Lakers 2002

[Russo21]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjRcTiwVEwo

This championship deserves an asterix or to be taken off the lakers all together. The Trophy, the rings and for the history books.

An absolute travesty. Word's cannot explain. With a ref admitting the games were fixed and the blatant calls against the kings and blatant no calls for the Lakers..

Something needs to be done about that. Worst fixed series ever. Admitted to be a fixed series no less.

Why can't the NBA do something about it? Like an Asterix or take the title off the Lakers permanantly? Kings shoulda won that in 6.

Feel so sorry for the Kings players fans and entire organisation.

[Venti Quattro]

8n3SEJnKQKc

zsivkdo4pjg

[KoolAid Mans Brother]

Jesus fucking Christ

1. What the fuck is an asterix?

2. Please just reference this thread:

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=196263


That is all.

[Venti Quattro]

mOOZmIG3nyA

[InTheCrust]

I guess GNSF heard all Spur titles were asterisked and made this thread in retaliation.

:nope Bad gray name, bad

[Venti Quattro]

NO-5Fr3LF2E

[Bynumite]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TvvqfY7cb5A/Tel8SNrOskI/AAAAAAAAC-s/tdXm6MxHps4/s1600/index.jpg

[Gutter92]

tbh, worse than just the calls against the Kings were the non-calls against the Lakers...lol @ 2:18 - 2:25 in that video...

[pass1st]

You can disregard 2002 if you disregard 2007

[Venti Quattro]

I want to punch this poster if I can. Next on my list would be Rummpd.

[Jelloisjigglin]

fvkKdXLwt0U

[Gutter92]

You can disregard 2002 if you disregard 2007

How do you figure that?

[HarlemHeat37]

The worst officiated game in sports history, tbh..

Even National media members, including biased Laker reporters, questioned the officiating..

It is what it is, though, it still counts for a Lakers title..

[Russo21]

Oooh Laker fans straight onto it. Didn't know how testy you were about this series. Kinda obvious you all think it was fixed to seeing how fast you come out to talk shit about my post and go into defense mode. Shame.

[pass1st]

How do you figure that?

lnSxGriD6GA

[Venti Quattro]

Oooh Laker fans straight onto it. Didn't know how testy you were about this series. Kinda obvious you all think it was fixed to seeing how fast you come out to talk shit about my post and go into defense mode. Shame.

The Kings...

a. Choked Game 1 at home
b. Choked a 20 point lead in Game 4, throwing out a potential 3-1 lead because of their inability to grab the ball with two fucking hands
c. Put on one of the most infamous choke jobs in playoff lore during Game 7

And you're telling us that Game 6 swung the entire series in favor of LA? :lol

[Venti Quattro]

Oh and let's all forget that the Kings were also given a sizable free-throw advantage in Game 5. :tu

You fucking idiots who only base their opinions on Youtube mixtapes. :lol

and also, :lmao Parker for MVP

[Gutter92]

The Kings...

a. Choked Game 1 at home
b. Choked a 20 point lead in Game 4, throwing out a potential 3-1 lead because of their inability to grab the ball with two fucking hands
c. Put on one of the most infamous choke jobs in playoff lore during Game 7

And you're telling us that Game 6 swung the entire series in favor of LA? :lol

Despite all that choking, if they didn't get jobbed in game 6, they advance to the Finals...

You have to understand that that game was the most obvious, blatant "gifted" game in NBA history...it's not like it'll ever be erased from the record books (and it shouldn't, unless that shit happened in the Finals, tbh), but you shouldn't pretend it never happened...just be happy it did

[pass1st]

Tbh, we always hear that the series was rigged in Lakers favor. It WAS rigged, but not in favor of the Kings or Lakers. Stern wanted a 7 game series between two of the strongest teams in the west because New Jersey was going to get buttfucked and everybody knew it. It was just a business move to give people an intense WCF to make up for one of the weakest Finals in a long time.

If there were no calls, Kings probably would lose because they were full of chokers. It would probably have gone to 5 to boot. Still, that series was rigged for sure.

[pass1st]

Despite all that choking, if they didn't get jobbed in game 6, they advance to the Finals...

