Talk about idiots. Do you still stand by what you said last year (scroll down to my sig if you don't remember, or are you trying to block it out of your mind?)?
Still having your Dirk-gasms?
Marc Gasol, who was involved in that Pau trade is basically a physical version of Pau, is only 24 years old and will be an all star in no time, book it. The Lakers also traded two first round picks and expiring contracts that Memphis desperately wanted. That trade made perfect sense for Memphis and isn't nearly as one sided as everyone likes to believe. In one year Marc > Pau.
I've never seen anyone classify the beginning of a decade from the last year of the previous decade.
The first season of the decade should start in 2000.
2000 LA
2001 LA
2002 LA
2003 SAS
2004 DP
2005 SAS
2006 MH
2007 SAS
2008 BC
So i think it was la lakers and the san antonio spurs team of the decade.
Two first round picks that are late-first rounders. Those are pretty worthless. Expiring contracts to sign who exactly? Waiting for 2010? Well no ones going to wanna come to Memphis. Don't even tell me Marc Gasol is better than Pau Gasol. Now you're just talking out of your ass.
I agree. I think you start the decade on the 2000-2001 season. You start counting at 1 to 10....not 0-10. 99-00 season is the end of the last decade IMO.
So I guess having gaps between championships would take the Spurs and Lakers out of the equation, but wait Lakers have the only three-peat this decade so they're back in it.
I'd have to mostly agree. I'd go with les being the ultimate yardstick. In the case of a tie I'd go with overall winning percentage, both season and playoffs as the tiebreaker.According to Spurfans: les > anything else. So if the Lakers win 4 this decade, it's theirs. I mean, you always hear them boast about 4 les
If the Lakers win this year (which I'm now rooting for), no contest. If not, it's destined to be a never ending debate. Both the Lakers and Spurs have good arguments as it currently sits. Personally, I don't know and I'm too tired to put a -ton of thought into it.
If you (the general "you", not you personally) argue the trade based on personnel only, LA had the clear advantage in the trade. But Memphis apparently got what they wanted with the draft picks and the expiring contracts so any argument is moot in my opinion.
Thanks for that tidbit....my view...both teams got in done multiple times within the ten year period from 1999 through 2009 so I don't view one as being necessarily better than the other.
Exactly. What an extraordinary piece of "luck" that trade was for the Lakers.
I don't think there's a conspirarcy, but it is interesting how different the NBA's business model is different from the other leagues.
I really don't think Stern wants parity, nor, going by the TV ratings, does the average/casual fan. They want to tune in to watch another Bulls/Jordan scenario - which is what they might be getting, as the Lakers seem to be poised to run off a string of les, and Kobe will be enshrined as Jordan jr.
Simple narratives sell.
Last edited by Capt Bringdown; 04-29-2009 at 11:13 PM.
More like team of the millennium
that's the stupidest reasoning ever LA lost to pho 2wice once in the 1st roundWay to the bed in the 1st round SA.
ROTFFLMFAO@UWay to the bed in the 1st round SA.
Team of the decade...LOL
LA Fakers getting their asses kicked big, big, big time by both the Detroit Pistons who the REAL Team of the DECADE (SA Spurs) beat the following year and then by the Boston Celtics last year which alongside of the 2006 Dallas Mavs, were the most embarrASSing loses in NBA Finals history!!! I am laughing my ass off! What a LOSER!!! Better luck next time, kiddo...
Besides we won 4 trophys in that 10 year span and the LA Fakers only won 3. Typical lack of math by people from LA as we see nightly on Jay Leno's Jay Walking where the dumbest people on the planet get exposed by Jay. Do people in LA even go to school???
And your Fakers in the last 10 years have the two most embarrASSing LOSSES in NBA history. Too funny!
BTW, don't you Faker fans have anyone smart enough to create your own sports talk forum? You'd think that with 20 million illiterates in the Los Angeles Metro area that you could put enough gray material to make one brain! Just a thought...oh well.
lol morons, who think the Lakers only have 2 championships, the Lakers won their first le in June 2000, which is in the middle of the year.
Count up to 10. What's the first number you start with? Zero?
Like I said, there is not one complete brain between all 20 million of you LA Idiots. I don't understand how so many can be so dumb!!! A decade is ten (10) years and can start on any date. Thus 1999-2009 is a decade, dumbfuk. Sheeeesh girls, give us Spurs fans a break from your stupidity!
