Basketball: Lakers beat down the Kings all day long

Cannon, I can't say I can dispute all your claims here because a lot of it is true.

Originally posted by Cannon:

I'm just going to put it this way:

Even when the Kings have played better than the Lakers every time they meet (which has been often), they generally lose their composure when the game counts and pick up a couple technicals late in the game....they allow the Lakers to beat them and rarely close out any of the games. This has been the formula for every Laker victory over the last few seasons.

Agreed. That's the one thing that's always bothered me about my team. They argue too much with the referees. They just have to shut up and play the game sometimes. They've done a much better job of that against Dallas this series.

The Kings defense is worse than the Lakers this year, which is sad.

Well except for last year haven't the Lakers always had a better defense. Last year the Kings were #1 in opposing field goal percentage for the season. But I always thought the Kings had the better offense and the Lakers had the better defense.

Sad for both teams because neither is getting past the 2nd round.

The Kings offense is handicapped by a hobbling Webber, who has no lift whatsoever to hit his shots consistently.

Yup, he won't be close to 100 percent if ever till next season. Being out 10 months with a knee injury isn't something easy to come back from.

The Kings blew out the Lakers at the end of the season and promptly lost the next game to the Warriors. The Kings lost a 5 game lead for first place in the Pacific to the Lakers, got it back, and promptly lost to the Warriors(or was that Denver?)

Um, actually it was both. Lost at Denver Monday night after the Lakers game. In the Kings' defense. At Denver, is the worst back-to-back especially after an emotional win over the Lakers.

Now the loss at Golden State was inexcusable. That was Wednesday night. They had one full day off and knew what was at stake.

AGAIN on the last game of the season to allow LA to overcome them again.

This team has no ability to play in the clutch, other than a couple of Mike Bibby miracle three pointers earlier in the season.

More accurately they have shown no ability to play in the clutch against the Lakers in the most important games, except for Bibby. Other than that they won the Pacific Division in 2002 and 2003 from the Lakers which isn't that important like TRD said and I agree with him in the whole scheme of things. However, you used the losing of the Pacific Division this year as an example and I'm saying if that's an example you're going to use then I can use it also to prove in similiar situations they have come through in the clutch.

And against other teams in the playoffs. ie. against Dallas at least so far they have come through in the clutch.

The last championship for the Lakers was a gift from the Kings, who missed quite a few free throws during that great Western Conference Finals that year, not to mention shot quite a few wide open shots into airballs.

Thanks Kings.

Hey, experience counts for a lot. It was their first trip ever to the Western Conference Finals. Did they choke, choke. Yeah. Unequiviocally. No one can dispute that.

Originally posted by Cannon:

Oh and even if the Kings don't meet the Lakers this year they will promptly collapse against the Spurs. That is, if they can beat the Timberwolves.

My unbiased opinion (Seriously ) is that neither the Kings or the Lakers will make it to the Western Conference Finals. Without Bobby Jackson, the Timberwolves will have too much for the Kings.

And the Spurs I think are head and shoulders above every team in the league. They're better than the Kings. They're better than Timberwolves. And they're better than the Lakers. I look for the Spurs to either take the Lakers out in 5 or maybe even sweep them. No more than 6 though.

[Edited on 04/28/2004 by Fox Mulder]

[Edited on 04/28/2004 by Fox Mulder]

[Edited on 04/28/2004 by Fox Mulder]

And the Spurs I think are head and shoulders above every team in the league. ... They're better than Timberwolves.

The diference I see between the Spurs and the T-Wolves is that the Wolves for once have the veteran team. Cassell has won a couple of championships, Sprewell has been around the block (a couple of times), and the rest of the team isn't exactly youthful. I just think it's thier time.

Originally posted by Gibbs Baby!!!:

I've hear many, many people say just that, Yanks-Sox is not a rivalry.

Really? I've heard people not only say Red Sox-Yankees is a rivalry but the best rivalry in all of sports because of the history of both teams and the fact they've been playing each other for so long and both teams have been around for so long.

Personnally, though, I'd have to say that both of them actually are rivalries. It's not so much about the teams as how much the fans hate the other teams

Yeah I agree with that and I think all you need is that and both teams to actually be reasonably good to get a rivalry going.

Originally posted by Gibbs Baby!!!

And the Spurs I think are head and shoulders above every team in the league. ... They're better than Timberwolves.

The diference I see between the Spurs and the T-Wolves is that the Wolves for once have the veteran team. Cassell has won a couple of championships, Sprewell has been around the block (a couple of times), and the rest of the team isn't exactly youthful. I just think it's thier time.

the spurs are good no doubt

but they arent head and shoulders above every team thats kinda ridiculous.

between the wolves, the lakers, and the spurs, any of those teams can win against each other. its all just intangibles and how they play, etc. they are all damn good teams this year and all have a legitimate chance to win.

Really? I've heard people not only say Red Sox-Yankees is a rivalry but the best rivalry in all of sports because of the history of both teams and the fact they've been playing each other for so long and both teams have been around for so long.

It seems every year, the Yankees Red Sox rivalry is brought up, and there are always talking heads on ESPN or where ever who claim that it isn't a rivalry. I think it's mainly just Yankees fans who have the acces to get thier word on the tube. But, like I said, it's a rivalry if you ask me.

between the wolves, the lakers, and the spurs, any of those teams can win against each other. its all just intangibles and how they play, etc. they are all damn good teams this year and all have a legitimate chance to win.

True, but I still think that the
Wolves will win this thing outright.

Originally posted by Osobad28:

the spurs are good no doubt

but they arent head and shoulders above every team thats kinda ridiculous.

You're right. I was getting away with myself there but I will say at least a little better than the other two.

Between them and the Timberwolves. I believe in a process. One year with your same, main nucleus, you get past the first round, the next you get past the 2nd round. I don't see a team that's been put out of the first round 7 straight years winning it all. I know they have Sprewell and Cassell and they weren't here last year and this is still KG's team. He's part of their main nucleus.

With the Lakers they have everything to win it. But 3 of 4 Hall of Famers past their prime and distractions. And potential chemistry problems. But they did look good last night.

I would go 1) Spurs, 2) Lakers, 3) Timberwolves.