Robinson calling out LA; says they are still a few moves from challenging SA

[TD 21]

He only played seven seasons w/o Duncan, of which his ppg dropped from the regular season to the playoffs EVERY year. Way to show up when it matters, Davey..."bu-bu-but he had a bad team!" Yes, the same team that had no problems winning 55-60 games every year in that same WC. Matter of fact, Davey has lost 3 or 4 playoff series where he had HCA.

He's a nice guy. He quotes scripture. He loses playoff games.

Most players ppg drops from the regular season to the playoffs. Check the stats, you'll be surprised at how few players numbers go up and the ones that do are the all time greats (McGrady's an exception, but he was an all time great talent). I never said he had a bad team, I said he lacked a second star, which is indisputable. A great center, in his prime, is all but assured of winning at least 50 games, no matter who's surrounding him. But in the playoffs, history shows that, unless you're '94 Olajuwon or '03 Duncan, you need another star. No, Howard didn't have one either. But here's what he had: the team that would have beaten his was missing their best player in the playoffs and the only other credible team in the conference was even more flawed than his team. Put prime Robinson in his shoes and the Magic still make the Finals.

Say the Spurs never land Duncan, which would have given Robinson 3-5 more prime or near prime seasons as the lead dog and let's presume they bring in someone credible to help him as he ages. Maybe not a true star, just someone who was at least All-Star caliber. You're telling me there wasn't at least a fairly good chance of him getting to a Finals? The Jazz were a very good team, but the West was there for the taking from 97-01.

[DeadlyDynasty]

Most players ppg drops from the regular season to the playoffs. Check the stats, you'll be surprised at how few players numbers go up and the ones that do are the all time greats (McGrady's an exception, but he was an all time great talent). I never said he had a bad team, I said he lacked a second star, which is indisputable. A great center, in his prime, is all but assured of winning at least 50 games, no matter who's surrounding him. But in the playoffs, history shows that, unless you're '94 Olajuwon or '03 Duncan, you need another star. No, Howard didn't have one either. But here's what he had: the team that would have beaten his was missing their best player in the playoffs and the only other credible team in the conference was even more flawed than his team. Put prime Robinson in his shoes and the Magic still make the Finals.

Say the Spurs never land Duncan, which would have given Robinson 3-5 more prime or near prime seasons as the lead dog and let's presume they bring in someone credible to help him as he ages. Maybe not a true star, just someone who was at least All-Star caliber. You're telling me there wasn't at least a fairly good chance of him getting to a Finals? The Jazz were a very good team, but the West was there for the taking from 97-01.

What a complete pile of that post was. Where to begin...

1.

Most players ppg drops from the regular season to the playoffs. Check the stats,

I did. Dream, Malone, Barkley, Ewing, Shaq, and the like all had a number of seasons where their playoff #'s increased. D-Rob had NONE before the Duncan era (and only 2 during it). Not one year did he improve his ppg in the playoffs. Why not?

2. Disqualifying Howards' Finals Run, despite the fact that he had to go on the road to beat the C's and Cavs. The Cavs were 40-1 at home that year, too. D-Rob consistently played in the friendly confines and got ousted nonetheless.

3. lol thinking D-Rob plus (insert player not named Duncan here) has any chance of beating Utah in 97 or 98, as well as the 2000 or 2001 Lakers. Not even God could beat the 2001 Lakers in a series. I'm not even taking into account 1999, b/c that was such a sham of a season. A ing 8th seed was in the Finals...

[TD 21]

What a complete pile of that post was. Where to begin...

1.

I did. Dream, Malone, Barkley, Ewing, Shaq, and the like all had a number of seasons where their playoff #'s increased. D-Rob had NONE before the Duncan era (and only 2 during it). Not one year did he improve his ppg in the playoffs. Why not?

2. Disqualifying Howards' Finals Run, despite the fact that he had to go on the road to beat the C's and Cavs. The Cavs were 40-1 at home that year, too. D-Rob consistently played in the friendly confines and got ousted nonetheless.

3. lol thinking D-Rob plus (insert player not named Duncan here) has any chance of beating Utah in 97 or 98, as well as the 2000 or 2001 Lakers. Not even God could beat the 2001 Lakers in a series. I'm not even taking into account 1999, b/c that was such a sham of a season. A ing 8th seed was in the Finals...

1. You really are dumb. I said "most players", not "most great big men from the 90s". And I didn't say anything about "individual seasons", I was speaking strictly about overall.

