SA Spurs slide means...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    OK....let me put it this way....I am a Sox fan.....we have been on a roll so to speak lately....but our arch rivals are the Yankees....we won early on...but the Yanks have us by a 4-1 margin in world series wins....that is something that is relevant....because both teams play in the same league (conference)....the Yankees have dominated the Sox over the years.....beaten them to the big show

    in the NBA, the Lakers and Celtics play in different conferences....so their records cannot affect the outcome of the playoff standings....they can only be judged by head to head competition...

    so for the record...

    regular season..............Celtics record prevails...

    Finals..........................Celtics completely dominate the Lakers.........questions.....?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from genaro008. Show genaro008's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    Jerry Buss did not even want to claim those titles till the last few years. He wanted his own legacy now that the lakers are close they now count them. PUHHLEEZE
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to SA Spurs slide means... : Even though I am new to this board, I am well aware of your reputation here.  Why do you get off on kicking other people when they're teams are down?  When the Lakers were struggling I privately enjoyed it but I never rubbed it in with any of their fans.  Just enjoy your team.  You were fortunate enough to get through this season relatively injury-free.  Just be grateful for what you have.  No need to gloat about it here.
    Posted by MsLithium21[/QUOTE]

    MsLithium, apparently you are new to this forum. Gloating is a staple on this site. Many of the homers on this site not only enjoy the Lakers "trials", but they like to revel in the past and remind us. They gloat about the C's head-to-head championship record against the Lakers; the 39 point blowout in the 2008 finals; Andrew Bynum's injuries; their record 17 championship banners...I could go on, but you get the point. Now, I know this is a "Boston Celtics" forum, but since this is an OPEN forum and some of the homers post comments that require a "counter-point", well me and a few other are here to help balance the discussion and keep them grounded.

    For instance, only in Celtics land is Red Auerbach TODAY, considered the greatest coach in NBA history. The rest of the NBA world (talking heads included) consider Phil Jackson the greatest NBA coach, not only because he has more rings, but he's done it in an era with considerably more NBA teams, and at a time when All-star players come and go to the highest bidder. Red's teams were pretty stable for most of his championships.

    I can bring up a counterpoint to any argument that a Celtics fan has. Most of my fellow Laker brethren already have. We'll argue back and forth and my opinion won't change that, TODAY, the Lakers are the marquee franchise in the NBA. Meawhile, guys like Duke, Pierce34 (and his many aliases), Concord and others will argue any point I make and they won't change their opinion that the Celtics are still the NBA's greatest franchise. But it's all good. That's the point of a "forum".

    Like you, I enjoy when the C's stumble and fall. And right now, they're stumbling and falling more than the Lakers. But I'll admit, the C's surprised me during the playoffs last year and they might have a little bit of magic left before the rebuilding begins. So relax and enjoy the season. And don't take it personal if I rub it in your face cause the C's fans are going to do the same to me and some of the regular Laker fans.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from genaro008. Show genaro008's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    Are there Celtic trolls on Lakers web site from these forums?
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]The Lakers may very well tie us with 17 titles.....but head to head all time....? Celtics win the regular season match up Celtics dominate in the playoffs.......9-3 speaks volumes Q....simply put, when  the title is on the line the Lakers have been no match for Boston...hell it took them 27 years to finally beat the Celtics....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Come on Duke...once again, you're living in the past. No one argues the record. But since 1980, the Lakers have won 10 NBA titles, the Celtics 4. Which has allowed the Lakers to come within one title for the record. When that happens, do you seriously think anybody (except Celtics fans) is going to care. 17 titles is 17 titles. Most recently, the Lakers are 3-2 during the last 5 meetings against the C's. Those days of "domination" are long over. That "Celtic mystique" that all C's fans used to flaunt is a myth. Magic Johnson disspelled that BS a long time ago.

    So, you can continue to live in the past, while the Lakers continue to win titles NOW and in THE FUTURE. But if the past gives you comfort at night, dream on.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : MsLithium, apparently you are new to this forum. Gloating is a staple on this site. Many of the homers on this site not only enjoy the Lakers "trials", but they like to revel in the past and remind us. They gloat about the C's head-to-head championship record against the Lakers; the 39 point blowout in the 2008 finals; Andrew Bynum's injuries; their record 17 championship banners...I could go on, but you get the point. Now, I know this is a "Boston Celtics" forum, but since this is an OPEN forum and some of the homers post comments that require a "counter-point", well me and a few other are here to help balance the discussion and keep them grounded. For instance, only in Celtics land is Red Auerbach TODAY, considered the greatest coach in NBA history. The rest of the NBA world (talking heads included) consider Phil Jackson the greatest NBA coach, not only because he has more rings, but he's done it in an era with considerably more NBA teams, and at a time when All-star players come and go to the highest bidder. Red's teams were pretty stable for most of his championships. I can bring up a counterpoint to any argument that a Celtics fan has. Most of my fellow Laker brethren already have. We'll argue back and forth and my opinion won't change that, TODAY, the Lakers are the marquee franchise in the NBA. Meawhile, guys like Duke, Pierce34 (and his many aliases), Concord and others will argue any point I make and they won't change their opinion that the Celtics are still the NBA's greatest franchise. But it's all good. That's the point of a "forum". Like you, I enjoy when the C's stumble and fall. And right now, they're stumbling and falling more than the Lakers. But I'll admit, the C's surprised me during the playoffs last year and they might have a little bit of magic left before the rebuilding begins. So relax and enjoy the season. And don't take it personal if I rub it in your face cause the C's fans are going to do the same to me and some of the regular Laker fans.
    Posted by Qdaddy[/QUOTE]


