PDA

View Full Version : More disgraceful and embarrassing: 58 or 39 point loss?



lakers4sho
04-28-2009, 11:11 PM
I was listening to the radio a while ago, and they were discussing this question,

Which is more disgraceful/embarrassing?

a. Losing by 58 points in front of your home crowd in the first round

or

b. Losing by 39 points away from home in an elimination game in the NBA Finals

Discuss.

superkegger
04-28-2009, 11:13 PM
39 point Finals loss. If you make it to the finals, you shouldn't get beat by that much. That's embarassing and signs of mental weakness and giving up.

A first round domination just shows you're not that good, and while you had a horrific game, part of it was that the other team was just that much better.

pd7631
04-28-2009, 11:16 PM
58 points is really, really, really bad. I'd definitely say that that's more embarassing. It's never good when you lose so bad that it's a record.

kb24ap28
04-28-2009, 11:20 PM
kegger makes a good point but still, 58 points is just flat out horrendous

effen5
04-28-2009, 11:21 PM
Losing 50+ is a ****in joke....

lakers4sho
04-28-2009, 11:23 PM
Not only that, but their own fans also paid to see them play...

still1ballin
04-28-2009, 11:25 PM
Ugh, don't remind me of the 39 pts loss....I'll choose option A

op12
04-28-2009, 11:28 PM
you shouldnt lose by that much in a game for the nba championship. not trying to bash the lakers but when you are a top 2 team that type of lose makes it look like the winning team is far superior. the lakers were obviously better than that last year and either just didnt show up, gave up or buckled under pressure. tough to end a strong season that way. even though losing by more than 50 is pretty terrible.

KB24PG16
04-28-2009, 11:55 PM
39 point loss was bad but a lot of t was in garbage time but the 58 point lead was mostly built during when the starters were playing

superkegger
04-29-2009, 12:01 AM
Here's my thing.

In that finals game, it was the Lakers team sans Kobe being mentally weak and just not showing up. Kobe still put up 25, 7 boards, 4 assists, and 5 steals with 6 TO's. Paul had 4 points, 6 assists and 6 TO's. We saw that Denver took Paul out of it, and nobody else could step up and do anything. To me that, along with alot more, that they're just not THAT good of a team, and the nuggets are just a much better team.

In the Lakers-Celtics Finals, the Celtics weren't that much better of a team. We just decided to puss out in that game, and got beat like a JV team on the biggest stage in basketball. To me there's nothing more embarrasing (in basketball terms) than getting beat by a team that you're about equal with, on the biggest stage because you're mentally weak and can't overcome adversity.

MrBloop
04-29-2009, 12:05 AM
I was listening to the radio a while ago, and they were discussing this question,

Which is more disgraceful/embarrassing?

a. Losing by 58 points in front of your home crowd in the first round

or

b. Losing by 39 points away from home in an elimination game in the NBA Finals

Discuss.

Does it get any better than this thread??? I say no way in hell.

Its never cool to lose by 39 in the finals...what's left to ponder?

JordansBulls
04-29-2009, 12:15 AM
39 point Finals loss. If you make it to the finals, you shouldn't get beat by that much. That's embarassing and signs of mental weakness and giving up.

A first round domination just shows you're not that good, and while you had a horrific game, part of it was that the other team was just that much better.

Jazz lost by 42 to the Bulls in the finals.

However I do believe that in a concluding game you should never get beat by that much in the finals.

The 58 point loss is almost as if you didn't show up.

superkegger
04-29-2009, 12:21 AM
Jazz lost by 42 to the Bulls in the finals.

However I do believe that in a concluding game you should never get beat by that much in the finals.

The 58 point loss is almost as if you didn't show up.

Yeah, that was quite the embarrasing game for the Jazz, but it also wasn't the norm for the series (only game decided by more than 5 points). The Hornets had 2 blowout losses already in the series, we know they're not as good as the nuggets. While it's a horribly embarrasing loss, we know the Hornets aren't as good as the nuggets.

That's my point more than anything. The same can't be said of the Lakers-Celtics last year. The Celtics weren't head and shoulers above the lakers.

G-Funk
04-29-2009, 01:00 AM
Im ashamed of that loss but a Championship will make me forget about it.

what54!?
04-29-2009, 01:03 AM
getting blown out by 58 at home. Thats ****ing pathetic. The road team just made your house their house after that

KobeIs
04-29-2009, 01:03 AM
39 pts to me.
grandest stage of them all.
nationally televised game and lose by 39 pts when almost everyone expected the lakers to actually win the series. it was really sad.

