PDA

View Full Version : Lakers: Most disappointing teams of the past ten years



DarrinS
04-30-2013, 11:19 AM
Top ten: Lakers on the list twice :lmao

http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/list-gallery?gid=27843&gf=261

Raven
04-30-2013, 11:25 AM
how is the 2004 olympic team only 7th?

Mugen
04-30-2013, 11:29 AM
I don't think the 2011 Heat and the 2004 Lakers belong on that list.

Blake
04-30-2013, 11:30 AM
How is 2007 Mavericks not in the top five, much less top ten?

KaiRMD1
04-30-2013, 11:54 AM
I figured the Lakers would make it to number one, they underachieved in ways the Knicks never could.

HarlemHeat37
04-30-2013, 11:56 AM
Teams that make the Finals shouldn't even sniff this list, tbh..

100%duncan
04-30-2013, 12:01 PM
:lol 3 and 1 but imho 2004 olympic team deserved to be #1.

Phillip
04-30-2013, 12:10 PM
How is 2007 Mavericks not in the top five, much less top ten?

I think its because this list went off of pre-season hype expectations. No one expected the 07 Mavs to win 67 games before the season started. All these other teams were considered among the top favorites to win the championship in dominant fashion before their seasons even started.

JamStone
04-30-2013, 12:12 PM
If the 2004 Lakers make the list, I'd probably put the 2007 Patriots on it too. But I tend to agree with Harlem. If a team makes the championship game/series, even if they lose, it's tough to call that team too disappointing.

Phillip
04-30-2013, 12:45 PM
If the 2004 Lakers make the list, I'd probably put the 2007 Patriots on it too. But I tend to agree with Harlem. If a team makes the championship game/series, even if they lose, it's tough to call that team too disappointing.

Didn't even think about the 07 Pats. I don't get how they didn't get on the list, and a team like the 11 Heat did.

I can somewhat understand the 04 Lakers though, because they underwhelmed even in the regular season. The Pats and Heat both had a fantastic regular season, and pretty much dominated in the playoffs, up until the Finals/SuperBowl

mercos
04-30-2013, 02:44 PM
I agree that teams that make the finals shouldn't make the list. 2004 USA Olympic team should probably be number one as the first team featuring NBA players to not get gold in the Olympics. This year's Lakers are close behind though with a $100 million payroll and first round sweep. The 2007 Mavs that won 67 games should have probably made the top ten as well.

baseline bum
04-30-2013, 03:25 PM
LOL 2013 Lakers the most disappointing team since Naismith invented the game.

hater
04-30-2013, 04:19 PM
not sure what the criteria is but I would not even list the 2013 lakers here. I would call them the most overhyped team in history thou. No contest. But truth be told, they were not qualified to begin with. Only a few of us saw it when season started, while most ppl were drunk with the hype. (including timvp :lol)

Ima have to say the Olympic team that got bukkaked by Carlos Arroyo is gotta be the most dissapointing team in history. :lmao

LkrFan
04-30-2013, 04:25 PM
Top ten: Lakers on the list twice :lmao

http://www.foxsportssouthwest.com/list-gallery?gid=27843&gf=261

2004 Spurs
2004 Olympic squad
2006 Spurs
2008 Spurs

Any guesses on why I chose the above teams? Bonus: what HOF player is the common denominator on all 4 disappointing squads? Now :downspin: that shit DarrinS

:lol

baseline bum
04-30-2013, 04:26 PM
Any guesses on why I chose the above teams? Bonus: what HOF player is the common denominator on all 4 disappointing squads? Now :downspin: that shit DarrinS

:lol

Because you're butthurt that 73-9 became 0-4?

hater
04-30-2013, 04:26 PM
well not everyone had a rape charge to fight in the offseason :lmao :lmao :lmao

LkrFan
04-30-2013, 04:32 PM
Because you're butthurt that 73-9 became 0-4?
Nope. The Lakers will reload again (they always do) and give themselves a shot at ranging. Sometimes it works, sometimes it don't, but seemingly, they always have the opportunity to compete for rangs.

Be lucky I didn't include 8 in my above post. :lol

LakerHater
04-30-2013, 04:36 PM
Because you're butthurt that 73-9 became 0-4?

They also go another 0 in 2011!

Clipper Nation
04-30-2013, 04:39 PM
2004 Spurs
2004 Olympic squad
2006 Spurs
2008 Spurs

Any guesses on why I chose the above teams? Bonus: what HOF player is the common denominator on all 4 disappointing squads? Now :downspin: that shit DarrinS

:lol
Damn son, all that bitterness due to B:lolnner and Baynes shitting on Dwight, huh.... :downspin:

baseline bum
04-30-2013, 04:40 PM
Nope. The Lakers will reload again (they always do) and give themselves a shot at ranging. Sometimes it works, sometimes it don't, but seemingly, they always have the opportunity to compete for rangs.

Be lucky I didn't include 8 in my above post. :lol

LOL competing for rings with a bunch of quitters.

Roger Freemason Jr.
04-30-2013, 05:09 PM
2011 Spurs should be on that list. Losing to the 8th seed, in such a convincing fashion, after finishing top in the west.

Latarian Milton
04-30-2013, 07:35 PM
and the LA city got 3 teams on that list :lmao

Thebesteva
04-30-2013, 10:46 PM
Ill never forget how fuckin whack this season was

Obstructed_View
05-01-2013, 04:12 PM
2011 Spurs should be on that list. Losing to the 8th seed, in such a convincing fashion, after finishing top in the west.

If the '07 Mavs aren't there, then the '11 Spurs shouldn't be. Everyone and their brother knew Gasol and Z-bo were going to feast on smallball.

Well, almost everyone. :pop:

Aztecfan03
05-01-2013, 05:33 PM
and the LA city got 3 teams on that list :lmao

I don't think I saw dodgers, so you must be talking about the Angels. They are not LA, they aren't even in the same county.