You have to understand that that game was the most obvious, blatant "gifted" game in NBA history...it's not like it'll ever be erased from the record books (and it shouldn't, unless that shit happened in the Finals, tbh), but you shouldn't pretend it never happened...just be happy it did

Game 7 was even, Kings could have won

If refs weren't helping Kings in game 4 then Lakers would be the one looking to finish it up in 6.

[Gutter92]

lnSxGriD6GA

Big difference there, and I'll explain why.

There is a rule that is not left to interpretation (crossing the line onto the court during an altercation), and a rule that is left to interpretation (fouls).

The Suns players crossed the line (literally) during an altercation, and were given the appropriate punishment. As we've seen very recently, Amare is not the best at keeping his cool (lol fire extinguisher), so his temper cost his team a chance at the championship.

There is a big difference between that and the referees blatantly choosing to interpret fouls in one team's favor. Like I said, recognize it and be grateful, it helped you advance. There's no asterisk only cause that shit didn't happen in the Finals, and you still had to win vs. the (lol)East team

[Venti Quattro]

I am not denying that it didn't happen. I just wish that uniformed fucktards would start doing research so that they would realize that Sacramento had more to do in their loss as compared to one game that was rigged for LA.

They lost three fucking games because just because they couldn't close out.

Let's also not deny that the Kings were handed a 13, 20 and 10 free-throw attempt advantage in Games 2, 4 and 5 respectively.

[pass1st]

Big difference there, and I'll explain why.

There is a rule that is not left to interpretation (crossing the line onto the court during an altercation), and a rule that is left to interpretation (fouls).

The Suns players crossed the line (literally) during an altercation, and were given the appropriate punishment. As we've seen very recently, Amare is not the best at keeping his cool (lol fire extinguisher), so his temper cost his team a chance at the championship.

There is a big difference between that and the referees blatantly choosing to interpret fouls in one team's favor. Like I said, recognize it and be grateful, it helped you advance. There's no asterisk only cause that shit didn't happen in the Finals, and you still had to win vs. the (lol)East team

It's not that there is a difference, it's that both are completely in hindsight. Unlike the 99* which is just an asterisk by virtue of being a shortened season.

[Gutter92]

It's not that there is a difference, it's that both are completely in hindsight. Unlike the 99* which is just an asterisk by virtue of being a shortened season.

Damn, were some teams not allowed to participate in the playoffs that year or something? Tbh I was too young to watch the NBA back then, so you'll have to fill me in on that one. Were the Spurs the only team to play 50 games or were all teams playing the same amount of games, no teams were banned from competing for the playoffs, each team had the same amount of preparation time, etc...? Because that would mean that the Spurs did the unprecedented and were the only team that was able to adjust in order to win the ring in an abnormal year, tbh.

[pass1st]

Damn, were some teams not allowed to participate in the playoffs that year or something? Tbh I was too young to watch the NBA back then, so you'll have to fill me in on that one. Were the Spurs the only team to play 50 games or were all teams playing the same amount of games, no teams were banned from competing for the playoffs, each team had the same amount of preparation time, etc...? Because that would mean that the Spurs did the unprecedented and were the only team that was able to adjust in order to win the ring in an abnormal year, tbh.

Shortened season, it's an abnormally which makes it an asterisk.

Spurfan hates the idea of an asterisk because it is a strike against their franchise they believe, but it basically says the title was won under abnormal conditions and not a knock against the team or their franchise.

[Gutter92]

Shortened season, it's an abnormally which makes it an asterisk.

Spurfan hates the idea of an asterisk because it is a strike against their franchise they believe, but it basically says the title was won under abnormal conditions and not a knock against the team or their franchise.

Remind me again, are championships won in the regular season or the playoffs? Then, with that in mind, can you tell me if the playoffs were shortened as well? Remember, I was too young to watch the NBA back then, so I'm genuinely curious ;) If the playoffs (the real season) were the length of the normal playoffs in any other year, I don't see how you can attach an asterisk to ring that is won in the playoffs, unless said playoffs were shortened, tbh.

