Jump to content
North Side Baseball
  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Bill Simmons' column today explains that he thinks the eventual 2012 Champs will have a footnote thanks to Rose's injury, and ranks other "footnote titles".

 

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7883334/the-footnote-title

 

He's missing this.

 

1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966 Boston Celtics

 

What Happened: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Footnote: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Verdict: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

Posted
Bill Simmons' column today explains that he thinks the eventual 2012 Champs will have a footnote thanks to Rose's injury, and ranks other "footnote titles".

 

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7883334/the-footnote-title

 

He's missing this.

 

1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966 Boston Celtics

 

What Happened: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Footnote: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Verdict: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

There were 8 other teams in 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66.

Guest
Guests
Posted
Bill Simmons' column today explains that he thinks the eventual 2012 Champs will have a footnote thanks to Rose's injury, and ranks other "footnote titles".

 

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7883334/the-footnote-title

 

He's missing this.

 

1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966 Boston Celtics

 

What Happened: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Footnote: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Verdict: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

There were 8 other teams in 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66.

I see where you think that totally invalidates his point.

Posted
Bill Simmons' column today explains that he thinks the eventual 2012 Champs will have a footnote thanks to Rose's injury, and ranks other "footnote titles".

 

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7883334/the-footnote-title

 

He's missing this.

 

1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966 Boston Celtics

 

What Happened: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Footnote: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Verdict: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

There were 8 other teams in 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66.

I see where you think that totally invalidates his point.

 

I like to deal in facts.

Community Moderator
Posted
Bill Simmons' column today explains that he thinks the eventual 2012 Champs will have a footnote thanks to Rose's injury, and ranks other "footnote titles".

 

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7883334/the-footnote-title

 

He's missing this.

 

1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966 Boston Celtics

 

What Happened: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Footnote: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

The Verdict: There were only 7 other teams in the NBA

 

There were 8 other teams in 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66.

I see where you think that totally invalidates his point.

 

I like to deal in facts.

 

Like when referring to all star ballots?

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Simmons is an idiot. All a team can do is win the title that year. I dont think anything invalidates a championship.

 

If you read the article, you'd realize that he went out of his way to indicate that he's not invalidating anything.

Posted
Simmons is an idiot. All a team can do is win the title that year. I dont think anything invalidates a championship.

 

If you read the article, you'd realize that he went out of his way to indicate that he's not invalidating anything.

And I think he did a good job, in at least most of the capsule,s talking about whatever the given year/champ was of saying why they shouldn't be "invalidated" or have a footnote by at least providing one counter argument/theory/etc.

Posted
Simmons is at his best when talking about NBA history in an interesting way (aside from his Boston bias, which is annoying but it is what it is. I'm biased in favor of my teams too) and I didn't really see anything in his article that changed my thinking on that.
Guest
Guests
Posted

Looks like the Lakers are punting Game 3.

 

EDIT: Maybe not.

Guest
Guests
Posted
Looks like the Lakers are punting Game 3.

 

EDIT: Maybe not.

Don't they want to lose a couple to have artest back for game one?

 

Probably. I think they'd prefer not to go back to Denver for Game 6, though, even though that would mean Artest would miss Game 1 of the next series if they make it.

Posted
Looks like the Lakers are punting Game 3.

 

EDIT: Maybe not.

Don't they want to lose a couple to have artest back for game one?

 

his name is world peace, show some respect

I will not.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...