Oliver P

I'm amazed... Yes literally amazed. But it's not the fact that the Mavs lead 3-0 that amazes me no... It's that, despite the fact that the Mavs lead 3-0 indeed, and that they've clearly played better than LA in the first three games, a lot of people still think that the Lakers can win this series. Alright it is definitely true that it's not because no team has ever gotten back from a 3-0 that the Lakers will not come back as well this time. Records are made to be broken and I'm sure that someday a team will come back from a 3-0 and win one day. So the Lakers can do it, no one can deny that. That is true. But still I just can't believe that so many people think that they will indeed. It's just unbelievable how people are so confident in that team. I watched the game this morning (it was broadcasted on French tv and I don't work today so I didn't have to wake up at 4 AM, I downloaded the game and watched it quietly this morning haha) and even the French commentator, even when the Mavs were leading in the first half, yeah even then, one of the French commentators was sure that the Lakers would come back and win (he was wrong about that though). And said at the end of the game that Lakers could enter history as well. I mean it's like the whole world thinks that the Lakers will win. Unbelievable. Really unbelievable... Okay I said it myself, it's true that they can. Yes. But I personally do not think that they will. Why ? Well first of all because of the way they've played so far. And it's honestly hard for me to imagine them playing better all of a sudden. And the Mavs have been really great... Now I can imagine the Mavs being overconfident (yes I have watched the 2006 Finals.. sadly) and I'm worried about that, but honestly I think that by now Dirk has learned his lesson. And I can't imagine that they won't give all what they got tomorrow, to end the series as soon as they can. Especially that now Dirk has become a much better leader than he was at the time. Second it's not only the fact that the Lakers didn't play very well and that they're led 3-0 that makes me think that they will not come back, no, it's ESPECIALLY because of THEY WAY THEY LOST THIS LAST GAME. As a matter of fact they had this game in the fourth, it seemed impossible that they could lose at some point but they lost anyway. That's a tough loss. A VERY TOUGH LOSS. And it's gonna be even harder to come back because of that. I know that Kobe is strong mentally but honestly... And the fact is that the Lakers need Pau to win. And Gasol just totally lost his confidence. Yet Pau is the kind of player that needs confidence to play at his best. And I just don't think that he can find it back just like that. Kobe said that he thought that the Lakers would still win this series as well. He's doing his leader's job but does it really believe it ? It sounds more like he's TRYING to believe in it... It reminds me of the 95 Finals, when the Magic were led 3-0, totally lost their confidence after the first game and Penny said that they could still win it after game 3... It didn't happen. Now if we take the 96 Finals as example, the Sonics were led 3-0 and managed to come back to 3-2 (they still lost the series in game 6 though) but there was a factor that woke them up in the game 4, it was their spiritual leader's, Nate McMillan, come back. It suddenly woke them up and changed them into another team. I don't see something like that happening to the Lakers. What factor could change them ? Besides game 4 was in Seattle during the 96 Finals, it's not the same in this series. The Lakers will have to win that game away. So for all these reasons, even if I admit that it's definitely possible, I just don't see the Lakers come back. And I believe that the Mavs will end the series tomorrow. Also just wanted to say something about this last game, Carlisle did a great job during the whole series and he did it again yesterday, it was especially great of him to use Stojakovic instead of Marion in the fourth (Marion didn't do anything great in that game anyhow) as it forced Odom to get out of the paint in defense. And Stoja had quite some great shots in that game anyway... I knew he would bring something to that team. Oh and no one can defend on Dirk by the way. When you have a 7 footers who shoots that well (definitely the best shooter among the big man in the history of the game, one of the very best mid range shooters as well) and shoots the ball that high, well there is just no way you can defend him. No one can stop Dirk. I can't wait for tomorrow's game.

Wow... Wow, wow, wow. I had to wake up at 4:30 AM to watch the first two games of this series but I don't regret it one bit lol. Dirk is my favorite player since Starks and Ewing retired, the Mavs are my second favorite team since Dirk arrived in the league, so I'm happier than ever right now. This team has definitely a strong chance to win it all (been saying that since before the season started) and I'm particularly glad that I never stopped to believe in them. That I kept believing in them when they choked in Portland in game 4 (contrary to most people... what d'I tell you htown ? ). The series is certainly not over though. And the Lakers can still come back, that's for sure. A series is never over until one team wins four games. But... honestly, the team that wins the first game usually wins the series, and the Mavs won the first two games AWAY ! So it's certainly not good for the Lakers. Not good at all... Besides the last time the Lakers lost their first two games AT HOME was in 77 against Portland, and the Blazers just swept them. Oh and Dirk is the best PF in the world indeed, and by far, I've been saying that for years now. Definitely not arguable. LET'S GO MAVS !!!

