# Lakers vs. Kings, still a rivalry?



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

i've been wondering, has the "shizzle" of lakers/kings cooled off? if it has, it was one of the greatest rivalries in recent NBA history, between 2 teams: one who always had their number and the who other wouldn't back down. so-cal vs. nor-cal is great for the NBA, and i gauruntee that they still want this to be a rivalry, they always televise lakers vs kings games on national TV. and even if it is a rivalry, all that's left from the good'ol days is kobe and bibby...

p.s: everybody knows the kings were the better team in 02 or 03. you can't argue against the fact that the officials wiped the lakers' *** in those games, thats just how the NBA wants it. if it wasn't for a simple bounce of the ball, the Kings would have a championship banner right now...

p.s #2: the offseason sucks :curse:


----------



## DaBruins (Jul 30, 2003)

Sacramental said:


> i've been wondering, has the "shizzle" of lakers/kings cooled off? if it has, it was one of the greatest rivalries in recent NBA history, between 2 teams: one who always had their number and the who other wouldn't back down. so-cal vs. nor-cal is great for the NBA, and i gauruntee that they still want this to be a rivalry, they always televise lakers vs kings games on national TV. and even if it is a rivalry, all that's left from the good'ol days is kobe and bibby...
> 
> p.s: everybody knows the kings were the better team in 02 or 03. you can't argue against the fact that the officials wiped the lakers' *** in those games, thats just how the NBA wants it. if it wasn't for a simple bounce of the ball, the Kings would have a championship banner right now...
> 
> p.s #2: the offseason sucks :curse:


the kings were better?? It's statements like that that makes the rivarly live on.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

nah, neither one of our teams is significant enough.


----------



## BBB (Jan 19, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> p.s: everybody knows the kings were the better team in 02 or 03.


LOL

Sure thing.


----------



## nguyen_milan (Jun 28, 2005)

http://geocities.com/laker_john/kingslakers/KingsLakers.htm
Rivalry? nah, i dont think so.. haha


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

Sacramental said:


> p.s: everybody knows the kings were the better team in 02 or 03. you can't argue against the fact that the officials wiped the lakers' *** in those games, thats just how the NBA wants it. if it wasn't for a simple bounce of the ball, the Kings would have a championship banner right now...



At least some things haven't changes since the rivarly days. Crybaby


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

btw, who thinks bibby sounds like kermit the frog? :banana:


----------



## City_Dawg (Jul 25, 2004)

Naw, its not a rivalry, not anymore, but if the teams meet in the playoffs....

And quit trying to bait guys with your statements


----------



## Pnack (Aug 23, 2005)

nguyen_milan said:


> http://geocities.com/laker_john/kingslakers/KingsLakers.htm
> Rivalry? nah, i dont think so.. haha


Ouccccchhh hahaha, that makes me feel sorry for Kings fans all over the world.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Thank the refs for the Kings missing numerous free throws and Peja and Christie's air balls in game 7.


----------



## cadarn (Feb 1, 2006)

Sacramental said:


> p.s: everybody knows the kings were the better team in 02 or 03. you can't argue against the fact that the officials wiped the lakers' *** in those games, thats just how the NBA wants it. if it wasn't for a simple bounce of the ball, the Kings would have a championship banner right now...


hahaha, this is why fans of both la teams hate the kings


----------



## brotherofthelunatic (Jul 10, 2006)

afobisme said:


> btw, who thinks bibby sounds like kermit the frog? :banana:



And looks like Mini Me.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

I don't understand how it was a rivalry in the first place. Sure it was heated competition since both teams hated each other, but the Kings didn't win anything against the Lakers. 

In order for it to be a rivalry both teams need to win. King's never accomplished that, when they both hated each other.


----------



## Ghiman (May 19, 2003)

OMG! :rofl: 



nguyen_milan said:


> http://geocities.com/laker_john/kingslakers/KingsLakers.htm
> Rivalry? nah, i dont think so.. haha



Nawww i dont think its a rivalry anymore ever since Snaq left. He was the only one who made it sound like a rivalry.


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

This shouldn't be considered a rivalry. We always won.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> Thank the refs for the Kings missing numerous free throws and Peja and Christie's air balls in game 7.


