Regular season don't mean anything

[ambchang]

'49 was more impressive than the joke which was 2007. A convicted felon handing you game 3 and Stu Jackson suspending the Suns best player on a technicality while ignoring the fact that Duncan did the same thing.

That convicted felon never reffed a Lakers playoff game, I presume.

And Duncan did the same thing? Remember the league changed the rule after Ewing was suspended in 97 vs. the Heat when he stepped on the court. It changed from not allowed to leave the bench during an altercation to not allowed to leave the bench area during an altercation.

Duncan stepped on the court, but was right in front of the bench. There also wasn't an altercation that took place when he did.

Vs. the Suns situation where the Suns player rushed out to mid-court.



I am having trouble finding the Duncan video, but if memory recalls, it was no where close to the "same thing".

Notice how the Spurs stopped winning after the Lakers stopped rebuilding. Must suck to be the Lakers doormat.

You mean how the Spurs beat the 3-time defending champs the year the Spurs were rebuilding? That year?

e;



tanking for Timmy says lolwut?

The Lakers earned their recent back to back through savvy front office movements.

Yeah, and 27 FTs in the 4th and amazing "networking" with other team front offices.

[cd98]

Amazing L.A. fan criticizes 07 le while not including his 09. At least Lebron was the best player in the NBA. Nothing impressive about beating a team without its starting point guard and a platoon of Hedo, Lewis, and Gortat; and Howard, who isn't top 8 in big men for the last decade.

[cd98]

I'm disparaging 07, not the 99 season where nobody really practiced due to work stoppage.

Those 5 les were won by the Lakers, fyi.

Judging by how things turned out for L.A., they probably didn't practice in playoffs either.

And mudslinging aside, I think '99 is the way an NBA season should be. No reason to have "meaningless" regular season games to leave teams injured and less than 100%. Better to have them playing less regular season games and going into the playoffs healthy. It was a great year for playoffs and the basketball was much better quality than watching L.A. barely beat an injured Celtic team last year. And Kobe should have enough respect to hand that MVP trophy to Gasol, who really earned it.

[ChumpDumper]

Damn, lakerfan really does care about the Spurs.

[ElNono]

tanking for Timmy says lolwut?

Mitch tanking to get Bynum says lolwut?

[Blackjack]

You never asked for my opinion.

Common sense to me says they were better off with Thorpe than Drexler.

You say common sense says they were better off with Drexler. I'm trying to get a simple answer from you.

I just did. You finally contributed something.

Common sense tells you the Rockets made a bad trade.

It's cuter how evasive and butthurt you get over extremely simple questions.

What's evasive about stating an opinion? Adorable and so very special, you are.

I'm just trying to figure out what common sense you are using that says the Rockets would not have won again if not for Drexler coming.

Feel free to say "it's just my opinion" and leave it at that.

See above.

so why do you think the 1995-1996 Rockets squad had a similarly mediocre regular season record before getting swept in the 2nd round by Seattle?

Because team play, athleticism and age isn't static? Maybe because there are no guarantees on a trade's end result, in it fulfilling the goals you wish for it to achieve (being a better matchup)?

Good communication involves a message that is clear and direct. Reagan's message was always simple and basic enough for the ordinary man to easily understand.

Your posts are verbose and ambiguous. I'm not sure you could hold ducks' jock.

Thanks for nothing but cheap entertainment.

Here ya go, Nancy!

I state opinion.

You rebut with an emoticon after misunderstanding.

I clarify.

You acknowledge, and then pose two separate but related questions.

I've since answered both questions and posed you a question.

You've now answered that question, stating your common sense tells you the Rockets made a bad trade. You think a Rockets team that's braintrust didn't believe it could beat Seattle, San Antonio (and maybe Utah) were wrong and you were/are right on the basis of next year's result.

My common sense tells me to side with the Rockets.

You're welcome, once again. I'm a communicator.

