so if the lakers sign odom. do you think that prompts the spurs to get someone else?

they've spent a lot but they have the lle or mle or something with le at the end of it, right? could trying to further get over the hump would the spurs go for it, particularly with so many still not bad free agents out there? i liked td, tp, mcdyess, rj, and mason with manu and this blair guy off the bench, but the lakers would have artest and odom, seems to change things.

No, I think the lineup we have is made to beat the Lakers. A healthy Manu and Tim would have made things close. The pieces we've added should put us over the top.

No. We're done with the big acquisitions unless something falls in our lap.

The lineup you have is probably not good enough to beat the Lakers with Odom.

no

there isnt much left to do except add bowen and drop a few more guys, plus figure out which rookies are going to fit in the rotation

i hope they reget bowen, and hope the silence on any deals with him (unlike oberto) bodes well. duncan takes gasol, mcdyess handles bynum, kobe on mason, artest over rj, tp over fisher, manu and odom are about even, i could see it going either way if they were to meet. hopefully our bench eviscerates theirs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by td4mvp3

i hope they reget bowen, and hope the silence on any deals with him (unlike oberto) bodes well. duncan takes gasol, mcdyess handles bynum, kobe on mason, artest over rj, tp over fisher, manu and odom are about even, i could see it going either way if they were to meet. hopefully our bench eviscerates theirs.

---

Odom over Manu ? Are you kidding me ? Sheesh...man, how soon we forget.
Manu is going to kick ass and take names this year.

he better as one more injury and his career may be done.

The Spurs have plugged the needed holes to get pass the Lakers. The one hole beyond control is health so as long as it doesn't become a problem then the series could go either way.

Technically the matchup is:
Tim/Blair vs Bynum/Mbenga
McDyess/Mahinmi vs Gasol/Odom(Should he sign)
Jefferson/Finley vs Artest/Walton
Mason/Ginobili vs Bryant/Vujacic
Parker/Hill vs Fisher/Farmar


On paper and assuming they are all healthy(Right now they are healthy per Pop), Spurs have enough weapons. Pop calling the Lakers the best is his way of making sure the Spurs play with what he terms, "appropriate fear."

it'll be interesting to see what skill set haislip brings to the second unit and if he is able to play odom even. we should have a nice bench this season.

The Spurs weren't making moves this summer with the thought that Odom was leaving. They've done about all that is possible to make the best possible roster. There might be a final trade out there but it's not like a re-signing of Odom would make them try harder to find that trade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

The Spurs weren't making moves this summer with the thought that Odom was leaving. They've done about all that is possible to make the best possible roster. There might be a final trade out there but it's not like a re-signing of Odom would make them try harder to find that trade.

---

you know, i hadn't thought of it that way. that puts it into a better perspective. the guy who pointed out finley in the lineup gave me pause, i'm not sure what he still brings to the table. still, very excited at this point, probably more so than i've been in a while about a season.

sa's peter burns posted this on his twitter

PeterBurns760Odom signs with Miami. Well, they goes my late May 2010 vacation. Spurs favorites to win West now. Awesome.17 minutes ago from mobile web

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

The Spurs weren't making moves this summer with the thought that Odom was leaving. They've done about all that is possible to make the best possible roster. There might be a final trade out there but it's not like a re-signing of Odom would make them try harder to find that trade.

---

Exactly.

If Odom leaves the Fakers it's a nice cherry on top of the off-season for us, but I don't think it affects what we do in any way.

How would Burns know anything about Odom?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spursmania

How would Burns know anything about Odom?

---

dont know he posted it on his twitter about 30 minutes ago take it for what its worth

I don't think it really means anything..I'd still be absolutely shocked if Odom isn't a Laker..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

I don't think it really means anything..I'd still be absolutely shocked if Odom isn't a Laker..

---

I'd be absolutely thrilled if Odom isn't a Laker :smokin

Quote:

---

Last LAL source said they've moved on from LO. LO source suspects same, hopes otherwise. Me? Can't fathom LAL letting Ariza and LO go.

---

Thats from Ric Buchers Twitter!! Goddaaamnnn I hope so. I used to hate Miami but they will be my second favorite team if they take Odom and Boozer out of the West!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

The lineup you have is probably not good enough to beat the Lakers with Odom.

---

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

The lineup you have is probably not good enough to beat the Lakers with Odom.

---

Don't be so sure. Your team is one Ron Artest freak out away from melting down.
:nope

I can't wait to see Kobe's fat ass ego crash with Artest it's going to be hilarious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

The lineup you have is probably not good enough to beat the Lakers with Odom.

---

Not so sure about that. The addition of Jefferson really changes things for teams that are defending the Spurs. For years, Spurs only had 3 scoring threats on the floor. Now they'll have four. That hasn't been the case in a longggg time. And if the line-up is Parker, Ginobili, Jefferson, McDyess and Duncan, then holy shit, that's 5 scorers.

And on top of that, the Spurs have been really impaired by the fact that we've only had one good rebounder (Duncan) for years. If Blair is on the floor with Duncan, I see some glass domination the likes of which we haven't seen in San Antonio since the days of the Twin Towers.

