And the Magic get blown at home by Chicago. This is the same Orlando that blew out San Antonio and Cleveland.
Not the same Magic. They were missing both their starting PG and backup PG in the latest game so the 3rd string guy started.
I wish we could've gotten Fournier damn it. That dude would be our 3rd ball handler, our 3rd scorer, are 3rd everything. Question to the forum: If Orlando is a bottom-dweller at the trade deadline, what do you think it'd take to get Fournier? Maybe something like: BOS Gets: Ed Davis (Using Injured Player Exception) ORL Gets: Maurice Harkless, 2018 BOS 1st, 2018 POR 1st POR Gets: Evan Fournier, Jonathan Simmons (TPE). Would that be enough? I like this lineup: Lillard / McCollum McCollum / Simmons Fournier / Turner Aminu / Vonleh Nurkic / Collins
...Orlando just signed Simmons, they aren't going to lose both players so no that is not enough (nor do they want Harkless back) I do like Fournier though
Orlando looks for real and there is no situation in which they'd want to give up Simmons and Fournier for Mo Harkless back. I know they get picks but it ain't gonna happen. Do you really think Orlando isn't a playoff team? It's not like their wins are close games against crappy teams. They are blowing out good teams on the road. The one game sample size of their loss to Chicago doesn't mean they should be looking to blow it up.
I can't remember a season when so many teams were around 500 at the same time...only a couple bottom feeders this season
Dude... LMAO. I bet you they're at least 8 games under .500 at the all-star break. It's funny that you say "The one game sample size is two small", yet formulate opinions with a ridiculous level of certainty based of 4-game, 6-game, 8-game sample sizes. So when a team at the start of the season overperforms and beats a couple of good teams, you get extremely carried away. Suns "hottest team in the league" as well as "the best team if they hadn't played us". Orlando is now "for real" and a "playoff team". You get sooo carried away with small sample sizes. Smaller sample size means more standard deviation, means less accurate results (in the case, a less accurate record). Quit getting carried away with small sample sizes. It's ridiculous.
His boyfriend has been getting carried away with his small sample size for years! #BAM Too bad he won't see this.
In something like this, schedules matter. Be informed. http://www.espn.com/nba/team/schedule/_/name/orl/orlando-magic
As do definitions, for although it seems obvious to me, there are some who take an altered definition of the term "games under .500", looking at the past instead of at the future. At the all star break, ORL will have played 57 games, so the threshold here should over/under 24.5 wins (24-33 being 9 games under .500). I would hate for this to be agreed to, for the Magic to be 24-33, and for KS to then say, "If they had won 5 of the games they've lost they'd be over .500; therefore they're only 4.5 games below .500 right now, and I win." I've seen this argument elsewhere before and suggest it be avoided in advance.