[Rummpd]

http://www.82games.com/lakerskingsgame6.htm


"As a whole, these plays suggest to me the refs were calling the game honestly, if perhaps not well. "

This officiating geek guy rates the dubious Lakers win over the Kings in game 6 leading to a game 7 as not definetely "fixed" but many have claimed it was and whether or not there was bias by one or several refs, it is universaly regarded as one of the worst called playoff games in NBA HX.

Either way, a break here or there or a different call and the Lakers might not be trying to tri-peat again but striving for the first tri-peat in the Jackson era and Kobe would have 4 les the same as Duncan.

Or maybe not even that many if you regard the comments about the LAL getting all the calls in game 7 last year as plausible: http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show....php?p=4429187

(including this classic from BRHornet: "easily in the top 5 ... it looked to be fairly called through the first 3 quarters, then the NBA took over and pushed the Lakers to victory with those twenty-one 4th quarter freebies." or even better from Can't-_be_Faded: I would just like to see ONE PIVOTAL GAME in Kobe's bull career where the Lakers are not total beneficiarys of bull calls. They are always the ones that come out on top of bull officiating and it makes me sick. This league is such a sham."




Now don't get me started about the physically impossible Fisher catch, turn and leap shot 0.4 B.S. but at least due to some kind of karma, LAL did not win it all that year despite having a true dream team lineup.

*&%$ happens and whether or not funny stuff went on any of these years when it always seems the LAL are involved - the LAL hold 5 les in the Duncan era but don't hold your breath LAL fans = Spurs might well get another one before Kobe does suprisingly this year (unless the refs make the Spurs play 5 on 8)!

[Blake]

I just did. You finally contributed something.

Common sense tells you the Rockets made a bad trade.

You whining that I hadn't given my opinion is not the same as asking for it.

Common sense.

What's evasive about stating an opinion? Adorable and so very special, you are.

Nothing is evasive about stating an opinion.

You not answering a simple question is evasive.

Very terrible at communicaton and comprehension you are.

Because team play, athleticism and age isn't static? Maybe because there are no guarantees on a trade's end result, in it fulfilling the goals you wish for it to achieve (being a better matchup)?

Proper reading comprehension would allow you to realize this answers nothing I asked you.

Here ya go, Nancy!

Anyone with common sense will tell you that name-calling is an indication of a poor communicator.

I state opinion.

You rebut with an emoticon after misunderstanding.

I asked a question regarding your seemingly rhetorical question regarding the Rockets after the Drexler trade.

Poor comprehension.

I clarify.

You acknowledge, and then pose two separate but related questions.

I've since answered both questions and posed you a question.

You have not answered the questions directly. If anything you answered the questions with ambiguous questions.

You've now answered that question, stating your common sense tells you the Rockets made a bad trade. You think a Rockets team that's braintrust didn't believe it could beat Seattle, San Antonio (and maybe Utah) were wrong and you were/are right on the basis of next year's result.

My common sense tells me to side with the Rockets.

This does not answer the question, no matter how hard you want it to.

I also think the Rockets "braintrust" thought they made a good trade at the time, but I never asked that. I'm not sure how you think siding with the Rockets answers anything either, but it's funny.

I've already posed the question(s) at a pretty simple, easy to read level, but if you need me to, I'll try to dumb it down for you further. Just ask.

You're welcome, once again. I'm a communicator.

Yes, thanks again for the cheap entertainment. Messageboard butthurt is always fun to watch.

[Blackjack]

"messageboard butthurt"

What have you not comprehended, Blake?

My opinion: The Rockets don't go back-2-without the Drexler trade.

Why? Both the Spurs and Sonics were better teams prior to the trade (why the Rockets made the trade).

I've already given you the rationale as to why they made the trade and that I agreed with it.

Your turn.

[Blake]

My opinion: The Rockets don't go back-2-without the Drexler trade.

Why? Both the Spurs and Sonics were better teams prior to the trade (why the Rockets made the trade).

Your turn.

That reply only explains why you think they made the trade.

I'll ask again:

"What makes you think they couldn't have won a trophy again with Thorpe instead of Clyde?"

So far, all you have really said is that they were better with Drexler based on your common sense.

If that's all you have, great, just say so. Very, very simple.

[Blackjack]

That reply only explains why you think they made the trade.

I'll ask again:

"What makes you think they couldn't have won a trophy again with Thorpe instead of Clyde?"

So far, all you have really said is that they were better with Drexler based on your common sense.

If that's all you have, great, just say so. Very, very simple.

With that rationale, I'll take my being able to point to the Rockets making a blockbuster trade on Feb. 14 as being better evidence they couldn't repeat with Thorpe than your "I think the Rockets could have won a trophy with Thorpe."

This isn't all that hard, Blake. I made my opinion known, you thought it wise to smugly reply and -- as per the usual when our paths cross -- I've had a little fun combating your passive aggressive retorts with plenty of facetious and condescending replies.

And Nancy isn't name-calling, by the way. It's a nickname and moniker earned, deserved and bestowed with great affection.

Tim Duncan is the Big Fundamental because he is both tall and fundamentally sound.

You are Nancy because you're synonymous with the question 'Why?' and would be completely obnoxious if you weren't so adorable.

[smeagol]

I miss Laker Lanny . . .

[Blake]

With that rationale, I'll take my being able to point to the Rockets making a blockbuster trade on Feb. 14 as being better evidence they couldn't repeat with Thorpe than your "I think the Rockets could have won a trophy with Thorpe."

This isn't all that hard, Blake. I made my opinion known, you thought it wise to smugly reply and -- as per the usual when our paths cross -- I've had a little fun combating your passive aggressive retorts with plenty of facetious and condescending replies.

I've basically been asking what you are basing your opinion on.

You have nothing but what you say is common sense because the trade itself makes it so.

And you are getting butthurt instead of just saying that's all you have.

And Nancy isn't name-calling, by the way. It's a nickname and moniker earned, deserved and bestowed with great affection.

It's absolutely name-calling. Nancy is a name and you are calling me that name.

It's also a desperation move by a poor communicator.

You are Nancy because you're synonymous with the question 'Why?' and would be completely obnoxious if you weren't so adorable.

That makes no sense at all.

But you are an extremely poor communicator with weak reasoning skills, so it's also no surprise.

[SequSpur]

you guys are s.

[Blake]

you guys are s.

I agree with Laker fan...Spurs are built (this year) for regular season wins against ty teams. Spurs can't beat LA, Boston, Orlando, Miami or Dallas....Maybe not even the Hornets...but they can still beat all the other ty teams...handily, I might add....

Spurs need a big or two to do something...Period...Timmay is a 100 years old...

Are u mad because nobody responded to this weak post?

Do you require attention like this in real life too?

[SequSpur]

Are u mad because nobody responded to this weak post?

Do you require attention like this in real life too?

i don't require .

And you're a for quoting me...

go search the sequ "quote" topic....

lmao

[Blake]

i don't require .

And you're a for quoting me...

go search the sequ "quote" topic....

lmao

I'm sure it'll say "you're a ".

lmao attention

[Blackjack]

I've basically been asking what you are basing your opinion on.

You have nothing but what you say is common sense because the trade itself makes it so.

Basically? So what are you really asking?

I told you why I believe the Rockets made the trade and that I agreed with the rationale to make the trade. That's not so hard to understand now, is it?

And you are getting butthurt instead of just saying that's all you have.

That's all I have? What more is there to have? You want to provide me with something to suggest my view's wrong and yours is right? Adorable.

It's absolutely name-calling. Nancy is a name and you are calling me that name.

Literally, yes. Just like literally, as in the Rockets would have been in the playoffs and had a statistical chance to go back-to-back, you could say the Rockets could win the le. They wouldn't but they could, hypothetically; and I really hope that's not the basis for your butthurt on this. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you had better things to do with your time.

It's also a desperation move by a poor communicator.

Great communicators know how to elicit the response they wish to receive. You keep coming back for more.

That makes no sense at all.

But you are an extremely poor communicator with weak reasoning skills, so it's also no surprise.