The Lakers may still have an edge on paper, but I'm feeling pretty confident that the Spurs are going to rise back to the top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peskypesky

Not so sure about that. The addition of Jefferson really changes things for teams that are defending the Spurs. For years, Spurs only had 3 scoring threats on the floor. Now they'll have four. That hasn't been the case in a longggg time. And if the line-up is Parker, Ginobili, Jefferson, McDyess and Duncan, then holy shit, that's 5 scorers.

And on top of that, the Spurs have been really impaired by the fact that we've only had one good rebounder (Duncan) for years. If Blair is on the floor with Duncan, I see some glass domination the likes of which we haven't seen in San Antonio since the days of the Twin Towers.

The Lakers may still have an edge on paper, but I'm feeling pretty confident that the Spurs are going to rise back to the top.

---

Jefferson was a good addition as was McDyess.

Think of it this way. Last year's Spurs team fully healthy was not good enough to beat the Lakers in a 7 game series. The additions they made in the offseason probably get them close to last year's Laker team. I sincerely believe next year's Laker team, assuming Odom is still a Laker, will be even better than last year's team. A fully healthy Bynum, Artest, Brown.....the team is going to be very special. The only weakness I can see is at the PG spot, but I expect Brown to become a surprise player just like Ariza did for us last season.

A lot of wishful thinking assuming Ron Artest is just going to implode. If anyone is going to keep him in check it's Phil Jackson. In a system where Ron does not have to shoulder any offensive responsibility he will be allowed to play to his strengths (i.e. his defense). He will flourish just like Ariza flourished last season, a natural byproduct of playing with Kobe and Gasol. I will tell you right now opposing teams are not licking their chops at the idea of facing Ron and Kobe on the perimeter.

i just hope la doesnt resign odom i know its proably a longshot but i have to hope. without odom i figure the spurs have a shot at taking the champs out .

With odom/artest la is gonna be a real handful to dethrone

i want Odom to resign with the Lakers so we can beat them with him on the floor.

The Spurs as is are easily enough to beat the Lakers. It hangs on a healthy Duncan (likely) and a healthy Manu (a bit less likely). They can make the POs without Manu but things get much easier once there with him.

The Lakers were a weak champion. I don't know why people refuse to see this. If they weren't LA and ESPN wasn't knob-slobbering all over them, this would be readily admitted. A determined, tough team will usher them out. But if Odom doesn't resign, we'll all have the enjoyment of watching them fall apart all on their own. This is because their bench will make it a very long season for the starters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Body

The Spurs as is are easily enough to beat the Lakers. It hangs on a healthy Duncan (likely) and a healthy Manu (a bit less likely). They can make the POs without Manu but things get much easier once there with him.

The Lakers were a weak champion. I don't know why people refuse to see this. If they weren't LA and ESPN wasn't knob-slobbering all over them, this would be readily admitted. A determined, tough team will usher them out. But if Odom doesn't resign, we'll all have the enjoyment of watching them fall apart all on their own. This is because their bench will make it a very long season for the starters.

---

IMHO a weak champion is one that fails to repeat despite having 4 chances to do so.

I don't even think this current Laker team is close to the '01 team, but they've already managed to do what the Spurs could not in making back to back Final's appearances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

IMHO a weak champion is one that fails to repeat despite having 4 chances to do so.

I don't even think this current Laker team is close to the '01 team, but they've already managed to do what the Spurs could not in making back to back Final's appearances.

---

This years, playoff cast is pretty weak. In fact, contending teams such as the Spurs and Celtics had their best players injured even before the start of the playoffs. Lakers should put an asterisk to their championship because of this

This thread is a dump!!! Lots of assumption on who on what? or what on who? ignore this thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

IMHO a weak champion is one that fails to repeat despite having 4 chances to do so.

I don't even think this current Laker team is close to the '01 team, but they've already managed to do what the Spurs could not in making back to back Final's appearances.

---

I wouldn't hang my hat on '08, buddy. One of the most embarrassing displays of team basketball at that level ever seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Body

I wouldn't hang my hat on '08, buddy. One of the most embarrassing displays of team basketball at that level ever seen.

---

Funny how you keep making excuses for your team's failures.

You act like the league was any better in '07. The top threat was the fucking no-defense Suns for crying out loud.

Disparaging any NBA champion because of the path they took to get there is a weak argument. Outside of the 1st round matchup no team has any control over who they play. The bottom line is the Lakers accomplished what VERY few teams have ever done, which is make it back to the Finals after losing and then win the championship. They are criticized for not having their foot on the gas all season long, but when they had to play their A game they brought it every single time.

Eh, I'm not disparaging matchups. Just saying Lakers aren't and weren't that good. That's the truth. They'll get trussed up in no time, don't get bent up about it.

I think our talent level is enough to play at least on par. Assuming the Lakers retain odom, we would have to rely on our championship defense to overcome the Lakers. I am fully confident that we will do just that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Body

Eh, I'm not disparaging matchups. Just saying Lakers aren't and weren't that good. That's the truth. They'll get trussed up in no time, don't get bent up about it.

---

Absolutely true. The Lakers won last year because they were healthy, not because they were so good. A healthy Spurs team would have beaten those soft panzies. And a healthy Boston team would have crushed them again. Even the Magic with a healthy Jameer Nelson wouldn't have blown those two nailbiters, and would have been up 3-1 and closed it out instead of being down 1-3 and losing.

Only the Lakers are arrogant enough to think they could repeat without Ariza and Odom.

Well, we'll see you in the playoffs, ladies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

Funny how you keep making excuses for your team's failures.

You act like the league was any better in '07. The top threat was the fucking no-defense Suns for crying out loud.

Disparaging any NBA champion because of the path they took to get there is a weak argument. Outside of the 1st round matchup no team has any control over who they play. The bottom line is the Lakers accomplished what VERY few teams have ever done, which is make it back to the Finals after losing and then win the championship. They are criticized for not having their foot on the gas all season long, but when they had to play their A game they brought it every single time.

---

So where were the Lakers in 07?

I can't believe how much Spurs fans are underselling last year's team. I don't think people are giving the right value to a HEALTHY Manu. Playoff Manu, firing on all cylinders can have as much impact on a game as a Kobe or Lebron, we've all seen it.

Last Year's team WITHOUT Manu IS a first round team, but with full strength Manu we would have pushed or beaten the Lakers already.

+Jefferson + Blair + McDyess - Ariza - Odom -(+Artest) = Spurs favorite in my mind.

either way Spurs need another good wing player

I think the Spurs have a legit shot at beating them with or without Odom. Repeating is very tough, the Lakers have already been to the NBA finals back to back. Artest could go off and cause some locker room/on court problems.

It's a long season and the Lakers will be gunning for a third straight NBA finals appearence.

Until someone beats them, I give them the edge if they sign Odom, but the Spurs have improved and are a threat.

The healthiest of the 2 will win if they play in the 2010 NBA playoffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

Funny how you keep making excuses for your team's failures.

You act like the league was any better in '07. The top threat was the fucking no-defense Suns for crying out loud.

Disparaging any NBA champion because of the path they took to get there is a weak argument. Outside of the 1st round matchup no team has any control over who they play. The bottom line is the Lakers accomplished what VERY few teams have ever done, which is make it back to the Finals after losing and then win the championship. They are criticized for not having their foot on the gas all season long, but when they had to play their A game they brought it every single time.

---

Please, give him the Ketamine already...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baseline

Absolutely true. The Lakers won last year because they were healthy, not because they were so good. A healthy Spurs team would have beaten those soft panzies. And a healthy Boston team would have crushed them again. Even the Magic with a healthy Jameer Nelson wouldn't have blown those two nailbiters, and would have been up 3-1 and closed it out instead of being down 1-3 and losing.

Only the Lakers are arrogant enough to think they could repeat without Ariza and Odom.

Well, we'll see you in the playoffs, ladies.

---

Who was better than the Lakers last season?

They won 65 games and dominated their conference. You can say the Lakers weren't a spectacular champion compared to prior ones, but you can't really say that they weren't the best team in the league last season.

Against the top teams they proved they were the best. 2-0 against Cleveland, 2-0 against Boston. I think we can all agree the Lakers would have beaten the Cavs because they had several matchup advantages they could exploit. Boston would have been a tougher opponent, but the Lakers would have had HCA and that would have made all the difference IMO. Boston is not a great road team at all, and even beyond KG they had severe injuries to Powe and other key bench players. The Laker's depth would have overwhelmed them over a 7 game series.

It's absolutely stupid and ridiculous to say that the only reason the Lakers won was because of health. No shit Sherlock! Nobody said winning a championship wasn't a combination of talent, heart, health, and a little bit of luck.

Bottom line, Lakers were the best team in the league and deserved NBA champions. 15 going on 16, gonna repeat and do what your franchise could never do. Win back to back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

Who was better than the Lakers last season?

They won 65 games and dominated their conference. You can say the Lakers weren't a spectacular champion compared to prior ones, but you can't really say that they weren't the best team in the league last season.

Against the top teams they proved they were the best. 2-0 against Cleveland, 2-0 against Boston. I think we can all agree the Lakers would have beaten the Cavs because they had several matchup advantages they could exploit. Boston would have been a tougher opponent, but the Lakers would have had HCA and that would have made all the difference IMO. Boston is not a great road team at all, and even beyond KG they had severe injuries to Powe and other key bench players. The Laker's depth would have overwhelmed them over a 7 game series.

It's absolutely stupid and ridiculous to say that the only reason the Lakers won was because of health. No shit Sherlock! Nobody said winning a championship wasn't a combination of talent, heart, health, and a little bit of luck.

Bottom line, Lakers were the best team in the league and deserved NBA champions. 15 going on 16, gonna repeat and do what your franchise could never do. Win back to back.

