The Morning After: Broken, Beat & Scarred
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 8:58 AM CDT
in The Morning After
258 comments
Last night was a punch in the gut. In a game of inches, our Horsemen fell just short in a valiant effort, 116-114.
Under attack from an unsaustainable barrage of three-pointers by the Disney Darlings, our boys were able to outplay Orlando in nearly every statistical aspect of the game and manage to keep the final score within two points. Make no mistake -- the plan worked. The defensive rotations were good, LeBron drove the lane with force, and we finally got some contributions from The Other Cavaliers. LeBron seemed to burn out a bit at the end, committing some costly turnovers, but he also hit some clutch free throws that kept us in it and a "how'd-he-do-that" fade away three that brought us within one and set the stage for another possible buzzer-beater. It truly came down to inches, and luck just wasn't on our side (despite the navy jerseys).
if Delonte snags that rebound with six seconds left, the series is tied. If LeBron's "LeShot 2" attempt is three inches to the right, the series is tied. If Orlando doesn't get the game of a lifetime from it's replacement starting guard, the series is tied. OK that last one isn't about inches but seriously, come on.
Now, we go home. But we don't go home defeated. We may be battered, broken, bloodied, bruised and a bunch of other "b" words that connote near defeat, but we're not done yet.
We now rest and we move on. We move on not because we've been defeated and not because we're turning a blind eye to what has happened in this remarkable series so far. We move on because we must. We move on because it's what championship teams do. And this, my friends, is a championship team.
Forget the naysaying. Forget all you Negative Nancies and Debbie Downers. Forget the ghosts of Cleveland past. Take a look inside all of yourselves and reach deep. Boston once had "ghosts," too. Turns it is was just a bunch of morons wallowing in their own self pity. If they can overcome 3-0 and 3-1 deficits (different sport, blah blah), then why can't us?
A wise man once said "what doesn't kill you only makes you stronger." By that measure, I know no stronger people in my life than the good people of Cleveland and the athletes they hold dear. Cleveland dies hard. Our Cavaliers, like our city, are on the brink of a comeback for the ages.
Forget all the excuses and and reasons why this can't happen. Better yet, disregard them. Disregard the perceived pity and disrespect, the ghosts, the conspiracies, the curses -- because to even forget them is to admit they existed in the first place. All we need is to take care of business at home and steal Game 6 on the road. It won't be easy. Nothing we've ever accomplished in this city has been. But to suggest that three wins in a row is not possible for the best team in the NBA is to suggest that you don't know anything about sports.
Listen, and listen good: We got this. I've never been more sure of anything in my life.
We will ride on.
2 recs |
258 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I agree ( imagine Geroge C. Scott speaking your ending rant)
We got these suckas right where we want them. At this point, “they won’t know what hit um”.
So I told her," I'll be nicer if you try to be smarter!'..That was a mistake.
by Juannieboy on May 27, 2009 9:14 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree I called this
That LeBron would score 40+points in every loss only to come back and score 80 a game to win 4-3.
I am with you man…
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love unbridled optimism from any teams fans...lol!!!
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If there is a team in the playoffs that can come back from being down 3-1, it’s the Cavaliers. This team is talented and battle-tested. It’s not like they have rolled over in this series and are playing dead. The fight they showed at the end of the 4th Q and OT last night was remarkable.
Cue the Rocky theme; repeat Bluto’s speach: “Did we surrender when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”; visit www.iwasborntowin.com… there is much to inspire us and have some positive vibes going in to Thursday’s game.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on May 27, 2009 9:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m a Clevelander though and through, I love everything about Cleveland, I love the good and bad of Cleveland. Unfortunately what comes along with all of the love is the acceptance of being “losers”, never good or lucky enough to finish first, and having bruises that still have yet to heal from “the choke” or the “the shot”. I am only 25, I have not endured through the hardship many older Cleveland fans have. This year that mindset changed and for once being first seemed possible if not inevitable. I still believe the CAVS can persevere, just as I believe Cleveland will persevere from the stereotypes, and roadbumps that plague us. In all I agree with the statement “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”. The CAVS have gotten better everygame, I believe the series is ours! GO CAVS!!
by Soko on May 27, 2009 9:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I get what you’re saying about the plan working, the team fighting, and luck just not going our way. But still, should it have to come down to last-10-second luck every time? We won 66 games. We ought to do better in at least one game or two this series – say, winning by 6-9 points or so.
Would it work better to stop double-teaming Howard? Put one guy on him and let him have his 30 points and 15 boards or whatever he will have. Have the other four guys concentrate on locking down anyone not named Howard, especially on the perimeter. Make them score by twos, or by ones (fouling Howard).
The Magic are averaging 100.25 points in regulation. They averaged about 98 points in the regular season. The Cavs allowed an average of 91.4 points in the regular season. So there should be room for improvement there.
I could be totally wrong, and that’s why I’m not the coach.
Baseball isn't boring. YOU ARE.
by Matt Y. on May 27, 2009 10:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
We ought to do better in at least one game or two this series – say, winning by 6-9 points or so.
That’s what games 5, 6, and 7 are for.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure hope so!
Baseball isn't boring. YOU ARE.
by Matt Y. on May 27, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t see how the plan worked? If the plan worked, you win, right? I agree to stop double teaming Howard. Every time they do double him, they end up shooting a wide open three. Cover the outside and force them to shoot inside the arc. They are still going to make shots, I’d rather them hit 2’s than 3’s. Let’s say you force them to step in on ten shots, and they make half of those, you just saved yourself 5 points. What are they losing by? A couple points, except for game 3. Howard is only good within 2 feet of the basket. He’s usually a decoy, pass in to him, he passes it out, one more pass, wide open 3. It is truly annoying to watch them do nothing about this. The Magic let Lebron walk all over them, and shut everyone else down. So let Dwight Howard run rampant, and shut everyone else down!
by sether1 on May 27, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the plan worked, you win, right?
No, not always. Many times a well-laid plan will fail, especially when you’re talking the game of basketball where a few bounces here or there can mean the difference between victory and defeat. It’s absurd to make judgements on the validity of a plan on the bases of one game, let alone one game decided by a single point in overtime.
There were many, many ways in which the Cavs could have won that game last night — would that have made the plan a success? If Delonte West grabs that rebound, does that make Mike Brown a genius instead of an idiot?
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
thinking about delonte failing to secure that rebound (my wine and gold colored glasses tell me howard shoved him?) is haunting me. really really pounding my gray matter.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 12:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wanted a loose ball foul too. Unfortunately, it’s never going to get called there and I don’t think I would want to watch basketball if every time two guys hit the floor, there was a foul called. It was too bad he didn’t get it, but it wasn’t a blown call. Sadly.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 27, 2009 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, i agree. very difficult to call a foul there, and it definitely wasn’t a CLEAR violation. not coming up w/ that ball hurt so much, though, that it magnified the potential call for me.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 1:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does that mean you're calling Brown an idiot ....
…because Delonte didn’t get the loose ball…lol?
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m saying that other people are implying Brown is an idiot (or at least a bad coach).
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not everything has to be so black and white. Genius or idiot aren’t the only two choices….
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 10:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The plan has not worked in 3 games, really 4. There are always many ways the losing team could have won, but the point is they still lost. The rational I’m talking about is the Cavs are supposed to be a better team. When they lose, yes the plan is failing. I am also not calling Mike Brown a genius or an idiot. Just quite simply saying his plan is not working. After four games, you would think a coach would realize they are losing because the other team is shooting the daylights from 3 point land, then make adjustments for this to be limited. Especially if the other team is known to live and die by the 3. Waiting around for them to die by the 3 is not much of a plan, and not when you’re letting them shoot so wide open, a one armed blind monkey could make the shot.
It does not come down to one point, it comes down to who won the game. Lose by 1, lose by 20, it’s still a loss. If they continue the defense they have been playing, the results will stay the same. These guys are pros and tend to not miss too many wide open shots. And Tim McGarver is a douche.
by sether1 on May 27, 2009 11:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lose by 1, lose by 20, it’s still a loss.
yes, but losing by 1 on a clutch last second 3, or by 2 in overtime, is very different than a 20 point loss as far as the plan, or execution goes. brad’s point is a very good one. if delonte west hits an open 3 in game 1 and secures the rebound w/ 6 seconds left in game 4, this series is 3-1 cavs…and the “plan” has been no different, except that people would say it’s “working”.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 11:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, that’s the whole point. Then the plan would be working, because it would be producing wins! That’s the point of “the plan” right? To win? As someone who is pulling for the Cavs here, I sure hope it is.
by JasonB on May 28, 2009 12:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course the plan is to win. But the point is that if Delonte West getting that rebound of making that shot has nothing to do with the plan. If those happen, then the Cavs are up 3-1 and the plan has “worked”? But the plan was still the same either way! That’s the point — the plan hasn’t changed in either case, so how can it be good in one case and bad in the other? It’s still the same plan. You cannot base the efficieny of an entire coaching plan on the outcome of ONE shot. That’s not reasonable.
