The Lakers are The Best team in the NBA a sure lock to win it all.

[Warlord23]

^^ 21 Blessings is the . He thinks the current Laker team has playoff experience. Well let's see now ... how many playoff games has the current Laker core won? 3 in 2006 + 1 in 2007 = 4 overall.

Do you know how many playoff series the current Spurs core has won? 14. That's the difference I'm talking about. And you bring Luke ing Walton to support your "championship pedigree" argument.

[Findog]

The Lakers are definitely the second-best team in the West right now, and they could definitely beat the Spurs in a series if they get some breaks. We'll just have to play the games because nothing is getting decided on an internet messageboard. As for my two cents, I think the Lakers a year away.* The Spurs are the best playoff team until proven otherwise. There's a reason all these teams are going OLDER for the playoffs, with Phoenix bringing in Shaq, Dallas getting Kidd, the Spurs getting Thomas, Houston getting Bobby Jackson, the Celtics getting Cassell, etc.

* That is of course if the League decides a Boston-LA Finals is too juicy to pass up. Who knows what's going to happen? Last year most pundits were booking a Dallas-Phoenix Conference Finals and both those teams came up woefully short.

[21_Blessings]

^^ 21 Blessings is the . He thinks the current Laker team has playoff experience. Well let's see now ... how many playoff games has the current Laker core won? 3 in 2006 + 1 in 2007 = 4 overall.

Do you know how many playoff series the current Spurs core has won? 14. That's the difference I'm talking about. And you bring Luke ing Walton to support your "championship pedigree" argument.

You're stupid, seriously.

Playoff experience, which Luke Walton has. No one said anything about championship pedigree.

Your championship pedigree didn't save your Spurs from getting bouched by the Mavericks two years ago.

Fact is, this Lakers team is not lacking in 'playoff experience', nor 'championship experience'. You're making this arbitrary value out to be something that will actually matter.

[td4mvp21]

You're rather naive if you think that will be an issue. Seems like you don't watch Laker games.

Seems like you're rather biased towards a Lakers team that has proven nothing.

Cool, this Laker team does have two hall of famers: Kobe and Phil Jackson. Not to mention a future hall of famer in Andrew Bynum (yes I said it).

I'm talking about on the court. I don't think Phil Jackson plays on the Lakers . And I don't give a if you think Bynum will be a future hall of famer, he's not now. Deal.

But I was being sarcastic about the 40 and 20 thing. What I said means nothing, but it's sure as more legit than some crackpot 100 ppg theory the previous Spur fan spewed.

What are you talking about? There was no "theory". Are you illiterate? It is proven factually that the last team allowing 100 ppg to win an NBA championship was the '95 Rockets. Does that mean it will be the same this year? No. Is it factually proven? Yes. My God, pay attention when you read.

Enough said. Proving my earlier point that you haven't watched much of the Lakers this year. Chemistry is not an issue with his team, neither is playoff experience. People are just reaching at this point.

I'm not a Lakers fan, but I watch them when they are on national team. I'm assuming you don't watch many Spurs games but I'm not going to dangle that over your head at this point. I never said chemistry was an issue, the Lakers clearly have it. People are not reaching. That is laughable, it could be an issue come playoff time. COULD. Not WILL. COULD. None of us know what will happen. It's still something to consider and again, you're naive if you don't. But whatever, have fun in Lakerland!

Spurs are a very good team. I'm not so sure Spurs fan should be so y until they prove they can win back to back les.

How was I being y? I have never said the Spurs are the best team in the NBA. I have never said the Spurs will win this year's le.

[Warlord23]

No, I take back whatever I said. I had momentarily forgotten about Luke Walton. Now that you have reminded me, I think the Spurs should just forfeit the season. I mean, why go up against the inevitable and face the wrath of Luke Walton's playoff experience?

[21_Blessings]

Seems like you're rather biased towards a Lakers team that has proven nothing.

Oh look, the pot calling the kettle black!

I'm talking about on the court. I don't think Phil Jackson plays on the Lakers . And I don't give a if you think Bynum will be a future hall of famer, he's not now. Deal.

You didn't say on the court. And I don't give a what you think, doesn't change the fact that every Phil Jackson coached team that won 40 games before losing 20 games won the NBA championship. And Kobe, nor Scottie Pippen were hall of famers when they won their first les with Phil. Deal.

What are you talking about? There was no "theory". Are you illiterate? It is proven factually that the last team allowing 100 ppg to win an NBA championship was the '95 Rockets.