I'm really excited by this series. The first time that those two teams play each other in the playoffs since 1988. If this series is as good as the 1988 WCF, it will be amazing for sure. At the time the young Mavericks surprised everyone by almost beating the mighty Lakers, forcing them to play seven games to beat them. Great players like Aguirre, Blackman, Perkins, Tarpley (who could have been one of the very best PF ever...) or Derek Harper (my favorite PG ever) were in that Dallas team. One of the best series of the history of the game. And I do believe that this series can be as good indeed. I might be the only one but I really think that the Mavs stand a very good chance to win in this series. I've been hearing many times that the Mavs couldn't win because of Dirk's help. Because Dirk needed another superstar as a sidekick. Someone like Caron Butler... Well I disagree with that. First of all the Mavs do not need Caron Butler to win. Butler has never felt comfortable in that team. If anything the Mavs are even better now without him. Well the Mavs are definitely better now than what they were a year ago anyhow, that's for sure. Second of all you definitely can win with one superstar only. If it's better to have another superstar in your team, it is not essential to win at the same time. If you have a well balanced team you can win with one superstar only. It was the case for the 94 Rockets. Or the 89-90 Pistons for instance. And even better the 04 Pistons actually won without any superstar whatsoever. And the least we can say is that this Mavs team is definitely well balanced. They're good inside and outside. They've been good outside the whole decade, the real difference this year is they have for the first time good players inside. Thanks of course to Tyson Chandler. Even better his back up, Haywood, is actually better than the Bradleys, LaFrentz, Dampiers or other Wang Zhizhis... And players like Terry, Stojakovic, Barea or Kidd can get on fire any time anyhow. And they sure don't all have to be on fire at the same time for the Mavs to win.... Speaking about Kidd, well he's not getting any younger and it's hard to call him a superstar now, but he definitely still got it. He's better then ever behind the arc, and he's having his best season since quite some time this year. The Mavs are also one this year of the best defensive teams that they have this decade, if not the best defensive team. So if you ask me the Mavs got all what they need to win it all this year. In fact many people laughed at them when they let Portland get back in game 4, in the first round, but they reacted immediately and won the next two games in a row. They've been quite impressive and showed that they were more solid than those past years. Especially when we consider that their opponents, the Blazers, were the hardest team to face in the first round. So among the contenders, the Mavs are the ones who had the toughest match up in the first round. Meanwhile the Lakers have had a lot of trouble against a Hornets team that was clearly not as good. They better play much better than that against Dallas or they will not be in the WCF this year, you can be sure of that. I expect at least 6 games in this series. And I hope for Dallas and Dirk that this year they will finally get a ring.

Finally... I heard about that when I woke up this morning (the radio weaks me up every day) and I just couldn't believe it. I thought I was still dreaming at first... I have been waiting for this moment for ten years. For ten long years.. I was starting to believe that it would never happen. And I'm glad it did. Sure, as the father of one of the many people who died during the attacks said, it will not bring back his son, it will not bring all those people back. Just like it will not bring back the magnificent Twin Towers. But, as Obama said, justice has been done. At last. I'm very happy. I'm happy for America, the greatest country in the world. And I'm even happier for New York City, the greatest city ever. And I'm especially happy for all the New Yorkers, who have showed us how brave they were during those difficult times. They showed that, even if you can hurt New York in its heart, you will never be able to destroy it. New York is a fantastic city. And it will be even more when the new Wolrd Trade Center will be built. A better one, a HIGHER one. Just to show that New York is even better than it was before the attacks, more magnificent forever. I wish I was in New York today. Even more than usual. To celebrate this special day with all the New Yorkers. Long live America. And long live New York City. STARS AND STRIPES FOREVER !!! http://frankwilliams.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/9-11NeverForget.jpg http://www.tripsgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/The-Statue-of-Liberty-wallpaper.jpg

The Celtics are the only team who swept his opponent in the first round. They didn't end the season very well (just like last year), but woke up in the playoffs (just like last year), which is not surprising at all. New York had some injury trouble but still the way Boston dominated us was very impressive. This despite the fact that Shaq didn't play.. Contrary to what some people might think the Celtics are still here and are definitely the team to beat in the East. The Heat haven't been very impressive in the first round. Not only they lost one game to Philly but they barely won the other ones... Yet the Sixers were the less good team of the playoffs (yes Indiana is a better team overall than them in my opinion, despite the fact that the Sixers have a better record..). The Heat should have destroyed them. So I'm still not convinced by this team to be honest. Although the Celtics had a lot of trouble against the Hawks in the first round in 2008, yet they eventually won a ring. So it doesn't mean anything at the same time. But honestly if Shaq plays and stay healthy, and in fact if all the Celtics stay healthy and are all at their very best, I personally believe that they can win 4-1 or 4-2 at worst. And to be honest I wouldn't be surprised if they even swept them... Even if I don't think it will happen. Anyhow the Celtics have a much better chemistry, they are the deepest team, they are more experienced. And defensively the Heat showed that they could have a terrific defense but their D lacks of regularity. So I also give an advantage to Boston here as well. It doesn't mean that they will win for sure but Boston is definitely the better team overall IMO.

