most successful because that is exactly what he claims:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

michaeljohn: The burden is on him to prove it, not me! Remember, Mathematicians must back up their theorems with proofs.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

rexhamer: “But michaeljohn says that it is not set in stone that “He with the most titles is the best”. I say, “Why not”?”

Originally Posted by rexhamer

michaeljohn: The burden is on him to prove it, not me! Remember, Mathematicians must back up their theorems with proofs.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

I was thinking of pointing out that he is incorrect when he claims I have refuted the majority of the categories of his scorecard (and let us not forget – this is HIS scorecard, based on categories that are relevant in HIS opinion). I have not dismissed them; I have just diminished their importance as many of them deal with regular season results that have not translated into championship results. MJ has even concurred with this notion regarding the relevance of 60-win seasons. Instead of addressing the point at hand, he ignores it and weakly offers a criticism of my use of the term “gaudy”.

He never offered a scorecard, so I had to construct one for him, based on what he posted. Everywhere I listed a Lakers advantage, he claimed it was refuted. Now he says diminished. Isn’t it up to the reader to determine how they value the numerous non-title advantages the Lakers own over the Celtics? So, I could only construct a scorecard based on what he said. As far as “gaudy” goes, the word has negative connotations. He still hasn’t offered up a better word to use instead of it.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

And I was also thinking of noting that he does not include the Celtics significant 9-2 edge in head-to-head as it is just my opinion. But let’s all note how often MJ and other Lakers fans have proclaimed during the course of this season that they wanted to meet the Celtics in the Finals. Not just that they wanted to win a championship, but they wanted it to be against their dominant rival. Even yesterday, on the eve of the Finals, Euro-weenie Sasha Vucovich was quoted, “We wanted the Celtics”. Lakers fans and even Lakers players themselves are all cognoscente of wanting to put a dent in 9-2.

Because 9-2 is already refuted, it's speculation, and doesn’t belong.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

I could easily have gone though MJ’s entire final blog and refuted all his points for the third time if I chose to. But I will demonstrate that it is completely unnecessary.

This makes me laugh. Each of my blogs offered new evidence which hedismissed as already refuted. Again I say, how can you refute something without even addressing it? You can’t, it’s impossible. Your credibility is fading fast. Also, since you can easily refute it, why haven’t you? As it stands, you have a lot of egg on your face, your blog was annihilated and destroyed.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

It has been obvious from the start that neither MJ nor I were going to have our minds changed or concede this argument. And on the other site, with more activity than Webrats, Celtics and Lakers fans fall predictably in line with their team’s allegiances (except for one Lakers fan who has alternated between his support for the Celtics and the Lakers. I don’t know what to make of him!). The true measurement of success in this argument can only be derived from examining the conclusions of neutral fans in their replies to our separate blogs. These neutral fans are objective and unbiased, with no preconceived attachment to either side of this argument. Even MJ agrees with this. But more on that in a moment.

Yep, plenty more on this from me in a moment too. It kills his entire case.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

To that end, I have reviewed the replies to all five blogs and compiled a tabulation of the number of responses that have taken a specific position for either MJ’s case or mine. I have discounted trolls, replies of smack talk only, anyone who merely replied “Go Lakers” or “Go Celtics” without indicating their opinion of the question at hand (these were equal anyway). I have also discounted any Lakers fans who merely said the Lakers have been more successful in the last 40 years without expressing an opinion of the full history of the NBA. This debate is not about the last 40 years.

Yeah, but much of rexhamer’s hypocritical argument is based on selecting the most favorable of the 60 years of the Celtics and creating primary advantages with them. Let me repeat the death blow to Cherry Picking from my last article:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

1) Cherry Picking is an attempt to select the cream of the crop from statistics to gain an unfair advantage. Let me give two simple examples, with a little humor added in.


“The Lakers’ record in games when they lead by 10 or more points with 1 minute or less on the clock is 100-0.” Obviously this is a very misleading statement, and will yield no significant advantage.