2. I'm not disqualifying "Howards' Finals Run"; I'm qualifying it. Just like the Lakers les in '00 (Duncan missed playoffs), '02 (Kings debacle), '09 (Garnett missed playoffs) and '10 (Perkins missed game 7), should be qualified.

3. I said until '01. The '00 Lakers were highly vulnerable, which is why a starless Trail Blazers team had them on the brink (on the road, no less) with a quarter to go. '99 was the season, in particular I was thinking of. But, depending on the quality of the sidekick, I don't think it would have been out of the question at all for the Spurs to have made it in '97 or '98. The Jazz had exactly zero reliable centers last time I checked.

I'm not making excuses for Robinson (early in my time on this board, I was often made out to be anti-Robinson), I'm speaking to the reality of the situation. And the reality is, he didn't have nearly as many chances as a lead player as many seem to think and he had probably the worst supporting cast out of any other elite player during that time.

[DeadlyDynasty]

1. You really are dumb. I said "most players", not "most great big men from the 90s". And I didn't say anything about "individual seasons", I was speaking strictly about overall.

2. I'm not disqualifying "Howards' Finals Run"; I'm qualifying it. Just like the Lakers les in '00 (Duncan missed playoffs), '02 (Kings debacle), '09 (Garnett missed playoffs) and '10 (Perkins missed game 7), should be qualified.

3. I said until '01. The '00 Lakers were highly vulnerable, which is why a starless Trail Blazers team had them on the brink (on the road, no less) with a quarter to go. '99 was the season, in particular I was thinking of. But, depending on the quality of the sidekick, I don't think it would have been out of the question at all for the Spurs to have made it in '97 or '98. The Jazz had exactly zero reliable centers last time I checked.

I'm not making excuses for Robinson (early in my time on this board, I was often made out to be anti-Robinson), I'm speaking to the reality of the situation. And the reality is, he didn't have nearly as many chances as a lead player as many seem to think and he had probably the worst supporting cast out of any other elite player during that time.

No, you're the epitome of the quintessential D-Rob nuthugging apologist. How dense are you? Why would you compare Robinson to non-bigmen, when that's what he was?

If you want to play the qualifying game, let's go:

1999*
2003 (Dirk injured)
2007 (Donaghy, WCSF)


Move on, got.

[therealtruth]

1. You really are dumb. I said "most players", not "most great big men from the 90s". And I didn't say anything about "individual seasons", I was speaking strictly about overall.

2. I'm not disqualifying "Howards' Finals Run"; I'm qualifying it. Just like the Lakers les in '00 (Duncan missed playoffs), '02 (Kings debacle), '09 (Garnett missed playoffs) and '10 (Perkins missed game 7), should be qualified.

3. I said until '01. The '00 Lakers were highly vulnerable, which is why a starless Trail Blazers team had them on the brink (on the road, no less) with a quarter to go. '99 was the season, in particular I was thinking of. But, depending on the quality of the sidekick, I don't think it would have been out of the question at all for the Spurs to have made it in '97 or '98. The Jazz had exactly zero reliable centers last time I checked.

I'm not making excuses for Robinson (early in my time on this board, I was often made out to be anti-Robinson), I'm speaking to the reality of the situation. And the reality is, he didn't have nearly as many chances as a lead player as many seem to think and he had probably the worst supporting cast out of any other elite player during that time.

I don't think you have to apologize for 2. Howard's le run in '10 was mainly due to the Magic getting on fire from 3 point range. You'll beat any team if you get on fire from 3pt range.

[TD 21]

No, you're the epitome of the quintessential D-Rob nuthugging apologist. How dense are you? Why would you compare Robinson to non-bigmen, when that's what he was?

If you want to play the qualifying game, let's go:

1999*
2003 (Dirk injured)
2007 (Donaghy, WCSF)


Move on, got.

If some think I'm anti-Robinson and one idiot thinks I'm the opposite, then I must be neutral. I was comparing him to stars and superstars in general. And the reality is, a lot of their numbers don't go up in the playoffs.

if '99 is a *, then so is '12. It's funny, I haven't heard anyone say that. Why? Because one of the glamor teams, with a glamor star won it.

Not "Dirk injured" . You're right, that's every bit the same as the best players on the reigning champs (and teams that had destroyed the Lakers the previous season) sitting out the playoffs entirely.

Even if Donaghy messed around, it was one game. Not damn near every game, like the Kings series (and nowhere near as blatant and overt).

