# Clips are damn scary.



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

PG Miller, Jaric, Dooling
SG Richardson, Piatkowski, Stith
SF Odom, Maggette, Fowlkes
PF Brand, Wilcox
C Olowokandi, Ely, Rooks

If this team is together in two years, they could be beating the Lakers.

That is a ton of talent.

Every one of those guys excluding Rooks could drop 20 on any given night. That is insane.

Cavs got raped. Hell Stith is even better than Jamison.


----------



## Hotlantadude198 (Jul 12, 2002)

Clippers should get half of TV games


----------



## Hotlantadude198 (Jul 12, 2002)

Everyone that knows me on the message boards knows
I have been down on the NBA...But the Clippers have 
the talent of a 1980's basketball team.


----------



## G.O.A.T (Jul 19, 2002)

The Clippers are about as scary as a 39-42 team can be. They are extremely overrated, and they have no defense just overrated players. The Pacers have better young talent according to me, David Aldridge, David Dupree, Jack Ramsay, and Hubie Brown and they proved it last year. Brad Millers numbers were better than Olowokandis last season and they are the same age. Jammal Tinsley can be just as good as Andre Miller real soon. Al Harrington looks to be ahead of Quentin Richardson, offense is about even but Harringtons far superior defense gives him the edge. Jermaine O'Neal is better than Brand, bigger, faster, much more athletic, younger, and with much more potential. Then the Pacers have future superstar Jonathan Bender, NBAs #1 defensive player Ron Artest, Fred Jones, Austin Croshere, Jeff Foster, they could have Europes best player Gregor Fuc_ka and they will add a quality back up PG to Tinsley real soon, and ofcourse they still have Mr. Reggie Miller. In the words of David Dupree "Indiana will be the next dynasty in the NBA"
ays, im sure in a few years the Clippers would settle for losing to the Pacers in the Finals, and I'm sure their fans would settle for that too, after all the Clippers havn't been to the playofs in like 10 years.


----------



## Hotlantadude198 (Jul 12, 2002)

You have the east dynasty,but the west owns
the NBA for years to come.The Bulls will have a
good team after one more losing season.

In two years you have:

Indy
Boston
NJ
Orlando
New Orleans
Chicago Bulls
Detroit
Raptors

But it's kinda to early what will happen in two years.

Philly seems to be having some problems and
Mutombo is locked into a longterm contract.

Atlanta-Sadly,we are stuck spinning wheels in the
mud

Heat-Age is hitting them

Cleveland-Sorry,no deal

Knicks-See Hawks


----------



## G.O.A.T (Jul 19, 2002)

NBA in 2 years is so hard to predict damn

Indiana: should be great by then
Nets: if Kidds stay they will be damn good too
Magic: if Hills healthy by then and if they have a big man they could be real good
Bulls: they should be about an 8 or 7 seed by then
Hawks: they have some good young players (Rahim, Terry, Ratliff) but they just cant seem to go anywhere, a lot can be placed on injuries, but they also need a REAL pg, and if Dickuas the real deal they could be a 4 or 5 seed by this time.
Knicks: suck badly now, will almost certainly still suck in 2 years.
Cavs: They getting a nice group of young players, if they get Lebron and hes as good as advertised then who knows, they could be a damn good team.
ok i gotta go shower see ya all later


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

*Damn Scary it is, but let's wait and see*

The Clipps are set for now.....(For now only) whos know's what will happen down the road, they're stacked with Talent big time, and they are somewhat considered overrated, unless they prove otherwise, I guess consistency & playoffs would help resolve all of that, they finally get the Guard they need, Dre is a true floor leader and he will serve the players well, They might of lost Miles, but I think they have a similar player in Wilcox, if he pans out along with Ely, they would be considered as one of the bigger frontlines. they got Dre too damn easy, and they got the best of this trade, thus far, but Miles will be missed by many.


----------



## nima86 (Jul 30, 2002)

I wanna see the pacers record if they were on the West coast. Then well see whos overrated. CLippers last year would be in playoffs if they played in the sorry east


----------



## G.O.A.T (Jul 19, 2002)

Pacers had a tougher schedule last year than than the Clippers. The Pacers had more back to backs and "3 games in 4 nights" than any other team in the NBA, whereas the Clippers had the least, and if you dont believe me go check it out, also the Pacers did fine against the west, 15-13 record including beating the Clippers and the Spurs easily (also two of those loses were a 142-141 lose to the Mavs in double-OT and a loss to the T-Wolves in triple-OT) compared to the Clippers 23-29 record against the West. So there goes your "Pacers play in the weak *** East" excuse. Try to come up with something better next time ok?