If the Cavs were badly outplayed then you could definately criticize the coaching staff, and I’m NOT saying the the coaching staff is absolved of any criticism. My point is that it’s false to argue that the plan has failed simply because the Cavs are down 3-1 when they could easily be up 3-1 with the exact same plan if the Cavs had got a couple of lucky bounces.
I know in sports it’s common to ignore the factor of luck and simply say the winning team executed correctly and the losing team executed poorly, but it’s not always that simple. The games are way too complex and have too many variables to simplify it like that.
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 8:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would say up until last night, the Cavs have been outplayed and out-coached. And really on quite a simple play that Orlando ran over and over and over and over and over and … well, you get the point. I guess I’m not making myself clear. The plan did not work because the Magic were lights out from 3. I wouldn’t miss either as wide open as these guys have been. Last night I think I counted 3 wide open 3’s compared to about 12 in game 4. The Cavs are good enough that it shouldn’t come down to a clutch shot at the buzzer, it should come down to them making their foul shots in the last minute. And I’m not taking anything away from the Magic, they are a great team, probably 3rd best in the NBA, but the Cavs D should not be giving up so many wide open 3’s. That’s the difference in this series right now. And if they want to win game six, more d like last night! Shut down the 3!!!!!!!!
by sether1 on May 29, 2009 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you. When you’re down 3-1 in a series, the plan has NOT worked.
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is such basic, poor thinking. And sadly very, very common.
by tabler84 on May 27, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
More often than not the correct answer is the most obvious one.
When you try to rationalize and overthink things… that’s when things start to get messed up.
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Delusion is bad.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ve been pulling for the Cavs in this series… I’m just being honest with myself about how their “plan” has went so far.
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And of course the important thing to note here is that this obviously a question that can’t be fully answered yet. The series isn’t over. Just because “the plan” hasn’t translated to wins yet doesn’t mean it ultimately won’t.
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jason,
This might be hard for you to realize, but your black-and-white approach is what makes most fans unbearable. I understand that it’s fueled by ESPN and Bill Livingston and Kenny Roda, but it still sucks. And if all you can contribute to this forum is a declaration that results trump nuance and circumstance, I just hope you’ll say it once and then listen to everyone else.
by tabler84 on May 28, 2009 4:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s exactly right. This is the kind of thinking that contributes to the “Derek Jeter is a Winner” and “A-Rod is a Loser” kind of arguments that fuel sports talk radio and TV these days. But there are many, many factors that go in to a team winning or losing a game that are completely ignored by this approach. We strive for more intelligent analysis here than that.
And, I want to add, this isn’t about the Cavs being down and we’re trying to make excuses for them. If West makes those two plays (as an example) and the Cavs are up 3-1 we wouldn’t be saying that Orlando’s plan has “failed”. So it’s not about us trying to make the Cavs look good or anything like that, it’s about realizing that the outcomes of games depend on far too many variables and a good amout of luck so classiflying things based solely on the outcome is a flawed approach.
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 8:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s right. This is not a forum filled with apologists; we’ve been clearly tough on Mo and Z and Delonte, for good reason.
But facts are facts. The fact is, the Cavs lost games 1 and 4… and held the lead with less than 15 seconds to go in each game. Even if we only win one of those two games, everyone around here is pacified.
by tabler84 on May 28, 2009 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
to be honest...i would say anyone has been REALLY hard on them...
…i mean..i don’t remember anyone in hear calling Mo out for opening his big mouth when he’s shooting under %40 for the series..and then disappearing again in Game 4…..did i miss that?? If so my apologies in advance. Mostly what i have seen is reason why Mo, Z, and whoever can’t possibly shoot this poorly all series and that they’ll obviously turn it around. While i haven’t read ever post i’m sure…i’ve read most of them…..and that kind of stuff would’nt be considered very hard on them at all i wouldn’t think…:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think you’re ignoring a lot of “the other cavs had better step up” and “if this continues the other cavs are going to cost LeBron this season”.
but most of what you’re saying is probably right…as opposed to excoriating our guys, we’re trying to find reasons to be positive…it is a cavs blog after all! i do think you’re glossing over some of the stuff above.
and, honestly, if the situations were reversed—the cavs were up 2-1 and rashard were being asked about a series guarantee—i have a feeling a lot of people here would have said, “who cares about rashard guaranteeing a series victory, he was baited by the reporter, what else is he going to say?” you saw a ton of that around here when mo said what he said. it was a total non-event, and was treated as such (as it should have been).
by DontCallMeJoey on May 28, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While i'm all about being positive...
…my reply was about evenone being “hard” on mo…which if all you can come up with is that someone said “the other Cavs need to step up”..pretty much proves my point…Turk’s calling out Mo on the game thread aside…which i did not see.:) But then again…that’s hardly everyone..
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 3:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I definitely called out Mo for that in the first comment of one of the game threads
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 28, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry Turk my man...i must have mised that one..:)
..I’m usually so late to the thread i’m trying to get to the bottom and then work my way back..lol
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dunno man...lol...
…somewhere down deep i get the sneaky suspicion if the Cavs were up 3-1 you’d finding some obscure stats that shows somehow the Cavs were dominating somehow and have really been close to sweeping the series…lol…but that just a feeling i have…certainly not FACT….:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, that’s not how we operate. We don’t manipulate stats to make our point. I know some Cavs fans would say that, but not me or most of the guys here.
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 11:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was a JOKE Brad....
…you need to put down the abacus and lighten up man..lol….it’s just basketball..:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 3:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So, if Lewis misses that shot at the end of regulation and the series is tied 2-2, then that mean the plan has worked? All because of one shot?
No, sorry, this is improper reasoning.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Results are all that matters. This is sports. This is the point of the playoffs. The team who wins was right. They’re the better team.
This is the nature of the beast. Fact is he did make that shot and that’s all that matters.
You are what you’re record says you are. The Cavs are 1-3 in this series. So yeah, it hasn’t worked. Clearly.
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Over four games the better team does not always win. That’s why upsets happen. Four games is too small of a sample to make that judgement, especially when three of the four games came down to ONE possession. No, the better team does not always win in a short series. I could give you many examples of when that wasn’t true (and I’m sure you know some yourself).
I know the Cavs are 1-3, nobody is arguing that. But that doesn’t mean their plan “clearly” isn’t working. I know sports fans are conditioned to think that if you won you did everything right and if you lost you did everything wrong but it’s just not that simple. The game is much more complicated then that.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many games does it take?
You’re right 4 games is not enough but 11 of last 15 is. Yeah there are different players and situations in reg season but the key players have pretty much been the same. In every game this year vs Cavs the Magic seem to be on cruise control while Lebron and the Cavs are scrambling. Yes you lost 3 games by a total of 4 points but 2 of them were must wins with one of them being at home. Magic just don’t seem uncomfortable running their offense with any matchup Cavs throw at them.
You always have a shot with Lebron but as a Magic fan since their creation, I see a very focused and determined team ,like no other Magic team, that will not be denied. And with their matchup advantages, that focus is a series ending combination.
by O-Town MagiCane on May 27, 2009 7:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s not about doing “everything right” or “everything wrong.” But over the course of a seven game series, one team WILL get it more right than another team.
If being down 3-1 doesn’t mean their plan isn’t working… what does it mean? If the plan is working and you’re still down 3-1… Maybe it was a bad plan?
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 10:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you listening to what we’re saying? We’ve given many arguments about why this is a flawed approach to analysis.
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 8:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so, for example, a pitcher no hits his opponent through 8 2/3 innings. his team is up 1-0. he hits a batter w/ 2 out in the 9th and then gives up a game-ending homer. his “plan” has failed?
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously.
Don’t look for the logic in an argument that sounds like it came from Tim McCarver.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 27, 2009 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Clearly only an idiot who knows nothing about sports would think winning is what matters.
/sarcasm
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very poor analogy.. We’re talking about a seven game series between two teams here. Hardly a pitcher in one game.
When over the course of 4 games one team has lost three, I do think it’s reasonable to say that said team’s “plan” hasn’t worked like they thought it would. Obviously.
