Reply With Quote
The game after Bynum went down is what I meant to say. They were holding the number one seed.
Pau Gasol made his debut on LA on February 5th, 2008 against the New Jersey Nets. Going to into that game, the Lakers were 30-16.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...008_games.html
The Suns did not have a game that day, but they had a 34-14 record.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...008_games.html
So 21 Palins, please explain to me how 30-16 is a better record than 34-14.
The game after Bynum went down is what I meant to say. They were holding the number one seed.
Are you laughing because you were wrong? Because that is funny.
How was I wrong? You're the one who had to change your argument after you realized you were wrong. That's a very Palin-like debate tactic.
I never changed arguments. The Lakers were holding the number 1 seed before the Gasol trade happened. Which is what I originally said.
You keep talking about Palin and arguing over semantics. You must be her biggest fan.
No they weren't, at the time of the Gasol trade, they weren't winning their division. I just posted proof of that that you can't seem to refute.
This is coming from someone who's stupidity earned the nickname 21 Palins.
Yes they ended up losing the number 1 seed because Bynum went down they began to struggle. Still doesn't change the fact that they were holding the number 1 at one point before the Gasol trade. Learn to comprehend context.
Why is it just now that you decide to insert the phrase "at one point"?
Because your reading comprehension is pathetic.
I'm gonna go with you thought you had your facts right but you didn't, so you quickly changed the meaning of your statement.
What would be the point in saying the Lakers were "at one point" the one seed before the Gasol trade? It does nothing to dispute the argument that the Gasol trade saved them from being the 7-8 seed.
My facts were right. And the original statement was not wrong. No where did I imply they were holding the 1 seed the entire season.
1 seed without Gasol. Not that hard to grasp.
He is saying before the injury to bynum, once bynum got hurt we lost a couple of games, but with bynum healthy and without gasol we could have 1st seed in the west
Still does nothing to disprove the opinion that the Gasol trade saved them from a disastrous season, which was the topic that started this whole argument.
But with Bynum. If the Gasol trade didn't happen, they would have had to play the rest of the season w/o Gasol or Bynum, most likely resulting in a 7-8 seed and Kobe demanding a trade once the season was over.
You're playing the what if game, which is stupid.
Fact is, 1 seed without Gasol. Kobe isn't demanding a trade from the best team in the West when healthy.
Not really, the lone Suns victory in Staples Center over the last two seasons came when Bynum and Gasol were out just to remind you of how bad they were during that stretch. Without Bynum and Gasol, that team isn't a whole lot better than the 2006 or 2007 Lakers.
The what if game is dumb, but in this situation the argument itself was a what if game.
I really have no idea why "what if the Gasol trade didn't happen" was discussed earlier on in this thread, but that trade undoubtedly saved the Lakers.
No it wasn't a what if game. But I can play it too. What if Bynum's knee was properly taken care of last year and Ariza doesn't go down. What if games are stupid. 1 seed without Gasol is a fact.
No it didn't save them as they won jack last season. 1 seed without Gasol, fact. Bynum is right on schedule to return within the time frame originally planned this season. Sub Bynum for Gasol and they're still the favorite out West with better defense.
I never said the Lakers with a healthy Bynum but w/o Gasol weren't the favorite in the West, but at the time of the Gasol trade Bynum was out as you know.
Andrew Bynum is a turrible player he can't even make shots, so he can't be useful to his team
Well, this is good to hear if what people are stating is true, and Bynum is expected back to practice by next Friday. Hopefully Phil was throwing the press some BS about the 3-4 week timeframe from this week for Bynum to start practicing.
you were expecting a to "disprove the opinion".
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
