# **** The Lakers



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

That is all.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)




----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Really? Who's going to lock it? I can just open it again. Just saying...the Lakers are **** lately. Very frustrating. **** them.


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

Losing to the Cavs is one of the most embarrassing loses of the franchise. We're talking about a team that is arguably the worst team in NBA history.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Personally, it's the worst loss I've seen as a Lakers fan. Truly pathetic, in every sense of the word. The only thing that can salvage this is a 3-Peat. If we don't get that, we'll be known as the team who couldn't win the championship and lost to the 9-win Cleveland ****ing Cavaliers.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Didn't the Jordan Bulls lose to the awful Damon Stoudamire Raptors during the second three-peat?


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Didn't the Jordan Bulls lose to the awful Damon Stoudamire Raptors during the second three-peat?


Not only did they lose to the Raptors, but it was during the 72-10 season that it happened.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

Mighty Mouse > Mo Williams.


----------



## ChosenFEW (Jun 23, 2005)

i wonder how many people lost money thinking the lakers were a sure bet....



better yet,... i wonder who bet on the cavs to win that game


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

One loss.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Didn't the Jordan Bulls lose to the awful Damon Stoudamire Raptors during the second three-peat?


Whats your point? This Lakers team is nowhere near as good as that Bulls team.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

Here's my theory: Phil Jackson and Kobe Bryant ran too hard of a practice after their blowout loss against CHA. Kobe Bryant has too many miles and even had surgery again on his knee in the summer, so that must've affected his game even against the lowly Cavs (he's been missing several practices over the course of the season to reduce fatigue and to try and fully recover). However in the end there really is no great excuse for basically all the Lakers minus Gasol to struggle as they did. I'd understand more if it was a back to back  But I guess Phil and Kobe were really pissed after the CHA game so their legs must've felt like it was a back to back anyway. Maybe those Kobe paternity paper rumors are true as well. I don't buy that they were just mailing it in for the ASG because they were blown out earlier and had practiced on the road afterwards.

Before the season started I thought the Lakers had a significant chance of not making out of the West because of their mileage, surgeries, and the continuing decline of Kobe Bryant. Its looking that way so far. FWIW I think if the Spurs win tonight they'd have more wins on their rodeo road trip than both LA teams combined on their Grammy road trip.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Pay Ton said:


> Not only did they lose to the Raptors, but it was during the 72-10 season that it happened.


To be fair, the Raptors did win 21 games that year.


----------



## Porn Player (Apr 24, 2003)

Mighty Mouse > Michael Jordan


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Basel said:


> If we don't get that, we'll be known as the team who couldn't win the championship and lost to the *9-win* Cleveland ****ing Cavaliers.


*10-win


----------



## sonicFLAME6 (Dec 19, 2006)

Pump Bacon said:


> *Here's my theory: Phil Jackson and Kobe Bryant ran too hard of a practice after their blowout loss against CHA. *Kobe Bryant has too many miles and even had surgery again on his knee in the summer, so that must've affected his game even against the lowly Cavs (he's been missing several practices over the course of the season to reduce fatigue and to try and fully recover). However in the end there really is no great excuse for basically all the Lakers minus Gasol to struggle as they did. I'd understand more if it was a back to back  But I guess Phil and Kobe were really pissed after the CHA game so their legs must've felt like it was a back to back anyway. Maybe those Kobe paternity paper rumors are true as well. I don't buy that they were just mailing it in for the ASG because they were blown out earlier and had practiced on the road afterwards.
> 
> Before the season started I thought the Lakers had a significant chance of not making out of the West because of their mileage, surgeries, and the continuing decline of Kobe Bryant. Its looking that way so far. FWIW I think if the Spurs win tonight they'd have more wins on their rodeo road trip than both LA teams combined on their Grammy road trip.


Actually they only "practice" they had in CLE was a voluntary work-out on Tuesday morning. So your theory is wrong.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

I realize it's only one loss, but it doesn't change the fact that it's pathetic. Do I still think this team will win a championship? Yes. But for now, **** them. There's no reason to get excited or disappointed about anything from here on out until the playoffs.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

need T-Mac or Arron Brooks


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

I personally think this team has been too far gone for a couple of months now. I just don't see where NBA Finals level play is gopnna happen from these guys.


----------



## Vuchato (Jan 14, 2006)

Nets beat the Celtics last year (though they had 4 shots), and the Celtics still made the finals. Cavs will probably win more games this year than the Nets did last year too


----------



## CosaNostra (Sep 16, 2010)

Ugh. Threads like these are why people hate on Lakers fans. Come on, man.


----------



## BlackNRed (Feb 9, 2005)

Although I hate the Lakers I can kind of feel your pain Basel. I say "**** the Dolphins" all the time, which is my favorite sports teams of all(Heat are close second.) But I really love them. They just make be nuts with all of their constant management blunders every single season.

But to be fair that team hasn't won anything since 1973, whereas the Lakers are one of the most dominant franchises in sports history so imo you should be a little more grateful.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

So what did the Mamba say about this loss?


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

I've seen worse, and I saw this coming a mile away.

I'm not concerned. Either this team is good enough to win another title or it isn't. We will see in June.

Am I disgusted? Totally. I hate their lack of work ethic. But I am not going to go off on them when I have already gone off on them, it gets old.

This team has brought you two titles to enjoy, Basel. This thread wasn't necessary.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Jeez, relax. It's not like I hate the team. I was just angered by their play (and a little drunk when I got home last night). They're just so incredibly frustrating to watch. I love all the championships, but this is a new season. And they're playing like ****.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Basel said:


> Jeez, relax. It's not like I hate the team. I was just angered by their play (and a little drunk when I got home last night). They're just so incredibly frustrating to watch. I love all the championships, but this is a new season. And they're playing like ****.


You start a thread titled "**** the Lakers" and you are telling me to relax? :laugh:


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

...Touché.

But there's nothing wrong with this thread, in my opinion. It was my way of voicing my frustration with the team right now. Nothing more, nothing less. Here's to hoping they play like NBA caliber players coming out of the All-Star weekend. :cheers:


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

they lost to the Clippers twice last year dont forget but yeah last night was just disgusting


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

They lost to bad teams every year. But it's never been this bad.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

they played 4 games in 5 nights and they're old


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Basel said:


> That is all.