    IT'S A CELTICS FORUM................WE TALK ABOUT THE CELTICS AND DISS THE LAKERS, THAT IS WHAT WE DO HERE..........YOU GUYS NEED TO GO TO THE LA TIMES WHERE IT IS A LAKERS LOVE FEST - WE DON'T LIKE THEM.........and we don't want you people here, either!

    For a supposedly intelligent guy, NOT knowing those things really surprises me!!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to SA Spurs slide means... : Don't count your rings just yet. If the Celtics can get Shaq back...an "iffy" if, I agree...LAL won't win. They can't. Not with JO and Krstic coming off the bench. LAL just cannot match up, size-wise. If Shaq cannot return, all bets are off. Simple.
    Posted by cshashaty[/QUOTE]
     
    We're not fretting about the return of the Big Methuselah...his best days are long gone and you'll be lucky to get more than a few minutes and 7 games out of him. If you've watched Bynum lately, you'd know that he's moving a lot better and has more explosiveness. He'll get Shaq and JON in early foul trouble.

    Krstic? I'm not even going to respond to that.

    If you don't believe that the Lakers match up well with the C's "big men", then you haven't watched a Lakers game lately.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : Another believer in the miracle working Shaq. He worked out very well in Phoenix and Cleveland, huh? BTW, how long has it been since Shaq last played? Even if he came back yesterday, it would not be until the 2014 season before he was in game shape.
    Posted by Tayshawn[/QUOTE]

    Good point Tayshawn. But in their defense, I have to say that Shaq is ALL they have to depend on since "the trade".

    That's not a good thing.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]The first 5 Laker titles are the oldest of news.......won before the advent of the shot clock...commonly referred to as the advent of the modern NBA....you know...the days when they jumped center after baskets...the days where the Minny Lakers lost a game by the score of 18-17.....do you really want to claim the titles won in those days.....?
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Yeah Duke, even though it galls you, those are part of the Laker franchises 16 titles. But it's been the Lakers dominance during the Buss ownership that has allowed them to get within one title of the record.

    The Celtics have been trying desperately to fend off the hard rushing Lakers, but it was a 20+ years of irrelevance that has put the Lakers on the brink of catching them. And as all of you already know, that small window of opportunity for the new "big 3" is just about to shut. Danny Ainge's questionable judge of talent doesn't inspire confidence of a new Celtics resurgence. He's no Jerry West (or Mitch Kupchak).
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]OK....let me put it this way....I am a Sox fan.....we have been on a roll so to speak lately....but our arch rivals are the Yankees....we won early on...but the Yanks have us by a 4-1 margin in world series wins....that is something that is relevant....because both teams play in the same league (conference)....the Yankees have dominated the Sox over the years.....beaten them to the big show in the NBA, the Lakers and Celtics play in different conferences....so their records cannot affect the outcome of the playoff standings....they can only be judged by head to head competition... so for the record... regular season..............Celtics record prevails... Finals..........................Celtics completely dominate the Lakers.........questions.....?
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Irrelevant. See above.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]Are there Celtic trolls on Lakers web site from these forums?
    Posted by genaro008[/QUOTE]

    Why don't you go find out and get back to us.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Qdaddy. Show Qdaddy's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : IT'S A CELTICS FORUM................WE TALK ABOUT THE CELTICS AND DISS THE LAKERS, THAT IS WHAT WE DO HERE..........YOU GUYS NEED TO GO TO THE LA TIMES WHERE IT IS A LAKERS LOVE FEST - WE DON'T LIKE THEM.........and we don't want you people here, either! For a supposedly intelligent guy, NOT knowing those things really surprises me!!
    Posted by hedleylamarr[/QUOTE]

    That's why we're here hedley, to keep you guys straight. HAH!

