Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 332 of 452 FirstFirst ... 232282322330331332333334342382432 ... LastLast
Results 4,966 to 4,980 of 6768
  1. #4966
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,143
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Maybe but they were more skilled and that counts for something. And they had the talent to play both styles. Just think a better Kings team.
    I'm not convinced that they had a better version of the 02 kings and I think that kings team would beat that warriors team. Those kings played a much different brand of basketball so I'm not sure why you're making that comparison.

  2. #4967
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    When did I say Pau could be replaced by anyone? I just said that Pau wasn't an elite superstar. He was around a top 15-20 guy, a case could be made he was in the top 10, but it's a lot different to play alongside a superstar.
    Thats the thing. He was a super star center. Even to why Pop was so upset Lakers got him. He knew what that meant. When Lakers got pau the question was not if they will make it to finals it was can they win a ring or two. But i know what you mean he was not a top tier super star. But thats like saying Bradley Beal is not a super star.

  3. #4968
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,143
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Thats the thing. He was a super star center. Even to why Pop was so upset Lakers got him. He knew what that meant. When Lakers got pau the question was not if they will make it to finals it was can they win a ring or two. But i know what you mean he was not a top tier super star. But thats like saying Bradley Beal is not a super star.
    Yep, we agree. Bradley Beal, much like Pau, is not a superstar lol

  4. #4969
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    34,037
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Yep, that would've been really epic and it would've put a conclusive ending to that short rivalry between those teams. As is, they both beat each other in the finals. The lakers could be said to have won the mini-rivalry since they won 2 (a back-to-back) and Boston 1, but it would've been nice to at the very least see one more show down between them to get a definitive conclusion.
    For sure. After that first battle the Lakers got Bynum back which we all saw made a big difference on the glass in the second matchup. Tony Allen in that first matchup was coming off an ACL tear the year before. Like other players he bounced back in year 2 and was a much better role player. Glen Davis was a seldom used backup in that 0708 team but become a real great bench option. I think Pau and Odom took the punking they got from KG/Perk being more physical players to heart and grew A LOT for those next 2 LA titles winning years. I think an 09 series would have been as great as the 10 one was.


    NE Patriots Forum HOF (Class of 2011)

  5. #4970
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I'm not convinced that they had a better version of the 02 kings and I think that kings team would beat that warriors team. Those kings played a much different brand of basketball so I'm not sure why you're making that comparison.
    GSW was toying with the regular season. The reason Lakers beat Kings was shaq. Had kings took Shaq out his game they could have won. GSW and Kings would of matched up well but GSW would of been to much. your exchanging 2s with 3s. The mid range heavy game is gone for now.

  6. #4971
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    34,037
    Those Warriors teams were a ****ing problem. Definitely better than those Kings teams, c'mon now.

    I personally think those Warriors teams are still beating Shaq/Kobe. They'd just run em off the floor. Shaq could probably get two every time down the court but I think the Warriors would hit a high enough % of 3s to make up for it.

    If Shaq goes 10-12 in the paint, the Warriors only need to 7-12 from 3 to get more points out of those 12 shots. With Shaq unable to step out on the perimeter and those Warriors having insane shooting I think they could have done that enough. There's a reason that team won 73 games, most all time.


    NE Patriots Forum HOF (Class of 2011)

  7. #4972
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,143
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    GSW was toying with the regular season. The reason Lakers beat Kings was shaq. Had kings took Shaq out his game they could have won. GSW and Kings would of matched up well but GSW would of been to much. your exchanging 2s with 3s. The mid range heavy game is gone for now.
    Those 3s don't fall at the same rate when the game is played in the half court and everything is much slower. Both Curry and Klay become different players in the half court, still very good, but nowhere near what they do when the game is fast paced.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-25-2020 at 12:17 PM.

  8. #4973
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,143
    Quote Originally Posted by hugepatsfan View Post
    Those Warriors teams were a ****ing problem. Definitely better than those Kings teams, c'mon now.

    I personally think those Warriors teams are still beating Shaq/Kobe. They'd just run em off the floor. Shaq could probably get two every time down the court but I think the Warriors would hit a high enough % of 3s to make up for it.

    If Shaq goes 10-12 in the paint, the Warriors only need to 7-12 from 3 to get more points out of those 12 shots. With Shaq unable to step out on the perimeter and those Warriors having insane shooting I think they could have done that enough. There's a reason that team won 73 games, most all time.
    There's also a reason that team went down 3-1 to a OKC team that was frankly really bad at executing (and they were fortunate to escape and it only occurred because OKC didn't know how to play championship basketball). The issue is that it takes 2 to run, meaning both teams have to engage in an up and down style of play. Once the game slows down, those 3s don't fall at anywhere near the same rate in the half court as they do in semi transition.