:yes:


----------



## hollywood476 (Aug 20, 2005)

what, so does that mean the lakers and timberwolves were never rivals...cause I thought they were since I live in minnesota.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Very few rivalries have the "power" to be decent when both teams are mediocre. That's what the loss of sizzle is about IMO.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

hollywood476 said:


> what, so does that mean the lakers and timberwolves were never rivals...cause I thought they were since I live in minnesota.


rivals? not really... the wolves lost to us in the first round so many times, and in 04 we saw them in the WCF.. but that was it. wasnt enough to become rivals, plus the series wasn't historically good, like it was when we played the kings/spurs.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

You have to beat the other team for it to be a rivalry. Woops.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> http://geocities.com/laker_john/kin...KingsLakers.htm


bump


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

Only a few players left from that rivalry. on the LA side kobe, Sac side bibby, miller and anyone else i didnt mention.


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

EHL said:


> bump


Sorry, the page you requested was not found.

You left a "..." in the URL.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

^^^ My bad.



> http://geocities.com/laker_john/kingslakers/KingsLakers.htm


bump


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Rivalry? Nah... Both team suck... And it will be a long time before both teams are relevant at the same exact time. All the players from the old Kings are gone, all the players from the old Lakers are gone. There's nobody left besides Bibby and Kobe.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

EHL said:


> You have to beat the other team for it to be a rivalry. Woops.


Like the Red Sox and Yankees right?


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Zero Hero said:


> Like the Red Sox and Yankees right?



Both those teams have beat each other in the playoffs. Kings haven't done so yet with Lakers.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Zero Hero said:


> Like the Red Sox and Yankees right?


The Red Sox at least _once_ beat the Yankees in the playoffs. And that year they went on and won a World Series. So horrible comparison.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Ah yes... the greatest rivalry of all time didn't become a rivalry until... 2 years ago... Fantastic... That 2 year long rivalry... Greatest... Ever... I mean you're absolutely right... Not a rivalry until 2004...


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

are you guys serious?anyone can say that a team sucks, but you know, you KNOW, the kings are not a bad team. for a team that's only been together for half a season, it's idiotic to say **** like that. if ending the 2nd half of the season with the 3rd best record sucks, than the lakers ARE TRASH. define suck before you go off and use it like that, kings dont suck...


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

I don't see any Laker fans saying the Kings suck...

Only two people have said the word "suck" that would be you, and Zero Hero


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Sacramental said:


> are you guys serious?anyone can say that a team sucks, but you know, you KNOW, the kings are not a bad team. for a team that's only been together for half a season, it's idiotic to say **** like that. if ending the 2nd half of the season with the 3rd best record sucks, than the lakers ARE TRASH. define suck before you go off and use it like that, kings dont suck...


Both teams suck in comparison to when the rivalry took place. There is no doubting that. Both teams are not in contention, and they aren't important. A rivalry doesn't exist unless there's something they're fighting for. There can't be a rivalry between two teams battling to make the playoffs when half the teams make the playoffs.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Zero Hero said:


> Ah yes... the greatest rivalry of all time didn't become a rivalry until... 2 years ago... Fantastic... That 2 year long rivalry... Greatest... Ever... I mean you're absolutely right... Not a rivalry until 2004...


It wasn't the "greatest rivalry of all time" until the Sox beat the Yankees. Before that time it was the "Sox have bad blood against the Yankees yet always get *** pounded when it matters most" rivalry. Now, at least, they can say they not only beat the Yankees, but beat them in embarassing fashion and then won the chip. The Sacramento Kings? Pssst.


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

Zero Hero said:


> There's nobody left besides Bibby and Kobe.


Miller? George?


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Shady™ said:


> Miller? George?


George is gone most likely... And Miller wasn't present during the rivalry.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

EHL said:


> It wasn't the "greatest rivalry of all time" until the Sox beat the Yankees. Before that time it was the "Sox have bad blood against the Yankees yet always get *** pounded when it matters most" rivalry. Now, at least, they can say they not only beat the Yankees, but beat them in embarassing fashion and then won the chip. The Sacramento Kings? Pssst.


No it wasn't the greatest, in fact it wasn't even a RIVALRY according to your standards...


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

never argue with Faker fans, zero hero, you should know that by now living in LA


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Zero Hero said:


> No it wasn't the greatest, in fact it wasn't even a RIVALRY according to your standards...