I second the "**** the Lakers" motion.

I'm not watching any more games of this sorry-*** bunch of no-pride posers till the playoffs begin.

Thank God for the Clippers.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

e-monk said:


> they played 4 games in 5 nights and they're old


Not a valid excuse.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

**** Basel.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Hater.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Basel said:


> Really? Who's going to lock it? I can just open it again. Just saying...the Lakers are **** lately. Very frustrating. **** them.


So because you are a mod you can start a crap thread? I started my "I can make a thread about Lebron that stays under 25 posts" thread in the summer and it got locked.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> So because you are a mod you can start a crap thread? I started my "I can make a thread about Lebron that stays under 25 posts" thread in the summer and it got locked.


I didn't lock it. I hardly ever lock threads around here.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Basel said:


> Not a valid excuse.


maybe not but how much time do you have on your hands? go check the schedules and see how many other teams have had to do that this year (I honestly dont know but suspect the number is low to 0 and there's a reason for that)


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

e-monk said:


> maybe not but how much time do you have on your hands? go check the schedules and see how many other teams have had to do that this year (I honestly dont know but suspect the number is low to 0 and there's a reason for that)


Lakers have the fewest back-to-backs this season with 15, and they're 9-2 on the end of those back to backs so far. So I don't buy the fact that they're old or that they played 4 games in 5 nights to be an excuse for their poor end to the road trip.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Basel said:


> I didn't lock it. I hardly ever lock threads around here.


Yeah but you didn't unlock it either which you said you would do if someone locked this thread (which it would of been locked if a regular poster started it).


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Want me to go unlock your LeBron thread and bump it? I didn't even know it was locked.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

This Lakers team is on it's last legs as a 1st tier contender. It's actually a lot like the 98 Bulls because it's pre-lockout too, so I expect Phil to be gone and if they win, Kobe will consider retirement. Even if with their current roster, age is catching up with them. They'd need to add an impact starter with some athleticism. They've become slow.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> This Lakers team is on it's last legs as a 1st tier contender. It's actually a lot like the 98 Bulls because it's pre-lockout too, so I expect Phil to be gone and if they win, Kobe will consider retirement. Even if with their current roster, age is catching up with them. They'd need to add an impact starter with some athleticism. They've become slow.


They really remind me more of the Spurs of about 3 years ago.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> They really remind me more of the Spurs of about 3 years ago.


That works too. Except I doubt Phil sticks around like Pop has.


----------



## VBM (Jul 2, 2010)

Sir Patchwork said:


> That works too. Except I doubt Phil sticks around like Pop has.


Pop's just waiting for Duncan to retire, then he'll spend his days getting drunk in Wine Country


----------



## BeeGee (Jul 9, 2010)

It sucks going into the break off of that loss, but they can still turn it into a positive. Still though, if you'd told me Pao had 30-20 on the Cavs, I'd say we probably beat them by 30+ again.


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Pau was so awful last night. I don't care if the box score says he had 30 and 20.

He gave up a dunk to Eyenga, a dunk to Hickson, two layups to Sessions, and a fadeaway to Jamison all in sequence in the fourth quarter. That was the worst defense by a big man I've seen all year and I'm not exaggerating. You don't lose to the worst team in the league by luck.


----------



## CosaNostra (Sep 16, 2010)

Sir Patchwork said:


> This Lakers team is on it's last legs as a 1st tier contender. It's actually a lot like the 98 Bulls because it's pre-lockout too, so I expect Phil to be gone and if they win, Kobe will consider retirement. Even if with their current roster, age is catching up with them. They'd need to add an impact starter with some athleticism. They've become slow.


Why would Kobe consider retirement?


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

CosaNostra said:


> Why would Kobe consider retirement?


Because he has played 15 seasons, and said he just wants one more title. Plus it can't be understated the impact of Phil leaving, which I think is inevitable. I'm not sure how Kobe feels starting over with a new coach at this point in his career. The combination of these things leads me to believe he would strongly consider retirement if the Lakers won the title this year.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Because he has played 15 seasons, and said he just wants one more title. Plus it can't be understated the impact of Phil leaving, which I think is inevitable. I'm not sure how Kobe feels starting over with a new coach at this point in his career. The combination of these things leads me to believe he would strongly consider retirement if the Lakers won the title this year.


For such a short post, its amazing how many wrong-headed statements are actually in it.

First of all, its quite obvious you are not in southern California (yes, I know you are in Oklahoma City, I see that). My point is, if you were in southern California, you would know from the chatter here that everyone already knows Phil is gone after this season and B. Shaw is his replacement.

Kobe has already said he has the utmost respect for B. Shaw, having played with him, and having listened to him as an assistant coach for a number of years now.

And whether Kobe said he only wants one more title (I don't recall him ever saying this), do you really think he would stop at 6, when he as a legitimate shot at 7 to leap over Jordan's 6 titles?

No way.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

PauloCatarino said:


> I second the "**** the Lakers" motion.
> 
> I'm not watching any more games of this sorry-*** bunch of no-pride posers *till the playoffs begin.*
> 
> Thank God for the Clippers.


:2ti:

When the Lakers win another title or have another classic series vs. Boston, in 4 years noone's going to give a damn about what the Lakers did in February, besides some "the Lakers had slow regular seasons before winning the title" type comments. 

Calm down, because these are the kinds of statements and threads that end up looking dumb and pointless. 

It's all good. Until the Lakers do this when it counts, relax yourselves.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Ron said:


> For such a short post, its amazing how many wrong-headed statements are actually in it.
> 
> First of all, its quite obvious you are not in southern California (yes, I know you are in Oklahoma City, I see that). My point is, if you were in southern California, you would know from the chatter here that everyone already knows Phil is gone after this season and B. Shaw is his replacement.
> 
> ...


Kobe said he had the utmost respect for Rudy too. That didn't work out too well. We'll see I guess. When things are good, Kobe can play for anybody. When things are going wrong, Kobe won't second guess Phil because Phil has the chips and they have a history. Other coaches might get thrown under the bus in harder times. 