---

Typical Laker troll....Regular season games don't show who your team really is, PLAYOFF games do...The Lakers were the healthiest team, that's it!!! They dominated NO ONE in the playoffs....Utah was hurt, Houston was hurt, , Denver was the mentally unstable team, and Orlando was incompetent

BTW

The Spurs were hurt, Boston was hurt

No, Odom resigning with the Lakers is what was expected when we went shopping.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

Even other Lakers fans hate me and it makes me sad. :depressed

---

It's not like the Spurs are going to say "here's a move that makes our team better, but the lakers didn't sign Odom so we're not going to bother". What the lakers do or don't do is irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

The lineup you have is probably not good enough to beat the Lakers with Odom.

---

your team is not good enough to beat the spurs this season

The Lakers don't need to prove they can beat the Spurs. They did just that in '08 with a far inferior team to what they have now. They are the champs, not the Spurs. The Spurs lost 4-1 to the worst Mavericks team I've seen in 5 years despite having HCA.

The Laker's core is flat out better than the Spur's core at this point in time. The only thing that could level the playing field is a time machine. I'll take Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Ron Artest, Lamar Odom, and Bynum over anything the Spurs can trot out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScientistMan

I have a feeling when Blair knocks Artest into the stands (against his will this time), you're going to come out and talk about how the Lakers still had a better team this past season.

---

:lmao

the thing that Laker fans keep ignoring is that they had arguably the easiest path to the title in NBA history..competition AND results..

as I've explained before..

Utah without Okur for most of the series, Houston without Yao, McGrady, Mutombo, Denver losing on 2 in bounds plays, Orlando missing Nelson and losing 2 games by historic choke jobs..

the Lakers absolutely deserved their title, because they were the last team standing..nobody can deny how easy their path to the title was, considering these results, and considering the injuries to other teams..

the Spurs got SIGNIFICANTLY better if health permits..Dallas already got better, so did Denver, and Portland still might..Boston is probably now the most stacked team in the NBA, Orlando got better, and so did Cleveland..

considering that the Lakers had so many things go their way this season, and the rest of the league got better, I'd say the results will be much different, with or without Odom..

if they lose Odom and don't get anything significant return by next year's playoffs(have to include this in case they receive a gift like they always do), then I'd be absolutely shocked if they even made the Finals..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

The Lakers don't need to prove they can beat the Spurs. They did just that in '08 with a far inferior team to what they have now. They are the champs, not the Spurs. The Spurs lost 4-1 to the worst Mavericks team I've seen in 5 years despite having HCA.

The Laker's core is flat out better than the Spur's core at this point in time. The only thing that could level the playing field is a time machine. I'll take Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Ron Artest, Lamar Odom, and Bynum over anything the Spurs can trot out.

---

Yet Kobe is the only player you listed that is better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs_210

Yet Kobe is the only player you listed that is better.

---

:lmao Burn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Man In Black

Technically the matchup is:
Tim/Blair vs Bynum/Mbenga
McDyess/Mahinmi vs Gasol/Odom(Should he sign)
Jefferson/Finley vs Artest/Walton
Mason/Ginobili vs Bryant/Vujacic
Parker/Hill vs Fisher/Farmar


On paper and assuming they are all healthy(Right now they are healthy per Pop), Spurs have enough weapons. Pop calling the Lakers the best is his way of making sure the Spurs play with what he terms, "appropriate fear."

---

Tim/Blair vs Bynum/Gasol/Mbenga
McDyess/Mahinmi vs Gasol/Odom(Should he sign)
Jefferson/Finley vs Artest/Walton
Mason/Ginobili vs Bryant/Vujacic
Parker/Hill vs Fisher/Farmar

Gasol plays a lot of center for us as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ezau

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

---

It's not some lunatic statement. In a series, this Lakers team vs this Spurs team...the Lakers probably win. The Spurs definitely could win, but the Lakers would be the favorites

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ezau

This years, playoff cast is pretty weak. In fact, contending teams such as the Spurs and Celtics had their best players injured even before the start of the playoffs. Lakers should put an asterisk to their championship because of this

---

Idiocy. 2003 the Spurs in many way were the last team not struck by injuries. And nobody puts an * on that title. And 99 too, (i dont consider it or any of the 4 an * title, i give them the respect they deserve as champions. you should do the same

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Body

Eh, I'm not disparaging matchups. Just saying Lakers aren't and weren't that good. That's the truth. They'll get trussed up in no time, don't get bent up about it.

---

By that logic the Spurs were worse last year. And since LA holds a slight edge this upcoming season, i guess you mean to say the Spurs are also not that good...

Spurs won in 2003 only because Dirk was hurt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghazi

Spurs won in 2003 only because Dirk was hurt.

---

But the still won :toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

the thing that Laker fans keep ignoring is that they had arguably the easiest path to the title in NBA history..competition AND results..

as I've explained before..

Utah without Okur for most of the series, Houston without Yao, McGrady, Mutombo, Denver losing on 2 in bounds plays, Orlando missing Nelson and losing 2 games by historic choke jobs..

the Lakers absolutely deserved their title, because they were the last team standing..nobody can deny how easy their path to the title was, considering these results, and considering the injuries to other teams..

the Spurs got SIGNIFICANTLY better if health permits..Dallas already got better, so did Denver, and Portland still might..Boston is probably now the most stacked team in the NBA, Orlando got better, and so did Cleveland..

considering that the Lakers had so many things go their way this season, and the rest of the league got better, I'd say the results will be much different, with or without Odom..

if they lose Odom and don't get anything significant return by next year's playoffs(have to include this in case they receive a gift like they always do), then I'd be absolutely shocked if they even made the Finals..