It's common sense. You want rose-colored horse crap, take your ish over to the KingsFan forums.



sac23kings said:


> never argue with Faker fans, zero hero, you should know that by now living in LA





> http://geocities.com/laker_john/kingslakers/KingsLakers.htm


bump.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Well, both teams are in the ****ter. And I don't see any hope with Mitch as GM. So I'll take my position over yours currently.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Zero Hero said:


> Well, both teams are in the ****ter. And I don't see any hope with Mitch as GM. So I'll take my position over yours currently.


Problem is I never argued any of this. Of course, when you want to talk about who is in the "****ter" more, it looks bad when you're arguing for the team who ended up with fewer regular and post season wins (Kings) than the Lakers this past season. Funny. :laugh:


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

whatevers EHL, it took 27 free throws in the 4th quarter of game 6 in 2002 for the desperate lakers to win that year... i know what i saw and i know in that year we were the better team. i wont count 2003 cause injuries are injuries(webber) so whatevers... but for 1 year we really were the better team and that makes it a rivalry in my book...


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

sac23kings said:


> whatevers man, it took 27 free throws in the 4th quarter of game 6 in 2002 for the desperate lakers to win that year... i know what i saw and i know in that year we were the better team. i wont count 2003 cause injuries are injuries(webber) so whatevers... but for 1 year we really were the better team and that makes it a rivalry in my book...


How many missed FTs did the Kings miss in Game 7 of that series again? Fourteen, plus lots of choking. 

Face it kid, your buddies lost that series. For a quick recap see here: http://www.nba.com/playoffs2002/west_finals.html. And for a brief overview of NBA history, see here: http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

There Shouldve Never Been A Game 7


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

sac23kings said:


> There Shouldve Never Been A Game 7


Nah, bad reffing in Game 6 made up for the ref choke job in the Kings' favor in Game 5. Kings then choked without the refs' help in Game 7, and the rest is history.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

But there was and you lost... have a nice day


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

Bibbys Nose Fouled Kobes Elbow... I Forgot About That One


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

sac23kings said:


> Bibbys Nose Fouled Kobes Elbow... I Forgot About That One





> Nah, bad reffing in Game 6 made up for the ref choke job in the Kings' favor in Game 5. Kings then choked without the refs' help in Game 7, and the rest is history.


bump


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

One of the greatest songs ever.... Also its a shame there is no video of webbers moving screen in game 5 of that series, buts its allright

<object height="350" width="425">

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CqZQ7fYavT4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" height="350" width="425"></object>


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Cris said:


> One of the greatest songs ever....
> 
> <object height="350" width="425">
> 
> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CqZQ7fYavT4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" height="350" width="425"></object>


Horry > Kings


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

sac23kings said:


> Bibbys Nose Fouled Kobes Elbow... I Forgot About That One


Because that never happened, so it's easy to forget.

They didn't call a foul on Bibby that play, it was a no call and they called the foul on Christie seconds after.

BTW how many FT's of those 27 were in the final minutes when the Kings were intentionally fouling? How many FTs did the Kings shoot in game 7?


----------



## City_Dawg (Jul 25, 2004)

Why is this thread 4 pages long?

seriously.....


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

yes dont blame it on bibby... we all know ms. piggy told him to do it.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

The Spurs and Lakers were the better rivalry. Battle of the two best players in the league for a good 5 years (from 1999-2003, Shaq and Duncan were the best and no one else was close). Lakers respected the Spurs because before the Lakers began their three-peat, the Spurs were the team to put them on their butt in a 4 game sweep. Then during the dynasty, the Lakers put the Spurs back in their place for 2 of the 3 years in dominant fashion. Then in 2003 the Spurs put an end to the dynasty. 

The Lakers-Kings 7 game series was a classic series, but nothing to build a rivalry on. Lakers were a lot more successful, and in rivalries, you'd like to see the success go back and forth.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Sir Patchwork said:


> The Lakers-Kings 7 game series was a classic series, but nothing to build a rivalry on. Lakers were a lot more successful, and in rivalries, you'd like to see the success go back and forth.


I agree. That series was epic, but that was the only year where people actually thought the kings could win...and they didn't. Lakers won three strait after the spurs swept us in 99', then they knocked us off in 2003, with some good battles in between. probably a better "rivalry", just didn't have all the hatred between the teams. spurs were too classy for that.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

to keep this from going to 5 pages: 
kings are a better team than the lakers right now, if you wanna argue that, you're a <font color="red">*edit*</font>. end of story, ty and goodnight.


<font color="red">Be nice...