Kobe said this:


> When a reporter asked how to keep the rings, Kobe smiled and detailed, "Nobody sees them, I just keep them in safe and put them away. I hide them. When my career is all over, I will bring them back out and look at them, but now I just prepare for the next game. For my next goal, I just want one more cookie."


http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/sports/2010-07/28/c_13418585.htm

That link is not where I originally read it, but it's what I found on google. He said it this past summer. I also recall him saying in an interview that he could "see the finish line" which is a sign that retirement is atleast on his mind. No better time than after completing a three-peat, after Phil leaves, going into a lockout season. Just like Jordan.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

People are saying for Laker fans to relax, but it doesn't seem like any Laker fans are panicking or looking for fallen skies or anything like that.

They're mainly just venting their frustrations. Nothing wrong with that. Sports is a "what have you done for me lately" type of medium. They're just pissed.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> He said it this past summer. I also recall him saying in an interview that he could "see the finish line" which is a sign that retirement is atleast on his mind. No better time than after completing a three-peat, after Phil leaves, going into a lockout season. Just like Jordan.


You mean the Jordan who came back and played for the Wizards?

Kobe is much younger, he will turn 33 this August. Competition runs through this buys blood like red cells. No way he calls it quits this year, win or lose.

To think that is pure fantasy. Has he earned it? Sure. But given his nature, I can't see him bailing out now.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

I think Kobe wants to break into the top 3 in scoring. Top five at worst.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Pay Ton said:


> People are saying for Laker fans to relax, but it doesn't seem like any Laker fans are panicking or looking for fallen skies or anything like that.
> 
> They're mainly just venting their frustrations. Nothing wrong with that. Sports is a "what have you done for me lately" type of medium. They're just pissed.


You are right.

That whole "panicked Laker fan" edict is some **** that people make up, I mean seriously: How can any Laker fan be panicked after seeing their team appear in three straight Finals and win two of them?

Laker fan is already happy. A third ring in a row would be icing on the cake. No one ever said it will be easy. It sure wasn't last year.

But win or lose, no one is going to give a **** about a loss to Charlotte or Cleveland in February. **** happens.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Pay Ton said:


> People are saying for Laker fans to relax, but it doesn't seem like any Laker fans are panicking or looking for fallen skies or anything like that.
> 
> They're mainly just venting their frustrations. Nothing wrong with that. Sports is a "what have you done for me lately" type of medium. They're just pissed.


Yup.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

P.S. I said two months ago, after their pathetic efforts against Milwaukee and Miami, there was no way I was going to spend over $500 for four people in the nose-bleeds to see this team suck for 48 minutes, when it was clear they didn't give a **** to those fans of theirs who pay good money just to see them **** all over themselves.

If I want to be entertained by a basketball team, I'll go see the Clippers. The talent level might not be there, but at least they give the effort. And with Blake Griffin, they have the entertainment value too.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Ron said:


> You mean the Jordan who came back and played for the Wizards?
> 
> Kobe is much younger, he will turn 33 this August. Competition runs through this buys blood like red cells. No way he calls it quits this year, win or lose.
> 
> To think that is pure fantasy. Has he earned it? Sure. But given his nature, I can't see him bailing out now.


Yes. The Jordan who retired from the Bulls at 34 years old, after 13 seasons. It's not unreasonable to think Kobe at 33 years old after 15 seasons will be considering retirement if the Lakers win the title this year.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Yes. The Jordan who retired from the Bulls at 34 years old, after 13 seasons. It's not unreasonable to think Kobe at 33 years old after 15 seasons will be considering retirement if the Lakers win the title this year.


I think you missed my point.

Kobe has already seen that movie. Rest assured he will be taking a lesson from Jordan's career and not come back in a couple of years just to give the Minnesota Timberwolves attendance figures a boost.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

We'll see. He is no spring chicken. 15 seasons is not easy on the body. After this season, he'll have played the same number of seasons as Jordan did his whole career, Wizards era and all. It's moot if the Lakers don't win though (and I'm doubtful about their chances), because Kobe isn't going out on a loss if he can help it.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Adam said:


> Pau was so awful last night. I don't care if the box score says he had 30 and 20.
> 
> He gave up a dunk to *Eyenga*, a dunk to *Hickson*, two layups to *Sessions*, and a fadeaway to *Jamison* all in sequence in the fourth quarter. That was the worst defense by a big man I've seen all year and I'm not exaggerating. You don't lose to the worst team in the league by luck.


so are you saying that he had to cover the entire Cavs squad?


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Just thought I would bring this thread back around now.

Okay, bandwaggoners, you can jump off now. Make room for the true Laker fans, the ones who have always been here through thick and thin.

Lakers going through the rest of the league like a hot knife through soft butter.

NOT.

EVEN.

CLOSE.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Ron said:


> Just thought I would bring this thread back around now.
> 
> *Okay, bandwaggoners, you can jump off now.* Make room for the true Laker fans, the ones who have always been here through thick and thin.
> 
> ...


Are you adressing Lakers' fans or Heathians'?


----------



## Blue Blobster (Jul 8, 2010)

whats a lakers? 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Lakers Fan


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

> *Laker hater *
> 
> A person who thinks they're down, special, and cool just because they hate the Lakers. Usually jumps to and sells out to different teams that have a better chance of beating the Lakers.
> Laker Hater:
> ...


...


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Some of you Laker fans were the main ones cursing the team out and saying you didn't think they had a chance at the title, don't make me go fishing for posts. 

I was one of the only people in here saying this **** happens every year and when it comes time for what matters they'll be on track...but people were trying to downplay it as me saying it just to say it. 

People should know by now the Lakers sputter and have problems playing down to teams, but they're just too talented and have good leadership in the right spots, they will always pull out of the funks until they don't. 

Same thing next year, I guarantee it.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

i never panicked. for some people, the sky falls down twice a day though.

it is annoying to watch your team lose to inferior ones, but to be honest.. how are you supposed to play 110 games a season and play every one like it's your last one? you can't. not many teams can do it.

and how do you expect the team to be as collectively hungry (early and midseason) as other teams that have not won titles? you can't, and if you were basketball player you'd probably have the same issues.

the truth is, if the lakers played their hardest all season long.. they'd be not only gassed out going into the playoffs, but also mentally stale.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> Some of you Laker fans were the main ones cursing the team out and saying you didn't think they had a chance at the title, don't make me go fishing for posts.
> 
> I was one of the only people in here saying this **** happens every year and when it comes time for what matters they'll be on track...but people were trying to downplay it as me saying it just to say it.
> 
> ...