---

2007 was arguably even easier. They played the worst finals team in NBA history (Cavs)

And LA got better this year too. Artest obviously. And a healthy Bynum who was averaging 14 and 8. Those two help tremendously.
Best offense in the League last season. It will be the same this season. And Kobe and Artest, the best perimeter defensive duo in the NBA, will be back by TWO seven footers in the paint. Thats a great defense in, theory at least

So one day Dr House says the Lakers don't have the stuff of dynasties, the next day they're definitely going to repeat

One day they're gonna lose to denver, the next day "I told you so" after they won a championship

One day Phil Jackson has nothing to do with the Lakers' title run the next day he has his gimmick "TEN" avatar

Dr House is a horrible poster and often picks and chooses what posts he responds to because he's so easy to call out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghazi

So one day Dr House says the Lakers don't have the stuff of dynasties, the next day they're definitely going to repeat

One day they're gonna lose to denver, the next day "I told you so" after they won a championship

One day Phil Jackson has nothing to do with the Lakers' title run the next day he has his gimmick "TEN" avatar

Dr House is a horrible poster and often picks and chooses what posts he responds to because he's so easy to call out.

---

+ Infinity, I still remember his bullshit about the game being rigged at half time, then when the Lakers came back and won he was all over the forum spamming how awesome the Lakers are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carrao45

It's not some lunatic statement. In a series, this Lakers team vs this Spurs team...the Lakers probably win. The Spurs definitely could win, but the Lakers would be the favorites

---

Lakers are the Champs therefore the team to beat. :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carrao45

Idiocy. 2003 the Spurs in many way were the last team not struck by injuries. And nobody puts an * on that title. And 99 too, (i dont consider it or any of the 4 an * title, i give them the respect they deserve as champions. you should do the same

---

Lakers won fair and square. They had a great year and why people keep trying to downplay their title is stupid.

Every champion needs some luck to win a title but the Lakers had quite a huge helping of luck to win last year. As mentioned before almost every team of consequence was riddled with serious injuries.

I didn't think they were historically a very strong champion at all. Seven games to oust Houston without McGrady or Yao?

Getting to the finals 2 years in a row doesn't impress me either because of all the controversy surrounding what accomplished this ie. the Gasol trade that had collusion written all over it. Never have I seen a 19/10 bigman in his prime traded for cap space.

Even though the Spurs have never repeated the one thing you can't take away from them is that they have never missed the playoffs in the Duncan era. The Lakers can't say the same for Kobe and I feel that will always be a huge blemish on his legacy. Duncan has always elevated the play of his teammates and the Spurs FO has been able to re-tool on the fly without entering the (ugh) lottery.

2007.

Your biggest threat was a team that played zero defense and you needed David Stern suspensions to eek it out.

If we're going to talk about weak title paths, then it's only fair you look in the mirror. It's insecure to belittle the accomplishments of another team that actually won the NBA championship.

What does that say about your team? They couldn't even get out of the 1st round.

We can argue until we're blue in the face about this. My opinion is that the 2009 Lakers were one of the least talented championship teams of the decade; more credit to Phil Jackson than anything. House sure isn't going to change that opinion.

And remember that against "weak" competition in 2007, the Spurs went 16-4 in the playoffs. The Lakers went 16-7 against comparable competition: the 2009 Magic weren't much better than the 2007 Cavs, and none of the Jazz/Rockets/Nuggets/Magic were on the 2007 Suns level. The 2007 Suns didn't play any defense, but they were still a better team than any 2009 West playoff team other than the Lakers.

It's great to see that lakerfan's entire self-worth is based upon the performance of people who don't know he exists.

What does that say about you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TwoHandJam

Every champion needs some luck to win a title but the Lakers had quite a huge helping of luck to win last year. As mentioned before almost every team of consequence was riddled with serious injuries.

I didn't think they were historically a very strong champion at all. Seven games to oust Houston without McGrady or Yao?

Getting to the finals 2 years in a row doesn't impress me either because of all the controversy surrounding what accomplished this ie. the Gasol trade that had collusion written all over it. Never have I seen a 19/10 bigman in his prime traded for cap space.

Even though the Spurs have never repeated the one thing you can't take away from them is that they have never missed the playoffs in the Duncan era. The Lakers can't say the same for Kobe and I feel that will always be a huge blemish on his legacy. Duncan has always elevated the play of his teammates and the Spurs FO has been able to re-tool on the fly without entering the (ugh) lottery.

---

He was injured for part of that season. Not to mention Brian Cook was starting, as was Chris Mihm. Those players cant even get PT, and Mihm was traded for cash, thats it. They were and are NBDL level talent. Duncan never had a supporting cast nearly as bad as the 05 Laker team.
Not to mention the Lakers' coach quit and they had some scrub assistant coaching them. I don't think it's a blemish

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

We can argue until we're blue in the face about this. My opinion is that the 2009 Lakers were one of the least talented championship teams of the decade; more credit to Phil Jackson than anything. House sure isn't going to change that opinion.

