# I just realized the Lakers are probably a bigger lock for the title than I thought



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Shaq has missed 15 games
Kobe 17 and counting
Malone 39 and counting
Fox 41

What team can have so many players from their starting lineup be injured at that rate and still be 4th?

Bench- Slava 14, Cook 40, Grant 9

The Lakers have not played a game with all 5 starters healthy.

When 4 starters are healthy they are *32-9*. 20-5 with the four being Payton, Kobe, Malone and Shaq. 12-4 with the four being Fox instead of Malone.

Now considering they started the season 18-3, they have proven in the past that they don't long to gel together.

Damn the playoffs should be fun to watch!


----------



## Cam*Ron (Apr 13, 2003)

You mean if all the starters are healthy, so they aren't a lock for the 4th seed if they continue at this rate. 

I agree though should be a fun playoff.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

The Kings have yet to have a full healthy team all season, everone is here Webber is out, Miller goes out, Webber comes back Miller comes back Jackson goes out. And theyre in first place


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Kings have no chance, Webber won't be ready for the playoffs. Too bad, Kings have a great team.

If Lakers are healthy they take it. They HAVE to be healthy, that's all that matters. 

Remember the 2001 rampage when Kobe came back for the last 4 games of the season from his injury? It was domination from that point on.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Webber wont be ready but Malone will... Makes sense doesnt it


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Jemel, will you be keeping that signature if the Lakers lose? 

*Jemel:* They wont lose

But if they do?


----------



## Ghiman (May 19, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
> Malone 39 and counting


 Wow! I didnt realize he missed that many games!


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

Aren't you making quite a big assumption by assuming the Lakers will be healthy come playoff time? I for one doubt that they will be. When they were fully healthy they were the best team in the NBA so that distorts their record; in recent months with guys injured they have been at best the 6th best team in the West, behind even the Grizzlies and the Mavericks who have almost caught up after being way behind the Lakers in December. So if they aren't healthy in the playoffs why do you expect them to stay any better than 6th in the West?

Oh and John: I'm sure that when the Lakers lose, Jemel's signature will be forgotten the way he forgot the "No way Robert Horry leaves L.A" predictions. But do't worry, mine will stay there for months.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> Oh and John: I'm sure that when the Lakers lose, Jemel's signature will be forgotten the way he forgot the "No way Robert Horry leaves L.A" predictions. But do't worry, mine will stay there for months.


haha, we are the first two names! 

I hear a lot about the 18-3 start and how its supposed to be a sign Lakers will dominate in the playoffs, but what about the 2 games they dropped in the next 3 games with the big four all healthy? They were 19-5 until Malone got hurt against Pheonix and played only 4 minutes that game. In comparison, Kings were 18-6 in those first 24 games, only 1 game difference, and they were without their best player. This doesnt mean either team is a lock to win the title. Its not how you're playing at the beginning, its how you're playing at the end.


----------



## Ben1 (May 20, 2003)

We have a huge chance of winning it this year, that is if we can be healthy come playoff time.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ben</b>!
> We have a huge chance of winning it this year, that is if we can be healthy come playoff time.


But not because of injuries like this thread is assuming.


If the Lakers win it all, it will have nothing to do with their prior injuries.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> Kings have no chance, Webber won't be ready for the playoffs. Too bad, Kings have a great team.
> 
> If Lakers are healthy they take it. They HAVE to be healthy, that's all that matters.
> ...


I think you win the award for the biggest Homer among the
entire set of posters. Never have I seen anyone so blind to
any thought which does not completely favor your own team.

How is it that the Kings have no chance because Webber won't
be ready despite the fact that he is already back and playing
great, yet Malone has yet to play a minute but he will ready
to dominate in the playoffs.

The Kings not only have a chance, they have a great chance to
win the whole thing.