The Grizzlies never cease to astound me... This team really is unbelievable. In the first round, I thought that they would be a tough match up for the Spurs but that San Antonio would eventually win at the end of game 6 or 7. Well not only Memphis won but they clearly DOMINATED the Spurs. They should even have won 4-1 if the Spurs didn't steal game 5. I was a bit scared for the Grizz at the end of game 6, when the Spurs took the lead, but Memphis reacted rightaway, they played like an expericend team. And Zack has just been fantastic... So today I certailny can't say that I'm surprised to see them leading so far. And I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Memphis went to the WCF. Besides when we look at it, they are even an overall better team than the Thunder. They have a better chemistry, defense and bench than them, and Zack Randolph is for me the playoffs MVP so far. So honestly Westbrooks better wake up or else... I'm even starting to believe that the Grizzlies could make the Finals. Okay I'm exaggerating a bit and to be perfectly honest I believe that the winner of Mavs-Lakers will be the West champs, but if Memphis keep playing that well who knows... Well I love both Memphis and OKC anyhow, so whatever happens I'm sure I'm gonna enjoy this series.

Yesterday I watched The Hunt for Red October. http://jierem.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/Posters/hunt_for_red_october.jpg Very entertaining movie, I usually like McTiernan's movies and Connery is one of my fav actors so I wasn't disappointed one bit by the movie. Not a masterpiece but very good nonetheless I give it a 8/10. And today I rewatched Ghostbusters. http://www.miwim.fr/blog/wp-content/uploads/yopadato/decembre2009/sos-fantomes-3-ghostbusters-sigourney-weaver.png One of the movies I watched the most. It was my favorite movie when I was a kid, with Back to the Future and The Goonies. Ghostbusters will always be a special movie to me. It's even the movie that made me discover and love New York City (if I ain't mistaken, it was a VERY long time ago so I ain't sure anymore but I'm almost sure lol). A movie I will always enjoy to watch. So it might not deserve it but I can only give it a 10/10.