    Without us, you guys would actually start to believe the BS that all of you spew.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : That's why we're here hedley, to keep you guys straight. HAH! Without us, you guys would actually start to believe the BS that all of you spew.
    Posted by Qdaddy[/QUOTE]

    Nah, that's not it!!


    It's attention seeking, or you're all friendless......or you are all frustrated in certain part of your life...BS?  You probably believe Buss WANTS those 5 MN titles.  You probably believe there were no shenanigans in the Gasol trade.  And you probably believe the lakers were robbed in 2008.
    And WE BS??
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Laker-Nation32. Show Laker-Nation32's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : Nah, that's not it!! It's attention seeking, or you're all friendless......or you are all frustrated in certain part of your life...BS?  You probably believe Buss WANTS those 5 MN titles.  You probably believe there were no shenanigans in the Gasol trade.  And you probably believe the lakers were robbed in 2008. And WE BS??
    Posted by hedleylamarr[/QUOTE]

    The Minny titles are Dr Buss's.. he owns the Lakers and th history that comes with it.

    Gasol was a legit trade, Memphis has since gotten better. Unlike the TWolves that McFale wrecked to further his former team. Disgraceful!

    2008- boston got lucky with the Bynum/Ariza injuries. Only 2 of our 5 starters!! We now have the back to back titles beating boston and when we 3-peat this year, boston will learn what the rest of the world knows....the Lakers would have 4 in a row if not for injury's!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ConnectingRod. Show ConnectingRod's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : The Minny titles are Dr Buss's.. he owns the Lakers and th history that comes with it. Gasol was a legit trade, Memphis has since gotten better. Unlike the TWolves that McFale wrecked to further his former team. Disgraceful! 2008- boston got lucky with the Bynum/Ariza injuries. Only 2 of our 5 starters!! We now have the back to back titles beating boston and when we 3-peat this year, boston will learn what the rest of the world knows....the Lakers would have 4 in a row if not for injury's!
    Posted by Laker-Nation32[/QUOTE]

    Something is wrong with your memory. Bynum never played a single playoff game in 2008. But Ariza did play in the playoffs. 

    If Perkins did not get hurt in Game 6 then there is no back to back for the Lakers. 

    The Lakers not only lost in 2008, they got hit by a 39-point tsunami in Game 6. It was a convincing victory. Unlike the 2010 Laker championship that has a lot of question marks attached to it. A 4-point win only means the Lakers got the breaks in the end. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from lalakerman. Show lalakerman's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : IT'S A CELTICS FORUM................WE TALK ABOUT THE CELTICS AND DISS THE LAKERS, THAT IS WHAT WE DO HERE..........YOU GUYS NEED TO GO TO THE LA TIMES WHERE IT IS A LAKERS LOVE FEST - WE DON'T LIKE THEM.........and we don't want you people here, either! For a supposedly intelligent guy, NOT knowing those things really surprises me!!
    Posted by hedleylamarr[/QUOTE]

    Tough Chit!!  We are here and not going anyhere!!! LIVE WITH IT!!!!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : The Minny titles are Dr Buss's.. he owns the Lakers and th history that comes with it. Gasol was a legit trade, Memphis has since gotten better. Unlike the TWolves that McFale wrecked to further his former team. Disgraceful! 2008- boston got lucky with the Bynum/Ariza injuries. Only 2 of our 5 starters!! We now have the back to back titles beating boston and when we 3-peat this year, boston will learn what the rest of the world knows....the Lakers would have 4 in a row if not for injury's!
    Posted by Laker-Nation32[/QUOTE]
    So, OKC has one NBA title?

    Gasol trade HIGHLY suspect.  How many of those guys are still in the league?  Memphis lucked out that Marc Gasol is an OKAY big man - certainly LA got the better of the deal.  Aaron McKie??  He was retired!!

    If Bynum  didn't get hurt in 08, no Gasol.  They would not have made the trade.  So, you are clearly wrong on that one, too.  Trevor Ariza?  Really?  He was such a difference maker he's now on his third team in 3 years, and you let him walk.

    What's a McFale?

