Orlando Burys the Celtics 106-92 MAGIC IN 7!

[BCEagle74]

Just like the Bruins...first time in NBA History..

JJ is heating up....its just a matter of time....

JJ drops 50 in the next 2 games and I wish I had a betting account.

[bignick33]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

[commavegarage]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

I've seen enough to know that he's not that big of a difference maker.

[bignick33]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

I've seen enough to know that he's not that big of a difference maker.

[commavegarage]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

I've seen enough to know that he's not that big of a difference maker.

I hope to God you weren't waiting in this forum for an hour just to see my response...you responded in under 30 seconds.

[bignick33]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

I've seen enough to know that he's not that big of a difference maker.

I hope to God you weren't waiting in this forum for an hour just to see my response...you responded in under 30 seconds.

You got me figured out. It's amazing that you were likewise able to respond so quickly. Perhaps a "touche" is in order.

One other thing: If basketball is a team sport, shouldn't you have seen the whole regular season in order to evaluate Perkins' contributions? Ya know...since they may be more subtle than the stat-book would indicate.

As you haven't watched much of the series, you might not have noticed that Perkins is far and away the best Dwight stopper on the Celtics. I'm thinking that his forced absence may have had more of an impact than an admitted ignoramus such as yourself could realize, as it doesn't appear in the stat-sheet. Just saying.

[commavegarage]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

I've seen enough to know that he's not that big of a difference maker.

I hope to God you weren't waiting in this forum for an hour just to see my response...you responded in under 30 seconds.

You got me figured out. It's amazing that you were likewise able to respond so quickly. Perhaps a "touche" is in order.

One other thing: If basketball is a team sport, shouldn't you have seen the whole regular season in order to evaluate Perkins' contributions? Ya know...since they may be more subtle than the stat-book would indicate.

As you haven't watched much of the series, you might not have noticed that Perkins is far and away the best Dwight stopper on the Celtics. I'm thinking that his forced absence may have had more of an impact than an admitted ignoramus such as yourself could realize, as it doesn't appear in the stat-sheet. Just saying.

There are maybe 3 players in the NBA who could account for a 30-40 point swing in a half, and he isn't one of them...And you know I'm right.

Was it really that surprising that I responded so quickly? There was a new post before I even clicked out of the thread.

[bignick33]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

I've seen enough to know that he's not that big of a difference maker.

I hope to God you weren't waiting in this forum for an hour just to see my response...you responded in under 30 seconds.

You got me figured out. It's amazing that you were likewise able to respond so quickly. Perhaps a "touche" is in order.

One other thing: If basketball is a team sport, shouldn't you have seen the whole regular season in order to evaluate Perkins' contributions? Ya know...since they may be more subtle than the stat-book would indicate.

As you haven't watched much of the series, you might not have noticed that Perkins is far and away the best Dwight stopper on the Celtics. I'm thinking that his forced absence may have had more of an impact than an admitted ignoramus such as yourself could realize, as it doesn't appear in the stat-sheet. Just saying.

There are maybe 3 players in the NBA who could account for a 30-40 point swing in a half, and he isn't one of them...And you know I'm right.

Was it really that surprising that I responded so quickly? There was a new post before I even clicked out of the thread.

"30 or 40 point swing." It's really starting to show that you only watched a few moments of the game last night. I'm still surprised that you think you're qualified to comment.

[bignick33]

I never want this thread to go away.

[twballgame9]

But I don't see him being the difference between Orlando scoring well over 100 and winning by 20 and them scoring less and losing.

How would you know? You just said you "don't follow NBA that much at all."

I've seen enough to know that he's not that big of a difference maker.

I hope to God you weren't waiting in this forum for an hour just to see my response...you responded in under 30 seconds.

You got me figured out. It's amazing that you were likewise able to respond so quickly. Perhaps a "touche" is in order.

One other thing: If basketball is a team sport, shouldn't you have seen the whole regular season in order to evaluate Perkins' contributions? Ya know...since they may be more subtle than the stat-book would indicate.

As you haven't watched much of the series, you might not have noticed that Perkins is far and away the best Dwight stopper on the Celtics. I'm thinking that his forced absence may have had more of an impact than an admitted ignoramus such as yourself could realize, as it doesn't appear in the stat-sheet. Just saying.

Wait, there are contributions in sports that the stat book doesn't indicate? WHO KNEW!

[pick6pedro]

Pop quiz.

Which makes one more qualified?

A) seeing a player in over 40 games throughout his career
or
B) not following an entire sport "that much at all"

[bignick33]

Pop quiz.

Which makes one more qualified?

