PSX5Central

Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: SER on June 02, 2002, 06:49:42 PM

Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 02, 2002, 06:49:42 PM
Still a few more seconds left.... But Lakers have it in the bag!

GO LAKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: videoholic on June 02, 2002, 06:53:02 PM
Lakers win, let the riots begin.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: -____- on June 02, 2002, 06:56:19 PM
i wonder how many people are gonna die in riots tonight.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 02, 2002, 07:00:57 PM
LAKERS WIN! IN ALL YOU KINGS FAN-BOYS FACES! WHAT!?!? WHAT?!?! I THINK MY REMOTE CONTROL IS BROKEN BUT I DON\'T CARE LAKERS BABY!!! HELL YES! NOTHING FELT BEST BUT WATCHING THOSE SACRAMENTO FANS SEEP OUT OF THE STADIUM SHOVING THEIR "BEAT L.A." SIGNS RIGHT UP THEIR @$$ES!

[size=20]G[/size][size=20]O [/size][size=20]L[/size][size=20]A[/size][size=20]K[/size][size=20]E[/size][size=20]R[/size][size=20]S[/size][size=20]![/size]

(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsportsmed.starwave.com%2Fmedia%2Fnba%2F2002%2F0602%2Fphoto%2Fa_kobe_vt.jpg&hash=dc268c0ed7c09eee701a0ce026822544cda4c91a)

Oh, and now for the "intelligent" portion of my post. Lakers won because they know how to shoot the free throws. Kings had no one to step up (Bibby was maybe the exception) in the clutch, and the Lakers took advantage.

I can hear the replies now, "TEH REFEREEZ CHEETORS!!11"
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: -____- on June 02, 2002, 07:03:49 PM
No, the refs were fine in this game.  it was all the kings fault for the loss. no one could make free throws, vlade got fouled out, and PEJA SUCKED REALLY REALLY BAD!!! Airing an open 3???  my god.  it was all the kings fault.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 02, 2002, 07:06:28 PM
um...GO NETS!

Sure they won\'t actually win it, but I would love to see the Nets surprise them and take a few.  Oh well, maybe next year...when Peja is better again and Webber grows some testicals...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Bozco on June 02, 2002, 07:07:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by -____-
No, the refs were fine in this game.  it was all the kings fault for the loss. no one could make free throws, vlade got fouled out, and PEJA SUCKED REALLY REALLY BAD!!! Airing an open 3???  my god.  it was all the kings fault.


WORD, Christie and Peja sucked.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 02, 2002, 07:08:26 PM
Damn, oh well.  Kings killed themselves at the line today.  LA pulled through.  Bibby played so hard though, his teammates didn\'t help him out at all.  Well looks like 3Peat to me.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 02, 2002, 07:11:34 PM
Bibby is a free agent next year. Although I\'m sure the Kings will resign him. He\'s their best player, IMO. He steps up and I have alot of respect for him.

I feel like dancing naked in the streets.
Title: Re: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 02, 2002, 07:11:51 PM
Lakers take Nets in 4.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 02, 2002, 07:12:36 PM
I agree, Lakers are gonna be waiting for the Nets to arrive in L.A. with a broom. The Nets can\'t matchup with the Lakers at all.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 02, 2002, 07:13:54 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
Bibby is a free agent next year. Although I\'m sure the Kings will resign him. He\'s their best player, IMO. He steps up and I have alot of respect for him.

I feel like dancing naked in the streets.


If he chooses.... Which I think he will.

And, go ahead and dance naked. I\'m sure someone will snipe your package from the roof. :)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 02, 2002, 07:14:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by serrano007



And, go ahead and dance naked. I\'m sure someone will snipe your package from the roof. :)


Damn. If someone did that it would be a tremendous shot if you get my drift ;)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: -____- on June 02, 2002, 07:32:41 PM
you must be saying that your testicles are  extremely small targets that only the best sharpshooter could hit.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 02, 2002, 07:48:14 PM
The Nets will lose in 5 or 6. They won\'t get swept, i can almost guarantee it.

MuColloch (sp?) is big enough to slow Shaq....maybe...

Put Van Horn on Horry

Martin on Fox

Put Kidd on Kobe....Kobe should be able to score on him because of height but Kidd is an awesome defender.

Then leave Kittles vs. Fisher. Even though i bet they\'ll put Kidd on Fisher and Kittles on Kobe. Oh well...Lakers get 3 peat. Next year the Kings will win it...if they\'re healthy.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 02, 2002, 09:33:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by -____-
you must be saying that your testicles are  extremely small targets that only the best sharpshooter could hit.


Thank you for clarifying that. :rolleyes: :p

And Fayded, I don\'t see the Kings going to the championship even next year, I think other teams will shadow them because some teams in the west are emerging. Believe it or not, but I think the Mavericks will be a huge threat in the west next year.

And Lakers will 4-peat. :D
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: QuDDus on June 02, 2002, 09:56:19 PM
Is there anyone on the earth that thinks the nets will win a game?

And the kings are so terrible. I mean shooting air ball on the 3. Then christie with wide open 3 miss:rolleyes Kings chocked:)

LAKERS IN 4!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 02, 2002, 09:57:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake


Thank you for clarifying that. :rolleyes: :p

And Fayded, I don\'t see the Kings going to the championship even next year, I think other teams will shadow them because some teams in the west are emerging. Believe it or not, but I think the Mavericks will be a huge threat in the west next year.

And Lakers will 4-peat. :D



I don\'t see the Kings getting shadowed.. I just see huge competition in the West, kinda like this year.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: theomen on June 02, 2002, 10:30:17 PM
First off the Kings will be huge next year, because Mike bibby is now a different player.  These playoffs made him into a scoring pg (thin Iverson in his first couple of years) also they will be together another year, so chemestry will be better...if that\'s possible.  And finally hopefully they\'ll have more poise in the playoffs, ie free throws.  And with Bibby, Webber and a healthy Peja you have 3 20 point players.

One more thing, someone said Nets will play in La.  I may be wrong, but the Nets are a number one seed and La is a 2nd seed, so Net will host.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 08:48:19 AM
Yes you are wrong. Lakers host.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 03, 2002, 09:17:34 AM
It goes to the team with the best record right?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 03, 2002, 10:11:26 AM
Yeah best record, and Lakers are a 3 seed.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: jm on June 03, 2002, 11:19:23 AM
Man, what a Game 7 last night to start off.

I think the Laker\'s threepeat is much a reality. Nets have no Finals expirence, this is new territory for the Net\'s organization. But I will not count them out for at least giving the Lakers a decent challenge. It seems this series is going to be more centered around Jason Kidd with his push the ball type of offense. If they want to win, they\'ll have to play full court basketball instead of half court.

They have no real answer for Shaq, or does anyone? He\'s making his free throws these days, he\'s dominant, and he\'s having fun. Finals MVP, again.

It seems to me like everyone stamped the Lakers as an ordinary team or a lackluster team because we saw something we have never seen before. A team go 15-1 in the playoffs, which has never been done (2001). Then when they are challenged this year, everyone assumes that the Lakers "suck" or they aren\'t any good anymore. You just have to realize, that it\'s a learning process. They have learned a lot from the Kings, and I guarentee you they\'ll be so much tougher to beat next time around.

And quit saying the Kings will knock the Lakers down next year. Did you forget that Shaq is playing with an arthritic toe (which is getting surgery on), 2 bad ankles, and wrist problems? It\'s only gonna get worse next year when he\'s healthy again. I have to give that man credit for playing through all his pain. He kept his promise of sucking it in, and making shots when it counts. Only a select few people can live up to their bold statements.

Lakers in 5 or 6, because I still respect the Nets, but I\'ve been an LA fan since pre-Jackson/Shaq/Kobe era. I sat through their San Antonio beatings, and their selfish offense. I pretty much saw it all before they were what they are today.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 12:19:19 PM
I don\'t think anyone believes the Lakers won\'t win the finals now.  I don\'t think it will be a sweep, simply because last year the Lakers were better, and didn\'t sweep.  I also think the Nets this year are better than the Sixers last year.

There is no way in hell MacCulloch will slow Shaq down Fayded.  There are very few people who can slow him down, and MacCulloch is not one of them.  I wish we could bring back the Hakeem of the Rockets championships, and see how well he could guard Shaq now.  That would be a battle.

I said at the beginning of the playoffs that the Lakers would win again.  They are the best team in the NBA, and will remain the best team until someone proves otherwise.  No one has been able to yet.  I would not count on the Kings being able to beat them next year either.  They might get better, but if Shaq gets healthier, then I don\'t know who can stop that team.

Shaq is the best player in the NBA right now.  Not Kobe, Shaq.  If anyone disagrees, I don\'t think you\'ve been watching this team closely enough the last few years.  Shaq, when he is on his game, can not be stopped.  No one is as big and strong as him, and depending on how the refs call the game, he can pretty much have his way with whoever is on him.  Just look what he did to Mutumbo, the defensive MVP, last year.  Hell, I think at this moment, he is the best player on his team, even though he is playing with a million injuries.  No one can dominate a game the way he can.  And now he\'s hitting free throws too.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 03, 2002, 12:39:26 PM
I think MacCulloch might be able to slow Shaq. He\'s big. Yes, Shaq will still score, but he won\'t dominate as you people think. If he does, well, i\'m overrating MacCulloch.

Shaq can\'t be THAT injured. Not when he scored 41 points and grabs 17 boards. Not when he averages something like 30 points a game during the series. That\'s like how much he averaged when he was healthy. He\'s not injured as bad as you people think.

Quote
They might get better, but if Shaq gets healthier, then I don\'t know who can stop that team.


Are you forgetting that the Kings didn\'t have Peja? One of their key players, a 20 point scorer. If he was 100% the Kings would have won IMO. But he wasn\'t, **** happens. Next year if the Kings have a healthy roster they\'ll win the championship.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 03, 2002, 12:53:39 PM
Now would be a good time to say...Go Heat.  lol uh that was totally off subject but anyway...the Kings should be able to beat the Lakers next year.  Especially if they play Bobby Jackson more down the stretch.  I was shocked to see him on the bench for the last part of the 4th quarter.  

Nets won\'t be much of a problem for LA.  They might win 1 or maybe even 2 games, but nothing more than that.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 12:56:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by unfocused
Now would be a good time to say...Go Heat.  lol uh that was totally off subject but anyway...the Kings should be able to beat the Lakers next year.  Especially if they play Bobby Jackson more down the stretch.  I was shocked to see him on the bench for the last part of the 4th quarter.  


I don\'t know how anyone can say that any team should beat the Lakers.  Could, maybe.  Should, no.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 12:59:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
I think MacCulloch might be able to slow Shaq. He\'s big. Yes, Shaq will still score, but he won\'t dominate as you people think. If he does, well, i\'m overrating MacCulloch.

Shaq can\'t be THAT injured. Not when he scored 41 points and grabs 17 boards. Not when he averages something like 30 points a game during the series. That\'s like how much he averaged when he was healthy. He\'s not injured as bad as you people think.



Are you forgetting that the Kings didn\'t have Peja? One of their key players, a 20 point scorer. If he was 100% the Kings would have won IMO. But he wasn\'t, **** happens. Next year if the Kings have a healthy roster they\'ll win the championship.


Shaq\'s big toe is worth as much as Peja\'s whole body.

Shaq, when healthy, dominates.  He doesn\'t dominate as much now, but can still score that much.  If he ever wanted to just hog the ball, and all his players helped him, I\'d bet he could get close to 50 a night when healthy.  But he\'s not that selfish, and he plays with people who need the ball.  That\'s why he gets only 30 or so a night.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 03, 2002, 01:07:15 PM
That\'s why he got 41 and 17 boards :rolleyes:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 01:09:46 PM
Yes, because even with several nagging injuries slowing him down, he\'s still the best man on the court.

It\'s like the game a few years ago when Jordan played in the finals with the flu.  He had a decent game, but it was just that much harder.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Coredweller on June 03, 2002, 01:33:20 PM
Prediction:

NBC\'s ratings for the NBA Finals are going to plunge into the crapper.  Most of the United States does not give a damn about watching the Lakers sweep the Nets.  I wish you Laker fans would come to understand how much you and your team are hated.  It isn\'t all love and happiness to win the Finals when you do it with a team including a-holes like Rick Fox and Robert Horry.  Hey maybe Horry will throw a towel in Phil Jackson\'s face during a timeout.  I\'d watch that.  Otherwise, I plan on getting some sleep.

