Phx-Suns.Net

pickle wrote:

Hermen wrote:

O_Gardino wrote:

pickle wrote:Second round predictions: (I know the second round has already started but these were my thoughts before the games tipped off, just didn't find the time to post)

Cleveland - Toronto: 4-3 Cleveland
Washington - Boston: 4-3 Washington

San Antonio - Houston: 4-3 Houston
Golden State - Utah: 4-1 Golden State

Not that confident in any of these.

It's risky to predict that Houston will beat Houston.

More seriously, I don't think Toronto has a chance against Cleveland. But we can hope.

His format was: teamA - teamB: winnerWins-loserWins winningTeam
Houston was just the only winning team not in the teamA position

You must be a programmer... you summed that up way better than I could have.

Kinda weird that Utah is the only one with a state name, and not the city name...

When your entire metro area can barely crack a million people, and the entire state only has 3 million, you do what you can to bring in the entire state.

Cap wrote:

pickle wrote:

Hermen wrote:

O_Gardino wrote:

pickle wrote:Second round predictions: (I know the second round has already started but these were my thoughts before the games tipped off, just didn't find the time to post)

Cleveland - Toronto: 4-3 Cleveland
Washington - Boston: 4-3 Washington

San Antonio - Houston: 4-3 Houston
Golden State - Utah: 4-1 Golden State

Not that confident in any of these.

It's risky to predict that Houston will beat Houston.

More seriously, I don't think Toronto has a chance against Cleveland. But we can hope.

His format was: teamA - teamB: winnerWins-loserWins winningTeam
Houston was just the only winning team not in the teamA position

You must be a programmer... you summed that up way better than I could have.

Kinda weird that Utah is the only one with a state name, and not the city name...

Around the league, there's also Indiana and Minnesota. Does New York count?

Golden State? That's the state nickname, not the city name.

What about football? I remember there was some outcry when we changed the team name from Phoenix Cardinals to the Arizona Cardinals...

pickle wrote:What about football? I remember there was some outcry when we changed the team name from Phoenix Cardinals to the Arizona Cardinals...

That change was a great call, and what they needed to be from the beginning, IMO. Having two birds in a name was odd to me.

In2ition wrote:

pickle wrote:What about football? I remember there was some outcry when we changed the team name from Phoenix Cardinals to the Arizona Cardinals...

That change was a great call, and what they needed to be from the beginning, IMO. Having two birds in a name was odd to me.

Two birds, one stone.

I have always disliked the names "Arizona" Cardinals and "Arizona" Diamondbacks. I think both would be better with "Phoenix" in their names. Using the state name makes us sound bush league like our whole state barely merits having sports teams. Successful cities and states don't use the whole state name in their team names.

One fun exercise is to think of all 30 NBA team names and ask yourself, would this team sound better if you subbed in the state for the city? The one emphatic "yes" I can think of is for the Blazers. I mean, come on, the Oregon Trailblazers is an awesome team name.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I have always disliked the names "Arizona" Cardinals and "Arizona" Diamondbacks. I think both would be better with "Phoenix" in their names. Using the state name makes us sound bush league like our whole state barely merits having sports teams. Successful cities and states don't use the whole state name in their team names.

One fun exercise is to think of all 30 NBA team names and ask yourself, would this team sound better if you subbed in the state for the city? The one emphatic "yes" I can think of is for the Blazers. I mean, come on, the Oregon Trailblazers is an awesome team name.

So you are not a fan of the Golden State Warriors?

Indy wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I have always disliked the names "Arizona" Cardinals and "Arizona" Diamondbacks. I think both would be better with "Phoenix" in their names. Using the state name makes us sound bush league like our whole state barely merits having sports teams. Successful cities and states don't use the whole state name in their team names.

One fun exercise is to think of all 30 NBA team names and ask yourself, would this team sound better if you subbed in the state for the city? The one emphatic "yes" I can think of is for the Blazers. I mean, come on, the Oregon Trailblazers is an awesome team name.

So you are not a fan of the Golden State Warriors?

