Cheesewater
(ex-Uriah Heep)
Yes. The Lakers, the Celtics, the Heat, those are the heroic teams with brightly colored costumes and likeable [sic] characters.
The Past 25 Years In The NBA - It's Fantastic For 6 Teams
- Thread starter Gee!
- Start date
Yes. The Lakers, the Celtics, the Heat, those are the heroic teams with brightly colored costumes and likeable [sic] characters.
Errntknght
Registered User
as a matter of (spurious) interest, what does [sic] mean when it is not in a quotation?
S_Nash
Funky Fresh
Same thing it means in quotations.
Likeable is not the right word in there. (Unless you support those teams/players"
Likeable is not the right word in there. (Unless you support those teams/players"
Errntknght
Registered User
In a quotation it means that the word or phrase is given exactly as the quotee spelled/used it, so the reader won't decide its a misrepresenation by quoter, inadvertent or not. Hard to replicate that meaning outside of a quote, wouldn't you agree? I was wondering if it had recently acquired another meaning for use outside of quotes.
Cheesewater
(ex-Uriah Heep)
[sic] is an old way of saying that the usage of a word or phrase is incorrect or improper but used verbatim from a source. I use it jokingly when I write something that I don't actually agree with wholeheartedly. Like the word "likeable". I'm just being silly.
And I think it is as right a word as any. There are people of all walks, fans of basketball, fans of celebrities, fans of T-Mobile phones...who just LOVE Dwyane Wade. To them, he is a hero.
You and I might not agree with them, but some folks like Kevin Garnett and even Kobe Bryant in that way...
Yech.
But insofar as the Hero myth goes...I think they qualify as likeable.
And I think it is as right a word as any. There are people of all walks, fans of basketball, fans of celebrities, fans of T-Mobile phones...who just LOVE Dwyane Wade. To them, he is a hero.
You and I might not agree with them, but some folks like Kevin Garnett and even Kobe Bryant in that way...
Yech.
But insofar as the Hero myth goes...I think they qualify as likeable.
S_Nash
Funky Fresh
I'm taking it as everyone uses the term "likeable characters", but he doesn't agree with that term. Everyone says it, but it's wrong.
No, [sic] doesn't make sense, but to get the jist of what he's saying, you have to let it slide.
No, [sic] doesn't make sense, but to get the jist of what he's saying, you have to let it slide.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,924
- Reaction score
- 16,765
Trust me, Errant knows the meaning of the word, he was just being sarcastic. His issue is that the traditional use of the word requires that it be inside the quotation marks.
Steve
Cheesewater
(ex-Uriah Heep)
Shall I then post sarcastically bringing forth my issue with his inability to capitalize the first word in a sentence?
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,924
- Reaction score
- 16,765
Shall I then post sarcastically bringing forth my issue with his inability to capitalize the first word in a sentence?
Hey, I really should have stayed out of this. I'm lucky if I spell my name correctly.
Steve
i just want to see somebody else win it.. I don't care who.. Just stop it with these repeat 6 teams. Ugh how boring can this get? Bulls get lebron, bulls go on and continue this 6 team run. I can totally see it happening.
How about a nets team or something? Bucks? OKC? SUNS? ANYONE??
How about a nets team or something? Bucks? OKC? SUNS? ANYONE??
elindholm
edited for content
It's funny that you mention that. I've noticed that you leave off the last "n" almost every time.
se7en
Go SUNS Go
How do you account for the absence of a major market team like New York from this list? Maybe for all of Stern's power he can't really do anything about their gross mismanagement... LOL...
Errntknght
Registered User
I wasn't being wholly sarcastic - my old dictionaries didn't list a meaning for [sic] outside of a quotation but languages do evolve and I thought perhaps it had acquired another meaning in recent years.
I'm sure everyone is on pins and needles wondering so I'll give a meaning I just located online: "It is also sometimes used outside of quoted material to emphasize that the preceding segment of text was intentionally written as is; that is, that a seeming mistake in the text is not, in fact, a mistake (or if it is, that it's an intentional mistake)."
I can't resist adding that it is also used inside quotes to signal that an apparent error is in the original - with no implication that it was an error at the time and place the original appeared. If anything, the implication is that it was not an error in the original.
I'm sure everyone is on pins and needles wondering so I'll give a meaning I just located online: "It is also sometimes used outside of quoted material to emphasize that the preceding segment of text was intentionally written as is; that is, that a seeming mistake in the text is not, in fact, a mistake (or if it is, that it's an intentional mistake)."
I can't resist adding that it is also used inside quotes to signal that an apparent error is in the original - with no implication that it was an error at the time and place the original appeared. If anything, the implication is that it was not an error in the original.