I admire Jason Kidd, but I don\'t want to watch him get beaten up and pounded by Shaq, then see no calls resulting from it.  O\'Neal apparently gets fouled every time he steps on paint.  A defender is standing rock solid with his arms in the air and somehow that\'s a defensive foul.  Oh well, one of you Laker fans will have to explain that to me sometime.  I\'m sure you have a good explanation.  Meanwhile Bryant will continue to showboat his way to the highlight reels like he\'s always done.  It\'s fun watching him do some unnecessary bullsh*t reverse scoop layup, and then totally blow it.  He\'ll never change though, because there\'s no "Kobe" in the word "TEAM."

To summarize:  

NBC Finals coverage viewers =

State of New Jersey
Los Angeles metro area
Various Laker bandwagoners throughout the U.S.
Populations of selected mental institutions and prisons

THAT\'S IT.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 03, 2002, 01:36:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Coredweller
Prediction:

NBC\'s ratings for the NBA Finals are going to plunge into the crapper.  Most of the United States does not give a damn about watching the Lakers sweep the Nets.  I wish you Laker fans would come to understand how much you and your team are hated.  It isn\'t all love and happiness to win the Finals when you do it with a team including a-holes like Rick Fox and Robert Horry.  Hey maybe Horry will throw a towel in Phil Jackson\'s face during a timeout.  I\'d watch that.  Otherwise, I plan on getting some sleep.

I admire Jason Kidd, but I don\'t want to watch him get beaten up and pounded by Shaq, then see no calls resulting from it.  O\'Neal apparently gets fouled every time he steps on paint.  A defender is standing rock solid with his arms in the air and somehow that\'s a defensive foul.  Oh well, one of you Laker fans will have to explain that to me sometime.  I\'m sure you have a good explanation.  Meanwhile Bryant will continue to showboat his way to the highlight reels like he\'s always done.  It\'s fun watching him do some unnecessary bullsh*t reverse scoop layup, and then totally blow it.  He\'ll never change though, because there\'s no "Kobe" in the word "TEAM."

To summarize:  

NBC Finals coverage viewers =

State of New Jersey
Los Angeles metro area
Various Laker bandwagoners throughout the U.S.
Populations of selected mental institutions and prisons

THAT\'S IT.
 



The Laker fans know the rest of the US hates them. That\'s why they seem so blind at times.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 01:38:48 PM
Not blind...just arrogant.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 01:47:57 PM
Arrogant? Blind? WTF? What are you talking about? Thats how the sports world is when the team is number one. Everyone is gunning for them, it was the case with the Yankees and the Rams as well, EVERYONE WANTED TO SEE THEM LOSE. And if you didn\'t want to see them lose your percieved as arrogant or shallow? Just frusterates me, don\'t categorize all Lakers fans as arrogant or blind. Maybe a handful like to shoot their mouths off, but thats because they\'re just trying to defend their team that everyone is pointing their fingers at.

And I could careless what the rest of the USA thinks, or is this just jealousy that their teams are laying on their couches watching the playoffs with potato chip crumbs hanging off their lips?

Who knows? Who cares? Seriously though, the Laker bashing is getting so old and they just go on to win another series making alot of you (no names) look stupid.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Coredweller on June 03, 2002, 02:01:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
Who knows? Who cares? Seriously though, the Laker bashing is getting so old and they just go on to win another series making alot of you (no names) look stupid.
Why does it make anyone look stupid for the Lakers to win a championship with the assistance of their 6th, 7th, & 8th men in black and white uniforms?  I don\'t think any sane person is doubting what will happen.  Damn if I could play in the NBA under Shaq\'s rules, I\'d probably win a championship too.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 02:13:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Coredweller
Why does it make anyone look stupid for the Lakers to win a championship with the assistance of their 6th, 7th, & 8th men in black and white uniforms?  I don\'t think any sane person is doubting what will happen.  Damn if I could play in the NBA under Shaq\'s rules, I\'d probably win a championship too.


:laughing: Oh give me a break! :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 02:16:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
It goes to the team with the best record right?


Quote
Originally posted by unfocused
Yeah best record, and Lakers are a 3 seed.


LAKERS ARE HOSTING IT PEOPLE! Don\'t you watch ESPN? Listen to the commentators?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 04:36:43 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
And I could careless what the rest of the USA thinks, or is this just jealousy that their teams are laying on their couches watching the playoffs with potato chip crumbs hanging off their lips?


Actually, that\'s exactly what it is.  Jealousy in it\'s purest form.  If people could route for no one to win, I\'ll bet a lot of people would.

And fans of most championship teams in any sport seem to be arrogant.  You probably have a right to be too.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 06:13:24 PM
(Thinks about Yankees fans)

*shivers*

I can\'t help my team became the best. :cool:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 06:14:51 PM
I happen to like the Yankees, so I can relate :)

But we got the Red Sox...I don\'t think any group out there hates the Lakers that much.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 03, 2002, 06:25:03 PM
"Who cares about the rest of the US?"

**** YOU. That\'s exactly the arrogance that\'s being perceived. You dont\' care about the rest of the country, you only care that you\'re happy, and that the rest of the country hates you.

Oh, and nothing personal about the **** you part, Vapor. I just want to be cared about by the Lakers fan. Yeah, that\'s it.

Go Nets. See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: square_marker on June 03, 2002, 06:53:01 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
Thats how the sports world is when the team is number one. Everyone is gunning for them, it was the case with the Yankees and the Rams as well, EVERYONE WANTED TO SEE THEM LOSE.  


Not really, I mean i am a Lions fan, have been since i can remember.  I want to see the Rams play football, they are very exciting and fun to watch.  So in order for them to win, they must perform good, which is what people watch them for.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 07:09:03 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ROL Jamas


**** YOU. That\'s exactly the arrogance that\'s being perceived. You dont\' care about the rest of the country, you only care that you\'re happy, and that the rest of the country hates you.


:laughing: WHOA NELLY! :laughing: Seriously, can we say, "Melodramatic" .... Wow...

What I meant was that I could give a rats f*cking ass hair what America thinks of me, Lakers fans, or the Lakers. I\'m gonna be rooting for them, and thats all I care about. Why would it be of concern to me that you hate them? I don\'t care. Your opinion. I\'m not going to argue, "WHY DO YOU HATE THEM?!?". You hate them cuz\' they\'re the best. Period.

And boy oh boy the Lakers are bringin\' the broom and dustpan to the Finals.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: square_marker on June 03, 2002, 07:11:55 PM
I hate Shaq....I like Kobe....Shaq is on the lakers....I hate Shaq....End of story
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 03, 2002, 07:12:06 PM
yeah, Jamas gets like that at times.  He meant nothing by it.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 03, 2002, 07:30:45 PM
Tony...meh.

Vapor, don\'t tell me what to think. I don\'t hate them because they\'re the best. Shaq pisses me off, but he\'s cool. Hell, I rooted for this team last year, becuase I hated the Sixers more, and they had Tyron Lue, who still rules.

To put it bluntly, I hate Kobe Bryant. It also, oh, "greatly displeases" me (How\'s that for mellowdramatic?) when people tell me what to think of a team, or something else. Yes, it\'s my opinion, could you respect it? Every time my opinion is stated, I get backlash. Why should I respect your opinion if you won\'t respect mine?

Go Nets. See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Bozco on June 03, 2002, 07:34:40 PM
Quote
I can\'t help my team became the best.



You speak to soon.  **** like that will jynx you for the next games.  Well either way I\'m happy that you get to live out your athletic dreams one way or another mister spiky hair.:D
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 07:42:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Bozco



You speak to soon.  **** like that will jynx you for the next games.  Well either way I\'m happy that you get to live out your athletic dreams one way or another mister spiky hair.:D


(Gushes at self looking in the mirror while combing hair)

Jamas, when didn\'t I respect your opinion. Your the one who suddenly became offended for reasons that I still dont\' understand.

"Shaq pisses me off. But he\'s cool."

Uh, yeah, I understand. :rolleyes:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Bozco on June 03, 2002, 07:44:43 PM
Ok, I\'m good now.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 03, 2002, 07:45:05 PM
Vapor,  I see your friends don\'t piss you off sometimes, that\'s fine.

Well, if you want to turn this into what seems like a moral debate, then, you go right ahead. I\'ll go ahead and sleep.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 07:56:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ROL Jamas
Vapor,  I see your friends don\'t piss you off sometimes, that\'s fine.

Well, if you want to turn this into what seems like a moral debate, then, you go right ahead. I\'ll go ahead and sleep.

See Yuz.


Make sure to brush your teeth! A good smile goes a long way!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 03, 2002, 08:40:10 PM
What does "See Yuz" mean? I asked it before, but I guess I didn\'t see the explanation.. :confused:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 03, 2002, 08:42:06 PM
lol. I know man, I did think it means like "See you later" but he never seems to go anywhere. Oh well.

See yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 03, 2002, 08:44:39 PM
Nets in 4
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 03, 2002, 08:45:10 PM
Ahhhh... :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 04, 2002, 06:44:19 AM
Which is why I didn\'t come here for 3 months.

I\'ve been sayin\' See Yuz for like 4 years, datin\' back to the good ol\' days at the n64cc\'s. Besides, I got if off of Cow and Chicken, and everybody loves that show, right? :)

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 04, 2002, 11:57:31 AM
Ah, the good ol CC.  I almost used this as my avatar: (https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.n64cc.com%2FPICS%2F64CC_VSM.JPG&hash=139fd461fd4e58ae0a5f489c3a94ad1c2e43b639)
Looked bad on black though.  Oh well, might use it sometime down the line.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 04, 2002, 01:16:25 PM
Who on the Nets is going to guard Shaq?  Van Horn?

I see Shaq averaging 35 points for the series
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 04, 2002, 01:21:32 PM
How do you even throw Van Horn\'s name out there?  He\'s a SF.

I think it will be MacCulloch and Martin on Shaq, but it\'s a mismatch either way.  You just have to overcome that.  Shaq will get his points, try to shut the rest down.  There is pretty much no one who can match up with Shaq anyway.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 04, 2002, 01:25:38 PM
Hes the tallest player on the nets when they played the celtics.

I guess their centers are too sorry to even be on the court.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 04, 2002, 01:38:41 PM
How much did you watch? 2 minutes of the whole series? MacCulloch is like 7\'0" and weighs close to 300 pounds.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 04, 2002, 01:40:01 PM
Well he hardly played and is probably 60 overall
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 04, 2002, 01:44:09 PM
He\'s a starter....he played alot...well average minutes i should say.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 04, 2002, 01:53:08 PM
Lakers in 4-7 games
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: -____- on June 04, 2002, 02:13:40 PM
McCulloch is the best chance the Nets have to contain Shaq.  As much as I want to see the Nets win, I highly doubt it\'s gonna happen.  Shaq and Kobe are gonna dominate.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 04, 2002, 02:39:55 PM
I personally think that, baring foul trouble, Martin has a better chance at guarding Shaq.  He\'s smaller, but he\'s more physical.  Then again, they could also just double team him every time he touches the ball...and probably will.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Bozco on June 04, 2002, 03:10:38 PM
Martin should play just like the thug Cincinnati man he is.  And if they even sorta contain Shaq this will be a good series.  The Nets bench out scores the lakers bench 2 to 1.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 04, 2002, 03:29:53 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
How much did you watch? 2 minutes of the whole series? MacCulloch is like 7\'0" and weighs close to 300 pounds.


He can\'t compare with Shaq though. MacCulloch doesn\'t even rank in the top 10 centers in the league, Shaq will average 40 a night.

And if you double Shaq that leaves Horry open.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 04, 2002, 03:35:56 PM
I\'d rather take my chances with Horry and attempt to contain Shaq.  Horry won\'t hit them all, Shaq hits a lot.  You gotta pick your poison I guess.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 04, 2002, 03:37:47 PM
Either way, I just can\'t see how the Lakers can even lose one game as of now. Perhaps the Nets might steal one, but I just see a sweep o\'comin.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 04, 2002, 03:39:12 PM
I\'ll tell you how: hot shooting.  If the Nets can come out one night, and shoot the lights out, they have a very good chance of winning.

edit-800 posts...woo!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 05, 2002, 05:41:28 PM
So far with only 6 minutes gone by the Lakers are handing the Nets their @sses on silver plates. Nets can\'t seem to do anything at all, and I haven\'t seen the Lakers play so easily since the regular season.

