I admit this is a gut feeling, but I really don't think this is the Lakers year. I did not have this feeling the last 2 years even as well as SA played the regular season. Here is why I think this: 1) Shaq and this toe thing. 2) Outside of Kobe and Shaq (when healthy) the roll players are playing extra stinky and inconsistently right now. 3) Rising Kings: The Kings, already one of the Laker's tougher matches because of Webber and their offensive guns, are even better. The main reason for thus is Peja is now a borderline all-star and Bibby adds extra stability at the PG. They likely will have home court because the Lakers won't spend their energy catching them late in the season but rather in getting healthy and rested (the old Rockets strategy). Some it all up: I have a feeling they can win the series despite giving up 35PPG to Shaq (which they will) and 27PPG to Kobe (which they might). I think the rest of the Kings starters and bench are so much better than the Lakers they could still win the 4 they need at home. Shaq will get his, but will miss plenty of FT, and the Kings may just outgun them. I say this not because I want this. As tired as I am of Kobe publicity crap, the Kings fans and Webber are bushleague so it is equally bad to me if the Kings win. In fact I'll probably rout for the Lakers because of Webber's final comments sent our way. Also, nobody should bring up the Spurs (or another team). They have no chance to beat both Sac and the Lakers, the Spurs roll (Rose, Jesus, Bowen, and now DRob) players are even a notch below Fisher, Horry and Fox. The best thing for the Lakers is that Duncan goes mad on Webber and knock the Kings out (or the Mavs or Wolves do this), because any of them are far easier team for the Lakers to guard than the Kings are. Anyway, that is my 2cents.
It's the Lakers world this season. They did the EXACT same thing last season...They were sleepwalking through Feb. and March, then they flipped the switch in April and rolled everybody. This team was built for the playoffs. Shaq will demand double teams in the post and hit Kobe, Horry, and Fisher all day long for wide open jumpers. The Kings' potent running game will be hampered by the slowdown style of playoff basketball The Lakers are sleepwalking right now. Mark my words, come April, they're going to start rolling again. Until they get beat, they're still my pick to take the whole thing...
See, that's my problem with the majority of NBA fans. Look back historically. How many teams have just been able to "flip the switch" come April and turn into a dominant, unbeatable team? Very rarely does a team dominate in the playoffs if they haven't been dominant for the majority of the season, or at least the last two to three months. It's absolutely possible that they can flip the switch again, but I have my doubts if they can pull it off for two consecutive years. That's why I'm not picking the Lakers this year. In 2000, they had the Blazers "choke of the century" en route to a title. In 2001, they flipped the switch come playoff time, and were in a different league than everyone else. Over time, the breaks have a way of balancing out. Before any Laker fans jump on me, I'm not saying they didn't deserve their championships. Any championship team gets their breaks-- see Patriots-Raiders game. It's part of sports. I just have a hard time believing the breaks fall their way again, since they aren't playing great in the regular season. BTW, A-train, the flip side of that philosophy is that in a close playoff game, Shaq's free throw shooting woes are even more magnified, and you can turn the Lakers into a perimeter team. I agree with what you said about the Kings, but I still wouldn't count out the Spurs. The Spurs typically have some early to mid season struggles, and have had strong finishes. The talent they have now is actually better than what they had in 99, even though Robinson has declined. I think they're very capable of winning it again, but unfortunately Robinson's production has to be a big factor. Because of that reason, the Kings right now look like the better choice. I also wouldn't count out the Mavs. The Lakers have no one who can match up with Nowitzki, and Finley can do as well as anyone holding Kobe. Yes, Shaq would be a monster inside, but a high scoring team like Dallas who pushes the tempo I think would give the Lakers problems.
the spurms have no chance whatsoever...none. those c*cksuckers just cost me $60 vs. toronto. to think, i actually believed they could beat a vince carterless, big-manless raptor team. F*CKING WRONG they suck. they suck. they suck. even jesus parker...he sucks, too. no shooting b*tch.
Losing to the Raptors without Vince Carter still isn't as bad as losing to the Nuggets, Grizzlies, Warriors, Heat, and twice to the Bulls.
yea, and being two time defending world champions still isn't as bad as being a heartless *ex-championship team full of overrated, nonshooting punk ass b****es.
I'm not so sure that they can't just flip the switch on. You want me to go back historically... well, ok: The Bulls, 97-98. People forget that the Jazz actually had a better record during the regular season. But that didn't matter once it got to the playoffs. Rockets, 94-95: One could say that "chemistry" was perfect. I'd say that the Rockets knew they had a player who could beat just about anybody, and went to him in the playoffs in a way they didn't during the regular season. yes, Clyde was nice. But Hakeem was dominating. Along with the Lakers last year, those are 3 examples in recent years of this taking place. I don't want to say anything about past instances, simply because I didn't follow the NBA much before 93-94, just the Rockets . The Lakers are bored right now. And why shouldn't they be? Last playoffs, they completely abused all the competition. They're arrogant, but in a way... they've earned it. I'm going to believe they're hte best until someone beats them in a series. Team with the best player usually wins... and in any hypothetical match-up, I think the Lakers have both of the two best players on the court. One could make a case for Duncan over Kobe... but not Shaq.
haven, In 97-98, the Bulls got taken to seven games by Indiana. They got taken to six by Utah, and should've at least gone to seven. In 94-95, the Rockets got taken to seven by Phoenix (actually down 3-1) and to six by San Antonio. It's definitely possible for them to win again, but if they do I think it'll be a lot like the first championship. My point is that it's very unlikely for them to "coast" through the regular season, and then utterly dominate the league in the playoffs again like last year. There's a precedent for winning a championship after a non great season. There's not much of a precedent, though, for romping through the entire playoffs after a non great season. If the Lakers win again, they will at least be really tested by one team, if not more, imho. BTW, I think it's easier to make a case for Duncan over Shaq, instead of the Duncan over Kobe. As dominant as Shaq may be, you can't afford to give him the ball in the fourth quarter of a close game because of his free throw shooting. Shaq is definitely the most dominant player in the game today, but I don't think a team with him as the only star would do that well over the course of an entire season. With Shaq, you have to have another go to player somewhere on your team, because you can't risk him getting sent to the line on crucial possessions in close games.
