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

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