Nitro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lLdJIx6iGc Horrorcore rap at its finest...

Griffin had 22/18/7 tonight, keeping both the double-double and 20pt streak alive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMeFcVHNT1Q :glasses:

Wow Kobe looked really, really creepy there when he stuck out his tongue.

As I said before, they are just like the LA crowd...they are rich and don't care. They get those seats because they can, not because they are diehard fans. Same goes for the Yankees' seats between the bases, and the Jets and Giants PSL's. Only rich people can afford them, which is why they look empty during games, even though they are technically sold-out.

Ooo someone's butthurt because I said his dick probably looks like a toothpick...cute. Look in the medicine cabinet, you'll find your mom's Midol there, it'll help you tremendously.

I agree, I was actually thinking about this before. The reason is because love is something all non-sociopaths can relate to, and it makes girls vagina's tingle.

Gotcha. I hate internet sarcasm without smiles...gets confusing as [expletive].

They've sold out every game this season...they got the same kind of crowd the Lakers have where the guests with premium seats arrive in the 2nd quarter. There's also that guy who wears #3 on the Heat who won a championship.

Well traditionally the pyramid represents the father, son and the holy spirit, and when I wrote it out I wasn't thinking about it representing anything other than the Illuminati. But now that I think about it, it also can have that seperate meaning. It's funny, too, because I thought up that line in about 10 seconds, but I really like it.

It's a metaphor. Humanity is the fetus with the mother being the "system" (government/higher authorities which control society), the pyramid is the symbol of Illuminati (a pyramid also has 3 sides, with regular society/system/Illuminati being the 3 sides), and the Illuminati controls the higher authorities which in turn controls society.

NJ/NY (current players): Derek Jeter: He OWNS this area. Amare Stoudemire: New guy on the block, but he's catching on real quick. Eli Manning: Most beloved football player currently around. Rex Ryan: The media's favorite person at the moment.

Yes they are. Still, Rondo's been unbelievable all season. Even though he's surrounded by incredible offensive talent, I don't think there is anyone better at setting up his teammates except maybe Nash, which is a high honor.

The system is the mom, humanity's the fetus Pyramid's the symbol, Illuminati is the Jesus ~Me

I know they were Pippen's career years, but they were the only years of his prime where he was viewed as a #1 option like Gervin was virtually his entire prime. IMO if you are going to use an all-encompasing stat like PER which is so predicated on volume, then you have to take Pippen's 2 years without MJ with a lot more importance than you otherwise would. The problem is PER has its flaws, and IMO a player who averages 8-10 less points on a little worse efficiency shouldn't be considered easily superior to a player who still averages 20+ PPG on good efficiency, far more assists (with less turnovers), more rebounds and substantially more steals. I guess it comes down to how you value each statistical area, but I find a lot of value in guys who can score with decent volume and efficiency, but are also strong (or very strong) in every other statistical area over a guy who can score on greater volume and efficiency but is average to below average in every other statistical fecet. The '70's are widely regarded as the NBA's weakest era, but I don't think that's the reason Gervin's stats may be inflated...it has more to do with the fact that in Gervin's highest scoring years, the Spurs were scoring 120PPG, which led the league by a good amount. In Pippen's best year ('93-'94), the league average for PPG was 10PPG lower, and the Bulls that season scored 22PPG less than the Spurs did in Gervin's best season. Be careful there. Because Pippen was the primary ballhandler and facilitator of the Bulls while Gervin wasn't for the Spurs, that is skewed. All you need to know is that almost every year during Gervin's prime he averaged more turnovers than assists, while Pippen was always over a 2:1 AST:TO ratio. So, TO% may indicate Pippen was more turnover prone, but I think the raw stats are more telling. That's a poor assumption and over-generalization. Not saying there isn't some (or a lot of) truth to that, but we just don't know, especially since neither of us saw much or any of Gervin actually play. IMO the best way to compare players across different era's is to take what they did in their era and compare it to what another player did in their respective era. I based my opinion on the fact that Pippen was the more well-rounded player who could also score with volume and good efficiency, and he has the championships and sufficient individual accoldades to back it up.