-BH</font>


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Sacramental said:


> to keep this from going to 5 pages:
> kings are a better team than the lakers right now, if you wanna argue that, you're a d*mbass. end of story, ty and goodnight.


http://www.nba.com/standings/team_record_comparison/conferenceNew_Std_Cnf.html.

Good night indeed. :laugh:


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

LMAO!!! ^ ^, this EDIT doesnt realize that the kings made a major trade for a man by the name of ron artest, yeah. wake up and smell the coffee.. GOOD, NIGHT!

Don't insult other posters


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

well then, don't forget that the lakers began to gel after the kings got ron artest.

if they are better, only by a slight margin. either way, both of our teams are considered to be in the same tier.

btw, you're sacramental huh? no wonder you like ron artest :biggrin:

i dont think both teams have to win for there to be a rivalry. it just has to be a hard fought game, where there is no clear "better" team.


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

artest = mvp next year... mark my words


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

sac23kings said:


> artest = mvp next year... *mark my words*


if i did, i'd only find out later that they are insignificant anyways.

so here's my own. ron artest = grammy for best new artest of the year. mark my words. :biggrin:


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

I've almost become ashamed to be a Kings fans after reading some of these comments...


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Sacramental said:


> LMAO!!! ^ ^, this idiot doesnt realize that the kings made a major trade for a man by the name of ron artest, yeah. wake up and smell the coffee.. GOOD, NIGHT!



Sorry to keep this pointless argument going any further, but for the record;

Kings record against the lakers w/ Ron Artest: 1-2


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

Zero Hero said:


> I've almost become ashamed to be a Kings fans after reading some of these comments...


That's alright dawg, we all have some "family" members like that... :biggrin:


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

Zero Hero said:


> I've almost become ashamed to be a Kings fans after reading some of these comments...


dont worry man, it's just one troll.. im not gonna say "oh man, most kings fans are asses now" ... i dont think anyone else will because of him either :curse:


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> The Spurs and Lakers were the better rivalry. Battle of the two best players in the league for a good 5 years (from 1999-2003, Shaq and Duncan were the best and no one else was close). Lakers respected the Spurs because before the Lakers began their three-peat, the Spurs were the team to put them on their butt in a 4 game sweep. Then during the dynasty, the Lakers put the Spurs back in their place for 2 of the 3 years in dominant fashion. Then in 2003 the Spurs put an end to the dynasty.
> 
> The Lakers-Kings 7 game series was a classic series, but nothing to build a rivalry on. Lakers were a lot more successful, and in rivalries, you'd like to see the success go back and forth.


The Lakers dominated the Spurs in the playoffs during the 3peat though. Swept them in literally historic fashion in 01 and beat them in 5 in 02, it didn't compare to the Kings rivalry, or even the Blazers rivalry.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

we'll see...we'll see..


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

Zero Hero said:


> I've almost become ashamed to be a Kings fans after reading some of these comments...



what comments??


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

sac23kings said:


> what comments??


Look at Sacramental's posts/comments.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Eternal said:


> Look at Sacramental's posts/comments.


Then again, anyone who says Ron Artest is a legit MVP candidate in today's NBA, should be shot.


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

EHL said:


> Then again, anyone who says Ron Artest is a legit MVP candidate in today's NBA, should be shot.



True, true. If anyone thinks Ron Artest has a chance for MVP, their badly mistaken. =/


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

im telling you, ron artest's album is going to hit the top 100 charts on the billboard in his first week, and he'll steadily climb all the way to #1!


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

the reason why laker fans hate ron ron - he SHUTS down kobe. kobe might get 30 points on artest, but look at the stat sheet and see 9 for 27


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

EHL said:


> Then again, anyone who says Ron Artest is a legit MVP candidate in today's NBA, should be shot.


ok u tryin to be funny? lets look at a couple things... the kings were **** before he came and then they had arguably one of the best mid to end of season turn arounds in nba history... his impact on both ends of the floor is like no other in the nba... hes the best defensive player in the game today and his offense is pretty darn good for having not played ball for a year and a half... we will see my friend... and i guarantee artest gets an mvp before that wimp kobe.


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

Can't we have a sticky thread with the title "Silly morons whose teams never won anything but think they're great"? We could just let the Lippers and Queens battle it out amongst themselves and not deliberately instigate anyone else.

