[SAS/LAL] Can the Spurs mess up the NBA's dream finals?
- Thread starter Mr. S£im Citrus
- Start date
- Status
The only players left who I legitimately could root for without throwing up in the back of my throat are Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo on the Celtics and Tayshaun Prince and Sheed on the Pistons. I didn't want Boston to win until this point because Boston fans are the most annoying fans in the country (and it's not even close) but if the alternative is the Lakers or Spurs, I'll take that Boston championship and a million and one "i told you so's" any day. I don't think Detroit has a legitimate shot at winning the championship even if they do beat Boston.
Well, I'm not going to vote because I want them both to lose. 
Okay, I hate the Lakers and cannot cheer for them to win....no way...no how. Having said that, I really hate the way the Spurs play. There are more individual players on the Spurs that I dislike, than on the Lakers team. I don't hate a lot of the Laker players. It's what it says on the uniform, "Lakers" that makes me hate them.
Okay, that means for the 1st time, in a long time, I won't be upset if the Lakers win. I won't cheer for it, but I won't be upset.
Okay, I hate the Lakers and cannot cheer for them to win....no way...no how. Having said that, I really hate the way the Spurs play. There are more individual players on the Spurs that I dislike, than on the Lakers team. I don't hate a lot of the Laker players. It's what it says on the uniform, "Lakers" that makes me hate them.
Okay, that means for the 1st time, in a long time, I won't be upset if the Lakers win. I won't cheer for it, but I won't be upset.
Why does everyone hate the Spurs so much? I understand Bowen and Horry (for different reasons), but the rest of the squad is likable enough. They come from a town not unlike Sacramento, and didn't get good because of star power, but because they were lucky/crafty.
Now the Lakers? They can go straight to hell. I don't care if they get knocked out by Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett, somebody's got to do it.
Now the Lakers? They can go straight to hell. I don't care if they get knocked out by Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett, somebody's got to do it.
Agreed. Granted, the Spurs are FAR from my favorite team. Some of their players are dirty. Most of their players whine uncontrollably (although, as a Kings fan, I don't think I have much room to complain). And their coach makes a mockery of the game with the ridiculous fouling of any player that is sub-60% from the line.
With that said, I would move to Texas and buy a Robert Horry jersey before I root for the Lakers. I don't care how they lose, as long as they just lose. My 2 favorite NBA teams for the last 17 years have been 1) the kings, and 2) whoever is playing the Lakers. The kings are done, so for the next two weeks, I am a Spurs fan, without a second thought.
With THAT said, LA will win this series. San Antonio is old, tired, and lack home-court (which means LA is playing 8 on 5 for 4 of 7 games). I expect a hard fought series, filled with technical fouls, flopping, and of course, constant bitching to the referees about every call on both ends of the floor, by players and coaches alike. Kobe will probably hurt his back in game 1, his pinky in game 2, his shoulder in game 3, and so on until he has run out of body parts to whine about come game 7 (all the while hoisting 34 shots and averaging 28 points through his "injuries"... so brave). LA will win in 7.
And then Boston or Detroit will put them in their place.
My guess is Spurs in 6. In the get one on the Lakers homecourt and finish them at home in Game 6 theory. The Lakers, with Fisher and Kobe there dominating the ball and PJ on the sidelines are far FAR less likely to blink in a Game 7 at home than the Hornets were.
But much depends on Kobe. Swap Kobe out with Michael Jordan, and the Spurs are done. No way Jordan would let that squad beat him. And they could pummel him, get cheap, flop, whine, cry, intentionally foul or anything else the hell they wanted, and he would simply step forward and ice them. And give them a little glare just to let them know.