“The Clippers’ record in games when they lead by 10 or more points with 1 minute or less on the clock is 100-0.” Aside from being misleading, I am not too certain if the Clippers can find 100 games meeting this criteria, and even if they could, I am not sure they won them all! What Celtics_55 does with his “Cherry Picking” is select the best results he can from Celtics history and attempts to create a primary advantage with them. This is in direct contradiction to his statement that we are examining the entire history of the NBA.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

As a reminder, the five blogs go, 1 to 5: MJ-Rex-MJ-Rex-MJ. First off I will list overall supporters, even if they are identified as a fan of either team. This was made possible either from information in their public profile (which lists favorite teams) or could be reasonably deduced from how they replied. I have not counted multiple replies to the same blog. However, I have counted each respondent per blog as consistent support (or lack thereof) is a consideration. (Since I first examined this months ago for Blog 1(MJ), the numbers have changed a bit due to additional replies and the fact that I was better able to identify Lakers and Celtics fans.) The results, by blog:

Blog 1 2 3 4 5
Lakers 10 – 2 – 3 – 1 – 1 Total = 17
Celtics 9 – 8 – 5 – 7 – 8 Total = 37

Yikes! 37 – 17 is a rout! I realize these numbers are not extensive in their quantity, but in the immortal words if Bill Belichick – “they are what they are”. And remember – I should put an asterisk next to the Lakers figure for Blog 4(Rex) as that is the one where MJ made not two, as I thought earlier, but FIVE separate pleas to his fellow Lakers fans on their home page to come and submit a reply to show support for his case.

Here’s how they went:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

1) 2/27/09 - Meanwhile, I am tearing [Rex]'s blog apart. He is trying to set the rules of the debate. Anything goes! Find his blog, it's linked in mine, bookmark it, and back me up. I will win this for us!
2) 2/27/09 - Guys don't forget to support me as I destroy [Rex]'s blog. Add a comment, it's full of Celtics fans. He thinks he is beating me, and he isn't! I am exposing him left and right!
3) 2/28/09 - Please show your support for me fellow Lakers fans in his blog with your replies of encouragement. I am winning and will win this for us.
4) 3/1/09 - Hey Lakers fans! I am continuing the fight to prove the Lakers are the most successful franchise in the history of the NBA by refuting [Rex]'s blog. ….. You guys are invited to give me and the Lakers support in his blog.
5) 3/1/09 - Meanwhile, I am busy destroying [Rex]'s blog. Have a look and reply with support for the Lakers!

Originally Posted by rexhamer

Five separate pleas for help over 3 days, and the result: not a single Lakers fan responded. That’s right – zero, zilch, zip, none, nil, nada, a goose egg, the big donut, a complete whitewash, a shutout! MJ says there was plenty of support for him on the Lakers home page. Well, if there was, apparently they were not that supportive to take a few moments and a few keystrokes to show it!

I had countless instances of support. Not everyone posts in a blog. Not everyone posts replies here at Webrats, it’s something I have been fighting for years. Certainly you have seen how I banned many leechers who never bothered to type a thanks. I probably also told you, if not, I’ll repeat it here, my first article, back in December wasn’t getting replies and was of extreme interest to Lakers fans. I kept after the Lakers masses to reply in that as well, and it helped. Now, what’s so important about a reply? If it’s here at Webrats, we ask a reply or a hit of the thanks button if something is downloaded. At the blog site, a reply tells you it’s been read, and that’s why we write, to be heard. Also, when I posted my first Lakers/Celtics blog in January, I was asking for replies. 5 of them showed up in my original one, not in the current one! Why? Easy to explain. I ask for a reply on main page. Member clicks my profile. This gives all my articles. They scroll down, seeing no replies. They have to click a link to see the replies. They read the whole thing, were at the bottom and replied to the older blog! Add 5 more to the Lakers’ count on the first blog.

