^^^Keep your sig....I think it's flattering...it's also very childish. How many other people on internet sites post gay jabs at a poster?

Now, if I was 25 years old, I might stoop to your level. But I'm a little more mature than that.

And BTW...I loved the comeback tonight in LA. I love this team. How about you Shawn1515? Did you enjoy the win? Cav fans all around loved it. Yet another magical Cav comeback.

31 and 11....and coming home. Yeah baby!!

I agree with footwedge on this issue, enjoy what we have here with the Cavs...

For the record, this was what I really wanted to use regarding Footwedge's greatest upset nonsense;



Alright, I feel much better, now.

Footwedge wrote: ^^^Keep your sig....I think it's flattering...it's also very childish. How many other people on internet sites post gay jabs at a poster?

Now, if I was 25 years old, I might stoop to your level. But I'm a little more mature than that.

And BTW...I loved the comeback tonight in LA. I love this team. How about you Shawn1515? Did you enjoy the win? Cav fans all around loved it. Yet another magical Cav comeback.

31 and 11....and coming home. Yeah baby!!

Do me a favor wedgie, and tell me the final score of last nights game. Oh yeah, wasn't it 102-101? As I have stated numerous times, which either you can't read, or you're just too plain RAtarded to read, we are damn near unbeatable when we put up 100. Would we have won that game if we only scored 99 points? That's what I thought. Keep blowing Mike Brown though, tell him it doesn't matter that we are >>>>.500 when we don't score that many points, that one day we will be able to use his effective defensive skills to win some lower scoring ball games with regularity.

NBA Coach of the Year recent winners.

2008-09 Mike Brown Cleveland
2007-08 Byron Scott New Orleans (Fired in Nov)
2006-07 Sam Mitchell Toronto (Fired Dec of 2008)
2005-06 Avery Johnson Dallas (Fired April of 2008)
2004-05 Mike D'Antoni Phoenix
2003-04 Hubie Brown Memphis
2002-03 Gregg Popovich San Antonio
2001-02 Rick Carlisle Detroit (fired after the 2002-2003 season)

Brown will get this season, maybe next season, depending on how we are looking early in the year. He's nothing special, and 4 other teams had no problem getting rid of their coaches who at one time were considered " Coach of the Year". Why should we be any different?

What exactly have those teams, who have fired their former coach of the year winners, done since??

h2thaizzo wrote:

Footwedge wrote: ^^^Keep your sig....I think it's flattering...it's also very childish. How many other people on internet sites post gay jabs at a poster?

Now, if I was 25 years old, I might stoop to your level. But I'm a little more mature than that.

And BTW...I loved the comeback tonight in LA. I love this team. How about you Shawn1515? Did you enjoy the win? Cav fans all around loved it. Yet another magical Cav comeback.

31 and 11....and coming home. Yeah baby!!

Do me a favor wedgie, and tell me the final score of last nights game. Oh yeah, wasn't it 102-101? As I have stated numerous times, which either you can't read, or you're just too plain RAtarded to read, we are damn near unbeatable when we put up 100. Would we have won that game if we only scored 99 points? That's what I thought. Keep blowing Mike Brown though, tell him it doesn't matter that we are >>>>.500 when we don't score that many points, that one day we will be able to use his effective defensive skills to win some lower scoring ball games with regularity.

I've given you 3 chances to knock off your obnoxious gay references. Perhaps it is you that have a problem with your sexual identity.

3 times. And you continue with with childish behavior. So to you Mr. internet wannabe tough guy. Fuck the hell off of me.

And finally....you are now the first person EVER that I had to put on ignore....and I've been a regular on 4 different blog sites.

Take a bow sage.

You a truly a wretched ball of slime. I'm done with you. Enjoy your internet tough guy image you cocksuckin, motherfuckin, pudwackin queer.

JakeGiant wrote: For the record, this was what I really wanted to use regarding Footwedge's greatest upset nonsense;



Alright, I feel much better, now.

Hey sweetheart....I never said that it was the greatest upset ever. I said it was one of the greatest upsets ever. I explained my position quite clearly as to why I thought it was.

I stand by my opinion.

Wow, is this thread ridiculous.

1. The regular season means precisely nothing to this team. Getting upset over losses is just as foolish as getting excited over wins. The big games give you the best idea of what kind of team they have, but even they don't mean anything, so you can't read too much into it. They're pretty much playing out the string, and they are not going to bring it every night like they should. The Lakers and Celtics are doing the same. Maybe Orlando is too, although they made some big changes and may need to prove to themselves that they are the same team as last year.

2. I have been a fan of Mike Brown since the defensive performance I saw out of the Cavaliers in games 3-7 of the 2006 Eastern Semis against Detroit. After that I knew we would have a championship quality defense under Brown in the playoffs, which is really the only time it matters. Brown is not a good offensive coach. He needs a guy to come in and run the offense. Last year, we had as much success as we did because Kuester did a great job with the offense for the most part. I would like to see Brown get another guy in there, but I would not want to see him fired. He is a great defensive coach.