And so now we come to Kobe. He has spent his entire career as a wannabe Jordan. Loads of talent, but missing the essential character that made Jordan Jordan, and has made Kobe a cancer. Here is his chance to make like Jordan. He's got Jordan's coach. He's got a veteran team with at least as much talent as their opponent. And he is the best player on the floor, by quite a bit at this point in everybody's career. This is the one that Jordan never lost. Would never allow himself to lose. Pau and Odom look far more mature now than they once did, but without a leader you have to believe they will crumble before the Spurs antics just as they always have. Its put up or shut up time for Kobe. And if he does put up, Spurs go home, maybe even quickly. If he does not...
But much depends on Kobe. Swap Kobe out with Michael Jordan, and the Spurs are done. No way Jordan would let that squad beat him. And they could pummel him, get cheap, flop, whine, cry, intentionally foul or anything else the hell they wanted, and he would simply step forward and ice them. And give them a little glare just to let them know.
And so now we come to Kobe. He has spent his entire career as a wannabe Jordan. Loads of talent, but missing the essential character that made Jordan Jordan, and has made Kobe a cancer. Here is his chance to make like Jordan. He's got Jordan's coach. He's got a veteran team with at least as much talent as their opponent. And he is the best player on the floor, by quite a bit at this point in everybody's career. This is the one that Jordan never lost. Would never allow himself to lose. Pau and Odom look far more mature now than they once did, but without a leader you have to believe they will crumble before the Spurs antics just as they always have. Its put up or shut up time for Kobe. And if he does put up, Spurs go home, maybe even quickly. If he does not...
Last edited:
I don't find them likable. Manu is the league's worst flopper, and that in itself makes me dislike him. Parker falls down on almost every layup attempt, regardless of contact. He complains alot too. Duncan is also one of the league's worst whiners. Oberto is annoying for some reason. Must be the hair. Barry is ok, Finley isn't that bad, but I like Pop....when he doesn't use intentional fouls.
I didn't really understand it until this year's playoffs. Dirty play, cheap shot fouls, the defiling of the game with intentional fouls, etc., have really put me off. I advocated the Spurs as a team who plays the right way at the beginning of the postseason, and so far in these playoffs, they've proved me wrong.
That having been said, I would rather get rubbed down with sandpaper and dipped in lemon juice than see the Lakers win. So regardless of how annoying the Spurs have been so far this postseason, GO SPURS!
That having been said, I would rather get rubbed down with sandpaper and dipped in lemon juice than see the Lakers win. So regardless of how annoying the Spurs have been so far this postseason, GO SPURS!
If LA doesn't win Gm1 considering the Spurs have a 2 day turnaround w/ a nite spent in their plane, then you can pretty much say their goose is cooked right from the start. The other games will play themselves out, but Gm1 is a litmus test for each team if I've ever seen one.
In the 6 gm scenario, you're estimating the Lakers lose all 3 at SBC. Each team was 0-2 on the other's home floor. I think they're both good enough to win 1 on the other's court. Could be wrong, but that would be a rarity.
In the 6 gm scenario, you're estimating the Lakers lose all 3 at SBC. Each team was 0-2 on the other's home floor. I think they're both good enough to win 1 on the other's court. Could be wrong, but that would be a rarity.
I'm going way out here, and saying Lakers in 5.
And put me in the VF/Ryan camp. I am not rooting for the Lakers, but I am rooting for a Lakers/Celts matchup. 1) Its better basketball (to my eyes). 2) Its a classic rivalry. 3) I'd love to see the Lakers go down in flames rather than just go down, whereas the Spurs simply can't get off my TV fast enough.
And put me in the VF/Ryan camp. I am not rooting for the Lakers, but I am rooting for a Lakers/Celts matchup. 1) Its better basketball (to my eyes). 2) Its a classic rivalry. 3) I'd love to see the Lakers go down in flames rather than just go down, whereas the Spurs simply can't get off my TV fast enough.
I fail to see what one thing has to do with the other; why would your "love for the NBA" preclude you from rooting for Spurs/Pistons, or Spurs/Celtics? Hell, for all that, why wouldn't you rather want to watch Lakers/Pistons? Perhaps it would be more accurate to describe it as your love of the Lakers/Celtics rivalry than your love of the NBA?