Sweep. Lakers three peat. I\'m already calling this.

Shockwaves, yeah shooting, but will the Lakers allow the Nets to shoot them out? I doubt it, Shaq is invincible against MacCulloch and well, if your watching the game so far, I\'m playing a guessing game in how the Nets can ever even win 1.
Title: zzzzzzz...huh what? Lakers up by 16? How exci...zzzzz
Post by: Simchoy on June 05, 2002, 05:59:23 PM
If the Nets are going to play the rest of the series like this, not only will the Lakers 3 peat, but they will also become one very dull series. :yawn:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 05, 2002, 06:04:45 PM
Not if your a Laker fan... Nothing better than watching Shaq do a reverse layup or people off the bench shutting down the Nets starters.

I\'ve had enough good series watching the Lakers slosh through the West. It feels good to watch the Lakers dominate games again.

Kidd who?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 05, 2002, 06:04:50 PM
Well, the Nets are playing horribly.  Hopefully they can get themselves together.  Anyway, they have had a lot of open shots.  They just didn\'t take them, or missed them.  Hell, there was no one within 10 feet of Martin for most of the 1st quarter.

And as for Kidd who...Kidd hasn\'t been that bad.  Kidd will play well in this series.  He\'s the rightful MVP this year, and in some ways (as in ball distrubuting, passing, etc) he is the best player on the court.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 05, 2002, 06:09:46 PM
42 to 19 (now 42 to 23)? Man, its a freaking masacure there. Even the Laker fans are Staples Center appear to be falling asleep. :rolleyes:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 05, 2002, 06:28:20 PM
Halftime and the Nets brought it within 12.

Maybe we shall see a game come 2nd half.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 05, 2002, 06:30:29 PM
I agree. At least the Nets finally got a score that is more...respectable. Hope it is a real game in the second quarter. Maybe even a possible Nets victory. :p
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 05, 2002, 06:37:47 PM
"Throw it down big man, throw it down"

God, I hate hearing Walton say that over and over. :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 05, 2002, 06:55:03 PM
Eight point game...the Nets are finally looking pretty sharp.  This could end up being a game afterall.
\\/apor, you seen the Nets play during this comeback?  That\'s how they can win.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 05, 2002, 07:10:32 PM
The team that had the best shot to beat the Lakers was the Pacers, and they actually could\'ve if they would\'ve put their **** together in Game 4 when Shaq fouled out and it went to OT, but no..."Lets let Kobe score all over the place."  I would\'ve loved to see a Game 7 buzzer beater by Reggie Miller to win.  Blah oh well won\'t happen unless the Pacers get an awesome PG. aka Kidd/Bibby/Baron Davis  

I heard the Nets were only down 4 or something at one point.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 05, 2002, 07:15:49 PM
The Nets are losing by 7 now. Hell, this game just might be interesting. Shaq is killing them. 22 points 7 boards. I overrated MacCulloch i guess. Kidd has 17 points and 6 assists. Kidd who...hah.

There needs to be some way to turn Walton off. He pisses me off.

New Jersey is doing what the Kings were doing, missing FT\'s.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 05, 2002, 07:21:18 PM
Its called the Mute Button.  Use it wisely.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 05, 2002, 07:21:41 PM
9 point lead for L.A. heading towards the fourth. I can see how the Nets can win now, by forcing L.A. to turn the ball over, attempt smart shots, and move the ball around.

I\'m still not doubting my call that the Lakers will sweep, but I will not be surprised to see the Nets take one or two. They have what it takes. But I don\'t see them winning the series.

Here comes the fourth, and for like the 16th straight game watching the Lakers play I\'m nervous. Hate them or love them, you must admit that they have good games.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 05, 2002, 07:25:28 PM
The Nets have turned it around in the 2nd and 3rd quarter. They won both of them, and if it wasn\'t for their horrible 1st they might be winning. Down by 7 now...just stop Kobe and his shots, then try to contain Shaq. Even though they probably won\'t. Back down by 10...


Yeah, the Lakers do have alot of close games. But usually they come out on top. :mad:


Back down by 8...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: luckee on June 05, 2002, 07:31:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
Shaq is killing them. 22 points 7 boards.


:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Thats slow for shaq :)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 05, 2002, 07:31:19 PM
Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeamn!!!!!!

That Kobe slam over Williams was a jaw dropper! I found my new wallpaper.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: luckee on June 05, 2002, 07:33:50 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeamn!!!!!!

That Kobe slam over Williams was a jaw dropper! I found my new wallpaper.


It wasnt that great, you want great ones. DO a google search "Kobe Dunks"
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 05, 2002, 07:34:12 PM
Half of Shaq\'s points came in the 1st quarter...and thats the quarter the Lakers killed them.


That Kobe dunk was nice...but i\'ll still yell at my TV when i see it on ESPN or on one of the NBC commercials.

81-71. Nets are gonna lose.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 05, 2002, 07:42:21 PM
Nets within 4....uh oh. Another upset? Hey, there\'s been alot of upsets why not another.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 05, 2002, 08:10:07 PM
Sorry Fayded.

Lakers win, up 1-0.

Nets made it interesting, at least the Lakers know more about the Nets.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: luckee on June 05, 2002, 08:12:09 PM
Nets always do that come back in the 4th chit. Not enough this time though :)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 05, 2002, 08:15:10 PM
Err....stupid Nets down the stretch. Couldn\'t make a shot. Van Horn just about sucked. Jason Kidd...he\'s good. Triple double, again. Maybe he\'ll average a triple double this series too.

Lakers in 6.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 05, 2002, 09:18:19 PM
thats pretty bad when they have to have Kobe guard Jason.  That really says something about Fisher\'s defense.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: luckee on June 05, 2002, 09:30:04 PM
Quote
Originally posted by unfocused
thats pretty bad when they have to have Kobe guard Jason.  That really says something about Fisher\'s defense.


yea..teh suX0rz. Then again, most of us knew that baout fisher
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 06, 2002, 03:52:41 AM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake

Here comes the fourth, and for like the 16th straight game watching the Lakers play I\'m nervous. Hate them or love them, you must admit that they have good games.


I didn\'t feel the nervousness once this game. It just doesn\'t seem like the Nets have a chance of winning, even if they got as close as 3.. But that\'s just me, I could be wrong... I\'m always wrong.
:shy:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 06:59:30 AM
I didn\'t think the Nets ever had a chance either. It felt like the Lakers were in control the whole time.


Why couldn\'t Jason Kidd do this for the Suns?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 06, 2002, 07:03:28 AM
Probably cause the Suns suck.  The Nets had all the pieces they needed except a star PG, they got that and a few good draft picks (mainly Richard Jefferson) and boom.  I knew they would be better this year, but not this good.  I figured they would win 35 games or so.  Oh well they probably won\'t win anymore.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 07:12:39 AM
The Suns need a decent center. If Penny can ever get his head screwed on and be 80% of what he used to be they might be good. And they need a PF. Bah...they do suck. Oh well, back to the finals.


Go Nets.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Halberto on June 06, 2002, 09:30:06 AM
:laughing: OMG Nets are showing the Lakers up!  That was just funny as hell.  They one won by 5?


[size=20]GO NETS[/size]
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 09:37:15 AM
I feel like going out on a limb.

Nets in 7. The Lakers won this game, but in the final 3 quarters, they got complacent. Figured the Nets would lay down and die for them, and it didn\'t happen. Had to rely on Shaq throwing his weight around in order to take the game, you didn\'t see Kobe taking over this game, did you?

The Game was officially over when Kidd missed that 3 that could have cut it to 93-90 with about 1:30 left, that was juuuuuuuust about it.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 09:53:17 AM
That would be great if the Nets won in 7. I would laugh at the Laker fans. But i doubt it will happen....darn.


Yeah Kidd isn\'t very good at 3\'s. He needs to practice his jumper this off season...if he gets that down he\'ll be virtually unstopable.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 06, 2002, 11:30:03 AM
Unfocused: The Suns, without Kidd, are better than the Nets without him.  Kidd just works with that team.  The pieces were not all in place when he got there.  He made this team what it is.  And besides, Kidd didn\'t choose to leave.  It was the Suns who traded him.

I still doubt the Nets will win, but like I said, it will be close.  Once they settled down, the Nets played a damn good game.  It won\'t be the cake walk Lakers fans expect.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 11:34:17 AM
Wow, I agree with shock for once...


Trading Kidd was the dumbest trade. Stupid Colangalo traded Kidd for hitting his wife. Trades for Marbury who gets an extreme DUI. Idiot. Now Penny and Gugliata are taking up way too much cap space...but they arent tradeable. Marion wants 100 million. The Suns are screwed. When the cop pulled over Marbury he asked "What\'s your name?" Marbury responded with, "Well....my friends call me Starbury." Moron.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 06, 2002, 11:49:12 AM
I question the fact that Phoenix would be better without Kidd compared to NJ without Kidd.  The Nets have Van Horn and Kenyon Martin, two high draft picks that were pretty good to begin with.  The Suns have Marion and Penny, now um if this was 1995 then the Suns would easily be better, but Penny isn\'t exactly that good anymore.  Marion is good, but he doesn\'t deserve 100 million dollars.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 12:28:21 PM
He doesn\'t deserve 100 million, yet. This is only gonna be his 3rd or 4th year...me forgets. The Suns have talent, or washed up talent. Penny, Gugliata was good for the T-Wolves, Marbury, Marion, they did have Delk and Rodgers. If everyone turned out like they were supposed to they would be pretty good imo.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: jm on June 06, 2002, 12:38:33 PM
Quote
Shaq is the best player in the NBA right now. Not Kobe, Shaq.


Let me put it to you in respectable terms.

Kobe = Best all around game in the league today

Shaq = most dominant

There are somethings both of those players can and cannot do. I never seen Shaq win a slam dunk contest nor did I see Kobe do at least 12 dunks in a game.

It\'s kinda wrong comparing a 2G with a 5, needless to say.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Bozco on June 06, 2002, 12:46:57 PM
Shaq is far from the best.  They let him get away with fouls just because its him.  Hes just big, thats all.  There are many players that are far more skilled than him.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 06, 2002, 01:15:22 PM
Well, here\'s how I judge the best player in the NBA.  If I were in the NBA finals, and could choose one star I wanted leading my team, who would it be?  For me, it\'s Shaq, hands down.  No one can dominate the way he can, and that makes him the best player IMO.  He also steps up in big situations.  He scores more per game, he gets more rebounds, and he is more of a presence defensively than Kobe.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 02:05:03 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Bozco
Shaq is far from the best.  They let him get away with fouls just because its him.  Hes just big, thats all.  There are many players that are far more skilled than him.


He\'s got a nice jump hook and he knows how to use the glass. Hes not just a big oaf that drops the ball in the hoop, and add that his FT shooting is getting better...  you got yourself a Hall of Fame bound center.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: jm on June 06, 2002, 02:29:29 PM
More D than Kobe???? LOL

That\'s a huge understatement. Kobe made All-Defensive man team twice I think. Shaq doesn\'t guard "guards" during the game. Sure, Kobe might not average the 3+ blocked shots per game, but he\'s a tight, smart defender.

Shaq even said it himself, he will never be known for his defense. I think Kobe is better at defense than Shaq is, because Kobe is constantly chasing people, Shaq just protects the basket.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 06, 2002, 02:37:13 PM
In what I\'ve seen from the Lakers, Shaq has a bigger effect on the game from the defensive end.  He changes the opposing team\'s game by largely keeping them out of the lane.  Kobe can\'t do that.  The other team\'s game doesn\'t change when he leaves as much as it does when Shaq leaves.  You could clearly see that in last night\'s game for example.  Shaq is a presence on the defensive end that Kobe simply isn\'t.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 02:45:42 PM
Kobe doesn\'t mean as much to the Lakers as Shaq does. While they both mean alot, Shaq is more valuble. There isn\'t another center in the league that is as dominating as Shaq. While there are a number of SG\'s as good as Kobe. Shaq stops all drives to the basket, he blocks shots, and even if he doesn\'t block he makes the offensive player change their shot. Kobe might get a few steals, maybe a block or two, but sometimes he lets the offensive player beat him. Shaq is the core of the Lakers team, if you took Kobe over him you\'d be a fool.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 02:48:31 PM
However if the Lakers didn\'t have Kobe, they wouldn\'t have made it past the Spurs.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 06, 2002, 03:01:52 PM
They\'re a team.  Without either of them, they wouldn\'t be as successful as they have been.  LA is just lucky it ended up with both.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 04:19:34 PM
Well, lets put this in comparing terms.

