Reply With Quote
Artest was pretty compe ive on that put back. I thought Collins was gonna have a double coronary:::"NOOOOOOOOOOO!"
tee, hee.
The main thing is those teammates have no desire to fight for Kobe's 6th ring.
Phil is gone.
Fisher is old.
Gasol is tired.
Artest is uncompe ive.
Kobe can't manage the buzzard beater.
Odom hates Kobe.
Bynum is injury-prone.
Bench is thin.
Timber~
Artest was pretty compe ive on that put back. I thought Collins was gonna have a double coronary:::"NOOOOOOOOOOO!"
tee, hee.
what dynasty?
going through Utah, Houston, Denver and Orlando makes them a dynasty???
2000-2010 (decade)what dynasty?
going through Utah, Houston, Denver and Orlando makes them a dynasty???
5 lobs with with one back to back?......yeah, I'd say it's a dynasty no matter who they had to go through.
sorry it pains you but math dont lie....
the Shaq daddy laker dynasty ended in 03.
since then there has been no dynasty.
Yes, Artest WAS pretty compe ive....
Thanks,that is just what I mean.
Wouldn't that be three back-to-backs?2000-2010 (decade)
5 lobs with with one back to back?......yeah, I'd say it's a dynasty no matter who they had to go through.
sorry it pains you but math dont lie....
see what you did there. YOU are picking your own time frame/period to define a dynasty. don't work like that che....sorry.
how bout this;
The Lakers have won the most championships the last 30 years than any other team. how bout dem apples? see what i did? picked my own period.
don't be silly.
you define a dynasty by a period of time (traditionally in sports it's by decades) not by who played in them. don't pick your own period silly...
1- 3 peat and one back to back..... = 5
your right...
partly correct. 3 peat Shaq team was a dynasty.
that was over in 03.
again
going through Utah, Houston, Denver and Orlando makes them a dynasty???
Going through Cleveland makes San Antonio a champion???
How about defeating the defending champion Pistons in 2005, the same team that make the Lakers their in 2004.
not a hard concept to grasp really che.
what was over in 03? I didn't know decades ended in 3....
one more time for ya....2000-2010 = Lakers L-A-K-E-R-S won 5 of them, hence making them the dynasty of the first decade of this century...
Spurs can be considered a dynasty too, notwithstanding not repeating.
I guess lakerfans still in shock from the loss.
not a hard concept to grasp really che.
what was over in 03? I didn't know decades ended in 3....
one more time for ya....2000-2010 = Lakers L-A-K-E-R-S won 5 of them, hence making them the dynasty of the first decade of this century...
National Basketball Association
Minneapolis Lakers 1948 to 1954 (5 championships between 1949 and 1954)[39][40]
Boston Celtics 1956 to 1986 (16 NBA les in 30 years overall. 26 winning seasons, 20 division les, 18 conference les, including 11 championships in 13 years from 1957–69)[4][41][42]
Los Angeles Lakers of 1979 to 1991 led by Magic Johnson and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. (5 NBA championships, 10 Division les, 9 conference championships, 12 winning seasons)[42]
Detroit Pistons of 1987 to 1991 led by Isiah Thomas and the Bad Boys. (5 straight Conference finals appearances ('87 to '91) 3 conference championships ('88, '89, and '90) and NBA championships back to back ('89 and '90)) [42]
Chicago Bulls of 1989 to 1998 led by Michael Jordan. (6 NBA championships in 8 seasons, 2 sets of three consecutive championships ('91, '92, '93, '96, '97, '98), 6 division les in 8 seasons, and hold best regular season record in NBA history (72-10) during the '95-96 season).[4][42]
Los Angeles Lakers of 1999 to 2004, led by Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal. Won 4 Western Conference championships in 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2004 and 3 consecutive NBA championships in 2000, 2001, and 2002, including the best postseason record in NBA history in 2001 (15-1).[42]
San Antonio Spurs of 1998 to 2008 led by Tim Duncan. (4 NBA championships (1999, 2003, '05, '07) in 9 seasons) are considered a dynasty by some,[42][43][44] but not by others[45][46] because they did not win consecutive les.
i think being in 3 finals on a row took a toll. You dont agree?The main thing is those teammates have no desire to fight for Kobe's 6th ring.
Phil is gone.
Fisher is old.
Gasol is tired.
Artest is uncompe ive.
Kobe can't manage the buzzard beater.
Odom hates Kobe.
Bynum is injury-prone.
Bench is thin.
Timber~
Winning in international compe ion took its toll too
The Lakers from 2000-2002 were a dynasty, no way a three-peat isn't. But you can't call just a back-to-back a dynasty because everyone will agree that Hakeem's Rox weren't a dynasty. So to say the Lakers from 2000-2010 were a dynasty is crap, because the 2009-2010 le teams only share Kobe, Fisher (lol), and Phil. While Kobe remained, the Lakers of the early decade were Shaq's teams, clearly. And having the most dominant and unguardable center ever really helped Kobe and the rest of his teammates.
This recent run was more like a herpes flare-up.
Yeah, because them Pacer, Sixer, Net, and Magic teams were ing staaaaaacked brah
Let's see the teams the Spurs beat:Yeah, because them Pacer, Sixer, Net, and Magic teams were ing staaaaaacked brah
1999: New York
2003: New Jersey (not stacked according to you, but your team had to go 6 games)
2005: Detroit (the only one of significance)
2007: Cleveland
Anything more to show for?
1999: T-Wolves, Blazers, swept Kobe and Shaq
2003: Made Kobe and Shaq cry
2005: Stomped the Pistons that raped you the previous year
2007: Phoenix Suns that raped your rapist
The East was weak as until 2004 and the Cavs and Heat were terrible Finals compe ion. But the compe ion the Spurs faced in the West was pretty damn fierce, you cannot deny.
2001: 111-72 111-82 skunkage. Nuff said
2002: Boring as the Spurs 4-1 series win
2004: 0.4
2008:
it's done cause there's nobody left to coach kobe
2001: 111-72 111-82 skunkage. Nuff said
2002: Boring as the Spurs 4-1 series win
2004: 0.4
2008:
Two of those years neither of our teams won the le, so it's rather irrelevant.
2001/2002 we got rapedPERIOD. Not even going to defend that (our team outside of Tim was pretty damn old and washed up though). But don't forget the league gifted the Lakers that series versus the Kings. Only LA fans think they won that fair and squre.
2004: Lakers get massively owned with 4 all-time greats
2008: lol game 6
I can play this game all day bro.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
