So...if the Lakers are the Suns ...and the Suns are the Spurs ...
suns don't own anybody till they win something. The 80's showed the who's the in the Lakers/suns matchup. If the spurs had Lakerlike dominance to fall back on in the 80's then I wouldn't say they were the Lakers . But since Showtime dominated then and the Lakers still have your number. The spurs continue to be the Lakers .
Do you really think it will lower it? Your team getting their ass handed to them by the Lakers has only brought, "if only Manu was healthy". Laker fans will think the same thing in regards to Andrew Bynum.
WOW, i'm convinced now, very insightful.
They owned you 2 years in a row and Kobe doesn't own jack until he wins something. Robin to Shaq's Batman is not good enough.
The spurs are still the Lakers !!!!
+1
suns don't own anybody till they win something. The 80's showed the who's the in the Lakers/suns matchup. If the spurs had Lakerlike dominance to fall back on in the 80's then I wouldn't say they were the Lakers . But since Showtime dominated then and the Lakers still have your number. The spurs continue to be the Lakers .
Classic Laker fan talk.
They did win something...it was a playoff series 2 years in a row against the Lakers. Isn't that what the Lakers won against the Spurs this year...a playoff series? Neither team /wonis winning a le, so I guess the Lakers ownage counts against the Spurs but the Suns ownage against the Lakers doesn't?suns don't own anybody till they win something. The 80's showed the who's the in the Lakers/suns matchup. If the spurs had Lakerlike dominance to fall back on in the 80's then I wouldn't say they were the Lakers . But since Showtime dominated then and the Lakers still have your number. The spurs continue to be the Lakers .
The Suns owned a PITIFUL Laker team that had no business being in the playoffs. I hardly see how this is even remotely similar to how the Lakers have owned the Spurs over the last decade. Whenever we've faced off we both had championship caliber teams.
So now it comes down to caliber of team? I would venture to say the 2002 Spurs were not really a championship caliber team, starting a rookie PG, having a weak bench and an aged David Robinson. They struggled to put away a mediocre Sonics team in 5 games that year in the first round...should that one not count also? If it doesn't, aren't we 3-2 in the Duncan era? Does that equate to ownage?
BTW, I find it funny how Laker fans love to throw up how many les the franchise has but, when reminded of Celtics ownage of the Lakers, dismiss that since "those Finals were in the 60's"...
You're right it doesn't. Lakers have beaten the spurs and then won it all. Lakers have destroyed your precious hopes to win a back to back. suns have never won anything. They were a 2 seed beating a 7 seed. You should be able to see the differences, it shouldn't have to be spelled out for you.
So...you would rather see LA beat the Spurs than win a le?
It happened, it's the truth, get used to it, and stop crying about it.
Of course not. This is just for all the spur fans that are acting like if they just found a pot of gold.
Ahh. Well at least you didn't do like the Laker trolls and drop the "all Spurs fans" card.
I would agree....its pretty lame to trash a team that beat your team to advance. I know plenty of Spurs fans who complained last year after knocking out Phoenix who called out Suns fans who came here to talk when SA lost that game to Utah in the next round. Some of those same fans are doing what they called out others for.
Carry on.
Ahh. Well at least you didn't do like the Laker trolls and drop the "all Spurs fans" card.
I would agree....its pretty lame to trash a team that beat your team to advance. I know plenty of Spurs fans who complained last year after knocking out Phoenix who called out Suns fans who came here to talk when SA lost that game to Utah in the next round. Some of those same fans are doing what they called out others for.
Carry on.
The Spurs have beaten the Lakers (99 and 2003) and then won it all as many times as the Lakers have (2001 and 2002) in the Duncan era...I don't see how that is helping your argument. Also, I don't see how it was our fault that, since 2004, your team hasn't kept your end of the bargain in challenging us...
Each year is individual as far as winning a le goes, I don't feel any worse that it was a repeat oppurtunity...so I don't see how that helps your argument either...
The Suns knocked your team out of the playoffs, which is what you are basing your Lakers "ownage" of the Spurs on, you knocking us out of the playoffs, right?...I don't get how you don't see the hyprocrisy in your statements, it's comical...
His point is the Lakers were still pretty much in rebuilding mode while the Suns were competing for les. It was a lopsided mismatch both of those years. If you can't see how this is different from two championship caliber teams competing against each other then we'll just have to agree to disagree.The Spurs have beaten the Lakers (99 and 2003) and then won it all as many times as the Lakers have (2001 and 2002) in the Duncan era...I don't see how that is helping your argument. Also, I don't see how it was our fault that, since 2004, your team hasn't kept your end of the bargain in challenging us...
Each year is individual as far as winning a le goes, I don't feel any worse that it was a repeat oppurtunity...so I don't see how that helps your argument either...
The Suns knocked your team out of the playoffs, which is what you are basing your Lakers "ownage" of the Spurs on, you knocking us out of the playoffs, right?...I don't get how you don't see the hyprocrisy in your statements, it's comical...
So, once it is determined that a team sucks enough...eventhough they made the playoffs and had a 3-1 series lead in one of the series they lost...they are automatically excluded from ownage talks...gotcha...
It's like the Hawks taking the Celtics to 7 games. They had no business doing that in the 1st place, if BOS had played their A game from the start they would have won that series in 4-5.So, once it is determined that a team sucks enough...eventhough they made the playoffs and had a 3-1 series lead in one of the series they lost...they are automatically excluded from ownage talks...gotcha...
The ing ATLANTA HAWKS put up a better fight than the LA Fakers
Who's to say the Hawks had a good team but just couldn't play to their potential for a whole series...I don't think you can totally discredit what the Hawks did as being a byproduct of the Celtics sucking for 3 games.
Same with the Lakers-Suns series, especially in 2006, the Lakers had enough talent to win that series, they just couldn't keep it together enough to win, which is pretty much a choke job...I don't see how choking in a series your team should have won (considering the stats on teams up 3-1 in the playoffs) means you can automatically remove that series and year from the Suns fans being able to brag and throw it your team's face...kind of like how Lakers fans enjoy doing to Spurs fans.
PG: Smush Parker
C: Kwame Brown
SF: Luke Walton
SG: Kobe Bryant
PF: Lamar Odom
I'm sorry that is not enough talent to win jack . The fact that they were up 3-1 is remarkable, just like how the Hawks pushing the Celtics to 7 games was remarkable.
I guess we will agree to disagree then...had that team been as bad as you claim, I don't think they would have ever been up 3-1 in the series. At least with the Hawks, you can always make the claim that Atlanta never actually lead in the series, they just rode the momentum of their home court to defend it. The Lakers had that series in a deathlock and let it go...Also, it's not like the Suns were playing with a full deck that series either, Stoudamire was long gone after his injury and they were relying on the great post play of Boris Diaw of all people to carry them in the playoffs...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
