06 Feb 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWell obviously it was embarrassing, but that train wreck is the reason these past two Laker/Celtic games were so sweet. On Christmas, the Lakers ended the Celtics' 19 game win streak and showed what a Gasol-Bynum tandem can do against that physical defense. Yesterday, the Lakers showed what they could do without Andrew Bynum in the toughest situation of a NBA regular season, the second game of a back to back on the road against the defending champs in which they happened to end another long Celtic win streak. You can downplay the two games all you want but I think the Lakers are now in the Celtics' heads. In both games, the Lakers beat the Celtics when they were at their best, when no other team could beat the defending champs, and they did it with Bynum and without Bynum. The Lakers showed that not only is the team's lineup different (Bynum, Ariza, Powell, and most important, Vlade is on the bench far away from Paul Pierce who abused him in the Finals) but that they are mentally tougher this year; Lamar Odom made two clutch free throws to win the game. Really? Lamar Odom?! But you know what? My favorite thing about yesterdays game doesn't concern the Lakers, but rather the Boston Celtics and how they felt that the refs robbed them last night. How ironic, the refs decide to blow their whistle, the Celtics lose, and Doc Rivers shows his true colors.
How did this game, which was a bit more significant, feel? http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=280617002
07 Feb 09
Originally posted by MoneyManMikeIf a couple of regular season games (one decided by 1 point in overtime) make you think that makes up for the Lakers collapsing in the finals then good for you. When this Laker team actually wins something let me know.
Well obviously it was embarrassing, but that train wreck is the reason these past two Laker/Celtic games were so sweet. On Christmas, the Lakers ended the Celtics' 19 game win streak and showed what a Gasol-Bynum tandem can do against that physical defense. Yesterday, the Lakers showed what they could do without Andrew Bynum in the toughest situation ...[text shortened]... e refs decide to blow their whistle, the Celtics lose, and Doc Rivers shows his true colors.
27 Feb 09
Originally posted by no1marauderIf the supposed "Big Picture" your talking about is the Lakers having the league best record at the end of the regular season, then yes I do see the importance of this loss. With or without KG, the Champs shouldn't be losing to an injured Clippers team that is showcasing a lineup of journeymen and role players.
A 4-2 road trip with wins against the Hornets, Mavs, Suns and Nuggets and that with KG missing 3 1/2 of those games. Like most "homers", you fail to grasp the Big Picture.
27 Feb 09
1 edit
Originally posted by MoneyManMikeThe mighty Lakers lost to the Kings who have even less wins than the Clips. Your right about one thing and one thing only: the Celtics are the Champs.
If the supposed "Big Picture" your talking about is the Lakers having the league best record at the end of the regular season, then yes I do see the importance of this loss. With or without KG, the Champs shouldn't be losing to an injured Clippers team that is showcasing a lineup of journeymen and role players.
Home court didn't help the Super Lakers against the sub-.500 Bobcats. http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/gameTrax?gameId=2009012713
Since the Celts split the first two in LaLaLand and won all three in Boston in last years' Finals, "home court" advantage for LA would have meant losing in 5 instead of 6.
27 Feb 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWell your a fool if you don't think that having home court is important in the playoffs. Anyways, I am interested to see what "Starbury" does to your team's chemistry.
The mighty Lakers lost to the Kings who have even less wins than the Clips. Your right about one thing and one thing only: the Celtics are the Champs.
Home court didn't help the Super Lakers against the sub-.500 Bobcats. http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/gameTrax?gameId=2009012713
Since the Celts split the first two in LaLaLand ...[text shortened]... last years' Finals, "home court" advantage for LA would have meant losing in 5 instead of 6.
28 Feb 09
1 edit
Originally posted by MoneyManMikeHome court hasn't been terribly important in the playoffs in this decade. From wiki: 2008 marked the first time since 2000 that the top seeds from both conferences met in the Finals and the first time since 2003 that any top seeded team played in the NBA finals.
Well your a fool if you don't think that having home court is important in the playoffs. Anyways, I am interested to see what "Starbury" does to your team's chemistry.
As far as home court advantage this year, I wouldn't count my poultry before they leave the egg if I were you; the Lakers got manhandled in Denver tonight. Of course, that's a tough place to play; the Celtics barely managed to squeak out a win there Monday ........................ by 38 points.
28 Feb 09
Originally posted by no1marauderWhat?! You seriously believe that home court doesn't have any significance in the playoffs?! Really, how long have you been a basketball fan? I challenge you to go look up NBA and college teams' home and away records and then try to tell me that home court isn't important.
Home court hasn't been terribly important in the playoffs in this decade. From wiki: 2008 marked the first time since 2000 that the top seeds from both conferences met in the Finals and the first time since 2003 that any top seeded team played in the NBA finals.
About the Denver game...at least it wasn't the Clippers lol who happen to be losing to the Kings by 20 right now. How did you guys lose to the Clippers?! Hilarious.