₦airaland Forum

Greatihex:
at the bold, you have started now.


FYI, i will be pleased with lampard if chelsea finish anything above 6th, but i know why i continued with this conversation and i have gotten what i wanted. Now, let us wait for the season to end.




BTW, why are you not staking you hand in your claims this time around?

When I staked my hand before and was right did anybody give me an award? In fact, the only people who acted like they remembered are the people who believed me or wanted me to be right.

If he finishes anything above 6th, that is as good as winning the league. That is how certain I am, that he won't.

muyiwaadekunle1:
You are just going back and forth. I need you to justify why Spurs were better and deserved 3rd place.
I just used Liverpool, City scenario of how you said spurs were better than Chelsea and how Liverpool were better than everybody's else but lost the league.
At the end of it all, near misses don't count. It is the eventual outcome.
If they were really better as you claimed, they will never let their guard down no matter what . That's why you see teams that are exhausted midway through the season but have a mission grind out 1-0 wins most of the time, they secure die minutes draws, they'll rather loose their best player to a red card than loose a game.
I am not using emotion tactics because i am a Chelsea fan , We came third last season and we deserved it.
Before the Slump in December, the team followed Liverpool and City closely, where was Tottenham at that time even when we lost 3-1 at Wembley? Is it not when Chelsea had bad run of form that United and Spurs kick started their winning streak?
So when they fell short of expectations and Chelsea started grinding out wins, was it anybody's fault?
My Guy, Local man is tired

I don't think you know the meaning of back and forth. Spurs were the 3rd best team is the sentence I constructed. Deserving 3rd place is another argument. Liverpool were not better than everybody else. They were the 2nd best team in England. They were better than everybody else bar Man City. If LFC had finished 3rd to CFC. The argument then would have been, despite finishing 3rd, Liverpool were the 2nd best team in England.

Letting guard down and derailing is not evidence of a team not being better. Freak injuries, internal turmoil are some of the things that could force a team to derail. PSG lost to United in UCL but they were clearly the better team.

Bad run of form that Spurs needed to lose 7 of the last 12. 5 more than CFC to finish a point behind them and you can't draw a solid inference?

Tired? LOL. Tired must be a euphemism for emotional.

muyiwaadekunle1:
Liverpool lost only one match last season, they were way ahead of other teams by January not because they had scored more goals or played better football than Man city but the blue side of Manchester were crowned Champions in May.
Stop using those metrics in football. It is the final position that matter.
Did Everton not beat Chelsea, Arsenal, Man united at their home ground? Would you say because of that they ought to be placed above Arsenal?

But Arsenal beat Everton, CFC and United as well? It seems like you are throwing words around to legitimize your emotional arguments for CFC.

LFC were at the best they have ever been league wise and someone else peeped them to the title. That shows that that team was better than them. Which is different than them underperforming for an inferior team to beat them. A good e.g will be CFC when they finished 10th in the season Mou was sacked. CFC were not the 10th best team that season. They only underperfomed to that level. In other words, they derailed.

Greatihex:
Firstly, if What you mean by Arsenal and united improved is that they signed players; i will do well to remind you that they also signed players last season, but they still finished below chelsea.

That means that signing of players does not automatically mean that a team improved.

Having said that, let me go back to the initial question i asked you.

What made you say that chelsea has regressed and they can't contend for ucl places?



BTW, your claim that chelsea can't finish above 6th is rendered invalid by "all things being equal"

I know that if by mistake chelsea finish above 6th you will start telling us that there was no Ceteris Paribus

Improved is that they signed players in positions they were deficient in and of more quality(the players they signed that is) than most of what the other teams have in said positions.

Chelsea's team isn't better than the other top 6. In many positions, player for player they are not better. They lost their best player and the replacement will need more than 1 season to get to that level to plug the lacuna created by said player. CFC had problems scoring goals last season, that problem will worsen now.

All things being equal is, if United loses 8 of their starters to injury. Or Arsenal get punished by the FA and have 15 points deducted from them. Or Spurs players meet their demise in a plane crash.

