NBA Playoffs

SniperSB23 · #1 06-11-2009, 11:15 PM

This years Lakers is the worst championship team I have seen in my lifetime. I've never seen a team win three series in a row that they should have lost and played like **** and still won a championship cause their opponents played shittier. It is like watching Big Brown win the Preakness, you knew you were watching dogshit but people still wanted to praise it.

King Glorious · #2 06-11-2009, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

This years Lakers is the worst championship team I have seen in my lifetime. I've never seen a team win three series in a row that they should have lost and played like **** and still won a championship cause their opponents played shittier. It is like watching Big Brown win the Preakness, you knew you were watching dogshit but people still wanted to praise it.

I have to agree. Orlando has to go away kicking themselves. Simple free throws and they are tied. Inches away from being up 3-1. It can turn so easily. You have to give the Lakers credit though. It's not pure luck when you consistently come out on top and even though so many of their games could have gone either way, the majority of them are going their way. There's something to be said for always keeping yourself in it and giving yourself a chance to win. Gotta give it to Fisher too. Some big shot. Big shots. Gotta give Jackson credit too for sticking with him.

dalakhani · #3 06-11-2009, 11:29 PM

Was it just me or was Kobe trying to "punk" howard a little there?

#4 06-11-2009, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

This years Lakers is the worst championship team I have seen in my lifetime. I've never seen a team win three series in a row that they should have lost and played like **** and still won a championship cause their opponents played shittier. It is like watching Big Brown win the Preakness, you knew you were watching dogshit but people still wanted to praise it.

Celtics last year were not very impressive either imo.

dalakhani · #5 06-11-2009, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn

Celtics last year were not very impressive either imo.

Really? Garnett and Pierce are hall of fame players and perenial all everything. Ray Allen, although not as good, has had a wonderful career and is still a good player. They had a great mix of young and old and played outstanding defense.

Why weren't they impressive?

King Glorious · #6 06-11-2009, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Really? Garnett and Pierce are hall of fame players and perenial all everything. Ray Allen, although not as good, has had a wonderful career and is still a good player. They had a great mix of young and old and played outstanding defense.

Why weren't they impressive?

I'm going to guess he's going to say it's because of how Atlanta took them to seven games. That was a shock but after that, they beat a good Cleveland team that had been to the finals the year before and got progressively better in the next round against Detroit and finally against the Lakers. The difference between this Laker team and that Celtic team is that you never got the feeling that the Celtics were fortunate to win games they should have lost. It's sort of like the 1988 Lakers who were extended to seven against Utah in the conference semifinals and also by Dallas in the conference finals but you never got the feeling that they were lucking up to win. Just a good team winning a tight series.

dalakhani · #7 06-12-2009, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I'm going to guess he's going to say it's because of how Atlanta took them to seven games. That was a shock but after that, they beat a good Cleveland team that had been to the finals the year before and got progressively better in the next round against Detroit and finally against the Lakers. The difference between this Laker team and that Celtic team is that you never got the feeling that the Celtics were fortunate to win games they should have lost. It's sort of like the 1988 Lakers who were extended to seven against Utah in the conference semifinals and also by Dallas in the conference finals but you never got the feeling that they were lucking up to win. Just a good team winning a tight series.

i agree with this and i actually agree with the argument that this Laker team is probably the worst i have seen besides the 07 spurs team which was really bad. I think this team beats that 07 spurs team hands down.

dalakhani · #8 06-14-2009, 10:25 PM

On the great Delonte West:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...minated-090531

"Delonte West, who played well on Saturday, is ideally a first guard off the bench, a tough, skilled player who can man both guard spots. But at just 6-foot-3, he's too small to start at shooting guard, especially next to the 6-1 Williams"

Interesting. Broussard, a respected NBA columnist, views the great delonte west as too small to be a starting 2 guard even for a team that Jerry West said would be a lottery team without Lebron.

LOL. I guess he doesnt know what he is talking about either.

Cannon Shell · #9 06-15-2009, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

On the great Delonte West:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...minated-090531

"Delonte West, who played well on Saturday, is ideally a first guard off the bench, a tough, skilled player who can man both guard spots. But at just 6-foot-3, he's too small to start at shooting guard, especially next to the 6-1 Williams"

Interesting. Broussard, a respected NBA columnist, views the great delonte west as too small to be a starting 2 guard even for a team that Jerry West said would be a lottery team without Lebron.

LOL. I guess he doesnt know what he is talking about either.

Yeah this is useful. West had a real tough time guarding Rip Hamilton, Joe Johnson and Turkoglu, all who are much taller than him. Broussard is hardly an expert on anything and he says a lot of stupid stuff. yeah a guy who played 45 minutes a game in the playoffs should be coming off the bench. Cleveland's problem isnt its guards height, it is its lack of a long swing defender outside of Lebron.

#10 06-15-2009, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

i agree with this and i actually agree with the argument that this Laker team is probably the worst i have seen besides the 07 spurs team which was really bad. I think this team beats that 07 spurs team hands down.

Of course I dont.
That Spurs team played much better defense
than any of the teams we have seen the past 2years.
Not even close.

The Spurs boring teams are easy to pick on.
They just won games almost every fourth quarter
by playing superior help D. That D is now very old,
very slow, and the Spurs are very bad.

Cannon Shell · #11 06-15-2009, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn

Of course I dont.
That Spurs team played much better defense
than any of the teams we have seen the past 2years.
Not even close.

The Spurs boring teams are easy to pick on.
They just won games almost every fourth quarter
by playing superior help D. That D is now very old,
very slow, and the Spurs are very bad.

The Knicks are very bad. The Spurs are just old.

dalakhani · #12 06-15-2009, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgardn

Of course I dont.
That Spurs team played much better defense
than any of the teams we have seen the past 2years.
Not even close.

The Spurs boring teams are easy to pick on.
They just won games almost every fourth quarter
by playing superior help D. That D is now very old,
very slow, and the Spurs are very bad.

It could be argued that that team was given a ride into the championship game after the fight with Phoenix. The cleveland team they beat was about the worst championship finalist ever.

That spurs team would have gotten beaten by this laker team in my opinion.