I look at the Shaq Kobe Duo as the Jordan Pippen duo back when they were winnin\' titles. Granted, Shaq and Jordan are completely different, but stay with me. The Lakers loose Shaq, they will be good, but they will NOT be a Championship calliber team. The Bulls lost Jordan for a bit, but had the same supporting cast. The Bulls were good, but they were not a championship calliber team anymore.

You have to look at the supporting cast in that argument, too. Kukoc, Rodman, Bucheler, Harper, Kerr, Longley. That was a great supporting cast, and Harper even went on to win more titles with the Lakers. Fox, Horry, Fisher, Shaw, Walker, George. It\'s a good supporting cast, but In my humble opinion, it isn\'t as good as the Bulls supporting cast.

So, if you take one of the superstars out of the equation, you have a good team, but you don\'t have a title team. Also, both teams had the same coach, so yeah. No argument there.  The point to comparing the two? To see the effects if you take one of the superstars out. If you take Shaq out, you have Horry, Fox, Kobe, Fisher, Shaw. They\'d probably have to make another move somewhere, like putting George at Center, which would not prove to their liking, and probably **** up their team royally. Take out Jordan, and you have Longely, Rodman, Kukoc, Pippen, Kerr/Harper. Now these guys, back in their prime (when they were winnin\' titles), could have made a run.

Woo, that was fun. See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: luckee on June 06, 2002, 05:31:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ROL Jamas
Well, lets put this in comparing terms.

I look at the Shaq Kobe Duo as the Jordan Pippen duo back when they were winnin\' titles. Granted, Shaq and Jordan are completely different, but stay with me. The Lakers loose Shaq, they will be good, but they will NOT be a Championship calliber team. The Bulls lost Jordan for a bit, but had the same supporting cast. The Bulls were good, but they were not a championship calliber team anymore.

You have to look at the supporting cast in that argument, too. Kukoc, Rodman, Bucheler, Harper, Kerr, Longley. That was a great supporting cast, and Harper even went on to win more titles with the Lakers. Fox, Horry, Fisher, Shaw, Walker, George. It\'s a good supporting cast, but In my humble opinion, it isn\'t as good as the Bulls supporting cast.

So, if you take one of the superstars out of the equation, you have a good team, but you don\'t have a title team. Also, both teams had the same coach, so yeah. No argument there.  The point to comparing the two? To see the effects if you take one of the superstars out. If you take Shaq out, you have Horry, Fox, Kobe, Fisher, Shaw. They\'d probably have to make another move somewhere, like putting George at Center, which would not prove to their liking, and probably **** up their team royally. Take out Jordan, and you have Longely, Rodman, Kukoc, Pippen, Kerr/Harper. Now these guys, back in their prime (when they were winnin\' titles), could have made a run.

Woo, that was fun. See Yuz.


Well said, this post has owned you all, discussion over! :D
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 06:51:44 PM
Well if the Lakers lost Shaq, I\'m sure they would acquire someone that would fill his shoes much better than Devan George.

I personally think

Kobe, Fisher, George, Fox, Horry

could take

Pippen, Harper, Longley, Kukoc, Rodman

-------------------------------------------------------
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 06:57:16 PM
I said those backups in their prime. Pippen in his prime wasn\'t a whiner, so that makes a huge difference.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 07:03:34 PM
Even so...

Kobe vs. Pippen = Dead even. They both create and make plays happen, solid defenders, great shooters.

Fisher vs. Harper = Fisher. Fisher is younger and has the faster legs.

Longley vs. George = Longley. George isn\'t even a center really.

Fox vs. Kukoc = Tie. Both like to shoot the 3 ball, also like to slide in for a sneaky layup. Have the capability of alternating the momentum of a game.

Horry vs. Rodman = Horry. Rodman would get his share of boards, but he would offer few points and would probably pick up a technical. Horry always brings his A game in the fourth quarter and his a sufficient height advantage over Rodman.


Just my opinion really. Its tough to compare teams from different years, but thats just my useful/less two cents.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 07:07:42 PM
Yeah, but I think that Fisher vs. Harper one is wrong. Seems like Fisher is getting burned a LOT these days, and his scoring is pretty minimal. Harper was the 2nd or 3rd best defender on that old team (Jordan and Pippen, take your pick), and he could pop a clutch three when it was needed.

Also, another huge part of that team was Steve Kerr. That guy ruled, 3 point threat from wherever, and a great point guard. That guy ruled, and still rules to this day :)

Edit: How tall IS Horry, anyway? I know that Rodman was 6\'10, and if Horry has a sufficient height advangate, then, meh.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 06, 2002, 07:23:49 PM
I REALLY don\'t know where you guys get playing Devean George as center.  He\'s a small forward or a shooting guard if anything.  He\'s NEVER played center.  The only people on the Lakers roster right now that play center are Walker, Madsen, Medvedenko, and sometimes Horry.  Basically Lakers don\'t have a decent backup center, and if they didnt have Shaq, the first person that they\'d place is most likely Walker.  Definitely not George.

With that said... all those players I mentioned who plays the center position.. would probably be almost nil to nothing when paired up against Luc Longley.

But then again, if Shaq didn\'t exist in the Lakers, I\'m sure upper management would fill the spot with some big man who can actually play center.  Especially with the money they\'d have left over.

Oh yeah.. and Pippen has never been known to be a clutch player nor a leader.  Pressure gets to him, and has always got to him.  He\'s a good player, and is skilled.  And when the pressure was on, he always had a dependable teammate in Michael Jordan, so he didnt have to sweat as much, but he\'s definitely never been known to strive under pressure.  So in that sense, I\'d say Kobe > Pippen.

Harper in his prime would smoke Fisher.  Harper\'s a better shooter/play maker than Fisher ever will be.

Fox vs. Kukoc... hmm i dunno.. hard one to call..

Horry vs. Rodman.. hard one too because each served a different role as a support cast.  Rodman was more defensive, Horry is more offense minded.

Overall, beats the crap out of me.  I\'d say its pretty even, but the Lakers do have a better star in Kobe than the bulls in Pippen.  The support cast, I think the bulls would have the edge here.  if it was a seven game series, it\'d definitely go down to the seventh game.. but really its a toss up as to who would win.. But then again.. who\'s the only player on both teams that would be willing to make the clutch plays and make the shots down the line?  Horry and Kobe perhaps?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 07:44:42 PM
Kerr and Kukoc perhaps? In the Bulls last run at the finals, Kerr won Game 1 with the game winning 18 footer I believe.

You pretty much pinned the needle on the head, though. It\'d be a cool series to watch, too :)

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 07:56:57 PM
Yeah thats why I said that Devean George doesn\'t even play center.

People are talking about Fisher being burned so much, well because I\'m sure you\'ve only been watching him during these playoffs and not the regular season. These playoffs he\'s had to matchup with Bonzi Wells (Who he did well against), Tony Parker, Mike Bibby and now Jason Kidd. He\'s playing the top PGs in the league. The guy is a great defensive player! He can\'t run with the big dogs, but don\'t label him as mediocre only because he\'s forced to play the best right now.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 07:59:32 PM
Well, that was the thing, Harper COULD guard the big dogs of the league. Oh, remember in last year\'s finals, where mah man Tyrron Lue was guardin\' Iverson half the time, and doin\' a damn good job on him? Almost Won Game 1 of last year\'s finals last year, simply becuase Lue was the sparkplug that made it a game. The Crowd chantin\' "LUUUUUUUE!" durin\' the 2nd half, that was godlike.

Err, *cough*, anyway, Harper good, Fisher Mediocre :-D

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 08:11:09 PM
Weren\'t you the one that said Fisher could guard Bibby before the Kings series? Maybe not you, but yeah.


That would be an awesome series.

Kobe vs. Pippen - Pippen probably had the defensive edge. Kobe has the slight offensive edge. Dead even I\'d say.

Fisher vs. Harper/Kerr - Harper/Kerr. Like James said Harper was an excellent defender, then throw in Kerr and his great shooting. I don\'t see Fisher stopping him.

Longley vs. Laker center - Depends on who the center is.

Fox vs. Kukoc - Even there. Both play decent D with some offense.

Rodman vs. Horry - Tie again. Rodman played great D and was an excellent rebounder. But he lacked on the offensive end. Horry is good on offense and can hit the open shot. Meh, tie.


Advantage - Bulls....in a close game 7. Throw in MJ and Shaq, Bulls win in 6....maybe 7.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 08:18:01 PM
Hah.. Before I thought it was dead even, but if you throw in Shaq and MJ, I just don\'t see anyone slowing down Shaq.

But Kobe on MJ.... Man this is a series I would love to see.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 08:20:44 PM
Well, my entire point was to compare the two teams without the help of their best superstar, and you both have ruined that completely :P

Oh well, **** happens.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 08:23:56 PM
Waaah! :( :( ! HE STARTED IT !!! :p :( !!!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 08:25:04 PM
Longley vs. Shaq - Shaq of course, but Longley might do something.

Rodman vs. Horry - thats already been discussed

Pippen on Fox - Pippen would run circles around Fox.

Jordan vs. Kobe - Jordan wins. If you doubt that you should be beat over the head with a stick. Jordan in his prime was unstopable. He\'d still average 30 points against Kobe....maybe 25.

Harper vs. Fisher - Been discussed too.


Then you have the benches. You have Kukoc and Kerr off the Bulls, and you have...George off the Lakers...


Bulls in 6.



*laughs at James*
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 06, 2002, 08:25:23 PM
I am an advent Lakers fan.  I did post earlier somethin like Nets in 4, but no I never got a reply to it..  was a sarcastic piece of mine, but it really wasnt funny.

Anyways, I\'ve been watching almost every lakers game in every season for I dunno..  a long time.  And I\'ve seen Derrick Fisher over the years, and he\'s a decent player, but not a good player.  I still think he\'s mediocre.  The only time I thought that he was really good was last year when he came back from his injury and started making his shots like crazy.

Fisher\'s got this thing with lack of confidence and stuff.  He plays great when he has the confidence, but he\'s not really the smartest point guard around.  He makes some good plays.. has some good defensive stops.. but I really don\'t think he\'s that much better than Lindsey Hunter.  Well, actually i take that back.. I don\'t like Hunter that much either.. Looks too much to shoot the three and dribbles the ball way too much.  Takes away from the triangle.

But even still.  Fisher has a lot of aspects of his game he still needs to work on.  He\'s slowly been improving, yet I haven\'t seen anything significant from him yet.

And Tyron Lue?  The guy was a no namer for 2 or 3 years for the Lakers.  He hardly played during the regular season, and his role in the Lakers was basically to guard Iverson durin the finals, and that was it.  He did do a good job chasin Iverson down, and I was actually impressed by it, but he\'s definitly not better than Fisher.  Lue\'s still young and has a lot to learn still.  Personally I think Kobe did a better job of shutting down Iverson than Lue did in the finals.  There was a game where Kobe held Iverson scoreless in the second half of a game back in the season last year. Blocks after blocks after steals.  Its the whole size advantage thing, and how Phil really hates using small guards too.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 08:27:49 PM
Meh, oh well, Bulls probably did have the better team...

Would be fun to watch though...wish we could :P

Edit: Oh, and the only reason why I like Lue is because he went to the University of Nebraska, which is located here in Lincoln. He was the best player we had, and he was the main reason that his teams went to the Big Dance when he was there. And Lue DID do a better job than Kobe last year...didn\'t matter though, they won in 5. Besides, Kobe never guarded Iverson, it was always Fisher.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 06, 2002, 08:30:37 PM
Fisher needs to pull his headband up...bugs the shiat out of me for no good reason.

James just likes Lue because he played for Nebraska.

Edit - Damn you and your editing. I said you liked him because he went to nebraska first! ;)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 08:35:18 PM
Koko you are absolutly right. Fisher isn\'t superb, but he is a good all-around PG. He does jack the 3 ball up alot and can make bad decisions, but I recall him making huge three\'s in alot of games. I guess a good word to describe him would be, inconsistent.