I am not offended by the emotional line(s) of reasoning by most of you CFC supporters. Denial is usually the first stage of grief.

muyiwaadekunle1:
Did a third grader write this?
Tottenham were clearly the 3rd best team but eventually finished 4th. Is that how to analyze football?
When Chelsea surrendered 2nd place in January 2nd, 2018 and ended up 5th, why were they not termed the runners up before they derailed?
I somehow agree with your prediction that Man city, Liverpool and Tottenham are the front runners for the league but anything can happen midway through the season.
P:S : if you're a Chelsea fan thinking about tonight's match. Just forge it, we have lost before the ball is kicked and I don't See Lampard lasting till December before he gets the boot.

Tottenham lost 7 of their last 12 games of the season and still were just 1 point behind CFC. Won more games than CFC, scored more goals and conceded about the same despite losing 5 more games than CFC. What other metric do you need to see that they were better?

Greatihex:
so, these teams did not improve last season?

Tottenham did not improve. Every one knows that. They were clearly the 3rd best team in England last season but derailed. They have now added to that team so they will hold unto their 3rd best tag and possibly fight for 2nd or 1st. United have improved their defence. They are still hollow in midfield. Arsenal's attack and midfield is improved, their defence is iffy. City and LFC are in a different world. Of the top 6 teams, only CFC undeniably regressed. There are no goals around that team and alot of the youngins will be inconsistent.

You can mark my post. Ceteris Paribus, CFC won't finish higher than 6th.

Greatihex:
why do you think that the chelsea that finished 3rd last season can't finish third this season?

In summary, City improved. LFC will basically be the same (they got some injured players back). Tottenham (clearly the 3rd best team even last season before they lost their way) improved. Arsenal improved. United covered some of their lapses so they too will be better. CFC did not improve at all. In fact, this is a transition season.

CFC will finish 6th. Most likely.

I was reading some arrogant predictions about CFC finishing 3rd. I was just laughing.

So many things to say.

Siddonlook mode.

Iggy denied you. KD denied you. But people are still talking about overt and covert.

Melvyn11:
A tier 1 source in Germany said this.......!
[Süddeutsche Zeitung] : Leroy Sane has opted to join FC Bayern. The transfer is in final rounds of negotiations concerned about a record breaking transfer fee and a record salary.
I doubt united will even mount a title challenge but if they get Dybala then maybe.

Zobo. Trust me on this.

RiskelWillow:
I never claimed the 2018 Cavs would beat the Warriors and I can't remember anyone being that bold. We were excited however that after the trades the team was an improvement on the toxic waste they had.

And that's the thing. Everything about pretty much every team is based on what's on paper right now cause all the major contenders are significantly different from what they were a season ago. When you speak of lack of balance what do you mean?

Defense? We've got Green, Bradley and KCP for perimeter defense and AD and JaVale in the interior. Might get Iguodala too. Both Frank Vogel and Lionel Hollins were brought in for their defense.

Offense? We've got two of the best offensive forces in the game maybe 3 if anything that resembles the old boogie returns and a rising star in Kyle Kuzma.

Shooting? Green Bradley Daniels KCP Dudley Cook heck everyone on this roster bar rondo and JaVale has a 3 ball and even Rondo has improved in that regard. Might get Kyle Korver too.

Playmaking? We've got two of the best basketball minds in the history of the game.


So what is this balance you speak of? This roster is as versatile as any other in the NBA if not more.

I said I would get back to this, so let me do so now.

Like I said before, maybe 3-5 years ago this roster would have been scary because you would have had AD and Boogie on 20+/10+ in terms of ppg and rpg and then the icing on the cake would have been Lebron. But barring AD who is still approaching his peak no other player is at that level you are projecting anymore.

First off, this team is filled with many players who somewhat play or can deputize in the same roles. There is, in my eyes, an over-duplication of roles that the media are glossing over. And when the roles are not being duplicated, they seem to overlap themselves which portends questionable team chemistry.

Who are supposed to be the starters? You do know that a lineup starting boogie is just a recipe for abuse on defence and fouls? So if we take him out, you limit the slight spread he would have offered to Javale McGee whose only noteworthy defence will be interior shot blocking but that would not really matter since most of the teams you would face in the west have decent perimeter shooting.