Hey, if you guys wanna believe that this series has gone to plan and the Cavs strategy has worked so far… by all means do so. As a neutral observer, that sounds a bit homerish to me… But that’s your right.
by JasonB on May 27, 2009 10:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think that the analogy holds in that it illustrates that the effectiveness is not explicitly self evident when looking at the results.
now, i don’t think anyone here would argue that everything has come up roses for the cavs, nor has the “plan” worked like the cavs thought it would. what i’m arguing is that simply saying a 1-3 deficit means our plan sucks is not enough. as i said above, you change 2 plays—literally, 2 plays out of how many hundreds that have been run in the 4 games—and the series is 3-1 cavs, and the “plan” is brilliant, even though nothing about any plan would have been different.
maybe the strategy was bad, as you point out. maybe they have executed exactly as they intended, and are just being beaten by an outstanding string of play by a very good team.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 28, 2009 12:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well then you’re arguing a point that isn’t being made. I don’t think anyone is saying that “the plan” sucks or is saying that the Cavs need to blow it all up and start again… Just simply that “the plan” has so far failed to produce the desired results.
However close it’s come to succeeding… it hasn’t. I can’t believe that the Cavs are executing their strategy exactly as intended, simply because the intention of any strategy at it’s core is to prevent the other team from winning. It’s not simply about two clutch plays… Maybe I’ve got this wrong… but I don’t think the Magic are so good that even if the Cavs execute their strategy perfectly, they can’t beat them.
by JasonB on May 28, 2009 12:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody is saying that the Cavs executed their strategy exactly as intended (I don’t think any team does that). Of course we can look back and say they could have done things differently and they’re probably making adjustments now for the next game.
What we are arguing about is your first statement:
When you’re down 3-1 in a series, the plan has NOT worked.
That kind of declaration is what we have a problem with. You cannot look just at the results, you have to look at how the results came about. As we said, if two plays had gone differently then the Cavs would be up 3-1 and you would be saying the plan has worked. But the point is that the plan is the same either way, so how can it “work” in one case and not the other? That’s the oversimplification we’re talking about.
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 8:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Brad and Jason,
The issue here is that Jason thinks the plan is to “make shots.” Brad (and I) think the plan is to “create open looks.” When you’ve created open looks, it’s out of the coach’s hands regarding whether the shots go in.
On the defensive side, Jason thinks the plan is to “stop the Magic from scoring a lot of points.” Brad (and I) would say the plan is to “force role players and lesser shooters to take more shots than they tend to take, and get the ball out of Hedo and Lewis’ hands. Oh, and put Dwight Howard on the line.” We’ve done exactly that in the past three games, and so I think the plan has worked very well. When the plan was devised, everyone woudl have lived with the idea of Alston taking 17 shots, and Lewis not getting a FG until the 4th quarter.
by tabler84 on May 28, 2009 9:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tabler84
…you hae my utmost respect sir…you have done something fro Brad in one si ple paragraph that i haven’t seen him be able to do since i’ve been in here…that would be ending a debate by agreeing that their are two views to every answer…and sometimes NIETHER side is wrong….they just look at it differently..lol…just kidding brad….don’t break out the SAMPLE SIZE on me..lol
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If that’s how you read my comment, you misunderstand it.
One view is based on hope, and one is based on reality. Jason’s gameplan is not a plan at all; it’s a hope that we’ll make a bunch of shots and they’ll miss a bunch of shots.
Brad’s gameplan is to get our shooters the best looks possible, and to force the Magic’s worst shooters to take more shots than their best shooters. This is a very sound gameplan, and it’s one we have essentially pulled off.
by tabler84 on May 28, 2009 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh? Do you really think that’s what he meant?
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
God you guys are WAAAYYY to uptight...i was having fun Brad...
…you know…taking a little jab at the FACT that you can never let an argument GO..EVER…lol. and after Tabler’s beautifully written closing …you were like..uhm…“Well said”…lol…it was funny to me and probably anyone who has watched you go on foever in a discussion that past pointless 10 replies before…lol. that all…:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lordy my spelling is atrocious...what time of night was this..?? lol
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would still say the Magic are outplaying the Cavs in almost every aspect, yes. And being out-coached. which really hurts to say, by the way.
by sether1 on May 27, 2009 11:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I thought that the Magic were shooting at an unsustainable pace after the first game and that the Cavs would win in 5 or 6 games. Now though, I’m not too sure. I think the Cavs are having the bad luck of running into an extremely hot team that got hot at just the right time. That doesn’t mean the Magic won’t cool off and the Cavs can come back, it’s just that I’m no longer sure that the Magic can’t sustain this pace.
Eph.
by Cols714 on May 27, 2009 10:42 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I thought the conventional wisdom coming into the playoffs..
was that the Magic, while a very good team, would not be able to rely on the 3 ball as much as they did in the regular season. That looks pretty wrong right now.
Bad luck? What if Delonte corrals that loose ball? What if LeBron’s second foul shot just comes out over the rim? Andy was there for the easy tip in game winner.
Orlando has played well but if that fickle Lady Luck turns our way, 3 wins is doable.
So I told her," I'll be nicer if you try to be smarter!'..That was a mistake.
by Juannieboy on May 27, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Detroit Against a Tracy McGarbage led team? Yes. 1 on 5 against a Dwight Howard led team? No...
Hey man As a Magic fan we are just happy you got rid Of our “Orlando” the HATED Detroit Pistons( I puke a little when I type that city)
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don’t flatter yourself. Orlando, regardless of what happens over the next 1-3 games, is far down on our “hated sports cities” list.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No kidding. I really don’t mind Orlando. Some of their more mindless fans are annoying, but every team has those. Orlando is a great big “meh” to me.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 27, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sounds like it’s time for a list!
in no particular order…
pittsburgh
baltimore
cincinnati
boston
new york
detroit
denver
chicago
washington d.c. for the wizards… ’nuff said.
minneapolis (twins) and seattle (mariners) have produced a few on and off field skirmishes. these two are probably a stretch, but still, they’d go ahead of orlando.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Most hated sports cities in all sports? Mine is:
New York
Boston
Chicago
Dallas
Baltimore
Pittsburgh
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good idea:
Pittsburgh
Boston
Cincy
New York
Chicago
Baltimore
Manchester, England
Liverpool, England
Denver
Baltimore
That’s in no real order. If I’m being honest, I think I hate Cincy the most of all.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 27, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i have a feeling you hate baltimore the most.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mine is pretty basic....
Boston
Boston
Boston
..oh ..and i almost forgot….
New England…wherever the eFFF that is…lol
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You have to at least include New York in there. It’s full of Yankee fans, remember.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is a Yankee fan!
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lol...why do you think i HATE Boston sooooo much!!!!
…..it surely isn’t only because the Celtics manage to buy a ring once…lol…can’t anyone who does that as a Yankee fan…i’m not a hypocrite after all!!
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh and Turk...i expect you'll LOVE this.....while we're on the topic of full disclosure...my teams....
Orlando Magic…since 87
Montreal Canadiens….since i can remember…71 or 72
New York Yankees….since 75
Dallas Cowboys….since 77
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yankees and Cowboys? Ugh. You’ve lost some respect here.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the Canadiens
All three of those teams are all considered the “marquee” teams of each sport. Well maybe not Dallas, but New York and Montreal certainly.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on May 27, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You were a Orlando fan before they existed?
Unless you got the year wrong by accident, and you meant 1989.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on May 27, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well to answer your question..been in Orando since 86...
…the very next year in 87 they started a drive to get an NBA team…which was finally successful as you said in 89…so yes i have been a fan since before the actual team existed…which i think is rather cool..:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
HaHa Okay
Fair enough.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on May 27, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, gross dude. Where are you from?
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, major front-runner there. Absolutely unacceptable.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lol...not quite fellas.....here's why...
A) Originally born in Canada….so being a Canadiens fan is actually a birth right..lol.
B) I was actually Thurmen Munson fan from the git go…as i was a catcher myself in little league…hell i remember when Stienbrenner was just a rich ship builder and the Yankees sucked. But growing up watching all the Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig movies probably helped.
C) The first footaball game i can ever remember watching in Canada was the Steelers vs. Cowboys in the SB#?? 76 i think….i was pulling for the underdog Cowboys at the time…..have been ever since…could be worse…could have been a lifelong STEELERS fan..lol
D) The Magic i have explained above…but to recap…been in Orlando since 86…was already an NBA addict when we start the drive to get our own team by hiring Pat Williams from the Sixers in 87 to head it up…the original owner of the Magic was a guy named Jim Hewitt…the guy that built Church Street Station…kind of Orlando version of the “Flats” back then.
So if all that makes me a frontrunner….then i think they’ll have to revise the definition..lol
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha, fair enough. Ya know Steinbrenner’s from Cleveland, eh?
Also,
could be worse…could have been a lifelong STEELERS fan
Touche!
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes actually i did know that....
besides…how can anyone dislike me when i HATE EVERYTHING BOSTON!!!!..lol Isn’t that polarizing enough to overlook my lifelong allegences!!:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We’ll work on it ;-)
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey if it's any consolation a am a big Bernie Kosar fan....
…him being from THE U of course….i bet Brad will LOVE that….lmao
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The “U”!?!?!?!