First off, theory was that it has any relevance to this season, which it doesn't. Last I checked the season isn't even over yet and that value could change. But regardless, it is nothing but a crackpot theory that a re ed Spurs fan came up to 'prove why the Lakers won't win a le'.

Does that mean it will be the same this year? No. Is it factually proven? Yes. My God, pay attention when you read.

My God, pay attention to what you read you god damn re . You completely took my comment out of context you hypocritical fool.

I'm not a Lakers fan, but I watch them when they are on national team. I'm assuming you don't watch many Spurs games but I'm not going to dangle that over your head at this point.

Actually I do watch the Spurs plays and I certainly know what Udoka is capable of. But since you don't know what Ariza is capable of I'll just laugh at you because you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the Lakers.

I never said chemistry was an issue, the Lakers clearly have it. People are not reaching.

People are reaching when they are bringing up statistics from 1995 to prove a re ed point on the internet.

That is laughable, it could be an issue come playoff time.[/quote COULD. Not WILL. COULD. None of us know what will happen. It's still something to consider and again, you're naive if you don't. But whatever, have fun in Lakerland!

Keep telling yourself. You have already proven to everybody on the board that you don't watch Laker games. No, chemistry will not be an issue with this team. And you would realize that if you actually watched Laker games.

]

[21_Blessings]

No, I take back whatever I said. I had momentarily forgotten about Luke Walton. Now that you have reminded me, I think the Spurs should just forfeit the season. I mean, why go up against the inevitable and face the wrath of Luke Walton's playoff experience?

Why even have the Western conference playoffs in the first place? The Spurs have a 14 inch championship pedigree that will block shots, play transition defense, dunk the basketball and shoot lighting bolts out of Greg Popovic's ass. No point in even playing the games. Lets just put the Spurs into the NBA finals right now even though they have never won back to back les, were beaten fairly by the Dallas Mavericks two years ago and needed Tim Donaghy and nitpicky suspensions to get by the Phoenix Suns last year.

The NBA is quaking in fear.

[Warlord23]

21 Blessings, you can't fix your abysmal IQ but you could try and improve your reading comprehension. I never said the Lakers can't win it all. I was just pointing out that they'd be an anomaly in the NBA with the number of points they give up. Go back to my initial post and show me where I said the Lakers cannot win the le?

Dumb posters like you are the reason Laker fans are thought of as bandwagoning jerks in general.

[td4mvp21]

Oh look, the pot calling the kettle black!

Oh, except for the fact that I ranked them ahead of the Spurs at this point in the season. I'm definitely biased against them Read through the thread.

You didn't say on the court.

It was understood, I didn't think I would have a Laker fan responding with a witty retort.

And I don't give a what you think, doesn't change the fact that every Phil Jackson coached team that won 40 games before losing 20 games won the NBA championship.

And it doesn't mean that it will happen again! Nothing is a given in the NBA. It could happen again. That's definitely a stat I would want on my side. But let's not concede the championship to the Lakers just because they won 40 games before losing 20.

And Kobe, nor Scottie Pippen were hall of famers when they won their first les with Phil. Deal.

No ing . Doesn't mean that their level of talent is any less of what it merits post-career.

First off, theory was that it has any relevance to this season, which it doesn't. Last I checked the season isn't even over yet and that value could change. But regardless, it is nothing but a crackpot theory that a re ed Spurs fan came up to 'prove why the Lakers won't win a le.

He brought up a good point, and he proved it factually. It's no crackpot theory, it's factually based. He said it was interesting to note. Maybe he was insinuating that that statistic meant the Lakers wouldn't win it, but I'm not going to argue that further.

Actually I do watch the Spurs plays and I certainly know what Udoka is capable of. But since you don't know what Ariza is capable of I'll just laugh at you because you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the Lakers.

Kudos to you. But unfortunately, not everything revolving around the Lakers involves Trevor Ariza. I admitted I had not seen him play and did not make any assertion or guess based on his play.

People are reaching when they are bringing up statistics from 1995 to prove a re ed point on the internet.

You're calling it re ed because it's not what you want to hear. Suck it up and read the statistics. You are so ing biased and seriously live in another world where everything is perfect, the Lakers are perfect, and everyone is going to bow down to the mighty Lakers in submission.

Keep telling yourself. You have already proven to everybody on the board that you don't watch Laker games. No, chemistry will not be an issue with this team. And you would realize that if you actually watched Laker games.

