NBA Playoffs
- Thread starter 1001001
- Start date
Actually, I like him too.
How can you not like a guy that ugly who tries that hard?
He was ugly to start with...the black eyes, broken noses, and other assaults he's taken over the years haven't helped.
He got mad game though. He's on track to join that dubious list though of Best Players Never to Win a Title. I hear Patrick Ewing personally writes you a letter when you join that club.
He got mad game though. He's on track to join that dubious list though of Best Players Never to Win a Title. I hear Patrick Ewing personally writes you a letter when you join that club.
My ass. You think the casual fan would be more interested in seeing Orlando and Phoenix? That would be a ratings nightmare for the league. Only Magic and Suns' fans would care about that one. Right now David Stern is one of the happiest people in sports. The only thing he needs now is for it to be a long Finals.
Two years ago I knew the Lakers were in trouble against the Celts in the Finals, and they were. This year I don't feel the same way.
I see your location and assume you are a Lakers fan. I live near Boston but am a casual fan that just picks a team each year when the playoffs start, and have no rooting interest in the Celtics.
This series is sort of like Yanks-Sox, Duke-UNC, or Bears-Packers. The fans of those teams love it, some casual fans love it because of the rivalry, and other casual fans are sick of it and just want someone new.
I fall into that last category.
And I agree, David Stern is probably fap, fap, fapping away in his office from now until Game 1.
This series is sort of like Yanks-Sox, Duke-UNC, or Bears-Packers. The fans of those teams love it, some casual fans love it because of the rivalry, and other casual fans are sick of it and just want someone new.
I fall into that last category.
And I agree, David Stern is probably fap, fap, fapping away in his office from now until Game 1.
Then you are so in the minority. The NBA is different from the other pro team sports, although i daresay, MLB would not be disappointed, ever, to see the Yanks and Sox meet in the playoffs, nor does does the NFL sweat it when the Bears-Pack meet on Monday night.
The NBA however, is driven more by stars than by teams. But there are some team situations in the NBA that transcend that fact; the Lakers and the Celtics are one of those "situations", perhaps the only one the NBA has. In these Finals, the League gets the best of both worlds, the biggest and most recognizable star (Kobe) against his team's biggest and most popular rival.
This is as close to Magic/Bird as the league can get. If Stern can't have LeBron vs. Kobe, he'll take the next best thing, the Lakers vs. Celtics.
Just watch the ratings for this series, especially if it gets extended. Go back and compare them to the Detroit vs San Antonio Finals (or any of the Spurs' Finals), and you'll see who "casual fan" prefers.
And yes, I am a Lakers' fan, but that doesn't change facts.
And why do you think that would be?
I don't dispute what you are saying. You have two big basketball markets in the Finals, the history and rivalry between the two teams, the face that they are both very successful over the years, etc. It will definitely rate higher than San Antonio-Detroit or one of those years.
I just personally would like to see two new teams get a shot, if that makes me in the minority, so be it.
I just personally would like to see two new teams get a shot, if that makes me in the minority, so be it.
If this had been what you said in the first place, there would not have been a need for this discussion. However, your assertion that most "casual fans" don't want to see the Lakers and Celts in the Finals was ridiculous.
I wouldn't watch the NBA finals regardless so my opinion amounts to a hill of beans, but I AM sick of hearing about the same damn teams all the time on ESPN while waiting for hockey highlights on Sportscenter. It's always about the Lakers or Celtics or Magic or Cavaliers. It's like there aren't any other teams in the league.
The sad thing about the NBA is, half the time, there really aren't. Only the top seeded teams seem to compete in the playoffs, so the rest are just filling slots.
Boston looked shell-shocked. Simply didn't show up. And still lost by only 13, minus 3 for the gratuitous Kobe 3-pointer.
That said, if Gasol continues at a 20-10 clip, and Bynum can contribute 10-5, it'll be tough on the Celtics.
Although I expect them to get a few more rebounds and stop penetration of the paint by the L.A. "guards".
That said, if Gasol continues at a 20-10 clip, and Bynum can contribute 10-5, it'll be tough on the Celtics.
Although I expect them to get a few more rebounds and stop penetration of the paint by the L.A. "guards".
Actually, Boston looked surpprised that the Lakers could play their style (both sides were getting fouls called and there was a lot of contact). Say what you will, but I think Rivers and the celtics expected the 'softer' Laker team of 2008; and were caukght off guard when they discovered the 2010 lakers had no issues getting physical too.
Then you are so in the minority. The NBA is different from the other pro team sports, although i daresay, MLB would not be disappointed, ever, to see the Yanks and Sox meet in the playoffs, nor does does the NFL sweat it when the Bears-Pack meet on Monday night.
The NBA however, is driven more by stars than by teams. But there are some team situations in the NBA that transcend that fact; the Lakers and the Celtics are one of those "situations", perhaps the only one the NBA has. In these Finals, the League gets the best of both worlds, the biggest and most recognizable star (Kobe) against his team's biggest and most popular rival.
This is as close to Magic/Bird as the league can get. If Stern can't have LeBron vs. Kobe, he'll take the next best thing, the Lakers vs. Celtics.
Just watch the ratings for this series, especially if it gets extended. Go back and compare them to the Detroit vs San Antonio Finals (or any of the Spurs' Finals), and you'll see who "casual fan" prefers.
And yes, I am a Lakers' fan, but that doesn't change facts.
And why do you think that would be?
Maybe because of this?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Ahj3sB09g6Sz6JFC26fjy_68vLYF?slug=ap-nbafinals-ratings
Yeah, no one wants to see LA/Boston again....
I think the other thing that really turns me off about this series is the fact that both teams totally dogged it in the second half of the season and then flipped a switch when the playoffs started. I think the NBA needs to do something, though I have no idea what, to cut down on that.
When the two teams met in 2008, I believe the Lakers lost game 1 (in Boston) by less than 13, same as game 2. Margin of victory in game 1 didn't turn out to mean much in that series , did it? The only thing that is important is that, right now, the Lakers lead 1-0, 3 wins away from the O'Brien.
After all the talk about the Celts not showing up for game 1, a premise I disagree with -- they showed up, but just got beat -- I expect them to come out in game 2 like their hair is on fire. If you throw in Pau's dumb comments yesterday about KG having lost a step, if the C's don't come out crazed, I will be shocked. However, if they do and the Lakers still win, they are in deep trouble.
But, I won't be surprised to see the series head back to Boston tied. Of course, I have been wrong about nearly everything this season.
Point(s) taken. I suppose it all hinges on whether the Big 3 are too old, and Rondo still to inconsistent to make up the difference.
And on whether their defensive guru coach can plug the holes on defense.
I'll confess to being a "beat LA" type ever since Shaq left, although Kobe's matured out of infant status for the most part, and I do like Pao's game. And Ron's always entertaining.
Well, your words proved to be prescient thankfully.
Now here's my prediction: Celtics will lose at least 1 game at home based on their series against the Cavs and Magic.
BTW, the damned ticky tacky/phantom fouls are getting a bit frustrating on both sides.
Also, WTF???
-Jamman
Last edited:
Similar threads