Once in a while at least make an attempt to look at something
with an open mind. If you are completely blind to anything which is not
pro-Laker than you lose any credibility.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> Aren't you making quite a big assumption by assuming the Lakers will be healthy come playoff time? I for one doubt that they will be. When they were fully healthy they were the best team in the NBA so that distorts their record; in recent months with guys injured they have been at best the 6th best team in the West, behind even the Grizzlies and the Mavericks who have almost caught up after being way behind the Lakers in December. So if they aren't healthy in the playoffs why do you expect them to stay any better than 6th in the West?
> 
> Oh and John: I'm sure that when the Lakers lose, Jemel's signature will be forgotten the way he forgot the "No way Robert Horry leaves L.A" predictions. But do't worry, mine will stay there for months.


You are right in that I am making an assumption that they will be fully healthy now. But I am confident that Malone suffered a fluke injury, Shaqs injuries are playable in the playoffs and crossing my fingers nobody runs into Kobes shoulders.

I do agree with you that they will struggle if two of the main guys are out. Or if half the team is injured like those couple of january games.

But as of now the chance of them not winning is about as likely as Curry being an all-star and Penny Hardaway averaging 6+ assists, so the questions about my signature aren't valid.

And I never said there is no way Horry leaves LA. I said LA, going to his daughter or retirement.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Webber wont be ready but Malone will... Makes sense doesnt it


Yes, an MCL tear that didn't require any surgery is just as bad as lateral menicus surgery and microfracture surgery on the same knee.

Hey, tell me again how the Kings never made the playoffs in 2000, that was at least funny. :laugh:



> Originally posted by <b>mavsman</b>!
> 
> 
> I think you win the award for the biggest Homer among the
> ...


Are you merc_cuban? Your arguments are about as good, "Malone was injured too and it was just as bad as Webber's injury!!!". 

Seriously, stop posting, no one cares.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Again, if the Fab 4 are healthy the title will be won by the Lakers. If one of the Fab 4 is out or plays injured, then the Lakers still have a shot, but not nearly as guaranteed as it is with a healthy Fab 4.

It's really pretty obvious, but I guess a title is the only thing that'll change people minds, barring injury.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> in recent months with guys injured they have been at best the 6th best team in the West, behind even the Grizzlies and the Mavericks who have almost caught up after being way behind the Lakers in December. So if they aren't healthy in the playoffs why do you expect them to stay any better than 6th in the West?


If Shaq and Kobe are healthy and perform their best in the playoffs they are hardly the 6th best team in the league. The Grizz? Please. They're a great young team, but aren't any better than Shaq, Kobe and the rest of the Lakers. The Mavs? Maybe, I wouldn't doubt it. That would still make the Lakers 5th at worst, and if they had Payton that would make them better than every team in the West except maybe the Kings and Twolves, and with Malone the best team in the league. 

I'm assuming you understand no one from the East matters.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> Webber wont be ready but Malone will... Makes sense doesnt it


No. I didn't get that either. But I still don't think the Kings will win the title.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Lakers are pretty much a team to beat. Despite of Kobe's off court issues, injuries etc, we still managed to remain in the playoff home-advantage hunt.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

You know why? Because Shaq didnt miss that many games, had it been Shaq out for the stretch Malone and Kobe were out, the Lakers would barely make the playoffs, its all driven by the diesel, losing a player of Kobe and Malones caliber isnt as big if you have Shaq...


----------



## Ghiman (May 19, 2003)

Lakers- :boxing: -Kings

Wohoo! Playoffs in a couple more weeks!!!


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Lakers :sour::rocket: Kings


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

two words ( 4 counting these) dont pull that crap




> "Sacramento Kings,"


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

One word

"Lakers"


----------



## Cris (Jun 18, 2003)

wow, that was lame


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

Of course when you have Karl "Elbows" Malone on your team, you're a lock to win anything even most belligerent player of the year award.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

Even if everyone on the Lakers team is healthy they're not the best team. It all depends on how Shaq plays. I think that he's done and will never be the old slim shaq. Lakers won't win any championships lets say for a couple of years. It will be Kings, Minny, SA, and Dallas year after year. Get four Karl malones and four gary paytons and I still think that they're not the best team because they're the shouldabeen retired players team. (karl and gary). I hope we meet in playoffs so we could show the whole wide world who are the queens (with rings) and who are the fakers.  