^I understand and agree to an extent, but I think you are SERIOUSLY underrating some of the players from past generations. And using PER to compare 2 players with entirely different roles is questionable. PER always inflates players with volume scoring, and Gervin was a #1 option on his team for many, many years while Pippen wasn't. Gervin led the league in USG% a few times while Pippen wasn't close. However, if you look at the 2 years that Pippen was without MJ, he netted a PER of around 23, which was right at Gervin's PER during his peak years. Also, remember, PER is a baseline stat which adjusts according to the rest of the league, so using PER to compare players who played in different era's doesn't show much IMO. It shows their production (only production) relative to the rest of the league in that specific year, but it's not a great measuring stick for comparing two individual players across different era's. What's more worthwhile is analyzing their stats rather than just a general total of their production compared to their peers (PER). I know you said Gervin was 'easily' superior statistically to Pippen, and I know that was because of their PER's, but I think it's the other way around. When placed in similar roles, Gervin scored more on better efficiency than Pippen, but Pippen was better on the boards (RPG, TRB%, whatever stat you want), a MUCH better ballhandler and passer (again, APG, TO's, AST%, whatever stat you want), and was a FAR better defensive player (which Drtg, DWS, or whatever stat also shows).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ura-ijtpzvM For all you GTA III fans out there. This song got me into Royce back in the day.

SOURCE

Right now Artest should have minutes taken away from him. His defense continues to slip, he doesn't produce and his TS% is a HORRIFIC 47%. It's bad enough that Fisher is an inefficient, one-dimensional player that's starting, but having two is very hard to overcome, especially when Artest isn't playing like an elite defensive player. T-Mac would make the offense run so, so much smoother. He has the handles, passing ability and IQ of a PG in a SF's body, and he still has the ability to score, rebound and play average defense. I was implying that they should move Artest. I agree his contract is a [expletive], but he could potentially be useful off the bench for a team like the Thunder, who have weak backup wings and could use a veteran (and also have a low payroll to take on his contract). A 3 or 4 team trade would be required for the Lakers to acquire an upgrade like Prince, and players like Brown would need to be involved. Regardless, I really do think the Lakers need an upgrade at SF, whether it be by keeping Artest but reducing his role to backup, or getting rid of him altogether. Maybe not for Prince and/or T-Mac, but it needs to be done.

I agree, but I do think he'd be a nice fit on LA, assuming they're not happy with Artest and looking to make a move.

I wouldn't say McGrady is out of the question. If they are to move Artest, they will likely have to package Brown with him, and T-Mac can be had for a first rounder (which means nothing to LA). As for Prince, you are probably right unless they found a 3rd party suitor.

T-Mac with 14/6 on 5-8 shooting (with 6 turnovers, but who's counting?), and he had a +/- of -7, with every other starter being at least -14. Seriously, it's the first full game I've watched of the Pistons and they are so, SO bad. How they've won as many games as they have is a miracle. As for T-Mac, personal victories FTW.

Your dick probably looks like a toothpick. Not even kidding.

What are you talking about? The '90's were a very fundementally sound league, and Pippen was one of the most well-rounded players in NBA history. He was a very good scorer who had 3pt range (something, due to different era's, Gervin didn't have), an amazing playmaker, a very good rebounder, and arguably the greatest perimeter defender in NBA history. He also has 6 championships under his belt. Besides scoring, Gervin doesn't have any case over Pippen. Therefor, I'd take Pippen.

The ATDHE feed has been going perfect for me, try that. And T-Mac is lookin' good, running the offense well. He's been a little careless in the last few minutes, but I'm impressed. I think he could be a real nice bench player on the Lakers, he'd do well in the triangle.