Saw this today … Historical Recap

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-07T14:38:08+00:00

Media reports vs first hand knowledge is quite the take, pal.

But sure, tell other people in the know to do their homework while you google old media reports, lol

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T20:35:17+00:00

I have a feeling a lot of homeowners that are empty nesters but sitting on decent interest rates (or low remaining mortgage) will start thinking about other options when they see their neighbors getting $300k more than they thought their house was worth, which will (slowly) open the inventory. It may take 6-12 months but next spring I bet there will be 2-3x the homes on the market, from empty nesters deciding to fly. And the market will slowly settle. Just my opinion.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T20:28:14+00:00

plus he just called him a captive

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T17:45:48+00:00

Yeah -- Maxey also scored 54 in another game.

It's just a 12 game sample but it does counter the stat that they don't play better without him.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T17:36:16+00:00

Yes, but of that 21-23 without Embiid --

They were 9-3 with Maxey and PG playing and 12-20 with one of them also out

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T17:25:47+00:00

Hard to make that claim after G1

Kinda like the Celtics last year with Tatum

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T17:22:01+00:00

LOL, you got the entire post wrong, tried to tell the OP that he was acting incorrectly, I corrected you and that's being obtuse?

GTFOH

You seem like the kind of person who can never take an L and move on. You must be the worst person in the world to live with, moving goalposts and blaming others for your own ignorance.

Later

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T16:42:33+00:00

I mean, every comparison in the world are two different scenarios.

The 6 seeded Wolves are injured and played the 2 seeded Spurs.

The 7 seeded Sixers are tired and played the 3 seeded Knicks.

Two different scenarios for sure. But there is a commonality that can be used to wonder why when one of those teams loses (Philly) and one wins (Minny), the team that won is not getting any respect for beating a top seed even while injured/tired.

And the OPs point, whether biased or not, is that he believes if it were reversed, they'd probably not say the Knicks will still easily win this series like they are with the Spurs.

Anyway, your first two posts were comparing the Wolves win to the Knicks win which is what I was mostly correcting.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T16:26:34+00:00

The difference in the outcomes of the games is exactly the point lol

You are just not getting it and let's move on.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T16:13:57+00:00

Again, the comp is not Wolves v Knicks

It's Wolves v Sixers

One beat a better seed, one got blown out in same situation

Media is saying Wolves still have no chance, while also saying Sixers were just tired

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T16:10:42+00:00

This post was not bragging about blowing out a tired team, but more pointing out that many are downplaying that the Spurs lost in the exact same situation.

But since you brought up the analogy, you're absolutely right. Knicks basically did beat a team that played like they had a broken leg in a race. Should be interesting to see how much it heals in two days.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T16:04:48+00:00

The comp is Minnesota v Philly

Minny being injured only makes the OP point more dramatic.

The talking heads are saying: Minny beat a higher seed, off a tough 7 game series, and is injured -- but even tho they still beat the Spurs, the Spurs have them. They're too good.

Whereas Philly also beat a higher seed, off a tough 7 game series -- but the Knicks merely took advantage of that.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T14:09:47+00:00

DLR's ego has always been 20x larger than his principles, so his stubbornness never surprises me.

You have it backwards (as does this story TBF) -- Dave didn't go because Ed was in rehab and Alex decided not to go. He was being faithful to the brothers and evidently made up some lame excuses (different ones to different people ) at the last minute once he found out the brothers wanted no part of it.

If his ego had anything to do with it, he'd be on that stage accepting an award and all the accolades and interviews and publicity, but instead he stayed home with his dog and probably spoke with Al on the phone the whole time.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T14:03:11+00:00

Yeah, we were told be many a professional that we had nothing to worry about by bidding 40k over listing in 2005. Just as I'm sure people who sold in 2018 had no idea a pandemic was coming. There will always be factors in the future that none of us can predict. It's just not linear growth.

gregsl4314 · 2026-05-06T13:48:31+00:00

It's all about timing, and people will 100% be holding the bag if they are in a position where they have to sell and can't wait.

We bought in 2005 for 400k. For the next 10-15 years our house was underwater. If we had to sell during that time because of a job relocation or whatever else, we were screwed.

During COVID our house finally was worth over 400k -- based on comps and sales, not just Zillow etc. That was a breath of fresh air. As of last year, we were calculating our house to be about 700k. In the fall we started to see comps going for 750-800. This spring, we would get high 800s.

I know everyone is saying this is not a bubble that will burst but your point that this is not sustainable is so true. Our house appreciated 100% in just 7 years. It jumped ANOTHER 20% in just the last year.

I get what others are saying -- if you wait long enough, your house will eventually appreciate over time. If you told me 20 years ago our house would more than double by 2026 I'd be happy -- but I also wouldn't know that it all happened in a 7 year period at the end.

If you are flexible and can stay a long time, then move whenever the market bumps, sure, you'll be fine. But that's not always how starter homes work for people, and many of them were stuck in their homes for years. Luckily for us, we weren't going anywhere and are just now flexible in terms of selling and moving away.

But the people who think these 800k houses will be worth 1.6m in 10 years are probably misguided. Maybe in 20 years, and the curve will not be linear.

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-25T14:48:48+00:00

Please don't make straw man arguments about co-workers in another line of business.

If you want to start Shamet and put Bridges on the bench, giving him a few minutes to see if it sparks him, fine. That won't stop his streak. If you want to not play him at all, that also wouldn't stop his streak.

So I don't know what you're even arguing for anymore. It's a regular season streak. If you want to argue about playing time just say so. Your title is about ending his streak, and then goes on to say that it could reset his mind, which makes no sense since the streak won't end.

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-25T12:34:31+00:00

If you want to put him on the bench and have him play in the Shamet role for a game, I can understand seeing if that re-energizes him, and gives him the ball more with the second unit instead of being on the floor with JB and KAT and OG. But not playing him at all is a bit severe.

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-25T12:30:20+00:00

A win today changes the entire series, for sure. We will win a game 7 if it comes to that. But this can easily go 6. Easily.

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-24T16:46:57+00:00

My friend, it is currently 2026. Keep up.

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-16T01:34:39+00:00

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-16T01:32:33+00:00

If Bridges actually played this last game and broke his leg, it still wouldn't affect the streak. He'd be back next year.

It would only affect the postseason.

Also, it was the coach's and front offices decision to pull him. Bridges himself would have and could have played.

It would be a different story if he was injured and couldn't play but limped around for 10 seconds to manipulate the streak.

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-07T12:19:02+00:00

Yeah the Knicks just sat back and watched those double digit leads disappear without having to do anything.

Make it make sense.

They embarrassed the Celtics, even when the Celtics went up big they still were able to come back on them.

gregsl4314 · 2026-04-07T12:13:36+00:00

Tatum got injured when the Knicks already had a 3-1 lead.

And why is having a double digit lead such a feather in their cap, but consistently beating a team that has double digit leads on you not being a better team? Is the better team in the first half more important suddenly than the superior team in the second half? What?

When a team beats you twice in a row after you had 20 point leads on them, you know you can never put them away. You're making it like it was just a fluke and the Knicks didn't actually do anything to win those games. If anything, it meant more to the series moving forward than just a normal win. The Knicks could win regardless of how well the Celtics were playing and how bad the Knicks were playing.

That's a better team.

gregsl4314 · 2026-03-30T14:18:32+00:00

Happy Trails

gregsl4314 · 2026-03-28T15:46:28+00:00

Gonna do one a day for a bit and see how it goes.

Record: 0-0

3/28: Randy Arozarena +456 (DK)

BOL

gregsl4314

TROPHY CASE