Go fishing. Those laker fans deserve to be called out because they do it every year just like the laker haters hb and rockteer get hard ons when they struggle.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

This thread is a farce


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Go fishing. Those laker fans deserve to be called out because they do it every year just like the laker haters hb and rockteer get hard ons when they struggle.


I agree with you, so I don't know why you act like you're combatting my post or adding corny shots. And you're talking about calling people out..but no names have been called


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

The Bucks dropped you by 20 at home earlier this year and we SUCK... **** the lakers


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Dre said:


> I agree with you, so I don't know why you act like you're combatting my post or adding corny shots. And you're talking about calling people out..but no names have been called


Where do you get that in his post Dre?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Dre said:


> I agree with you, so I don't know why you act like you're combatting my post or adding corny shots. And you're talking about calling people out..but no names have been called


I don't know why you act like I'm combating your post when I agree with you.

*I* want to call those people out.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Tragedy said:


> Where do you get that in his post Dre?


He's just naturally defensive I guess.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

roux2dope said:


> The Bucks dropped you by 20 at home earlier this year and we SUCK... **** the lakers


Maybe if you got a franchise center instead of a "good" one you wouldn't SUCK.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

Jamel Irief said:


> Maybe if you got a franchise center instead of a "good" one you wouldn't SUCK.


Yeah.. unfortunately there wasnt a shaq available in that draft, Bogut has become one of the top 3 defensive big men in the nba, he is an elite rebounder and his offense was progressing nicely before his arm blew up into a jillion pieces.. your bogut hate is stunning


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> He's just naturally defensive I guess.


He really is.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

roux2dope said:


> Yeah.. unfortunately there wasnt a shaq available in that draft, Bogut has become one of the top 3 defensive big men in the nba, he is an elite rebounder and his offense was progressing nicely before his arm blew up into a jillion pieces.. your bogut hate is stunning


Your bogut defense is amazing. If you are happy with a guy that can't lead you to the playoffs unless he's your second or third best player when Chris Paul was hanging around then enjoy your sucky team.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Your bogut defense is amazing. If you are happy with a guy that can't lead you to the playoffs unless he's your second or third best player when *Chris Paul *was hanging around then enjoy your sucky team.


Chris Paul AND/OR Deron Williams.

The Buck's decision to pick Bustgut will continue to haunt them for years... ("The Next Bill Walton"...lol)


----------



## Adam (Jan 28, 2003)

Jamel Irief said:


> Your bogut defense is amazing. If you are happy with a guy that can't lead you to the playoffs unless he's your second or third best player when Chris Paul was hanging around then enjoy your sucky team.


He led them to the playoffs last year. They were on pace to win 50+ games and get the #4 spot when he got hurt. He's lucky to even be playing basketball this year.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

My bad but you quoted my post and said what you said..and more often than not on here you're saying something against my posts..I've never seen you co-sign one of my posts..so I assumed you were saying that towards me

And yeah I am defensive, I hear that all the time. Not necessarily a bad thing I just keep my guard up


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Just like that, 3 losses in a row. 2 losses to teams out of the playoff picture. Time to go back to the "they'll win when it counts" spiel.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Yeah some sky cracked my big toe today


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

LA has enough flaws of their own to lose it just as easy as win it this year. That's all my thing is. If LA wins it all again, I won't be surprised, but if they get knocked out of the playoffs I won't be surprised.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

Last year, I was a bit more concerned since they weren't healthy down the stretch. This year, I am not concerned at all since they have played lights out ball for the majority of the 2nd half, and at the end of the day you still have to beat them 4 times in the playoffs, and that isn't going to be an easy task.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Just like that, 3 losses in a row. 2 losses to teams out of the playoff picture. Time to go back to the "they'll win when it counts" spiel.


Did you watch the game?

Lakers played absolutely no defense today, and also went 50% level on offense.

They couldn't have beaten my old high school team tonight.

With the Lakers, its all about effort. When they give 100% effort and concentration, I will take them over any other team in the league.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Ron said:


> Did you watch the game?
> 
> Lakers played absolutely no defense today, and also went 50% level on offense.
> 
> ...


That being said Ron we all knew they were going to lose to the Warriors last night, and LA will lose against the Blazers at the RG as well. They have their flaws, they're terrible at defending the pick and roll. They're bench is terrible after Odom. If Bynum or Gasol don't play exceptional every single night their basically benched and shunned by Kobe and Phil. This team as great as it is, is simply on the same tier as the Bulls, Spurs, Thunder, Heat, Celtics etc They're not clearly better than anyone this season, where last year the only team anyone thought that could compete with them was the Cavs. LOL


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

They are certainly not as commanding as they were in 2009 and 2010 but I think they are now playing out the string...with Dallas and Miami losing tonight they don't have any incentive to give it that extra effort...but we have discussed this all before.

Real season starts in two weeks. They will pick it up again, just as they did last year.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

You know the funny thing is the 2nd seed may even be better for us if we get to face New Orleans and Dallas in the 1st two rounds.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Game3525 said:


> You know the funny thing is the 2nd seed may even be better for us if we get to face New Orleans and Dallas in the 1st two rounds.


Sounds like you're scared to face the better teams. Another reason that points to my opinion, that Portland, OKC/DEN, and SA might be a road LA couldn't get through. 

Also with that being said, OKC may end up with the 3rd seed. And I Have a feeling OKC will get that 3rd seed when they beat LA at the end of the season.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Ron said:


> They are certainly not as commanding as they were in 2009 and 2010 but I think they are now playing out the string...with Dallas and Miami losing tonight they don't have any incentive to give it that extra effort...but we have discussed this all before.
> 
> Real season starts in two weeks. They will pick it up again, just as they did last year.


We shall see Ron, we will see man. Like I said it's a 50/50 year for LA to win the chip. IMO the Spurs/Thunder/Nuggets all could knock out LA in the West. And in the East I know the Heat/Celtics/Bulls could beat them. It's all 50/50 man. Which actually should make this an even better year for the post season. And nothing against the Lakers. You can easily apply what I'm saying about LA to the other top tier teams in the league as well.