AD is a beast and Lebron is still great on offence and his reading of the game. But how does he offset what the defence cannot do. Green's defence is overrated. We all saw him against GSW. He had one customary great game and was breaking knees and waists en route to fouling out. He would not be a starter. And any strategy you set hoping your bench plays defence for you is poop. So it feels like the starting line up will bleed and then somehow the limited bench that can shoot if wide open will be tasked to stave the bleeding and somehow still compete on offence? What have we seen from that bench to indicate anything of the sort will happen?

Hope you can very well see that your team is a slow one that will be run ragged by fast-paced offences? Hope you realize that all that running will tire your big dogs or force them to more load management in readiness for the playoffs? Any combination that mixes the top dogs with the so-called 40% 3pt shooters like Cook and co will also weaken any average defence the Lakers were going to play. Cook played for GSW I know him. So the length and offence that the LAL pose would only have made sense with speed and athleticism which, and sad to say, most of those players don't have as such anymore- and that includes Lebron.

Surely, a slower tempo grind out playoff game will potentially favour your team. Where pounding the glass, and post-up play could go a long way. We saw a preview of this in the 2017 Pelicans but even at that, they were not contenders. So I don't see what the fuss is about. The LAL are better than they were last season, but again I ask, how much better? 13+ win swing?

The WC is a lot different than the east. The team's that barely scrape 50wins don't usually go on to be exponentially better in the playoffs. The trends have shown it. So the "we can be 3rd or 4th seeds and become something else crunch time", does not translate. And even then, when driving lanes are sealed would you put your money on the line for your starters or bench to start raining shots? LOL.

The legs of most of the players on this roster are not where they used to be. And 1 or 2 good one on one defenders cannot change that. Pelinka knew this, which was why they were going all out for Kawhi. It was to overload the team with talent such that the obvious lapses won't matter. Which is why I asked you repeatedly why you wanted him at all costs if you were very certain Lebron and AD were already going to win it all before he arrived?

All I am saying is not in any way implying that the team is absolutely rubbish because it is not. But I wager when the season begins, the dust will settle and the hype train will stop and people will come to realize this is not that team. LAC is more athletic than yours with comparable length and significantly better defenders. Then Kawhi and PG are clutch free throw shooters. I can't say enough about their bench led by Sweet Lou. And a 13 win swing on them means 61 wins. So they are actually better than the LAL.

And when the LAL don't win it this coming season, Lebron will be 36 and still declining. Which is why I said he won't win a ring in LA. I am predicting the first casualty will be Vogel getting the boot. Lebron will have some heroic games but how many can he have to will this team to 50+ wins when every game will be like the playoffs? You guys have a target on your backs.

The post is getting too long so I will leave it here.

steady986:
SmooshCHN and Hardetayour come and carry your man Eruditor o

Coward.

I told you before. Anything I say I can back it up. Mr. Kawhi was a LAL fan. Because Broussard and co were claiming it. LOL

steady986:
Lol, Mr man, you have been emphatically defeated. SHUT THA F.UCK UP

I said bet and you cowered and started talking about defeat lol. At least you have learnt about analysts now. Do you want to bet on SAS? Nick Wright?

steady986:
All along Mr Eruditor has been lying to us that Stephen A. Smith and Nick Wright predicted the Lakers to finish second in the west. Lol

You know how I roll. I want you to make a fool of yourself and then I will post SAS prediction with LAL as second.

steady986:
Bingo! The one you've been waiting for. Steven A predicted the Lakers would finish third This is so sweet.

Want to bet I can bring another post where he changed and made them second?

I can do same for Nick Wright. Bet?

Who does not know analysts change opinions like the wind?

LOL

steady986:
This is Zach Lowe saying 4 teams will win 60 games, including GS and Houston. Another prediction of Lakers not in the top 2 in the west.

I have time for you today.

That is what I was expecting. This is an example of an "analyst". Good. Now he makes up for all but one analyst. I don't know how this helps you. I can as well bring other people who put them second. I already mentioned 3 others. Here is a 4th.

steady986:
Lol, you're getting angry, and that's a sign of frustration. Let me frustrate you the more.

