*** on any championships won by the Celtics, Heat, and Lakers.

[djohn2oo8]

Son I guarantee if the Hornets back in Charlotte won a le in 1999, you would be running around proclaiming 1 ring got.

[JamStone]

An asterisk does absolutely nothing except to those who choose to allow it to let them feel butthurt. It doesn't take away the championship. So who cares? It's like when Spurs fans try to get Laker fans upset by saying the Celtics would have won if Perkins didn't get injured. So what? Perkins did get injured. The NBA doesn't take the trophy back and give it to the Celtics for last season. And they don't take away the 1999 le from the Spurs.

Moreover, the 1999 championship may have been legitimately an asterisk if not for 2003. If the Spurs never won another le, then I think it would be more of a sore nerve for Spurs fan. But the core of the 1999 le team won again. And Duncan won two more times after that. The other championships, especially 2003, ultimately legitimized the 1999 le.

But back to what I said first, even if the other les didn't legitimize 1999, who cares? The Spurs still won it. And no one can take it away.

[ohmwrecker]

Jam . . . goods . . . /thread.

[Pelicans78]

LOL Spur fans for getting trolled by BR. If BR's remark didn't bother them or think it was possibly true, they wouldn't respond. LOL World's Finest.

[The_Worlds_finest]

U think some pussy who uses the term sons, after every post bothers me? The hornets claim to fame is losing in a game seven to the spurs (oh and I think a mighty divison le). A le on a shorten season is better then no le and top it off most likely never going to le period. Face it the best that can ever happen for ur franchise is to move, at least with a move to seattle they can claim a le by default.

[Pelicans78]

U think some pussy who uses the term sons, after every post bothers me? The hornets claim to fame is losing in a game seven to the spurs (oh and I think a mighty divison le). A le on a shorten season is better then no le and top it off most likely never going to le period. Face it the best that can ever happen for ur franchise is to move, at least with a move to seattle they can claim a le by default.

Trolled again mister homerism. Stop fooling yourself. I own you and if you had a clue Seattle ain't getting a team until they get a new arena. Dip

[Harry Callahan]

Tanking for a #1 draft pick = classy move

Dumbass Laker fans keep harping on SA supposedly tanking the season to get Duncan when Robinson was legitimately injured with a broken foot and knee problems. 2nd best player Sean Elliott was out with knee problems as well. There was no guarantee of Duncan anyway.

Tanking could also be a more legit consideration with dumping contracts and players to get a big salary slot in 1996 to sign Shaquille O'Neal without providing any compensation to Orlando

The Lakers have never had to rebuild in a legitimate way in 40 years. They could always get a HOF player on the cheap.

Cram it Laker"fan". This subject is old and tired.

[Harry Callahan]

An asterisk does absolutely nothing except to those who choose to allow it to let them feel butthurt. It doesn't take away the championship. So who cares? It's like when Spurs fans try to get Laker fans upset by saying the Celtics would have won if Perkins didn't get injured. So what? Perkins did get injured. The NBA doesn't take the trophy back and give it to the Celtics for last season. And they don't take away the 1999 le from the Spurs.

Moreover, the 1999 championship may have been legitimately an asterisk if not for 2003. If the Spurs never won another le, then I think it would be more of a sore nerve for Spurs fan. But the core of the 1999 le team won again. And Duncan won two more times after that. The other championships, especially 2003, ultimately legitimized the 1999 le.

But back to what I said first, even if the other les didn't legitimize 1999, who cares? The Spurs still won it. And no one can take it away.

When a team goes 15-2 on a playoff run after winning 39 of 50, sweeping the Lakers (with Shaq and Kobe) and Portland (a stout team too) there is no fluke about it. If a team cannot get its stuff together after 50 or 60 games, then that's their problem.

[ALVAREZ6]

When a team goes 15-2 on a playoff run after winning 39 of 50, sweeping the Lakers (with Shaq and Kobe) and Portland (a stout team too) there is no fluke about it. If a team cannot get its stuff together after 50 or 60 games, then that's their problem.

/thread

[DMC]

LOL Spur fans for getting trolled by BR. If BR's remark didn't bother them or think it was possibly true, they wouldn't respond. LOL World's Finest.

I understand you feast on . If you respond, there must be some truth to it.

[DMC]

When a team goes 15-2 on a playoff run after winning 39 of 50, sweeping the Lakers (with Shaq and Kobe) and Portland (a stout team too) there is no fluke about it. If a team cannot get its stuff together after 50 or 60 games, then that's their problem.

But... but... but...

The Flakers were still in regular season mode! That's not fair!

[jjktkk]

Trolled again mister homerism. Stop fooling yourself. I own you and if you had a clue Seattle ain't getting a team until they get a new arena. Dip

A Spur fan a homer on ST. The horror of it all. .

[Seventyniner]

Wait...by everything I've read on this board the regular season doesn't matter.

The Spurs went through a full playoff slate in 1999.

Therefore, that season was no different than any other. Right?

[TE]

Wait...by everything I've read on this board the regular season doesn't matter.

The Spurs went through a full playoff slate in 1999.

Therefore, that season was no different than any other. Right?

It wasn't different. Just because it was 20 games shorter than other seasons didn't cause any of the NBA compe ion to be devalued. In fact, it worked to the advantage of teams because it allowed for fewer injuries to occur if the season would be at regular length.