And remember that against "weak" competition in 2007, the Spurs went 16-4 in the playoffs. The Lakers went 16-7 against comparable competition: the 2009 Magic weren't much better than the 2007 Cavs, and none of the Jazz/Rockets/Nuggets/Magic were on the 2007 Suns level. The 2007 Suns didn't play any defense, but they were still a better team than any 2009 West playoff team other than the Lakers.

---

They were a lot more talented than Miami in 06. More talented then SA in 05 and 07. And more talented than Detroit in 04.

And the 09 Magic were about 1000 times better than the 07 Cavs, and to think otherwise is idiocy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TwoHandJam

Every champion needs some luck to win a title but the Lakers had quite a huge helping of luck to win last year. As mentioned before almost every team of consequence was riddled with serious injuries.

I didn't think they were historically a very strong champion at all. Seven games to oust Houston without McGrady or Yao?

Getting to the finals 2 years in a row doesn't impress me either because of all the controversy surrounding what accomplished this ie. the Gasol trade that had collusion written all over it. Never have I seen a 19/10 bigman in his prime traded for cap space.

Even though the Spurs have never repeated the one thing you can't take away from them is that they have never missed the playoffs in the Duncan era. The Lakers can't say the same for Kobe and I feel that will always be a huge blemish on his legacy. Duncan has always elevated the play of his teammates and the Spurs FO has been able to re-tool on the fly without entering the (ugh) lottery.

---

i just saw randolph get traded yesterday for cap room

I don't care if LA signs Odom or not, I would like to add a 7 footer to the roster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carrao45

They were a lot more talented than Miami in 06. More talented then SA in 05 and 07. And more talented than Detroit in 04.

And the 09 Magic were about 1000 times better than the 07 Cavs, and to think otherwise is idiocy

---

Well, we've stated our opinions now. Nothing left for that.

The 09 Magic were light-years ahead of the 07 Cavs on offense, but the 07 Cavs were actually a great defensive team.

Anyone who is legitimately comparing the '07 Cavs to the '09 Magic needs to stop posting.

It's pretty sad that Spur fan can never admit reality. They can't admit when their teams lose. It's always blamed on the refs, injuries, or some other fluke excuses. They can't give credit to the teams that do win, always trying to poke holes and denigrate their accomplishments.

I've never seen a bigger collective group of sour grapes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iggypop123

i just saw randolph get traded yesterday for cap room

---

This makes the Gasol trade even more inexplicable. The Grizzlies are about to pay basically the exact same money to Randolph that they would have paid to Gasol if they had just kept him. We'd all agree that Gasol is a much better player than Randolph.

This would be akin to the Bucks suddenly taking on a big contract after the salary-dump trade with Jefferson.

Both Spurs and Lakers fans go on and on and on about the same thing in just about every thread.....what ifs, should've, could've, would've...your team sucks, your team is no good,your team is old, Kobe is a rapist, Tim is old, Manu is on his last legs,blah, blah, blah, blah..........don't you all get bored talking the same smack over and over?

Is it possible to have a though provoking discussionswhat each team needs to do to stay competitive w/o resorting to the same old smacktalk?

With all the same smacktalk and mudslinging that goes around, it would be poetic justice if neither the Spurs or the Lakers are of the WCF in 2009. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

Anyone who is legitimately comparing the '07 Cavs to the '09 Magic needs to stop posting.

It's pretty sad that Spur fan can never admit reality. They can't admit when their teams lose. It's always blamed on the refs, injuries, or some other fluke excuses. They can't give credit to the teams that do win, always trying to poke holes and denigrate their accomplishments.

I've never seen a bigger collective group of sour grapes.

---

I agree actually, at least for some of the Spur Fans in this thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

Anyone who is legitimately comparing the '07 Cavs to the '09 Magic needs to stop posting.

It's pretty sad that Spur fan can never admit reality. They can't admit when their teams lose. It's always blamed on the refs, injuries, or some other fluke excuses. They can't give credit to the teams that do win, always trying to poke holes and denigrate their accomplishments.

I've never seen a bigger collective group of sour grapes.

---

Take a good look in a mirror!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrHouse

Anyone who is legitimately comparing the '07 Cavs to the '09 Magic needs to stop posting.

It's pretty sad that Spur fan can never admit reality. They can't admit when their teams lose. It's always blamed on the refs, injuries, or some other fluke excuses. They can't give credit to the teams that do win, always trying to poke holes and denigrate their accomplishments.

I've never seen a bigger collective group of sour grapes.

---

The 07 Cavs were very bad for a Finals team. I just think that the 09 Magic (and the 09 Cavs for that matter) were quite overrated. Lots of talent, great shooters, bad coaching. Kind of like a worse version of the aforementioned 07 Suns.

So, you're saddened by the homerism of Spurs fans on a Spurs board, and are making as many generalizations yourself as you accuse us of. I ask, then, why do you even bother reading this board, let alone make what you know are inflammatory posts?

The 09 Magic would have destroyed the 07 Cavs. No contest. Probably beat them in 5.