Who is talking about Rockets and Lakers? Is sour argument about the Rockets and Lakers? I don't understand the kind of dullard I'm dealing with here? You brought up an argument about the Lakers finishing 2nd, and now you're mentioning Rockets.

And the people who made those projections are analysts. If you read the entirety of the articles you would see their names at the top or bottom of the post. Just because you don't know them don't make them any less of an analyst. After all you said most analysts, and not most notable analysts. And I'm still waiting to see proof of your own analysts who said Lakers would finish second. You've been trying to beat around the bush for so long and you're doing a terrible job of it.

P.S, I'm glad you accepted that you actually altered your post, no matter the English you tried to use to describe your action. For a second I thought you'd be that dumb to deny it.

How can I be altering my post clandestinely and put a comment under it when it is clear something else was there? Why would I need to alter my post?

You said all the major analysts are projecting LAL as top 2 or 3 now. I said the same major analysts did so last year. Then spoke about Raptors. You have now claimed you ignored the Raptors part and were asking me about Rockets. I said, the people you quote verbatim here all said LAL was the team that would give GSW a run for their money in the WCF. Your ally here even told you that SAS said same. You left all that to give me selected projected win counts from sports blogs. What am I supposed to do with it? How am I mentioning the Rockets? You are the one who is trying to use projected win counts of blogs to make up for major analysts. LOL

steady986:
People of this great thread, Mr Eruditor here said that these are bookmakers and not analyst's predictions. I know what a bookmakers odd looks like and I know what an analyst's prediction looks like. I can categorically tell you that these are analyst's projections. I asked you to bring your projections from your own analysts who said the Lakers would finish second, and til now you are unable to do so. I'm still waiting

This is so funny. Do you know how they come up with these numbers? Don't you watch Skip and Shannon for instance discuss if they would place their bets on the lakers finishing over or under the prognosticated win count? How can you help a mad person stop taking panadol to cure his madness? When you hear Vegas are predicting GSW to win 62 games who analysed the 62 games out? LOL.

Stop trying to out-stupid yourself. We have accepted you are the king please. I even threw out the names of the very same people you have called analysts on this thread and you are avoiding your brothers Nick Wright and co when they were running feeds talking about how LeBron could will the young LAL core to playing WCF against GSW. LOL.

You are posting bleacher report giving predictions of expected win counts and telling me it is analysis.

So if I say LAC to win LAL in round 1 of the playoffs 4-1 I have also analysed the playoffs.

steady986:
Eruditor, you are trying to be smart with words here, but you can't fool me, I'm too smart for you. The longer you drag this the more obvious it is that you both have a short memory and that you're re.tarded.

And you didn't have to go back to alter your posts. Don't be cheeky. The picture I attached to this post is what you said initially, and my reply, but you deleted it and wrote something else. You see I didn't mention anything about Raptors. I tackled your statement about Lakers finishing above Rockets.

You know that the internet holds onto memories excellently. Then you said this


I decided to tackle the first statement and leave the second, then you said this



Then I duly posted about 6 analyst that didn't project Lakers to finish second. But your dumb self called them bookmakers.

You are not smart enough for me, and you know it.

Your stupidity is gargantuan enough to steal sleep from droopy eyes. I did not alter my post. I was trying to quote myself to show you my exact words hours back and bungled it so I just paraphrased myself.

I wish you would see how lost you are in the eyes of common sense and logic. Please, if you are not a hopeless ignorant bastard. Post any comment here of me saying anything to the effect of Lakers and Rockets. If you don't provide just a shred of a post of me saying anything about the Rockets you will remain a bastard for eternity.

As for bookmakers and analysts. I actually have re-given up on you. Do you know what analysts are?

Am I being punked or something? Is it possible for a human being to be this hopeless?

RiskelWillow:
I never claimed the 2018 Cavs would beat the Warriors and I can't remember anyone being that bold. We were excited however that after the trades the team was an improvement on the toxic waste they had.