3. The Cavs lost to the Magic because:
- We had nobody who could guard Dwight Howard one-on-one at all, no one who could even slow him down. This means we had to double him and scramble to their shooters with short guys.
- Our perimeter defenders were too short to effectively contest their jumpers off of the pick and roll and when scrambling off of a double.
- Mo Williams choked and no one else contributed offensively except Delonte on occasion.

Match ups were exactly the reason we lost to Orlando. Does that mean they were better? I suppose, but that has nothing to do with how the Cavs would have done against the Lakers.

As far as Brown making adjustments, I don't really know what adjustments he could have made. If they didn't double Howard, he would have scored 50 a game and Z would have fouled out of every game. I guess the only thing they could try was using every guy on the bench to play and foul Howard every time he touched it. That seems a bit ridiculous though.

Our BEST defense is when we score 100 or more points. Numbers don't lie. When you can go 24-1 when you reach the century mark and only go 7-10 playing Mike Brown basketball, it becomes time for you to tell the team to push the ball up the floor offensively as much as possible. It doesn't take Mark D'Antoni to figure that part out. I'm fine that defensively we only allow around 94 PPG, what I am not fine with is the fact that when we, as a team, play the basketball that our coach has build his resume on, we can't win a majority of those basketball games.

Cleveland Buck wrote: Wow, is this thread ridiculous.

1. The regular season means precisely nothing to this team. Getting upset over losses is just as foolish as getting excited over wins. The big games give you the best idea of what kind of team they have, but even they don't mean anything, so you can't read too much into it. They're pretty much playing out the string, and they are not going to bring it every night like they should. The Lakers and Celtics are doing the same. Maybe Orlando is too, although they made some big changes and may need to prove to themselves that they are the same team as last year.

2. I have been a fan of Mike Brown since the defensive performance I saw out of the Cavaliers in games 3-7 of the 2006 Eastern Semis against Detroit. After that I knew we would have a championship quality defense under Brown in the playoffs, which is really the only time it matters. Brown is not a good offensive coach. He needs a guy to come in and run the offense. Last year, we had as much success as we did because Kuester did a great job with the offense for the most part. I would like to see Brown get another guy in there, but I would not want to see him fired. He is a great defensive coach.

3. The Cavs lost to the Magic because:
- We had nobody who could guard Dwight Howard one-on-one at all, no one who could even slow him down. This means we had to double him and scramble to their shooters with short guys.
- Our perimeter defenders were too short to effectively contest their jumpers off of the pick and roll and when scrambling off of a double.
- Mo Williams choked and no one else contributed offensively except Delonte on occasion.

Match ups were exactly the reason we lost to Orlando. Does that mean they were better? I suppose, but that has nothing to do with how the Cavs would have done against the Lakers.

As far as Brown making adjustments, I don't really know what adjustments he could have made. If they didn't double Howard, he would have scored 50 a game and Z would have fouled out of every game. I guess the only thing they could try was using every guy on the bench to play and foul Howard every time he touched it. That seems a bit ridiculous though.

SO losing that Magic series had NOTHING to do with losing momentum from game one, where we blew a 15 point halftime lead by trying to just "sit" on the lead instead of build upon it? Mike Browns gameplan would be ideal in football, but not basketball, where basket's are scored by teams on 40%+ possessions, and the shot clock only lasts 24 seconds. Did the other factors contribute, certainly, but i still maintain that playing piss poor in the second half, made up largely of us slowing the game down WAY too much to try and milk the clock beat us, not Orlando making its season average number of three pointers, and not Dwight Howard being unguardable.

h2thaizzo wrote: Our BEST defense is when we score 100 or more points.

That's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. The Lakers are 5-8 when they score less than 100 points. I guess it is time for Phil to hang 'em up. The Magic are 8-11 when they score less than 100 points. SVG's gotta go. Every team has a poor record when they score less than 100 points.

In the playoffs under Mike Brown (which is all that matters), the Cavaliers are 24-22 when they score less than 100 points. Over the same time, the Celtics are 13-13, and the Lakers are 10-13.

h2thaizzo wrote: SO losing that Magic series had NOTHING to do with losing momentum from game one, where we blew a 15 point halftime lead by trying to just "sit" on the lead instead of build upon it? Mike Browns gameplan would be ideal in football, but not basketball, where basket's are scored by teams on 40%+ possessions, and the shot clock only lasts 24 seconds. Did the other factors contribute, certainly, but i still maintain that playing piss poor in the second half, made up largely of us slowing the game down WAY too much to try and milk the clock beat us, not Orlando making its season average number of three pointers, and not Dwight Howard being unguardable.