Now, let’s analyze the reply to view ratios. Here at Webrats, a thread usually gets less than 1% of replies in relation to views. I had it much higher, but have been too busy to ban leechers. At least the thanks button helps a bit. I used to get close to 100% reply to download ratio. Now it’s under 25% counting thanks and replies. Check for yourself. Best on the internet for porn. Check that too.

Now, let’s examine who looks at news items at the other site. There is no view count, but there are two possible ways to guess. On the main NBA page is a link to an article for game one of the finals. Click that, you get a box score and the start of the article. Click the link to see the full story. As of the time of me writing this, there are 1,115 comments and the story is 14 hours old.. There is also a poll that has 97,024 votes in it. That means that about 11% of the people who voted, posted a reply. However, there is no way to tell how many viewed the article. Look in the bonus section of girl pics, I have a current poll, but it allows multiple votes. Not many have voted, but plenty more have viewed. Same with any poll you can find here. People just don’t vote. So, it’s possible 1 million people or so have viewed that article. What can we infer from this as to how many people viewed our blogs? Well, they aren’t on the main NBA page. They are tucked away within individual team pages. The shelf life of our blogs has ranged from a few hours to several days. Once a 6th blog is posted, our blogs get archived and no longer are front page material. So, let’s just pick a random number, and say a blog that is on main page for several days gets 10,000 views. Keep in mind, viewing is free, replying requires registration. That last step is a major hurdle.

There is only one way to measure what people think. It is done with probability and statistical analysis, based upon pure random samples. If it isn’t random, it simply cannot be trusted!

Read this article about random sampling: Random sample - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia this part should do for explanation in this argument: Random sampling- all members of the population have an equal chance of being selected as part of the sample.

If you could have asked Dewey why he didn’t defeat President Truman in 1948, he would tell you that the pollsters that said he would win were situated in places where they were likely to encounter Republican voters to survey! (Libraries, Banks, and so on). There is an entire course taught on probability and statistics that is required of mathematics, business, and social science (including psychology) undergrad majors. It can also be pursued for an undergraduate or graduate degree.

Is the sample of votes rexhamer gives above truly random? No it isn’t, and guess who distorted it? We both did! First, the blogs can only link to 20 of the 30 NBA team., Although I did that many, he didn’t. His latest blog went to 3 teams other than LA and Boston, and all hate the Lakers with a passion! His first only went to 12 teams other than ours and most hate the Lakers! So his replies are extremely non-random. I sent mine to the better team pages, ones that were likely to hate the Lakers. I don’t only want Lakers fans to see it, (They will agree with me) I want our rivals to see it, and see what they have to say! I am not looking for votes, I am looking for justification of my argument! The fact that a significant portion of the NBA fans were excluded from having a link on their main page further generates significant and case-killing statistical errors into the data interpretation.

Several of the respondents who are Celtics fans were brought there specifically by m, further skewing the bias. I simply replied to their blogs and invited them to mine. I am looking for someone to attempt to refute me, because rexhamer sure hasn’t. tannah, and Lisa are examples of Celtics fans I dragged in for the view. I also went to several neutral sites with our fight and got a few more neutral people to chime in. I recognize screennames in the replies to my blog from sites I spread the news. If no one refutes me, then I am correct! The next proven statistical flaw is the sample size. It is proven mathematically that the sample size is simply too small to make a definite hypothesies, and even if it was larger, the possibility of a Type I or Type II error persists. These are defined as rejecting or accepting a hypothesis when the opposite result is correct. Now, if rexhamer wants to go against proven mathematical criteria and formula developed by the foremost mathematicians in history and have you believe his interpretation of the replies is correct, then please line up and buy this great swampland I have in Florida. I also have to laugh that when rexhamer was after me about using theory and speculation in a debate, he was quick to point out the writings of Plato and Aristotle and how they had proven ages ago that speculation has no room in a debate. Now he wants to challenge the great mathematical minds of history!

Also I wish to add, it may not be possible to have truly neutral fans. It is well-known that the Lakers are the most hated team in the NBA. Here is one link with that opinion.

Hating Lakers one thing fans often agree on

This can be further verified looking at any sports board that has pages for the NBA teams. The Lakers page always has the most activity and the hate for them is strong! If anything, we have proved it is impossible to interpret replies as fact for who is the better franchise!

I will add one more thing about random samples. In a recent graduate school course I took, my team had to prepare a mock research paper and demonstrate how our hypothesis would be tested on a truly random sample population. If we couldn’t do that, we would fail the project, and that was explained in the grading rubric. Pity the poor PHD candidate who conducts an actual field research project without random sampling, he will never get his doctorate. rexhamer doesn’t even get a cookie for his work!

more to follow:

[michaeljohn]

Originally Posted by rexhamer

And in classic MJ fashion, he posts this on the Lakers page after I pointed out to him that it was obvious no Lakers fan was going to make the small effort to show their support:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

3/2/09 - Have look if you wish, but don't reply. We don't want [Rex] to think I am desperate for support, I will win this on my own!
What a joke! Let’s not forget how MJ bragged after his first blog that Celtics fans had not come forward to debate him in his blog. Therefore, we will hold Lakers fans to the same standard. If they did not come forward and reply to a blog, but meekly stayed in the comfortable confines of the Lakers pages, they cannot be counted.

This is wrong and misleading. Celtics fans replied to my blog, but they didn’t attempt a refutation. Only you did. As a matter of fact, I challenged just about all of them with the arguments they made with more proof I was correct and all they did was vanish. You even claimed they provided rebuttals to me, but they didn’t! Who says the people who didn't reply to a blog can't be counted? You do. We all know how your logic is flawed everywhere, so go back and count them. However, you don't need to as your tabulations have been refuted!

Originally Posted by rexhamer

I will also note for the record that not one single time did I go on the Celtics pages to recruit support. I have not been a member long enough to develop such relationships, and frankly, I would never stoop that low. I made one post each time to notify members that my blogs were available. Nothing more.

Ok, now that his interpretation of the data is completely and permanently refuted, let’s expose the other huge flaw in it all, and again, it’s one I warned him about in replies to his blog. As the blog war has continued, my case has developed. His stubbornness has not only enabled me to further refute his work, it has allowed me to improve my own case. rexhamer is making conclusions when the game is still in the first quarter! Now, let’s look at what happened with my last bloge, the one that destroyed his. The one he has never challenged. Now, did all of the people who replied in all blogs see my last one? No they didn’t. I made the post early in the AM on April 23rd. It takes a few hours for it to show up on the main pages, but it never did on the Lakers or the Celtics page. Why? Because on that day, five other people promptly posted their own blogs soon after mine! 5 blogs on the main page is the limit, then the oldest and bottom one gets archived when a new one is posted. Very few people saw my most powerful post ever! It was the one that point-by-point utterly refuted rexhamer’s blog. The same one that stands as a victory for me on all counts as he has yet to attempt to refute it. What victory did I achieve? I reaffirmed it is a debate. I refuted his 17-3, 9-2, and 14-15 “”Cherry Picked” statistics, and proved they didn’t belong in the argument. These were the same points he made here as his case oh so many months ago. Now, does anyone care about this lengthy argument besides us? We both pretty much agreed everyone gave up on it ages ago. So it really doesn’t matter to me few people saw my last blog. If rexhamer wants to keep the fight going over there, I assure many people will see my next refutation!

Originally Posted by rexhamer

MJ can run outside at any time to scream his frustration.

rexhamer may now go outside and scream, pull his hair out, kick himself in the arse, bark at the moon, consider himself owned and schooled, pray few Celtics fans don’t consider him a disgrace, and ask himself why oh why did he ever think he could best me in an argument. Sorry, I told rexhamer ages ago I always win internet arguments. This article is yet another example of this.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

And here is the coup de grace I promised. Take note of the results of neutral observers to Blog 5(MJ). This is the blog he claims has refuted all my points. My examples noted above aside for the moment, you will find that neutral replies have come in at 5-1 for the Celtics. That’s 5 out of 6, that’s 83% in favor of the Celtics after reviewing and evaluating Blog 5(MJ). MJ has repeatedly whined that I haven’t refuted his blog.