Artest MVP? Yep, right after hell freezes over. And with global warming in full swing, it might be a while. They'll be lucky if Artest makes it through another season without imploding and getting banned from the league.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

Sacramental said:


> the reason why laker fans hate ron ron - he SHUTS down kobe. kobe might get 30 points on artest, but look at the stat sheet and see 9 for 27


actually, i LOVE ron. he's pure entertainment... on and off the court.

i just made fun of him so your sacremental mind would get punctured, and you'd run off crying.



sac23kings said:


> ok u tryin to be funny? lets look at a couple things... the kings were **** before he came and then they had arguably one of the best mid to end of season turn arounds in nba history... his impact on both ends of the floor is like no other in the nba... hes the best defensive player in the game today and his offense is pretty darn good for having not played ball for a year and a half... we will see my friend... and i guarantee artest gets an mvp before that wimp kobe.


it's not arguable. they were 18-25 when they got ron artest. they ended the season 26-13. now, by regular standards, that's pretty good... but definitely not the best mid to end of season turnaround. then again, im not discrediting the credibility of the kings either.

either way, ron's offensive presence doesn't make that much of an impact on the team.. and do you think a defensive player would actually win MVP? im not sure if that's ever happened before, but if it has, it hasn't been often. he's good on offense, great on defense. usually MVP winners are either great on offense, good on defense... or great on both.


----------



## Shaolin (Aug 6, 2004)

*That Horry video was awesome*

Look....from the LA perspective, its not a rivalry. But from the Sac perspective it certainly is. Why? 

Because everyone hates the Lakers. Portland hates us. Sac hates us. Seattle hates us. Phoenix hates us. They hate the city of Los Angeles and they hate its winning sports teams. 

Where on the other hand, Angelenos generally don't care about these other cities. Really we don't. 

We pretty much hate the Celtics, the SF Giants in baseball....and thats about it.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

^^^ not sure if i agree with what youre saying.

besides that, how many lakers fan on this forum sported dallas avatars during the championships? you can certainly include miami on that list.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

so if this ISNT a rivalry, expain why so many lakers/kings games are nationally televised on TNT, ABC, ESPN NBATV...etc. etc..


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

Sacramental said:


> so if this ISNT a rivalry, expain why so many lakers/kings games are nationally televised on TNT, ABC, ESPN NBATV...etc. etc..


they stll are? not one game was played on a weekend, so count ABC out. i can't remember far enough to see if they played on tnt or espn though.


----------



## Sean (Jun 7, 2002)

Sacramental said:


> the reason why laker fans hate ron ron - he SHUTS down kobe. kobe might get 30 points on artest, but look at the stat sheet and see 9 for 27


Where did you hear this? Go back and do some research before you go spoutin' off at the mouth about things which you do not know. If you had, you would know that a lot of us Laker fans here at this site love Artest and were willing to deal with trading Odom for him last year. Not everyone, but there were many.

Kobe going 9 for 27 usually has nothing to do with who's guarding him. Rarely does any one defender stop him. He usually either has it on that game or on the rare occasion, he doesn't. When he is slowed down it is because of the team defense the opposition is playing, not because of one defender.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

This thread has completely derailed. I'm not going to lock it because it is pure comedy.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

I'll bet my house and everything I have to you Laker fans that the Kings will have a better record next season than the Lakers. Right now, I don't even think the lakers will make the playoffs, a lot of good and coming teams in the west, including Sacramento.


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

Sean said:


> Where did you hear this? Go back and do some research before you go spoutin' off at the mouth about things which you do not know. If you had, you would know that a lot of us Laker fans here at this site love Artest and were willing to deal with trading Odom for him last year. Not everyone, but there were many.
> 
> Kobe going 9 for 27 usually has nothing to do with who's guarding him. Rarely does any one defender stop him. He usually either has it on that game or on the rare occasion, he doesn't. When he is slowed down it is because of the team defense the opposition is playing, not because of one defender.


nobody can shut down kobe, but the one thing artest does better than anyone else is he makes kobe work the hardest to get his points.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

Sacramental said:


> I'll bet my house and everything I have to you Laker fans that the Kings will have a better record next season than the Lakers. Right now, I don't even think the lakers will make the playoffs, a lot of good and coming teams in the west, uncluding Sacramento.


see that there just shows me that you're a blind fool... you've also got to calculate that the kings might suffer numerous injuries (there's a good chance) that might cripple the team. dont forget the fact that both the lakers and kings are in "limbo" as in no one really knows how well they will do... they could have a 35 win season next year, or they could get even to somewhere in the 50's.. no one really knows.

let's not forget that the kings also have a new coach, and based on whath sacto fans have said, despite his potential... he's still unproven.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> I'll bet my house and everything I have to you Laker fans that the Kings will have a better record next season than the Lakers. Right now, I don't even think the lakers will make the playoffs, a lot of good and coming teams in the west, uncluding Sacramento.


