Re: Laker Haters: Best of

"igor eduardo küpfer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:32:57 -0800, "brink" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> My point is that these type of predictions have no truth value -- they are
> neither right nor wrong.

sure, but they can be "Good" or "bad."

"i predict that the US stock exchange will open tomorrow" = good prediction

"i predict that the US stock exchange will not open tomorrow" = bad
prediction

obviously the chances of the US stock exchange opening tomorrow are nearly
100%, but definitely not 1 in 1.  more like 99,999 in 100,000.  probably
better.  you get the idea.

If Shaq and Malone go down with season ending
> injuries -- not completely unrealistic -- then my prediction won't be far
off,
> will it?

of course not.  but it seems that you've changed your prediction from the
preseason.  before you were implying that the "parts wouldn't fit" and that
there was a good chance the lakers wouldn't get 50 wins even without some
disatrous injuries.  now you concede that apparently that's what it would
take for the lakers to fail to reach that plateau.

and obviously relying on relatively remote possibilities such as two
superstars on one team having season ending injuries during the same season
is probably not wise when dealing with actual probability.

But I still won't have gloating rights, because I had no rational
> basis for believing this would happen. Alternately, I would have little
> rational basis for believing they would both be healthy for the entire
season.
> I simply wouldn't know either way, which is why my prediction is empty.

well, it depends on what you mean by "healthy" for the entire season.  if
you mean that they both have to play all 82 games, then shaq's already done
messed that up.  i think a more realistic definition of healthy would be for
their combined games missed to be less than 15.  and past performance is a
pretty good indicator of future results when it comes to injury.  malone
obviously is pretty much the definition of tip-top, injury free NBA player,
so i think the chances of him missing more than 5 games are pretty slim.
shaq of course has averaged missing some 12 games over the past two seasons,
so i think i'd put his over/under for games missed somewhere right around
10, simply becuase he seems to be feeling the pressure to play through
injury rather than take as much time as he would like.

> Note that this is different from saying something like, "if Shaq and
Malone
> remain healthy for the entire season, I predict the Lakers will win 60
games."
> That is a _real_ prediction, one which can be true or false.

no, it's a different prediction, it's no more "real" than saying in
preseason "i predict the lakers will win more than 50 games this season."

> >If someone makes a contrary prediction, they feel that
> >> I've inferred incorrectly from the present. In neither case is anyone
> >"right"
> >> or "wrong". The person who won the bet didn't know how things would
turn
> >out
> >> any better than the loser did, they just guessed better. Maybe it's
just
> >me,
> >> but a good guess is nothing to be proud of. It's certainly nothing to
> >gloat
> >> about.
> >
> >oh come on, what's usenet without a little gloating?  ;-)
> >
>
> Someone once wrote that "I told you so" is the best feeling in the world.
To
> the extent that I agree, I am ashamed. I try to deny myself such petty
> actions.

it's called trash talking, i.e. lighten up and have a little fun.  i'm sure
you got your digs in when vince stuck it to tracy the other day, even if
only in private.  ;-)

> >i said from day one that payton and malone would be fine and the lakers
> >would be playign like gangbusters.  i also predicted that kobe wouldn't
be
> >"distracted" by his case, and he's been great.
> >
>
> Personally, I didn't think Malone would fit so seamlessly into the Lakers
> offense, and I especially didn't believe in Payton's ability to guard the
> perimeter so well. My respect for these players has increased greatly,
> whatever happens for the rest of the season. (I also thought Shaq would be
> playing much better. Luckily for the Lakers, this hasn't hurt them at
all.)
>
> >of course, i'm also wrong plenty of the time.  i predicted before the
last
> >baseball seaosn that the rangers would contend for the playoffs (whoops)
and
> >that a-rod would win MVP (ding), also that people would think dusty was a
> >letdown in chicago cause the cubs wouldn't be much better (whoops again).
> >
>
> I called a Jays playoff team.

it's not their fault they're in such a tough division, and winning the WC in
the american league is pretty tough these days.

they probbaly could've won the AL central.  the twins are my favorite team
but even i'll admit that they're lucky the competition is so weak.

> >>
> >> >> (Hater? Really, I must protest. I have but two NBA hatreds, neither
of
> >> >them
> >> >> Laker-related: Keon and tmoc. I am emotionally indifferent to the
> >rest --
> >> >> including your precious team, around which the world apparently
> >revolves.)
> >> >
> >> >you haven't heard?  the axis of planet earth intersects shaquille
> >o'neal's
> >> >locker at staples center.  ;-)
> >> >
> >>
> >> A good example of what I mean. I think Shaq is a total asshole. I've
> >thought
> >> that for years. I think he is, as a person, a discredit to the human
race.
> >
> >why?
> >
>
> I really don't want to go into it. I'll just say that the incident with
Yao
> exemplified everything I dislike about Shaq.

seems like a pretty harsh way to judge someone.

> >> But so what? He is a great basketball player, perhaps one of the
> >half-dozen
> >> best of all time. A versatile and exceptionally talented athlete. My
> >contempt
> >> for him personally shouldn't affect my appraisal of him as a player --
and
> >I
> >> don't think it does.
> >>
> >> Accordingly, whatever I happen to think of the Lakers as a whole (which
is
> >not
> >> much) shouldn't affect my appraisal of their ability. If I predict doom
> >for
> >> the franchise, believe me, it's not based on emotions. To call me a
hater
> >> ignores my reasoning.
> >
> >i don't think too many people take the "hater" label as seriously as you
do.
> >come on, lighten up.
> >
> >wear it proudly.  ;-)
> >
>
> Nah. I'm trying in vain to promote the idea that some people are able to
> criticize things with emotional detachment. I'm fighting a losing cause, I
> know.

well, i'm right with you.  i like to talk basketball and baseball from a
rational standpoint, with regard to baseball especially i definitely fall
into the "stathead" category  (there's another label that i think was
supposed to be an insult at one point but now has become a badge of honor to
the ones who got labelled.)

on the other hand, i don't think there's anything wrong with a little trash
talk, i mean this is usenet not a business meeting.  just like trash talk
and good basketball *play*, trash talk and good basketball *discussion*
aren't mutually exclusive.  some of my favorite posters are actually the
fans of the other teams that hang out here and can come up with creative
ways to tweak laker fans.  ;-)