T'wolves score ~30 in entire 2nd!!!!!!!!!!!!!

**Nellyinctown** · 12-21-10, 01:07 AM

I am glad I parlayed the 2H under +107 with Clips +1. I cant believe the game total didnt go over after the first half, what a couple of crappy teams.

**Aristocles** · 12-21-10, 01:13 AM

I just threw up. It seems a bit too much for rational thought.

I parlayed Rockets -2 1/2 and this game O214. Utter bullshit

Not even fun

**Avon Barksdale** · 12-21-10, 01:13 AM

Milicic was hurt and Love was playing injured. All of this was known before the game even started.

**Aristocles** · 12-21-10, 01:16 AM

Originally posted by Avon Barksdale

Milicic was hurt and Love was playing injured. All of this was known before the game even started.

Yeah and somehow they manage 126 POINTS IN THE ******* GAME before halftime. What exactly is your point? Or do you have one

**Avon Barksdale** · 12-21-10, 01:34 AM

My point is, you bet on the over when 2 of a teams 3 best players were injured between two bad, inconsistent teams. It was a dumb bet. Congratulations.

**top310** · 12-21-10, 01:36 AM

Im disgusted I had them with 12 points and they kill my teaser.
Forgot it was the last game of a long road trip

**Aristocles** · 12-21-10, 01:44 AM

Originally posted by Avon Barksdale

My point is, you bet on the over when 2 of a teams 3 best players were injured between two bad, inconsistent teams. It was a dumb bet. Congratulations.

They managed to score a 126 points in the first half between them, injured players and everything, and I noticed your 'dumb' ass was leaning toward "the over" in a post you made. Neither team can play defense and the line movement 45 seconds before tip off were the factors I based my judgment on. It is what it is. It was what it was.

Listen up fckhead, it is quite simple to pass by any thread. Un-spoken/typed thoughts are acceptable. I suggest you give that a go, fckhead.

I do give you credit for being able to spell "congratulations", fckhead.

Now what?

**Avon Barksdale** · 12-21-10, 01:46 AM

Originally posted by Aristocles

They managed to score a 126 points in the first half and I noticed your dumb ass was leaning toward "the over" in a post you made.

Listen up fckhead, it is quite simple to pass by any thread. Un-spoken/typed thoughts are acceptable. I suggest you give that a go, fckhead.

I do give you credit for being able to spell "congratulations", fckhead.

Now what?

Originally posted by Avon Barksdale

The statistics and records I have would point toward playing the under in the 2H of LAC/Minnesota and possibly a LAC 3RD QTR. I am watching the game on NBA League Pass to make sure it seems solid.

**Aristocles** · 12-21-10, 01:58 AM

In reply to this post, vis a vis, the FG:

"what do you think about clippers and wolves over 212?"

You typed:

"they both suck and play no d, so i'd lean over, but i have no play on it because they are both bad teams and aren't consistent."

This is what I referenced, when I typed: ". . . I noticed your 'dumb' ass was leaning toward '"the over" in a post you made. . ."

**Avon Barksdale** · 12-21-10, 01:59 AM

hmm. what did i say?

they both suck and play no d, but i have no play on it because they are both bad teams and aren't consistent.

thus, minnesota scored 30 points in the second half after the big 1st half score. seems pretty inconsistent to me, eh?

**JOHON8** · 12-21-10, 02:04 AM

Avon, he just called you out on a contradiction, give up.

**Avon Barksdale** · 12-21-10, 02:06 AM

i'm not sure how it's a contradiction when i said exactly what i have been saying.

good job though, your input is valuable.

**Aristocles** · 12-21-10, 02:07 AM

You said nothing but you typed that you leaned toward the 'over' as I typed in my reply to you. To which you replied with your quote from a prior post. Which was NOT what I referenced.

These two teams consistently play poorly and even more consistently play poorly defensively.

Again, keep the solipsistic thing in my mind. . .

"they both suck and play no d" Is that a consistent thing with these teams? R-H-E-T-O-R-I-C-A-L