Now you’ve dropped even lower on my list.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well when you get to a certain low point Brad
…after that what’s the difference really?? lol I know it pains you to say that the Greatest Broens QB of all-time was a HURRICANE!!! lol..Gotta run…later Turk!! lol
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe he left town to get out from under his old man shadow ...
…so the story goes anyways…:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't forget
Thurman Munson was from Canton, hell he crashed his airplane at A/C airport.
by sether1 on May 27, 2009 11:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes...sad day for sure...
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Coming from an Eagles fan...notorious "rearrunners"...
….lol…that doesn’t mean much since i’m a Cowboys fan:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gotta add
Columbus to the list. As much as I love the Buckeyes, the football fans that live there know next to nothing about them, or football. It really was annoying when I lived there, almost turned in my scarlet and gray!
by sether1 on May 27, 2009 11:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you kidding me? Columbus, a city with many Browns, Indians, and Cavs fans?
the football fans that live there know next to nothing about them, or football
That’s such an awful, awful generalization. I’ve lived in Columbus for 7 years now (including two in grad school at OSU) and I would heartily disagree with that statement. Of course there are idiot fans there, but there are idiot fans everywhere. Almost all of the Buckeyes fan who I’ve met there have been intelligent, football-loving fans, no different than Buckeye fans all over the state of Ohio. This statement is just wrong.
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 9:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it’s one thing if he’s a michigan fan…but he claims the buckeyes, which makes this statement completely outlandish.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 28, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was merely pointing out LIke Pistons have our number, 4-10 in your last 14 against the Magic we CLEARLY have yours
LOL@spawning a list of most hated cities.
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha, it’s just one of our favorite things to do to vent. Nothing personal meant here.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cleveland fans have a lot of hate
No wonder yall are so touchy. It makes so much sense now!
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on May 27, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s coping mechanism. After you’ve been hated on for so long, you start to fight fire with fire. It’s in our blood. We’re very rarely serious.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It must be a midwest thing
The only team I hate east of the Mississippi are the following: The Knicks (hate them, the franchise, the arrogance but many of the fans are cool), the Yankees (for obvious reasons) and recently the Red Sox for being the New England version of the Yankees.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on May 27, 2009 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Someone wise once said( Not me..lol)....
….LUCK is when OPPORTUNITY meets PREPARATION……and i think to some extent…the Magic have given themselves the opportunity to be in a position to be lucky because the have been prepared by the 2 playoff series before Cleveland….
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We've now lost Games 1 and 4 by a single possession
That’s gotta bounce back in our favor.
by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2009 11:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
it did
game 2, your team won by a single possession 2…both teams have had their share of lucky shots
by GoMagic on May 27, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So two games equals one? That’s a new kind of math.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah yeah, but the dice my friend, the dice remember not.
by hans on May 27, 2009 7:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember being if Vegas play roulette onetime at the Hard Rock casino
…..that sucker hit on red 13 consecutive times once…so i stopped gambling….permanently…..sometimes the balls never bounces your way…..ever!!
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ohio Sports Fail joined FTS at 12:39 pm. He posted that fun little screed at 1:08 pm, so he spent about 29 minutes of his life working on it. I’m sure he was giggling the entire time.
And it was deleted in about 3 minutes.
by Chemo on May 27, 2009 12:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Teehee
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I stayed up and rewatched the game on TNT last night
and damn it, how did we not win that game? That’s the thing that is troubling. We SHOULD be up 3-1. We’ve outplayed them in Games 1,2 and 4. We’ve got to finish or hope that these shots they keep throwing in late don’t go down.
We’ve been in all these games, even Game 3 we were down 5 before a mental meltdown by Delonte.
We got this.
by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2009 12:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i’ve been thinking about this game, and this series, an unhealthy amount lately. one thing that i keep coming back to is that the cavs have gotten exactly ONE “bounce” in this series—the LeBron game winner in Game 2. that’s it. everything else…delonte failing to secure the long rebound last night, lewis getting loose and knocking down 2 clutch 3’s, rafer alston getting smoking hot, mickael pietrus shooting 100000% from downtown, mo rattling threes out, LeBron rattling 4Q FTs out…everything seems to be breaking the way of the magic.
granted, the magic is creating an awful lot of this “luck” with their stellar play, but don’t the breaks have to start to even out at some point? i’m clinging to that hope.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 1:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
And for everyone who wants to harp on our D — I’ve heard a bunch of people say, “Well, yeah, we took Lewis and Hedo out of it, but eventually we have to cover Rafer!” — it’s important to remember this: Over the course of his 11-year career, Rafer Alston has been one of the worst shooters in the league. We’re not talking one season, we’re talking a career’s worth of dreadful, bottom-of-the-barrel shooting percentage. For a decade he hasn’t been able to hit the ocean if he fell out of a boat, and now he can toss a dime into a thimble from 24 feet away.
by tabler84 on May 27, 2009 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For a decade he hasn’t been able to hit the ocean if he fell out of a boat
Maybe he finally realized he was sailing on a river and corrected course…
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope. He just walked in on God making out with some college chick, and God promised him he could finally hit shots if he’d keep quiet.
Is this over the line?
by tabler84 on May 27, 2009 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i made a Greinke/meds joke last night, so no problem here.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha, just the hilarious line
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True. But I’d rather not bet on luck going our way, especially when it involves open threes. This is Cleveland sports. We don’t get lucky. Instead of assuming good things will happen, plan for bad things. Do something to try to force things to go our way.
Can we put one guy on Howard, shut down everyone else and force him to do it all himself? Or perhaps, continue the current approach, but do an in-game adjustment if it looks like Alston is hot?
Again, I could be way wrong.
Baseball isn't boring. YOU ARE.
by Matt Y. on May 27, 2009 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is Cleveland sports. We don’t get lucky.
I’ll have none of that around these parts.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright. I guess it was just my frustration talking. Sorry.
Baseball isn't boring. YOU ARE.
by Matt Y. on May 27, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha, no worries. We’re not gonna ban you for that. Just trying to help people stay positive!
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Instead of assuming good things will happen, plan for bad things.
What does this mean? Is that what you think the coaching staff is doing — hoping everything good happens and nothing bad will? I highly doubt that. No matter what team you play, you have to pick your battles — either you let one player beat you or take your chances with another. The Cavs are taking their chances with Rafer Alston beating them, and that’s a battle they’ll win most of the time. Unfortunately they didn’t win that one last night.
And let’s stop with the idea that Cleveland sports teams never get lucky and are cursed to always lose. We know that’s not really possible — there isn’t some being who controls sporting events and makes bad things happen to Cleveland teams. We’ll get our share of luck eventually.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I don’t think the coaching staff is doing that. I was referring to the mentality around here, that the breaks have to even out at some point in this series. Which isn’t unreasonable, but like I replied to Turk, it was my frustration talking I guess.
No matter what team you play, you have to pick your battles — either you let one player beat you or take your chances with another.
I agree. I just wonder if single-teaming Howard and manning up on the perimeter might be the best bet. End the rotating stuff.
Baseball isn't boring. YOU ARE.
by Matt Y. on May 27, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’ve been crying for singling howard since the second half of game 1.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Plan
Hey, Magic fan here, just stopping by to chat for a bit, not trying to get anyone riled up. As far as Browns plan, I don’t know that it’s been wrong, just difficult to execute. If you look at the teams that had success slowing the Magic down they have several things in common…A wide bodied center, who can make Howard takes shot’s while moving away from the basket ala Perkins, and very athletic wingmen who close out quickly on the shooters. While the Cavs obviously have one extremely athletic wingman in Lebron, I just don’t think the Mo, or West, or any of the other options have the quickness, and/or length to bother guys like Lewis, and Turk off the line. It’s not that they’re poor defenders, the stats show that isn’t the case, it’s purely a matter of match ups. In the first round Iguodala, and Young gave the Magic fits because of their length (6’6, and 6’8 respectively) and their speed. Either way, this series is far from over, and I refuse to celebrate anything until the clock reads 000, and the Magic have the lead. Even though the eries hasn’t gone your way thus far, it’s been close, and very exciting. I look forward to game 5, and truthfully expect the Cavs to take that one, leading to Orlando hopefully taking 6 at home, of course if Howards gets any more techs, this could all be wrong…
by Cardsfan25 on May 27, 2009 2:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Welcome, and thanks for the respectful commentary. I think, for the most part, you hit the nail n the head about why the Magic match up so well with the Cavs.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The matchup with Howard is what bothers me the most. From our stable of big men (Ilgauskas, Varejao, and Wallace), Varejao has the best combination of skills and size to combat Howard, but he can’t do it all game and is prone to committing bad fouls. Nobody’s going to stop Howard, but forcing him to hit a few turnaround jumpers or hook shots would help; the 3 consecutive bunnies he scored to open OT frustrated the hell out of me.
Nothing we can do about the size mismatch at guard. I think the best approach is to do our best on Turk and Lewis and if Alston continues on fire, so be it. I’d rather have Alston beat us than allow a better talent to do so.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i would agree
I think the best thing for cleveland to do would be to put Lebron on either Lewis, or Turk, and if one of the other guys beats you (Pietrus, Alston, Lee) then you have to live with it. I don’t really agree that Varejao can Guard Howard, I think he’s to small. ben Wallace has seemed to me to be the best defender of Howard, though his injury issues present a speed problem. The 3 has been what has kept us in the games thus far, so if I’m Brown, I try to clamp down on the most notorious shooters we have, and force Howard to do it from the line, and make another shooter step up. Just looking at percentages, that would be the way to go. You would essentially be forcing Howard to continue to hit above his average from the line, and and also foce a player not typically in the 20 pt range to get there. Not saying it would work because all of those guys (Pietrus, Alston, Lee) are capable of 20+, and apparently Howard can now shoot FTs, but that would be your best option.
by Cardsfan25 on May 27, 2009 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Varejao’s not the ideal defender for Howard, but I think he’s our best shot. As you hinted at, Wallace’s body isn’t what it used to be; in fact, it’s that of a 34-year old who has spent his career banging inside with guys larger than him (he’s only 6’9, 240). Andy’s got a constant motor, and is 2 inches taller 20 pounds heavier than Wallace. It may not look it, but Andy really does play physically when he’s not flopping.
But I agree on the guard play. I have Lebron on Lewis, and take your chances with Lee, Pietrus, and Alston. Make them hit their jumpers, and make Howard continue his uncharacteristic performance at the line; he’s a career 60% FT shooter who’s hitting 70% in this series… that can’t possibly continue.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Got a tip for you about Howard....but Mike Brown should already know this
..if you bang him on the post hard…with the allowable forearm…not the hand check that AV often does….he gets impatient after 2-3 tries backing a guy down…..then he gives up and fades away from the basket with that wacked out hook shot of his. He commits the cardinal sin for big men…he doesn’t attack the rim at that point..he tries to shoot going away. So even if there’s contact….it’s never going to get called. If AV can just pound Howard and keep him from getting deep in the lane without flopping…because it’s obvious the refs are over giving him that call…then Howard will beat himself without you having to constantly foul him or double team him.
The only caveat to this is that teams will probably only have 1 year or 2 at the outside to take advantage of this as he improves his post game:) So good luck…let’s see if M. Brown is smart enough to learn from the Boston film!!
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what happened to my post?
was it deleted just because you didnt agree with it? oh well, just goes to show how much of a blind fanboy-run this site is. thank you for proving my points.
next time, it be best if you REFUTED my points via a well-thought out debate instead of just deleting it because you’re angry its true.
what poor excuse for objective journalism.
by inee on May 27, 2009 2:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
it’s not because we disagree. there’s plenty of posts on here that disagree with us.
your post contains blatant disregard for facts, and the purpose of your post is that of a troll.
There were plenty of posts refuting your inane diatribe below, but the site mods apparently felt the stupidity of your original thoughts overwhelmed the responses.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 2:34 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
blatant disregard of facts?
you mean:
1. when i pointed out that cleveland needed more pieces?
2. when i pointed out that cleveland was dominated for most games?
3. when i pointed out that james cannot carry this team by himself?
4. when i pointed out that jordan and kobe both tried and that james should know by now of that preceding fact?
which ones?
sorry, but the stupidity of YOUR thoughts dont count. again, unless you can refute any of my “facts” i laugh at this site’s attack on my persona.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
2. when i pointed out that cleveland was dominated for most games?
yeah, this one. Cleveland held leads and opened the game with leads more often than Orlando. So stating that Orlando had them on edge the entire series is completely subjective, and quite frankly, wrong.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what? you have got to be kidding.
cleveland started strong only in game 1. game 1. orlando led most of game 2 until cleveland caught up and james saved them with that last shot. orlando beat cleveland silly in games 3 and 4—only in the fourth and parts of the third were cleveland able to catch up.
sorry, but you have to watch it again. cleveland didnt look like they had a chance. lebron is a godsend because he has the ability to will his way; and that’s pretty much what has happened so far.
disgree with me? well, im sorry that you disagree with MOST JOURNALISTS too, including NBA tv and TNT because we echo the same sentinent.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow. Did you even watch the game, or read this thread for that matter? Orlando most certainly did not lead most of game 2.
And the TNT/NBA talking heads are not journalists. They’re TV prsonalities, or analysts at best. Very big difference.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
go check the boxscores, and tell me that Cleveland didn’t start strong in game 2 or 4.
a 14-point lead at the end of 1 in game 1.
a 12-point lead at half in game 2.
a 4 point lead at the end of 1 in game 4, on the road.
an 8 point lead at half in game 4, on the road.
really? watch the games instead of following scoop jackson’s twitter, and maybe you’ll absorb a clue before it’s too late.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a 14-point lead at the end of 1 in game12.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
see? there you go again. the problem with you is that you look at the box scores instead of analyzing the game.
cleveland is good at end the quarters strong. that doesnt mean anything because you can make a run AT ANY TIME, and cleveland is strong at making runs to end the quarters. orlando makes runs too, and your argument rests on the fact that orlando doesnt make runs to end the quarters. if you watch the games for the MOST part of the quarters cleveland has been playing catch-up; then they try to end strong. if you didnt count the end of those quarters you’ll be looking at orlando leads at MANY different times.
dude, i dont know how to get this through you. you only need to look at the end result—3 out of 4 games and that one game was a saving shot. that doesnt sound like dominant to you? look at the percentage shots of orlando throughout the series. dude, game 4 they were shooting 50%!
does that sound like the best defensive team is on them?
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you didnt count the end of those quarters you’ll be looking at orlando leads at MANY different times.
you’ve said a lot of dumb things, but this is the dumbest. just stop.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And if you don’t count the end of the games the Cavs have never lost.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah…just lop off the last 6 seconds of the 4th quarter last night, and the last 15 seconds of game 1…cavs are up 3-1. maybe his statement isn’t so dumb…
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
see? there you go again. the problem with you is that you look at the box scores instead of analyzing the game.
Translation: “See, there you go again with your FACTS. FACTS ruin my argument!”
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
2. when i pointed out that cleveland was dominated for most games?
you only need to look at the end result
how can you be dominated when the end result includes deficits of 1, 1, 10, and 2 points? if a team was dominated, that implies quarter-to-quarter-, run-to-run. I picked a time series of the end of quarters. In game 2, which you claim the Magic dominated, they closed the gap to 6 points, a max-two-possession deficit, at the 3:56 remaining mark in the 1st Q. They did not close that gap back to 6 points for the next 27 minutes of gametime. But they dominated?
You seriously have an issue with using data.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
here let me define domination (unless i watch the videos again i cant come up with the specific times and leads and changes, so i’ll use this data instead):
1. game 4: cleveland bench (14 pts) vs. orl (26), blocks (3 vs. 4), 3pt (6 of 21 vs. 17 of 37), ast (17 vs. 21), FG (45% vs 50%)
2. game 3: bench (8 vs. 20pts), blocks (3 vs 4), stl (9 vs 7), FT (26-35 vs 39-51), 3PT (19% vs 35%), FG (37% vs 42%), TO (15 vs 13)
3. game 2: blocks (4 vs 7), stls (5 vs 6), 3PT (43% vs 26%), FG (45% vs 48%)
4. game 1: bench (5 vs 25pts), ast (23 vs 32), reb (33 vs 36), FT (71% vs 86%), 3PT (32% vs 45%), FG (49% vs 55%)
since you’re such a big fan of the box score. there. data. facts.
domination?
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bench scoring doesn’t matter, only total scoring does. And for the rest you’re cherry-picking stats to favor your team. If you think this is good analysis then you’re way off base.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
okay, sure, lets not cherry pick.
what, cleveland won rebounds by about 2 for some games. cleveland won some TO, AST, BLK, STLs on SEPARATE occassions.
how about the consistency of orlando’s data ACROSS ALL GAMES?
what do you mean bench scoring doesnt matter?
LMAO i cannot believe how blind you people are.
BLIND.
by inee on May 27, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We had leads of 16 and of 23. How does that fit into being dominated? You don’t know your own argument here. The Magic have won three but neither teams has been dominant. This series could be over as a sweep for either team with a couple of different bounces. No one has been anything close to dominating for more than a 10 minute stretch.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 27, 2009 8:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
even if this weren’t a blatantly biased selection of statistics, it doesn’t speak anywhere close to domination!
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. You may be right, but this is not a “fact.” This is an argument that should be supported by other facts.
