Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Poll

Celtics or Lakers??

Celtics
Lakers

Author Topic: NBA FINALS  (Read 4342 times)

Connelly

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #20 on: June 03, 2008, 11:12:06 AM »
Can't win every year, but I'll take 4-5 banners this decade when all is said and done...

HTH.

Yes, they seem to win the years they can dodge the tougher teams.  A very good 2nd or 3rd best team in the NBA for years at a time. 

Connelly

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #21 on: June 03, 2008, 11:16:42 AM »
The Hawks didn't even break 0.500 and still the Celtics were blown out by them in several games.

In the playoffs, I'm not sure if 97-92, 103-100, and 102-93 performances qualify as "blowouts".  

Quote
Also, the 2004 season was ages ago and the Lakers are a whole new team, especially after shedding the NBA's biggest dead weight...Shaq...he was holding Kobe down.

Exactly.  It was great to see the Lakers immediately start winning consecutive championships as soon as they were able to unload Shaq.  

Connelly

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 66
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #22 on: June 03, 2008, 11:19:00 AM »
I'm with you but how do you explain the Celtics' dominance v. the West head-to-head this year in the regular season?

I picked the Lakers in 5 too, but the 2-3-2 will make it more difficult for the Lakers...

I think the Lakers have too much depth and firepower when all is said and done but I wouldn't be surprised if it went 6 games...

The days off between games (which doesn't always happen during the regular season) will help the aging Celtics...

 
You think the Lakers are too deep? The biggest critique of their team is that they have such a terribly weak bench. They developed an 8-man rotation like almost every other team does in the playoffs, so now it's also pretty short. The Celtics, on the other hand, have refused to do so and regularly played 10 or 11 guys. It seems like you're talking out of your...lack of sports knowledge.

"Too much" could be referring to quality and not quantity.  3 players could be "deeper" than 5 scrubs.

dsetterl

  • Guest
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #23 on: June 03, 2008, 11:29:12 AM »
The argument on which team is more talented/ has depth is a very weak one. Both teams are very talented. With that being said sports, especially basketball, is one of streaks. If I had to put money down, which I won't because I have none, I would hands down pick the Lakers. The Celtics playoff performance has been awful, and I do not think a deep bench necessarily helps in the NBA. Confidence has a lot to do with sports, especially when dealing with the fragile super-ego of a susperstar athlete. What do you think being pulled out of a game does to these players? What about being pulled out of the game when playing well so a a sloppy, terrified KG can replace you? Well I may just be overplaying this, but the Lakers are going to win.

The Artist

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
  • Admit it... you got Rick Rolled.
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #24 on: June 03, 2008, 04:34:26 PM »
Also, the 2004 season was ages ago and the Lakers are a whole new team, especially after shedding the NBA's biggest dead weight...Shaq...he was holding Kobe down.

You had a good argument until you said that. Shaq 2003 and Shaq 2008 cannot be compared. Heck, Shaq 2005 was still pretty good (won a title with the Heat). Meanwhile, Kobe was 'exposed' as being a product of Shaq when many thought it was vice versa (he'd get points, but he didn't make his team better). He 'kinda' started to get it last year, but the truth is, if they didn't get Gasol in the most BS trade in NBA history, they not only wouldn't be in the Finals, they might have not made the playoffs (Warriors > Lakers without Gasol).

steezi

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #25 on: June 03, 2008, 06:13:14 PM »
:) I know. That last little bit was a personal bias against Shaq. The Kobe package just isn't complete without all the accessories, such as a good big man...Gasol, who is unselfish with the spotlight. Tim Duncan, KG, Yao Min are all good examples of big men that are unselfish and as a result have benefited team harmony and chemistry. It's true Shaq did win one with Miami in 2005 but look at how his dominance and efficacy has declined almost exponentially. Phoenix this year would have been better off without him and his "hack a Shaq" cancer.

The Artist

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
  • Admit it... you got Rick Rolled.
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #26 on: June 03, 2008, 06:22:59 PM »
:) I know. That last little bit was a personal bias against Shaq. The Kobe package just isn't complete without all the accessories, such as a good big man...Gasol, who is unselfish with the spotlight. Tim Duncan, KG, Yao Min are all good examples of big men that are unselfish and as a result have benefited team harmony and chemistry. It's true Shaq did win one with Miami in 2005 but look at how his dominance and efficacy has declined almost exponentially. Phoenix this year would have been better off without him and his "hack a Shaq" cancer.

You LA kids crack me up. My college was a mix of bay area and socal kids, and the socal obsession with the lakers is matched only by the bay areas hate of the lakers.


The Artist

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
  • Admit it... you got Rick Rolled.
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #27 on: June 03, 2008, 07:04:31 PM »
:) I know. That last little bit was a personal bias against Shaq. The Kobe package just isn't complete without all the accessories, such as a good big man...Gasol, who is unselfish with the spotlight. Tim Duncan, KG, Yao Min are all good examples of big men that are unselfish and as a result have benefited team harmony and chemistry. It's true Shaq did win one with Miami in 2005 but look at how his dominance and efficacy has declined almost exponentially. Phoenix this year would have been better off without him and his "hack a Shaq" cancer.

You LA kids crack me up. My college was a mix of bay area and socal kids, and the socal obsession with the lakers is matched only by the bay areas hate of the lakers.



But SF kids have a lot to be bitter about: Giants, Warriors, et al...

The Giants fans are still bitter about the Angels World Series. The Warriors fans (like myself) are FINALLY excited about our team (minus not making the playoffs this year and possibly losing B Diddy). The 49ers fans are disappointed about last season and worried that the 49ers may move to LA  :'( I'm one of the weird people who is an A's fan and a 49ers fan.

t...

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2380
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #28 on: June 03, 2008, 11:19:19 PM »
Lakers in 6.

Some of y'all are f-ing loony.
Quote
Cady on October 16, 2007, 10:41:52 PM

i rhink tyi'm inejying my fudgcicle too much

Quote
Huey on February 07, 2007, 11:15:32 PM

I went to a party in an apartment in a silo once.

ithappensforareason

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
Re: NBA FINALS
« Reply #29 on: June 04, 2008, 11:43:37 PM »
Celtics in 6, because if there is a God he won't let Kobe win a title without Shaq.

Its the name on the front of the jersey that matters, not the name on the back...

HTH

This man speaks the truth.