Well the first thing I want to say here is that, as I said many times before, it is totally impossible to make a 100% accurate top 10 greatest players of All Time. It is a subjective thing. As a matter of fact if you ask ten people who the ten best players of All Time are, you will have ten different lists. Not entirely different, there will be some similiraties in the list, but you won't have two lists that are exactly the same. I have never seen two lists that were the same so far anyhow. The fact is that no one can assert that one player in particular is the best of All Time for sure. There are just way too many things to consider. Besides basketball is first of all a collective game, teams win rings not players, and people tend to forget about that too easily. In collective games it's easy to say that a team is the best, it's obviously the team that wins the ring. It's a lot harder to say who's the best player as the players are part of the team. Of course sometimes it's obvious, like Jordan was the best player of the 90's but in some other cases it's way more complicated and just impossible to tell. Like for who's the best between Malone and Barkley for example a case can definitely be made for both players.If all the players played each other on one on one it wouldn't be the same but the fact is that it's not the case. Besides if we can tell for sure what's the best team for each season (as again it's the team that won the ring) it's a lot harder to say that a team was the best of All Time. As a matter of fact most of the greatest teams of All Time didn't play against each other so we cannot say for sure who's the best. The 96 Bulls never played against the 72 Lakers, the 63 Celtics never played against the 83 Sixers, the 1986 Celtics never played against the 2001 Lakers, etc... We can only speculate about that but we just cannot tell for sure. That's a fact. So as we cannot assert that one team was the best of All Time how could we say that one player was the best of All Time ? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. We can name a few teams and say that those teams are among the best, just like we can give a few names of players who had the biggest impact on their teams and tended to dominate other players but we just cannot say that one particular team or one particular player is the best for sure. Now I have my top ten list but there is no way that I will say that those players are the best of All Time for sure. For me the greatest players ever are the one who impressed me the most. And there are in particular seven players that impressed me more than the others, those players are Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Shaquille O'Neal and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. For me the best player of All Time is among those seven players. This because no one dominated the league as much as they did. Jordan dominated the 90's. I hear often that Jordan had a lot of help and that the 90's were not competitive but it's just totally asinine to say something like that and those people obviously didn't watch basketball in that decade. First of all the game was DEFINITELY as competitive as it is today, and I personally believe that it was actually even more competitive than today's NBA. People are often blinded by the fact that the Bulls dominated the era and tend to think that it's because they were the only good team at the time but it's FAR from the truth. The thing is that the Bulls won that much because they were just too strong. But there were a lot of other amazing teams in the 90's, teams like the 93 Suns, 97/98 Jazz, 91/94 Knicks, 98 Pacers, 92 Blazers, etc... And I am personally sure that if those teams played in the 2000's they would have won several rings. Then about Jordan's help well of course he had half there is NO PLAYER IN THE NBA HISTORY THAT WON WITHOUT GOOD TEAMMATES. Which is totally logical as, again, basketball is a collective game... And what puts Jordan ahead of many great players is in my opinion is fantastic playoffs records. Yes the most impressive thing about Jordan is that he is the only player from the 80's/90's/2000's to do things that only players from other eras did. If you look at his scoring records in the playoffs for example (I mentioned them in a lot of other threads so I ain't gonna post them here) for example you'll see that the players who are the closest to them are all from another era, players like West, Chamberlain or Baylor... Which is even more impressive. Bird and Magic dominated the 80's. The Golden era of basketball. There is something that I never understand is why most people put Magic on top of their list and Bird always as a 8th-10th best player of All Time... Doesn't make any sense to me. I would really like to know what Magic had that Bird didn't. They were both as good passers, ball handlers, leaders... In fact the major difference between the two was that Bird was a much better scorer and shooter. So if anything Bird should be considered as a better player. In fact most people think that Magic was clearly the better player of the two because he won more rings... But the fact is that the Lakers won those two more rings, not Magic alone... People are often blinded by rings. The fact is that they were both the player of the decade, it's just impossible to say that one of them was clearly better than the other. Besides people often forget of how AMAZING Bird was at the beginning of the 80's before his injuries. He was still terrific of course but before those injuries Bird was absolutely outstanding, at the time the Celtics played the Erving's Sixers every year. I suggest that people should watch those games to realize what kind of player he truly was.. Russell and Wilt dominated the 60's. Okay I often hear that it was another era, that there was less competition and that those players wouldn't have the same records in our era... Well I agree to some extent. Of course I do not believe that Wilt and Russell would average 25 RPG or Wilt 50 PPG in today's game. But I definitely believe that both players could dominate in today's game. And would be at least the best inside players today or even the best players. Sure human beings evolve and today's stars are stronger than ever but let's not exaggerate at the same time, the 60's were only 50 years ago, mankind hasn't evolve a lot since then... Besides most of the people who think that Wilt or Bill would be like Camby in today's game are actually young people who started to watch this game a couple of years ago.. The people who actually followed the game in this era never use this argument. And it's true that there was less competition in those days but that doesn't mean at the same time that Bill and Wilt wouldn't have dominated that much if there were more competition... We just can't know. Now it's true that it was another era, we cannot bypass this fact, but it's also important not to exaggerate, to keep in mind that it wasn't THAT different. Besides it's not like Bill and Wilt even choose to play in this era, so it would be totally unfair to blame them for that... Only Shaq and Jordan dominated as much as Wilt and Bill is arguably the best defender and leader ever. And one of the most intelligent basketball player of the history of the game.They both definitely can be considered as the best player ever. A case can be made for each. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar dominated the 70's. His palmarès is probably the most impressive in the history of the league. And his move, the Sky Hook is considered by many as the most unstoppable move in the NBA history. Actually even Darryl "Chocolate Thunder" Dawkins said once that he even dreamed of the Sky Hook at night. Shaquille O'Neal is for me kinda underrated as a few people think that he's a top 5 players ever. I sure think that a case can definitely be made for him. I think that a lot of people are blinded by the fact that he has only one MVP. Something that doesn't matter one bit to me, it's not because some people decided that he wasn't a MVP the other years necessarily means that they were right. The fact is that between 98 and 2006 Shaq could have been MVP EACH YEAR, he was clearly the best player in the world and that's all what matters to me. That's why I never take the awards in consideration and rather trust what I saw with my own eyes... Anyhow few people realize how great Shaq truly was at his prime. How dominant he truly was. During the early 2000's if the Lakers wanted to win all they had to do was to give him the ball. Ron Harper, who played with both Jordan and Shaq even said that for him Shaq was the better of the two. I disagree with him, but it still means something... Shaq is one of the very best scorer ever. The most impressive thing is his FG%. Shaq is second All Time for FG%. Only two players in NBA history have ever led the league in scoring and FG% the same season. They are Shaq and Wilt. Shaq has led the league in FG% 9 times. (tied with Wilt for most all time). Only 3 players have won championships while being the scoring champ, and those players are Kareem, MJ, and Shaq. It's in the Finals that we see how FANTASTIC a player Shaq really was. Shaquille O'Neal's performances in the three Finals between 2000 and 2002 are unquestionably the most dominant performances in NBA Finals history. Let's take a look at them statistically : 2000 : 38 PPG, 16.7 RPG, 2.3 APG, 2.7 BPG, 61.1 FG% 2001 : 33 PPG, 15.8 RPG, 4.8 APG, 3.4 BPG, 57.3 FG% 2002 : 36.3 PPG, 12.3 RPG, 3.8 APG, 2.8 BPG, 59.5 FG% Now let's compare them with MJ's best Finals performance (everyone agrees that it's the 93 ones against Phoenix) : 41 PPG, 8.5RPG, 6.3 APG, 1.7 SPG, 51 FG% We can definitely assert that Shaq's performances were just as dominant as the player's who is considered by many as the greatest of All Time. During the Lakers' first three peat Shaq's worst shooting performance was 52 FG% in two games, he had 36 pts, 21 rbds in one, 34 pts, 14 rbds in the other. His lowest scoring game during that same three peat was 28 pts. During that game he also had 20 rbds, 9 asts and 8 blks (NBA Finals record). During the three peat Shaq had several NBA records : 1st All Time in FG% in Finals history 60.1 FG% Most blocks in a game- 8 (tied with 2 others) Most FT attempted in a game, half, and quarter Most FTs made in a half Most points scored in a 4 game series- 145 pts Most FTs made and attempted in a 4 game series At his prime Shaq was just unbelievable. I love Kobe but he just didn't impress me as much as those seven other players. So personally I would personally put Kobe at number 8 at best. Yes in my opinion it's a toss up between him, Olajuwon, Duncan, Erving, Baylor, Robertson and West for number 8. But again that's just my list and I can admit that a case can be made for Kobe as a top 5 player ever. When we look at his career it's hard to imagine how it could have been better than that and that's what matters the most. It's not really important to know who, among all the greatest stars of the history of the game, is better than the others, they all had terrific careers and all help the game of basketball to get even better and that's the only important thing to me.

