<A href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/columns/psx/20000614/lakerssetforlongrun.html">Lakers set for long run</a> By Matt Steinmetz, SportsWritersDirect Sometimes you get to watching the Los Angeles Lakers and you realize you're watching a pretty good basketball team. Not run-of-the-mill NBA champion good -- like the Houston Rockets of the mid-1990s or the San Antonio Spurs of last season. No, more like Chicago Bulls of the 1990s good. Yes, the same Bulls teams that won six titles in that decade. ------------------ NOTHING BUT .NET CLUTCHCITY.NET
Just another mindless media loser, Clutch. Houston did win 2 in the 90's. If you are run of the mill, then you definitely don't win 2. He is yet another man in the long line of brainwashed idiots who think that there are no basketball greats outside of Chicago, NY, or LA. Yeah, LA is so good that they almost blew two games to the Pacers. If I remember correctly (and I know that I do) Houston swatted the Magic so bad in their last championship that Shaq, Penny, and Anderson couldn't pull together to even muster 1 win. That is definitely not mediocre. ------------------ He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
No comment, for fear I may be sent into Cardiac Arrest. ZIP IT! ------------------ HOOP-T Hey Shaq, Acme called, and they want their bricks back!
The Lakers have lost more games in the playoffs than any 65+ win team in the history of the league. It's also funny that the "run-of-the-mill" Spurs swept the Lakers last year in the 2nd round. I guess Ron Harper is just that good? ------------------ Too-Rye-Aye!
Give me the second championship team against anybody. Give them to me against the 72 win bulls and I guarantee we will wing. Give them to me against this years Lakers and I guarantee we sweep. Give them to me against any of the great Lakers or Boston teams of the past or even any of the few good New York teams and guess what we still win. That team had destiny on their side. They were not going to lose. They had a player that had possibly the greatest playoff run of all time. I mean there was a reason that players were saying Hakeem was better than Jordan had ever been. You see Jordan hadn't ever been guarded by 4 or 5 players on a regular basis and still dropped 40 to 50 points. I got a little off subject but you'll get my point. ------------------
I can answer the question in the thread title. He's one of the beat writers who normally covers the Golden State Warriors, writing for the Contra Costa Times (a suburban Bay Area paper). I'd always thought of him as a good writer, so I'm not sure what got into his head with this piece. Maybe he's just so used to watching the Warriors that he's a little giddy from seeing a winning team play. The notion that Shaq is more consistent than MJ is ridiculous. I lived in Chicago during his comeback, and not only could you rely on him scoring his 30 or so points per game, he was virtually guaranteed to produce a 20-point quarter if his team needed it. And because he was a perimeter player, you couldn't swarm him or deny him good shots the way Portland or San Antonio could with Shaq. The point Steinmetz should have made is that the Lakers could easily become the kind of dynasty he (wrongly) says they are now, just because their stars are young, and they're winning with such a flawed supporting cast. With the FA market and new labor agreement forcing lots of good players to accept exception-type contracts this summer, other writers have pointed out that the Lakers have the potential to win a title, then actually come back improved next year. ------------------ [This message has been edited by Swopa (edited June 15, 2000).]
"Jordan was one of the greatest players to ever play the game, but he was never as dominant as O'Neal has been during the playoffs." Speechless. ------------------ Too-Rye-Aye!
Sure wish they would have listed his e-mail address for a few choice replies! ------------------ Bring It!!
This is the worst crap I have ever read in my life. ------------------ President of the Moochie Norris FAN CLUB
RMT -- I'm working on it .... hopefully we'll find it. ------------------ NOTHING BUT .NET CLUTCHCITY.NET
So a team that was taken to elimination in the first round of the playoffs by a lowly 8 seed with no defense at all is as good as some of the best teams in NBA history? Funny, cause I don't think the Bulls ever lost one game in the first round in their 6 titles. Let's fast forward to Game 7, the game of the season for the Lakers. Yes, they won. But let's look at Shaq, and his supposed "dominance" compared to MJ. What does Shaq have? 18 points in the biggest game of his life, 4 turnovers, and is limited to 9 shots by an aging center who can't jump and is in foul trouble. Did MJ have those numbers in his career games? Nope. Hakeem? Nope. Both could also make free throws. This article was the biggest pile of garbage I've ever seen. ------------------ Cheaters never win. Unless you play for LA that is.
Cat, et al, Haven't we learned yet that when it comes to media based opinions, logic and statistics go out the window!? Thank You Bob Costass ------------------ [This message has been edited by mc mark (edited June 15, 2000).]
Damn that freak mad me mad! We need to start a new forum :"Dumbass' Email Addresses" ------------------ Proud owner of 271 different Hakeem Olajuwon Basketball cards
If you go by dominance in the playoffs, neither of the Rockets runs (a Starks make here, a Mario miss there) nor this Laker run (a Portland choke here) stack up with the Spurs run last year, nor Detriots last run or some of the Bulls. But I think W-L in playoffs isn't a very good mark of a chapion because it also is dependent on the teams they have to play. The Bulls for years had completely sucky competition in the East, I have no doubt the 94' Rockets would have beaten last years Spurs team either, I don't think it would have been close actually. ------------------ "The Rockets were ahead of the Suns by 20 late in game 2 of the series, but when the going got tough, we just Pippened . We would not be done in the series though."
I'm not even gonna read this! ------------------ Having a Rockets jersey, $40.00 Having a Rockets t-shirt, $15.00 Having CLUTCHCITY.NET, PRICELESS!
I think he may be saying that with the Lakers young nucleous (Shaq & Kobe) that they could be the team to beat for many years. It was a bad slam vs. the Rockets, but I think he was only saying that there is a potential dynasty in LA. ------------------
Damn. What a ****** cretin. He reminds me of that fool Costas who said that if shaq was 6 ft 1 inch he'd STILL be as dominant. I'd watch Mj's game over Shaq's game any day of the week.
I didn't know Micheal Johnson is now playing basketball. I do remember some other retired fellow by those intials that could play some good ball, but he isn't playing basketball any more. ------------------ "The Rockets were ahead of the Suns by 20 late in game 2 of the series, but when the going got tough, we just Pippened . We would not be done in the series though."