I have proven nothing of the sort. You've proven, on the contrary, that you are petty and fail to read what I post. I never, ever said that chemistry could be an issue. I clearly established that it would not be an issue. Again, go re-read my post. I said playoff experience could. I didn't say it was going to be. I said it could. Seriously, read what I write.

I find it ridiculous that you would insinuate that I am highly biased against the Lakers and know nothing about them when I have clearly established that they are the third best team in the NBA right now, in my eyes, ahead of my Spurs. That's called being objective. I wish I could say the same for you, but you live in Lakerland unfortunately. You, however, have shown you do not read what people post and instead present opinions based on your own whims and thoughts. Quit being so subjective.

[21_Blessings]

21 Blessings, you can't fix your abysmal IQ but you could try and improve your reading comprehension. I never said the Lakers can't win it all. I was just pointing out that they'd be an anomaly in the NBA with the number of points they give up. Go back to my initial post and show me where I said the Lakers cannot win the le?

It's not an anomaly if it has happened multiple times before. Do you even have a highschool diploma? Vintage San Antonio education.

Dumb posters like you are the reason Laker fans are thought of as bandwagoning jerks in general.

How dare I call you out on your re ed, reaching logic! I'm such a bandwagoning jerk!

[21_Blessings]

Oh, except for the fact that I ranked them ahead of the Spurs at this point in the season. I'm definitely biased against them Read through the thread.

Hypocrisy is grand.

It was understood, I didn't think I would have a Laker fan responding with a witty retort.

It was not understood since I proved your faulty logic wrong. Kobe and Pippen were not hall of famers when they first won les. You're making this too easy.

And it doesn't mean that it will happen again! Nothing is a given in the NBA. It could happen again. That's definitely a stat I would want on my side. But let's not concede the championship to the Lakers just because they won 40 games before losing 20.

No ! I used that crackpot theory in response to Mr. 1995 over there. Reading comprehension is your friend.

He brought up a good point, and he proved it factually. It's no crackpot theory, it's factually based. He said it was interesting to note. Maybe he was insinuating that that statistic meant the Lakers wouldn't win it, but I'm not going to argue that further.

No, it was not a good point. It was completely irrevelant. He did not prove factually. He just posted a completely irrevelant statistic. Hollinger would be so proud!

Kudos to you. But unfortunately, not everything revolving around the Lakers involves Trevor Ariza. I admitted I had not seen him play and did not make any assertion or guess based on his play.

Yes, but it proves you don't what you are takling about when it comes to Lakers basketball. Which I pointed out to you because, you thought chemistry (oh sorry, PLAYOFF experience, which the Lakers hve) could be an issue in the playoffs - which it won't be.

You're calling it re ed because it's not what you want to hear. Suck it up and read the statistics. You are so ing biased and seriously live in another world where everything is perfect, the Lakers are perfect, and everyone is going to bow down to the mighty Lakers in submission.

Every Phil Jackson coached team that has won 40 before losing 20 has won the NBA championship! See, I can post completely irrevelant crackpot theories too! Don't make me bust out the LEAP year theory. Don't make me do it.

I have proven nothing of the sort. You've proven, on the contrary, that you are petty and fail to read what I post. I never, ever said that chemistry could be an issue. I clearly established that it would not be an issue. Again, go re-read my post. I said playoff experience could. I didn't say it was going to be. I said it could. Seriously, read what I write.

Seriously, these re ed cliches you're using are hilarious. Playoff experience will not be an issue since the Lakers have it.

I find it ridiculous that you would insinuate that I am highly biased against the Lakers and know nothing about them when I have clearly established that they are the third best team in the NBA right now, in my eyes, ahead of my Spurs. That's called being objective. I wish I could say the same for you, but you live in Lakerland unfortunately. You, however, have shown you do not read what people post and instead present opinions based on your own whims and thoughts. Quit being so subjective.

You're just as bias as I am, it's pretty clear. Quit being a hypocritical homer.

[Warlord23]

It's not an anomaly if it has happened multiple times before. Do you even have a highschool diploma? Vintage San Antonio education.





How dare I call you out on your re ed, reaching logic! I'm such a bandwagoning jerk!

So much for the So Cal schools. If you've ever been inside one, that is, you dumb sucker. It can have happened before for it to be called an anomaly. Anomaly is not the same as "Impossibility" or "Uniqueness"

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anomaly

Maybe if your mom hadn't dropped you on your head we'd be having a reasonable conversation here, but like I said, your reading comprehension and general knowledge of the English language make this argument an unfair one. Thanks for playing.

[Vinnie_Johnson]

I'm not expecting to win a ring this year. I just don't like being told that by a en Piston fan or you mother ers for that matter. Our defense sucks way too much to win a ring unless we get lucky like the Cavs did and make it all the way to the Finals which in case I hope we meet these Piston slugs because I believe we can take them.

I know the truth hurts but that's cool my point was just they are not the best team in the NBA go back and read the first post.

[21_Blessings]

So much for the So Cal schools. If you've ever been inside one, that is, you dumb sucker. It can have happened before for it to be called an anomaly. Anomaly is not the same as "Impossibility" or "Uniqueness"

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anomaly

Maybe if your mom hadn't dropped you on your head we'd be having a reasonable conversation here, but like I said, your reading comprehension and general knowledge of the English language make this argument an unfair one. Thanks for playing.

You're seriously the dumbest Spurs fan on the planet.

Lakers winning the NBA championship would never be considered an 'anomaly' you tool. They've been to 13 of the last 29 NBA finals.

Thanks for playing.

[td4mvp21]

Hypocrisy is grand.

Where is the hypocrisy? Please explain to me how I am being a hypocrite.

It was not understood since I proved your faulty logic wrong. Kobe and Pippen were not hall of famers when they first won les. You're making this too easy.

I'll give you that; my point was in fact that Jackson's other teams have had two elite players while this one only has one.

No ! I used that crackpot theory in response to Mr. 1995 over there. Reading comprehension is your friend.

HE WAS STATING A FACT. THAT IS HOW DISCUSSIONS START. HE SAID IT WAS INTERESTING TO NOTE. HE'S STIRRING UP DISCUSSION WHICH IS WHAT AN INTERNET MESSAGE BOARD IS FOR. Unfortunately, you're cutting it short as you continue to display absolutely no intelligence.

No, it was not a good point. It was completely irrevelant. He did not prove factually. He just posted a completely irrevelant statistic. Hollinger would be so proud!

Are you this ing stupid? Seriously, are this ing stupid? It was a good point because in this day and age defense wins championships. Typically, 100 ppg allowed is not considered good defense. He was making a legitimate point that NO TEAM in the past 12 years has won a championship allowing 100 ppg. It is relevant because the topic of this thread is the Los Angeles Lakers and their status in the NBA, along with their chances to win the NBA Championship. It was relevant, you just didn't want to hear it because your so ing busy ing your pants over the Lakers. It was interesting to read. Get the over it.

Yes, but it proves you don't what you are takling about when it comes to Lakers basketball. Which I pointed out to you because, you thought chemistry (oh sorry, PLAYOFF experience, which the Lakers hve) could be an issue in the playoffs - which it won't be.

I don't know everything about the Lakers, I'll be the first to tell you that. But seriously, specifically quote to me where I exhibited limited knowledge of Lakers basketball-and quote something legitimate, not just something you didn't agree with. And as a team, the Lakers have very little playoff experience. They've been to the first round together, OMFG. Who the cares, second round intensity is notches above first round intensity. It increases with each round. It will be interesting to see how their players can handle it, especially should they meet the Suns, Mavs, or Spurs.

Every Phil Jackson coached team that has won 40 before losing 20 has won the NBA championship! See, I can post completely irrevelant crackpot theories too!

That isn't an irrelevant fact. It's an interesting statistic and like I said, I would like to have that on my side. I offered disagreement with it, big ing deal. Not everyone agrees with you, lakerfan.

Seriously, these re ed cliches you're using are hilarious. Playoff experience will not be an issue since the Lakers have it.

They have three players that have been to the Finals, along with a coach. Too bad that leaves 12 other players with minimal playoff experience. That includes Bynum who has yet to play in an important playoff game. Gasol hasn't even made it past the first round. If those four can make up for that, all the more praise to them.

You're just as bias as I am, it's pretty clear. Quit being a hypocritical homer.

Oh but it isn't. Ask any other person in this thread besides your dumbass.

I'm through discussing anything with you. You've proven to be ing stupid and illiterate at the same time. You live in your own world and will only see what you want to see. Have fun with that, I can't imagine what you're going to do if the Lakers get eliminated. Would you pretend it didn't happen because you didn't want it to? Would you blame the referees? Would you going to blame Stern? Probably.