[Venti Quattro]

I rag the Spurs a lot for being asterisk champions. But to be fair to them, the playoffs weren't shortened.

[pass1st]

Remind me again, are championships won in the regular season or the playoffs? Then, with that in mind, can you tell me if the playoffs were shortened as well? Remember, I was too young to watch the NBA back then, so I'm genuinely curious ;) If the playoffs (the real season) were the length of the normal playoffs in any other year, I don't see how you can attach an asterisk to ring that is won in the playoffs, unless said playoffs were shortened, tbh.

You're missing the point that I already stated: It was an abnormal season, hence the asterisk.

You can try to :downspin: this and ignore that teams played almost half the games in the regular season, but facts or facts.

[Gutter92]

You're missing the point that I already stated: It was an abnormal season, hence the asterisk.

You can try to :downspin: this and ignore that teams played almost half the games in the regular season, but facts or facts.

Sure, the seedings should be asterisked, since the season wasn't long enough.

But the playoffs were not shortened, as Venti just said, so the playoffs and the results of said playoffs were not abnormal.

That's my point, and you can try to :downspin: that however you'd like to, and ignore the fact that the 1999 playoffs were the same length as any playoff before and after (up until the "7 game in 1st round" change..)

[Gutter92]

I rag the Spurs a lot for being asterisk champions. But to be fair to them, the playoffs weren't shortened.

This, tbh

Asterisks shouldn't be put on rings unless some travesty occurs in the Finals, tbh...

[pass1st]

Sure, the seedings should be asterisked, since the season wasn't long enough.

But the playoffs were not shortened, as Venti just said, so the playoffs and the results of said playoffs were not abnormal.

That's my point, and you can try to :downspin: that however you'd like to, and ignore the fact that the 1999 playoffs were the same length as any playoff before and after (up until the "7 game in 1st round" change..)

I'm not :downspin: anything or ignoring the playoffs

Riddle me this: Does the season length play a part in how a team performs during the playoffs? I'll save you time and answer yes.

The shortened season affected the post-season, teams didn't enter in the same state they would if it was 82 games. Now like I said before, the asterisk does not knock the team in any way or say they had some kind of advantage. It merely marks that the title was won under abnormal circumstances and a shortened season is an abnormal circumstance that all teams experienced.

Get it? :toast

[Gutter92]

I'm not :downspin: anything or ignoring the playoffs

Riddle me this: Does the season length play a part in how a team performs during the playoffs? I'll save you time and answer yes.

The shortened season affected the post-season, teams didn't enter in the same state they would if it was 82 games. Now like I said before, the asterisk does not knock the team in any way or say they had some kind of advantage. It merely marks that the title was won under abnormal circumstances and a shortened season is an abnormal circumstance that all teams experienced.

Get it? :toast

So you're arguing that being a regular season champ is somewhat important then, no? Or you're claiming that NBA players (grown men) are unable to get up for the playoffs after 50 games compared to 82 games, tbh...

Basketball is all about managing the season and entering the postseason well rested and firing on all cylinders. One team did that better than all other teams (making history, tbh, being the team that overcame such odds) ... you could argue that it was harder for the Spurs since Duncan only had 50 games in his first season after his rookie year...hard adjustment for a 2nd year player tbh... :lol yet he overcame these odds and won in the playoffs that were just like any other playoffs, tbh

[pass1st]

So you're arguing that being a regular season champ is somewhat important then, no? Or you're claiming that NBA players (grown men) are unable to get up for the playoffs after 50 games compared to 82 games, tbh...

Basketball is all about managing the season and entering the postseason well rested and firing on all cylinders. One team did that better than all other teams (making history, tbh, being the team that overcame such odds) ... you could argue that it was harder for the Spurs since Duncan only had 50 games in his first season after his rookie year...hard adjustment for a 2nd year player tbh... :lol yet he overcame these odds and won in the playoffs that were just like any other playoffs, tbh

Regular season champ? No. The wear & tear of 82 games, yes.