That said, the Nuggets were not that great of a WCF team, the Rockets were a joke with their injuries, and the Jazz weren't going to beat anyone out West in the playoffs except maybe the Hornets.

To the title - no. 'Keepin it simple and peaceful since 2009' ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cry Havoc

The 09 Magic would have destroyed the 07 Cavs. No contest. Probably beat them in 5.

That said, the Nuggets were not that great of a WCF team, the Rockets were a joke with their injuries, and the Jazz weren't going to beat anyone out West in the playoffs except maybe the Hornets.

---

I did get carried away, I admit. 09 Magic >>> 07 Cavs, though I'm still not sold on the 09 Magic. Apologies.

If we're comparing the teams that the 07 Spurs and 09 Lakers faced in the playoffs, a better comparison is probably:

07 Suns vs. 09 Magic: 07 Suns were much better
07 Jazz vs. 09 Jazz: Wash (neither were a real threat)
07 Nuggets vs. 09 Nuggets: 09 Nuggets were much better
07 Cavs vs. 09 Rockets: Not sure

the 2007 Jazz were much better than the 2009 Jazz, no contest..the 2007 Cavs were a lot better than the 2009 Rockets without Yao, McGrady, and Mutombo..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurstrodamus

The Cavs.

---

If you saw the games you would say otherwise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

I did get carried away, I admit. 09 Magic >>> 07 Cavs, though I'm still not sold on the 09 Magic. Apologies.

If we're comparing the teams that the 07 Spurs and 09 Lakers faced in the playoffs, a better comparison is probably:

07 Suns vs. 09 Magic: 07 Suns were much better
07 Jazz vs. 09 Jazz: Wash (neither were a real threat)
07 Nuggets vs. 09 Nuggets: 09 Nuggets were much better
07 Cavs vs. 09 Rockets: Not sure

---

How about comparing by round, instead of switching it up to fit your agenda?

Example: 09 Magic>>>>>>>07 Cavs, Hell 09 Magic>>>>>>>09 Cavs

all the team needs is a raja bell type player who can guard other teams swingmen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs_210

The Spurs have plugged the needed holes to get pass the Lakers. The one hole beyond control is health so as long as it doesn't become a problem then the series could go either way.

---

There's other teams in the west. Let's not look past them. Remember we lost to dallas. Of course not at full strength and our team has drastically changed but the fact remains. I see us in the wcf but it will be a hill to climb

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e5...ane/el1oo2.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carrao45

How about comparing by round, instead of switching it up to fit your agenda?

Example: 09 Magic>>>>>>>07 Cavs, Hell 09 Magic>>>>>>>09 Cavs

---

Those are both correct. However, you know that you don't necessarily face teams in order of increasing difficulty. The 07 Suns were far better than any other team that the 07 Spurs played, while the 09 Magic were probably the best team that the 09 Lakers played. My point of 07 Suns >>> 09 Magic stands.

The Lakers won and the Spurs did not. All that matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

Those are both correct. However, you know that you don't necessarily face teams in order of increasing difficulty. The 07 Suns were far better than any other team that the 07 Spurs played, while the 09 Magic were probably the best team that the 09 Lakers played. My point of 07 Suns >>> 09 Magic stands.

---

A valid point. But i would point out that the Magic were the best defensive team in the league this year. And that strong defensive teams (for example: the spurs) were the Suns killers in 04-present. The suns thrived off teams that tried to outscore them. The Magic won because of their defense, and so, the 09 Magic would beat the 07 Suns IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carrao45

A valid point. But i would point out that the Magic were the best defensive team in the league this year. And that strong defensive teams (for example: the spurs) were the Suns killers in 04-present. The suns thrived off teams that tried to outscore them. The Magic won because of their defense, and so, the 09 Magic would beat the 07 Suns IMO

---

This is why DrHouse is on my ignore list and you aren't. Thanks for a rational discussion! I suppose I've been underrating the 09 Magic's defense (and that team as a whole). The 09 Cavs were fool's gold after all (which surprised me), but the Magic earned their spot in the Finals.

Of course, debating who would win between the 07 Suns and 09 Magic is just an extension of debating the hypothetical winner between the 07 Spurs and 09 Lakers, and we could go back and forth on that all day. We'll each take our teams, and there's no way to prove either wrong.

Great coaching is more important than superior talent, which is why none of the East teams scare me at all. If the Spurs can make it past the Lakers, the Spurs win the title. I'd give the Spurs between a 30% and 40% chance of doing it right now (I *am* a homer, remember), which can change depending on where Odom winds up and how the new Spurs jell in-season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

This is why DrHouse is on my ignore list and you aren't. Thanks for a rational discussion! I suppose I've been underrating the 09 Magic's defense (and that team as a whole). The 09 Cavs were fool's gold after all (which surprised me), but the Magic earned their spot in the Finals.

Of course, debating who would win between the 07 Suns and 09 Magic is just an extension of debating the hypothetical winner between the 07 Spurs and 09 Lakers, and we could go back and forth on that all day. We'll each take our teams, and there's no way to prove either wrong.

