Wednesday, December 22, 2004

Wednesday's NBA Picks

December 22, 2004

Home Team in CAPS

Individual record with team in [ ]'s

Anthony's Picks

Last Night:(2-4), Week:(2-10), Year:(153-149-10), Locks:(13-8)
  • BOSTON [5-16] -3 over New York [14-8] (W)
  • INDIANA [11-7-1] pk over Philly [10-7-1] (L)
  • San Antonio [10-10-1] -4.5 over ORLANDO [15-4] (L)
  • Utah [13-10] +3 over TORONTO [10-12-1] (L)
  • ATLANTA [12-9] +10.5 over Dallas [13-8-1]--LOCK (W)
  • Chicago [7-14] +9 over DETROIT [11-9] (W)
  • Cleveland [10-11-1] -4 over NEW JERSEY [10-10] (L)
  • Portland [9-11] +2.5 over MILWAUKEE [12-5-1] (W)
  • HOUSTON [9-9-2] -10 over Charlotte [8-11] (L)
  • GOLDEN STATE [10-9-2] +3 over Memphis [10-13] (W)
  • SEATTLE [11-8] -9 over Denver [8-12] (W)
  • LAKERS [8-8-1] -13 over New Orleans [10-9-1] (L)

I'd rather give it to Amanda Duke than continue making picks at this rate. I mean, when's the last time the Clippers covered, when they had Danny Manning? And the Suns the other night? They could only beat the Nuggets sans (Paul's word and one of the worst in the English language) 'Melo and Camby by 2? The Bulls have won 4 in a row, the Celtics can beat the Cavs in Cleveland but not Miami sans (I'm on a roll) Shaq, New Orleans is just f***ing with people every night, Memphis looks unbeatable...and was it just me or were the Knicks trailing by 82 at one point last night? How does that happen? How does Josh Howard have something like 26 and 17 in 28 minutes? The NBA is rediculous, that's why tonight I have a doozy of a lock. Why Atlanta, am I crazy? Well yes, but the real reason is that Dallas beat the Hawks the other night by 125 and then the Mavs trounced the Knicks by 94. Seems like a no-brainer to pick Dallas, and thats why I'm going with the ATL. Golden State is a strong play too. Right now you should go with the exact opposite of the obvious, like phx and den the other night. It should work and if it doesn't, I won't be the least bit surprised. Basically I just wasted 10 minutes of my life, sorry.


Paul's Picks

Last Night:(3-3), Week:(4-8), Year:(163-142-11), Locks:(13-9-1)

  • BOSTON [6-15] -3 over New York [15-7] (W)
  • Philly [15-4-1] pk over INDIANA [12-5-2] (W)
  • San Antonio [9-11-1] -4.5 over ORLANDO [18-2] (L)
  • TORONTO [11-11-1] +3 over Utah [11-12] (W)
  • Dallas [15-7-1] -10.5 over ATLANTA [12-9] (L)
  • Chicago [8-13] +9 over DETROIT [14-6] (W)
  • Cleveland [9-12-1] -4 over NEW JERSEY [11-9] (L)
  • Portland [9-11] +2.5 over MILWAUKEE [14-4-1] (W)
  • HOUSTON [7-11-2] -10 over Charlotte [8-10-2] (L)
  • Memphis [10-14] -3 over GOLDEN STATE [9-10-2] (L)
  • SEATTLE [11-9] -9 over Denver [12-10] (W)
  • LAKERS [8-13] -13 over New Orleans [9-10-1] (L)

Hi, my name's Paul and I've done nothing to help Ant out with these picks in the last week and a half or so yet I'm still faring better than he is. I have a cool new job which doesn't even allow me 3 minutes to sign online to make my picks. I actually just make Ant call me with all the spreads and be my little slave. In addition to me ruining his entire life, my brother also bashes him after he worked for 3 days on an article. My brother's a jerk and a loser and didn't get laid til he was...well, he's never gotten laid. Poor guy, maybe that's why he has so much time to write 5000 word posts in our fantasy league. Anyway, since this isn't even really me writing this, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah and Happy Kwanza. I'll try and get a new 5 on Five up before Artest comes back.


3 Comments:

At 2:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ant -- sweet picks on atlanta and golden state. chicago was a great pick, as well. by the way, ant, when i said good luck on your picks, i meant it sincerely and not as a sarcastic jab (although given past history, I do understand why you apparently took it that way).

"both" of you guys should know that i didn't mean to criticize ant's article harshly at all. the fact is, there WERE facts wrong, and i thought i was going easy by holding back on some of them. you seemed to be asking what people thought of the piece, and i tried to illuminate what I liked about it (the media critique) and not dwell much on what i disliked about it. rather than shoot my mouth off, though, i will be more careful with what i post and strengthen the filter, so to speak. i like reading both of you guys' writing, and i enjoy finding out what you have to say, even if I vehemently disagree with it some of the time. so while i think your take on the marketing of kobe is absolutely preposterous (a response you essentially invited on numerous occasions in the article), it did make me think, it did make me laugh, and it did make me smile like i always do when i'm hearing something new. frankly, i've read and heard a LOT of takes on kobe, and i think jim caple's article contrasting him with MJ (an article which I probably find even more misguided and unfair) is the only one I can definitively say I prefer to yours. so, keep up the good work and don't let Debbie Downer throw you off your track.

But at LEAST get your facts right. I may be a jerk and a loser, but I have hit the booty. aplenty. sorry if i never occasioned to do it in front of you, but more sex goes on in the world than what endlessly occupies your computer screen. perv.

 
At 3:14 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

it was skip bayless, not jim caple. for the record, skip bayless ALWAYS comes off like an ignorant, smarmy prick. but his articles are still worth reading.

 
At 8:39 AM, Blogger Anthony Peretore said...

Thank you Matthew. I always take your advice into consideration as much, if not more, than anyone elses. I'm always up for a friendly debate on any issue regarding sports, so maybe next time pose your comment that way so we can both learn from one another, and hopefully even pull some others into the debate. And I don't know why you're directing all this virgin talk at me, that was, um, Paul. Yeah. Happy Holidays buddy, enjoy your time in beautiful CT.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home