Post#8 » by kobeaki » Tue May 4, 2010 10:58 pm
ooh, good topic....
1) the celts are older, and should they get there to the finals, they will be gassed, they would still have to also go through(most likely) orlando, we ahve artest now, they dont have posey, advantage us. weve got pau/bynum, they lost kendrick, without posey and with ron ron, kobe can guard rondo, while ron neutralizes pee-pee...and then there is lamar, a true "x" factor here...
2) the cavs were built to dethrone the champs; us! that is how that team is constructed, its also why we have artest, mainly for lebronze....
3) either team will present creative reffing, no doubt about that...whether its lebron being "protected"
or the kelts being allowed to play rugby-within-nba rules, it will be an issue...
4) as much as i id LOOOOOOOOVE to beat lebron, id like much much much more to beat the celtics, for 2008, for 1984, for the 1960's, for wilt for jerry(both) , etc....
the question is ; assuming the lakers come out of the west, would stern/nba rather see the kelts or the lecrabs in that matchup? i.e., whats better for the league?