Well while after all these years its a shrug to me personally, the Lakers/Celtics rivalry is the all time classic NBA rivalry -- that's good for the league. It would spur (hah) immense interest, pump up the ratings -- its a clear winner for the NBA on that front and would likely have the highest ratings of any Finals since...maybe since the Jordan era. Would have to see. It also would prevent a Celtics/Spurs or Pistons/Spurs Finals (the latter already having been a ratings bust a few years back) that could go 7 games with neither team ever scoring 80 points.
Last edited:
I'd prefer none of the 4 remaining teams win the NBA title, so I'm a little torn. I'm leaning a bit toward the Spurs since most pundits seem to be counting them out for potentially the 3rd straight series. But I really don't want to watch another NBA Finals with the Spurs, mainly because I agree with Superman's take of their play (which I happen to think has been going on more than just this post season, hack-a-poor-free-throw-shooter aside).
Yeah, okay... that much is self-evident, but no one has explained to my satisfaction why I should consider that a good thing.
I mean, I'll concede that the Lakers/Celtics would generate ratings, because the Lakers always bring ratings... But I don't run the league; I could give a rat's *** about the ratings. I'll concede that Lakers/Celtics is hailed as some "classic" rivalry, which is all well and to the good, as long as you loved the Lakers/Celtics rivalry. I didn't love the Lakers/Celtics rivalry; I didn't even like the Lakers/Celtics rivalry. I actually found the Lakers/Pistons rivalry to be much more compelling and, furthermore than that, out of all the Finals series to take place in the eighties, the only one I actually liked was 1989.
And what's wrong with having seven games where they don't break 80?
I mean, I'll concede that the Lakers/Celtics would generate ratings, because the Lakers always bring ratings... But I don't run the league; I could give a rat's *** about the ratings. I'll concede that Lakers/Celtics is hailed as some "classic" rivalry, which is all well and to the good, as long as you loved the Lakers/Celtics rivalry. I didn't love the Lakers/Celtics rivalry; I didn't even like the Lakers/Celtics rivalry. I actually found the Lakers/Pistons rivalry to be much more compelling and, furthermore than that, out of all the Finals series to take place in the eighties, the only one I actually liked was 1989.
And what's wrong with having seven games where they don't break 80?
Different strokes for different folks, S£im. Does it have to always be one person right so the other is wrong?
You would like a Spurs/Pistons final. I wouldn't. That doesn't make either of us right or wrong. It's like arguing with someone whose favorite ice cream flavor is butter brickle when yours is pistachio...and thinking there can only be one correct favorite flavor.
---------------------------------------
Now, back to the game...
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
I am officially now rooting for an earthquake.
You would like a Spurs/Pistons final. I wouldn't. That doesn't make either of us right or wrong. It's like arguing with someone whose favorite ice cream flavor is butter brickle when yours is pistachio...and thinking there can only be one correct favorite flavor.
---------------------------------------
Now, back to the game...
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
I am officially now rooting for an earthquake.
Well no. Despite my squawking, I'd be perfectly willing to live and let live about this; it was the use of the term "love of the NBA" that I object to, quite vehemently, in fact. I mean, seriously? You want Lakers/Celtics because of your "love of the NBA?" Seems to suggest to me that you might think that people don't love the NBA enough if they don't want to see it.
OR it might mean that "love of the NBA" was describing a remembrance of things past when the Lakers/Celtics rivalry was so intense it seemed to permeate all of sports. Almost EVERYONE had a favorite in those matchups. They were talked about by a lot of people who normally didn't even talk about basketball or any other sports. In the pantheon of rivalries, the Lakers/Celtics are true classics in the minds of many.
I think you were, quite frankly, reading way too much into the comment.
I think you were, quite frankly, reading way too much into the comment.
- Status