    Otherwise, great post!!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : MsLithium, apparently you are new to this forum. Gloating is a staple on this site. Many of the homers on this site not only enjoy the Lakers "trials", but they like to revel in the past and remind us. They gloat about the C's head-to-head championship record against the Lakers; the 39 point blowout in the 2008 finals; Andrew Bynum's injuries; their record 17 championship banners...I could go on, but you get the point. Now, I know this is a "Boston Celtics" forum, but since this is an OPEN forum and some of the homers post comments that require a "counter-point", well me and a few other are here to help balance the discussion and keep them grounded. For instance, only in Celtics land is Red Auerbach TODAY, considered the greatest coach in NBA history. The rest of the NBA world (talking heads included) consider Phil Jackson the greatest NBA coach, not only because he has more rings, but he's done it in an era with considerably more NBA teams, and at a time when All-star players come and go to the highest bidder. Red's teams were pretty stable for most of his championships. I can bring up a counterpoint to any argument that a Celtics fan has. Most of my fellow Laker brethren already have. We'll argue back and forth and my opinion won't change that, TODAY, the Lakers are the marquee franchise in the NBA. Meawhile, guys like Duke, Pierce34 (and his many aliases), Concord and others will argue any point I make and they won't change their opinion that the Celtics are still the NBA's greatest franchise. But it's all good. That's the point of a "forum". Like you, I enjoy when the C's stumble and fall. And right now, they're stumbling and falling more than the Lakers. But I'll admit, the C's surprised me during the playoffs last year and they might have a little bit of magic left before the rebuilding begins. So relax and enjoy the season. And don't take it personal if I rub it in your face cause the C's fans are going to do the same to me and some of the regular Laker fans.
    Posted by Qdaddy[/QUOTE]
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    Daddy, you make quite a few great points in this post....I agree with you on the fact that these are the two marquis franchises and the greatest rivalry...and each team's fans are staunch in their beliefs....however, this is what bothers me...

    Laker fans love to come over here to gloat and take pot shots....I, for one, have never gone over to the Laker board and done the same...you mention that we make statements that you feel you need to address....ok yes, it is an open forum but c'mon....it is Celtic fans talking amongst one another....we have our opinions and beliefs, our stories to tell....

    Also, Laker fans love to talk about how they are one title away and all....then they love to talk about 20 years of irrelevance for Boston.....but when we mention that the first 5 titles go back to the early 1950's before the shot clock you guys staunchly defend them...we had a 20 year period on the downside....but so did the Lakers....the Lakers went almost 20 years between the last title in the '50's and the next one in the '70's...it also took them 25 years to beat the Celtics in the finals....during the 70's & 80's the Lakers and Celtics were pretty much even....keep in mind that we lost Bias and Lewis...don't you think that set us back a bit?

    Lastly, in this time of free agency and multi millionaire basketball players, do you believe Boston and Los Angeles are on an even keel...? Boston offers a great history and lousy winters....LA offers a warm weather climate and Hollywood....Orlando and Miami have the weather, Disney World, and South Beach.....and no state income tax...Boston can't compete with that...just check out the free agent signings...Shaq went to LA not Boston....my Laker friends keep joking that they aren't sure whether they prefer Dwight Howard or Chris Paul for their next signing...and they aren't kidding....hey, LA is probably a great place to live...free agency is to now what Red's era was to the earlier NBA....it all evens out over the years...
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tayshawn. Show Tayshawn's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    The LAKERS fans must have touched a nerve.

    Look celtic fans, we are only here to enlighten and educate you all about the NBA and what it takes to win championships on a CONSISTENT BASIS.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]The LAKERS fans must have touched a nerve. Look celtic fans, we are only here to enlighten and educate you all about the NBA and what it takes to win championships on a CONSISTENT BASIS.
    Posted by Tayshawn[/QUOTE]

    Thanks, we get it.  Now go away!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    Qdaddy, 

    God don't like ugly!   Be careful of the gloating because you just don't know when/if we get healthy and then kick your rear!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: SA Spurs slide means...

    In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SA Spurs slide means... : 1.  It's 9-3 head to head.  That's what he meant. 2.  Your math is WAY off. The Celtics were founded in 1946 - that's 55 years.  They have won 17 titles, that means their OVERALL record is 17-38. The MINNEAPOLIS lakers (since you insist on stealing their titles) were founded in 1947.  That's 54 years.  The franchise has won 16.  That means OVERALL record is 16-38. Questions??
    Posted by hedleylamarr[/QUOTE]

    So 1946-47 to 2009-10 = 55 years? or 2010-1946 = 55? Do you even know subtraction?

    Minneapolis Lakers were founded in 1947? BBA standings in 1947-48:

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/BAA_1948.html

    Eastern Division:
    Philadelphia Warriors 27-21
    New York Knickockers 26-22
    Boston Celtics 20-28
    Providence Steam Rollers 6-42

    Western Division:
    St Louis Bombers 29-19
    Baltimore Bullets 28-20
    Chicago Stags 28-20
    Washington Capitals 28-20

    Yes, the Lakers were founded in 1947, but they played in the NBL in 1947-48, not in the BAA/NBA. Nonetheless, they won the NBL championship in 1947-48. Do you want to count that one?

    Yes? then the Lakers were 17-46
    No? then the Lakers were 16-46

    Take your pick.

    And about head to head in the finals, in case you don't know, the goal is to win a league championship. Since when does only beating the Celtics in the final count?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share