andre smoothwhite Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Portland over Dallas baby and Memphis over San Antonio maybe.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guru Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Would have easssiily happened if the Knicks didn't get hit with injuries. Celtics still blow.lol weak excuse for getting SWEPT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 lol weak excuse for getting SWEPTNot an excuse at all, just a fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Bomba Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Except for the fact that the Knicks were playing like shit going into the playoffs. If they weren't hit with injuries, they might of not gotten embarrassed, but they still would of lost the series rather easily. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guru Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 (edited) Not an excuse at all, just a fact.Really? The Knicks would have won the series if nobody got injured? WTF. Â I don't even know what to say to you at this point. Edited April 25, 2011 by Guru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Except for the fact that the Knicks were playing like shit going into the playoffs. If they weren't hit with injuries, they might of not gotten embarrassed, but they still would of lost the series rather easily.The Knicks won 7 of their last 9 games going into the playoffs, I guess that's playing like shit. You obviously didn't watch the series, the first game came down to a three by Allen and Billups getting injured in the final minutes which ended up being huge. Second game Amare left early and the Knicks were a layup from Jeffries to win the game. It's tough to win when 2 of your 3 best players don't play, especially when the rest of the team are scrubs. This seris would have been a sweep from the NY if Billups and Amare played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Really? The Knicks would have won the series if nobody got injured? WTF. Â I don't even know what to say to you at this point.Yup. You don't need to say anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guru Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Man you sound sooooooo stupid right now. Please explain what happened in game 3. PLEASE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AboveLegit Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 The Knicks won 7 of their last 9 games going into the playoffs, I guess that's playing like shit. You obviously didn't watch the series, the first game came down to a three by Allen and Billups getting injured in the final minutes which ended up being huge. Second game Amare left early and the Knicks were a layup from Jeffries to win the game. It's tough to win when 2 of your 3 best players don't play, especially when the rest of the team are scrubs. This seris would have been a sweep from the NY if Billups and Amare played.Melo had a terrible game 1 and game 3. Billups was playing like shit in the first game, and the Celtics defense held them to under 100 points every game.  Officiating was pretty bad throughout the series, but it didn't always favor Boston. It as in favor of NYK during the 3rd quarter comeback today, yet they didn't get it done. Boston is just the superior team, when Pierce and Allen are shooting the way they have been, and when Rondo is staying aggressive, they are a legitimate contender in the East. You're foolish if you think New York would sweep them, much less beat them in a 7 game series. The Big Three won't lose in the first round of the playoffs, no way.  Stop with these BS excuses such as player X was injured, the fact is, Boston is the superior team no matter what the scenario happens to be.  And speaking of the Knicks winning 7 of their last 9 before the playoffs, let's take a look at who they faced. Orlando (won in OT)Nets (won by 4 without Deron)Cavs (won)Raptors (won)76ers (won by 5)Nets (won)Pacers (won by 1)Bulls (lost by 13)Celtics (lost by 10) Their defense is atrocious. Through that 9 game stretch, only twice did their opponent not reach 100 points. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Man you sound sooooooo stupid right now. Please explain what happened in game 3. PLEASE.Billups didn't play and Amare was playing while he was still injured. I don't get what's so ridiculous that I'm saying, I don't really feel like posting what I just posted a few minutes ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guru Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Melo had a terrible game 1 and game 3. Billups was playing like shit in the first game, and the Celtics defense held them to under 100 points every game.  Officiating was pretty bad throughout the series, but it didn't always favor Boston. It as in favor of NYK during the 3rd quarter comeback today, yet they didn't get it done. Boston is just the superior team, when Pierce and Allen are shooting the way they have been, and when Rondo is staying aggressive, they are a legitimate contender in the East. You're foolish if you think New York would sweep them, much less beat them in a 7 game series. The Big Three won't lose in the first round of the playoffs, no way.  Stop with these BS excuses such as player X was injured, the fact is, Boston is the superior team no matter what the scenario happens to be.  And speaking of the Knicks winning 7 of their last 9 before the playoffs, let's take a look at who they faced. Orlando (won in OT)Nets (won by 4 without Deron)Cavs (won)Raptors (won)76ers (won by 5)Nets (won)Pacers (won by 1)Bulls (lost by 13)Celtics (lost by 10) Their defense is atrocious. Through that 9 game stretch, only twice did their opponent not reach 100 points.That pretty much sums it up. Boston > NY. It is that [expletive]ing simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 LOL, you can't tell me this series wouldn't have been different if Billips and Amare had played. These aren't excuses, if two of your stars get injured, it's definitely going to effect the series. Game 1, Rondo was held in check to only 10 points and 9 assists when Billups played. Games 2 and 3 he explodes when Douglas and Carter are asked to defend him. Maybe the Knicks wouldn't have won the series but it would have gone to 6 or 7 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AboveLegit Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 LOL, you can't tell me this series wouldn't have