misterearl wrote:Slow Your Cinnamon Roll

loweyecue wrote:Excellence? Now we are comparing to Russle's Celtics and Magic's Lakers? Exactly what have the Knicks done? Second in the East? Big Whooopdedo.
First prove you have even the faintest claim to excellence THEN talk about sustaining it.

loweyecue: the comparison was only used to certify 50 wins as a standard of excellence. Mike Woodson needs 6 more wins to get us there for the first time in a dozen years. Before 2000, our beloved Knicks have not had consecutive 50 win seasons since 1991-1994.

Nowhere were the 2013 Knicks put on the same pedestal with those Celtics or Lakers teams. Rather than rushing to judge, you may want to slow down as you read and allow your comprehension skills to breathe.

Can Mike Woodson get 50 wins and replicate that standard for three more years?

BS.

The only reason those teams achieved excellence was because of what they went on to go AFTER their 50 win regular season. 50 wins is NOT a standard of excellence it's BS. And by trying to make it look like we are on the same track that they were you ABSOLUTELY DID COMPARE us to them.
Making arguments you don't fully understand will typically lead to results like this.

loweyecue wrote:

misterearl wrote:Slow Your Cinnamon Roll

loweyecue wrote:Excellence? Now we are comparing to Russle's Celtics and Magic's Lakers? Exactly what have the Knicks done? Second in the East? Big Whooopdedo.
First prove you have even the faintest claim to excellence THEN talk about sustaining it.

loweyecue: the comparison was only used to certify 50 wins as a standard of excellence. Mike Woodson needs 6 more wins to get us there for the first time in a dozen years. Before 2000, our beloved Knicks have not had consecutive 50 win seasons since 1991-1994.

Nowhere were the 2013 Knicks put on the same pedestal with those Celtics or Lakers teams. Rather than rushing to judge, you may want to slow down as you read and allow your comprehension skills to breathe.

Can Mike Woodson get 50 wins and replicate that standard for three more years?

BS.

The only reason those teams achieved excellence was because of what they went on to go AFTER their 50 win regular season. 50 wins is NOT a standard of excellence it's BS. And by trying to make it look like we are on the same track that they were you ABSOLUTELY DID COMPARE us to them.
Making arguments you don't fully understand will typically lead to results like this.

BR.

Basketball Reference.
Don't like arguments based on comparisons to proven winners, how about the other side of the equation?

Hawks --> only time they reach the Semis? 50 win seasons 09-10, 93-98, 85-89.
Nets --> only time they win anything? 50 win seasons 73-76, 01-03, won the ABA, went to the Finals.
Cavs --> only time they win anything? 50 win seasons 05-09, went to the Finals and the ECF
Cats --> Number of 50 win seasons? Guess.
Pistons --> 50 win seasons 7 times, won Finals
Warriors --> only 2 50 win seasons. Guess what? only got to the First Round.
Clips --> 2 50 win seasons, only time they made it to the Semis.
Wolves --> 4 50 win seasons, made it to the WCF
Magic --> 7 50 win seasons, made it to the ECF twice, lost Finals.
Suns --> 14 50 win seasons, WCF 4 times, Finals once.
Raptors --> 0 50 win seasons, Semis one time.
Kings --> 5 50 win seasons, WCF once, Semis twice.

Maybe one needs to understand the term "bullshit" before one flings it.

50 wins obviously means something. Winning isn't like a stomach flu. It takes time and it takes doing it long term, like say, sustained over 3 or 4 years.

De nada.

jrodmc wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

misterearl wrote:Slow Your Cinnamon Roll

loweyecue wrote:Excellence? Now we are comparing to Russle's Celtics and Magic's Lakers? Exactly what have the Knicks done? Second in the East? Big Whooopdedo.
First prove you have even the faintest claim to excellence THEN talk about sustaining it.

loweyecue: the comparison was only used to certify 50 wins as a standard of excellence. Mike Woodson needs 6 more wins to get us there for the first time in a dozen years. Before 2000, our beloved Knicks have not had consecutive 50 win seasons since 1991-1994.

Nowhere were the 2013 Knicks put on the same pedestal with those Celtics or Lakers teams. Rather than rushing to judge, you may want to slow down as you read and allow your comprehension skills to breathe.

Can Mike Woodson get 50 wins and replicate that standard for three more years?

BS.

The only reason those teams achieved excellence was because of what they went on to go AFTER their 50 win regular season. 50 wins is NOT a standard of excellence it's BS. And by trying to make it look like we are on the same track that they were you ABSOLUTELY DID COMPARE us to them.
Making arguments you don't fully understand will typically lead to results like this.

BR.

Basketball Reference.
Don't like arguments based on comparisons to proven winners, how about the other side of the equation?