Mike Brown didn't run the offense last year. John Kuester did. And they blew the big lead because they couldn't guard Orlando.

Cleveland Buck wrote: Wow, is this thread ridiculous.

1. The regular season means precisely nothing to this team. Getting upset over losses is just as foolish as getting excited over wins. The big games give you the best idea of what kind of team they have, but even they don't mean anything, so you can't read too much into it. They're pretty much playing out the string, and they are not going to bring it every night like they should. The Lakers and Celtics are doing the same. Maybe Orlando is too, although they made some big changes and may need to prove to themselves that they are the same team as last year.

2. I have been a fan of Mike Brown since the defensive performance I saw out of the Cavaliers in games 3-7 of the 2006 Eastern Semis against Detroit. After that I knew we would have a championship quality defense under Brown in the playoffs, which is really the only time it matters. Brown is not a good offensive coach. He needs a guy to come in and run the offense. Last year, we had as much success as we did because Kuester did a great job with the offense for the most part. I would like to see Brown get another guy in there, but I would not want to see him fired. He is a great defensive coach.

3. The Cavs lost to the Magic because:
- We had nobody who could guard Dwight Howard one-on-one at all, no one who could even slow him down. This means we had to double him and scramble to their shooters with short guys.
- Our perimeter defenders were too short to effectively contest their jumpers off of the pick and roll and when scrambling off of a double.
- Mo Williams choked and no one else contributed offensively except Delonte on occasion.

Match ups were exactly the reason we lost to Orlando. Does that mean they were better? I suppose, but that has nothing to do with how the Cavs would have done against the Lakers.

As far as Brown making adjustments, I don't really know what adjustments he could have made. If they didn't double Howard, he would have scored 50 a game and Z would have fouled out of every game. I guess the only thing they could try was using every guy on the bench to play and foul Howard every time he touched it. That seems a bit ridiculous though.

Pretty much spot on. Just a terrible matchup with Orlando. Once teams get to the level of the Lakers, Celtics, Cavs..etc.. The regular season is really here to just keep the guys in shape.

No, they blew the lead because they came out the second half trying to slow the game down by running nothing but half court offense. SO you restrict the best scorer in the game from using his best assets, not a smart game plan. And you brought up the best point, Mike Brown doesn't even run the offense. What other head coaches don't do anything with the offense? Its ridiculous.

Here we go again playing the percentage game instead of looking at the big picture.

Cavs-24-22 >>>100
Celtics-13-13>>>100
Lakers-10-13>>>100

Percentage wise, sure, it looks like we are better off, but why don't you look at the number that really matters, LOSSES, we have 9 more than each of those teams. That's two playoffs exits, while the other two teams you brought up have won two banners. There's no reason why our team with LeBron James should have played in a total of 46 games in the playoffs and NOT been able to score 100 points. The Celtics have played in 20 less of those games in the same time, the Lakers 23 less, and both have the bling to show for it. Coincidence?

Shit, We went 2-4 against that Boston team in these types of games. It's not hard running through the lower seeded teams and not putting up big numbers, see Detroit, not known for offense and Washington. How many games when we scored>>>100 did we win against the Spurs in the Finals?

I don't see your point of us playing more games scoring less than 100 points proving anything. Simple math tells me that by average, if Boston played the same number of these games as we did, they would go 23-23, a one game difference. That's supposed to be a big deal to you? Would you rather go 25-50 from the free throw line in a game, or 9-10? Percentage wise, 9-10 is great, but doesn't 25-50 give you more points? You're trying to give props to something that HASN'T worked, and the fact that we've more than doubled the amount of these games then the two most recent NBA Champions is alarming to me.

12-5 under MB in playoffs when scoring more than 100 (70% win)
24-22 under MB in playoffs when scoring less than 100 (52% win)

You're telling me its good that our coach puts us in a position to win 52% of our games 73% of the time we suit up in the playoffs?

Sorry, I'd rather go 5-12 in games less than 100 points scored and 32-14 in games when scoring more than 100 points.

Boston has played 46 playoff games in this time frame. They have scored 100+ in 20 of 46 (43.4%) 1 ring. Went 2-1 in these games in their Finals victory over the Lakers. (10-10 overall in these games)

LA Lakers have played 60 playoff games, have scored 100+ in 37 of 60 (61.6%) 1 ring. Went 2-1 in these games in their Finals victory over the Magic. (24-13 overall in these games)

Cleveland has played 63 playoff games, have scored 100+ in 17 of 63 (26.9%) 0 rings.

So you want to root for the Phoenix Suns. Go ahead. I will root for the championship contender.

Cleveland Buck wrote: So you want to root for the Phoenix Suns. Go ahead. I will root for the championship contender.

I love when people say dumb shit like this after getting smacked in the face with logical statistics.