SportsRadioLos
05-20-2008, 10:50 PM
So I've been thinking about this for the past 9 years or so.
Since 1999 The NBA Finals has featured a team with either Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal. 9 of 9 years.
8 of the past 9 years (with the exception of 2004 Detroit), the NBA Finals winning team has either had Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal.
So with this in mind, does anyone really think that this Laker team that won 1 more game than the Spurs all year long is really the kind of team that can ruin an almost decade long trend? I don't believe so.
What I see is an MVP surrounded by a group of career underachievers (minus Fisher) who have little to no playoff success. Is this really the kind of team that takes down a defending champion?
Don't let ESPN fool you. These are not the Lakers of 2000-2002. These are not the Lakers of the 1980's. What they are is a nice team. But their players are even less accomplished championship-wise then Phoenix.
P.S.
One last piece of comedy:
Mark Jackson on ESPN 5/20/08 - "I'm going with the Lakers vs the Spurs. They've just gotten it done all season long."
2007-08 records:
Lakers 57-25
Spurs 56-26
Apparently the Spurs failed to get it done all season long at the Lakers level, though fortunately only finished 1 game behind the Lakers. There are clearly reasons why Mark Jackson isn't getting very serious looks at being an NBA GM...one may be his ability to add then comprehend.
Since 1999 The NBA Finals has featured a team with either Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal. 9 of 9 years.
8 of the past 9 years (with the exception of 2004 Detroit), the NBA Finals winning team has either had Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal.
So with this in mind, does anyone really think that this Laker team that won 1 more game than the Spurs all year long is really the kind of team that can ruin an almost decade long trend? I don't believe so.
What I see is an MVP surrounded by a group of career underachievers (minus Fisher) who have little to no playoff success. Is this really the kind of team that takes down a defending champion?
Don't let ESPN fool you. These are not the Lakers of 2000-2002. These are not the Lakers of the 1980's. What they are is a nice team. But their players are even less accomplished championship-wise then Phoenix.
P.S.
One last piece of comedy:
Mark Jackson on ESPN 5/20/08 - "I'm going with the Lakers vs the Spurs. They've just gotten it done all season long."
2007-08 records:
Lakers 57-25
Spurs 56-26
Apparently the Spurs failed to get it done all season long at the Lakers level, though fortunately only finished 1 game behind the Lakers. There are clearly reasons why Mark Jackson isn't getting very serious looks at being an NBA GM...one may be his ability to add then comprehend.