Where did I "cry" VEL? Combatting your incorrect comments with fact is crying? I guess I've been crying this whole thread then.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VEL
and The Sonics are a good team because they had a better record then the Celtics? So, then that would make the seahawks a bad team because they did worse then the Pats?
|
LOL WHAT? We're talking about the 2005 season right? Do you watch basketball? The Sonics not only had a better record in a much tougher conference but advanced to the second round in said conference. The Celtics were a first round exit against a #6 seed who lacked their best player. Yes, the Sonics were a good team. Not because they had a better record than the Celtics. They won their division and advanced to the second round, losing only to the team that won the NBA Finals. The Sonics were a good team.
I used the words "bad" or "good" nowhere. I simply said that Sonics > Celtics. And obviously Pats > Hawks. That doesn't mean the Hawks were bad they were just much shittier than the Pats.
Yes you're entitled to your opinion, you have provided no support for it which is why you're looking dumb here. You originally said that Hafner had worse stats than Ortiz, then when I provided meaningful stats to combat your pointless ones you didn't respond. Then you said Hafner couldn't be MVP because he wasn't there to help his team. I asked you if Ortiz missed the time Hafner did would you vote for someone else. You didn;t respond to that either.
I'm sure in your response you will flame me or say I'm crying or whatever, but I want to make a special request you answer this question this time. I'll even put it in bold for you.
If David Ortiz missed 2 weeks due to injury like Travis Hafner did, would you then not select Ortiz as your MVP?
We already know you are a homer, but if the answer is no, you are a hypocrite.