Or all the Minnesota teams, the Colorado Avalanche or Rockies, the Carolina Panthers or Hurricanes, the Florida Panthers, the Tennessee Titans, Indiana Pacers, or Texas Rangers. I'm probably forgetting some.

In2ition wrote:

Indy wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I have always disliked the names "Arizona" Cardinals and "Arizona" Diamondbacks. I think both would be better with "Phoenix" in their names. Using the state name makes us sound bush league like our whole state barely merits having sports teams. Successful cities and states don't use the whole state name in their team names.

One fun exercise is to think of all 30 NBA team names and ask yourself, would this team sound better if you subbed in the state for the city? The one emphatic "yes" I can think of is for the Blazers. I mean, come on, the Oregon Trailblazers is an awesome team name.

So you are not a fan of the Golden State Warriors?

Or all the Minnesota teams, the Colorado Avalanche or Rockies, the Carolina Panthers or Hurricanes, the Florida Panthers, the Tennessee Titans, Indiana Pacers, or Texas Rangers. I'm probably forgetting some.

New England Patriots don't even limit it to one state.

Wait. What's wrong with Texas Rangers in that sense?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

Cap wrote:

In2ition wrote:

Indy wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I have always disliked the names "Arizona" Cardinals and "Arizona" Diamondbacks. I think both would be better with "Phoenix" in their names. Using the state name makes us sound bush league like our whole state barely merits having sports teams. Successful cities and states don't use the whole state name in their team names.

One fun exercise is to think of all 30 NBA team names and ask yourself, would this team sound better if you subbed in the state for the city? The one emphatic "yes" I can think of is for the Blazers. I mean, come on, the Oregon Trailblazers is an awesome team name.

So you are not a fan of the Golden State Warriors?

Or all the Minnesota teams, the Colorado Avalanche or Rockies, the Carolina Panthers or Hurricanes, the Florida Panthers, the Tennessee Titans, Indiana Pacers, or Texas Rangers. I'm probably forgetting some.

New England Patriots don't even limit it to one state.

By Marty's logic, that's because their whole are is so underpopulated and generally poor that they have to share one team.

Same thing goes for colleges. Cal Berkeley sounds like it is from an area of the country that can only afford one school!

O_Gardino wrote:

Cap wrote:

In2ition wrote:

Indy wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I have always disliked the names "Arizona" Cardinals and "Arizona" Diamondbacks. I think both would be better with "Phoenix" in their names. Using the state name makes us sound bush league like our whole state barely merits having sports teams. Successful cities and states don't use the whole state name in their team names.

One fun exercise is to think of all 30 NBA team names and ask yourself, would this team sound better if you subbed in the state for the city? The one emphatic "yes" I can think of is for the Blazers. I mean, come on, the Oregon Trailblazers is an awesome team name.

So you are not a fan of the Golden State Warriors?

Or all the Minnesota teams, the Colorado Avalanche or Rockies, the Carolina Panthers or Hurricanes, the Florida Panthers, the Tennessee Titans, Indiana Pacers, or Texas Rangers. I'm probably forgetting some.

New England Patriots don't even limit it to one state.

By Marty's logic, that's because their whole are is so underpopulated and generally poor that they have to share one team.

Same thing goes for colleges. Cal Berkeley sounds like it is from an area of the country that can only afford one school!

Arizona and Kentucky are so poor that we have to share a mascot.

Indy wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I have always disliked the names "Arizona" Cardinals and "Arizona" Diamondbacks. I think both would be better with "Phoenix" in their names. Using the state name makes us sound bush league like our whole state barely merits having sports teams. Successful cities and states don't use the whole state name in their team names.

One fun exercise is to think of all 30 NBA team names and ask yourself, would this team sound better if you subbed in the state for the city? The one emphatic "yes" I can think of is for the Blazers. I mean, come on, the Oregon Trailblazers is an awesome team name.

So you are not a fan of the Golden State Warriors?

LOL. Got him!

Indy wrote:So you are not a fan of the Golden State Warriors?

I do think they'd be better as the Oakland Warriors, or now as the San Francisco Warriors.