What a great game ! That game sure made my day to be honest lol. Even if I said in another thread that I believed that the Grizzlies stood a chance in that series, well.. I honestly can't believe that they actually lead 2-1 now... Awesome. The Spurs are now in a very bad situation, it's gonna be very hard for them to win this series. The Grizzlies are playing very, VERY well. It is honestly time to realize it now : http://www.spurssuck.com/images/spurs-suck_vm0i.jpg Anyway lol watever happens it sure is a great series. I wouldn't be surprised to see seven games in that series.. Go Grizzlies !!!

Most horrible game of the playoffs so far for sure... For me at least. Honestly I say all the time that I miss the 90's but I miss them even more now. If it was the 90's you'd have four or five Celtics on the injury list by now... I miss our violent defense... I've always said that the hatred that most people have for D'Antoni was definitely exaggerated, just like it was exaggerated that people called him a genius when he was in Phoenix, but still I didn't like it when I heard that the Knicks hired him. I wanted a defensive coach at the time and I still do. I love huge defense. Especially during the playoffs. And I missed it even more in the first three games... So I hope for D'Antoni that he will have some success (wether it's as a head or assistant coach..) but with another team. I'm not just saying that because Rivers has done a much better job than him in those playoffs (it's not surprising anyway...) but I just want huge defense back in the Garden. Especially that D'Antoni's offense is not made for Melo as he's better in a half court offense system. So, just like most Knicks fans, I hope that we're gonna get another coach this summer. That would be great if Pat Riley (I certainly don't believe he will get back here though...) or Van Gundy (Jeff of course, definitely not his brother...) could get back next year. Now we still did a good job in the first two games despite all the injury troubles we got. But tonight... It's just too bad that we had our worst game in the Madison. The Celtics are gonna win this series (I'm still gonna root for us till the end though) but all I hope now is that we win game 4. I don't want this series to be like the 2004 Knicks-Nets, I want us to AT LEAST win one game. At home. It's gonna be hard as Billups won't probably play and Stats might miss the game too... Honestly it was a HUGE mistake to make him play last night. Not only he was totally useless but being in his condition he needed some rest. I certainly don't understand that... Well anyhow I hope we're gonna give all what we got and win this game 4. Like the Sonics did in the 96 Finals, when they lost the three first games (and got blown out in the third...) and were like a totally different team in games 4 and 5. Before eventually losing the series in game 6... Well whatever happens I still have hope about our future. We played eye to eye against the mighty C's in the first two games despite our injury troubles and we have now a solid base to build around. That's the most important thing. Now back to Boston I definitely don't understand how so many people thought that we would beat that team before the series. Most people consider them done because they don't have Perk and they weren't very good in the last games of the regular season... Don't make sense to me. First of all last year the C's didn't end the season very well too yet they got to the Finals and almost won another ring... Second, even if Perk was important in the Celtics defense, let's not overrate him at the same time... He's certainly not PP, Ray, KG or Rondo. The C's can definitely win without him, there's no doubt about that. I am not surprised one bit to see Boston winning this series. Just like I wouldn't be surprised if they won another ring this year. The fact is that, in the East, Boston is the team to beat. Before the playoffs my prediction for the ECF was a Celtics-Bulls and I haven't changed my mind about it. I see them winning against the Heat in the semis. This is gonna be a very interesting series to watch anyhow. Well anyway Knicks-Celtics is not over yet, and again I hope that there will be at least a game 5... Let's win game 4 !!!