1999 was an abnormal season, that made the playoffs abnormal. You're pulling a typical spurfan reaction and saying this is a knock against the team by trying to say Spurs deserved the title. I could also argue that Duncan & Spurs didn't feel the affect of close to 20 games in a month as much as the other teams, but I won't argue that.

You're :downspin: this a little too much. The asterisk is simply designating the title as being under abnormal circumstances. There are no what-ifs involved, no saying the Spurs were gifted or they wouldn't win otherwise, but just saying that it was an abnormal title thusly an asterisk.

[Gutter92]

Fact of the matter is, the playoffs were not shortened, therefore, the title does not have an asterisk on it. If it was missing one game, even one game, I'd agree that there should be an asterisk for the NBA Champions that won during a shortened playoff. However, as there was not, there should be no asterisk.

[lefty]

You can disregard 2002 if you disregard 2007

Why?

We didnt get any help from Stern like you did in 2002

The NBA applied the rules

You have heard of those rules, havent you ?

[pass1st]

Fact of the matter is, the playoffs were not shortened, therefore, the title does not have an asterisk on it. If it was missing one game, even one game, I'd agree that there should be an asterisk for the NBA Champions that won during a shortened playoff. However, as there was not, there should be no asterisk.

Fact of the matter is, the season was shortened, therefore, the title does have an asterisk on it. If it was a regular season, not a compacted mess with near 20 games in a month, I'd agree it shouldn't be an asterisk for the NBA champions that won after a normal season. However, as the season was short and compacted, there should be an asterisk.

[Venti Quattro]

We didnt get any help from Stern like you did in 2002

:lol :lol :lol

[pass1st]

Why?

We didnt get any help from Stern like you did in 2002

The NBA applied the rules

You have heard of those rules, havent you ?

Already addressed that they would both be asterisks, not for what happened, but for how OP is claiming they are asterisk.

He's looking in hindsight, thinking Kings were robbed. Problem is, Lakers were heavily favored and Kings were playing like dog shit. But because of game 6 (ignoring the times LAL was jobbed in earlier games) Kings somehow got robbed even though they choked multiple times and had an even game 7 to win it. All that slip your mind?

Same logic can be used for 2007, but I don't consider either asterisks.

[Gutter92]

Fact of the matter is, the season was shortened, therefore, the title does have an asterisk on it. If it was a regular season, not a compacted mess with near 20 games in a month, I'd agree it shouldn't be an asterisk for the NBA champions that won after a normal season. However, as the season was short and compacted, there should be an asterisk.

So the championship was given to the team with the best record after 50 wins? Like the night of the 50th game, Stern came out and gave out the rings to the team with the best record? There wasn't a playoff like there is in every other year, tbh?

[Deuce Bigalow]

fvkKdXLwt0U
*

[pass1st]

So the championship was given to the team with the best record after 50 wins? Like the night of the 50th game, Stern came out and gave out the rings to the team with the best record? There wasn't a playoff like there is in every other year, tbh?

More :downspin:ing?

Didn't I already explain how a season affects the post-season, or are we just going to throw that out of the window and look at only part of the picture?

[Russo21]

LOS ANGELES -- Was Game 3 of the 2008 NBA Finals held at the scene of a crime?
Disgraced ex-referee Tim Donaghy alleged as much Tuesday in a filing made by his attorney in U.S. District Court in New York, saying the highly controversial Game 6 of the Lakers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=lal)-Kings (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=sac) playoff series in 2002 was impacted by the actions of two of the three referees who worked the game.


Although no teams are specifically named, it is not hard to deduce the game in question. The Lakers-Kings series was the only one that postseason that went seven games, and the officiating in Game 6 was so questionable that consumer advocate and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader called for a formal investigation.

In addition, a foul was called against Mike Bibby (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3245) of the Kings after he was shoved and elbowed by Kobe Bryant (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3118), denying the Kings an opportunity to try for a tying basket. Also in that game, Kings centers Vlade Divac (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=84) and Scot Pollard (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3189) fouled out, and Kings coach Rick Adelman was highly critical of the officiating afterward.


"My first thought [upon hearing Donaghy's allegation] was: I knew it," Pollard said Tuesday night. "I'm not going to say there was a conspiracy. I just think something wasn't right. It was unfair. We didn't have a chance to win that game."