$KnicksAndKobe$
04-29-2009, 01:22 AM
38 is 38

58 ... well wow it's like 60 and that's tooo sexy

conway429
04-29-2009, 01:30 AM
39 pts to me.
grandest stage of them all.
nationally televised game and lose by 39 pts when almost everyone expected the lakers to actually win the series. it was really sad.

that's not true.
everyone always say this and I really don't remember it being like that.
it was definately supposed to be close, so I don't think you can say almost everyone expected the lakers to win.
either way, I'd say it's got to be the 58 point loss, and how could there be any comparison.
39 point losses have happened. I didn't think I'd ever see a team lose by 58 in the playoffs.
Plus it was at home, which just makes it more significant and more embaressing. Maybe if it had been in Denver it would have been 70 points.
So, as far as I'm concerned, I see it as 70 > 39
New Orleans was one of the top teams in the NBA last season, so you can't really say the Nuggets were so much better, and that's why the score was the way it was.
and sure, the NBA finals are nationally televised and on a massive stage, but the entire NBA playoffs are pretty well covered by the media and put on a pretty large stage. so it's not like this game slipped below the radar or anything.
did anyone not find out what happened?

superkegger
04-29-2009, 01:52 AM
that's not true.
everyone always say this and I really don't remember it being like that.
it was definately supposed to be close, so I don't think you can say almost everyone expected the lakers to win.
either way, I'd say it's got to be the 58 point loss, and how could there be any comparison.
39 point losses have happened. I didn't think I'd ever see a team lose by 58 in the playoffs.
Plus it was at home, which just makes it more significant and more embaressing. Maybe if it had been in Denver it would have been 70 points.
So, as far as I'm concerned, I see it as 70 > 39
New Orleans was one of the top teams in the NBA last season, so you can't really say the Nuggets were so much better, and that's why the score was the way it was.
and sure, the NBA finals are nationally televised and on a massive stage, but the entire NBA playoffs are pretty well covered by the media and put on a pretty large stage. so it's not like this game slipped below the radar or anything.
did anyone not find out what happened?

What the nuggets did last year has little to do with how good they were this year.

Chandler is gimpy and ineffective. Peja has dropped off hardcore. No Janero Pargo. And while they added James Posey, their weaknesses on the bench are guard and Bigs, neither of which posey helps. the nuggets beat them by 29 in game 1, 15 in game 2 and barely lost in game 3. So while the Nuggets aren't 58 points better than the Hornets, they are clearly much better.

DrDEADalready
04-29-2009, 10:07 AM
58 points. plus on your home floor? Flat out Re Donk U las.. Jazz fans would shun the Jazz if that happened here.

IndyRealist
04-29-2009, 11:31 AM
If you lose by 58 in the first round, you were probably lucky to have been in the playoffs to begin with. No reason to be embarassed about overachieving.

If you make it to the finals you've already beaten 3 teams and gotten 12 wins in as many as 21 games. Barring catastrophic injury to your star player(s), losing by 39 (or 42) is just ridiculous.

nyybronxborn
04-29-2009, 11:40 AM
a team that gets a lwo sead may not be any good so even though losing by 58 is awful
losing by 39 in finals is worse just because you are the best 2 teams in the game and never should you lose by that much

mitch91
04-29-2009, 11:42 AM
58 is alot and i mean ALOT to get beat by but its in the first round and if you reach the finals your expecting to have a good shot at winning the whole thing but a blowout like that in a finals is disgraceful

Durant is hype
04-29-2009, 11:45 AM
If you lose by 58 in the first round, you were probably lucky to have been in the playoffs to begin with. No reason to be embarassed about overachieving.

If you make it to the finals you've already beaten 3 teams and gotten 12 wins in as many as 21 games. Barring catastrophic injury to your star player(s), losing by 39 (or 42) is just ridiculous.

Great point.

Very tough question. Standings would make it much easier to answer this question.

69centers
04-29-2009, 12:27 PM
that's not true.
everyone always say this and I really don't remember it being like that.
it was definately supposed to be close, so I don't think you can say almost everyone expected the lakers to win...

Um, maybe YOU just don't recall, but right before the finals started, EVERYONE was picking the Lakers to win that series. If you went to ESPN.com they had a 10 man poll from their biggest sports analysts and writers and, at first, 10 out of 10 picked the Lakers. Then, as if someone at ESPN said, "hey, we'll look foolish if we all pick the Lakers and they lose" about a day or two later, if you went to the site, one guy changed his pick to the Celtics. Still, 9 out of 10 had picked the Lakers.

Not sure where you are getting that the Finals were supposed to be close, because, believe me, I remember all the Finals predictions very well.

Getting beat 39 in an elimination Finals game, to your worst rivals, is bar far a worse loss than the Hornets the other night. They're still playing in that series.

jrands
04-29-2009, 01:01 PM
39 point loss definitely. Staving off elimination, playing for a championship, and lose by 39? C'mon...

td0tsfinest
04-29-2009, 02:28 PM
39 loss in the final.

tjlipford
04-29-2009, 03:14 PM
Both are horrible.