Battier in this game made me http://i54.tinypic.com/ws7oyg.gif

Quite a nice game so far. Glad to see the Grizzlies leading by two at the half. They've been quite impressive especially defensively... I agree with ABL this series might definitely be close than most people think. Now good news for the Spurs Duncan seems to be at his very best. However I certainly do not believe that he can play at this level during all the playoffs games. Besides he cannot play as much as he used to. And this is gonna be the main problem for the Spurs in the playoffs. Of course they didn't need a Duncan at his best to be the best team in the regular season but the playoffs are different. It's there that you need your leader. You can have some success during the regular season without your best player but in the playoffs it's just impossible, you need your leader at his best. Now it's true that Ginobili can be their go to guy, he already had many times in the past, but, as good as Manu is (and he sure is), the fact is that he is not Tim Duncan. Besides, if he can make his team win all by himself, he also can make it lose all by himself... And that's the main reason why, even if I think that the Spurs will eventually beat the Grizzlies, I do not believe in San Antonio this year. And the Grizzlies definitely have a shot in this series, especially if Many were to miss more games... Well anyhow I hope the Grizzlies are gonna get this first game.

Yeah well you will change your mind when the Bulls beat the Spurs in the Finals... Oh wait it sure won't happen as the Spurs won't even pass the first round.

Wow, wow, wow... What a game. Pardon my French () but what a [expletive]ING GREAT GAME !!! Best game of the year so far, no doubt about that (for me at least). What a great way to start the playoffs. That's a terrible bummer for Indiana though. They dominated the whole game and lost at the very end... Very tough loss. It's gonna be very hard to get over it. It's gonna be interesting to see how they're gonna react in game 2. But anyway those playoffs start very well. Hope that Phila-Miami is gonna be as good. Looks that way so far as Philly is currently dominating Miami.

It's playoffs time, at last !!! Honestly the regular season is good but the playoffs are like a totally different season... I mean the NBA playoffs is the greatest basketball tournament in the world, the intensity is just unbelievable, there's no other tournament in the world that has such an incredible intensity. Best time of the year for sure. Nice to see the playoffs starting with this Bulls-Pacers series... Bulls-Pacers always remind me of that incredible 98 series, one of the very best series in the history of basketball. Anyway back to this first game it was a very good first half, it's a very enjoyable game so far. I was a bit scared before the game that Chicago dominate too easily (like most people I suppose) so I'm glad to see the Pacers playing that well. Even if I'm 100% for the Bulls, who are my favorite team, with Boston, in the East. Well that is, favorite team not named Knicks obviously... It's especially surprising to see the Pacers this good in this game as Granger has been quite invisible, I don't remember seeing him scoring more than 2 baskets... Collison has been literally amazing. And for Chicago only Rose, Boozer, Noah and Korver have done something in this first half... The rest of the team better wake up now. I hope the game is gonna stay close till the end though. But I doubt that... I expect the Bulls to play a much better defense in the third quarter honestly and I wouldn't be surprised to see them take a 10-15 points lead at the end of the third.. I hope I'm wrong though.

Recently I rewatched Barton Fink. http://unesemaine-unchapitre.com/public/barton.jpg A pure masterpiece. I don't know how many times I watched it... I can never get tired of it. My favorite movie from my favorite filmmakers, the Coen Brothers. Turturro and Goodman both have amazing performances in it, definitely among the best actor performances of All Time. Especially Goodman who's just beyond belief. Truly an amazing actor, among my very favorites. So I definitely give it a 10/10. Then I watched The Ghost Writer. http://images.fan-de-cinema.com/affiches/thriller/the_ghost_writer,0.jpg Very good movie, I liked it a lot. Polanski is one of my favorite filmmakers anyhow, I'm never disappointed by his movies. It's not my favorite of his movies (Chinatown is, followed by The Ninth Gate and The Tenant) but it was still a great movie, I advise it to anyone who hasn't watched it yet. I give it a 9/10.

This is IMO the only award where there's no easy choice. As a matter of fact it is now quite obvious that Rose will be MVP, Odom Sixth Man, Griffin ROY, Howard DPOY and Love MIP. I mean other players would deserve those awards as well, but those players just deserve it more than everybody else. So for COY it's a toss up between Thibodeau and Pop. Both coaches would deserve it indeed. However I would personally pick Gregg Popovich. As a matter of fact there is no doubt that Tom did a great job in Chicago indeed but still the main reason why the Bulls had such a great season is Derrick Rose. While Coach Popovich is the main reason why the Spurs had such a terrific season. As a matter of fact before the season started most people thought that the Spurs would be AT BEST a 7 or 8 seed in the West. Many even thought that the Spurs wouldn't make the playoffs at all. This first because Duncan is now on the downside of his career and was expected to have his worst season.. People were right about that, the Spurs leader had the worst season of his career indeed. But the team did great nonetheless. Which is the biggest surprise of the year. And Pop's great coaching deserves most of the credit for that IMO. In fact Pop managed to make his team the best team in the league this with NO LEGIT MVP CANDIDATE. The Spurs are actually only the second team in NBA history to manage to have the best record during the regular season with no serious MVP candidate. And probably even no player in the All NBA teams (Ginobili could be third team AT BEST but it's far from being certain..). The other team were the 89 Pistons. At least they had a player in the NBA All Defensive team (Dumars) though... The Spurs will have none for sure. That certainly gives more credit to Pop. And that is why I would personally give the award to Gregg Popovich this year.