At least were beyond the whole Cleveland Cavs are going to win the Championship etc etc LOL


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

23AJ said:


> Sounds like you're scared to face the better teams. Another reason that points to my opinion, that Portland, OKC/DEN, and SA might be a road LA couldn't get through.
> 
> Also with that being said, OKC may end up with the 3rd seed. And I Have a feeling OKC will get that 3rd seed when they beat LA at the end of the season.


Scared....lmao no.

The Lakers are an older team, and it is better if they can end series quicker, a potential Dallas and New Orleans series may be over in 5 games. While I know they would beat the Thunder, Spurs, Blazers, and Denver in a playoff series, it may be longer. And the last thing an old team like LA needs is more games in the playoffs.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

23AJ said:


> Sounds like you're scared to face the better teams. Another reason that points to my opinion, that Portland, OKC/DEN, and SA might be a road LA couldn't get through.


Your reasoning is full of flaws, not the least of which is whether the poster known as Game3525 is scared or not, his fright has no bearing on how the Lakers feel about going against those teams. :|


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Ron said:


> Your reasoning is full of flaws, not the least of which is whether the poster known as Game3525 is scared or not, his fright has no bearing on how the Lakers feel about going against those teams. :|


Come on Ron you're better than that. Let's keep it civil here. What I got from the games post initially was that he's not exuding confidence in how LA would fare against certain teams in the West. Thus, he broke down his post and clarified his position further that he believes LA would play more games against the better competition out West. Which I agree with, but I simply take it that next step, and my opinion once again is that LA can just as easily get beaten by teams such as OKC/DEN/SA/CHI/BOS/MIA as they can beat those teams. 

But I get it Ron you're busy looking for holes in my opinions like it's swiss cheese. Rather than actually having any intelligent discourse with me. Which is fine buddy, we're all here for our own reasons. Carry on, and wave that purple and gold flag proudly.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

**** the Lakers.  But only right now; in a week I'll be praising them again. :laugh:


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

23AJ said:


> LA has enough flaws of their own to lose it just as easy as win it this year. That's all my thing is. If LA wins it all again, I won't be surprised, but if they get knocked out of the playoffs I won't be surprised.


so basically, whatever happens, you won't be surprised. such a strong opinion.


----------



## Bubbles (Nov 12, 2005)

PauloCatarino said:


> Chris Paul AND/OR Deron Williams.
> 
> The Buck's decision to pick Bustgut will continue to haunt them for years... ("The Next Bill Walton"...lol)


You're seriously accusing Bogut of being a bust? Laughable.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

JT said:


> so basically, whatever happens, you won't be surprised. such a strong opinion.


Listen, if you actually read through my posts, I have listed the teams specifically that I believe can knock out the Lakers. And yes its' a strong opinion, considering the majority here believe LA will win the championship. However I'm sure your backside was firmly planted in the "Cleveland Cavs will win the championship, and LeBron James is the greatest thing since sliced bread the past two seasons." I never was, again it was an unpopular opinion, and I said the Cavs will never win a championship the way the team was constructed, people thought that was an asinine opinion back then as well. For some reason though I get more, and more validated with each passing post-season. Will see how this one turns out too. I have a hunch, I'm closer to the truth with my opinion than many want to admit.


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

It's easy to be closer to the truth when you pick 7 different teams to be a champion. That's why your opinion isn't strong because you're covering as many bases as you can. It's like playing roulette and covering 36 numbers and saying I'm more right then you because I will most likely have picked the right number. It's easy to throw out a claim of I wouldn't be surprised if the Thunder beat the Lakers, if you're right you look like a prophet if you're wrong nobody remembers or thinks anything of it. Your stance really isn't a strong one at all. A strong opinion would be the Thunder will beat the Lakers, but your statement is just one that covers as much ground as possible without really giving any insight. And don't act like you were the only one that didn't believe the Cavs would win, because the only people that did were inside Cleveland or Lebron fans. No Celtics, Lakers, or Spurs fan thought the Cavs would actually win.


----------



## NOFX22 (Sep 28, 2006)

If boston and LA finishes with the same record who holds the tiebreaker?


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

End of the day they have the best coach, the most talented team, 3 all-star caliber big men, the most determined player in basketball who still plays on a first tier level...I just find it very irrational to pick against them.

If the biggest question about them is do they want it...I'm going to assume they will come playoff time.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

thug_immortal8 said:


> It's easy to be closer to the truth when you pick 7 different teams to be a champion. That's why your opinion isn't strong because you're covering as many bases as you can. It's like playing roulette and covering 36 numbers and saying I'm more right then you because I will most likely have picked the right number. It's easy to throw out a claim of I wouldn't be surprised if the Thunder beat the Lakers, if you're right you look like a prophet if you're wrong nobody remembers or thinks anything of it. Your stance really isn't a strong one at all. A strong opinion would be the Thunder will beat the Lakers, but your statement is just one that covers as much ground as possible without really giving any insight. And don't act like you were the only one that didn't believe the Cavs would win, because the only people that did were inside Cleveland or Lebron fans. No Celtics, Lakers, or Spurs fan thought the Cavs would actually win.


Man this statement couldn't be any further from the truth. 

First of all it's not about covering bases/ground or etc It's the change that took place this season versus the prior seasons. There are many teams this season that have a great chance of knocking LA out of the playoffs. Notice I didn't make that claim that past couple seasons about LA ? Reason being teams were not on that level last year or the past few seasons besides Boston. 

Teams have now closed the gap so considerably, so much so the top teams are on a tier together. None of them stand apart enough. The gap has been closed. If you would like I could go into why the gap closed, especially pertaining to the Lakers and Celtics. A few things have happened to both teams this season that brought them down off their pedestals. 

Also I'm not here to look like a prophet or be unforgettable . And if you go back to the last couple seasons, and take the pulse on basketball boards the Cavs were clearly the favorite by most to win it all. Especially last season. I remember LA fans on this board specifically saying that they didn't want to face the Cavs in the Finals. And were actually relieved when Boston beat them. So please let's not start having revisionist history. 

And if you're as much of a basketball junkie as I am. The articles, and talking heads were all over the Cavs winning it all when they made their predictions going into the playoffs. Who can ever forget RIck Kamla from NBA tv waving that wine and gold flag for the Cavs and LeBron the past two years on national tv, picking them to win it all. 