another thing I forgot is that lakers can be the best team if the referees are helping them. :yes:


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

Oh yes, it's all about refs, who helped out Lakers in their three- peat(2000-2002) - hahahahahahahah :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## Brian34Cook (Mar 26, 2003)

Cmon guys let's try and stay on topic and not start a Lakers/Kings war


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaUnbreakableKinG</b>!
> Even if everyone on the Lakers team is healthy they're not the best team. It all depends on how Shaq plays. I think that he's done and will never be the old slim shaq. Lakers won't win any championships lets say for a couple of years. It will be Kings, Minny, SA, and Dallas year after year. Get four Karl malones and four gary paytons and I still think that they're not the best team because they're the shouldabeen retired players team. (karl and gary). I hope we meet in playoffs so we could show the whole wide world who are the queens (with rings) and who are the fakers.
> 
> 
> another thing I forgot is that lakers can be the best team if the referees are helping them. :yes:


Yes, unfortunately for the Kings the Lakers are the best team in the league when they are fully healthy.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> 
> Yes, unfortunately for the Kings the Lakers are the best team in the league when they are fully healthy.


So True.


----------



## mavsman (Jun 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> 
> Yes, an MCL tear that didn't require any surgery is just as bad as lateral menicus surgery and microfracture surgery on the same knee.
> ...


EDIT- Sarcasm used to insult Of course you didn't address the fact
that Webber is already back and playing well and Malone has yet
to play a minute. EDIT- insult 

I didn't say one word about how bad Malone's injury was or was
not. But when I see some moron make an argument that the Kings
have no chance to win because Weber has been hurt and will not
be ready for the playoffs despite the fact that he is already back
and playing well I feel compelled to respond.

And no I am not merc_cuban, if I was I would be saying that the
Mavs are better than all other teams. I am quite a bit more objective.

I hate the Kings but I am not stupid enough to make moronic statements
like they have no chance to win despite the fact that they have
been the best team in the league so far even with the best 
player on the team injured.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Both of you stop.

Consider that the warning.


----------



## The Ballatician PDM$ (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> The Kings have yet to have a full healthy team all season, everone is here Webber is out, Miller goes out, Webber comes back Miller comes back Jackson goes out. And theyre in first place


That is also true. I think the Kings will be a very dangerous team if they get everyone geared up and healthy come playoff time. I don't think any team from 1-12 can match up with their combination of talent and firepower. The Mavericks have a ton of offensive punch but lack an ideal big-man to go to battle with the likes of a Shaq or Tim Duncan. The Kings have Vlade Divac and Brad Miller-both cunning vets with a ton of savvy who play Shaq well. However,I still do not think the result will come out any different this season,as oppose to the last few season's (speaking of the Kings) I mean,what's going on now that has not gone on before? The Kings are atop of the league; they are missing a few key players;the Lakers are encoutering injuries and other drama. So everything is what It should be. I love it every year when the Kings come in and say the are the "favorites" because the boast the league's best record. But...they had the league's best record before and feel short....twice. The Lakers, on the other hand, have a top 4 record in the West..are encountering some sort of turmoil and are battling injuries-thish as happened before. And before last year,we have gone on to win the title. For the Lakers to be were they are at now is amazing considering all the games missed by very key players. When we were relatively helathy,we were rolling the elite..not just beating them..but rollin them. I understand teams have progress since the start of the season but I also take into consideration that the Lakers were nowere near acclimated with the new personnel and system together,adn were winning on pure talent alone. 