Wait wait wait! This is BS!! Your saying you have a house?


----------



## Drk Element (Nov 10, 2004)

Sacramental said:


> i've been wondering, has the "shizzle" of lakers/kings cooled off? if it has, it was one of the greatest rivalries in recent NBA history, between 2 teams: one who always had their number and the who other wouldn't back down. so-cal vs. nor-cal is great for the NBA, and i gauruntee that they still want this to be a rivalry, they always televise lakers vs kings games on national TV. and even if it is a rivalry, all that's left from the good'ol days is kobe and bibby...
> 
> * p.s: everybody knows the kings were the better team in 02 or 03.* you can't argue against the fact that the officials wiped the lakers' *** in those games, thats just how the NBA wants it. if it wasn't for a simple bounce of the ball, the Kings would have a championship banner right now...
> 
> p.s #2: the offseason sucks :curse:


No, you were the only one.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Sacramental said:


> I'll bet my house and everything I have to you Laker fans that the Kings will have a better record next season than the Lakers. Right now, I don't even think the lakers will make the playoffs, a lot of good and coming teams in the west, *uncluding* Sacramento.


this must be some new hip kid slang for not including


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Cris said:


> this must be some new hip kid slang for not including


I think you hit it right on. :biggrin:


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

Cris said:


> this must be some new hip kid slang for not including


:rofl: You're 16. Shouldn't you be the one using this new hip kid slang?


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

afobisme said:


> see that there just shows me that you're a blind fool... you've also got to calculate that the kings might suffer numerous injuries (there's a good chance) that might cripple the team. dont forget the fact that both the lakers and kings are in "limbo" as in no one really knows how well they will do... they could have a 35 win season next year, *or they could get even to somewhere in the 50's*.. no one really knows.
> 
> let's not forget that the kings also have a new coach, and based on whath sacto fans have said, despite his potential... he's still unproven.


yeah, the kings can. but what have the lakers done this offseason to show they have a better chance? 

....exactly. :clap:


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> yeah, the kings can. but what have the lakers done this offseason to show they have a better chance?


Adding a young, nasty competitor to our weakest position and signing another scoring option who can spread the floor?


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

Shady™ said:


> Adding a pure point guard and another scoring option?


who? lol, gimme names


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

Jordan Farmar
Vladimir Radmanovic


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

Shady™ said:


> Jordan Farmar
> Vladimir Radmanovic


Jordan Farmar: Who? 

Radmanovic: he'll be lucky to throw up 3 shots a game, phil's offense and kobe are gonna keep him from showing his shooting abilities. no joke.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> Jordan Farmar: Who?
> 
> Radmanovic: he'll be lucky to throw up 3 shots a game, phil's offense and kobe are gonna keep him from showing his shooting abilities. no joke.


Yes because the triangle is designed to keep laker sharp shooters to 3 shots per game. Steve Kerr anyone?


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> Jordan Farmar: Who?
> 
> Radmanovic: he'll be lucky to throw up 3 shots a game, phil's offense and kobe are gonna keep him from showing his shooting abilities. no joke.


 :no: 

BTW, we also added a nice bench player named Maurice Evans. 

Who did yall add?


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

wow, what have the lakers done? the lakers have done more than the kings. 

what did the kings do, sign john salmons (no really, who is this guy) and lose bonzi wells... while still hovering around the cap. um, hello? if any team has gotten worse, it's the kings.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> but what have the lakers done this offseason to show they have a better chance?


What have the Kings done? 

John Salmons wont make much of a differnce and the difference he does make will be cancelled out by the absence of Bonzi Wells. I mean, you signed a 8,3, and 3 guy and lost a 14, 8, 3 and 2 guy. I dont think you guys will be as good as last year. 

The Lakers have improved a lot. This previous season was full of obstacles. Smush came straight out of the D-League. Kwame came from Washington, had high expectations, and had a rocky start. Mihm was injured at the end of the season. Lamar was disappearing again and again. Kobe didnt trust his teammates.