2. Losing by 1 and 2 is not being dominated. Not only is this dead wrong, it’s also not a fact.
3. Again, an argument, not a fact.
4. Same.
Did you ever learn the difference between fact and argument/opinion? I pity the way our children are raised today.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. fact—i already gave supporting FACTS, you know, that ones that were DELETED?
2. fact—they didnt just “lose by 1 or 2.” they got beat silly most of the game until james caught up in the 4th. dude, i cannot believe how much thinking needs to be put on this. you dont look at the last score when you analyze “being dominated”. was that so hard to understand?
3. fact—james has been trying to carry the 4th every game—resulting in FAILURE. if you tried 4 times and failed 3 out of 4, then you CANNOT DO IT==FACT.
4. i have no idea how you could not understand this. the proof is in history, and you claim this is not a fact. WTF?
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
show us the history, don’t just proclaim it as truth.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL. read your own history, im not going to help you there. if you dont know that then nevermind. it is truth unless otherwise proven wrong.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i just did.
and as expected, the data, facts, and history prove you wrong, incompetent, and unable to make an argument, even a wrong argument at that.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL, good job. its all you can do. here i am laying out every argument and fact and all you can do is attack my persona.
good job.
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
2. fact—they didnt just "lose by 1 or 2." they got beat silly most of the game until james caught up in the 4th. dude, i cannot believe how much thinking needs to be put on this. you dont look at the last score when you analyze "being dominated". was that so hard to understand?
That is just completely and utterly wrong. We led by 23 at one point in game 2 and 12 at the half. That is in no way being dominated. You are flat wrong, period.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you just don’t seem to get…well…anything.
1. it’s not fact if you can’t support it with objective evidence. LeBron needs more pieces around him? how does winning 66 games fit into that “fact”? the reality is that if the pieces around him were more productive in this series, the cavs would be, at worst, tied.
2. the cavs have lead at the half in 3 of the 4 games. they’ve also lost by 1, 2, and 10. that is a far cry from being dominated. plus, “dominated” is not an objective observation. there is no fact of domination.
3. if you tried 4 times, and failed 3, then you actually absolutely CAN do it. you just said it yourself. you failed 3 times, but DID IT once. so, even if it were acceptable to view your assertion as factual (which it’s not) you’ve just disproved yourself. brilliant.
4. again, there’s not an objective data set that can prove to us that kobe and jordan “tried and failed on their own.”
as well, you came with nonsense like “give up” and “it’s over”. how do you expect something like that to go over on a cavaliers blog? so, not only was your post unintelligent, it was inflammatory. how could you be surprised that it got whacked?
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
not only was your post unintelligent, it was inflammatory. how could you be surprised that it got whacked?
That’s the main point, you were just looking to start a fight. That’s what you wanted (and what you got). Don’t go acting like a martyr now.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sure, i dont get anything?
1. 66 games dont mean anything. if 66 games your team can perform and in the playoffs they flop, what use is it? what, you want to turn into the next dallas mavericks that got swept but were on top? THATS how that fits into that FACT.
2. sure there is a fact of domination. youre in denial. if you cannot defend your opponent’s weapon—the 3pt—then you cannot dominate. if you cannot get your own guys to score consistently out of your opponents defense—then you cannot dominate. if you cannot WIN GAMES, you are in no way shape or form in any dominant position. the fact that games are lost by 1 or 2 doesnt matter.
3. i dont even know what you were doing with this. its so stupid i dont know how to answer it. IF 75% of the time you cannot beat a team, then you cannot beat them, then it is FACT that you cant beat them. so for now, it is FACT, unless they can pull off the IMPROBABLE three straight wins against a strong team. fact unless proven otherwise. contrary to what you were stupidly trying to assert, a fact doesnt need 100% statistics to back it up. any science relies on a margin of error to claim facts.
4. sure there is, you need to do your homework.
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL...oh this is going to go over REAL well in here...:))
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is amazing in its inanity. i guess i’ll go one more round, but it’s hard to convince someone who merely changes his argument at the first sign that he’s been trumped.
1. 66 games means an awful lot. the cavs won 7 more games than the magic, and had a tougher schedule (cavs SOS: .499; magic SOS: .498). the pieces around LeBron got it done in the regular season. you mention the mavericks…that has absolutely nothing to do with anything.
2. there is no objective standard of “domination”. therefore, there is no factual basis to say the cavs have been dominated. furthermore, you completely shift your argument here and make the world of basketball boil down to 2 buckets: domination, and getting dominated. the cavs have not dominated this series, but that does not mean they’ve been dominated, which is what you said before you knew it made no sense and changed your argument to this version that makes no sense.
3. so, aside from the times that the cavs CAN beat the magic (twice this year, and once in the last week)…they CAN’T beat them, is that how i should think about this? if 75% of the time you cannot beat a team…well, my simple math tells me that 25% of the time you can beat them. margin of error is not what you’re appealing to here…cut off the “margin of” and you’ve got your analysis.
4. there’s no objective evidence that shows that michael jordan didn’t make everyone around him better enough to win a championship. people love to say that it wasn’t until a team was built up around michael that he won…but how do we know that he wasn’t key to making those teammates better? the roster wasn’t substantially different from 89 to 90.
you just don’t understand argumentation.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 4:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i have no idea what you’re barking about. im not changing my argument.
1. sure the mavericks have to do with everything for this argument, you just choose not to see it. THE REGULAR SEASON DOESNT MATTER.
2. i just gave data above to support DOMINATION. and that’s apart from the helping fact of 75% in this series. i didnt change anything, all the data correlate.
3. i dont know how to explain this point to you. when something happens MOST of the time, IT DOES! you dont get the flu EVERYTIME the virus gets to you. but it is an accepted fact that you will get sick if you catch the virus. was that so hard to understand?
4. im not talking about jordan making his teammates better. try again. im talking about the years he tried to do it ALONE—the years he scored A LOT, tried to will his team into winning. it was only when he learned to use pippen, grant, paxson, kerr, etc..that his championships came. the same is being proven for shaq-less kobe.
by inee on May 27, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So because upsets happen occasionally that means the regular season doesn’t matter? What about all the times when the team with the best record wins the championship — don’t those examples count?
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
they won NOT because of their best record. they won because they DESERVE it, they won because they were THAT GOOD.
i cannot begin to tell you how many variables can CHANGE that best record immensely. when a star player (or two, due to injuries) goes out for most of the season that team will get a low standing in the playoffs; when he comes back they can go all the way. when a coach is changed midseason. when trades happen midseason or before the all-star break.
A LOT of things can change that “best record in the NBA” standing that dont mean SQUAT in the playoffs where your team is LOCKED (most of the time, because injured players can still come back in and some can go out).
when you have a team that has been playing together for a long time, and the core players are intact, and know how to play together; when you have chemistry; when your coaching staff is intact and ready for the team; when the personnel are experienced vs. rookies.
NOBODY expected the bulls to go 7 games against a great team. but it had to be a rookie to make the difference.
by inee on May 27, 2009 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow. this literally makes no cogent sense whatsoever. none. i award you no points…may god have mercy on your soul.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
1. Of course 66 games mean something! You obviously don’t know anything about statistics — anything can happen in a small sample. To get a good indication of the quality of a team you need to look at a large sample of games, so the regular season matters. The Cavs are the better team than the Magic; they’re not playing better in these four games but it’s only FOUR games. If Orlando is so much better, why did they win seven games less than the Cavs?
2. What are you talking about — you’re turning your own words around. You’re arguing that the Cavs aren’t dominating but nobody is saying that. NOBODY. You’re saying that Orlando is dominating the Cavs and that’s simply false. Every game was close, and 3 of the 4 came down to ONE SHOT. That is not domination. You were arguing that the Magic were dominating the Cavs, are you are wrong. What you said here does nothing to support your argument. Nothing. You’re arguing something that nobody said.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. the regular season DOES NOT MATTER. oh please grow up. anyone—ANY BASKETBALL professional and/or analyst will tell you the same. THE PLAYOFFS ARE A WHOLE DIFFERENT MONSTER.
2. you just didnt understand this, i wont care to re-explain every single post. again, THE LAST SCORE is NEVER, NEVER, indicative of how the game was played. any team can be beat by the 4th quarter then the coach pulls his starters and the opposing bench can pile up the lead—-that’s not what happened by i am illustrating a point—THE LAST SCORE IS NOT INDICATIVE of the game.
by inee on May 27, 2009 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The last score isn’t indicative of the game?? Then what score is? And if your conterexample doesn’t work in this case, then which one does? You’re not illustrating your point if it’s not valid with your argument.
And this point is so funny because you keep claiming that the Magic are better than the Cavs because they beat them in 3 of the 4 games. Do you know how they determined who won - by the LAST SCORE. So the final score is valid to make your case, but when it doesn’t support your case then it’s not valid.