  9. #4974
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,155
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    GSW was toying with the regular season. The reason Lakers beat Kings was shaq. Had kings took Shaq out his game they could have won. GSW and Kings would of matched up well but GSW would of been to much. your exchanging 2s with 3s. The mid range heavy game is gone for now.

    Missing ariza was the main issue they missed that guy on the wing. Bynum helped to bang with Perkins to but they were at their best with Pau at center.

  10. #4975
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    There's also a reason that team went down 3-1 to a OKC team that was frankly really bad at executing (and they were fortunate to escape and it only occurred because OKC didn't know how to play championship basketball). The issue is that it takes 2 to run, meaning both teams have to engage in an up and down style of play. Once the game slows down, those 3s don't fall at anywhere near the same rate in the half court as they do in semi transition.
    Maybe they just had to get focused. Okc was more talented.

  11. #4976
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Those 3s don't fall at the same rate when the game is played in the half court and everything is much slower. Both Curry and Klay become different players in the half court, still very good, but nowhere near what they do when the game is fast paced.
    But your banking on them slowing it down. I am just saying they can play in the half court but make no mistake they will push the ball. Even in half court with so many ball handlers thats also great shooters it easy to run plays and get looks.

  12. #4977
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,857
    Quote Originally Posted by hugepatsfan View Post
    Man, looking back on those two Kobe/Pau championships makes me sad about KG. After they won the title I think a lot of people forget that KG missed the whole next playoffs. ORL beat Boston in 7 games that year, then went on to beat CLE to get to the Finals. The next year, with KG back, BOS beat ORL and CLE in the playoffs. So I feel strongly they would have done just that the year before with a healthy KG.

    While KG came back, he really wasn't the same player. Don't get me wrong, he was still great, but he wasn't the BIG TICKET anymore. When he came back he was more Rasheed Wallace than he was prime KG. He didn't have the athleticism at the rim anymore. He was still a strong team defender but not the dominant help defender he was before. And on offense he was pretty much a jump shooter only because he was never someone who used strength to finish inside, always athleticism.

    If KG doesn't hurt his knee I think Boston gets another couple years of Big Ticket KG and those BOS/LA teams play 3 straight years in the finals. The 2010 Finals was awesome as it was and I think KG at closer to peak levels would have hyped it up even more. And instead of that boring ORL-LA gentlemen's sweep I think it would have been another epic battle.
    KG was all over that championship season. Defense MVP and 3rd in league MVP. So KG would of made 2009 interesting.

    Boston did lose 2 other key players. Posey got his last big pay day for what he brought to Boston. Losing Posey on defense is a big hit. They also lost PJ Brown. Posey and Brown played 5th and 6th most mins in the championship series.

    Lakers on the other hand got their own Posey back, Trevor Ariza. Bynum also returned. The others, like Shaw call's them can swing a game in your favor. For sure that series would of been big time basketball.
    Last edited by Bostonjorge; 05-25-2020 at 12:50 PM.

  13. #4978
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    33,688
    Quote Originally Posted by McAllen Tx View Post
    That would be interesting. If he takes the stance that the Warriors lost because of the Draymond suspension that would weaken his LBJ stance in this thread.

    He doesn't want to accept that Kobe was a legitimate alpha by the 2000/01 season because he played with Shaq but he never replied to me when I asked, with KDs arrival in GS did that mean that Curry was no longer an alpha?
    If Kobe was the Alpha by the 00/01 season how come Shaq still dominated literally everything? I think you're confused on what Alpha means. There can only ever be one Alpha. Either you have an Alpha or you don't. At best you could argue that there was no true Alpha on the later seasons of the Lakers 3-Peat, but even then, we all know that isn't really true.

    As for KD's arrival in GS, that's a good question. I think you could argue that KD became the Alpha on that team.

  14. #4979
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    47,641
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    If Kobe was the Alpha by the 00/01 season how come Shaq still dominated literally everything? I think you're confused on what Alpha means. There can only ever be one Alpha. Either you have an Alpha or you don't. At best you could argue that there was no true Alpha on the later seasons of the Lakers 3-Peat, but even then, we all know that isn't really true.

    As for KD's arrival in GS, that's a good question. I think you could argue that KD became the Alpha on that team.
    KD was clearly the Alpha on that team


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  15. #4980
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,155
    KD differed and shared the spotlight I would ave to say Green was the alpha of GSW.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •