NBA Smack Talk thread

[michaeljohn]

Originally Posted by rexhamer

Here's another beauty:


The harsh reality is that is has been YOUR argument that has been completely refuted. Logic and facts will do that to a spurious argument all the time. Since my original blog took apart your original argument, is clear from the overwhelming no. of replies in support of the Celtics who has made the better case. And these would not be "misleading stats", they are facts.

Even your fellow Lakers fans have abandoned you. Despite two separate and desperate pleas on the Lakers fans pages for them to show support for your argument, the responded with ZERO replies!

The only way to resolve this here is for you to provide the Webrats community with a link so they can judge for themselves. Fine with me.

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.

Hahahha, now you are showing what a tool you are and how you can't read.

Dude, your prime arguments, as stated here before, were the Celtics edges of 17-3, 9-2, and Lakers 14-15 finals record. I destroyed and annihilated those. Oh, wait you don't like it when I say I did that. Tough shit. That's what I did.

Your big gripe against my argument was use of what-ifs. I took those out and proved you were basing your main arguments on what ifs. You had your ass handed to you royally and the irony was classic. You got bit by your own complaints against my arguments. What a fucking hypocrite you are.

Let me repeat how I destroyed your logic at the other site. Note IEttR stands for Inevitable Exception to the Rule. rexhamer bases a lot of his arguments on "there can be no exceptions". that was easy to deal with:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

rexhamer has classified the following three categories as relevant since the Celtics have edges in them all: 17-3, 9-2, and 14-15. Let’s see what he had to say for justify classifying these as relevant, from his latest blog, and repeated above referring to 9-2 and 17-3:

Originally Posted by rexhamer

It is insulting to sports fans in general, and NBA fans in particular, to dismiss two categories that are so prominent in any fan’s discussion.

Originally Posted by rexhamer

I stated that it is not “cherry picking” to examine categories in order of relevance to fans

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

First, I would like to say that these categories are placed as relevant and important by rexhamer's opinion. They are backed up by facts which I maintain are “Cherry Picked”. Does everyone else think they are as important? Well, rexhamer has just told you they do! Let’s expose the flawed logic with this. First and foremost, we have the IEttR come into play. 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! If they aren’t Celtics fans, I doubt seriously many of the fans will bring these categories up at all, let alone prominently! Check any basketball forum. They talk about every basketball notion you can imagine, except this! 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!



That in itself immediately and officially eliminates 9-2 and 17-3 from this debate. Also it is his opinion. I don’t think we should allow opinions to determine relevant categories. I could play that game too. I think the Lakers’ team colors are better. They represent royalty, advantage Lakers! Of course I won’t, my example is as ridiculous as his justification for including his “Cherry Picked” statistics. I also wish to point out that not only have I already logically refuted them, (Two seperate refutations is more than enough) I have correctly identified them as “Cherry Picking”. Since 14-15 is his opinion as well, that should also be dropped from the discussion as relevant. This is a huge advantage to rexhamer. He doesn’t have to search every sport worldwide to prove there is no best franchise with a losing finals record. He will just have to live with the ludicrous facts! Also, opinion is best left for the reader’s evaluation of historical data. When a final scorecard is listed below, they will be free to make a choice. I will construct a scorecard based upon truly relevant historical fact alone.



What have I been saying all along? The old arguments for Celtics supremacy don’t hold up anymore!

So, your main arguments got beaten twice. first, I logically reguted them and exposed your flawed logic, I also proved they didn't belong in the discussion to begin with!

Lakers 37 Celtic 24. That's domination, live with it.

as to far as Lakers fans support, did you see all the kudos I got on the main Lakers page over the months? No, I'll bet you didn't. Go scroll through a few hundred pages, you will see plenty. I stopped asking for replies ages ago. The fans didn't desert me.

Now, you just got here, just like you did there. I didn't even post all your other uses of flawed logic to make your points. This thread isn't supposed to be a fight between us. I invited you to reply to me at the other site. Do it there, not here. So far, you haven't refuted anything of mine. The specualtion part is gone, and the facts kick your ass. So whatever you do here next do it very carefully.

[michaeljohn]

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.

This part really made me laugh.

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.

Examples: I make a formula out of criterea for NBA awards and apply them to NBA teams. I specifically kept other sports award systems out of the argument to keep the objections out that would certainly arise. rexhamer tests them on other sports and claims my formula doesn't work! He tries it on two other NBA teams and claims it fails again! Facts are, he didn't read my post, I point out that there are other unmeasured success assets that need to be factored in. Those extra edges make it work!

Lord, I hope you take this argument to the other site. You embarrassed the Celtics and their fans with your weak blog. I will be using your failures here against you, just as I have every time before.

Dude, you lost the argument. Get over it. Last year, your team won. I had to eat shit. Now it's your turn. Go read my blog!

[BackdoorJesus]

Do I have to put you two in separate corners?

Come on guys, take a step back, count to ten, relax...it is just professional sports.

now I'm going to go watch the Lakers/Nuggets game and suggest you do the same.

[rexhamer]

Originally Posted by BackdoorJesus

Do I have to put you two in separate corners?

Come on guys, take a step back, count to ten, relax...it is just professional sports.

now I'm going to go watch the Lakers/Nuggets game and suggest you do the same.

To all:

I have absolutely no interest in reprising this debate here, so I will only make a few points.

1) Regardless of what MJ says regarding 300zx guy and the inability to have duplicate accounts, be reminded that he claims the mechanism to prevent this is maintained by moderators ....... like him! I don't care about his warning not to question moderators authority - the facts remain that this alleged member's existence is highly suspicious. If MJ wants to ban me, that's fine. How is it going to look banning a guy who you've lost an argument to?

2) MJ has repeated his claim that he has refuted my points, but never offers to let other Webrats members judge for themselves. It's like a defense attorney proclaiming he has evidence to prove his client's innocence, but cannot reveal it and wants the jury to acquit just because he says so. I have no reservations sharing our blogs.

3) Lastly, in typical MJ fashion, we get much verbiage, but not a single word admitting, acknowledging, conceding, apologizing for, or even refuting the obvious hypocrisy he is guilty of in this thread.

I have nothing more to add on this subject. I just want people to know that they are in for if they attempt an intelligent discussion on any matter in which MJ disagrees with them.

[michaeljohn]

Originally Posted by rexhamer

To all:

I have absolutely no interest in reprising this debate here, so I will only make a few points.

1) Regardless of what MJ says regarding 300zx guy and the inability to have duplicate accounts, be reminded that he claims the mechanism to prevent this is maintained by moderators ....... like him! I don't care about his warning not to question moderators authority - the facts remain that this alleged member's existence is highly suspicious. If MJ wants to ban me, that's fine. How is it going to look banning a guy who you've lost an argument to?

2) MJ has repeated his claim that he has refuted my points, but never offers to let other Webrats members judge for themselves. It's like a defense attorney proclaiming he has evidence to prove his client's innocence, but cannot reveal it and wants the jury to acquit just because he says so. I have no reservations sharing our blogs.

3) Lastly, in typical MJ fashion, we get much verbiage, but not a single word admitting, acknowledging, conceding, apologizing for, or even refuting the obvious hypocrisy he is guilty of in this thread.

I have nothing more to add on this subject. I just want people to know that they are in for if they attempt an intelligent discussion on any matter in which MJ disagrees with them.

1) dude, I whipped your butt in the argument, I am not going to ban your pathetic ass. I already proved I didn't create an account beyond a reasonable doubt. If he wants to trivialize this, it shows how desperate he is to try to knock me down a peg.

2) We had an agreement not to cross links, but we can share material. I reposted a bit of it already. I showed some of how rexhamer lost this debate, and he lost it big. I have no problem saying this, because that is the truth. Who wants to see the whole fight and report back here what they think? No one cared before, but rexhamer is lying. He lost, and he lost big. If he won, he would have replied at the other site with a new article. All he did there was mimick me in his replies. I'm telling you, his actions there were puzzling to say the least.