Losing by 58 points to another NBA team is terrible and I feel for those fans who paid there money to see it. Thats embarassing and there is no excuses.

Losing by 39 in the Finals might even be worse. Especially with Kobe.

bostncelts34
04-29-2009, 03:59 PM
39 point Finals loss. If you make it to the finals, you shouldn't get beat by that much. That's embarassing and signs of mental weakness and giving up.

A first round domination just shows you're not that good, and while you had a horrific game, part of it was that the other team was just that much better.

x2

lakers4sho
04-29-2009, 04:28 PM
What the nuggets did last year has little to do with how good they were this year.

Chandler is gimpy and ineffective. Peja has dropped off hardcore. No Janero Pargo. And while they added James Posey, their weaknesses on the bench are guard and Bigs, neither of which posey helps. the nuggets beat them by 29 in game 1, 15 in game 2 and barely lost in game 3. So while the Nuggets aren't 58 points better than the Hornets, they are clearly much better.

Exactly, the Hornets are that bad. It's embarrassing, hence the answer.

JJ81
04-29-2009, 04:40 PM
58... how!?

CityofTreez
04-29-2009, 05:23 PM
LA Lakers take the cake!

A historic franchise in the Playoffs lose by 39 to another historic franchise. I'm pretty sure that was the decisive game as well. The Paul Pierce shot in Kobe's face-priceless.

The Hornets have a new crowd and their team is full of youth. They are not a promising playoff team, losing the way they did to the Spurs last year. They have not been playing like a playoff claiber team since....they lost to the Sac Kings on their home court in 11/14/09. They lost by 10 to the worst team in the league @ home. So this wasn't surprising especially since Billups was going up aginst CP3, huge mismatch.

TheDiggler
04-29-2009, 05:26 PM
Every loss pisses off. Doesn't depend on points. But 58 points get you the feeling you are on the wrong the team ...

rapswin98
04-29-2009, 06:26 PM
losing by 58 points is just discusting, whether its a season game or playoff game

superkegger
04-29-2009, 07:07 PM
LA Lakers take the cake!

A historic franchise in the Playoffs lose by 39 to another historic franchise. I'm pretty sure that was the decisive game as well. The Paul Pierce shot in Kobe's face-priceless.

The Hornets have a new crowd and their team is full of youth. They are not a promising playoff team, losing the way they did to the Spurs last year. They have not been playing like a playoff claiber team since....they lost to the Sac Kings on their home court in 11/14/09. They lost by 10 to the worst team in the league @ home. So this wasn't surprising especially since Billups was going up aginst CP3, huge mismatch.

:confused:

New crowd? Youth? What?

Bluerapoileagle
04-29-2009, 07:39 PM
It doesn't matter when it is, a 58 point loss is really, really embarrasing and something that should never happen ever if you want to call yourself a NBA team, especially when it's a home game.

CityofTreez
04-29-2009, 07:39 PM
:confused:

New crowd? Youth? What?

I'm getting at the fact they just came back to New Orleans. Their fan base fell drastically after Hurricane Katrina. They moved to Oklahoma City for a year or two. They got a young team especially w/ Chris Paul as the vocal leader. If you wanna count veterans there is Posey/Chandler/Peterson/Daniels/Peja don;t matter cause he doesn't play at all even as a starter.

I'm pretty sure Rasaul Butler & Hilton Armstrong played significant minutes throughout the season. They cannot hang w/ Anderson/Martin/Nene at all.

Billups/Smith/Anthony/Martin/Nene-Anderson
Paul/Butler/Peja/West/Chandler
D-West is the only considerable match-up, you can't even match Billup's veteran experience to CP3 monster seasons.

Kakaroach
04-29-2009, 07:48 PM
Both are pretty bad. But bad losses is one of the things that separates championship teams from playoff teams. I'd say a 39 point loss in the Finals is on a much bigger stage, so yeah.

VRP723
04-29-2009, 07:58 PM
You can't lose at home that bad, it's way more embarrasing just because of that

FaceDown91
04-29-2009, 08:51 PM
Forget the question. I'm noticing a lot of laker fans are voting against their own team and saying that the 39 point loss was worse and the other fans are saying the 58 point loss was the worst.

Laker fans, u feel that most of PSD is a laker hating forum and the one time they actually support ur team, u go against ur own team!? laker fans i am just shocked! :laugh:

DODGERS&LAKERS
04-29-2009, 09:56 PM
Losing by 39 in the final game of the season on the road to your biggest rival is a slap in the face to every fan who paid to see you that season.

A 58 point loss at home in the first round is a slap in the face to everyone who paid for that game.

The Lakers loss was much worse. I would even say blowing the 24 point lead in game 4 was worst than what the Hornets did.

EX-TREME
04-30-2009, 05:40 AM
58 points at home :pity: