So... will it be the same excuse AGAIN?

[crc21209]

neither did kobe crying had anything to do with it


wasnt that picture was when he lost the conf finals from 03. yeah i can understand the tears losing after 3 years some of you spurs fans are prolly use to inconsistency

The Spurs inconsistent? Um...I think you have your cheap ass team mixed up with ours....lets take a look at whos been more "inconsistent" since 2003.

Spurs

2003- NBA Champions
2004- Lost in Conf. Semis to Lakers
2005- NBA Champions
2006- Lost in Conf. Semis to Mavs
2007- NBA Champions
2008- Lost in Conf. Finals to Lakers


Lakers

2003- Lost in Conf. Semis to Spurs
2004- Lost in NBA Finals to Pistons
2005- DID NOT MAKE PLAYOFFS
2006- 1ST ROUND LOSS to Suns
2007- 1ST ROUND LOSS to Suns
2008- Lost in NBA Finals to Celtics

Looks to me like the Lakers have been the more inconsistent team huh?

[underdawg]

Are you on some kind of personal mission to get every single Spurs fan to admit the Lakers are a better basketball team? Christ, you've been up to this for how many months now? If I tell you the Lakers are better, will you give it a rest? Or is it gonna take some kinda signed pe ion? I don't understand this incessant need to get Spurs fans to agree with you. STFU already.

I don't mind admitting they're better right now as we have with other teams many years before - I just think it's funny how much worth some people put into the regular season. The Lakers are winning right now and they have the best record - no argument, but until they win it Laker fans need to have perspective. The funny thing is that we are/were never considered the best team (even when we were,) so who cares if some tool thinks the team he roots for is better than the team we root for?

[underdawg]

I personally ruined Bynum's season?

Then that must mean you jinxed Manu for laughing and celebrating when Bynum went down.

I was being just a tad facetious - although, let it be said I never celebrated Bynum being hurt. I'd rather curb stomp the little yellow daisy jersey wearing fakers full strength with no excuses for the good ole TEXAS wood shed beating the Spurs will give them.

[DeadlyDynasty]

The Spurs inconsistent? Um...I think you have your cheap ass team mixed up with ours....lets take a look at whos been more "inconsistent" since 2003.

Spurs

2003- NBA Champions
2004- Lost in Conf. Semis to Lakers
2005- NBA Champions
2006- Lost in Conf. Semis to Mavs
2007- NBA Champions
2008- Lost in Conf. Finals to Lakers


Lakers

2003- Conf. Semis loss to Spurs
2004- NBA Finals loss to Pistons
2005- DID NOT MAKE PLAYOFFS
2006- 1ST ROUND LOSS to Suns
2007- 1ST ROUND LOSS to Suns
2008- Lost to Celtics in NBA Finals

Looks to me like the Lakers have been the more inconsistent team huh?

I like how you conveniently start at 2003 to support your argument. Weak.

How about only 2 years w/o a playoff appearance since 1975? How's that for consistency. See, I can do that too!

The "inconsistency" HE (not I, I think both LA and SA have been the class of the league the last 10 years) is referring to is your inability to repeat as champs, given 4 chances to do so

[Brazil]

Dear spurs fans

why oh why you waste your time answering a 300 posts get a life useless lakers troll ?

[crc21209]

Inconsistency is missing the playoffs one year totally as well as having two 1st round exits. The Spurs have advanced to at least the 2nd round almost every year of the Tim Duncan era, dont give me this 1975 bull , you probably werent even born then, and dont bring up the "Minneapolis" era either like other Faker fans do. Peace. I'm out.

[Agloco]

now that manu has a injured knee and prolly will make a come back before the season ends and for the playoffs and with that notion the spurs AS A TEAM will get their asses handed to them by the los angeles lakers will the same excuse arise from die hard spurs fans that "Manu's Hurt thats why we lost! will you spurs fans actually cough that tired old excuse again? just as much as the ref excuse? and fisher piggy backing brent barry excuse?


if thats so..

in the event that we lose can we say we didnt have BYNUM? ..



ing pathetic....

That's the first ing thing that would exit your damm mouth. The tears would follow shortly after.

[Gutter92]

How many teams have repeated in the NBA? How many have won 4 over a span of 9 years? ok then...

[underdawg]

How many teams have repeated in the NBA? How many have won 4 over a span of 9 years? ok then...

The real question to laker fan is - if they hadn't won back to back in '87 and '88, would the lakers of the 80's be considered a dynasty? I guarantee that everyone of those hypocritical, bandwagon, medicinal pot smokin', dignity selling out fans would say, "Yes!"

[Flux451]

ST the new TNT, where drama happens.

[DeadlyDynasty]

How many teams have repeated in the NBA? How many have won 4 over a span of 9 years? ok then...

Both are impressive feats, and the greatest teams did both:
All the greatest NBA dynasties were able to defend their le at some point.
Minneapolis Lakers
Boston Celtics (60's)
Los Angeles Lakers (80's)
Chicago Bulls (90's)

Los Angeles Lakers (00's)--5 finals appearances and 3 les (including a 3-peat) since 2000. A win this year(and as of now we are the prohibitive faves) gives them 4/6 in 9 years.


San Antonio Spurs (00's): 4 les since 1999 (very impressive), but not one defended le

[DeadlyDynasty]

The real question to laker fan is - if they hadn't won back to back in '87 and '88, would the lakers of the 80's be considered a dynasty? I guarantee that everyone of those hypocritical, bandwagon, medicinal pot smokin', dignity selling out fans would say, "Yes!"

we're doing hypotheticals now? If you're parents never had that dinner and a movie you'd of never been born. It DID happen, so "ifs" are incidental

[underdawg]

we're doing hypotheticals now? If you're parents never had that dinner and a movie you'd of never been born. It DID happen, so "ifs" are incidental

nice attempt to skate the question, but it's pretty simple and you can answer the "hypothetical." Houston won a back to back - are they a dynasty?