I might have exhibited some biased opinions, but I was very praiseworthy, albeit critical, of the Lakers. You've said hardly anything praiseworthy of the Spurs, all the while posting with homerism towards your Lakers. They are a damn good team. Definitely top 2 in the West. Are they legitimate contenders? Yep, definitely. It would be a lot more fun and much easier to enjoy their success if there weren't so many ignorant Laker fans like you who do nothing but jack off to what the media says, disregard facts, and refuse to believe anything negative about the Lakers. Truly a classic example of stupidity. See you in the playoffs, hopefully, mother er

[Findog]

I gotta rank them Spurs 1A and Lakers 1B. Conventional wisdom says the Spurs would edge out the Lakers in a playoff series, but that's why they play the games.

[Warlord23]

You're seriously the dumbest Spurs fan on the planet.

Lakers winning the NBA championship would never be considered an 'anomaly' you tool. They've been to 13 of the last 29 NBA finals.

Thanks for playing.

What? What the does 13 NBA finals have to do with this argument? What does it have to do with the anomaly of champions giving up 100 PPG or more? Of having more than zero play off series wins in the past? Are you seriously this pathetic? If you're getting whipped in an argument, the best you can do is to nut up and take it like a man. Instead you post some random nonsense about 13 NBA finals? Congrats, you've set a new standard for stupidity today.

[Warlord23]

There's no point, td4mvp21. This guy has a similar mental makeup to da_suns_fan or SpursDynasty. No matter how much rational argument you put forward, it'll simply bounce off this tool's pea brain.

[21_Blessings]

What? What the does 13 NBA finals have to do with this argument? What does it have to do with the anomaly of champions giving up 100 PPG or more?

Because you're argument is irrevelant and stupid. If the Lakers win a championship it sure as won't be an 'anomaly' and everybody on the planet will laugh at you.

Of having more than zero play off series wins in the past? Are you seriously this pathetic?

Are you dumb? Kobe, Fisher, Luke Walton and Phil Jackson have plenty of playoff series wins.

If you're getting whipped in an argument, the best you can do is to nut up and take it like a man. Instead you post some random nonsense about 13 NBA finals? Congrats, you've set a new standard for stupidity today.

Random nonsense? The Los Angeles Lakers winning CHAMPIONSHIPS is random nonsense? All 10 of them, really? Lets all hope you never breed. For humanity's sake.

[Warlord23]

Because you're argument is irrevelant and stupid. If the Lakers win a championship it sure as won't be an 'anomaly' and everybody on the planet will laugh at you.

Again, what does this have to the original premise? Even if the Lakers win a le, they'll only be the third team in 3 decades to have given up so many points and win an NBA championship. That's an anomaly. Are you not able to comprehend this, face? This has nothing to do with how likely they are to win.

Are you this dumb? Kobe, Fisher, Luke Walton and Phil Jackson have plenty of playoff series wins.

That was with a set of proven veterans like Shaq, Horry, Fox. Not unproven newbies. This Laker team has done zilch in the postseason

Random nonsense? The Los Angeles Lakers winning CHAMPIONSHIPS is random nonsense? All 10 of them, really? Lets all hope you never breed. For humanity's sake.

You bet your re ed ass its random nonsense. Your franchise's past les are as irrelevant to this argument as the past les of teams like the Heat, Knicks, 76ers and Warriors.

[Warlord23]

Random nonsense? The Los Angeles Lakers winning CHAMPIONSHIPS is random nonsense? All 10 of them, really? Lets all hope you never breed. For humanity's sake.

And how could I forget this? This bag "Laker fan" doesn't even know how many les the Laker franchise has. You, 21 Blessings, are a one-man disgrace to Laker fans everywhere! Have fun winning arguments with your thorough knowledge of your team's history , "Laker fan"

[21_Blessings]

Where is the hypocrisy? Please explain to me how I am being a hypocrite.

Because you're a blatant homer.

I'll give you that; my point was in fact that Jackson's other teams have had two elite players while this one only has one.

Bbbbbbbbaackkpedal.

HE WAS STATING A FACT. THAT IS HOW DISCUSSIONS START. HE SAID IT WAS INTERESTING TO NOTE. HE'S STIRRING UP DISCUSSION WHICH IS WHAT AN INTERNET MESSAGE BOARD IS FOR. Unfortunately, you're cutting it short as you continue to display absolutely no intelligence.

It was an irrevelant statistic. Was not interesting whatsoever. Proved and meant nothing and I called him on it.

Are you this ing stupid? Seriously, are this ing stupid? It was a good point because in this day and age defense wins championships.

Are you this ing stupid? PPG is a meaningless statistic when you don't factor in pace. You re .

Typically, 100 ppg allowed is not considered good defense.

Lakers are 5th in defensive efficiency without their anchor and second best perimeter defender.

