Well, they were best in the regular season too. They won 57 games. Cleveland won 61. Cleveland played 52 games against eastern conference teams. Lakers played 52 against western conference. Then, lakers have had more injuries than Cavs. So how better cavs really are than them? Not to mention, Lakers get lazy once in a while. Cavs play each game like their life depends on it. While lakers were criticized all season long. Cavs were never criticized because they played like they should have.
It will be different in playoffs. We will see Anyways, I actually want Cavs to win over Lakers if it comes down to that. But i think Lakers will take it.. they are still the better team than them
Except for the fact that a team has beaten them during the playoffs? And how can you say that the Lakers are UNDOUBTEDLY better than the Magic who have steamrolled?
Collectively, OKC and Utah are better teams than CHA and ATL. Orlando hasn't met a team that has challenged them yet, like OKC has to the Lakers. Bobcats were a pushover, and the Hawks knew they lost after the first game embarrassment. The Magic will finally be challenged in the ECF, regardless of whoever comes out of CLE - BOS.
Agree with all points, I'm just saying you can't unarguably name the Lakers better than the Magic right now.
What a game. Anyhow, the league is so different nowadays with a premium more on skill, quickness, and speed, rather than strength down low. There are far less typical PFs from the 90's which started to happen when KG came into the league. What I go on is pure talent and skill and try to imagine if let's say Gasol and Bynum was growing up back then or let's say some tandem back then grew up today. It's all subjective bc it's so difficult to compare eras..but by looking at pure skill (ability to rebound, block, post moves, and shooting) and physical tools, I think you can get the best picture. I agree in 1991 with the Dream and Robinson reasoning, though this is pretty much only because Dream and Robinson were both monster HOF top 50 players entering their prime years. I disagree about the Laimbeer, Rodman duo. They averaged a combined 19.2 pts, 21.5 rebounds, and 1.4 blocks. Laimbeer was old and on the decline. Hypothetically, if Bynum and Gasol grew up back then, I'd argue that the Pistons would easily trade Rodman an Laimbeer to whoever for the young Bynum and Gasol. Nance and Daugherty lead the Cavs to a 33 win season in 1991. They were talented players who averaged 40.8 pts, 19.5 rebounds, and 3.1 blocks. They both shot a decent .534 from the field. I think their athleticism could have translated to today's bball very well. I'd argue that Gasol and Bynum's size would be too much for the Cavs. Gasol shoots .536 from the field and Bynum shoots .570. I don't think this one is a clear decision, but I can't say the Cavs front court is definitely better. And if you go to Hot Rod as the backup, then Odom just makes LA more versatile. Buck Williams would not thrive in today's game, but I must admit, the lasting impressions that have of him are late in his career as a Knick, and he was horrible by then. And Duckworth, I did see. He's the prototype I'm talking about for the 90's center. Big, tough, good lane clogger. Terrible offensive talent and slow compared to today. Duckworth's liability on offense would really limit his minutes nowadays. Malone and Ewing would fall under the Dream and Robinson theory, and it becomes a weaker argument for the former two. I think the original argument is someone wrote that the Lakers PF/C rotation would be mediocre in the 90's. And I just strongly disagree with that. Mediocre means middle to me. And I don't see Gasol/Bynum and Odom being the 14th or 15th best big man rotation in any given 90's year. I'd argue top 5 and clearly top 10. And if we're going to do this game that says any 1 superstar HOF top 50 players makes that rotation better, then it's a little unfair because if that were the case, then we'd say Kobe/Fisher plus Farmar is better than any backcourt in the 90's other than Jordan. But maybe that should be the logic. Let's finish 1991: Boston Parish 37, McHale 33 - 33pts, 18reb, 3blk Chicago Grant 25, Cartwright 33 - 22pts, 15reb, 1blk Dallas Donaldson and Williams, horrible team - 23pts, 15reb, 3blk I'm getting too tired for this...and it's such a subjective argument anyways. The only thing I'm sure of is the game is so different today than in the 90's so the role of the C/PF is different and the skills they need are different. Can you step out on the PnR? Can you take charges? Can you hit the face up J? If you are a big oaf, can you dominate down low and I mean dominate? b/c giants are a big liability in today's game unless they are Dominant in the block. Look at Yao and all the issues we're always discussing with him due to his size. Yao would be so much better in the 90's because of that style. He could just push and shove and park his ass and not have to deal with zone defense. And because the positions require different things, it may look like the C/PF position is worse, but it's just different imo. And Gasol and Bynum (plus Odom) is a really good front court when it comes to size, talent, and skill. They're not a mediocre in the 90's front court. I can accept disagreeing with some of you on top 5 vs top 10, but being mediocre is an unfair description imo.
Did you not take a lesson from last year's Cavs? Tell me what the outcome of their season was after they steamrolled through the first two rounds. It doesn't always help to steamroll... either you're a great team like the 01 Lakers were (and I can tell you that the Magic are no where close to as good of a team as that team) or you're like the Cavs last year. I just believe it may end up costing them when they lose that they won't be able to make the necessary adjustments (most likely against Cleveland) to win a series. That's just my take though.
I dont want to doubt your claim. Just I've been seeing this criticism of LA for 15 years. Its because they're in Hollywood spotlight making it like they get pampered and "complacent" with the prestige. They say the same thing for UCLA basketball as well. I think the "laid back attitude" thing is exaggerated. Kobe's supposed to be the most killer instinct hardest worker the game's ever seen. And his team takes plays off and games off? Or Kobe's playing hard, but everyone else is taking it light? And its always those "blue collar cities" where the team brings their hard hat and lunch pail work ethic scratching and clawing for everything they get (like, Cleveland).
Calm down. They are playing a Jazz team that was missing 2 starters prior to tonight, and they also played the youngest team in the postseason in round 1 (and were a rebound away from going to 7 games). I highly doubt they would be mopping the Celtics like this, and they surely haven't been kicking the snot out of everyone like Orlando.
Kim I'm not arguing that the Gasol/Bynum tandem would be mediocore in the 90s, but they surely wouldn't be so dominant as to where like 2 teams could match up with them, like it is today. You are right that the league isn't as physical as it used to be, but part of that is because the bigs suck. The ones with skill that can actually bang still dominate. I still think the tandems I listed from 91 were better than Gasol/Bynum. But even if you think they weren't, you still should be able to notice the difference between now and then just by looking at LAs matchups. They may get to the Finals before seeing one legit big over 6-10.
Just watched the replay because I missed the game earlier. Lakers dodged a bullet because Mathews doesn't know how to tip the ball in.
They aren't soft but the Lakers have a horrible bench outside of Odom and their pgs suck. Artest is a black hole offensively, and while Odom is easily the most talented Laker on that team he lacks focus and drive at times. They aren't soft but they aren't invincible either, my guess is unless Gasol can contain DH the magic will steamroll them in the finals.
Wouldn't blame Matthews, his momentum was carrying him away from the direction the ball bounced. I'm amazed the tip even came close to rolling in. I'd blame Boozer for butterfingering a wide open dunk/layup from Korver under 2min to play.