The Lakers PG spot has been unstable since "MY MAN" Nick Van Exel hauled ass. God I was a Van Exel fanboy (As well as an Eddie Jones one too). Ever since people have came and gone, Harper and Lue for instance. Harper did a solid job, and koko is right with Lue. Lue was a no namer and rarely got play time during the regular season, I recall him making some plays but he wasn\'t in Fisher\'s league yet.

And since we are discussing PG\'s.. Whats up with Mitch Richmond? This guy has only one game these playoffs for like 1 minute against his former Kings. I don\'t follow Richmond much at all but I do think he is the Sacramento Kings all-time points leader. However his defense is sub-par.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 08:37:15 PM
Richmond is being waisted. He is a scorer, not a defensive player, which is why he doens\'t play, at all. It\'s a load of ****, but oh well.

Oh, and GO HUSKERS! I know Lue wasn\'t great with the Lakers, but he\'s a Husker, so he\'s cool :)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 06, 2002, 08:38:56 PM
I\'m really starting to think of Richmond and feeling frusterated here. This guy should be over Hunter at the least.... Hell even Madsen has more play time than him....

Edit: I need to get some rest now, I have this place I go to called school or something. I guess its important. Anyways, later.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 06, 2002, 08:43:35 PM
...trade him to the Bulls for Marcus Fizer!

Fizer - about 6\'8, played for Iowa State. He was the main reason why Iowa State had a National Title push about 2 years ago, the year that Michigan State won it. MSU Beat Iowa State in the Section Finals, winner to the Final Four, MSU as the 1 seed, ISU as the 2...that game was considered to be the real national title, those were the 2 best teams in the country to most people\'s opinion.

So yeah uhm...GET FIZER! You will win all the national titles, rah.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 06, 2002, 08:46:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
I\'m really starting to think of Richmond and feeling frusterated here. This guy should be over Hunter at the least.... Hell even Madsen has more play time than him....

Edit: I need to get some rest now, I have this place I go to called school or something. I guess its important. Anyways, later.


You\'re still in school???????

I GET TO POINT AT YOU........

AND LAUGH!

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Halberto on June 06, 2002, 08:48:15 PM
I\'m sorry Shaq isn\'t the best IMO.  Time Duncan earned that MVP.  I remember when he dished out 53 pts.  in a game this season.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 06, 2002, 08:53:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
The Lakers PG spot has been unstable since "MY MAN" Nick Van Exel hauled ass. God I was a Van Exel fanboy (As well as an Eddie Jones one too).

I agree totally with your thoughts about Van Exel and Eddie Jones.  Nick was definitly the MAN.  Let\'s see.. back then it was.. Eddie, Van Exel, Elden, Ceballos..  i forget who else.  Elden, I never really liked all that much.  But I do wish the Lakers could have kept Eddie Jones instead of opting for Glen Rice.  I liked Rice a lot, but I personally like Eddie better.  And I also wish Phil Jackson had become coach before they traded Van Exel.  If it wasnt for Del Harris, I still think Van Exel would be a Laker today.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 06, 2002, 08:56:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ViVi
I\'m sorry Shaq isn\'t the best IMO.  Time Duncan earned that MVP.  I remember when he dished out 53 pts.  in a game this season.

Heck I remember Kobe getting 56 in 3 quarters..
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Luke on June 06, 2002, 09:21:46 PM
you guys are forgetting that during the bulls run, whenever they played shaq, they put rodman on him.

and rodman played him better than anybody ive ever seen.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Bozco on June 06, 2002, 11:30:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by LUKE
you guys are forgetting that during the bulls run, whenever they played shaq, they put rodman on him.

and rodman played him better than anybody ive ever seen.



I\'m sure Vapor knew that, he was probably a Bulls fan then.:D
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: theomen on June 07, 2002, 02:18:46 AM
Shaq would be quite weighed down by the three headed monster of the Bulls with Longley, Wennington and Bison Dele (I think) but would still get some points, however he may get frustrated with 18 fouls coming at him, and Rodman grabbing all the boards.  So I\'d say Shaq would be in the low 20\'s with maybe9-10 boards.

Pippen and Fox, Fox wouldn\'t stand a chance, he might score 10 points tops, but would be picked a couple times, and Pippen would have 20.

Harper vs Fisher, well this would be a wash, with little scoring coming here, except Harper possibly wasting Fisher in the low blocks (he was quite a low post player)

Now at PF, Rodman would have some good numbers on the boards 15-20, and would help on weakside defence against Shaq, maybe getting a steal or two.  But Hory would have a couple 3\'s because of Rodmans never leaving the paint.

Bench, Bulls plain and simple.

Now the SG, Jordan would tear Kobe apart, Kobe would get some points, maybe even mid 20\'s.  BUT Jordan would possibly score up to 40 a game.  Because let\'s remember that when MJ played against a quality opponent he would step his game WAY up, remember the Portland finals when he was on fire from three.  Also Jordan would be out to prove that Kobe is No MJ.

I\'d say Bulls in 5.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: theomen on June 07, 2002, 02:20:39 AM
Quote
Originally posted by kokopuphz

I agree totally with your thoughts about Van Exel and Eddie Jones.  Nick was definitly the MAN.  Let\'s see.. back then it was.. Eddie, Van Exel, Elden, Ceballos..  i forget who else.  Elden, I never really liked all that much.  But I do wish the Lakers could have kept Eddie Jones instead of opting for Glen Rice.  I liked Rice a lot, but I personally like Eddie better.  And I also wish Phil Jackson had become coach before they traded Van Exel.  If it wasnt for Del Harris, I still think Van Exel would be a Laker today.


at center was Vlade.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 07:00:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Bozco



I\'m sure Vapor knew that, he was probably a Bulls fan then.:D


lol. :laughing:


We all pretty much agree that the Bulls would win. So...um...go Charles Barkley...or something.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 07, 2002, 12:30:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
Even so...

Kobe vs. Pippen = Dead even. They both create and make plays happen, solid defenders, great shooters.

Fisher vs. Harper = Fisher. Fisher is younger and has the faster legs.

Longley vs. George = Longley. George isn\'t even a center really.

Fox vs. Kukoc = Tie. Both like to shoot the 3 ball, also like to slide in for a sneaky layup. Have the capability of alternating the momentum of a game.

Horry vs. Rodman = Horry. Rodman would get his share of boards, but he would offer few points and would probably pick up a technical. Horry always brings his A game in the fourth quarter and his a sufficient height advantage over Rodman.


Just my opinion really. Its tough to compare teams from different years, but thats just my useful/less two cents.


I gotta disagree with those matchups.

Kobe>Pippen: Pippen was good, but he was never as good as I believe Kobe will be.  Then again, if I had to take a lose, this is one I\'d want...

Fisher
George
Fox=Kukoc: Neither were that great.  They did what they need to though, both of em.

Horry
Bulls-MJ>Lakers-Shaq.  It\'s close though.

Quote
Originally posted by LUKE
you guys are forgetting that during the bulls run, whenever they played shaq, they put rodman on him.

and rodman played him better than anybody ive ever seen.


I think Hakeem played him better.  Rodman was damn good too though.  Shaq wasn\'t as good then though.

Quote
Originally posted by ViVi
I\'m sorry Shaq isn\'t the best IMO.  Time Duncan earned that MVP.  I remember when he dished out 53 pts.  in a game this season.

Shaq dominates Tim when they play.  Besides, Shaq was injured for part of the season.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 12:41:52 PM
Remember Rodman\'s brief moments for the Lakers? Didn\'t do a single thing for them, those were some frusterating years when we couldn\'t beat Utah and Kurt Rambis was head coach...

*shivers*
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 07, 2002, 12:49:47 PM
Yeah, but when Rodman was with the Lakers, you could tell he wasn\'t really focussing on basketball.  He was well past his prime.  I\'m talking about the Rodman from the years before then, defending physically and diving for rebounds and such.  During the years with the Bulls, there is no question to me that he was better than Horry.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 07, 2002, 06:14:35 PM
Throw it down....

Watching the game right now, damn I hate that phrase. :evil:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 06:18:13 PM
Yeah, that phrase gets old after hearing it 2 times every minute.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 06:18:29 PM
As long as he\'s saying it for only Shaq. Which he has all game.

Man the score is decieving, the Lakers should be up by 25 right now, not 9.

Almost halftime and Kidd is 0-3 on the night.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 07, 2002, 06:20:55 PM
Only reason game is as close as it is is because the Lakers missing many shots. Just like one of the announcers said...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 06:23:49 PM
Nets are throwing up bricks too.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 06:30:39 PM
I\'m glad I stuck with my guns earlier and stood solid with my pick of Lakers sweeping the Nets.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 07, 2002, 06:40:27 PM
At least the game is still close. If the Nets didn\'t shot bricks all the time, and the Lakers continue shooting bricks for the rest of the series, Nets still have a chance to at least prevent a sweep, and maybe really make this a real series.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 06:54:58 PM
The Nets are winning in offensive rebounds, turnovers, and FT attempts. They just can\'t buy a basket.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 07, 2002, 06:57:48 PM
Right now, the Nets are pretty much imploding. Nets seem to be picking up a ton of fouls this quarter.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 07:05:08 PM
Kidd is starting to get his shot going though....
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 07:15:50 PM
HAHA! SHAW HITS THE THREE! LAKERS UP BY 20! MAYBE I\'M CAUGHT IN THE MOMENT, BUT THE NETS SUCK!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHH!!!!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 07, 2002, 07:17:00 PM
Game is pretty much over. Being up by 20 now, the Lakers have this game in the bag. Well, theres always game 3 in Jersey. :rolleyes:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 07:20:49 PM
Haha Kobe just missed a dunk. :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 07:28:58 PM
w00t! Here come the Nets once again...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 07, 2002, 07:29:07 PM
13 unanswered points in the fourth quarter? Still think LA going to win, but the Nets have made the game interesting again.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 07:35:53 PM
Shaq knocks down Collins. No call, Shaq dunks it. Shaq goes over Collins back, lowers his shoulder. Foul on Collins. Jesus.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 07, 2002, 07:37:33 PM
Geez, no bad officinating here. :rolleyes:

I could count three offensive fouls that were either not called on the Lakers, or went the Lakers way.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 07:38:11 PM
Charge on Fisher. No call. Lakers score. God.

Now they call a foul on a loose ball against the Nets.


Games over. Bah.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 07:55:53 PM
*Scrolls over typical whiny crybaby posts over officiating*

WHAT?! LAKERS UP 2 NILL!

LAKERS THROW THE NETS BACK INTO THE HOLE THAT THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD ESCAPE FROM!

Nets didn\'t even come to play today, they just wanted to go back to New Jersey so bad.

SKUNK! BRING OUT DA BROOM!

DAMN ANOTHER THREE BY KOBE!

NETS GETTING ANNIHILATED!

HAHAHAHAHAHAAH! I LOVE IT!

JESUS ANOTHER THREE AS I WAS TYPING THAT!

MY GOD, TALK ABOUT DOMINATING A GAME!!!

HAHAHA I\'M LAUGHING LIKE A MADMAN HERE!!!

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 07:56:21 PM
I hate Kobe. He shoots the 3\'s when the games already over. God. Yes, the 2nd one was luck but still, he just wanted his stats.


Vapor, you wonder why people don\'t like Laker fans. God, shut the **** up.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 07:58:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
I hate Kobe. He shoots the 3\'s when the games already over. God. Yes, the 2nd one was luck but still, he just wanted his stats.


:laughing: LMAO! HAHAHAHAHAAA!

(Points finger and laughs at Fayded)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:00:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded


Vapor, you wonder why people don\'t like Laker fans. God, shut the **** up.


:laughing: OH MY GOD! HONESTLY, I\'M NOT JUST GIGGLING HERE, I\'M FALLING OUT OF MY CHAIR IN HYSTERICS! THIS IS FUNNY AS HELL!!!!

(Falls out of chair again)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:00:55 PM
Nope...i\'m not even gonna argue. I\'ll just laugh twice as hard when the lakers lose next year.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:02:43 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
Nope...i\'m not even gonna argue. I\'ll just laugh twice as hard when the lakers lose next year.