He was making a legitimate point that NO TEAM in the past 12 years has won a championship allowing 100 ppg.

It was not legit, it was irrevelant and pointless. Just like the 40 before 20 thing I sarcastically responded with.

It is relevant because the topic of this thread is the Los Angeles Lakers and their status in the NBA, along with their chances to win the NBA Championship.

That statistic has nothing to do with Lakers chances of winning a le this season. Thats reality. Therefore, irrevelant.

It was relevant, you just didn't want to hear it because your so ing busy ing your pants over the Lakers. It was interesting to read. Get the over it.

Just like your hypocritical homer ass didn't even balk at the 40 before 20 FACT. The statistic Mr. 1995 posted was completely irrevelant, not to mention disingenuous because he failed to factor in PACE.

I don't know everything about the Lakers, I'll be the first to tell you that.

We know. But seriously, specifically quote to me where I exhibited limited knowledge of Lakers basketball-and quote something legitimate, not just something you didn't agree with. And as a team, the Lakers have very little playoff experience. They've been to the first round together, OMFG.

Phil Jackson, Derek Fisher, Kobe Bryant. STFU.

That isn't an irrelevant fact. It's an interesting statistic and like I said, I would like to have that on my side. I offered disagreement with it, big ing deal. Not everyone agrees with you, lakerfan.

It is irrevelant, meaningless and disingenuous. Not mention: Re ed. Rational basketball fans are laughing at you and Warlord95 over there.

They have three players that have been to the Finals, along with a coach. Too bad that leaves 12 other players with minimal playoff experience.

They don't have minimal playoff experience. You're re ed. If you guys want to bring legit gripes about the Lakers chances, I'm all for it. But I call out re ed and irrevelant like this out.

I'm through discussing anything with you. You've proven to be ing stupid and illiterate at the same time. You live in your own world and will only see what you want to see. Have fun with that, I can't imagine what you're going to do if the Lakers get eliminated. Would you pretend it didn't happen because you didn't want it to? Would you blame the referees? Would you going to blame Stern? Probably.

First you backpedal, now you're through with me. Oh no. Now I'm going to blame David Stern. I love your rational basketball anaylsis. Please stay and tell us more.

I might have exhibited some biased opinions, but I was very praiseworthy, albeit critical, of the Lakers.

You are biased. Just admit it.

You've said hardly anything praiseworthy of the Spurs, all the while posting with homerism towards your Lakers.

Because I'm too busy easily refuting re ed, reaching logic like the you and 95spursfan are spewing.

They are a damn good team. Definitely top 2 in the West. Are they legitimate contenders? Yep, definitely. It would be a lot more fun and much easier to enjoy their success if there weren't so many ignorant Laker fans like you who do nothing but jack off to what the media says, disregard facts, and refuse to believe anything negative about the Lakers.

The truth comes out. Media doesn't fellate your precious Spurs and you feel insulted. Boo hoo, cry more. Doesn't mean your posting of irrevelant statistics will have any bearing on the Lakers chances this season.

Truly a classic example of stupidity. See you in the playoffs, hopefully, mother er

Yeah, let that bias homerism run rampant. You know ya like it. Feeeeeeling you!

Like I said, bring some rational discussion and I'm all for it. I have been of the opinion for awhile now that the Lakers will most likely lose to the Spurs in a playoff series if Bynun can not come back healthy.

But hey, please post more statistics from the early 90s!

[DazedAndConfused]

The poor defense of the Lakers has more to due with the fact that Andrew Bynum and Trevor Ariza are injured right now than anything else. When they were healthy we were the #1 rebounding team in the league and top 10 in every defensive statistical category. In other words, we were one of the top defensive teams in the league.

This argument is a moot issue. When Bynum gets back Pau will slide over to his natural position at the PF spot and we will no longer be at a disadvantage in rebounding and interior defense. I see the Spurs fans making this same argument over and over again and it is really dumb. You think the Spurs would be a great defensive team without Duncan and Bowen playing? Of course not, but I would not be so quick to call them a pathetic defensive team if I knew those guys were coming back at some point.

Bynum's stats this year

13.1 ppg
10 rpb
2.1 bpg
64% FG
under 30mpg

He is absolutely vital to us being a championship team this season, without him we are 2nd tier no question.

[21_Blessings]

^^ Oh look a rational post. By a Laker fan? Who would have thought!

[Warlord23]

^^ Oh look a rational post. By a Laker fan? Who would have thought!

Here you go "Laker fan" .... to help you get to know your beloved LA Lakers a little better .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Lakers

10 championships