Please, please, please, tell me how a one-point victory was a domination by the Magic. You have yet to explain that (besides cherry-picking stats).
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well you’re either never going to admit it, or youre just playing with me. because i have thrown every explanation out there to help you, and you just choose to be blind. no cherry-picking stats? then what? do you want me to tell you a story about a dragon princess?
again, it is STUPID to count on the fact that it was a 1-2 point victory. you people seem to hold on to that for dear life, on the hope that the cavs have a chance. complete and utter denial and in gross delusion that cleveland can win 3 straight against a great team that has beaten them multiple times in almost every category in every game. THERE WAS FEW PARITY in the statistics.
i wonder why you keep leaving game 3’s 10 point victory out.
by inee on May 27, 2009 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You simply cannot argue. If you are seeing domination in these games you don’t know much about basketball. SVG hasn’t fudged the final scores by resting people or any other nonsense like that.
Game 1: Won by a last second three and a close miss.
Game 2: Won by one of the greatest shots of all time.
Game 3: A four point game with under a minute to play.
Game 4: Overtime and a just missed buzzer beater.
No one is dominating this series. Are the Magic putting up prettier numbers? For sure. That, however, doesn’t mean much when you cannot put the other team away. The Cavs could just as easily be up 3-1 as down 3-1. This has been good, compelling basketball that you are willfully misinterpreting to see something that isn’t there. It’s really almost sad.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 27, 2009 8:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. No one said we were “journalists” here
2. In order to have a well-thought out debate, both sides have to be capable of thinking. Whoops.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh im sorry. i thought that if you had enough brains to write an article/blog, you would be capable of thinking. my bad. forgive me for assuming you were capable of thinking.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone involved with running this site is damn well capable of thinking. You missed something there, chief.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
uh no. i gave a well thought out written argument, and everyone involved with running this site deleted it instead of refuting it.
i didnt miss anything.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trying to refute what you wrote would have been like a T-Rex hunting for sloths. It’s just so easy that it’s pointless, and it doesn’t serve any purpose.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what poor excuse for objective journalism.
this is a cavaliers blog, kronkite.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i can’t wait for him to decry that we’re suppressing his right to free speech.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 27, 2009 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you provide a well-thought out post, we’ll give well-thought out comments.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what do you mean? i provided ENOUGH well thought-out arguments. and all they can do is delete them.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As shown above, you keep repeating “facts” that are just wrong. I’m not going to repeat them all, you can read them above. But the Cavs were NOT dominated in every game as you keep saying. That’s purely false, and you lose credibility. They could have easily won Games 1 and 4 with one shot being changed.
Nobody, I repeat, nobody here thinks LeBron can carry this team by himself. We’ve never said that. And he hasn’t done that this year; Mo, Delonte, and Z have all provided scoring help all year long. The only reason we’re losing is because they’re all missing too many open shots they usually make. So I don’t know what your point is with telling us that LeBron can’t win by himself as if that’s a new thought.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry, but i dont think turk shares your opinion of Lebron carrying this team.
you all harp about “one shot that could change…”—-dude, let me make this even simpler. cleveland should NOT have gotten it to ONE SHOT that could change. cleveland should have beaten orlando convincingly, and not have had to resort to “the last shot”.
but be it as it may, 3 out of 4 games, “the last shot” has not worked for them. what does that tell you?
i dont know, but im getting increasingly bothered by this—-THREE OUT OF FOUR. let me repeat.
THREE OUT OF FOUR. there.
3 of 4, going down to one shot and no victory. 75% of the time—-i guess that doesnt speak domination. if it wasnt that dominant, it would be 2-2 or even 3-1 cleveland.
fact of the matter is, orlando burned cleveland with 3 bombs and cleveland it sounds, couldnt defend it. orlando ran the same pick-and roll plays with lewis/lee/peitrus at the corner.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry, but i dont think turk shares your opinion of Lebron carrying this team
Wha?
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
cleveland should have beaten orlando convincingly, and not have had to resort to "the last shot".
i thought we were dominated? how is it that we should have beaten orlando convincingly, if we’ve been dominated?
orlando burned cleveland with 3 bombs and cleveland it sounds, couldnt defend it.
(my bold)
it sounds? have you actually watched the games?
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Orlando has dominated Cleveland
We’ve obviously been watching different games.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on May 27, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
seriously. doesn’t this have to qualify as one of the most evenly-matched 3-1 series in recent history?
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It might be the standard to which that very statement is applied in the future
Most playoff games are pretty close truthfully, and what the Cavaliers did in the 1st 2 rounds was so atypical, that a part of me thinks the Cavaliers still haven’t really adjusted to that yet. Maybe they can’t.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on May 27, 2009 5:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree ....
..if anything…i think we have just closed more efficiently on offense and defense
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously Pook,
This has been a great Back And Forth series.
And I suspect it will continue to be.
Blessings.Love.Peace
by lifestyleforthesellout on May 27, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOL, you didnt understand my post. nevermind. read it again.
by inee on May 27, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
FACTS, dude, FACTS. Learn to use them. See all the posts above refuting your “domination” claim. Or are you ignoring them because you know you’re wrong.
And who said Cleveland “should have” dominated Orlando? Nobody here thought we were going to dominate them, they’re a very good team. You’re just making things up.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, its a pity none of my FACTS are being disproven. i gotta learn to use more of them. especially on a blind site like this.
im not ignoring anything, im going to try to get some data in here so i gotta look at a couple of sites.
i never said anyone said cleveland should have dominated orlando—please read the posts better before you open your mouth.
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
cleveland should have beaten orlando convincingly, and not have had to resort to "the last shot".
You said that as part of your argument, but my point was that those are YOUR words not the thoughts of anyone here. YOU said Cleveland should have dominated Orlando. Nobody here believed that, so that has nothing to do with your argument. That’s my point.
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
of course it does. it has everything to do with my argument. if you reread the posts you’ll know why i said that.
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
honestly, i don’t even think YOU know why or what you’ve said. which explains why you simply retort: reread my posts.
i’ve got news for you…none of those make any sense, either.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, random question…Are we getting another thread to talk about the LA-Denver game tonight?
Welcome to Smashville, Tennessee.
Official Graphic Designer/Researcher of MCM.
Proud iPhone user. Take that, Jim Balls.
by Aditya T (smashville) on May 27, 2009 3:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I’ll throw up an open thread an hour or so before the game
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
okay cool
Welcome to Smashville, Tennessee.
Official Graphic Designer/Researcher of MCM.
Proud iPhone user. Take that, Jim Balls.
by Aditya T (smashville) on May 27, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Under attack from an unsaustainable barrage of three-pointers by the Disney Darlings"
unsaustainable? WTF does that mean, and if you typed what I thought you meant to type I would only have one natural question…
Are you from America?
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 3:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
unsustainable
And if their 3’s were so “unsustainable” they would not have hit 17..
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 3:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I mean unsustainable over multiple games.
It should be clear by now these pieces aren’t meant as critical analysis but rather a mixture of tongue-in-cheek optimism and positive propaganda. The Cavs fans get it. And after all, this is, ya know, a Cavs blog.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
" tongue-in-cheek optimism and positive propaganda. "
THERE YOU GO. that’s what i was waiting for. thank you.
i can finally end.
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you really not understand what I was doing?
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i did, but i have the feeling a lot of the people here dont—because they defend it with such zeal as if it were truth and such i had to make my comments known.
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hate blowhards...from ALL fan baes...get over it man...move on!!
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i can finally end.
You should have never started.
I really don’t get what kind of person comes to another team’s fan site just to make derogatory comments about their team and start fights. Really, what’s the point of this? What would motivate you to do this? Does it make you feel better as a person to put down other people’s teams on a website?
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WTF? i am a fan of cleveland. that means this is my fan site too. but i am not stupidly blind.
i didnt make derogatory comments. i stated facts and put up arguments and appealed to the fans here to stop being blind.
YOU guys on the other hand, took it the wrong way and labeled me a troll.
by inee on May 27, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, we’re all blind. Thank God we have YOU to show us the truth!!!
by Buckeye Brad on May 27, 2009 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember our friend from LGT who got banned mid last season? This guy reminds me of him. He changes his argument, ignores the facts and spouts unprovable garbage at every turn, then claims to be on the same side as everyone else; a prophet who has been sent to enlighten us all.
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 27, 2009 8:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was joking man clam down
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 7:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My bad, couldn’t tell
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 8:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hitting 17 is known as “getting hot”. the magic, over 82 games, hit 3’s at 38% as a team (if i’m remembering correctly) in the regular season. the concept of mean reversion implies that a continued stretch at 46% is highly unlikely.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Magic DID get more open 3’s in game 4 than most, so that probably contributed to the improvement. It would be disappointing to NOT get hot when there’s that many open 3’s to start you off.
by CityShrimp on May 27, 2009 4:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know all you guys care about is sample size...but here is something to consider...