I DON’T NEED TO!

Uh, yes you do. You can’t ignore all your flawed logic this simply. You fight or you quit. Desperate attempts such as this thread of yours have pretty much taken away whatever sympathy and credibility you may have gained here. Wouldn’t the other site love to see this side of the story! I suggest you fight me here if you plan to continue, and not there! Whoops, I have since discovered he did take the fight to the other site. Bad news for him, bad news indeed when Celtics fans see what became of their champion of the blog war and how easily and disgracefully he fell.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

He’s doing my job for me; i.e., winning converts over to the Celtics cause! What do you call a blog that has the exact opposite affect of its author’s intent? A complete and utter failure! It must be painfully obvious to MJ that nobody is buying what he is selling. (Even GM salespersons are doing better these days!) I should probably thank him for doing my job for me. In fact, I should encourage him to write another blog, maybe the results will be 10-1 in favor of the Celtics!

Uh, yes you do. You can’t ignore all your flawed logic this simply. You fight or you quit. Desperate attempts such as this thread of yours have pretty much taken away whatever sympathy and credibility you may have gained here. Wouldn’t the other site love to see this side of the story! I suggest you fight me here if you plan to continue, and not there! Whoops, I have since discovered he did take the fight to the other site. Bad news for him, bad news indeed when Celtics fans see what became of their champion of the blog war and how easily and disgracefully he fell.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

He’s doing my job for me; i.e., winning converts over to the Celtics cause! What do you call a blog that has the exact opposite affect of its author’s intent? A complete and utter failure! It must be painfully obvious to MJ that nobody is buying what he is selling. (Even GM salespersons are doing better these days!) I should probably thank him for doing my job for me. In fact, I should encourage him to write another blog, maybe the results will be 10-1 in favor of the Celtics!

How am I winning converts over to the Celtics case? I am winning them over to the Lakers side! Everyone believes the Celtics are the better franchise until they see my side of the story! That has to hurt, seeing people choose the Lakers over the Celtics! Your statement I am winning people over to the Celtics side has already been proven false mathematically! More on my new blog you suggest I make: Since it was written, the comparisons have changed. Lakers have another finals appearance, and are in striking distance of another title. First, as of today, it’s 14-17. I think the Celtics are done, and the Lakers will win more titles, it’s what I posted in my 2nd blog, and my prediction:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

When it’s 15-17, many more people will agree with me.

When it’s 16-17, a heck of a lot more people will agree with me.

When it’s 17-17, just about everyone will agree with me. Lone exceptions will be Celtics fans diehards that didn’t see this blog.

So, perhaps a new blog is warranted soon, let’s enjoy the finals. 2 titles is not that much. You use misleading statistics anyway, now I know why since you demonstrated your ignorance of them here. You say 3 titles is a 20% lead. 2 titles is about a 13% lead, and 1 title up is about 6%. It drops fast as things are so close! 14-17 is close enough for another look, and 15-17 and 16-17 most certainly are! Especially in light of the Celtics history from 1988-2007! That failed period becomes more magnified as the Lakers draw closer!

Originally Posted by rexhamer

Now MJ will probably try to say many of these respondents have concluded that it is all about championships and the Celtics lead the Lakers. It is MJ’s basic premise that 17-14 is so close we must look elsewhere. But if neutral observers are rejecting MJ’s basic premise, they are rejecting his entire argument (and not all of them claim merely the championship lead as the reason for their opinion, many of them have rejected other facets of his argument).

Your interpretation of the data has failed, outlined above.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

He may also point out that none of these respondents have provided a point-by-point rebuttal. One does not need to provide a point-by-point rebuttal to disagree with something. For instance, MJ may post a 5,000 word blog “proving” the world is flat. An interested reader may simply review all the relevant points, weigh their validity, and come to an intelligent and common sense conclusion that they disagree. A lengthy rebuttal is not necessary.