On pure talent alone the Lakers were better than anyone else. No,not because they had the deppest bench or none of that. It was because they got the most out of the players they would play the majority of the time. And the players that we do have (speaking of the big 4) all have attributes than can be match by few-and with the case of Shaq and Kobe-they have atributes that cannot be matched by anybody. The Lakers also are proven...while the Kings,who always seem to be the best in the regular season, have yet to do anything in the post-season. They have the potential to win any team in a seven game series of healthy...but I'd take a proven,healhty Lakers team,who has players who have been thru it all..over a team that has not gone ot the Finasl or has had success against LA in the playoffs. San Antonio has more experience with Duncan and also have a dominant post player. They give LA fits because they are tough upfront. Not saying the Kings do not have any players upfront..but they seem to come thru a lil less than the Spurs frontcourt players come playoff time.

Things are right were they should be. I know it.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> 
> Yes, unfortunately for the Kings the Lakers are the best team in the league when they are fully healthy.


Yet in the past 2 years, the Kings have never been healthy, nor have they ever been this whole season, so how would you know...


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

The Lakers have never had to deal with key injuries in the playoffs, if the Kings are healthy they have just as good if not better chance than anyone...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Didnt I hear this last year?

"The Lakers are a lock, all the other teams are fakers. We're going for a 4th straight, no one can stop us, no one stands a chance, bla, bla, bla."

If you make it to the finals, then we'll talk. Every team this year has had to deal with injury, we just havent heard them ***** about it so much so you may not have noticed.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> Didnt I hear this last year?
> 
> "The Lakers are a lock, all the other teams are fakers. We're going for a 4th straight, no one can stop us, no one stands a chance, bla, bla, bla."


No, you didn't.



> If you make it to the finals, then we'll talk. Every team this year has had to deal with injury, we just havent heard them ***** about it so much so you may not have noticed.


Every team does deal with injury, just not to this extent. And now is quintiple-asterisking it because here in LA we don't give a damn about regular season sucess. Its why we don't hang pacific divison or western conference title banners.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
> Every team does deal with injury, just not to this extent. And now is quintiple-asterisking it because here in LA we don't give a damn about regular season sucess. Its why we don't hang pacific divison or western conference title banners.


There's no way in hell that a fan doesn't give a DAMN about his/her team during the season. you're just trying to act like u don't give a damn but hell yea u give a damn. it's ur favorite team. u would love them to win 70 games. isn't that right Jemel Irief???


----------



## HallOfFamer (May 26, 2003)

As a Laker fan, I can honestly say there are only two teams that really strike fear in me. They are the Kings and the Twolves. Even if we get all of the big 4 back healthy, I still think the Sac - L.A. series will go 7 games.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>HallOfFamer</b>!
> As a Laker fan, I can honestly say there are only two teams that really strike fear in me. They are the Kings and the Twolves. Even if we get all of the big 4 back healthy, I still think the Sac - L.A. series will go 7 games.


You said it right my friend. I'm not saying Kings are better than Lakers, but Lakers are not better than Kings either. So yea like you said HallOfFamer if they meet it will go down to 7 games and maybe a couple of overtimes. But one of these two teams will win it all (*if healthy*).


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Every team does deal with injury, just not to this extent. And now is quintiple-asterisking it because here in LA we don't give a damn about regular season sucess. Its why we don't hang pacific divison or western conference title banners.


I figure your referring to the Kings with the banner hanging, hey you gotta start somewhere... Number 2, if the Lakers had won seventy games this season, you would be all on the Lakers nuts, just because theyve had a dissapointing season as far as that team goes, "O who cares about the regular season" The regular season does matter, who would you rather play in the first round, the Nuggets, or the Spurs? Theres a huge difference in opponents, then you also get homecourt. The regular season does matter... And if the fans here in LA dont give a damn about the regular season, why are there multiple page threads on every game this season? Why do people talk about it, why are people dissapointed on this board when the Lakers lose, why are they happy when they win? The regular season is very important...


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

This thread is hilarious. Lakers and Kings fans are arguing with each other about whose team has had worse injury issues, and the assumption seems to be that whichever team is the most injury-prone is the most likely to win the championship.

