OT: About the L.A. Lakers in the playoffs
Moderators: bisme37, Froob, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts, Parliament10, canman1971, shackles10, snowman
OT: About the L.A. Lakers in the playoffs
- campybatman
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,100
- And1: 185
- Joined: Apr 19, 2007
OT: About the L.A. Lakers in the playoffs
With Andrew Bynum possibly done for this season. Do you believe the Lakers will say they were without him as one excuse if they don't reach the NBA finals?
For me, If the Celtics were to reach the NBA finals, the Spurs or Hornets would make for an intriguing match up. I've a friend that desires for that opponent to be the Lakers. I could careless as long as Boston does their part and get there themselves. The opponent doesn't matter. The TV networks probably care more about that than anyone.
For me, If the Celtics were to reach the NBA finals, the Spurs or Hornets would make for an intriguing match up. I've a friend that desires for that opponent to be the Lakers. I could careless as long as Boston does their part and get there themselves. The opponent doesn't matter. The TV networks probably care more about that than anyone.
- RoyHobbs
- Senior
- Posts: 531
- And1: 0
- Joined: Jun 14, 2007
- SuperDeluxe
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 23,956
- And1: 23,621
- Joined: Feb 23, 2003
- Location: Celtic Nation
-
- Falstaff
- Starter
- Posts: 2,140
- And1: 412
- Joined: Feb 02, 2005
-
You know, if Lakers fans use Bynum as an excuse, then they're no better than the Phoenix/Sacramento/Timberwolves fans who've used the same excuse over the past couple years when they've lost becaues of injuries to Stoudemire/Webber/Cassell etc. Injuries are part of the NBA, and it sucks, but that's the way it goes. "If only" doesn't matter.
The Celtics lost 18 straight games last year, and only won 24. No one cares that Paul Pierce was injured for most of them. No one accepts that as a legit excuse. So in my book, the Lakers losing Bynum is no different.
The Celtics lost 18 straight games last year, and only won 24. No one cares that Paul Pierce was injured for most of them. No one accepts that as a legit excuse. So in my book, the Lakers losing Bynum is no different.
- campybatman
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,100
- And1: 185
- Joined: Apr 19, 2007
RoyHobbs wrote:It would probably be used as an excuse, but it's a legitimate one. Taking Bynum off the Lakers is at the very least the equivalent of the Celts losing Perk, and I know that would be a huge loss for our team.
Fortunately, the Celtics still have Powe and Davis as twelve fouls as oppose to Garnett who doesn't like to play center. Whereas, the Lakers have to play their second best player at center. They aren't afforded the same luxury as Boston with Garnett. Still, the Lakers have Mihm and Ilunga-Mbenga who both must be injured or just don't play much.
- Bleeding Green
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 24,178
- And1: 13,875
- Joined: Feb 28, 2005
- Location: Atlantic Champs OMG OMG OMG!
- campybatman
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,100
- And1: 185
- Joined: Apr 19, 2007
An excuse is a reason for when you don't accomplish a goal. The Celtics minus Garnett still feature Pierce, Ray Allen and a deep bench. Not to mention, they're the league's best defense with Tom Thibodeau still on the coaching staff to make adjustments if the team were to lose their defensive leader in Garnett. I like the chances of Boston to still be able to compete for a NBA finals appearance. Conversely, I can't say the same of the Lakers with confidence. Even with Bynum, the Spurs are still a tough out opponent for the Lakers with their experience. Remember, the Lakers are one of three teams, Denver and Phoenix being the other two, that gave up the most points (100+) during the regular season of the teams that made the playoffs in the western conference.
- greenbeans
- RealGM
- Posts: 60,140
- And1: 14,166
- Joined: Sep 14, 2007
-
Re: OT: About the L.A. Lakers in the playoffs
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 3,777
- And1: 13
- Joined: Jan 03, 2007
- Location: Leftcoast of the USA
Re: OT: About the L.A. Lakers in the playoffs
bonsaiflipflops wrote:With Andrew Bynum possibly done for this season. Do you believe the Lakers will say they were without him as one excuse if they don't reach the NBA finals?
For me, If the Celtics were to reach the NBA finals, the Spurs or Hornets would make for an intriguing match up. I've a friend that desires for that opponent to be the Lakers. I could careless as long as Boston does their part and get there themselves. The opponent doesn't matter. The TV networks probably care more about that than anyone.
Yes the lakers would use AB not being there as an exscuse. That is what they do. Whine, bitch complain, and then make exscuses somewhere in the middle of all that.
Celt's would crush the Lakers in 5. They would manhandle them.
- MyInsatiableOne
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,319
- And1: 180
- Joined: Mar 25, 2005
- Location: Midwest via New England
- Contact:
-
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 31,052
- And1: 19,764
- Joined: Jan 05, 2004
- Location: real gm
I think it would be a pretty legit exscuse. I know if we lost one of our starting 5, and I mean any one of them I think our chances of winning would be diminshed differently.
Anyway I think the team to watch is New Orleans. I'm officially a little nervous about Chris Paul the way I get nervous about LeBron. He is able to get anywhere he wants and I sort of think of the West teams they are one of the better constructed teams as far as matching their strengths against some of our weaknesses. On Paper only San Antonio seems equipped to deal with Paul and Paul has killed them this year If I remember correctly.
Anyway I think the team to watch is New Orleans. I'm officially a little nervous about Chris Paul the way I get nervous about LeBron. He is able to get anywhere he wants and I sort of think of the West teams they are one of the better constructed teams as far as matching their strengths against some of our weaknesses. On Paper only San Antonio seems equipped to deal with Paul and Paul has killed them this year If I remember correctly.
- MyInsatiableOne
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,319
- And1: 180
- Joined: Mar 25, 2005
- Location: Midwest via New England
- Contact:
-
- MyInsatiableOne
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,319
- And1: 180
- Joined: Mar 25, 2005
- Location: Midwest via New England
- Contact:
-
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,321
- And1: 3
- Joined: Feb 28, 2005
dclock wrote:Why would any real Celtics fan prefer the Spurs over the Lakers in the finals? Is it not a C fan's wet dream to have a matchup between Celtics and Lakers with Celtics dominating the Lakers?Last I checked Celtics didn't have a real big history with the Spurs like they do the Lakers.
Ooooh tough one. It's not as long a history, but it's a pretty acrimonious one. The whole Tim Duncan thing, constantly winning championships and contending while the Celtics suffered. It'd feel damn good to win a championship against the Spurs!
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 2,995
- And1: 0
- Joined: Sep 12, 2005
- Location: BEAT LA!
dclock wrote:Why would any real Celtics fan prefer the Spurs over the Lakers in the finals? Is it not a C fan's wet dream to have a matchup between Celtics and Lakers with Celtics dominating the Lakers?Last I checked Celtics didn't have a real big history with the Spurs like they do the Lakers.
I'm not a "real" Celtic fan, I'm a KG fan and a bbal fan in general.
And for me, KG vs. TD NBA Finals matchup is as good as it can possibly get.
If (it's a BIG if I know) KG can own TD in the Finals ala Hakeem/Admiral, I will die a happy man.
I mean it's possibly TWO BEST POWER FORWARDS EVER in a head-to-head showdown, ARE YOU KIDDING ME?