Dennis Rodman is definitely a Hall of Famer. First of all the All Star selections are totally irrelevant here. As a matter of fact the people who decide who will get an NBA award are not necessarily right... For example we all know that Aldridge had an All Star year this season. Yet fans and coaches decided not to make him an All Star. Sure the other players deserved to be All Star as well but no more than LMA IMO. Many players would have deserved to be All Star this year but the fact is that they couldn't all be picked. Aldridge was one of the players who were not picked. But all of us know that he would have definitely deserved it. Yet it's one less All Star selection for him and in the future, people who didn't watch the game this year will probably think that LaMarcus wasn't All Star because he didn't deserve it... Things are not always as simple as they might seem. The fact is that Rodman would DEFINITELY have deserved to be All Star way more often. So again the All Star selections mean nothing at all. Besides it's very important to know that Rodman was quite hated and blacklisted at the time. Because of his behavior... So he had no chance to be picked in the first place. But everyone who watched the 90's know that he should have been picked every year between 92 (his last All Star selection) and 98. Everyone was outraged that he was not picked during that time. And knew that he was an All Star indeed. So that's at least 6 more All Star selections... Then it's certainly true that Rodman wouldn't have won in Chicago without Pip and Jordan. But would Pip and Jordan have won without him ? I certainly do not think so. It's quite simple : except from Rodman all the major players from the 96 team were already there in 95. Now of course Jordan had just come back in 95 but still, when we look at it his stats were already as good as it was the following years IN THE PLAYOFFS. In fact his FG% was even better than it was the following years... Yet the Bulls lost against the Magic in 6 games. You add Rodman to that team and they win three rings in a row. This DEFINITELY shows the importance of Rodman as a Bull. Furthermore in the 96 Finals Rodman was absolutely unbelievable. I don't think that any player in the history of the game had such an incredible defensive performance as he had in those Finals (except maybe Russell...). George Karl even said that it was ONLY because of Rodman that the Sonics lost games 2 and 6. Rodman grabbed 11 offensive rebounds in each of these two games which tied an NBA Finals records. As a matter of fact only Elvin Hayes also grabbed 11 offensive rebounds in one Finals game in 79. Rodman did it twice in the same Finals... And he got Kemp completely out of the game both times. Many people think that he should have been Finals MVP. I am one of them. Actually I think that he and Jordan should have been co-MVP and if Rodman alone was Finals MVP I have to say that it would have been fine by me. Then let's not forget that Rodman didn't play in Chicago all of his career and had already showed who he was in Detroit and San Antonio. Rodman won two rings with the Pistons. And at the time when the Bad Boys were the best team in the league only three players were All Stars, they were Thomas, Dumars and... yes Dennis Rodman (that was before he was considered as "crazy" and so still had a chance to be All Star...). This clearly shows how important Rodman was to that team (although it was quite obvious how important he was for the people who watched some Bad Boys games...). Now it is true that Rodman was not as "gifted", especially offensively, as other players, but that doesn't mean that he was not as important to his team than those players were to theirs... For example I had a debate with another poster once who was trying to convince me that the Bulls would have been better with Webber instead of Rodman as Webber was definitely a better player overall. Something that I highly disagreed with because even if Rodman was not as "good" as Webber I doubt that Webber would have done the same things that Rodman did. Rodman was not the superstar that C-Webb was, he couldn't do all the things that C-Webb could do, that is true, but the fact remains that he was the best at what he did best. That's why that, even if Webber would have done a lot of things that Rodman couldn't do, especially offensively of course, he would not have been able to be as efficient defensively and would not have gotten as much rebounds. Let's not forget about all the little things that Rodman did to help his team to win, like entering his opponents mind (as I already mentioned it earlier) to destabilize them. Rodman's impact on his team was always fantastic, better than a lot of players who were more "gifted" than him and that's what matters the most. Besides his defense definitely makes up for his lack of offense IMO, he's even arguably the best defender in NBA history (the only player that can be considered as better is Bill Russell IMO). And he's probably the only player in the NBA history who could guard any player, from point guard to center, just as efficiently. Dennis Rodman definitely deserves to be Hall of Famer, this is not arguable, and I'm glad that he's finally been elected.

Definitely one of those : http://www.smosh.com/PC/smosh-pit/photos/23-best-names-ever I can't believe that real people actually wear those names lol... More seriously I've always been attracted by American names. That's because I love the USA in the first place though... A name like Mike Tyson is just awesome. I love Native Americans names as well, I've always been fascinated by the Native American culture. Names like Sitting Bull or White Crow are great. But in all honesty I don't want to change my name at the same time. I'm perfectly fine with the name I got. Besides a name is in reality not very important... I'm just grateful that my name ain't Hiren, Charles Joseph or Umair, definitely the worst first names someone can have.

