By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
burninmylight said:
Chris Hu said:

That reply was a big nothing burger bottom line is the Nets are up 2-0 and will win the series in six or less even if James Harden doesn't come back and plays any of the remaining games in the series.  Everyone got a false sense of confidence about the Bucks chances of winning the series because they won two close meaningless games against the Nets towards the end of the regular season.

Waits until well after the game is in hand to reply, then calls my post a nothing-burger, great job!

And no, those games weren't meaningless, because the Bucks and Nets were both vying for seeding at the time and trying to acquire the first seed, the hold of which wouldn't have to go through the second and third seeds to get to the finals.

If they were so meaningless, why did Durant play 40 minutes in each game, and why did Irving play 37 and 39? In fact, the only starter that played less than 33 minutes in those games was ceremonial starter DeAndre Jordan.

Why do you never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever answer a single question presented to you, ever? Is it because you don't have answers when someone able to cite facts, sources and reasonable arguments calls you out on your claims, and you're left not knowing how to respond?

Again the Nets are up 2-0 and will have no problem winning this series so yeah your reply is a big nothing burger and like most people that picked the Bucks to win the series you got false hope by them winning two meaningless games towards the end of the season by razor thin margins.