:laughing: DUDE SERIOUSLY! JUST STOP REPLYING, I CAN\'T CONTROL MYSELF!!! HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHHAAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  (Gasps for breath) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

:laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: theomen on June 07, 2002, 08:03:08 PM
Vapor Snake\'s respectibility is going down like New Jersey\'s chances of winning the finals.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:03:47 PM
You want me to stop replying because you can\'t control yourself? Seriously, just go away or something.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:05:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by theomen
Vapor Snake\'s respectibility is going down like New Jersey\'s chances of winning the finals.


No ****. And he was the one whining that Laker fans aren\'t arrogant. Moron.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 07, 2002, 08:05:12 PM
:rolleyes: Its not the team I have problems with, its the fans. Heres an example right here.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:06:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by theomen
Vapor Snake\'s respectibility is going down like New Jersey\'s chances of winning the finals.


Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
You want me to stop replying because you can\'t control yourself? Seriously, just go away or something.


(Controls self momentarily)

Its just so funny to listen to you guys after the Lakers win yet again. You can\'t just compliment their play or discuss the game, Fayded just complaining about something so retarded and petty such as Kobe\'s final threes... My god man, thats your two cents here? And then his follow ups were well, funny.

And honestly since you guys are rooting for the Nets I can see where you coming from... Hah.... haha... hahahahahah!!!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:08:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Simchoy
:rolleyes: Its not the team I have problems with, its the fans. Heres an example right here.


Bah Humbug! Even in a previous thread (maybe this one?) I said I couldn\'t careless about how Laker fans were generalized or what you thought of me.

I\'m doing what any fan of a team would do, be happy. I\'m not trying to rub anything in, just Fayded\'s posts got me rolling.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:09:20 PM
Sure, they beat the Nets. Well, Shaq beat the Nets. And you just KNOW Kobe couldn\'t let Shaq get all the attention. He had to at least score 25. Now, go away.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:10:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake


Bah Humbug! Even in a previous thread (maybe this one?) I said I couldn\'t careless about how Laker fans were generalized or what you thought of me.

I\'m doing what any fan of a team would do, be happy. I\'m not trying to rub anything in, just Fayded\'s posts got me rolling.



Like next year when the lakers lose, I\'ll be rolling. I\'ll mention how the lakers lost every chance i have. Then we\'ll see what you have to say.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:12:35 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
Sure, they beat the Nets. Well, Shaq beat the Nets. And you just KNOW Kobe couldn\'t let Shaq get all the attention. He had to at least score 25. Now, go away.


Wrong, wrong, and I forgot, WRONG! Devean George came up when Shaq was out, with 6 points... And don\'t be like 6 points thats it?!?!?! Hell even Devean George tied Kenyon Martin for points. Also Kobe made up with some offensive mistakes with defense. And god just stop bringing up those final two shots, not only are they insignificant, you just make no sense. He was standing at the three pointer, and was wide open, why shouldn\'t he shoot? The stuff you whine about is so petty I can\'t but help to laugh.... ha....haha...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:16:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded



Like next year when the lakers lose, I\'ll be rolling. I\'ll mention how the lakers lost every chance i have. Then we\'ll see what you have to say.


Well perhaps I shall take notes from you:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fayded\'s statements, when his team loses

*Complain about officiating
*Point out mistakes of the winning team, although they still won despite the mistakes.
*Keep in mind to always defend my team even if there are more loopholes in my argument than a hunk of cheese.
*Bring down an opposing player\'s characters by their tactics
*And when all else fails, continue to complain about officiating

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:16:20 PM
Ok...i wasn\'t talking about George. Martin had a bad game. God, i\'m not going to argue anymore. You\'re a Laker fan, it will do nothing. You just brag and enjoy their three-peat. I\'ll enjoy watching them lose next year.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:18:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
Ok...i wasn\'t talking about George. Martin had a bad game. God, i\'m not going to argue anymore. You\'re a Laker fan, it will do nothing. You just brag and enjoy their three-peat. I\'ll enjoy watching them lose next year.


Well when you say "Shaq" won the game, you are also saying that the rest of the Lakers didn\'t contribute. I was just proving you wrong. And for the rest of the post, well, its that stuff that makes me laugh!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:21:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake


Well perhaps I shall take notes from you:

Fayded\'s statements, when his team loses


*Complain about officiating
*Point out mistakes of the winning team, although they still won despite the mistakes.
*Keep in mind to always defend my team even if there are more loopholes in my argument than a hunk of cheese.
*Bring down an opposing player\'s characters by their tactics
*And when all else fails, continue to complain about officiating




Complain about offiating? All the calls i mentioned were fouls/not called fouls. They were open fouls, hell even Walton saw them.

Did i point out any mistakes of the Lakers? No. I just called Kobe an arrogant **** who wanted his stats.

The Nets aren\'t even my team....I just HATE THE LAKERS

Continue to complain about officiating. God, i called out what? 4 fouls. They were fouls/not called fouls too. You\'re just too blind to see them.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:22:53 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake


Well when you say "Shaq" won the game, you are also saying that the rest of the Lakers didn\'t contribute. I was just proving you wrong. And for the rest of the post, well, its that stuff that makes me laugh!


Shaq had 40 points, 13 boards, and like 7 assists. Or something close to those numbers. He made everyone else\'s stats look like nothing.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:24:23 PM
Uh... I\'m not even going to bother... Well, I gathered those notes from some replies from back in the Kings/Lakers series as well.. Anyways, I wish I could hang around and we could continue our spam fest longer, but I need to go play some basketball, just watching your team whomp another like that really gets you in the mood, ya  know? Oh, I\'m sorry. I don\'t think you would, don\'t worry Fayded, your time will come eventually.

Tootles.

(Flies off on broomstick)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:26:00 PM
My time will come when the Suns get good again...if that ever happens. Until then, I\'ll go for every team playing against the Lakers.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: square_marker on June 07, 2002, 08:27:38 PM
I dislike the Lakers not because they keeping winning...just for the fact Shaq is on their team.  This man does not have any class...you look back at the classy players.  There are none left in the NBA, it\'s like a ghetto rap league lol...entertaining but nonetheless.  What ever happened to those Isiah Tomas\'s, Micheal Jordan\'s, and Jeff Hornaek.....I mean these guy\'s didn\'t rub a victory in someone face or come off the bus at a stadium looking for reports to flant there arragonce.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:34:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by square_marker
I dislike the Lakers not because they keeping winning...just for the fact Shaq is on their team.  This man does not have any class...you look back at the classy players.  There are none left in the NBA, it\'s like a ghetto rap league lol...entertaining but nonetheless.  What ever happened to those Isiah Tomas\'s, Micheal Jordan\'s, and Jeff Hornaek.....I mean these guy\'s didn\'t rub a victory in someone face or come off the bus at a stadium looking for reports to flant there arragonce.


(Flies back in on broomstick)

Shaq has no class.... Hmm, okay interesting... Well the game of basketball is really evolving, hell it even (stereotypically) revolves around the Hip Hop culture. Thats why you see these new, so called "no class" players. And man you must not watch must NBA, because I could list 100 players over Shaq that have no class. If anything, Shaq is a pretty classy player compared to alot of the "thugs" around. Have you seen Allen Iverson? Yeah, you must hate the 76ers as well.

Jordans still playing by the way, but guys like him and Thomas, Hornacek are gone, because the game is always changing like I said before.

And if your still speaking about Shaq... How does he rub in a victory? The guy almost avoids reporters, and when he is interviewed he mumbles like 4 sentences. Same goes with Kobe, did you guys see him at halftime? Kobe said two words and just wanted to go in the locker room, but the reporter kept asking dumb questions.

Seriously, I don\'t think you\'ve watched the NBA too closely since like 96\' man. ;)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: theomen on June 07, 2002, 08:34:59 PM
Tootles, flies off on broomstick???

what the hell is the sh!t?  I\'m sorry but that is the dumbest thing I have read in quite some time.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: square_marker on June 07, 2002, 08:37:34 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake


. Same goes with Kobe, did you guys see him at halftime? Kobe said two words and just wanted to go in the locker room, but the reporter kept asking dumb questions.

Seriously, I don\'t think you\'ve watched the NBA too closely since like 96\' man. ;)


Well taking it that I am 16 lol....but maybe it isn\'t the class, but it seems that like some of these players are in gangs man...i mean seriously lol  Come on derek fisher...wear the headband the right way...u wanna know why he wears it all over his ears...its cuz he is in a gang :laughing:

I also like Kobe...any player that can join the NBA at the age of 17 deserves respect.....!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:48:18 PM
he was 19.... And Derek Fisher? Dude, your on crack....

Omen, thanks for contributing to the discussion. :rolleyes:You obviously haven\'t seen me post much...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 07, 2002, 08:53:56 PM
True, some of these guys might look like they\'re in a gang, but i bet none of them are. They might make rap music, dress like thugs, act like thugs, but whatever. And how does wearing a headband make someone in a gang? I agree, i think he should pull the headband up. It bugs the crap out of me, but he\'s still not in a gang.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 08:56:09 PM
If the headband helps him rain three\'s on the Nets than I couldnt\' careless what he does with it. :D

(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsportsmed.starwave.com%2Fmedia%2Fnba%2F2002%2F0607%2Fphoto%2Fs_oneal_vt.jpg&hash=5b2ef99b51372faeaec20bbf0eb5e96b8fdf76ea)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: theomen on June 07, 2002, 09:02:02 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
he was 19.... And Derek Fisher? Dude, your on crack....

Omen, thanks for contributing to the discussion. :rolleyes:You obviously haven\'t seen me post much...


well it\'s because i try my best to ignore you.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 07, 2002, 09:08:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by theomen


well it\'s because i try my best to ignore you.


Well you do a piss poor job at it.

THUG: (https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsportsillustrated.cnn.com%2Fstatitudes%2Fnews%2F2001%2F05%2F30%2Flakers_btn%2Ffisher_ap.jpg&hash=3f7e1e87210320e5d3c47baf1811fc3a27d391ef)

:laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 08, 2002, 06:44:45 AM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake


Well perhaps I shall take notes from you:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fayded\'s statements, when his team loses

*Complain about officiating
*Point out mistakes of the winning team, although they still won despite the mistakes.
*Keep in mind to always defend my team even if there are more loopholes in my argument than a hunk of cheese.
*Bring down an opposing player\'s characters by their tactics
*And when all else fails, continue to complain about officiating

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yeah, I noticed that too.  Fayded, learn to lose with some dignity.  The Lakers did not win that game due to officiating.  There were bad calls both ways.  Next time your team loses, try something.  Accept the fact that they didn\'t deserve to win that night.  Accept the fact that they were outplayed.  Don\'t lose your composure, and start pointless and senseless arguements you can\'t possibly win.  Don\'t start insulting the tactics or class of the other team.  Don\'t start saying you hate their players when you know nothing about them.  Then maybe...just maybe...you can come out looking like you have some intellience.

And yeah, \\/apor wasn\'t the only one laughing at your replies.  You senseless complaining is becoming all too predictable.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 08, 2002, 03:57:56 PM
(Flies in on broomstick)

Shockwaves your my new best friend.

(Gives shockwaves a cookie)

(Flies off on broomstick)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 08, 2002, 04:07:33 PM
The funny thing...I was actually eating a cookie when I read that :)

(takes cookie, eats it :))
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 09, 2002, 01:40:41 PM
Alright, the discussion is pretty much over, but I guess I get to throw my two cents in. Lakers got up by 20 late in the 3rd quarter, then put Shaq on the bench. Start of the 4th quarter, Shaq still on the bench, Nets get 13 unanswered points, make the game a real game again. Shaq goes back into the game, Nets are stymed, Lakers win easily thereafter.

Now for Vapor and Fayded. Vapor, it\'s all fine and good that your team is winning (Albeit, by ways that I hate), but you really don\'t have to rub it in. It lowers your reputation, and it\'s making a lot of people disrespect you, simply because you won\'t shut the hell up about your damn Lakers. Fayded, give it a rest. Don\'t *****. It\'s Basketball. If you say you\'re going to stop discussing, DO IT. You\'re only adding fuel to the fire by replying with some more spite, It sucks.

Oh, and for one more final thought. The Nebraska Cornhuskers are in the College World Series for the 2nd Straight year. Ph33r.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 09, 2002, 01:42:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ROL Jamas
Oh, and for one more final thought. The Nebraska Cornhuskers are in the College World Series for the 2nd Straight year. Ph33r.