But now, Kwame has confidence to do good, Lamar has settled in, Mihm gives us depth, Smush now knows that he somewhat belongs in the league and with all that, Kobe can finally trust his teammates. Plus, we signed Radmanovic which gives us another double digit scorer and one of the best three point shooters in the league. Shammond Williams can keep up better than Smush and Sasha with small guards. Mo Evans is one of the most athletic players in the league and is a good bench player.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Shady™ said:


> :rofl: You're 16. Shouldn't you be the one using this new hip kid slang?


 maaaaaayybbbe.... but this sounds like a (no)cal thing... i want to be hella differnt


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

hella hardcore, bros!


----------



## Ghiman (May 19, 2003)

Lakers vs. Kings, still a rivalry? 

Looking at the number of pages of this thread, i would say "HELL YA!" 

If there wasnt one, there one now...at least here at bbb.net :banana:


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

the only rivalry we have is with one blind idiot of a kings fan, or maybe two..


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

the defenition of rivalry means "the act of competing or emulating", and just because one team always falls short of glory doesn't mean it's not a rivalry. From what i see, most laker/kings games are fun to watch and competetive. Quailty of the teams doesn't matter, as long as its a grueling and intense game. And of course it's a game that kings players and laker players look forward to, everybody watches. it may not have the magnitude or tension of the old days, but it still is, indeed a rivalry. can i get an a-men???


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

According to your definition of rivalry, every NBA game is a rivalry.


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

The rivalry was over after this shot...

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/E3iV4aYvopM"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/E3iV4aYvopM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

ok ok, the real rivalry was c-webb vs. shaq. shaq is gone, c-webb is gone, and both teams suck compared to those days. so then why does TNT televise lakers vs. kings on Rivalry Week still?????????????


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

honestly, i dont even know... but yeah, it was shaq vs. kings when webber/stojakovic were there. it's not really a rivalry, maybe they're just playing on the past... since not many other teams are interesting enough to watch.

dont forget when rick fox got punked by christie, and both those guys are gone. horry and his dagger to the king's back is also gone. only main guys left are kobe and bibby... and as far as i know, there wasn't much of a rivalry grudge between those guys.

maybe it's just a battle for the logos.. or they are looking to renew/revive a rivalry with hype.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

afobisme said:


> honestly, i dont even know... but yeah, it was shaq vs. kings when webber/stojakovic were there. it's not really a rivalry, maybe they're just playing on the past... since not many other teams are interesting enough to watch.
> 
> dont forget when rick fox got punked by christie, and both those guys are gone. horry and his dagger to the king's back is also gone. only main guys left are kobe and bibby... and as far as i know, there wasn't much of a rivalry grudge between those guys.
> 
> maybe it's just a battle for the logos.. or they are looking to renew/revive a rivalry with hype.


nice post, that's all we needed to know.


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Its hard for it to be a rivalry when Kobe is the only one left, But I guess you can say its a pacific division rivalry? I always look foward to when they play each other!


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

Zero Hero said:


> There's nobody left besides Bibby and Kobe.


Luke Walton?


----------



## Eternal (Sep 7, 2005)

Luke Walton wasn't on the team during that time. =/


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> ok ok, the real rivalry was c-webb vs. shaq. shaq is gone, c-webb is gone, and both teams suck compared to those days. so then why does TNT televise lakers vs. kings on Rivalry Week still?????????????



relax with this TV nonsense, that really doesnt make it a rivalry... and it was really shaq vs vlade, not webber...

the only thing right now that makes it a rivalry IMO is that the fans HATE each other.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

Phil started the rivalry...he was the one who called sacto a cowtown. and what about that song shaq sang about vlade and the kings? maybe this rivalry was not only an on-court issue..


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> Phil started the rivalry...he was the one who called sacto a cowtown. and what about that song shaq sang about vlade and the kings? maybe this rivalry was not only an on-court issue..


Your right, The song was hilarious! :laugh:


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

anyone have that link... havent seen that in years


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

Cris said:


> anyone have that link... havent seen that in years


they show it on an episode of "NBA rookies" or some show on NBA TV. ill look for a link


----------



## MVP™ (Jun 11, 2006)

Na, noone wants to watch a rivalry where 2 teams aren't really THAT good. [no offense]



Since both of the teams cooled off, and there games aren't that excited, nah why call it a rivalry and not a reg. season game? :banana:


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

The past is over. I would rather enjoy a rivalry with the Clippers or the Suns. They involve teams of today, not yesteryear. 

