1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

[ESPN] Biggest offseason losers

Discussion in 'NBA Dish' started by J.R., Jul 27, 2010.

  1. J.R.

    J.R. Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    106,191
    Likes Received:
    152,877
    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insi...y?columnist=hollinger_john&page=losers-100727
     
  2. Prince

    Prince Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2009
    Messages:
    5,375
    Likes Received:
    161
    Lakers? they did nothing..
     
  3. Der Rabbi

    Der Rabbi Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    801
    Likes Received:
    428
    Obviously the Knicks are the answer ... they squandered 3 or 4 years of assets on Amare. Nice going.
     
  4. supdudes

    supdudes Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,530
    Likes Received:
    126
    LOl ESPN realllllly hates the Lakers. :)
     
  5. TheMacster

    TheMacster Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    263
    Likes Received:
    5
    Lol wow, Lakers improve with Barnes and Blake (both under MLE)

    and ESPN calls them one of the biggest off-season loser
     
  6. QdoubleA

    QdoubleA Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    4,767
    Likes Received:
    256
    Wth..the Lakers got better and lost nothing of significance, what am I missing?
     
  7. Qball

    Qball Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2001
    Messages:
    4,151
    Likes Received:
    210
    Hell hath no fury like a woma....like Kobe scorned...
     
  8. daeyeth

    daeyeth Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    28
    Garbage article since they put in the Lakers and the Nets in there. I'll talk about the Nets since ppl already commented on the Lakers and I agree with them.

    How can you call the Nets losers for what they didn't get? That's ridiculous. You could say that about every team in the NBA that didn't get Bosh or LeBron - and ppl would agree that too, which is silly because all three of those teams got better.

    A team is only a loser if they got worse and the Nets didn't get worse, they got mildly better.
     
  9. jchu14

    jchu14 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2000
    Messages:
    918
    Likes Received:
    913
    The author's point on the Lakers being an off season loser even though they improved is awkward, but sound in my opinion.

    Let's say they had a 50% chance of repeating next season if the big 3 in Miami didn't get together. Now with Miami, they only have a 35% chance of winning (Numbers pulled out of my ass). They've effectively become 'worse' in terms of able to win the championship again. It doesn't impact other teams in the league as much because they were not the favorite. The Timberwolves won't be losing any sleep that their chance of winning the championship went from 0.1%to 0.05%.
     
  10. ryano2009

    ryano2009 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    7,620
    Likes Received:
    4,997
    Wow, I would say this is the first negative article about the lakers.
     
  11. SunsRocketsfan

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Messages:
    6,232
    Likes Received:
    451
    wow sometimes you really do get crappy articles ... WTH? if the Lakers are losers because of external factors which they state is Miami got better .. Doesn't that mean every other team outside of Miami is a loser also?

    stupid article.. I really dont get why anyone pay's for the insider stuff.. but thanks for all those that keep posting the crap on ESPN insider
     
  12. BimaThug

    BimaThug Resident Capologist
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 1999
    Messages:
    8,333
    Likes Received:
    4,783
    Not quite.

    What if the Nets signed Matt Barnes to a MAX contract? Technically, they would have gotten better. But I think we can all agree that they would be off-season losers. Big time.
     
  13. YouCompleteMe

    YouCompleteMe Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2010
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    1
    Not really,
    ESPN has highlights of all of their games, the same can't be said about the Rockets.
     
  14. htownrox1

    htownrox1 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    7,209
    Likes Received:
    4,401
    THE KNICKS ARE THE LOSERS!!! MUAHAHAHA!!

    [​IMG]
     
  15. dachuda86

    dachuda86 Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Messages:
    16,307
    Likes Received:
    3,580
  16. vcchlw

    vcchlw Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2002
    Messages:
    6,823
    Likes Received:
    1,050
    ESPN tries to underrate the Lakers now so that they can jump on the bandwagon in the middle of the season when the Lakers exceed the low expectation.
     
  17. AroundTheWorld

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2000
    Messages:
    65,658
    Likes Received:
    42,480
    If it was Minnesota, I wouldn't put it past them to do that...
     
  18. meh

    meh Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2002
    Messages:
    15,311
    Likes Received:
    2,165
    I'm surprised only one poster realized this. Not to mention the fact that with Miami around, the focus on the Lakers by ESPN and other national media would be a lot less.

    Kind of stupid of the writer not to dumb down his argument for his audience. There really is no reason for a national writer not to kiss Lakers ass.
     
  19. goodbug

    goodbug Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,863
    Likes Received:
    32
    Hollinger is a Lakers hater and LeBron ass kisser.
    He's predicted Suns would have taken Lakers in 6 and LeBron would have swept Celtics. This was after similar prediction the year before.

    This clown is a slave of queen. He's gonna take queen's team every year.

     
  20. melvimbe

    melvimbe Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Messages:
    554
    Likes Received:
    22
    Following that logic, why single out the Lakers? If a team losing out because Miami got better, why list every team in the NBA that essentially did nothing? Boston, Orlando, NO, OKC, Phx...

    Singling out Lakers either because they are the defending champs, hype, or cuz you just don't like them. I personally think they're doing an excellent job of addressing their weaknesses, although starting PG is still a big hole.
     

Share This Page