Reply With Quote
-2/10
It's funny to see you maggots act like you're the class of the NBA again.
The reality is your team is nothing more than a regular season performer. They are not built for the playoffs and they will lose to the Lakers should they face off. They have zero size and rely more on their offense than defense to win games. This goes against the Spur's tried-and-true formula of being able to grind out games, and that is what enabled them to win 4 championships. The Spurs have never won a ring relying so much on their offense, and it will be their undoing come playoff time.
3 point shooting teams NEVER win rings. NEVER. I'm gonna go ahead and bookmark this thread and bump it after your team is bounced out of the playoffs
-2/10
Too generous.-2/10
It does for playoff seeding, tbh.
If the Spurs defeat the Lakers in the playoffs, will you also bump it? That'd be swell, thanks...
cool.
It seems the OP is dazed and confused.
define "3 point shooting team"
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/tea...ff/order/false
Spurs also slightly better defensively than the older Lakers (average team age is about 2 years older)
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball...s/11/5/diffeff
Three top teams in out of the paint points are Miami/Boston/SAS with LAL down the list because the LAL basically suck at it:
SAS shoot per game 3 point attempts: 18.4 vs. 16.9 for the Lakers (Not a large ##) but Spurs make 6.9 vs. 6.1 for the LAL but the Spurs are just much better - it is not a large difference and Spurs will go inside more to Duncan in the playoffs.
Let's look at the facts:
The Lakers are 5.5 games back of the Spurs.
Lakerfan says it don't mean "sh*t" on a Spurs messageboard.
Theses are the facts as we know them. This is what we know.
n I can't wait till these gots lose in the playoffs so their fans will shut up. You guys are way too y.
Your arguments are hard to reject......oh wait....
It's been done better by about every other troll on this board. I mean at least give some stats or some to back up your argument little lady.
http://www.nba.com/2009/news/feature...court20090417/
HCA advantage means a of lot in the playoffs spin the crap all you want but unless LAL catches the Spurs they the LAL are playing catchup and will have to beat the odds and LAL has not won a finals without HCA in the Jackson era.. LAL is a fine team and could still catch the Spurs if the Spurs falter or have injuries as the Spurs have 5 more back to backs and three games left vs. LAL and 4 more road games but Spurs also benefit from already having played a much harder schedule.
It's funny to get trolled by Lakers fans again.
It is more fun when LAL fans cannot bring a salient arguement to the table.
Isn't Laker fan the same one that will beat his chest if the Lakers win 8 in a row during the regular season?
eh-yup.
Look up "confirmation bias" sometime. People see what they want to see.
The same Laker team that's won 2 straight NBA championships and been to the Finals 3 times in a row? Yea, they get a pass in the regular season. They're coasting and still #2 in the WC.
Someone's insecure today.
If the Spurs lose i don't see Lakers winning it all again anyway. You barely survived the Celts in 7 games last year and this year they are deeper and hungrier. Plus they will likely have Home court.. Lakers appear to be older and not as deep..
is not the same Laker team
The Spurs don't score most of their points from the outside. Just because they are the best 3pt shooting team doesn't mean they are predominately a 3pt shooting team.
The Spurs make 3 more 3pt shots a game than the Lakers, but take just over 2 more a game.
I would say that Phil would accept 3 more three point attempts if he could get 3 more makes.
Our 3pt average is higher than the Lakers. That's why we take the shots. Your three point shooting sucks. That's why you don't.
You are confusing cause and correlation, but that's no surprise for a trolling homer.
P.S. Boston is 4th in 3pt percentage. I do recall a 40pt thumping in the Finals from some team, not sure who... tick...tick....tick....
You do realize that "yea" is pronounced "yay", right? Probably not.
Let the meltdown continue.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