Posters like EHL and Jemel Irief will look ridiculous if the Lakers lose. No team is EVER a "lock" to win a championship.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> Posters like EHL and Jemel Irief will look ridiculous if the Lakers lose. No team is EVER a "lock" to win a championship.


That's right man. even the 8th seed might win the championship. It's not going to happend but it could you could never say never on anything in basketball. Things change so fast. Noone is a lock to win this year. yea the west is more favored but you never know what happens. :yes:


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> Didnt I hear this last year?
> 
> "The Lakers are a lock, all the other teams are fakers. We're going for a 4th straight, no one can stop us, no one stands a chance, bla, bla, bla."


As Jermel said, no, you didn't, don't know what world you were living in last year. I was among many Laker fans that saw a weak team with a fat Shaq. Things kind of change when you add Karl Malone and Gary Payton and get rid of players like Samaki Walker and Mark Madsen. 



> If you make it to the finals, then we'll talk.


Tell that to the Pacers. 



> Every team this year has had to deal with injury, we just havent heard them ***** about it so much so you may not have noticed.


Yeah, I'm sure all the Western elite teams have had multiple key starters that have missed just as many games as the Lakers key starters have missed this season due to injury. Oh wait, no.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Posters like EHL and Jemel Irief will look ridiculous if the Lakers lose. No team is EVER a "lock" to win a championship.


Let me know when a 100% healthy Lakers team loses the title this year. If they're healthy, and win the title because of that, I'll make sure to pull this thread back up and put a big fat laugh icon right next to your post. Just for you. 

Seriously, get over it, the Lakers are a lock for the title if healthy. Maybe not 100% lock, but probably at least 90% lock.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> I figure your referring to the Kings with the banner hanging, hey you gotta start somewhere... Number 2, if the Lakers had won seventy games this season, you would be all on the Lakers nuts, just because theyve had a dissapointing season as far as that team goes, "O who cares about the regular season" The regular season does matter, who would you rather play in the first round, the Nuggets, or the Spurs? Theres a huge difference in opponents, then you also get homecourt. The regular season does matter... And if the fans here in LA dont give a damn about the regular season, why are there multiple page threads on every game this season? Why do people talk about it, why are people dissapointed on this board when the Lakers lose, why are they happy when they win? The regular season is very important...


Pretty much every team that except for the Lakers hangs Divison and Conference banners, so you aren't the only sucess starved team.

Would I be happy if the Lakers won 70? Of course. I did not mean what I said literally, but I do not care about the regular season as much as say you do, because my team has frustrated me in the past by flipping on light switches when it feels like it. 

I don't really care about seeding or all that either. Bottom line is if the Lakers are healthy, they win. Remember them going 11-0 against the 50 win Blazers, Kings and Spurs?


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
> Would I be happy if the Lakers won 70? Of course. I did not mean what I said literally, but *I do not care about the regular season as much as say you do*, because my team has frustrated me in the past by flipping on light switches when it feels like it.


I don't care that much either but I like seeing them win games. If they can get the top seed why not?? if they were like the lakers with switches I would try and say I don't really care but deep in your heart you care about them and want them to get the top seed and win as many games as they can.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

The only thing the Laker's are 100% lock for is locker-room implosion. Nobody EVER has 100% chance to win championship. Fully healthy I'd say 60%, because any team can be beaten.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> 
> As Jermel said, no, you didn't, don't know what world you were living in last year. I was among many Laker fans that saw a weak team with a fat Shaq. Things kind of change when you add Karl Malone and Gary Payton and get rid of players like Samaki Walker and Mark Madsen.
> ...


Look at threads from last year. You all DID say you were a lock until it was apparent that you were not. "We're going for 4, no one can stop us."

But hey, keep contradicting yourself like always EHL. Your posts always make me laugh.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> Look at threads from last year. You all DID say you were a lock until it was apparent that you were not. "We're going for 4, no one can stop us."


