Perhaps the Lakers are just getting used to playing with the full team again after going 39 games without Malone and a bunch more w/o Kobe and Shaq. If the 7 gm streak means nothing, how about 18 of the last 22? The line about inexperience sounds like a major league copout. How many years must they play before they gain this valuable game-closing experience? Before this week, the Lakers had yet to play the Rockets, Kings, or Pups with a completely healthy team. Maybe you should see how they do against LA with Malone in the mix before making up your mind. The T'Pups and Kings found out that they were a little tougher to beat this time around. I thought you said the Rockets were inexperienced. And how much playoff success has your current squad had? I don't recall them making the playoffs since 1999.
The difference between Rockets and T-wolves is that the Rockets team are built perfectly for playoffs. They play hard defense, slow half-court offense, with a huge post offense in Yao Ming. T-wolves are exactly opposite to that. They don't play much defense, lots of their baskets depend on transition, and they don't have an inside presence. T-wolves can win a lots of regular season games, but come playoff time, they look very vulnerable. Also I just don't see a winner in KG. Sure he puts up very good numbers, but he cannot carry the team and make his teammates better. He is known to disappear in clutch situations or double-teamed. T-wolves are in a serious slumping mode near end of regular season, which is never a good sign. Lakers' chemistry look really good with Malone back to the lineup. Shaq seems to be really motivated with Malone on the floor. But again, I would like to see them face some serious competition, like healthy Spurs, Memphis, Rockets, Pacers, Pistons, or Kings without Webber before calling them the team to beat this year.