been different if Billips and Amare had played. These aren't excuses, if two of your stars get injured, it's definitely going to effect the series. Game 1, Rondo was held in check to only 10 points and 9 assists when Billups played. Games 2 and 3 he explodes when Douglas and Carter are asked to defend him. Maybe the Knicks wouldn't have won the series but it would have gone to 6 or 7 games.I never said the series wouldn't have been different, they may have been able to pull off a win or two at home, but that's it. The Knicks were not going to beat Boston, absolutely no way. You were acting all confident before the series started saying the Knicks will beat them, and when they eventually got swept, you began to bring up injuries and gave no credit to the Celtics who pulled off the first sweep of the playoffs after ending the regular season so poorly. Â This team is simply built to win in the postseason, everyone in that starting line up has so much experience and have tremendous basketball IQ's, you know they will be ready to play in late April. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 I never said the series wouldn't have been different, they may have been able to pull off a win or two at home, but that's it. The Knicks were not going to beat Boston, absolutely no way. You were acting all confident before the series started saying the Knicks will beat them, and when they eventually got swept, you began to bring up injuries and gave no credit to the Celtics who pulled off the first sweep of the playoffs after ending the regular season so poorly.  This team is simply built to win in the postseason, everyone in that starting line up has so much experience and have tremendous basketball IQ's, you know they will be ready to play in late April. lol ok man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guru Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 lol ok manThis could have went so much smoother if you just admitted you were wrong. -_- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 This could have went so much smoother if you just admitted you were wrong. -_-How am I wrong? No one knows how the series would have went without injuries... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guru Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 How am I wrong? No one knows how the series would have went without injuries...  The Knicks will upset the Celtics, quote me. Injuries are a part of the game. That is the gayest excuse ever. It's funny because even Knick fans know that their chances of beating the Celtics were not that great. But for some reason or another you continue to blab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Make It Naaaashty Posted April 25, 2011 Report Share Posted April 25, 2011 Lmao.. Â I'm done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted April 26, 2011 Owner Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 Probably 4-2 in Boston's favor, with the entire Knicks team healthy.  The Celtics didn't go into the postseason injury-free, either: Shaq was a huge part of what they were trying to accomplish at one point, and granted Shaq is 60 years old, there's not a single player on the Knicks' roster that had a chance of defending him. Teams are difficult to figure out when injuries occur. Take the 2009 Houston Rockets and their series with the Lakers. Look at the current series the Lakers are in with the Hornets. See the current Grizzlies, without Gay. The new-look Cavaliers were a team nobody knew anything about coming into the season, and they pulled off an upset over the Celtics right out of the gates, and were around a .500 team for a while. Boston planned for a fully-loaded Knicks team, which takes guys like Jared Jeffries out of the equation. Doc Rivers would've never guessed Jeffries would have decent offensive games in 2-3 of those meetings, so Boston didn't plan on it. With Billups on the floor, they expected Melo to handle the ball a bit less, which helps Pierce save energy for his offensive production. When Game 2 arrived, Pierce didn't stand a chance on either end of the court. Melo came to play. Game 3? Different story, as Boston had 4-5 days to adjust to the Knicks not having Billups, plan on Melo trying to duplicate his Game 2 performance, and it paid off. At the end of the day, Boston wasn't the match-up the Knicks wanted. If it was between the Celtics and Heat, there's no question about it: D'Antoni would've wanted Miami. The Heat have weak play at the point and center positions, and Amare would've had his better games against Bosh. I wouldn't say they'd beat Miami, either, but they would've had a better chance in that series. Both Miami and Boston got what they wanted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted April 26, 2011 Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 I really dont see why everyone is so high on Memphis. They are a good team no doubt but they are not ready for the big stage. Hell do they even have anyone on that roster that has played an NBA playoff game? Let alone upset the Spurs when they have HCA or the defending champions?People seem to forget the Spurs have only lost 5 games at home and at least 1 of those games 1 or more of the big three didn't play. Whether it's LA or SA that series goes 5 MAX. Not even Dallas could choke away that series with HC.  Well, you may be right on that one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckets! Posted April 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 Grizzlies, YAY! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch23 Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 I was wrong as shit! I completely underestimated the Grizzlies. Â Anyway now that I am over my mourning period I must say I am rooting very hard for Memphis. They have an increible team! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abro Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Awesome that memphis upset! and I like the dallas "upset" if you want to call it that. Now I'm hoping for a bulls upset. Haha. That would be crazy to see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andre smoothwhite Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Told yall i said memphis would take down the spurs and they did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abro Posted May 11, 2011 Report Share Posted May 11, 2011 ^ And I'm happy about it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.