It makes all the sense in the world. But you know that, it's common sense.

Just like no reigning champion has ever made a blockbuster trade with a little more than 2 months left in the season because they believed their team was championship-caliber as is.

I look forward to your reply my sweet, adorable Nancy.

[Blake]

Basically? So what are you really asking?

I told you why I believe the Rockets made the trade and that I agreed with the rationale to make the trade. That's not so hard to understand now, is it?



That's all I have? What more is there to have? You want to provide me with something to suggest my view's wrong and yours is right? Adorable.


Literally, yes. Just like literally, as in the Rockets would have been in the playoffs and had a statistical chance to go back-to-back, you could say the Rockets could win the le. They wouldn't but they could, hypothetically; and I really hope that's not the basis for your butthurt on this. I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you had better things to do with your time.

It makes all the sense in the world. But you know that, it's common sense.

Just like no reigning champion has ever made a blockbuster trade with a little more than 2 months left in the season because they believed their team was championship-caliber as is.

so you are saying that the Rockets were better just because they made a trade in the middle of a season that they won a le, even though they won a le the year before and failed to win a le the year after.

If this is not the case, feel free to ramble on further.

Great communicators know how to elicit the response they wish to receive.

I look forward to your reply my sweet, adorable Nancy.

it appears you aren't trying to elicit anything.

name-calling is a weak, butthurt reflex action.

I am curious to see how many more melt-down posts you are going to post regarding me instead of just talking basketball.

[jjktkk]

so you are saying that the Rockets were better just because they made a trade in the middle of a season that they won a le, even though they won a le the year before and failed to win a le the year after.

If this is not the case, feel free to ramble on further.



it appears you aren't trying to elicit anything.

name-calling is a weak, butthurt reflex action.

I am curious to see how many more melt-down posts you are going to post regarding me instead of just talking basketball.

This is a meltdown post? Man, you need to go read mono or his bff Bump's posts. Those 2 know how to throw down a meltdown.

[Blackjack]

so you are saying that the Rockets were better just because they made a trade in the middle of a season that they won a le, even though they won a le the year before and failed to win a le the year after.

Yes. Absolutely. With-out-a-doubt. I don't speak any other languages, so that's the best I've got.

Question, if I may, what does the year prior and after have to do with the Rockets ability to win in '95? The compe ion the same? The Rockets the same team? Health, age, any other factor the same?

Just wondering . . .

If this is not the case, feel free to ramble on further.

Ramble On, And now's the time, the time is now, to sing my song.
I'm goin' 'round the world, I got to find my girl, on my way.
I've been this way ten years to the day, Ramble On,
Gotta find the queen of all my dreams.

it appears you aren't trying to elicit anything.

Looks can be deceiving. You're still here (and I'm enjoying it).

name-calling is a weak, butthurt reflex action.

Tim Duncan doesn't get butthurt about the Big Fundamental. It's just a nickname, Blake. You should be proud of it. You earned it and were bestowed it legitimately. It wasn't some contrived 'Mamba' or 'STAT' nickname you gave yourself. I mean, how may people are nicknamed Nancy? You can truly be the trend setter Cully always hoped to be.

I am curious to see how many more melt-down posts you are going to post regarding me instead of just talking basketball.

Oh, I'm ready to go EPIC meltdown, Nancy. EPIC.

Thorpe > Drexler

[Blackjack]

Common sense to me says they were better off with Thorpe than Drexler.

He really did say it.

[Mel_13]

This Thorpe/Drexler debate is interesting, but I'm wondering if either of you have an opinion on that whole World Trade Center mosque controversy?

[Blackjack]

This Thorpe/Drexler debate is interesting, but I'm wondering if either of you have an opinion on that whole World Trade Center mosque controversy?

Funny you should ask . . .






























He's a racist.

[Blake]

This is a meltdown post? Man, you need to go read mono or his bff Bump's posts. Those 2 know how to throw down a meltdown.

every now and then mono will melt down, but I've read enough from those two to know they are mostly just trolling around.