A rebuttal means to offer something up to refute an argument. Disagreement is an opinion. Without a rebuttal, it remains disagreement. Opinions can’t be proved, you said this yourself at the close of your last blog:

Originally Posted by rexhamer

The problem we have is that, try as we may, you cannot “prove” an opinion. You can certainly provide backup reasoning to validate your opinion, and can attempt to win others over, but in the end you cannot prove any one opinion more than another person’s conflicting opinion. I suggest we respect each other’s opinions and agree to disagree.
The figures I have provided are an honest, accurate, undeniable and irrefutable tabulation of all the replies to the blogs. There is no opinion or speculation relevant to these results. They are not “misleading stats”, in fact, they are just the opposite.

I’ll use this against you below.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

So after 5 blogs, tens of thousands of words, dozens of replies, endless points and counter-points, the votes are in and the polls are closed. The jury of neutral observers has weighed the evidence and the verdict is clearly in favor of the Celtics by an 18-4 margin. I can accurately and confidently proclaim that there is overwhelming consensus on the Internet that the Boston Celtics are the most successful franchise in NBA history.

So when the results of any contest are 18-4, it is clear that when the team/person with the “18” claims victory, they are telling the truth. When the team/person with only “4” claims victory, they are either delusional or lying. I’ll let others be the judge of making that determination.

Game, set, match: Rexhamer!

I rest MY case.

Your case failed, that has been proven above. It is also ridiculous. Again, I point out, I win because I made a debate out of it. I am also winning because your entire blog has been refuted and all flawed logic you used to construct your arguments has been exposed. You have done absolutely nothing to challenge the points I made except to create another case that runs away from the main issues and is based on totally flawed logic. Speaking of flawed logic, let’s see what you had to say about it in your last blog, before I proved you base your entire case on using it:

Originally Posted by rexhamer

And finally I point out that in michaeljohn’s initial reply to my original blog, he claims he found it “riddled with flawed logic”. Although he never actually provides a single example of flawed logic, it is important to note that he announces his contention that “flawed logic” is bad for an argument. Lo and behold, we finally agree on something. I was certainly going to make this point myself, but the fact that michaeljohn has introduced the notion that

Flawed Logic = Bad Argument

confirms a key point in this discussion. michaeljohn may live to regret the day he typed those words!

Well, I think it is rexhamer that has lived to regret those words. I proved it in my last blog, and I have proved it here.

So let’s see where we stand. rexhamer now has two articles I have completely refuted, his blog and this one.

He has two choices. He can debate them both, or he can walk away. If he debates them, he has to refute all the flawed logic I have exposed in both arguments, and his speculation in the first. He is a nobody here. No one will care I beat him down.

He has reposted this thread at the other site in my blog. I made a recommendation in his blog what to do regarding that. Now, all I need to know is what is he going to do next. I welcome a debate, but don’t mind if he lets it go. I do have a nice Boston blog I wish to post. However, its fate is up in the air until this matter is resolved. Why don’t the Boston fans tell him to give the fight up. He needs to admit he lost both debates, (admitting defeat in the debate doesn’t mean either team is better, that is decided by personal opinion) and allow me the time to construct something that will be extremely appreciated by Boston fans.


Let me quote him one more time from the replies to his last blog, on April 15:

Originally Posted by rexhamer

You may ask - how do we end this? If you have any ideas, I am all ears. Yet I would point out that, at the end of my blog, I was the one who offered that we respect each others opinions and agree to disagree. It is michaeljohn that has rejected that notion.

Well, of course I had to reject the notion to agree to disagree because he ignored my refutation to his blog. Thus my last blog was written and still remains ignored. However, since it is clear he wants out, and my suggestion he admits defeat will do nicely. This gets the Boston fans my promised article. I close with a simple quote that rexhamer should pay heed to in this regard.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. (or the one)
Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities. (Captain James T. Kirk, in The Wrath of Khan).

I rest my case.

[michaeljohn]

Well, there you go rexhamer, you just got

Opinions from others are welcome.