[DeadlyDynasty]

nice attempt to skate the question, but it's pretty simple and you can answer the "hypothetical." Houston won a back to back - are they a dynasty?

how is that skating the question? Hypotheticals are useless in an argument. If the Buffalo Bills won those superbowls they'd be one of the greatest dynasties ever!!!...didn't happen, so it's a moot point.

Houston (and Detroit) only won 2 les--I don't know anyone who would call 2 les a dynasty.

[underdawg]

how is that skating the question? Hypotheticals are useless in an argument. If the Buffalo Bills won those superbowls they'd be one of the greatest dynasties ever!!!...didn't happen, so it's a moot point.

Houston (and Detroit) only won 2 les--I don't know anyone who would call 2 les a dynasty.

Ok, no hypothetical. Were the Lakers a dynasty in the 80's because they won 5 rings or because they won a back to back during those 5 rings?

[DeadlyDynasty]

Ok, no hypothetical. Were the Lakers a dynasty in the 80's because they won 5 rings or because they won a back to back during those 5 rings?

good question...and the answer is both. 5 les and 8 appearances in one decade is quite a feat. , go watch the old NBA films (sometimes the games are on espn classic or NBATV). Pat Riley and the Lakers stressed how important it was for them to repeat as champions, saying something like (and i'm paraphrasing): "it's the only thing we've yet to do."

Listen man, I'm not trying to get in a shouting match w/ you about all this. What the Spurs have done the last 10 years is nothing short of spectacular. I just personally feel (one man's opinion), that defending a le carries a legitimacy to just how dominant your team truly is/was.

[underdawg]

good question...and the answer is both. 5 les and 8 appearances in one decade is quite a feat. , go watch the old NBA films (sometimes the games are on espn classic or NBATV). Pat Riley and the Lakers stressed how important it was for them to repeat as champions, saying something like (and i'm paraphrasing): "it's the only thing we've yet to do."

Listen man, I'm not trying to get in a shouting match w/ you about all this. What the Spurs have done the last 10 years is nothing short of spectacular. I just personally feel (one man's opinion), that defending a le carries a legitimacy to just how dominant your team truly is/was.

That's the thing - you say both, but that's pretty tough to say the other 4 championships weren't that important until they got the 5th since it was a back to back. Sorry - if you win 5 championships in a decade, you are a dynasty regardless of back to backs. In fact the back to back was pretty meaningless since you won half of the championships that decade - much better than a back to back. The same can be said about 4 championships in a decade and having the best winning % in all of professional sports for that decade as well. No shouting match here - just logic.

[DeadlyDynasty]

That's the thing - you say both, but that's pretty tough to say the other 4 championships weren't that important until they got the 5th since it was a back to back. Sorry - if you win 5 championships in a decade, you are a dynasty regardless of back to backs. In fact the back to back was pretty meaningless since you won half of the championships that decade - much better than a back to back. The same can be said about 4 championships in a decade and having the best winning % in all of professional sports for that decade as well. No shouting match here - just logic.

Both feats are impressive man, all I'm saying is defending a le shows dominance--playing w/ the bullseye on your back and STILL winning it all.

[K-State Spur]

now that manu has a injured knee and prolly will make a come back before the season ends and for the playoffs and with that notion the spurs AS A TEAM will get their asses handed to them by the los angeles lakers will the same excuse arise from die hard spurs fans that "Manu's Hurt thats why we lost! will you spurs fans actually cough that tired old excuse again? just as much as the ref excuse? and fisher piggy backing brent barry excuse?


if thats so..

in the event that we lose can we say we didnt have BYNUM? ..



ing pathetic....

i was thinking of going with the excuse that we'd have won if only we had Rick Fox. nobody's ever used that one before, have they?

[Spork KIller]

now that manu has a injured knee and prolly will make a come back before the season ends and for the playoffs and with that notion the spurs AS A TEAM will get their asses handed to them by the los angeles lakers will the same excuse arise from die hard spurs fans that "Manu's Hurt thats why we lost! will you spurs fans actually cough that tired old excuse again? just as much as the ref excuse? and fisher piggy backing brent barry excuse?


if thats so..

in the event that we lose can we say we didnt have BYNUM? ..



ing pathetic....

These mother ers always make excuses, but Manure healthy or not, they are going NOWHERE!

[manufor3]

Useless trolling

sigh...

[Evil Angel]

These mother ers always make excuses, but Manure healthy or not, they are going NOWHERE!

"Manure" Excuse me...
Tell Momma she can have the computer back now.

[Evil Angel]

These mother ers always make excuses, but Manure healthy or not, they are going NOWHERE!

Dude, you one ed MF.
Sorry, that's about all I have for you. If looking for more you just may have to pray on the TROLLS as they will take great care of you there...
We just love non-SPURS fans here.

[urunobili]

at the Lakers with insecurity complex at its best...

[lefty]

now that manu has a injured knee and prolly will make a come back before the season ends and for the playoffs and with that notion the spurs AS A TEAM will get their asses handed to them by the los angeles lakers will the same excuse arise from die hard spurs fans that "Manu's Hurt thats why we lost! will you spurs fans actually cough that tired old excuse again? just as much as the ref excuse? and fisher piggy backing brent barry excuse?


if thats so..

in the event that we lose can we say we didnt have BYNUM? ..



ing pathetic....

Bynum is not even a factor