Also I will state for the record one last time. LA has a 50/50 chance to win it all this year. No more no less. Every one that's a fan of the top tier teams in the NBA has to feel confident this post season their teams have a great opportunity to win and advance far into the playoffs. 

Just another walk in the park.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Dre said:


> End of the day they have the best coach, the most talented team, 3 all-star caliber big men, the most determined player in basketball who still plays on a first tier level...I just find it very irrational to pick against them.
> 
> If the biggest question about them is do they want it...I'm going to assume they will come playoff time.


By that perspective you completely ignore the great coaching, great players (with a will to win as strong as Kobe), and improvements that have been made. Hence Spurs having the best record with 60 wins already this season. Hence the MVP being not named Kobe/LeBron/Wade/Howard/Durant etc but yet Derrick Rose who is leading his team to the best record in the East this season. The super big 3 in Miami who swept LA in the regular season, even embarrassing them in LA. And Wade shutting Kobe down in Miami to secure the W. The trades that changed the Nuggets/Thunder. Shall we just ignore all this ? And keep saying well if LA plays their best nobody can beat them ? I don't believe that's the case anymore, actually not even close. LA will have to play their best to beat any of these teams, but they still might fall short. Because the other teams in the top tier are equally as great as the Lakers. 

The past few post seasons have validated my opinions. Let's see what this post season holds. And then will come back and revisit this thread. Wether I'm right or wrong. I got no problem eating crow if I"m wrong, or getting my props if I'm right.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I'm not ignoring anything. Best is a relative thing, so obviously I feel like relative to the competition they have the best shot. That's not hard to understand.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

23AJ said:


> Come on Ron you're better than that. Let's keep it civil here. What I got from the games post initially was that he's not exuding confidence in how LA would fare against certain teams in the West. Thus, he broke down his post and clarified his position further that he believes LA would play more games against the better competition out West. Which I agree with, but I simply take it that next step, *and my opinion once again is that LA can just as easily get beaten by teams such as OKC/DEN/SA/CHI/BOS/MIA as they can beat those teams. *
> 
> But I get it Ron you're busy looking for holes in my opinions like it's swiss cheese. Rather than actually having any intelligent discourse with me. Which is fine buddy, we're all here for our own reasons. Carry on, and wave that purple and gold flag proudly.


I can understand Boston, Miami, and SA, and maybe Chicago(barely), but I don't see how OKC and DEN could beat LA easily, it is a 7 game series not one and done.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

Quite Frankly said:


> You're seriously accusing Bogut of being a bust? Laughable.


He is a bust. They picked him #1 overall and he's nothing more than a double-double guy. Solid, sure (when healthy), but hardly what you want out of the number one overall pick. Just because he's better than Kwame Brown doesn't shield him from bust status. At least they didn't pick Marvin Williams.

The Chris Paul/Deron Williams thing is crap however, as far as I know neither one was ever projected as the potential #1 pick, so it's pretty pointless to hammer on the Bucks for passing them up.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Game3525 said:


> I can understand Boston, Miami, and SA, and maybe Chicago(barely), but I don't see how OKC and DEN could beat LA easily, it is a 7 game series not one and done.


Well, I can't articulate my opinion any clearer with out breaking down match ups, advantages such as home court etc If you can't see how well OKC and Denver match up with LA I don't know what to tell you other than watch the games. I wouldn't of been so keen on Denver or OKC being able to knock out LA pre-trade. However since those trades went down, the proof is in the pudding. These teams are as good as any on the top tier and they've proved it by beating all the good teams and having a great record. 

Will watch the games though, and see how it plays out. Let me get you hip to something right now though, LA will play OKC in the second round. OKC is going to pass Dallas, and end up with the third seed.


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

23AJ said:


> Man this statement couldn't be any further from the truth.
> 
> First of all it's not about covering bases/ground or etc It's the change that took place this season versus the prior seasons. There are many teams this season that have a great chance of knocking LA out of the playoffs. Notice I didn't make that claim that past couple seasons about LA ? Reason being teams were not on that level last year or the past few seasons besides Boston.
> 
> ...


You go around stating how you've been so right in the past, and how you're the only one that saw the Cavs collapse coming and now this year you have a "strong" opinion in stating that any of 7 or 8 teams could win, and you talk about how you're getting more and more validated each year so don't flip the act once you get called out on it. Other than that please show me where these Lakers fans were that would have rather played a one man team in the Cavs over a team in the Celtics. You accuse me of revisionist history but it's really you. I'm a Lakers fan and I was on the boards last year too and in the Lakers forum, I don't remember anybody wanting to play the Celtics more. I think we just didn't like Lebron so we wanted the Celtics to beat the Cavs. I'm ok with you thinking that there's many teams that can beat the Lakers this year, but don't act like it's a strong opinion. Everybody here knows that like all sports anything can happen, no one would be surprised if the Heat, Magic, Bulls, Celtics, Mavs, Spurs beat the Lakers (don't know how the Thunder and ****ing Nuggets got in this too) but don't act like it's a strong opinion. It's just a fact of sports that anybody could win. The dumb statement comes when you say the Nuggets could win easily..based on what? The Thunder could win EASILY...again based on what. It's actually far from a strong opinion it's a hopeful one. I guess we have to wait and see but when this gets bumped when the Nuggets get swept or lose 4-1 don't backpedal about your statements that the Nuggets could beat the Lakers easily. It's hard enough providing evidence as to how the Nuggets could find a way to beat the Lakers in a 7 game series, and it's even harder to prove that they could do it easily, your statement just ends up looking dumb despite your fanaticism about the NBA.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

thug_immortal8 said:


> You go around stating how you've been so right in the past, and how you're the only one that saw the Cavs collapse coming and now this year you have a "strong" opinion in stating that any of 7 or 8 teams could win, and you talk about how you're getting more and more validated each year so don't flip the act once you get called out on it. Other than that please show me where these Lakers fans were that would have rather played a one man team in the Cavs over a team in the Celtics. You accuse me of revisionist history but it's really you. I'm a Lakers fan and I was on the boards last year too and in the Lakers forum, I don't remember anybody wanting to play the Celtics more. I think we just didn't like Lebron so we wanted the Celtics to beat the Cavs. I'm ok with you thinking that there's many teams that can beat the Lakers this year, but don't act like it's a strong opinion. Everybody here knows that like all sports anything can happen, no one would be surprised if the Heat, Magic, Bulls, Celtics, Mavs, Spurs beat the Lakers (don't know how the Thunder and ****ing Nuggets got in this too) but don't act like it's a strong opinion. It's just a fact of sports that anybody could win. The dumb statement comes when you say the Nuggets could win easily..based on what? The Thunder could win EASILY...again based on what. It's actually far from a strong opinion it's a hopeful one. I guess we have to wait and see but when this gets bumped when the Nuggets get swept or lose 4-1 don't backpedal about your statements that the Nuggets could beat the Lakers easily. It's hard enough providing evidence as to how the Nuggets could find a way to beat the Lakers in a 7 game series, and it's even harder to prove that they could do it easily, your statement just ends up looking dumb despite your fanaticism about the NBA.