And we are not dominant so we can't just steamroll over those teams anymore. I loved that series vs. the Suns. I say leave the past in the past. The team is getting better every year, let's give them a chance.


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

I can't believe this thread went 8 pages...

BTW, Sacramental, you have Kobe listed twice in your "****list."

:rofl:


----------



## West44 (Jun 29, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> Phil started the rivalry...he was the one who called sacto a cowtown. and what about that song shaq sang about vlade and the kings? maybe this rivalry was not only an on-court issue..


if sacto didn't want to be called a cowtown maybe the fans shouldn't have brought thousands of cow bells to the games. being a cowtown seemed to be a source of pride for sacto at the time.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

Shady™ said:


> I can't believe this thread went 8 pages...
> 
> BTW, Sacramental, you have Kobe listed twice in your "****list."
> 
> :rofl:


i meant to do that. 

and yea both teams arent as exciting, what is exciting is kings vs. suns, now those games are run-and-gun styles. lakers vs. clippers really wouldn't be much of a rivlary since the clippers are so much better than LA. :banana:


----------



## MVP™ (Jun 11, 2006)

Not to jump out of Conference but if you want to watch a RUN -N- GUN game, 


Suns VS Mavs is the place to be.


AND another thing, Kings are nothing now.

I remember the old days, Peja, Doug, WEbber, and bibby. look at this now, not as enjoyable to watch.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

DiirkLUVA41 said:


> Not to jump out of Conference but if you want to watch a RUN -N- GUN game,
> 
> 
> Suns VS Mavs is the place to be.
> ...


why don't u take a break from going around all the forums with dumb posts? dallas fans...as unknowledgable as they are whiny. :banana:


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

Sacramental said:


> why don't u take a break from going around all the forums with dumb posts? dallas fans...as unknowledgable as they are whiny. :banana:


you are one to speak.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> what is exciting is kings vs. suns, now those games are run-and-gun styles. lakers vs. clippers really wouldn't be much of a rivlary since the clippers are so much better than LA.


The Suns are waaaayy better than the Kings. They were 10 wins better. How the hell can you call that a rivalry?

On the other hand, the Clippers were only two regular season wins better than the Lakers and both teams lost to the Suns in 7 games.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

LamarButler said:


> The Suns are waaaayy better than the Kings. They were 10 wins better. How the hell can you call that a rivalry?
> 
> On the other hand, the Clippers were only two regular season wins better than the Lakers and both teams lost to the Suns in 7 games.


clipper fanboys have said it already.. they threw away a few games so they could get the easy ticket into the playoffs. much respect to the clippers! :biggrin:


----------



## Shady* (Jul 3, 2005)

Sacramental said:


> i meant to do that.
> 
> and yea both teams arent as exciting, what is exciting is kings vs. suns, now those games are run-and-gun styles. lakers vs. clippers really wouldn't be much of a rivlary since the clippers are so much better than LA. :banana:


The Clippers won 2 games more than us last year. 

And how can the Clippers be better than LA? The Clippers *are *LA. Thats like saying the Kings are better than Sacramento.

Also, the Suns and the Lakers series was one of the most exciting and most watched series of all times. For a while, the series thread in the playoffs had more replies/views than the Finals thread.


----------



## Sacramental (Mar 12, 2006)

Shady™ said:


> The Clippers won 2 games more than us last year.
> 
> And how can the Clippers be better than LA? The Clippers *are *LA. Thats like saying the Kings are better than Sacramento.
> 
> *Also, the Suns and the Lakers series was one of the most exciting and most watched series of all times.* For a while, the series thread in the playoffs had more replies/views than the Finals thread.


hahahahahha. the refs made it interesting and that shouldn't happen. the suns shoudl've had it in 6 games, but the refs...u know how it goes, NBA wants cities like LA to win. :banana: lakers are a 1-man team with bunch of overpaid scrubs. shaq WAS the lakers.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

:banghead: Close this stupid thread. it's not funny anymore. and to laker fans; quit arguing w/ little kids, it's beyond pointless.


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

Sacramental said:


> hahahahahha. the refs made it interesting and that shouldn't happen. the suns shoudl've had it in 6 games, but the refs...u know how it goes, NBA wants cities like LA to win. :banana: lakers are a 1-man team with bunch of overpaid scrubs. shaq WAS the lakers.


 its not worth arguing with a guy who has a "****list" in his sig... haters and trolls will be haters and trolls

good luck making the playoffs with John Salmons


----------