Really? Show me where I said last year's Laker team was a lock for the title. You can't show me, because I *never* said such a thing. I wasn't even a member here before last November. :laugh:

Now, if you meant other Laker fans, sure, I've read plenty of idiot posts from other Lakers fans claiming they were a lock last year. I made it a routine to put them in their place last season. But you wouldn't know, you've only read my posts from this season on this board, and not last season at other boards. 



> But hey, keep contradicting yourself like always EHL. Your posts always make me laugh.


:laugh:

Yes, I've contradicted myself by....? Exactly. I haven't contradicted myself, you just like to make blanket statements. I can make blanket statements too. For example..."You shouldn't talk, you were the one saying the Pacers would blow through the 2003 playoffs by going 16-0". See. :laugh:


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> I'm assuming you understand no one from the East matters.





> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> 
> I'll make sure to pull this thread back up and put a big fat laugh icon right next to your post. Just for you.


Right back at you, buddy!

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## RG (Jan 1, 2003)

ooops, that's gonna leave a mark.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

ouch


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This was the post I was waiting for with your signature all season long, and you didn't dissapoint.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*there go elvis! broham*

Just like the Staples Center, when losing this place is a ghost town.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> 
> But as of now the chance of them not winning is about as likely as Curry being an all-star and Penny Hardaway averaging 6+ assists, _so the questions about my signature aren't valid._


But what if, for the sake of argument, LA *doesn't* win?

Even in basketball...at the start of the season, bet on the field, if someone will offer you that sweetheart bet.


----------



## HallOfFamer (May 26, 2003)

whoa, harsh harsh bump.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>The Ballatician PDM$</b>!
> 
> On pure talent alone the Lakers were better than anyone else. No,not because they had the deppest bench or none of that. It was because they got the most out of the players they would play the majority of the time. And the players that we do have (speaking of the big 4) all have attributes than can be match by few-and with the case of Shaq and Kobe-they have atributes that cannot be matched by anybody. The Lakers also are proven...while the Kings,who always seem to be the best in the regular season, have yet to do anything in the post-season. They have the potential to win any team in a seven game series of healthy...but I'd take a proven,healhty Lakers team,who has players who have been thru it all..over a team that has not gone ot the Finasl or has had success against LA in the playoffs. San Antonio has more experience with Duncan and also have a dominant post player. They give LA fits because they are tough upfront. Not saying the Kings do not have any players upfront..but they seem to come thru a lil less than the Spurs frontcourt players come playoff time.
> 
> Things are right were they should be. I know it.


Pimpsy Collins, your thoughts about last night's game... :reporter:


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Wow...Jamel should go into seclusion after this bump, if he hasn't already. "Questions about my signature aren't valid..." What a laugh riot.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rawse</b>!
> 
> 
> Pimpsy Collins, your thoughts about last night's game... :reporter:


:laugh:

That little guy with the microphone gets me every time.

I'm waiting for a new Pimpsy thread called "A message for the Lakers and our fans." Maybe Ron will make an appearance there too, for once, after a Lakers loss.

And maybe pigs will fly.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

Greatest bump ever. Open mouth and insert foot. :laugh:


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Haha, this bump doesn't hurt at all. Not when ArtestFan has to cut up my predictions to make them look bad. 

For the record, I actually said:

_Let me know when a 100% healthy Lakers team loses the title this year. If they're healthy, and win the title because of that, I'll make sure to pull this thread back up and put a big fat laugh icon right next to your post. Just for you. _

Though, that doesn't make the Pistons' performance in the Finals any less great. But quite obviously, a healthy Malone would have given them a much much better chance.


----------



## RG (Jan 1, 2003)

Admit it....The prediction carried the weight of a Kobe guarnatee. :laugh:


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>rawse</b>!
> Wow...Jamel should go into seclusion after this bump, if he hasn't already. "Questions about my signature aren't valid..." What a laugh riot.


Nah, did you read my post to start the thread? 

I have better material to bump than this. Some stuff almost on par with the infamous asterisk thread.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jamel Irief</b>!
> 
> I have better material to bump than this. Some stuff almost on par with the infamous asterisk thread.


Now *that* was funny.


----------