…during the regular season…yes a WHOLE 3 games…the Magic did hit more 3’s than there average i believe and at a higher percentage as well…please don’t tell me that your waiting for an 82 game sample of Cavs/Magic games before you begin to understand that this may be the norm and not the aberration. The Cavs defensive matchups on the Magic just make it more likely that they are going to shoot more 3’s and and make a higher percentage. AV can’t guard Lewis behind the arc, Delonte can’t keep Turkoglu from shooting over him behind the arc…and even Alston is bound to hit a much better share of 3’s if the Cavs are willing to leave him WIDE OPEN!! Doesn’t any of that seem to make sense?? Really th only one i can see cooling off any time soon is Pietrus because he has been guarded reasonably well and is prone to taking bad shot…which much to the Magic fans surprise and delight…he hasn’t done much of the entire playoffs..
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
please don’t tell me that your waiting for an 82 game sample of Cavs/Magic games before you begin to understand that this may be the norm and not the aberration. The Cavs defensive matchups on the Magic just make it more likely that they are going to shoot more 3’s and and make a higher percentage.
I’ve been wondering if matchups have something to do with it.
and even Alston is bound to hit a much better share of 3’s if the Cavs are willing to leave him WIDE OPEN!! Doesn’t any of that seem to make sense??
Yes it does to me.
Baseball isn't boring. YOU ARE.
by Matt Y. on May 27, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok guys...gotta run for now...happy hour at the downtown wine bar is calling...
…all you can drink vino for $20 and all the upscale professional females to boot….great combo!! Enjoy the game tonight.!!
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 27, 2009 4:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
We got em’ right where we want ’em.
Resident Josh Freeman fan.
by gahnki on May 27, 2009 5:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Get hot and win at home = 3-2. Go nuclear and win in Orlando = 3-3. Go apocalyptic and blow out the Q 4-3.
This is what I would like to see.
by Ilamuku on May 27, 2009 5:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
They’re not the Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse for nothing!
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright, kids. Enough feeding the trolls. They’ve been warned, let’s move on.
Ride on ye fearsome Horsemen of the Basketball Apocalypse. We got this.
by Turkmenbashi on May 27, 2009 5:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m not really sure what that is, but is sounds cool so we will go with it.
Resident Josh Freeman fan.
by gahnki on May 27, 2009 5:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For What It's Worth...
Just ran a Biorhythm chart for Mo Williams, and he will be “riding a triple high” on May 28th (Game 5). Conversely, Dwight Howard will be having a “triple critical day” on May 30th (Game 6). This is very encouraging news for Cavaliers fans.
by BrownsCavaliersIndiansForev on May 27, 2009 6:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Doogie Howser is that you?
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 7:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is blind optimism at its finest.
Even Mo Williams wouldn’t say that.
by redzero on May 27, 2009 7:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
so, i decided to look at games during the regular season in which the magic scored less than 90 points. i picked 90 b/c the cavs averaged 91ppg against this year, and i figure if we can hold the magic to 90-ish, we ought to have a pretty good shot at winning.
there were 19 such games (23% of the contests for the year), so it’s not ridiculous to suggest that it could happen once or twice in the course of a 7 game series (and it’s happened 0 in the first 4 games). interestingly, 5 teams pulled this off more than once: ATL (2x), BOS (4x), DET (2x), MEM (2x), NO (2x). i haven’t done enough thinking to know what each of those teams has in common that allowed them to pull such off, but i guess i’m saying i hope mike brown and company are watching some tape of these games to get a feel for how you keep the magic from exploding in your face, offensively.
nothing earth shattering here…just trying to keep myself from jumping off the ledge.
by DontCallMeJoey on May 27, 2009 7:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Terrible shooting % Nightmare from the 3...
Some people swear they down as can be
Turns out those same Homies Sit down to pee
by I blocked Patrick Chewing on May 27, 2009 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nike
I’m thinking Nike is scrammbling on how and who made the blunder of not signing DH looks like hindsight bit them in the ass.
by krs1961us on May 27, 2009 11:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
because he’s been so easy to market, what with his silky smooth shot and ok, I can’t even be that sarcastic.
by Hardcore Legend on May 28, 2009 12:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't remember that guy...what was his name?? Shaq something?? He didn't have a "silky smooth" anything as i recall....
…and i seem to remember he did “ok” marketing wise..lol
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 10:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lebron
I’ll make this short. Lebron and the Cavs are mentioned together in every sentence. Case closed!
by krs1961us on May 27, 2009 11:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
these Cavs
they will not quit. that’s not part of their vocabulary. i’m a lakers fan. i want these cavs to win not because i want them to battle with the lakers, it is because i’ve seen them do awesome things. they are the same cavs you guys know and love. support them all the way.
"One person working diligently alone can do wonders, but many people working harmoniously together can accomplish worlds."-Brandon Boyd"
by kobethebasketballmessiah on May 28, 2009 12:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s time to get real. Despite the hype, despite the feel good talk, our Cavs’ season is over. Orlando is dominating. What makes us think we’ll actually turn things around? Forget history? Please! History is going to once again repeat itself. Our city’s pro teams have a habit of choking. It’s happening again.
by jlujan69 on May 28, 2009 1:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Nope.
We GOT this. Shut up. Sit down.
by johnnyphoenix on May 28, 2009 4:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Orlando is dominating
Completely false. All four games were close in the last minute so how can you possibly say that one team dominated?
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why are there now two people espousing the idea that Orlando is dominating? Does no one actually watch the games?
I become an expert simply by doing something.
by fwembt on May 28, 2009 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It took a long time yesterday for me to find an updated series price for CLE/ORL, and finally came up with ORL -260/CLE +210. Simple math on these Vegas odds put the Magic at 70% to win the series, and obviously, 30% for the Cavs.
In the NBA’s 62-year postseason history, 190 teams have taken a 3-1 lead in a series and 182 of them have won.
In NBA playoff history? Only 4% of teams down 3-1 have won the series.
Do you believe? Vegas does.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on May 28, 2009 8:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Magic have superior offensive options.
Even though they were beaten in every statistical category, as stated in the post, they were still able to turn to their hot shooting. The Cavs don’t have any actually viable “go-to” options for when they’re struggling.
"I was playing in the streets one time and my friend broke off a leg to a chair and threw it at another guy through his heart and he died." - Ron Artest, QB's finest
by endverse on May 28, 2009 8:30 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This assumes the Magic can count on this with regularity. Um, there is a reason that their 3-point shooting set a record in game four. It was because it has never happened before. So to pretend it’s something that can be counted on is obviously silly. Outliers happen.
by tabler84 on May 28, 2009 9:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what abou the other two wins???
Once upon a time the Suns got out on the break... and along came Steve sucKerr
by Murcy on May 28, 2009 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I think the Cavs have the very best go-to option for when they’re struggling.
by Chemo on May 28, 2009 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
look guys
I’m a real optimist. And I’m kind of okay with Cleveland, and have no problems with Orlando, so I don’t really support either team here. but, you asaid there is no problem after game 1. after game 2, that the LeShot will break them. after game 3, no problem, we have this series. after game 4, no problem WE HAVE THIS SERIES! I know this is a team blog, and that you have to be optimistic… but you are basically STATING that Cleveland wins. after losing 3 out of 4 against a VERY good team with multiple weapons, while the Cavs team apart from James have been really bad you will simply win all 3? well… okay, good luck. It just seems a bit unreal and too repetitive
Once upon a time the Suns got out on the break... and along came Steve sucKerr
by Murcy on May 28, 2009 11:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Uhh, nobody here said any of those things.
by Buckeye Brad on May 28, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually i remember most all of these things being said,....lol..
…at the time i was just like “oh thats cute…they’re being so supportive..” , but after you string them all together is does look a little funny…but hey..i’m all about blind optimism myself…so not knockin you guys or anything..:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 4:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so, what should we say? “let’s give up, guys. see you next year”?
every major media outlet is saying “this series isn’t over”, in spite of the fact that statistically it is all but over (96% win rate for teams up 3-1). why would you expect a cavs blog to be more pessimistic?
by DontCallMeJoey on May 28, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
to quote a great line somewhere....
…after hearing the odds are one in a million…." so you’re saying there’s a chance then??" …this pretty much describes my optimism when it comes to my sports teams….lol…i’m all about the miracles happenin baby!! Just not against us..lol!:)
"if you're going to cry...go cry to your mama"
by MagikFanatic on May 28, 2009 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said, we got you right where we want you. And you’re not going to notice until it’s over.
Resident Josh Freeman fan.
by gahnki on May 28, 2009 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Fear The Sword
Related FanShots on Fear The Sword
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Socialize With FearTheSword
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