Hawks --> only time they reach the Semis? 50 win seasons 09-10, 93-98, 85-89.
Nets --> only time they win anything? 50 win seasons 73-76, 01-03, won the ABA, went to the Finals.
Cavs --> only time they win anything? 50 win seasons 05-09, went to the Finals and the ECF
Cats --> Number of 50 win seasons? Guess.
Pistons --> 50 win seasons 7 times, won Finals
Warriors --> only 2 50 win seasons. Guess what? only got to the First Round.
Clips --> 2 50 win seasons, only time they made it to the Semis.
Wolves --> 4 50 win seasons, made it to the WCF
Magic --> 7 50 win seasons, made it to the ECF twice, lost Finals.
Suns --> 14 50 win seasons, WCF 4 times, Finals once.
Raptors --> 0 50 win seasons, Semis one time.
Kings --> 5 50 win seasons, WCF once, Semis twice.

Maybe one needs to understand the term "bullshit" before one flings it.

50 wins obviously means something. Winning isn't like a stomach flu. It takes time and it takes doing it long term, like say, sustained over 3 or 4 years.

De nada.

Did you look up examles of teams that win 50 games and didnt do Jack Shit? Way to get on your high horse with a confirmation bias.
I called BS because 50 wins was being equated to EXCELLENSE. That may be your standard for it, mine are a somewhat higher.

ActionJackson wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:Sustained excellence?

They beat the Magic and Raptors, let's cool the jets a little

Also the Jazz. Substitute Nets and Wizards in and this would be called linsanity a year ago

Lol

we're dropping 4 of the next 5 though,

don't see us beating Celtics, Grizz or Heat

How come dudes around here go all Radio Silence, when their Nostradamus type crap is disproven???

Because it's a little happy blip from a fundamentally flawed team,

they felt like playing a little again, big whoop, the basic problems with leadership and attitude have not changed

ActionJackson wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:Because it's a little happy blip from a fundamentally flawed team,

they felt like playing a little again, big whoop, the basic problems with leadership and attitude have not changed

But it still doesnt explain why YOU have to get called out in order to, as they say "Man Up" and admit that your 4 out of 5 prediction was total crap. And you know what if we 50 or so Happy little blips in our Win column at the end of the year something must be right with the leadership & attitude or where you "predicting" that we would go 73-9 & beat the Bulls record if Gallo, Chandler & Moz had stayed.

I don't have to 'get called out', you're just one guy that's very excited

misterearl wrote:Make that two

I don't have to 'get called out', you're just one guy that's very excited

Isn't it exciting enough to have a squad that plays imperfectly hard every night... for a consistent coach who defies the second-guessers and trusts his veterans to exemplify accountability?

It's all in the context and frame. There are many different types of fans

IronWillGiroud wrote:

ActionJackson wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:Because it's a little happy blip from a fundamentally flawed team,

they felt like playing a little again, big whoop, the basic problems with leadership and attitude have not changed

But it still doesnt explain why YOU have to get called out in order to, as they say "Man Up" and admit that your 4 out of 5 prediction was total crap. And you know what if we 50 or so Happy little blips in our Win column at the end of the year something must be right with the leadership & attitude or where you "predicting" that we would go 73-9 & beat the Bulls record if Gallo, Chandler & Moz had stayed.

I don't have to 'get called out', you're just one guy that's very excited

The win streak equaled the linsanity run and this year it is helping the Knicks win the division title.

IronWillGiroud wrote:I don't have to 'get called out', you're just one guy that's very excited

I may be excited thats what actually liking your team does but the fact remains how come you can't just be "one guy" who has the stones to say "you know what fellas, I WAS WRONG about us losing 4 out of our next 5. I was really hoping we would tank so I could say I told you so because I'm just that sort of self righteous blowhard but in this case I miscalculated the resolve of players who I castigate all the time even though I don't really know them on any real substantive level other than the crap I read on blogs or in bastions of journalism like the NY Post. In the future I'll keep my big yap shut!!!"

loweyecue wrote:

misterearl wrote:Slow Your Cinnamon Roll

loweyecue wrote:Excellence? Now we are comparing to Russle's Celtics and Magic's Lakers? Exactly what have the Knicks done? Second in the East? Big Whooopdedo.
First prove you have even the faintest claim to excellence THEN talk about sustaining it.

loweyecue: the comparison was only used to certify 50 wins as a standard of excellence. Mike Woodson needs 6 more wins to get us there for the first time in a dozen years. Before 2000, our beloved Knicks have not had consecutive 50 win seasons since 1991-1994.

Nowhere were the 2013 Knicks put on the same pedestal with those Celtics or Lakers teams. Rather than rushing to judge, you may want to slow down as you read and allow your comprehension skills to breathe.

Can Mike Woodson get 50 wins and replicate that standard for three more years?

BS.

The only reason those teams achieved excellence was because of what they went on to go AFTER their 50 win regular season. 50 wins is NOT a standard of excellence it's BS. And by trying to make it look like we are on the same track that they were you ABSOLUTELY DID COMPARE us to them.
Making arguments you don't fully understand will typically lead to results like this.

EXACTLY...