So basically, you're copping out and you concede.

[DeadlyDynasty]

If some think I'm anti-Robinson and one idiot thinks I'm the opposite, then I must be neutral. I was comparing him to stars and superstars in general. And the reality is, a lot of their numbers don't go up in the playoffs.

if '99 is a *, then so is '12. It's funny, I haven't heard anyone say that. Why? Because one of the glamor teams, with a glamor star won it.

Not "Dirk injured" . You're right, that's every bit the same as the best players on the reigning champs (and teams that had destroyed the Lakers the previous season) sitting out the playoffs entirely.

Even if Donaghy messed around, it was one game. Not damn near every game, like the Kings series (and nowhere near as blatant and overt).

So basically, you're copping out and you concede.

You wouldn't be so gung-ho to defend his honor if you weren't a DRob nuthugger. Read the thread. You're guilty as charged. I've never seen so many excuses for underwhelming playoff performances before.

Now this can go one of two ways:

1. I can continue to make you look bad by providing stats that Robinson was less than his peers in the playoffs

or

2. You can just stfu and save what little dignity you have left. if memory serves right, you're already short on that after LJ tore you a new ass on this board a couple months back

[TD 21]

You wouldn't be so gung-ho to defend his honor if you weren't a DRob nuthugger. Read the thread. You're guilty as charged. I've never seen so many excuses for underwhelming playoff performances before.

Now this can go one of two ways:

1. I can continue to make you look bad by providing stats that Robinson was less than his peers in the playoffs

or

2. You can just stfu and save what little dignity you have left. if memory serves right, you're already short on that after LJ tore you a new ass on this board a couple months back

I'm not "defending his honor", you idiot. I'm speaking to the reality of the situation. See, if you said "he wasn't a great compe or or on court leader", I'd have been fine with that. But saying or inferring that Howard is better because of one Finals appearance (without factoring anything in) is just plain stupid. I'm not surprised though; I wouldn't expect anything else from a Lakers fan.

You're right in saying that this can go one of two ways, but wrong in the two ways you detailed (and wrong about what LJ supposedly did; I don't even know what you're referring to)

1. I can continue to make you look like the dumb Lakers fan you are

or

2. You can run along back downstairs with all of the other vermin.

[DeadlyDynasty]

I'm not "defending his honor", you idiot. I'm speaking to the reality of the situation. See, if you said "he wasn't a great compe or or on court leader", I'd have been fine with that. But saying or inferring that Howard is better because of one Finals appearance (without factoring anything in) is just plain stupid. I'm not surprised though; I wouldn't expect anything else from a Lakers fan.

You're right in saying that this can go one of two ways, but wrong in the two ways you detailed (and wrong about what LJ supposedly did; I don't even know what you're referring to)

1. I can continue to make you look like the dumb Lakers fan you are

or

2. You can run along back downstairs with all of the other vermin.

D-Rob failed to ever lead a team to the promised land. All your posturing and excuse-making making won't change that. Cry yourself to sleep if it helps.

[TD 21]

D-Rob failed to ever lead a team to the promised land. All your posturing and excuse-making making won't change that. Cry yourself to sleep if it helps.

You're quickly moving into the pantheon of dumbest people I've ever encountered on a message board.

That wasn't the argument (that's not even an argument; it's a fact). The argument was whether Howard is better than Robinson and whether Robinson was capable of leading a team to the Finals. I annihilated you, you predictably copped out and now you're predictably prolonging this and digging the hole deeper. Give it up.

[DeadlyDynasty]

You're quickly moving into the pantheon of dumbest people I've ever encountered on a message board.

That wasn't the argument (that's not even an argument; it's a fact). The argument was whether Howard is better than Robinson and whether Robinson was capable of leading a team to the Finals. I annihilated you, you predictably copped out and now you're predictably prolonging this and digging the hole deeper. Give it up.

Jesus Christ you are one stupid ing chud-baby.

You lost all credibility when you uttered this:

Say the Spurs never land Duncan, which would have given Robinson 3-5 more prime or near prime seasons as the lead dog and let's presume they bring in someone credible to help him as he ages. Maybe not a true star, just someone who was at least All-Star caliber. You're telling me there wasn't at least a fairly good chance of him getting to a Finals? The Jazz were a very good team, but the West was there for the taking from 97-01.[/

Talk about pantheon of all-time dumbest ever said on this board. Kill yourself with a hammer.

