Reply With Quote
DrHouse is getting too much Hugh Laurie bull everyday. That's why he's been trolling in this forum to prove that his Fakers are better than the Spurs
Talk smack all you want to the team that has bested you 4 times in this decade alone. Yea that's real smart.The Lakers are the best team in the West...for now...but they still got utterly assraped with a sandpaper dildo last year in the Finals. Kobe without Shaq hasn't won . I'll smack talk all I want, because 3 > 0, no matter how much dope you smoke, Faker fans...
DrHouse is getting too much Hugh Laurie bull everyday. That's why he's been trolling in this forum to prove that his Fakers are better than the Spurs
it's really annoying when people talk about sports like it's personal life. "what you know deep down inside"? are you kidding me? We love the spurs but seriously, no one is deluding themselves, nor are they basing their worth or feelings of who they are "deep inside" on the Spurs or spurs games or whether the lakers beat the spurs or not. at least i hope people aren't doing that.
that said, you're right! You have big guys that duncan can't guard all alone! You're right! you guys beat us badly at home and we beat you by 1 at home! The season's not over yet, the Spurs are playing pretty well, you guys are playing pretty well, and we're going to meet in the WCF and someone is going to win. Your depth is really great and you're going to score points on us. Kobe is playing at a really high level, and Gasol is dangerous. Our core is extremely good, tested, and our bench is developing. If people all over the country started betting heavily on the spurs right now to win that matchup, i'd be surprised. But you shouldn't be surprised that spurs fans think that we're gonna get the job done, because we've been fans of this team during an era where they've pulled out a lot of wins, and we don't doubt them.
no one's hiding from the facts here. We have no reason to hide from the facts. nothing has been decided yet.
DrHouse,
You keep bringing up that stat!!
It was the Spurs who ended the Lakers chance to win a 4th le in 2003 and they didnt play each other in 2005-2007 playoff seasons and the Spurs won 2 championships during those years.
And the Spurs were clearly the best team in the west those years and if they would played the Lakers in the playoffs...they would have won those series.
Yes the Lakers have won their playoff matchups in this decade...but there is another top team in the west this decade and everybody knows it!!
What do you have to show for it??? Certainly not anysince 2002. Let's take a look at the Spurs and the Lakers during that time, shall we???
2003 - Spurs win the NBA Finals (defeat Nets in 6)
2004 - Lakers knock Spurs out of playoffs (.4 bull ) but get humiliated by the Pistons in the Finals
2005 - Spurs win the NBA Finals (defeat Pistons in 7)
2006 - Mavs knock Spurs out of playoffs (stupid Manu foul) but get owned by the Heat (with Shaq, HA HA!) in the Finals
2007 - Spurs win the NBA Finals (sweep Cavs)
2008 - Lakers knock Spurs out of playoffs (bull plane ride, Manu injured, Barry foul not called) but get ruthlessly assraped by the Celtics in the Finals
So...since 2003, either one of two things happened...either the Spurs won it all, or the team that knocked off the Spurs made it to the Finals, only to be crushed by the Eastern Conference Champion. Interesting pattern there, don't ya think?
2009 - TBD
Thank you!
I couldn't have written it better myself!!
One thing is for sure, the Spurs will never cry if they lose to the Lakers....
^ thisDrHouse,
You keep bringing up that stat!!
It was the Spurs who ended the Lakers chance to win a 4th le in 2003 and they didnt play each other in 2005-2007 playoff seasons and the Spurs won 2 championships during those years.
And the Spurs were clearly the best team in the west those years and if they would played the Lakers in the playoffs...they would have won those series.
Yes the Lakers have won their playoff matchups in this decade...but there is another top team in the west this decade and everybody knows it!!
Do you recall when the San Antonio Spurs had BOTH Kobe Bryant and Derrick Fisher crying on the bench because their season was coming to an end? It's a vivid memory.
Maybe DrHouse needs to remember this:
Freaking epic post !What do you have to show for it??? Certainly not any
2003 - Spurs win the NBA Finals (defeat Nets in 6)
2004 - Lakers knock Spurs out of playoffs (.4 bull ) but get humiliated by the Pistons in the Finals
2005 - Spurs win the NBA Finals (defeat Pistons in 7)
2006 - Mavs knock Spurs out of playoffs (stupid Manu foul) but get owned by the Heat (with Shaq, HA HA!) in the Finals
2007 - Spurs win the NBA Finals (sweep Cavs)
2008 - Lakers knock Spurs out of playoffs (bull plane ride, Manu injured, Barry foul not called) but get ruthlessly assraped by the Celtics in the Finals
So...since 2003, either one of two things happened...either the Spurs won it all, or the team that knocked off the Spurs made it to the Finals, only to be crushed by the Eastern Conference Champion. Interesting pattern there, don't ya think?
2009 - TBD
All true. The only thing I would add to that list is that in 2006 against the Mavs in Game 7 (after Manu's fould and Dirk's three-point play tied the game, Duncan got hacked on the last play of regulation on an offensive rebound putback shot, but didn't get a whistle. He would have had two foul shots with one second left. So that was 2006, and the Fisher shot being allowed (the single most bogus call in NBA history) was in 2004.
So in my opinion the Spurs could have easily won rings from 2003-2008.
I'll give the Lakers last year... except for the obvious fact that we would have beaten them if Manu had been healthy.
If you're going to bring up Manu then I get to bring up both Ariza and Bynum who DIDN'T EVEN PLAY in that series. We've already seen the outcome this season of both teams at full strength. The Lakers curb stomped the Spurs so badly that Pop didn't even bother playing his Big 3 in the 4th quarter one minute.
Your own coach has admitted how incredibly difficult it is for the Spurs to beat the Lakers at full strength, in a moment of unabashed honesty he flat out said the margin of error is razor thin for the Spurs. A couple bad defensive sequences in a row and they lose the game.
The bottom line is the Lakers are the worst possible matchup for the Spurs out of all the elite contenders. They have a coach that has bested Pop 4-1 in this decade. They have the personell to attack the Spur's biggest weakness, which is their undersized frontcourt. They have a great bench. And thus far they are showing that they now have the mental toughness to close games out and to out tough physical teams and beat them at their own game.
Quite frankly, at full strength I expect the Lakers to handily dismiss the Spurs the way they did last season.
And for the supposed classiest fans in the league ya'll have a lot of trouble admitting that your team just lost. Get over it.
Here's a history lesson for you, It seems you forgot. Nice job....
"Game 6 June 17, 2008 Boston 4-2 131-92, W
Boston's 39 point lead surpassed the NBA record in a championship clincher in the largest margin of victory in Association history beating the old record of 129-96 set when the Celtics beat the Lakers in Game 5 in 1965.
Go talk your homer history and selective memory tough talk elsewhere old man. And be sure to claim Minneapolis Laker les as your own as well.
Legends in your own mind. Your embarrassing standard of excellence will get you no where
Seriously WTF kind of crack do you have to smoke to ever make a statement like that?
The Laker franchise IMHO could be argued to be the most successful franchise in the NBA. The best winning percentage, most Finals appearances, and since the introduction of the salary cap the most rings.
You bring up BOS's win but forget that YOUR TEAM LOST TO THE LAKERS 4-1. What the does that say about the Spurs that they couldn't beat the team that lost that badly in Game 6? You can't talk about what another team did to the Lakers that your team couldn't do. That's weak.
And if you want to bring up past beatdowns, let me remind you of some very relevant history that actually has to do with the Lakers and Spurs.
In 2001 the Lakers swept Duncan and the Spurs by an average margin of 22.3 points per game in the WCF, including a 39 point advantage beatdown. That was the greatest margin of defeat for a conference series in NBA history.
The people that claim the Lakers would have won the Championship last year with Bynum...try to remember that you would not have had Gasol had the walking injury not gone down.
Also, you are right, DrHouse. Nothing has changed since last year, the Spurs bench scoring has not improved at all, we did not get a player that has ice water in his veins that will come in handy when playing the Lakers, who won(not counting 2 blowouts each) games by 4,2,5(I know its 8, but thats because of Sasha's disrespect to a team that decides not to foul in the last 15 seconds with a 5 point deficit.) I dont see the Lakers winning this year w/o Bynum. The Spurs are winning games while playing sub-par defense.