Go Longhorns ;)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 09, 2002, 01:47:07 PM
BLAH. Death to the \'Horns! Gotta hate Texas...but they DID produce Justin Seeley, who hits the Go-Ahead Grand Slam, Huskers win 11 to 6 :D

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 09, 2002, 02:13:59 PM
It seems as if Vapor has been watching a little too much Harry Potter. :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 09, 2002, 03:00:03 PM
Haha, ahh, I would not doubt that at all. Either that, or Las Vegas has produced a new wonderdrug, one of the two :)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 09, 2002, 04:13:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by serrano007
It seems as if Vapor has been watching a little too much Harry Potter. :laughing:


Quiet muggle!

(Slaps serrano with wand)

(Flies off on broomstick)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: unfocused on June 09, 2002, 05:06:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ROL Jamas
Oh, and for one more final thought. The Nebraska Cornhuskers are in the College World Series for the 2nd Straight year. Ph33r.


Go Canes!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 09, 2002, 05:10:38 PM
They didn\'t make it :p
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: mjps21983 on June 09, 2002, 05:16:37 PM
The nets need to do one thing to win, get that giant called shaq in fould trouble, becuz to me, they can defend kobe, and without shaq there is no one in there to create.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 09, 2002, 05:23:00 PM
That, or do everything they did already, but with good shooting instead of horrible shooting.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 09, 2002, 05:30:07 PM
Given how terrible they are currently shooting in the second quarter, going to be a short season series. :rolleyes:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 09, 2002, 05:40:38 PM
I\'m not even watching the game...Not risking my great sports weekend on it. Watchin\' the Braves Rangers game instead, gotta love baseball :)

Go Nets anyway. See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 09, 2002, 05:48:58 PM
Well, right now, the Nets have made a little comeback, now only down by 6 at the half. Better then the first part of the second quarter, but still short of overtaking the Lakers. Lets see if they can continue their rally in the second half.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: mjps21983 on June 09, 2002, 05:54:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by shockwaves
That, or do everything they did already, but with good shooting instead of horrible shooting.


True.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 09, 2002, 05:58:35 PM
I\'ve been writing E:mails and just listening to the TV. Thats how confident I am in the Lakers.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 09, 2002, 06:02:55 PM
I\'m not even watching. How confident am I?

See Yuz.
Title: zzzzz
Post by: Simchoy on June 09, 2002, 06:18:50 PM
Ahhhhhhhh...time to do my take home final!

Lakers blowout. Go figure.
Title: Hmmmmmmmmm.
Post by: Simchoy on June 09, 2002, 06:36:09 PM
So much for that Lakers blowout. Nets tie the game!!! :eek:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 09, 2002, 06:52:07 PM
*turns it to the game* WHAT\'S THIS?! GO NETS! I WAS WITH YA ALL ALONG!

See Yuz.
Title: Re: Hmmmmmmmmm.
Post by: luckee on June 09, 2002, 06:52:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Simchoy
So much for that Lakers blowout. Nets tie the game!!! :eek:


Make that Nets up by 5 :)

On another note..how in the blue hell did aaron williams foul out and yet only play 7 minutes?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 09, 2002, 07:22:24 PM
Good question, luckee.

Oh look the Lakers WON!

WON!

TOOK IT IN NEW JERSEY!

WE\'RE ONLY ONE GAME AWAY!!!!! AH I\'M FREAKING OUT!! I\'m trying desperately to control myself, but I also remembered tomorrow is my last day of school.

Just one step away from the light at the end of the tunnel.

Lakers are such a great come from behind team, thats what makes them champions.

*Sings, "We are the champions..."
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 09, 2002, 07:24:59 PM
You know Vapor, I\'m an avid Lakers fan, but I just got to say..  If they never fell behind in the first place, they\'d never have to try and come from behind.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 09, 2002, 07:26:27 PM
Shut up, Vapor.

No Words. No Reasons. Those reasons make it even WORSE. God....*tries to contain anger* GOD.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Simchoy on June 09, 2002, 07:27:39 PM
Well, no one expected the Nets to do much. The fact that they made it a game is good.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 09, 2002, 07:31:52 PM
When they rebound, they can\'t score.  When they score, they can\'t rebound.  Go figure :rolleyes:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 09, 2002, 07:32:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by kokopuphz
You know Vapor, I\'m an avid Lakers fan, but I just got to say..  If they never fell behind in the first place, they\'d never have to try and come from behind.


If I didn\'t understand what you said, I\'d never have to try to comprehend.

And ROL.... Let the anger out... posts like those usually entertain me.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 09, 2002, 07:37:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
If I didn\'t understand what you said, I\'d never have to try to comprehend.

Bleh.. I was tryin to figure a way of wording what I said better, but i lost myself somewhere in the words..  Scary.. I must really be turning into a fob.

Basically something like if they maintained their lead and didnt fall behind, then they would never have to come back in the fourth quarter.  I sometimes wish they could put together 4 solid quarters instead of 1 solid, two mediocre, and 5 min in the 4th quarter of good basketball.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 09, 2002, 08:30:01 PM
Once again......

"THROW IT DOWN RJ, THROW IT DOWN MAN."

wtf! I hate thattttt!!!!!!! ughhh :laughing:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 09, 2002, 09:16:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by kokopuphz


Basically something like if they maintained their lead and didnt fall behind, then they would never have to come back in the fourth quarter.  I sometimes wish they could put together 4 solid quarters instead of 1 solid, two mediocre, and 5 min in the 4th quarter of good basketball.


Ah.. I get what your saying now Koko Puffs.

I\'m gonna call you Koko Puffs now, k? Hope you don\'t mind.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 09, 2002, 09:48:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
I\'m gonna call you Koko Puffs now, k? Hope you don\'t mind.

Sure.. whatever floats your boat mang :D

Just to make this thread a little interesting, and give Vaporsnake something to think about, I\'m going to attempt debating the \'otherside\' of the issue.  I do think the Lakers are one hell of a good team, but I\'m going to try out my rusty debate skills and see what I can do here.

Okay..  So the Lakers are going to role over the Nets and win 3 in a row.  Does that really make them great champions?  Does that really make them a dynasty?  What legendary NBA team have you seen in the past that does mediocre in the season and have to come back from fourth quarter deficits time and time again?  What great dynasty team was there that depended solely on two players and two players alone?

Great players are always characterized by their ability to make their teammates better.  Is Shaq or Kobe making anyone else on their team better?  With all the attention on defense that Shaq and Kobe gets, how come the other players aren\'t hitting all their open shots?  How come the role players only amount to about 20-30 points a game?

Would you seriously consider the Lakers a great TEAM?  When the top two players of a team are taken out, and the rest amount to basically nothing, is that considered a great team?  Take game 2 for example.  Shaq sits out for the end of the 3rd, beginning of the fourth, and the Nets roll on a 14 point run, bringing them within 4 after being down by close to 20.  And that is a dynasty caliber team?

The best TEAM that I see in the NBA today are the Kings.  Being a Lakers fan, I hate the Kings with a vengence, yet I have to admit that they are more complete as a team than the Lakers are.  The chemistry is there, and everyone contributes.  There are four to five players on the Kings that could score 20 points or more on any given night.  During this season, hardly any player other than Kobe or Shaq scored 20 points or more.

With the given dominance that Shaq has in the paint, with one of the best perimeters players in Kobe Bryant, the Lakers should be winning 70+ games per season, and should be rolling right throughout the playoffs.  Yet they seem to stumble on every little pebble they find on the road, and display the concentration level of a 5 year old.  Two years in a row they weren\'t Western Conference Season Champions.  Yes, 70% of the Lakers are better than most of the NBA teams out there, yet 70% of anything is not what people want to see.  When will Rick Fox, Derrick Fisher et al bring their A+ game?  Until the Lakers show that they can put 4 good quarters together, and dominate other teams as they are capable of doing, I will not consider the Lakers to be a true dynasty.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 10, 2002, 08:46:24 AM
The kings may be more talented, but the lakers are a much more smarter team.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 10, 2002, 09:01:07 AM
Meh, the Kings...they\'re still *****ing about losing. Oh well.

Last night\'s game was the proverbial nail in the coffin, and barring a miracle upon miracles, this series is done. Blah.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 10, 2002, 09:08:21 AM
Yeah, bring out the broom
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 10, 2002, 09:52:28 AM
No no, the Nets will win tomorrow.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 10, 2002, 10:54:10 AM
I dont think so.  Kidd had an MVP game last night, and they still couldnt win.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 10, 2002, 12:09:08 PM
Kidd had an MVP season, but whatever. They should have won, but at the end Kidd made some bad decisions. He shot two threes when they didn\'t need one. Along with a few other little mistakes that turned out to cost them the game. I still think they\'ll win tomorrow.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: square_marker on June 10, 2002, 01:06:40 PM
So where are the brooms....I mean, Nets suck...I mean...Lakers suck...I mean...... :eek:   GO WINGS
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: jm on June 10, 2002, 02:39:15 PM
How I figure it and what it boils down to.

The finals was just icing on the cake. They accomplished more than they expected, which was great. But I don\'t think they figured they\'d be in the finals til the won the first round.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: videoholic on June 10, 2002, 06:13:20 PM
JM, could you please get your damn avatar working again.  I miss that ass.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 10, 2002, 06:41:32 PM
Koko, I think what makes them a great team is how much the players have matured. Shaq and Kobe comes to mind. And yes it may be a two man team at times, but wasn\'t the Bulls a great dynasty? All they had were Jordan, and maybe Pippen. Thats it, same case.

I think winning three championships in a row makes a dynasty, regardless of other factors.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 10, 2002, 06:44:33 PM
But the thing is, the Bulls could have won 8 straight titles. The Rockets might have beat them one of the years but still, they could have come very close.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 10, 2002, 06:56:53 PM
By eight do you mean 6?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 10, 2002, 07:04:58 PM
Vapor.. Yeah, I think you\'re right about the dynasty one.  Thought about it a little, and figured.. what makes a good dynasty does boil down to how many titles they won in a row, and stuff like that.  Afterall 10 years from now, no one\'s really going to remember the little blips here and there anyhoo.

by 6 do you mean 7?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 10, 2002, 07:05:28 PM
No I mean 8. They won three straight, Jordan retires and the Rockets win 2 straight, then Jordan comes back and they win 3 straight again. They could have won 8 straight possibly.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 11, 2002, 06:32:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
I think winning three championships in a row makes a dynasty, regardless of other factors.


I do not think three titles makes a dynasty.  No way.  To be a dynasty, you have the be the dominant team, and remain the dominant team for a much longer period than 3 years.  You have to constantly be the team everyone\'s gunning for.  The Bulls were a Dynasty.  The Lakers aren\'t yet.  In a year or two, probably.  If they were to lose Shaq and Kobe and not do much next year, I wouldn\'t consider the Lakers of the early 2000s a dynasty.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 11, 2002, 07:11:14 PM
I\'m sure everyone has their own definition of dynasty. And the Lakers fall under mine.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 11, 2002, 08:35:00 PM
Lakers are a dynasty too me..
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 11, 2002, 08:39:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by \\/apor Snake
I\'m sure everyone has their own definition of dynasty. And the Lakers fall under mine.


I wonder why... :rolleyes:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 11, 2002, 08:51:37 PM
How many teams have won more then 3 titles in a row?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 11, 2002, 08:53:11 PM
*me thinks*

I believe only the Celtics. They won somethin like 8 straight...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 11, 2002, 08:56:11 PM
So the Lakers are a dynasty
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 11, 2002, 08:58:04 PM
No they aren\'t, not yet. They\'ve been a great team for 3 years. That\'s not long enough. Say if they don\'t win the championship next year, but win it the next, then I think they\'ll be a dynasty. A team can\'t win 3 championships and be considered a dynasty.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 11, 2002, 09:16:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
No they aren\'t, not yet. They\'ve been a great team for 3 years. That\'s not long enough. Say if they don\'t win the championship next year, but win it the next, then I think they\'ll be a dynasty. A team can\'t win 3 championships and be considered a dynasty.


Your talking like the definition of "dynasty" is in a dictionary under your guidelines.

It\'s all comes down to opinion. Every sports writer/announcer says they\'re a dynasty so go figure.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 12, 2002, 01:03:01 AM
The way I see it.. I figure the Lakers are damn close, if not already, a dynasty.  I figure past dynasties are teams which you look back at and say, \'darn that team was good for that amount of time\' kind of thing.  The Lakers in the 80s, the Celtics in the 60s, the Bulls in the 90s.  Those teams stood out as being brilliant.  It had star players that shined, they won championships, and they dominated most of the league.  Sure there were rivals at times, but other than those rivals, they dominated most of the league.

