Reply With Quote
You talking about the team with a 28 yr old Shaq putting up 28.7/12.7 in 39.5 mpg? Yeah, that was a good team.
Same record as the 2001 Lakers.
preaseason
You talking about the team with a 28 yr old Shaq putting up 28.7/12.7 in 39.5 mpg? Yeah, that was a good team.
but what color swan was he?
21_ tings!
This changes everything!
Same record as the 2001 Lakers.
up all night trying to convince yourself everything will be alright
LOL trying to convince yourself that a team with a 10 years older Kobe, 10 years older Fish, and a very thin bench is even close to the caliber of the 2001 Lakers.Same record as the 2001 Lakers.
LOL obviously not watching LA that closely this season!
Same record as the 2001 Lakers.
Wait, they went to the playoffs with this record? Holy we are just a little over the halfway mark. Damn they suck.
lakers are boring
Are you trying to convice us or yourself?
Seems like yourself
Same record as the 2001 Lakers.
Pronounced "prayseason"
Did the 2001 Lakers lose to a 10 win team?
This makes sense, because Andrew Bynum is just as good as a prime Shaquille O'Neal. And the bench is just as good, too.
lol equivocation
Just said the same thing in the NBA forum. Blessings wasn't old enough to remember it so I'll give him a pass.
29 year old Fisher
23 year old Kobe
28 year old Shaquille
not to mention Robert Horry in that team
yeah, that theory makes sense
That's why they lost to Cavs, if they would win it they wouldn't match that record
You can't have it both ways. You can't be in the boat of "regular season = worthless" and then backpedal to "but just in case the regular season does mean something, the Lakers did this before..."Same record as the 2001 Lakers.
You need to pick a side. If you really don't care about the regular season, then don't create a thread showing a Lakers team (from 10 years ago - with the 2 best players in the world at the time) with that reg season record going on to win a championship...if the regular season doesn't mean anything neither does the similarity in records.
Yikes the Lakers have over twice as many losses as the Spurs alreadyThey're even trailing the ancient Boston Celtics.
@johnhollinger No team has ever won a championship after losing to a club that lost 26 straight games.
lol Lakers from today's Daily Dime:
(from Lakers homer J.A. Adande)
I'm big on historical precedent, but the ones I keep seeing in my Twitter timeline don't apply here.
Some still cling to the 2001 Lakers team that was a pedestrian 48-26 before winning the last eight games of the regular season and 15 of 16 playoff games to capture the championship. At their peak, before their own excellence contributed to a nine-day, rhythm-disrupting break, they beat the No. 1 seed San Antonio Spurs by a combined 68 points in the final two games of the Western Conference finals. I got Kobe, Derek Fisher and Rick Fox talking about that run a couple of years later and they quickly concluded that it would never be duplicated -- at least not by them. Teams just don't play that well for that long. Might as well wait for UCLA to win another seven consecutive NCAA tournaments.
Kobe and Fisher are 10 years older. Pau Gasol isn't going to break out a pair of 40-point, 20-rebound games the way Shaq did to start the Sacramento series that year. Just leave 2001 alone.
the only difference is Kobe being 10 years older and the SPURS are now 4 times Champions.
Has anyone looked at SA's starting lineup in 2001?
Tim Duncan
David Robinson
... ok, good so far, but ...
Antonio Daniels
Terry Porter
Danny Ferry (g1-2) / Derek Anderson (g3-4)
How about that deep Spurs bench? You had ..
an aging Avery Johnson
a decrepit Sean Elliott in the last games of his career
Malik Rose
Steve Kerr
Samaki freakin' Walker
Shawnelle Scott - WTF was this?
LMFAO!! Yes, 2011 and 2001 have so many parallels ...
Um, and the best player in the NBA is no longer playing for the Lakers..
As for the 2001 Spurs, they were extremely overrated, as was the rest of LA's compe ion in the West..this version of the Spurs, the current Mavs, and the Celtics/Heat are better than any team LA played during that season..you could make the argument that a few other teams were just as good..
Lol Blessings, posting upstairs early in the morning.
That team had a prime and supremely dominant Shaq and a Kobe entering his prime = end of discussion. This is also the team that was supposed to along with the Heat threaten 70 games - the Heat at least have played well in stretchs but except for the cupcake schedule the first part of the year Lakers to date are just Frauds
LMAO lakerfan posting this at 5AM West Coast time
er coudn't get any shut eye
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