3) Big words pal, reread what I said yesterday. This is Webrats. Fun and Stupidity at its best. You want to come here and lie, expect to get bitch-slapped. You were the one who wanted to defend the Celtics and you failed. No one else did, and you did a horrible job. You should apologize to all Celtics fans for how you messed up.

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.

a) Speculation was removed from my argument and you were left the only one specualting in yours. Who's the hypocrite? you devoted about half of your last article whining about my use of it. I didn't need it to make my case, but you sure needed it to make yours.
b) misinformation? My article is full of historical fact, all of which you acknowledge. Don't get me started on what we agreed to disagree with. Pardon me, I need to now go spread this on the internet to get more overwhelming Lakers support.
c) Faulty logic? Me? No pal, it was you, and your argument was loaded with it. I isolated each case and explained why it was. You never even challenged it.

I have to go to work now, let's see what happens here while I am gone.

[BackdoorJesus]

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

3) Big words pal, reread what I said yesterday. This is Webrats. Fun and Stupidity at its best. You want to come here and lie, expect to get bitch-slapped. You were the one who wanted to defend the Celtics and you failed. No one else did, and you did a horrible job. You should apologize to all Celtics fans for how you messed up.

that last part made me LOL

[michaeljohn]

I have the perfect avatar for rexhamer. Rather than give him a Lakers one, this fits him much better:



That's "Big Baby" Glen Davis crying on the bench after Kevin Garnett chewed him out earlier this year. Not saying I'll give him one, I am just saying this suits him. Oh yeah, remember all those little guys KG was picking on this year? Seems Karma bit him on the ass, a season ending injury. Too many miles on the Big 3, now, Boston is done as elite.

So far, no one has offered to have a look at the whole argument we had. Here it is in a nutshell:

1) I posted an article giving evidence the Lakers were the most successful franchise in NBA history.
2) He posted a rebutal, claiming he had my blog refuted.
3) I promptly refuted his.
4) He posted a lengthy rebutal, mainly attacking my style of argument. What's funnny is, he ignored a lot of my new evidence. His reading attention span is lacking.
5) I made a new article, removed what he objected too, used what I beat him with in 3) above, and added a bit more for good measure. Case closed, his arguments blew up in his face.

I double checked the other site, and he has no new article posted. No one has yet refuted my latest article. It's convincing and devasting to rexhamer. Yep, I can prove it. I can repost it here bit by bit. Let's see how rexhamer carries on in here now.

Oh, some members may remember a delusional nutcase member we once had named Insaniteous. Does any long time member "in the know" think he and rexhamer may be the same person? I just had a look at that classic thread Insaniteous made where he went after me and got owned over and over again and I was wondering.....

[michaeljohn]

rexhamer has said he wants out of this argument, yet he brought it back here. His profile says he went to UMass, but I really wonder about that. Let's look at one of his many gaffes in his last blog:

Originally Posted by rexhamer

Take note of my comments regarding the Vikings and NY/SF Giants and the diminishment of regular season accomplishments if they are not matched by championship success. In fact, Lakers_55 now understands this concept as he posted a reply to his blog a few days ago in which he dismisses a gaudy regular season statistic because it did not necessarily result in a corresponding success in titles. I am happy to enlighten him!

My reply to him:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

Regarding his last sentence, regarding a “gaudy” regular season statistic, it is in reference to teams who have won 60 games or more in the regular season. Miriam Webster defines gaudy thusly:

Do the above definitions truly define winning 60 games in a season? I don’t think rexhamer wants to go there. For brevity, I’ll stop here.

What's really happened here is a Lakers fan has kicked his ass. He relied on all the old arguments that don't hold up anymore. Suddenly, the Celtics failures of 20 years caught up with his team. Let's look at those 20 years, also from my last blog:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

I selected the Celtics’ seasons of 1987-88 to 2006-07, 20 years in total to scrutinize. This time period starts one year after their last finals appearance. It ends just before the start of last season. This is when the 22 year drought ended, as they won it all last year. During this time span, the Celtics achieved the following results:

1) 0 finals appearances

2) 2 Eastern Conference finals losses.