I agree. Does anybody realize how absolutely mediocre the current Lakers team is, including Kobe, without Shaq? The future of that team in the not too far away Shaq-less future is cloudy at best, but that's another thread in itself. Their role players' talent is waning fast. Fisher played above his head last year, and is coming back to the reality of his talent. Walker was a significant downgrade at power forward. Horry is less effective, and the "clutch/turn it on in the playoffs" argument is hardly a tenable one. Add in the fact they have absolutely no depth at center, and there's definitely room for doubt. The Kings are still their only competition with Dallas and Minnesota coming in a distant 2nd and 3rd contender-wise. The timberwolves would have to win it with their defense, the Mavericks with their offense; either would have to have one hell of an abberation of a series relative to how they usually play. Bibby really may be the difference. Jason Williams makes Moochie Norris look like a good defender. Bibby won't let a Fisher go off on them in the playoffs. Just having stability from the point on such an offensively gifted and deep team may put the Kings over the top. And unlike the other pretenders, they don't necessarily need to play above themselves to defeat the Lakers.
I think some of you are missing a very big point. The Lakers have had all these problems with Shaq missing games and are said to be sleep walking yet still have the second best record in the NBA. That's pretty strong.
True, but some others are also missing the point that other teams may also be sleep walking. The Kings, Spurs, etc. all know they are going to get to the playoffs as a reasonably high seed... what great motivation do they have that the Lakers lack? If you use the Lakers "believe they can win on the road" excuse, remember that in the last two years the Lakers have won a grand total of one series where they didn't have home court. By the way, Shaq has missed about a third of the games Webber has missed, and the Kings are still about three games in front of the Lakers. That's pretty strong in its own right.
Agreed, but one time is hardly a reason for arrogance. By the way, great sig... hadn't noticed it before.
I agree with Desert Scar. Only, I kind of hope the Mavs take it. Wait...no, they're in Texas. Okay, I hope the Kings win...no, I hate them too. Well, maybe Game 7 of the finals will go into so many overtimes they pronounce it a tie and the teams have to split the title. Yeah...that's what I wish.
The Lakers don't flip any switches. Shaq does. Kobe and the rest of the merry men hang off his pubes until another championship come their way.
"Flipping the switch" is not only NOT a guarantee, it is absolutely a dangerous thing. Just because you did it before doesn't mean you can do it year in and year. Here's an example that hits close to home. In 1994 the Rockets won the NBA championship. In 1995 they were completely banged up, got healthy for the playoffs and turned it on and won the championship again. In 1996 the Rockets went the same route and Rockets fans and players assumed they would "flip the switch" again, won the first round game and got absolutely blasted adn wasted in the 2nd round. NOTHING is guaranteed, and just because Lakers did it once doesn't mean they can do it again. Different season, different players, different teams for the most part. The Mavs are stronger, the Kings are stronger, the Nets, Bucks, what have you. That Lakers are looking very vulnerable, moreso then in recent year. Don't assume they'll dominant just because they did it last year. The path they're going right now reminds me a lot of the Rockets during the defense of their 2nd championship.
Even if you believe Webber is the best power forward in the game, he doesn't have the impact of Shaq on the court. The Kings are 12-11 on the road this year while the Lakers have the best road record in the league at 15-8. The Kings have played 3 more games than the Lakers, all at home.
With the trade deadline coming up & some of the rumors that won't die, I wouldn't dismiss any team just yet. The Mavericks are an interesting team & Don Nelson just recently stated that the playoffs are won with an inside game. He's reportedly going to give his big men more PT in preparation for the playoffs. While it will be very difficult (if not impossible) to pull off, the rumor of Malone being traded to the Mavericks, keeps popping up periodically (sometimes by Malone himself). If they could pull off the trade, that would give the Mavericks some serious beef up front & as we all know, Cuban isn't too concerned about the cost. With Malone replacing Howard, that could make Dallas a serious threat to the Lakers.
Some random points A. Last years lakers got nice breaks 1. Blazers were falling apart even before the playoffs started. 2. The Kings bread and butter last year was chemistry, but that went out the window in the playoffs with all of the "C-Webb leaving" talk. 3. The spurs saw the momentum the lakers had, got scared and choked. I would think even the spurs fans admit their team is soft. 4. When the lakers finally played a team with heart, their wins didn't come all that easy and the streak was broken. Not to take away anything from the lakers, but they got some breaks. B. On to The Kings 1. No more Jason Williams. This is the one guy who's shot selection is worse than Cat's worst. When The Kings had a chance to win a couple of games last year this idiot threw up stupid threes and does anyone remember that dumbass layup he took with the game on the line that Shaq swatted. 2. They can score from every position. They have 7 guys averaging in double figures. Even Divac will get his points against Shaq. 3. Stojakovic is better. Even without Webber the team tore it up. 4. Christie is a good defender and will make kobe work for his shot. That's not to say bryant won't get his, but he will be D'ed up. He's gotten better offensively too. 5. They're damn near unbeatable at home. So if they end up with the best record, lakers need to worry. The only question that remains is whether or not they have the heart. Lakers will be tough no doubt about it, but not unstoppable. The one team who could challenge them is Sacramento. Now if Sacramento takes out the lakers I don't know if they would win the series against a team like The Bucks and it could get interesting.