And that's the thing. Everything about pretty much every team is based on what's on paper right now cause all the major contenders are significantly different from what they were a season ago. When you speak of lack of balance what do you mean?

Defense? We've got Green, Bradley and KCP for perimeter defense and AD and JaVale in the interior. Might get Iguodala too. Both Frank Vogel and Lionel Hollins were brought in for their defense.

Offense? We've got two of the best offensive forces in the game maybe 3 if anything that resembles the old boogie returns and a rising star in Kyle Kuzma.

Shooting? Green Bradley Daniels KCP Dudley Cook heck everyone on this roster bar rondo and JaVale has a 3 ball and even Rondo has improved in that regard. Might get Kyle Korver too.

Playmaking? We've got two of the best basketball minds in the history of the game.


So what is this balance you speak of? This roster is as versatile as any other in the NBA if not more.

I will respond to this when I am well rested. It is past midnight here and I need to sleep.

RiskelWillow:
LOL Apart from Shannon Sharpe who said it in a gimmick. None of those other "analysts" definitively called the Lakers the second best team in the west. You can't classify one or two people as most. Seeing as that title technically ended up going to Portland I can argue bar the Lakers misfortunes they would've had a shot. But that's a different issue entirely cause misfortunes can befall any team now be it the Clippers or the jazz or nuggets. But sh-tting on this Lakers roster you are sipping nothing but the haterade small fry. Just admit you effed up and move on.

I never told you Lebron was not good. I never told you that even with his last Cavs team. But when you were getting excited about trades and who was going to play, I told you that the roster was not exactly balanced. Remember? When Clarkson and the other Lakers slam dunk guy came to Ohio. When Hill, Hood, Green all joined. When they barely beat Indiana? When you and Shannon Sharpe would not let anybody rest when he swept the Raptors. I told you that the team was not balanced.

So yes, AD, Bron, Boogie, Danny, Bradley, Rondo look good on paper etc. But I am not overwhelmed by the ensemble. Maybe 3 years ago AD and Bron would have done that. But now I am seeing the flaw in the team. I would have felt the same had Kawhi gone there BTW. They would have won a title ok. But even the way everyone wanted to claim it would have been the greatest trio on NBA history. I would have told them to pipe down.

You only say that after you have seen the team play and how they will. I know they will be better than last season. Ok. How much better? Philly type of better (I mean compared to how they were last time).

RiskelWillow:
So apart from stephen A which other "analyst" ranked the lakers as the second best team in the west?

Nick Wright bashed the Rockets.
Shannon Sharpe
Cris Carter

All Lebron tearjerkers.

steady986:
Let me oblige you this last time.

But did I argue with you about the statement you made about the Lakers being ranked above Raptors? I didn't answer you because I knew you were right. What I questioned was your first statement where you said most analysts rated Lakers in 2nd place. So why bugging me with the Raptors s.hit? I did some digging, and I'm yet to find anyone who projected Lakers to finish in 2nd place.

It continues in my next post

Let me quote myself again.

You said all the major analysts and Bookmakers put LAL in top 2/3 this season. I said most of the analysts did same last season. One statement. Then said ESPN in their rankings put LAL even over Raptors.

You then asked me about rankings and Rockets. I told you that the claim about ranking and projections was for Raptors and that I specifically mentioned ESPN.

I don't know how to help you.

steady986:
Eruditor

I'm waiting for you to counter my findings. If you don't, then it means you're actually re.tarded.

We are discussing analysts and you are showing me bookmakers. What kinda person am I dealing with habeg?

Can you read?

RiskelWillow:
LMAO! And what does "schizo dumbo" even mean small fry?


The consensus here? Boffin? genius? mastermind? demigod? Father of all GSW bandwagon fans?

Schizophrenic dumbo.

RiskelWillow:
Small fry WTF does this even mean?

I have edited it now.

Grammarly switches dumbo to dumb or "dunno".

But you should know who you are. It is a consensus on here.

Even the Schizo dumbO who is a fellow Lebroncircle jerker knew what was being said and tried to bail you out by pretending it was only Stephen A Smith that said it.