Now you look at the Lakers of late.  In my personal opinion, I think they\'re a great team.  I know I attempted to debate the other side of the issue, saying things like they dont have good role players, etc, but when you look at the entire package, they\'re one hell of a team.  when they want to win, they know they can win, and they do win.  They dominate any team other than Sacramento whenever they want to dominate.  I believe that it becomes a dynasty when from the start of the season, they are expected to win the entire thing.  And a lot of people expect them to be strong for at least 2 more years.  I believe they have a valid rival in the Kings, and they perhaps might not make it to the finals either next year or the year after, but they\'re definitely going to be on top of the league.

When you know a team is strong.. When you have a team that  so many people hate for being arrogant and dominating...  you definitely have a dynasty..  But then again, this is only my own opinion, and opinions of some other people.   And as Vapor said.. it all comes down to opinions.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 12, 2002, 08:05:26 AM
They are no dynasty. You can ramble about how they\'re the most dominant team in the league, but that\'s far from the truth. The Dominant teams don\'t just do it during the playoffs. Sure, you say that\'s exactly what Michael did, just turned it on for the playoffs, but if you didn\'t see during that dynasty, they set the record for most wins in the Regular Season (72-10, anybody?). The Lakers were a 3 seed in the playoffs this year, and were clearly vincible.

I still personally think the Kings should have won that series, but the Lakers got a lot of good breaks, thus, they are here sweeping the weak team out of the East, and the Kings are not.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 12, 2002, 09:11:56 AM
Shaq and Kobe were injured for about a total of 30 games during regular season, reason for 3rd best record

All this about kings being a better team, didnt they blow a 24 point lead in game 4?

Pacers pushed bulls to 7 games,  jazz pushed bulls to 6 twice, does this not make them a dynasty?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: mjps21983 on June 12, 2002, 09:18:34 AM
The lakers have not faced a formable foe in the nba finals all three times, look at it this way, when jordan won all six of his titles the teams in the west were still very good, magics lakers, trailblazers, barkleys suns, malones jazz, so the lakers have had no real test, the only test they had was there own conference.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 12, 2002, 09:24:31 AM
did the trail blazers take the bulls to 7 games?  I remember the fourth quarter, bulls were down by 14
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 09:35:30 AM
Nope, Chicago beat Portland in 6 too. The year before that they beat the Lakers in 5. Then after Portland they beat the Suns in 6 (anyone remember that game? That was my first bsketball memory, and i HATED it). Then the Bulls won their next 3 championships in 6 games. When they beat Seattle, Seattle had Shawn Kemp in his prime and Gary Payton. Then the Jazz, well you know who they had.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 12, 2002, 09:51:49 AM
I remember that game like it was yester day, grant blocks shot, paxton shoots 3, bulls win, great memory
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 11:13:24 AM
No no, it sucked balls, GIANT BALLS! Arr...
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 12, 2002, 11:25:25 AM
How does it compare to the game 4 3 pointer at the buzzer by robert horry?

the turning point in the series, imo
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 11:32:45 AM
I think the Paxon shot was bigger. It ended the Finals. Horry\'s shot was in the middle of the series, even though it did keep the Lakers alive.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: square_marker on June 12, 2002, 12:47:40 PM
Lemme just say this about the lakers.  As much as I hate them, they will be a dynasty.  There is no dening that statement.  Now you can argue which "dynasty" was the best wither it be the lakers, bulls, but if i had to choose it would definatly be the celtics....i mean 10 championships in 13 years....that is sick
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 12:55:42 PM
Yeah, the Celtics probably had the best. Then I\'d say the Bulls.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 12, 2002, 01:42:20 PM
Paxson, shot, SCORE! THE BULLS HAVE TAKEN A 2 POINT LEAD! With 6 seconds left, Bill Paxson has given the Bulls the lead!

That\'s the only play I saw of the game...I was outside biking during that entire game, came inside, and that\'s what I saw :)

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 01:45:55 PM
Then KJ comes down and gets swatted by Grant. I hated it.



w00t! 400 posts.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 05:59:10 PM
The Nets came to play. Especially K-mart. Go Nets!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: videoholic on June 12, 2002, 06:01:51 PM
What a shocker.  Nets are winning.  Um yeah.....
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 12, 2002, 06:02:32 PM
Lakers back within 2. Man it kinda sucks if the Lakers win the championship in Jersey, :(. Oh well...

Only one half left to stardom....
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 12, 2002, 06:04:34 PM
As I already told Cerebral, Shaq is going to tear his ACL and the Nets are going to win 120 to 70. Garunteed.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 06:04:54 PM
They came back with K-Mart and Kidd on the bench. Oh well, i think the Nets will win this game.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 12, 2002, 06:10:20 PM
Fayded you think alot of things that are wrong.

I have some people over and they are all busting my nuts with rooting for the Nets just to piss me off, so I just locked myself in my room.

DAMN! SHAQ WITH THE FACIAL!
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: square_marker on June 12, 2002, 06:11:19 PM
so far this game sucks.  I have counted 4 missed traveling calls and 6 phantom fouls.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 12, 2002, 06:13:03 PM
Vapor, that\'s pretty dumb...half the fun of these things is to watch the games with friends...Hell, I watched Game 4 of that Lakers Pacers series with my friend, who\'s a die hard Lakers fan. Nothin\' is funner :)

Oh yeah, K-Mart sucks. Store and player. Anyone from the Unviersity of Cincy is bad. That\'s right, shockwaves, Steve Logan is still trash, rah.

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 06:13:26 PM
We\'ll see who wins Vapor. If the lakers win you better not go on cheering hysterically....or at least not post it.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 12, 2002, 06:15:58 PM
Not me, I watch the players not the refs.

Finally the Lakers remember how to shoot the 3-ball.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 12, 2002, 06:18:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fayded
We\'ll see who wins Vapor. If the lakers win you better not go on cheering hysterically....or at least not post it.


Just because you brought it up, I will.

And ROL... you just don\'t know.... These guys are like screaming inches from my face and throwing peanuts at me and sh*t.

LMAO, one is sliding notes through my door. I think this is funner just evading them.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 12, 2002, 06:28:18 PM
Sliding Notes, hahahaha, yes, that is pretty good...keep it up for as long as possible :)

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: WakeRider04 on June 12, 2002, 06:53:05 PM
Well, I know I\'m probably going to get ripped into about what I\'m going to say, but since I only come here once in a blue moon, I think I\'ll express my views on professional basketball.

First off, if you were any kind of a good sports men fan at all, you would never respect or support anybody/team that sells out to make money, and in turn screws the fan. (Just a generalization)

Therefore, that lowers or should lower the respect of the sport to anyone at a professional lvl, is that most of the people, notice the word most in basketball, are crying lil\' babies hell bent and grabbing every single penny they can get even though they already have millions apon millions.

I mean, would you really want to take some average joe-shmoe and practaclly worship him/her just because he/she can do a lil\' somthing better than you?  Hell, why don\'t we wear Bill Gate jerseys, sure he\'s made millions upon billions upon trillions, but he was one of 2 people that came up with windows and revolutionized computers.  Him and that god awful guy for mac (who should have been shot).

Anywho, kind of got off the subject of how awful basketball is.  I just don\'t understand the way those guys figure on justifyin\' the way they act, so I hate the sport (at a professional levle).  SO, with any luck, some outer power will come down and elimante any and all of those cocky ass NBA "stars"

Feel free to bash me, I would really like to know what you guys think about this.  It\'s always good to get different view, and I\'m sure if you saying anything worth noting (which is doubtful) ROL over there will let me know

I\'m Out
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 12, 2002, 06:58:52 PM
*raises hand*

Go Collegiate Sports.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: WakeRider04 on June 12, 2002, 07:03:02 PM
*Bows head*

You learn quickly young padawen.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 12, 2002, 07:51:01 PM
Vap?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 12, 2002, 08:34:14 PM
I gotta give respect where respect is due. The Lakers proved me wrong by beating the Kings, then by sweeping the Nets. They are a better team than i gave them credit for. Albeit i still think the Kings are better. But they\'re out, it\'s all over. Good job LA. These NBA playoffs were pretty darn good this year don\'t you think?
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 12, 2002, 09:16:52 PM
Damn, sorry for not replying the instant the buzzer went off. These forums were down for me for some odd reason... (*conspiracy*)...

Well I\'m all cheered out and my voice is gone so don\'t worry about me throwin\' down the Caps Lock button... The Lakers were stellar these Finals, and did what I predicted them to do, SWEPT.

It\'s bitter sweet, a little disappointing that the season is done, and that we couldnt\' win in L.A. But yet feels very relieving as well.

Great season, and we are gonna go for the 4-peat.

These playoffs were much better than last year\'s, and I fear they will only get harder for the Lakers. Teams are actually starting to structure themselves on beating the Lakers, because we all know now that the road to the Championship goes through L.A.

I see Orlando being the threat in the East, and call me a fool, but I see the Clippers emerging as an 8th seed in the West, but I fear Sacramento the most next year.

Only time will tell... Its been alot of fun arguing and raising my post count through all of these NBA playoffs threads.

Time for some well deserved sleep.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: kokopuphz on June 12, 2002, 09:52:57 PM
I ditto your opinion about Orlando, Lakers, and the Clippers.  The Clippers have grown leaps and bounds these past two years, and I really think they will make the Finals next year.  They\'re an exciting bunch to watch.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 12, 2002, 09:55:37 PM
Michael Olowokandi for MVP.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Fayded on June 13, 2002, 07:03:45 AM
Yeah I can see the Clippers making the playoffs. Only to lose to the Lakers, Mavs, or Kings in the first round. But hey, it\'s alot better than what they were getting. I can\'t see how Orlando will get there, but you never know. So yeah, no more NBA for a long time. :mad:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: shockwaves on June 13, 2002, 12:44:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by ROL Jamas
Oh yeah, K-Mart sucks. Store and player. Anyone from the Unviersity of Cincy is bad. That\'s right, shockwaves, Steve Logan is still trash, rah.

See Yuz.


Trash that can play damn good basketball!  YEAH!

...damn, that was bad.  Anyway, go college basketball.

Oh yeah, Luke, what the hell are you doing here?  I agree though, college basketball is better than the NBA.  More exciting, and just better overall.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 13, 2002, 02:50:36 PM
I just wanted to say.......

I CREATED A THREAD THAT WENT 12 PAGES! MUAHAHAHAHAH :evil:
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: WakeRider04 on June 13, 2002, 05:20:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by shockwaves


Oh yeah, Luke, what the hell are you doing here?  I agree though, college basketball is better than the NBA.  More exciting, and just better overall.


Wha? Am I not a wanted here by you?  At least here I don\'t get ripped into for givin\' an opinion.  And if you look at my date of signing up it was in March...I just haven\'t said anything yet.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: clowd on June 13, 2002, 05:24:51 PM
My favorite moment of game four would have to be mitch richmonds fade away shot with abouyt 15 seconds left, it puty the icing on the cake,

also george got his confidence back, which is bad news for the nba:)
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Cerebral316 on June 13, 2002, 05:57:26 PM
Phil said hes gonna give Madsen more playing time to let him show what he is really made of next season. I cant wait to see that.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 13, 2002, 10:11:49 PM
Madsen isn\'t THAT bad. Although I think Jackson won\'t be able to back that up, because I feel the Lakers will get Carlos Boozer this draft and that will help tremendously.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: Cerebral316 on June 13, 2002, 10:20:14 PM
Madsen was ranked the 3rd worst player in the NBA. Yeah, I think he\'s that bad, but Id like to see him do well.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SER on June 14, 2002, 04:27:38 AM
What happened to Richmond anyway? He used to score big points when he was with the Kings..
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: ROL Jamas on June 14, 2002, 07:18:50 AM
He\'s getting waisted, basically...he should sign on with the Bulls and score 15 a game again :D

See Yuz.
Title: NBA Finals: Lakers vs. Nets
Post by: SwifDi on June 14, 2002, 09:39:36 AM
Richmond has bad knees this year, which just made his defensive game suffer even more.

Hell, at least he finished the season with a bang.