3) 3 Eastern Conference semi-finals losses.

4) 6 First round playoff losses

5) 9 Seasons without qualifying for the playoffs.

Now, these 20 consecutive seasons equal the Celtics 20 finals appearances. In this time frame they won 8 playoff series and lost 11. They missed the playoffs 9 times. Their 3 worst seasons saw them win 15, 19, and 24 games. They had 8 seasons where they won from 32 to 36 games. Also, please refer to my chart in my previous blog. This is the time period when the Celtics coughed up all of the advantages they held against the Lakers except titles.

there was more to it than this, I just wanted to summarize. If you want to say the Celtics are more successful than the Lakers, you still have to realize Boston has 1/3 of their history being a disaster. The Lakers have no such problems in their history. Funny thing about that is, rexhamer wants to criticize Lakes finals losses and drag them down because of them. Those are the 2nd best result a team can achieve in a season, and he says achievements short of a championship count towards a teams' success. More hypocrisy and flawed logic.

I'll add more, it depends on rexhamer. He is a nobody here. No credibility, and he certainly isn't gaining any either as I expose his words and use them against him!

[BackdoorJesus]

now now let's let bygones be bygones. rexhamer has said he doesn't want to debate any longer and I can relate after dealing with many EOTH debates that just wouldn't end...your case is made, but since there is no judge & jury for internet arguments, no one needs to answer to nor concede to anything here, we just have to get all zen & shit - bend like a reed in the wind grasshopper. this too in time shall pass.


be at peace my friend



oh and link me to Erica C's Lakers outfit photo shoot

[michaeljohn]

Originally Posted by BackdoorJesus

now now let's let bygones be bygones. rexhamer has said he doesn't want to debate any longer and I can relate after dealing with many EOTH debates that just wouldn't end...your case is made, but since there is no judge & jury for internet arguments, no one needs to answer to nor concede to anything here, we just have to get all zen & shit - bend like a reed in the wind grasshopper. this too in time shall pass.


be at peace my friend



oh and link me to Erica C's Lakers outfit photo shoot

Yeah, that's fine. Let me summarize. rexhamer said on the other site he didn't want to argue anymore, but he comes here and goes after me by spreading false accusations and lies. He claims a victory when he clearly lost. His lies have been outlined above. Now, let me say this, I have already stated I have proof he is lying, and it's in the evidence of our debate at the other site. However, if I am lying he has the perfect opportunity to take me down here by showing how I am wrong. However, that can not be done as the facts back me up.

I wonder if his wife knows her husband is a liar? She's a member here and voted for the Celtics in my last poll, so she has seen the debate:


Jamesson888
whore
Last Activity: 03-12-2009 10:54 AM

Forum Info Contact Info
Join Date: 01-23-2009
PostsTotal Posts: 7 (0.06 posts per day)
Find all posts by Jamesson888
Find all threads started by Jamesson888

Referrals: 0
User Notes: [Post User Note]
ThanksTotal Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Date of Birth:
August 3, 1964
Age:
44
How did you find webrats:
a friend
Where do you pimp:
Boston, Ma
What do you pimp:
mercedes sports
Where do you freeload:
photographer
Body type::
Slim/Slender
Gender:
FEMALE
Ethnicity::
Other
Availability::
Married
Country:
United States

[rexhamer]

So much to say, but here is just a sample of typical MJ ducking the issue. I asked for a justification of his hypocrisy:

Originally Posted by rexhamer

3) Lastly, in typical MJ fashion, we get much verbiage, but not a single word admitting, acknowledging, conceding, apologizing for, or even refuting the obvious hypocrisy he is guilty of in this thread.

and we get this:

Originally Posted by michaeljohn

3) Big words pal, reread what I said yesterday. This is Webrats. Fun and Stupidity at its best. You want to come here and lie, expect to get bitch-slapped.

And here is what was said "yesterday":

Originally Posted by michalejohn

aww, did my little smack hurt you and your one-and-done Celtics? This is Webrats, grow some balls. besides as noted above, looked like you quit this place.

Still no justification, just some lame excuse that he thought I was no longer here - and that makes it OK to be hypocritical? And note also that it began two months ago.

Secondly, I have noted twice separately so far that all this debate can be made clearer to Webrats members if MJ is willing to share the other site in some fashion (even if that were to be by PM invite). And despite suggesting it twice - not a single word from MJ! What could he be hiding? I've got nothing to hide. Let's let others see our blogs and replies and judge for themselves.

Yet obviously the prospect of other members judging this debate is so frightening to MJ that he figures if he just ignores this issue it will go away.

Instead, he has decided to spoon feed his selected pieces to the forum. Talk about "Cherry-Picking"! Oh, that's right - according to the MJ School of Debate, "anything goes" and more hypocrisy is par for the course.

So there you have it - two simple questions to answer.

[rexhamer]

Another question - but not for MJ. I would like any other Webrats moderator to tell me if they feel it is appropriate for MJ to reveal information that is noted on another site, but not here (where I went to college); and the fact that my wife signed on as a member.

The second piece is clearly from an IP address match and can only be accessed by a moderator. Is it appropriate for this to be made public?

Or is it "anything goes" at Webrats.

Again, I'm not looking for MJ to reply, but any (or several) other moderators to explain this.

[BackdoorJesus]

What was posted from the profile was public information, from a user profile on Webrats, property of Webrats per our TOS.

Personal information you have revealed on another public site site is public knowledge as well; it is just reposted here.

What you put out on the internet is there for all to see; I don't think there is any impropriety here.

Now I thought you guys were done sniping at each other - is this going to continue or what?

Get back to topic please.

[michaeljohn]

Speaking of LeBron's buzzer beater for the win tonight (Only his second of career), I suddenly thought of what happened in 2004 with the Lakers and the Spurs in game 5 of the WCSF.

Lakers up by one. tim Duncan Scores with 0.8 left on the clock, which was incorrectly allowed to tick down to 0.4. See the replay below, it is clear. Then Derek Fisher hits the game winner.

YouTube - derek fisher 0.4 shot

There is also this short version, filmed by a fan. I like it because you can hear the crowd groan when he makes it. Evil, aren't I?

NBA Playoffs- Derek Fisher shot w/ 0.4 on the clock

Similarities and differences. Two game changing shots in the last second. However, if Duncan misses his shot, Spurs lose. If Turkoglu misses his with one second left, it's overtime. Clock will run out while ball bounces out.

LeBron's shot kept them from going down 0-2 and headed to Orlando. Fisher's shot kept the Lakers from going down 3-2. I still like the Lakers chances to win that series, game 6 is in LA, and the Lakers had solved the Spurs by collapsing on Parker and Duncan. Lakers had let a big lead get away. I have seen plenty of delusional Spurs fans say the shot was illegal, it wasn't. They also claim they win the series with the Lakers, and go on to win a title. Sorry, no one would have beaten Detroit that year. So LeBron's shot may turn out to be a bigger one than Fisher's, depending on the outcome of that series. Either way, it was hype for the NBA, "Where Amazing Happens". 4 close games, with 3 last second shots to win or tie. Only one did the trick.

I'll look for a video of the two shots tonight later. However, the Nuggets and Magic are for real. So are the Lakers and Cavs, and now the burden is on them to prove it.

[michaeljohn]

Originally Posted by joerockhead

Here is my IP - 3.54.33.165

Who cares if an IP is posted, BFD!!

Now, lets get back to the thread idea of Sports and Basketball!!

Since this should be about the teams currently playing, no further discussions will be allowed!!

Cleveland, Denver, LA, Orlando are the only teams that can be discussed.

Anyone else whine and cry about anything but these teams in the playoffs this year (2009), then you will be banned by me!!!

(No, I am not a moderator!!!!)

Yeah, that ignore member function in your user CP works great, I would suggest you and others use it when and where appropriate.

I wanted to add just a bit about the conspiracy theories that abound. There is no way either of these series have been rigged.