Feel sorry for the kings, and their team has gone to shit in the decade since.

It's just fucked. Makes you wander how many series and titles could have gone another way in other years if it wasn't for dodgy officiating.

The 1999 and 2012 seasons are fine, i have no problem with them, each team played the same amount of games and had/have the same opportunity to win the championship.

From Cops to prisons, sports to the stockmarket, corruption and bribery is everywhere. I just wish the NBA wasn't one of those places.

[pass1st]

LOS ANGELES -- Was Game 3 of the 2008 NBA Finals held at the scene of a crime?
Disgraced ex-referee Tim Donaghy alleged as much Tuesday in a filing made by his attorney in U.S. District Court in New York, saying the highly controversial Game 6 of the Lakers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=lal)-Kings (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=sac) playoff series in 2002 was impacted by the actions of two of the three referees who worked the game.


Although no teams are specifically named, it is not hard to deduce the game in question. The Lakers-Kings series was the only one that postseason that went seven games, and the officiating in Game 6 was so questionable that consumer advocate and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader called for a formal investigation.

In addition, a foul was called against Mike Bibby (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3245) of the Kings after he was shoved and elbowed by Kobe Bryant (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3118), denying the Kings an opportunity to try for a tying basket. Also in that game, Kings centers Vlade Divac (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=84) and Scot Pollard (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3189) fouled out, and Kings coach Rick Adelman was highly critical of the officiating afterward.


"My first thought [upon hearing Donaghy's allegation] was: I knew it," Pollard said Tuesday night. "I'm not going to say there was a conspiracy. I just think something wasn't right. It was unfair. We didn't have a chance to win that game."


Feel sorry for the kings, and their team has gone to shit in the decade since.

It's just fucked. Makes you wander how many series and titles could have gone another way in other years if it wasn't for dodgy officiating.

The 1999 and 2012 seasons are fine, i have no problem with them, each team played the same amount of games and had/have the same opportunity to win the championship.

From Cops to prisons, sports to the stockmarket, corruption and bribery is everywhere. I just wish the NBA wasn't one of those places.

Feel sorry for the Kings because they choked away a series? Kings and LAL were both jobbed for certain games in the series and the Kings honestly were not in a position to win the series with even officiating. Stern extended the series to 7 games because he knew that whoever won would sweep the Nets in one of the most 1 sided finals ever with poor ratings. Kings could have won game 7, choked it away.

At any rate, that and 2007 aren't asterisks :tu

99 and 2012 are:toast

[Jacob1983]

It definitely deserves an *. Didn't Mike Bibby get called for a foul when the rapist elbowed him in the nose? Any video?

The officiating was pathetic and downright obvious that it was in favor of the Lakers. With that being said, if certain shit would have happened, we wouldn't be talking about this because the Kings would have won. If the Kings had more a few more shots or free throws or some defensive stops, they would have won game 4 and been 3-1 in the series. The same could be said for game 7. The Kings fucked themselves in the ass by missing a ton of free throws in game 7. In the NBA, bitching and moaning about the refs will get you no where and you won't win a championship. I think that's one reason why the Mavs won last year. They didn't bitch and moan about the refs like they did in past years. In game 6 of the Finals last year, the refs tried a little to give the game to the Heat but the Mavs said "fuck you" and beat the Heat and the refs to win their championship.


I highly believe the NBA is rigged and manipulated when certain scenarios are possible but you have to rise above that shit and play to win. Bitching and crying about the refs and bad calls will not get you a championship.

[Russo21]

Jacob yeah, the rapist's elbow on Bibby was nasty as. It's in the vid i posted? Any player not named Kobe or LeBron would be suspended if they did that in todays NBA.

[Jacob1983]

Yeah, it's at around the 3:52 mark of that video. That right there just shows the officiating was shitty. The sad and pathetic thing is how the NBA just lies about it and is in denial. Everyone knows the officiating in that series was fucked up and shitty and definitely one sided. However, Stern can't admit that because it would make him look like a dumbass.