----------



## nima86 (Jul 30, 2002)

play them 4 times a year instead of 2 times then we will see your record, and have the clippers play eastern teams 4 times a year then we will see how they each do.


----------



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

*East belongs to the C's and Nets*

Nets and C's are all over the Pacers in the East


----------



## JoeF (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by *G.O.A.T *
> Pacers had a tougher schedule last year than than the Clippers. The Pacers had more back to backs and "3 games in 4 nights" than any other team in the NBA, whereas the Clippers had the least, and if you dont believe me go check it out, also the Pacers did fine against the west, 15-13 record including beating the Clippers and the Spurs easily (also two of those loses were a 142-141 lose to the Mavs in double-OT and a loss to the T-Wolves in triple-OT) compared to the Clippers 23-29 record against the West. So there goes your "Pacers play in the weak *** East" excuse. Try to come up with something better next time ok?


That gives the Pacers a 27-27 record against the East and the Clippers were 16-14 against the East. That contradicts your argument. The Pacers played better than the Clippers against the west but worse than the Clippers against the East. The perfect indication of even teams. "Try to come up with something better next time ok?" Both teams were around .500 teams. In the West that is a #8-9 team. They both have potential to be better teams in the future. Fortunately it is all settled on the court.

A side note: If your numbers are right LAC played 81 games. What happened to the other game?


----------



## HORNETSFAN (Jun 11, 2002)

*Could be*

They have the look of a team that can show significant improvement. If Sterling steps up with his wallet and keeps the young talent, they could have a bright future ahead.


----------



## MadFace (Jul 12, 2002)

*things come and go in phases*

In the 1980's the east was the power conference. one didn't really notice because of the lakers out west. The 1990's with the bulls the power started to dissapate some. think about it .people started to go west to get away from the bulls until the finals. Also there were a lot of stupid trades( WeBBer, Dirk , the draft lottery( tim duncan etc) and free agency losses ( What if shaq had stayed in the east?) so the bases of power changed. The same thing will happen in time again. people will want to go to the eastern teams and things will even out. I know that's a simplified way of looking at the lack of balance, but it works


----------



## G.O.A.T (Jul 19, 2002)

How am I off a game? The Clippers were 23-29 vs. the west and 16-14 against the east, that totals 82 games.The Pacers were .500 in the East and 2 games above .500 in the West therefor finishing 2 games above .500 (42-40), the Clippers were 2 games above .500 in the East but 6 games below .500 in the West finishing 4 games below .500 (39-43). Ok, this topic isn't going anywhere, time to move on.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by *G.O.A.T *
> Pacers had a tougher schedule last year than than the Clippers. The Pacers had more back to backs and "3 games in 4 nights" than any other team in the NBA, whereas the Clippers had the least, and if you dont believe me go check it out, also the Pacers did fine against the west, 15-13 record including beating the Clippers and the Spurs easily (also two of those loses were a 142-141 lose to the Mavs in double-OT and a loss to the T-Wolves in triple-OT) compared to the Clippers 23-29 record against the West. So there goes your "Pacers play in the weak *** East" excuse. Try to come up with something better next time ok?


The Pacers were 2 games over .500 right? If they were 2 games over .500 against the West, then they were .500 against the East. The Pacers won't be a great team in two years. 

Why? Because Reggie Miller will be gone by then, and Jermaine O'Neal will have to carry the load. Pacers will be good in 3 or 4 years.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Cleveland is so stupid...they gave up the second best point guard in the league for Darius Miles? i'm speechless. To give up that you can't guess on potential...geez. Maybe they think Diop will be an all-star next year too.


----------



## Hotlantadude198 (Jul 12, 2002)

GOAT..Dickau is not the answer to our problems.he is
just the next great white hope.That's why we be stuck
spinning wheels for the next 10 seasons.Are headed 
in the direction of the old Clippers.

It's ashame to see that happen after a winning record
every year besides one between 1985-1998


----------