Saying I'm dumb, a fanatic, etc etc shows to me a lack of debating skills on your part. You're way to busy trying to insult me, and tear my opinion apart. Which is very ape, and extremely asinine considering opinions are valid regardless if we agree or disagree with them. So we essentially agree to disagree. Not a big deal. But hey man you must be DUMB and etc etc

I will not waste my time searching through thread after thread, to prove a point about the consensus belief here was that the Cavs would win the chip. Sorry not worth my time or energy. 

But yeah continue to call me out, I'm not afraid to stand up for my opinions on basketball nor do I think you have said anything to really persuade me or influence my opinion one way or another. So not sure what your point is anymore, maybe to hear yourself talk ? If so continue to at my expense. I don't take things personally on here. 

And I will concede saying Denver or OKC would beat the Lakers easily is not really what I' meant or feel would happen in a series between those three teams. So allow me to retract that, and put it like this. I believe DEN/OKC match up very well against the Lakers and could beat them in a tough series. I believe when I used the word "easily" people are reading to much into it. Because I would of used the same word in suggesting that LA could easily beat the OKC/DEN teams as well. It's just a matter of lazy writing than my actual point I was trying to make. So anyways that should clear that aspect up. 

Just another walk in the park!


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

You called yourself a fanatic and use the same type of insults when you say "if you were a fan like me you would know". It's the same debating skills that you're saying I'm using. I'm inclined to question your debating skills because it is rare to see someone have such strong opinions about something but be hesitant and unwilling to show his argument "because if you don't see it then you're wrong". I'm sorry you making up that the consensus was what you say it was because you say it isn't an argument and if you have great debating skills you should know that. It's very easy to talk and talk and then say it's not worth your time when you get called out on your information. If you make a statement and get called out on, the onus is on you to prove your point, not to continue to claim it and disregard others as if they didn't know as much as you. Finally I called you a fanatic after you had called yourself one, I called you statement dumb, because you gave no proof as to how it could be true, not you. I had no personal insults so there's no need to question my debating. As for this being a debate, I don't see it as one since when people call you out on your opinion you don't respond with evidence or proof. Again there were no Lakers fan on here scared of the Cavs last year just because they swept them in the regular season. The Heat did that this year and they're the first team I'd want to play in the finals if I was a Laker between them the Bulls and Celtics. Regular season dominance over the Lakers has never meant anything. Especially when it comes to Lebron's teams.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

thug_immortal8 said:


> You called yourself a fanatic and use the same type of insults when you say "if you were a fan like me you would know". It's the same debating skills that you're saying I'm using. I'm inclined to question your debating skills because it is rare to see someone have such strong opinions about something but be hesitant and unwilling to show his argument "because if you don't see it then you're wrong". I'm sorry you making up that the consensus was what you say it was because you say it isn't an argument and if you have great debating skills you should know that. It's very easy to talk and talk and then say it's not worth your time when you get called out on your information. If you make a statement and get called out on, the onus is on you to prove your point, not to continue to claim it and disregard others as if they didn't know as much as you. Finally I called you a fanatic after you had called yourself one, I called you statement dumb, because you gave no proof as to how it could be true, not you. I had no personal insults so there's no need to question my debating. As for this being a debate, I don't see it as one since when people call you out on your opinion you don't respond with evidence or proof. Again there were no Lakers fan on here scared of the Cavs last year just because they swept them in the regular season. The Heat did that this year and they're the first team I'd want to play in the finals if I was a Laker between them the Bulls and Celtics. Regular season dominance over the Lakers has never meant anything. Especially when it comes to Lebron's teams.


Please show me where I called myself a fanatic. Secondly don't manipulate language. It's such a classic douche bag maneuver. Nobody any where deserves you to insult their intelligence. 

Please question away. 


I'm not hesitant to show my argument. I'm just not going to take the time to break down eight different teams to suffice you, or anyone. Nor do I think anyone really wants to see a break down of what we all pretty much have a good idea about anyway. Essentially what it cuts to is how you think those parts will work out. And I've already stated what teams I feel have an opportunity to win.

I'm also not making anything up about the Cavs being the most dominate team last season and everyone and their mamma thought they were destined to win the NBA championship. Lakers fans didn't want them to win it true, but sure as hell were worried to have to play them. This is the case wether you deny it or not.

There is no onus for anyone to prove anything. The games will be played, and that's the only proof that will indicate who had a better idea on how things would shake down.

People call me out because I'm out spoken, don't take anything on here seriously, and am willing to debate back and forth to an extent to see if anything comes out of it. 

But Thug, you're really doing nothing but trying to tear down my opinion, and call me out for it. Yet I haven't seen anything by you that would indicate why LA is going to win it all. Other than I'm sure the same things we've been hearing the past few seasons. Deep and Long front court. Great player in Kobe, and a Great coach. Which I'm in agreement with. You see I don't have an axe to grind, you might not know this but Kobe is one of my favorite players in the NBA. I just don't see LA as the overwhelming power house like I did the past few years. 

Just another walk in the park.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

NOFX22 said:


> If boston and LA finishes with the same record who holds the tiebreaker?


Lakers hold the tiebreaker since the teams split the season series 1-1 and the Lakers have the better out-of-conference record. (That is the tiebreaker for teams in different conferences.)


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Thug and AJ, please keep it civil. Don't be calling each other dumb.