Jordan didn't end up in a winning team. As a matter of fact when he arrived in Chicago the Bulls were nothing. It's thanks to Jordan's impact that the Bulls became a playoffs team. The only player who wanted to win as much as Jordan at the beginning of his career was Oak who arrived in Jordan's second season which is why Oak is still to this day one of Mike's best friend. Other than that they had players like Corzine or Woolridge who were decent but no more than that, the rest of the team was just a bunch of scrubs. Jordan changed the entire team by himself. When he arrived in Chicago he said that the Bulls wouldn't miss the playoffs for as long as he would be here and that's exactly what he did. Even during his second season, he got injured and came back at the end to make his team a playoffs team once again. Jordan proved that he was a franchise player and then the Bulls built the team around him. I definitely agree with what you said here. It totally depends on the player. I would go even further, I think that, even if a veteran or winning presence can have an impact on a player to some extent, being a winner or loser is not something that you can be taught. Either you are one, either you ain't. Jordan was a true winner and he would do anything to do to make his team wins, no matter who his teammates are. On the other hand you have players like DC (Derrick Coleman), players who are amazingly talented (could have been easily one of the best PFs ever) but sadly only care for the money and don't want to do the extra effort to make their team wins. No matter who their teammates are. It's definitely all about the player's mentality.

No argument there. Definitely in my top 10 movies list, and my second favorite Scorses movie ever. Pure masterpiece indeed. I usually ain't a big fan of biographical movies cause in those movies the filmmaker tend to exaggerate the truth, to make the person look better than he/she really was... Like in the movie The Doors for example, there's a scene in which Densmore, Krieger and Manzarek sell Light My Fire for a commercial. And we see Jim Morrison furious that they did such a thing. Well the fact is that it never happened. John, Robby and Ray considered doing it but they eventually didn't.. Oliver Stone just made that up to glorify Morrison. But anyway Raging Bull is a different biographical movie. First Giaccobe LaMotta (AKA Jake LaMotta) himself supervized the movie and helped De Niro during the shooting of the movie (he even said that De Niro could have been a real boxer) but the least that we can say is that he's not glorified in it.. A few things were changed though. Like in the scene I posted, we see LaMotta accusing his brother to "[expletive] his wife" then beat the shit outta him. Well in fact Jake really did that but not to his brother Giuseppe (AKA Joe LaMotta) but to his best friend Pete. But it's not important... The main point of this movie is rather to show the fight of a man with his inner demons. And the least that we can say is that it's a total success... Amazing, just amazing. Sir, have you been drinking ? Lol alright I might have exaggerated a bit but honestly... I can't agree with you about that. She's definitely not a good actress IMO. I mean all what she does is frowning during the whole movie... She's totally emotionless. I definitely hope I won't see her in another movie again lol. Lol yeah that was weird, that's true. But at the same time it's first of all a kid's movie so I'm fine with it. Yes Sir first time. htown advised me to watch it and I have to say that he was right for once (). Very good movie indeed.

So lately I rewatched Raging Bull. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_IopqgrGpWhQ/SWaVl-THyBI/AAAAAAAABis/P5HuSxuCmC8/s400/Raging_Bull_poster.jpg Awesome movie I don't know how many times I watched it, one of my very favorite movies. Pure masterpiece. De Niro and Pesci are just unbelievable in it. This is my favorite scene of the movie : One of my favorite movie scenes ever. Totallly improvised by Pesci and De Niro, it's just great. So I definitely give it a 10/10. I also watched Alice in Wonderland. http://www.sewersurfer.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/alice_in_wonderland_ver6.jpg I was quite disappointed by it to be honest. I'm a huge fan of Tim Burton (and Depp) and this one was clearly not as good as his usual work IMO. Still a nice movie, very good graphics, but no more than that. The original version is much better. And the actress who plays Alice is just terrible, honestly... Don't know why Burton picked her. So I'm gonna give it a 6/10. Then I watched Network. http://atthemovieswithbillyandbrian.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/network-movie-poster1.jpg Very good movie, I had a good time watching it. The actors are all great, a very interesting view of the television network, very good satirical movie indeed. I'll give it a 9/10.

Yeah you're right, I'm no longer a fan of this sport but at the time I was still one it was still 2 substitutions... They changed that in the mid 90's. Which is why I was mistaken. I still watch some games from time to time now (only during World Cup though and not all the games...) so I'm aware of this change it's just totally slipped my mind. The only sport I'm interested in now is basketball. Yeah I know there are no time outs in soccer, I grew up watching this sport so I know about that more than everybody else here.. I just didn't word that correctly at all my bad. In fact I meant "break of play" instead of time outs. By the way it's true that it doesn't exactly put back the exact amount of time lost, but certainly not by no means... It's almost the same amount of time that was lost. Besides as I said those breaks of play are always not very long. So whatever happens at least eight players play 90 minutes per game in soccer.