Grammarly app.

steady986:
I knew this was exactly what you were going to say next, so I was well prepared for you. You never accept your mistake because of some useless pride in you.

This is one statement you made


Then I replied you



Then you said this


Then I replied to you accordingly in my last post.

I have to say, I'm feeling sorry for you. You may actually be autistic and I'm being unnecessarily hard on you. Our argument started about 3 to 4 posts back, but your brain can't recollect, like it's 50 posts back or something. I've officially ended this argument, I won't engage you on this anymore.

LOL. You are so funny when you are not being stupid.

You said all the major analysts rated LAL top 2 or top 3 this season. I said it does not matter. They did same last year in the west. Then I also added another ridiculous thing that one of the major sport houses did. They also left the west and rated the LAL higher than even the raptors.

I don't know how bringing ESPN to ask me about Rockets helps you when I told you the specific reason I mentioned ESPN which is for the Raptors. The reason you rushed to call me a liar was because in your normally daft state of mind you thought I was saying ESPN rated LAL higher than the Rockets. When I pointed you back to the company and the claim I made about the Raptors you posted ESPN's list again trying to bring up the Rockets.

You can do your research. Find out what teams Nick Wright, Shannon Sharpe, Stephen A Smith said will face GSW in the WCFs. There are more of them. I only mentioned the few you quote willy nilly. Remember I said pre season. Don't come and bring Nick changing mouth after it was clear LAL will not qualify for the playoffs. Most of the analysts said LAL were the team to challenge GSW in the west.

steady986:
You couldn't even have the patience or the reasoning to go back to your earlier post and see what you actually wrote before coming back here to say this rubbish, like you are re.traded or something. You're just like a mad man who claims the whole world is mad, and not him. I think I've told you something like this before.

I don't need to explain to you what you meant in this statement, but if you can clearly read, your first line said MOST ANALYSTS and not MOST ESPN ANALYSTS. You only mentioned ESPN in relation to the Raptors.

You need to go see a doctor.

And of course, your dumb followers SmooshCHN and Hardetayour quickly liked the post without knowing wtf you were talking about. Do you see how dumb they are too?

And I put a screenshot of ESPN's title odds of 2018/2019 for good measures.

You don't even piss me off anymore. I know you epitomize the definition of a fool that the very famous description gave. You know nothing and do not know that you know nothing.

I have told you before to read things slowly.

Most analysts rated LAL 2nd in the west in 2018-19. Full stop. Representing one statement. To disprove this. Simply bring many analysts saying something contrary. That is part one.

Second statement. In fact, ESPN even rated them higher than the Raptors.

See how irredeemably daft and ignorantly cursed you are. You posted an image clearly showing the Lakers with better odds than the Raptors. And tried to use it to make my own argument for me whilst calling me mad.

I have seen them all. 50 mad persons in one and you. And I hate to say this, but if you left the world today, the foolishness of the world will reduce by 90%.

steady986:
Lol, analysts projected Lakers to finish above Rockets and OKC? You don't have to formulate lies just to prove your point.

But I'm very sure you wrongly projected the Warriors to win it all too, so you're no better than them I'm afraid. And if you ask me whose opinion I should take more seriously, I'm sure you know the answer to that.

When I think I have seen it all, you go on to surprise me with how unintelligent you are.

I gave a claim and even mentioned a brand. I said ESPN. You could have easily proven me a liar by bringing up the ESPN projected list for 2018-19 to see if my claims were false. No. You did not. You came here to allow me to bludgeon you again and even added OKC (that I did not even mention at all). I will pass.

I am not an analyst. But if the team I thought would win it all got to the finals and needed to be severely battered by injuries to lose, I would go to sleep knowing I was right. I don't know who puts his weight behind people who swore Celts will win 67 games and get to the finals.

But then again, you are you, steady, being dumb to the power of 986.

Lakers were projected 2nd in the west by most analysts last season as well. In fact, ESPN rated them higher than the Raptors. LOL.

Or did you think this part was a typo?

RiskelWillow:
And how would you know what intelligent people would do you're as dumb as a rock.

On my worst day, I am better than everybody in your family both born and unborn.