A) seeing a player in over 40 games throughout his career
or
B) not following an entire sport "that much at all"

C) Watching a game during commercials of the Mets.

[twballgame9]

[commavegarage]

So tell me I'm wrong. Tell me the Celtics win by 15-20 if Perkins isn't tossed. You won't because it's not true. You seem perfectly content to bash me without admitting I'm right. Celtics don't win that game last night with or without Perkins.

And I didn't say I don't follow the sport of basketball, OJ. I said I haven't watched the NBA much recently. That doesn't mean I don't understand basketball.

[branchinator]

How can you say the Celtics don't win that game without Perkins? They got it down to 6 points before two broken plays (off of poor rebounding, you know, an area where Perkins helps out a lot) led to open perimeter shots.

[pick6pedro]

And I didn't say I don't follow the sport of basketball, OJ. I said I haven't watched the NBA much recently. That doesn't mean I don't understand basketball.

Actually you said - "As I've said before, I don't follow NBA that much at all". Are you now changing that statement so you don't look like such a fool?

Pop quiz #2:

What is more of a stretched conclusion:

1) Not being qualified to comment on a sport because one "does not follow it that much at all".
or
2) Not being qualified to comment on a sport because one did not post on a certain message board during a certain period.

[b0mberMan]

Second technical rescinded

[Cadillac90]

And I didn't say I don't follow the sport of basketball, OJ. I said I haven't watched the NBA much recently. That doesn't mean I don't understand basketball.

Actually you said - "As I've said before, I don't follow NBA that much at all". Are you now changing that statement so you don't look like such a fool?

Pop quiz #2:

What is more of a stretched conclusion:

1) Not being qualified to comment on a sport because one "does not follow it that much at all".
or
2) Not being qualified to comment on a sport because one did not post on a certain message board during a certain period.

C) commavegarage is a douche

[commavegarage]

And I didn't say I don't follow the sport of basketball, OJ. I said I haven't watched the NBA much recently. That doesn't mean I don't understand basketball.

Actually you said - "As I've said before, I don't follow NBA that much at all". Are you now changing that statement so you don't look like such a fool?

Not at all...Since when is the sport of basketball limited to the NBA?

Seeing as this isn't going anywhere, I'm going to let it go.

But feel free to have the last word that you clearly so desperately need.

[bignick33]

And I didn't say I don't follow the sport of basketball, OJ. I said I haven't watched the NBA much recently. That doesn't mean I don't understand basketball.

Actually you said - "As I've said before, I don't follow NBA that much at all". Are you now changing that statement so you don't look like such a fool?

Not at all...Since when is the sport of basketball limited to the NBA?

Seeing as this isn't going anywhere, I'm going to let it go.

But feel free to have the last word that you clearly so desperately need.

It would be hilarious if we leave this to be the last post of the thread.

Whupps.

[pick6pedro]

And I didn't say I don't follow the sport of basketball, OJ. I said I haven't watched the NBA much recently. That doesn't mean I don't understand basketball.

Actually you said - "As I've said before, I don't follow NBA that much at all". Are you now changing that statement so you don't look like such a fool?

Not at all...Since when is the sport of basketball limited to the NBA?

Seeing as this isn't going anywhere, I'm going to let it go.

But feel free to have the last word that you clearly so desperately need.

What, no love for my pop quizzes?

I see, so I should have pointed to watching the NHL as a reason I could comment on Muse. I'm sure you would have accepted that as logical and asked for forgiveness for past trangressions on the spot, right? I'm learning so much today.

You're correct about one thing: this isn't going anywhere. But that's because it only reconfirms that you're the bed-wetting tampoon we've all come to know. Have a great Memorial Day weekend!

[bignick33]

The NBA refs the second tech on Perk, but not the first. To recap, the first was the one on which he accidentally elbowed Gortat as he was helping Pierce up off the ground; the second was the one in which he was walking away from the ref after a strong physical reaction to a bad call.

If David Stern shows his face in Boston for Game 6, I'll baby maker-punt him.

[bignick33]

It's the wrong league, but I think that this is somehow relevant:

[bignick33]

wrong board

Do you even read, or just look at the pics?

[cvilleagle]

If anything they should have taken back the first one and not the second one. This makes no sense.

[bignick33]

look at the pics?

wrong board

Tyrant

[twballgame9]

If anything they should have taken back the first one and not the second one. This makes no sense.

Both were bad, but the second was worse. On the first one, they always call double Ts when guys mix it up like that.

[OldEaglePub]

1. it's good 74 doesn't have a betting account.

2. commeavedouchebag sucks.

[Endless Mike]

[BCEagle74]

Twats check the time...the orlando in 7 was to start some posts from you boring girls.