The Spurs never cheated to win and don't have smug players or a for a coach. The Spurs also have more les than the Patriots, and haven't lost in the Finals the way the Patriots have lost in the Super Bowl (or earlier rounds of the playoffs courtesy of Jay Plummer and a one Peyton Manning). You would never hear Tim Duncan go into a postgame victory conference and say, "I knew they were going to call an offensive foul on Kobe before he put up that last shot. That's why I didn't D him up on that shot" the way Brady was spewing his classlessness in interviews two seasons ago when they were undefeated.
The Spurs could not be more unlike the Patriots, and the only glaring similarity is the Patriots just find a way to be consistently good like the Spurs do. And Pop may sound like an ass when he does interviews but he's a master of sarcasm and deadpan... Belichick is just a 100% grade-A smug asshole.
That was the greatest margin of defeat for a conference series in NBA history.
But your Lakers hold the NBA Finals record in margin of defeat. Spare me you obfuscations and diversions. We all saw it. Face it , it was embarrassing. B-ball fans across the world said in unison. "Kobe can't win w/o Shaq". Or maybe they should put an asterick (*=FAIL) in the record as an explanation? Your thoughts?
You see Dr. House, there's a huge difference between a conference final and an NBA Final. You should know this. Oh and huge type posting does nothing but shows your hysterical hissy fit.
Did I say nothing has changed?
The Spurs got better offensively and worse defensively. You can try and say they aren't trying on defense but that's simply not the case. They just aren't as good a defensive team now that they are getting older.
Roger Mason, George Hill......these players ultimately do not factor into my admittedly simple analysis. It's all about the front court. That has been the key to the Lakers impressive 6-0 road trip and will be the key going forward into the playoffs. The Lakers utilize their 3 7ft bigmen to generate extremely high percentage looks in the paint and wide open shots for the shooters. If you cannot contain these 3 players, which the Spurs can't do with Bonner and Thomas, you aren't going to beat the Lakers in a 7 game series.
It's that simple my friend.
Srsly the Patriots are more like the Lakers. They win a lot, have the best player in the game, 3 championships in the 2000s, asshole coach, asshole players, cheated (I guess in the Lakers case they didn't cheat but .4, Barry foul, and Gasol trade sure is some sketchy bad karma to me), have got fans, and haven't won in their sports leagues for a long time.
And yes I just admitted Brady is better than Manning since I can't live down ringsmack and 3>1.
Blah, blah, blah. Spur fan again changing the parameters of his pathetic argument to fit his incredibly idiotic smack talk.
The Spurs and Lakers will never face off in the Finals. Everyone knows in 2001 the WCF was essentially the Finals considering how weak the EC was that year.
And stop taking credit for what another franchise did that your franchise couldn't do. If the Lakers were so pathetic what does it say about your team that couldn't defeat them and lost handily 4-1?
Don't get scientific and statistical on us.
And your sanctimonious comment is not smack? Spare us all, after all what would the Lakers do without excuses? Face it it was a monumental embarrassment.
If the Lakers were so pathetic what does it say about your team that couldn't defeat them and lost handily 4-1?
So we lost? It happens but there's one thing that the Lakers can't take away. The Great Western Forum, home of the Showtime Lakers of Magic and Kareem was closed down in a sweep by the Spurs defeating a Kobe/Shaq team. That's historical smack of significant importance. We're just a small market team doing the very best with all our limitations who have won three Championships since the "Three Peat" but hasn't done despite all the talk and excuses since 2002.
Time marches on. Dance the "Grande Huevos" dance as it seems to bring you such luck.
anakha:
Looks like over compensation and smack of a team that still hasn't gotten the bile of bitter defeat out their mouths from last year's Finals monumentally and historically embarrassing as they were. Did you know that the Lakers set an NBA record for a margin of defeat in an NBA Finals? It surpassed their old 1965 record of defeat. Maybe they are used to it?
Perhaps if they played basketball and overcame their sense of en lement and expected coronation of being NBA Champions every year, the Celtics would show them some shred of compassion and mercifully not pound their s into the dirt.
Then again, they wouldn't be the Lakers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