Great coaching is more important than superior talent, which is why none of the East teams scare me at all. If the Spurs can make it past the Lakers, the Spurs win the title. I'd give the Spurs between a 30% and 40% chance of doing it right now (I *am* a homer, remember), which can change depending on where Odom winds up and how the new Spurs jell in-season.

---

:toast Well any team with Mo Williams as their #2 guy isn't winning anything, and yes they were fools gold. The Magic were a good team, but not even best in the East. That was Boston, and being the homer that i am, i say LA would have defeated Boston as well.

About coaching, i agree, which is why i think the Champion will be from the West. And LA and SA are nearly evenly matched, which is why in a series i think it will come down to PJ vs Pop. Whichever coach does a better job between the two will take his team to the title IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

This is why DrHouse is on my ignore list and you aren't. Thanks for a rational discussion! I suppose I've been underrating the 09 Magic's defense (and that team as a whole). The 09 Cavs were fool's gold after all (which surprised me), but the Magic earned their spot in the Finals.

Of course, debating who would win between the 07 Suns and 09 Magic is just an extension of debating the hypothetical winner between the 07 Spurs and 09 Lakers, and we could go back and forth on that all day. We'll each take our teams, and there's no way to prove either wrong.

Great coaching is more important than superior talent, which is why none of the East teams scare me at all. If the Spurs can make it past the Lakers, the Spurs win the title. I'd give the Spurs between a 30% and 40% chance of doing it right now (I *am* a homer, remember), which can change depending on where Odom winds up and how the new Spurs jell in-season.

---

OT for a sec: I forgot about the "ignore" feature. It does come in handy doesn't it?

Now back to the topic at hand.......:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carrao45

:toast Well any team with Mo Williams as their #2 guy isn't winning anything, and yes they were fools gold. The Magic were a good team, but not even best in the East. That was Boston, and being the homer that i am, i say LA would have defeated Boston as well.

About coaching, i agree, which is why i think the Champion will be from the West. And LA and SA are nearly evenly matched, which is why in a series i think it will come down to PJ vs Pop. Whichever coach does a better job between the two will take his team to the title IMO

---

Yes, a healthy Boston would've made the Finals easily. That would've been an epic series, IMO; probably Lakers in 7.

And as much as I hate to say it, if a series comes down to PJ vs. Pop, I don't like the Spurs' chances. Spurs need HCA plus a positive talent differential to overcome that. The Spurs just might have more talent if Odom leaves (the Lakers bench would look awfully thin), but as it stands right now, I can't give the Spurs more than 40%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

Yes, a healthy Boston would've made the Finals easily. That would've been an epic series, IMO; probably Lakers in 7.

And as much as I hate to say it, if a series comes down to PJ vs. Pop, I don't like the Spurs' chances. Spurs need HCA plus a positive talent differential to overcome that. The Spurs just might have more talent if Odom leaves (the Lakers bench would look awfully thin), but as it stands right now, I can't give the Spurs more than 40%.

---

The Spurs won't get HCA over LA I'm sure of it. Only because Pop doesnt care about the Regular Season. But SA is historically a great road team. I would agree though about their chances being 40%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carrao45

The Spurs won't get HCA over LA I'm sure of it. Only because Pop doesnt care about the Regular Season. But SA is historically a great road team. I would agree though about their chances being 40%

---

First and foremost. Congrats to the lakers. The laker faithful really thinks ron is gonna help them repeat. Barring any major injuries the lakers have everything they can handle with sa.la is still a mentally weak team outside of kobe and ron. If its close sa will drown em. The magic were just happy to be there and didn't have the discipline to close out and win the games they couldve . If that's sa or even boston with kg in that position you lose everytime. Don't put your money on ron. The lakers still have weaknesses even with lodom and the spurs will exploit em. Book it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurspokesman

First and foremost. Congrats to the lakers. The laker faithful really thinks ron is gonna help them repeat. Barring any major injuries the lakers have everything they can handle with sa.la is still a mentally weak team outside of kobe and ron. If its close sa will drown em. The magic were just happy to be there and didn't have the discipline to close out and win the games they couldve . If that's sa or even boston with kg in that position you lose everytime. Don't put your money on ron. The lakers still have weaknesses even with lodom and the spurs will exploit em. Book it.

---

Yeah ok...the Lakers have no chance in close games, yeah that makes sense. LA is great in close games. And if it's close i expect the best closer in the game (Kobe) to prevail. And no, the Lakers are not mentally weak.

And, besides the PG issue, name a weakness this Laker team posesses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghazi

Spurs won in 2003 only because Dirk was hurt.

---

The Spurs went up 3-1 with Dirk playing.

Game 1 you also barely won thanks to 50 free throws. DON'T GIVE ME THAT BULLSHIT. That could have easily been a sweep if you take out the 50 free throws you got from the refs with Dirk playing.

You played better when Dirk went down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice009

The Spurs went up 3-1 with Dirk playing.

Game 1 you also barely won thanks to 50 free throws. DON'T GIVE ME THAT BULLSHIT. That could have easily been a sweep if you take out the 50 free throws you got from the refs with Dirk playing.

You played better when Dirk went down.

---

This