BR is a re ed poster who anyone can get a laugh out of.

[TE]

Can't believe more people haven't dove into this discussion. I guess its a sign that collusion is becoming a widely accepted phenomenon. If the Melo for Bynum trade goes down, I rest my case and wait for any of you all to support it.

[LnGrrrR]

Can't believe more people haven't dove into this discussion. I guess its a sign that collusion is becoming a widely accepted phenomenon. If the Melo for Bynum trade goes down, I rest my case and wait for any of you all to support it.

It's probably because it's a stupid thread.

[cobbler]

Can't believe more people haven't dove into this discussion. I guess its a sign that collusion is becoming a widely accepted phenomenon. If the Melo for Bynum trade goes down, I rest my case and wait for any of you all to support it.

Why? Where does collusion come from in with a Melo for Bynum trade? Where's the illegality? The deception? You should grab yourself a dictionary.

[TE]

It's probably because it's a stupid thread.

Yeah, I'd expect a response like this from a fan who follows one of the teams who blatantly colluded.

[cobbler]

Dumbass Laker fans keep harping on SA supposedly tanking the season to get Duncan when Robinson was legitimately injured with a broken foot and knee problems. 2nd best player Sean Elliott was out with knee problems as well. There was no guarantee of Duncan anyway.

DRob was cleared to play and left out. Nice try. It was a calculated and IMO the right and smart move. Of course there was no guarantee to get Duncan but the odds sure improve. You win 3 more games your odds would have gone down roughly 20%. Again, nice try.

It was a tank job. Everyone knows it and it paid off big time. Be happy!

[TE]

Why? Where does collusion come from in with a Melo for Bynum trade? Where's the illegality? The deception? You should grab yourself a dictionary.

Check yourself. Collusion doesn't equate to illegality, but to inequality and fairness. I never implied for it to be illegal or deceptive, you should put that thesaurus down.

[cobbler]

Check yourself. Collusion doesn't equate to illegality, but to inequality and fairness. I never implied for it to be illegal or deceptive, you should put that thesaurus down.

wrong again!

col·lu·sion   /kəˈluʒən/ Show Spelled
[kuh-loo-zhuhn] Show IPA

–noun
1. a secret agreement, especially for fraudulent or treacherous purposes; conspiracy: Some of his employees were acting in collusion to rob him.
2. Law . a secret understanding between two or more persons to gain something illegally, to defraud another of his or her rights, or to appear as adversaries though in agreement: collusion of husband and wife to obtain a divorce.

[TE]

DRob was cleared to play and left out. Nice try. It was a calculated and IMO the right and smart move. Of course there was no guarantee to get Duncan but the odds sure improve. You win 3 more games your odds would have gone down roughly 20%. Again, nice try.

It was a tank job. Everyone knows it and it paid off big time. Be happy!

There was no tank job. The team that year was plagued by injuries and a woeful roster outside of D Rob. It's not like the Spurs of that year could've competed with the they had.

Anyone who attempts to believe the Spurs tanked that year is re ed.

[TE]

wrong again!

col·lu·sion   /kəˈluʒən/ Show Spelled
[kuh-loo-zhuhn] Show IPA

–noun
1. a secret agreement, especially for fraudulent or treacherous purposes; conspiracy: Some of his employees were acting in collusion to rob him.
2. Law . a secret understanding between two or more persons to gain something illegally, to defraud another of his or her rights, or to appear as adversaries though in agreement: collusion of husband and wife to obtain a divorce.

The term collusion, as it's surfaced this year, does not follow the definition given in this online dictionary. Words have relative meaning. Collusion in the NBA implies star players joining a team--completely ignoring the concept of fair play. For a fan of a franchise like yours, I am not surprised you argue against me. Deep down inside you know your team is bought out. The Lakers are team full of es who have signed on to ride the ship to a championship. How much for pussified can an organization be?

[cobbler]

There was no tank job. The team that year was plagued by injuries and a woeful roster outside of D Rob. It's not like the Spurs of that year could've competed with the they had.

Anyone who attempts to believe the Spurs tanked that year is re ed.

Say's the guy who doesnt even know the definition of collusion yet uses it in an argument.

The Spurs decided to shut Drob down when he was cleared to play. They gave up on the season and increased theirs odds in the lotto bg time. It was a great and smart move by the Spurs brass. If you don't wish to call it a tank job.. ok. Us re s know better!

[cobbler]

The term collusion, as it's surfaced this year, does not follow the definition given in this online dictionary. Words have relative meaning. Collusion in the NBA implies star players joining a team--completely ignoring the concept of fair play. For a fan of a franchise like yours, I am not surprised you argue against me. Deep down inside you know your team is bought out. The Lakers are team full of es who have signed on to ride the ship to a championship. How much for pussified can an organization be?

Awwwwww is someone getting upset? Now that you cant argue the points you need to go into the name calling and team smack! Good for you.

Regardless, you are wrong. As it surfaces this year with the Miami fiasco is no different. The collusion was the fact that the 3 conspired years ago in secret and illegally agreed to join up this year and that Miami "possibly" was in on it all along. The collusion wasnt the result that had a stacked or "fair play" team, it was the process. The secrecy. The illegality.