OP
OP
Why the Spurs? Not profitable? The Spurs had a ton of forgein players on those teams.. Stern wanted to expand the NBA to other countries.. What better way than get them to win championships.. Those Spurs teams might not have been big tv ratings in the USA.. But over seas they were huge.. And that is where the money aspect comes into the Spurs..
LostInTexas
Rookie
Under the theroy of Makeing more $ dosent it make sence for the suns to get thires one day? Look at it like this.
1. We are ALWAYS the underdog story, written off by the press not matter how good we are in reality.
2. Our players are all likable, friendly, (and for the most part) humble.
3. The Suns have slayed the dragons of there past and are set up for a Hollywood Finnish (no pun intended)
If the Suns ever won it would open up the doors for one of toughs sports movies one day about the little engine that could. AKA cash cow. Not to mention it would be a way for sterns to get heat off his back from conspiracy theorist. It makes sense for some one random to win...
1. We are ALWAYS the underdog story, written off by the press not matter how good we are in reality.
2. Our players are all likable, friendly, (and for the most part) humble.
3. The Suns have slayed the dragons of there past and are set up for a Hollywood Finnish (no pun intended)
If the Suns ever won it would open up the doors for one of toughs sports movies one day about the little engine that could. AKA cash cow. Not to mention it would be a way for sterns to get heat off his back from conspiracy theorist. It makes sense for some one random to win...
scXfreakX
Huh?
Guys, take this over to the grammar forum.
Did you guys ever stop to think that the difference outside of "luck" in the lottery with some of these teams has been shrewd ownership. The reason the Suns struggle to get on this list is because their owners sell draft picks for cash and let players walk to save money.
The teams on this list all had superstars and put talent around them. Don't go on some conspiracy rant. Just accept that these teams were talented. Outside of maybe the Lakers getting Gasol for nothing all of those other championships were earned not handed to teams.
The reason the NBA develops powerhouse teams is because it's structured so there isn't a lot of turnover in personnel. If you get a superstar you are pretty much assured that you can hold on to him unless you piss him off. You can keep the same 6 or 7 key players for 5 years and can have a superstar like Kobe or Jordan for 15 years.
This is very different from the NFL where you're lucky if a player is on the team for 4 years and even if you do keep your superstars they only make up a small portion of your roster and don't combine for the majority of minutes played.
The teams on this list all had superstars and put talent around them. Don't go on some conspiracy rant. Just accept that these teams were talented. Outside of maybe the Lakers getting Gasol for nothing all of those other championships were earned not handed to teams.
The reason the NBA develops powerhouse teams is because it's structured so there isn't a lot of turnover in personnel. If you get a superstar you are pretty much assured that you can hold on to him unless you piss him off. You can keep the same 6 or 7 key players for 5 years and can have a superstar like Kobe or Jordan for 15 years.
This is very different from the NFL where you're lucky if a player is on the team for 4 years and even if you do keep your superstars they only make up a small portion of your roster and don't combine for the majority of minutes played.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 92,286
- Reaction score
- 70,716
seriously, if the NBA was "rigged", why have the Knicks... in the biggest market in the COUNTRY have only made the NBA Finals TWICE in 40 years?! And why have they been HORRENDOUS for a decade? I mean, you really think Stern wanted SA to be in 4 rating killing NBA Finals over a team in NY? Or Detroit?!
Hayduke
Registered
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Posts
- 128
- Reaction score
- 0
This.
Shrewd ownership + friendships + money = Spurs.
Maybe if the Knicks played the right cards.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,924
- Reaction score
- 16,765
Stern was too busy to rig the games. Once he destroyed the evidence that placed him at the grassy knoll he had to jet to England to start on those crop circles. With his busy schedule, he'll be lucky if he gets a chance to hide those moon-landing props before someone stumbles across them. And the last time I saw him he was carrying a box of anal probes (I couldn't tell if they were new or used but no one was walking very close to him).
Steve
OP
OP
Whats a bigger market? NYC or the world? Im guessing the NBA made more money off the Spurs and all their foreign players to give a crap about the Knicksor even USA ratings.. Especially when he already has his West Coast East Coast rivalry in the Lakers and Celtics.. There is a reason them two teams have a combined 21 championships and 36 Finals appearances in the last 50 years..
BTW.. Does anyone remember when the Spurs win a title? Manu and Parker both got on the stand draped in their home counties flags soccer style.. I found that odd at the time.. But once you start putting it all together, starts making sense..
Picsof Manu and Parker..