A Decade is:
dec·ade(d
k
d
, d
) KEY
NOUN:
- A period of ten years.
- A group or series of ten.
ETYMOLOGY:
Middle English, a group of ten, from Old French, from Late Latin decas , decad-, from Greek dekas, from deka, ten; see dekin Indo-European roots
San Antonio SPURS: 4 Championships 1999-2009
LaLa Land Fakers: 3 Championships 2000-2001-2002
LaLa Land Fakers: 2 EmbarASSing Loses NBA Finals 2004 & 2008
LaLa Land Fakers: About to make it 3 EmbarrASSing Loses when they lose to the Cleveland Cavs.
Yo, o there Moron! Put your crack pipe down and pay attention!
Like I said, there is not one complete brain between all 20 million of you LA Idiots. I don't understand how so many can be so dumb!!! A decade is ten (10) years and can start on any date. Thus 1999-2009 is a decade, dumbfuk. Sheeeesh girls, give us Spurs fans a break from your stupidity!
A Decade is:
dec·ade
NOUN:
- A period of ten years.
- A group or series of ten.
ETYMOLOGY:
Middle English, a group of ten, from Old French, from Late Latin decas , decad-, from Greek dekas, from deka, ten; see dek
San Antonio SPURS: 4 Championships 1999-2009
LaLa Land Fakers: 3 Championships 2000-2001-2002
LaLa Land Fakers: 2 EmbarASSing Loses NBA Finals 2004 & 2008
LaLa Land Fakers: About to make it 3 EmbarrASSing Loses when they lose to the Cleveland Cavs.
I'll criticize that the same way though. The Spurs 1999 championship was for the 1998-99 season. If you end the decade with the current season (2008-09), then the first season/year of this past decade is 1999-2000, not 1998-99. If you want to include the Spurs 1999 championship, you would claim the decade from 1998-99 to 2007-08 and not include this current season or you have to say 1999-2000 to the current season 2008-09. It cannot be 1999-2009. That's 11 years. Not a decade.
I'm just saying. I'm neutral in this. I don't favor either side.
We're talking team of the decade as in the 2000s, not the decade of the 1990s. We're not talking team of the last eleven years, we're talking team of the 2000s, team of this decade, the Bulls were the team of the 90s decade, 1990-1999, then the Lakers or Spurs are the team of the 2000-2009 decade, then the next team of the decade will be from 2010-2019, then the next team of the decade will be from 2020-2029. The Spurs 1999 ring has nothing to do with the 2000 decade so it's three for the Lakers and three for the Spurs. Even if the Lakers got destroyed two times in the finals it's two more times then the Spurs even got there this decade so who really cares what happened when they got there.Like I said, there is not one complete brain between all 20 million of you LA Idiots. I don't understand how so many can be so dumb!!! A decade is ten (10) years and can start on any date. Thus 1999-2009 is a decade, dumbfuk. Sheeeesh girls, give us Spurs fans a break from your stupidity!
A Decade is:
dec·ade
NOUN:
- A period of ten years.
- A group or series of ten.
ETYMOLOGY:
Middle English, a group of ten, from Old French, from Late Latin decas , decad-, from Greek dekas, from deka, ten; see dek
San Antonio SPURS: 4 Championships 1999-2009
LaLa Land Fakers: 3 Championships 2000-2001-2002
LaLa Land Fakers: 2 EmbarASSing Loses NBA Finals 2004 & 2008
LaLa Land Fakers: About to make it 3 EmbarrASSing Loses when they lose to the Cleveland Cavs.
Last edited by KSeal; 04-30-2009 at 12:14 AM.
Look who started the thread. No need to read further.
Since neither the Fakers nor the Spurs won it last year then make it 1998-1999 to 2007-2008. However, the National Media, coaches, GM's, owners and players in the NBA consider it to be the Spurs by winning 4 Championships in a ten (10) year period. Even the NFL talks about what the Spurs managed to do.
Either way the Fakers lost twice in the NBA Finals during the period of 1999-2000 to 2008-2009 and were embarrassed both times. That alone disqualifies them as the team of the decade. The Fakers sure don't want to get embarrassed a third time this season. LeBron & Co. want it bad after getting swept by the Spurs in 2007.
Put the crack pipe down and go to bed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