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

Damn my bad I meant junkie not fanatic, I got mixed up there. And again there is difference between a statement being dumb and the person saying that statement being dumb. I didn't insult you just the statement that the Nuggets and THunder would win easily. You retracted that so I really have no beef with what you're saying aside from that you are wrong when you say Lakers fans were scared of the Cavs, it is a blatant lie, that's it. Secondly I still think that it's the easy thing to do when you pretty much say any one of these teams could possibly be the Lakers. And finally I'm done "debating" with you if you're going to resort to not showing any proof of your statements. It is easy to make statements when you hide behind them and don't show who said them or when they said them. 

I have to get back to writing papers but one last thing, not once did I say that the Lakers would win the championship this year. It's the same as every year they have a good chance if the pieces fall in place but I don't think that it will be anyone but the Spurs or Celtics that will beat them. And again I was on the boards last year too, as much as you think you repeating it will make it true, Lakers fans were not scared of Cleveland.


----------



## Kneejoh (Dec 21, 2004)

Didn't call him dumb once, just the statement that the Nuggets could beat the Lakers easily was. But since he's backed off that too then I have no problem apologizing for it too.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

I know, but calling statements dumb are a back-handed way at getting to the posters...I'm just saying cool it a bit...you guys both can easily make intelligent arguments.

A better adjective than "dumb" might be "questionable." Sounds less insulting, and you are still getting your point across.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

23AJ said:


> Will watch the games though, and see how it plays out. Let me get you hip to something right now though, LA will play OKC in the second round. OKC is going to pass Dallas, and end up with the third seed.


I disagree. Both teams have four games remaining, and Dallas' schedule is easier than OKC. They still have a one-game advantage, and they hold the tie-breaker. Even if Dallas goes 2-2 (which I think they will do better than that), OKC will probably go 3-1, and Dallas retains the 3rd seed.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

23AJ said:


> Man this statement couldn't be any further from the truth.
> 
> First of all it's not about covering bases/ground or etc It's the change that took place this season versus the prior seasons. There are many teams this season that have a great chance of knocking LA out of the playoffs. Notice I didn't make that claim that past couple seasons about LA ? Reason being teams were not on that level last year or the past few seasons about LA? park.


Liar. You picked Denver to beat the lakers in the playoffs in 2009.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Liar. You picked Denver to beat the lakers in the playoffs in 2009.


Of course he did.

His anti-Laker bias is getting in the way of logical thinking. Even the experts are predicting the Lakers as "prohibitive favorites" this year to again win the title. I myself wouldn't go that far because Kobe's shooting woes have me concerned (what has me more concerned is the guy isn't checking himself and passing the ball off when he knows he's cold), but when push comes to shove in a playoff series I can't see anyone winning four games in any one series against them.

It's going to take a major injury to take the Lakers out, simple as that.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Ron said:


> I disagree. Both teams have four games remaining, and Dallas' schedule is easier than OKC. They still have a one-game advantage, and they hold the tie-breaker. Even if Dallas goes 2-2 (which I think they will do better than that), OKC will probably go 3-1, and Dallas retains the 3rd seed.


OKC is the division winner. They'll get the third seed off that I believe in the event of a tie.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Ron said:


> I disagree. Both teams have four games remaining, and Dallas' schedule is easier than OKC. They still have a one-game advantage, and they hold the tie-breaker. Even if Dallas goes 2-2 (which I think they will do better than that), OKC will probably go 3-1, and Dallas retains the 3rd seed.


Maybe, but I have a feeling that OKC wants that third seed. And Dallas is playing terrible. Not sure if Chandler is back for the Mavericks, but with out him they fall down a notch defensively. I could see OKC running the table and Dallas lucky to get one win under their belt. Tonight is a big night to see how this may play out, I'm a bit surprised though with 4 games left, and OKC only behind Dallas one game, that the national media and most fans on this board haven't looked at that being a possible seeding change in the West. You just hear about DEN/OKC match up. My hunch is that it's going to end up Dallas/Denver.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> Liar. You picked Denver to beat the lakers in the playoffs in 2009.


Granted, I was pulling for Denver because I was emotionally invested in that team more so than LA. However I was always aware that LA were the prohibitive favorites to win it all. Thats basically my point, where as this year, I'm of the opinion that LA has come down closer to the pack, and more teams have gotten better thus making this post-season a much more level playing field.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

23AJ said:


> Granted, I was pulling for Denver because I was emotionally invested in that team more so than LA. However I was always aware that LA were the prohibitive favorites to win it all. Thats basically my point, where as this year, I'm of the opinion that LA has come down closer to the pack, and more teams have gotten better thus making this post-season a much more level playing field.


You PICKED Denver, you weren't just rooting for them.


----------



## ball_dont_lie (Apr 5, 2011)

**** The Lakers...

Are not going to win it all so dont worry about it :twoguns:


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

I leave for a week without basketball and they go 1-3. Bull****. Whatever, we're still the favorites.


----------



## 77AJ (Feb 16, 2005)

You know how every post-season somebody in the media mentions Phil Jackson's record of never losing a playoff series when his team wins the first game. ...

Well here is another Phil Jackson stat to chew on. Anytime Phil Jackson's teams have had a 4 game losing streak in the regular season, they've never won the championship. This season the Lakers have had two of those streaks.

Also if the Lakers lose tomorrow against OKC. That will be five straight losses. And there next game is against the Spurs.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Looks like Phil is about to become a streak buster.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

23AJ said:


> You know how every post-season somebody in the media mentions Phil Jackson's record of never losing a playoff series when his team wins the first game. ...
> 
> Well here is another Phil Jackson stat to chew on. Anytime Phil Jackson's teams have had a 4 game losing streak in the regular season, they've never won the championship. This season the Lakers have had two of those streaks.
> 
> Also if the Lakers lose tomorrow against OKC. That will be five straight losses. And there next game is against the Spurs.


lol interesting.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

23AJ said:


> You know how every post-season somebody in the media mentions Phil Jackson's record of never losing a playoff series when his team wins the first game. ...
> 
> Well here is another Phil Jackson stat to chew on. Anytime Phil Jackson's teams have had a 4 game losing streak in the regular season, they've never won the championship. This season the Lakers have had two of those streaks.
> 
> Also if the Lakers lose tomorrow against OKC. That will be five straight losses. And there next game is against the Spurs.


There is no correlation between the two, if they don't the win the championship it won't be because they had a four game losing streak during the season.


----------