You must be registered for see images
You must be registered for see images
You're right there is a reason. Look at the rosters of those championship teams and you'll see the reason. Guys like Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Kobe Bryant, Shaq, Wilt, Russell, Garnett...Superstars when paired with other superstars will win championships. Almost all of those guys were either brought in by draft selections of Boston/LA or by trades. You can maybe make a case that the NBA rigs trades if you want to be a conspiracy theorist, but you can't blame the NBA that the Lakers got Kobe in the middle of the first round, that Shaq wanted to sign with them as a FA, that Boston back in the 60s-80s made some great draft selections. Seriously just stop.
You're Suns traded the rights to Rondo for cash. Teams that do stuff like that don't deserve to be champions. Yes I know they didn't need Rondo, but surely they could have got a good pick for him or traded him later for a prospect that they could use. Had they not done that the Celtics wouldn't be in the finals right now. You can't blame the NBA for other teams making stupid trades unless you want believe that those teams are in on the fix.
chickenhead
Registered User
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2004
- Posts
- 3,109
- Reaction score
- 77
I definitely would not apply this argument to the league's history as a whole. Almost a third of the Lakers titles came in Minneapolis in a completely different era where George Mikan dominated. In later years he'd be, who, Danny Schayes? Then Boston won the bulk of its titles without significant competition outside of Philadelphia and the Lakers.
But since then, the rich still get richer. Chamberlain wanted to go to LA, followed by Kareem wanting to go to LA, followed by O'Neal wanting to go to LA. Three of the top 10 players of all time.
The Kobe pick is obviously one of the great picks historically, but the more important factor is that LA doesn't lose players. Yes, Kobe has made noise throughout his career, but LA was always in the best possible position to retain him. Had Kobe played in a smaller market, it wouldn't have been for long, and likely he would have made the same move Wilt, Kareem, and Shaq made. Had Phoenix won the coin toss and landed Alcindor, we may have swapped histories with the Bucks, but I don't think we'd be swapping history with the Lakers.
The other thing is that bad organizations routinely make trades to make good organizations even better. This isn't limited to basketball and I've never understood it. It's some sort of cosmic intimidation, like a plain jane loaning her car to a cheerleader or something. The Timberwolves were intrumental in the Celtics instantaneous change to contender. Kobe "needs help" in LA, and the Grizzlies trade their franchise leader in multiple categories for Kwame Brown? LA won 5 titles in the 80s because of Kareem's desire to play there and because of a #1 draft pick. But they didn't win the lottery to get Magic. They never should have been in position to draft him: for that you can thank your New Orleans Jazz. As long as teams are willing to trade for a higher profile team's garbage--especially in an era where expiring contracts have value--we'd might as well stay used to it.
But since then, the rich still get richer. Chamberlain wanted to go to LA, followed by Kareem wanting to go to LA, followed by O'Neal wanting to go to LA. Three of the top 10 players of all time.
The Kobe pick is obviously one of the great picks historically, but the more important factor is that LA doesn't lose players. Yes, Kobe has made noise throughout his career, but LA was always in the best possible position to retain him. Had Kobe played in a smaller market, it wouldn't have been for long, and likely he would have made the same move Wilt, Kareem, and Shaq made. Had Phoenix won the coin toss and landed Alcindor, we may have swapped histories with the Bucks, but I don't think we'd be swapping history with the Lakers.
The other thing is that bad organizations routinely make trades to make good organizations even better. This isn't limited to basketball and I've never understood it. It's some sort of cosmic intimidation, like a plain jane loaning her car to a cheerleader or something. The Timberwolves were intrumental in the Celtics instantaneous change to contender. Kobe "needs help" in LA, and the Grizzlies trade their franchise leader in multiple categories for Kwame Brown? LA won 5 titles in the 80s because of Kareem's desire to play there and because of a #1 draft pick. But they didn't win the lottery to get Magic. They never should have been in position to draft him: for that you can thank your New Orleans Jazz. As long as teams are willing to trade for a higher profile team's garbage--especially in an era where expiring contracts have value--we'd might as well stay used to it.
mojorizen7
ASFN Addict
Mr Obvious says there is very little parity in the NBA.
Mr Cliche says defense wins championships.
I agree with both of these guys because history doesn't lie.
I am wondering how the league is going to gift the LA LAKERS once again after Kobe retires in order to keep them a perennial contender. Look for them to aquire an under-the-radar 1st rd lottery pick from one of the cellar dwellar teams in the next few years that turns out to be just what the doctor ordered for a semi-talented 40 win team who just lost Kobe to old age.
Mr Cliche says defense wins championships.
I agree with both of these guys because history doesn't lie.
I am wondering how the league is going to gift the LA LAKERS once again after Kobe retires in order to keep them a perennial contender. Look for them to aquire an under-the-radar 1st rd lottery pick from one of the cellar dwellar teams in the next few years that turns out to be just what the doctor ordered for a semi-talented 40 win team who just lost Kobe to old age.
Chaplin
Better off silent
Similar threads