[callo1]

I don't know how anyone could compare Howard's 2010 Finals appearance to D'robs situation...the league was a different animal back then.

When in his prime, David was in one of the smallest markets in the league during the pre-CBA era which made it harder to compete as a small market team than it is today due to less parity.

Using that same flawed logic you can make the similar arguements about Jordan's rise to a championship, which shows how insane that arguement is to begin with.

Example:

Jordan took the Bulls to their championship run only after the Celtics, Lakers, and more importantly the Pistons had all become teams with aging players well past their prime.


Take the Shaq/Kobe era Laker championship teams, remove Shaq and put a prime Robinson on those teams and you think D'rob doesn't get those rings?

[DeadlyDynasty]

Take the Shaq/Kobe era Laker championship teams, remove Shaq and put a prime Robinson on those teams and you think D'rob doesn't get those rings?

[callo1]

Gripping and insightful

[TD 21]

Jesus Christ you are one stupid ing chud-baby.

The same dumb son of a that's desperate to come off as some cool, laid back guy, is losing it over the fact that he can't even remember what he was arguing about on a message board. What a loser.

You lost all credibility when you uttered this:



Talk about pantheon of all-time dumbest ever said on this board. Kill yourself with a hammer.

It's not at all dumb. The West was wide open from 97-01. '99, in particular, if you gave Robinson an All-Star caliber sidekick (other than Duncan, obviously), they'd have had a realistic shot at reaching the Finals. That doesn't mean I think they'd have beaten the Jazz in '97 or '98, though (or the Lakers in '00, for that matter).

[DeadlyDynasty]

It's not at all dumb. The West was wide open from 97-01. '99, in particular, if you gave Robinson an All-Star caliber sidekick (other than Duncan, obviously), they'd have had a realistic shot at reaching the Finals. That doesn't mean I think they'd have beaten the Jazz in '97 or '98, though (or the Lakers in '00, for that matter).

It's incredibly dumb. So much so that you finished up that paragraph with a disclaimer.

[TD 21]

It's incredibly dumb. So much so that you finished up that paragraph with a disclaimer.

Think of it this way: How many times in league history has an elite center not made the Finals as a lead player? Robinson is the only one that comes to mind and as I said, he only had seven chances and he had no other star on his team in that time. So it stands to reason that if he'd had 3-5 more chances and an All-Star caliber sidekick, there's a pretty good chance he eventually would have broken through.

And it wasn't a disclaimer; it was clarification, because you seemed to take my saying "pretty good chance from 97-01" and "the Jazz had exactly zero reliable centers" as saying the Spurs would have beaten them in '97 or '98.

[ohmwrecker]

The same dumb son of a that's desperate to come off as some cool, laid back guy, is losing it over the fact that he can't even remember what he was arguing about on a message board. What a loser.

DD, you gonna answer these charges, tbh?

[ambchang]

Deadly Dynasty trolling and demonstrating that after 15 years, he still couldn't figure out a big man needs a PG.

Even one of the best Laker of all time, Magic, said it as such. Try googling "Magic, Ralph Sampson"

[TDMVPDPOY]

Deadly Dynasty trolling and demonstrating that after 15 years, he still couldn't figure out a big man needs a PG.

Even one of the best Laker of all time, Magic, said it as such. Try googling "Magic, Ralph Sampson"

avery johnson was a fkn joke of a starting pg

[Phenomanul]

DD simply has a bone to pick... one that the numbers don't really corroborate...

[Drom John]

Count the rings.

Playoff percentages:
Steve Kerr 66.88
Robert Horry 62.28

[Sean Cagney]

lol every nba champion in history has to be alittle lucky, deadly dynasty talks about our les as if they were given and we werent the BEST team in the league that year. there are NO astericks and every team wins a le because they avoid an injury where a team might have an injury, or avoid a team that could beat them. its nothing new. the spurs won those les fair and square and in fact could have had more if r.c didnt trade luis scola for some skittles. every team has to have alittle luck on their side when it comes to winning les, whether its a certain team getting an injury to open it up or u avoiding a team that gives u trouble. it happens every time.

Common sense would tell you this here, good post and only an idiot would not get this!

[Sean Cagney]

DD simply has a bone to pick... one that the numbers don't really corroborate...

LOL at clowns who try to say Kobe is near MJ after that there, seriously......... WOW it's just so much difference between them in the playoffs and finals!

[lakerhaterade]

Common sense would tell you this here, good post and only an idiot would not get this!

DD be trollin tbh...