I can't prove it, but I can think of one finals series that was highly suspicous, and I know others have stated opinions on how the Miami vs. Dallas finals in 2006 was rigged. I even can make a case where it's possible one NBA superstar of high esteem was "on the take" and tanked a series for the mob. However, that's all theoretical, without proof, and beyond the scope of this discussion.

We have one instance that can be proven, and that's Referee Tim Donaghy who bet on games he worked. (You folks do know he was caught, convicted and sent to prison I hope). He clearly cost the Suns their series with the Spurs in 2007. Phoenix has a gripe, as do Utah, and Cleveland. They both proceded to play opponents they shouldn't have.

What's funny about this is Donaghy said the 2002 WCF series with the Lakers and Kings was rigged. Of course people had been saying that for years, and cite game 6. Nothing is further from the truth. First off, let me digress a moment. I was talking to a friend that coaches HS basketball. I said, if I were a coach, I would teach my players to never complain about a call, and I wouldn't either. The reason being my team would have reputation for honest play, and to me, that means karma will be good to us. My friend said, he has to gripe, else the refs will walk all over his team. I find that sad, but what do I know, perhaps he's right.

Ok, back to 2002. In game 5, there were a lot of bad calls that enabled The Kings to win. Phil Jackson bitched hard. Perhaps the refs took heed in game 6, I can't say. People focus a lot on a play where Kobe elbowed Bibby in the mouth, and nothing was called. Lakers had the ball with 12.6 seconds left and a 1 point lead. It appears at the 1:18 mark and is replayed over the next few minutes.

YouTube - Kings vs. Lakers, 2002 WCF Game 6, Part 3 of 3

What the video shows you is Bibby is grabbing Kobe first, trying to deny him the ball. Kobe is just trying to break free and while extending his arms, his elbow pops Bibby. It was a good non-call. Bibby fouled Kobe first. In the late seconds, just let them play.

There was a bad call in the Lakers Nuggets game late, probably more than one. With the Lakers down 2 and seconds left, there was a jump ball, which Lakers won, but promptly turned over. A Nugget clearly entered the jump circle before the ball was tipped. the announcers said it is a clear violation and should be ball out to the side to Lakers. However, number 1, it wasn't called. Number 2, does that mean the Lakers win? No, it doesn't. Probably we still turn the ball over or miss a shot and lose more time on the clock. As it stood, we had a chance to tie as Billups missed a free throw. Calls balance out. I make no excuses.

So, if the Lakers and the Cavs do get a split on the road, or better, it is possible if the games are close the conspiracy theories will pop up again. Clearly, that is the matchup the NBA, and the nation want.

See, an interesting thing about the Lakers is we are the most hated team in the NBA. I don't hate any team in the league. I love it when I see people say they hate the Lakers. That's exactly what we want. I particularly don't hate the Celtics. That's what they want. Yet, their fans sure hate us, lol. Must be because Lakers are the greatest franchise in NBA history. I certainly shook up a lot of people being able to make that claim. It was 100% to the Celtics as being best 20 years ago. Now, it isn't, it's a debate. That is driving Cetlics fans nuts. I mentioned all this because there are other ridiculous conspiracies about the Lakers, how getting Pau Gasol from Memphis was cheating. Mostly Spurs fans make that gripe because it made the Lakers better than them. I bring it up because it is relevant to this discussion of conspiracies, all this Lakers/Celtics love/hate. Just as I made a thread here after the trade that we could see a Lakers vs Celtic finals. Even NBA commisioner Stern went on record in an interview stating a LA vs. Boston finals was his dream matchup. When it happened, it fueled the conspiracy theories even more.

What people fail to relaize is just this: Suppose proof does come out that series are rigged. Goodbye NBA. It's done. All the best players head to Europe and Asia. I can't fathom the NBA rigging series for exactly that reason. We invented basketball, now the world has embraced it. There is nothing we can do about another crooked referee or a player "on the take" except hope they get caught.

Right now, it looks like a Nuggets vs. Magic finals, as they have HCA and have shown they can win on the road. If it ends up Lakers vs. Cavs, I just hope the conspiracy theorists have nothing to work with. Stay tuned!