Update: Darko is a Celtic

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

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to MajicMVP's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers." 

     

    That is what you wrote - PROVE IT!!

    [/QUOTE]

    In response to your "Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!".

    Go ahead and deny that's what you wrote. That's interesting.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, I wrote that, and I stand behind it..........now,on to you - prove what you wrote, or admit it was just your opinion!!

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to your "Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!".

    Go ahead and deny that's what you wrote. That's interesting.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, I wrote that, and I stand behind it..........now,on to you - prove what you wrote, or admit it was just your opinion!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Not yet, you said:


    "So, lakers fans don't care if the lakers reside in LA, Inglewood, MN or any other venue?  IN YOUR OPINION!!! "

    So, where did  I express that Lakers fans don't care if the lakers reside (note the present tense) in LA, Inglewood or any other venue? AS MY OPINION? Notice you said that "Lakers fans (present tense) don't care if the Lakers reside in LA, Inglewood or any other venue". Not to mention your lie in the same vein:

    "YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. "

    You confessed that

    "Fierce, I'll bet you a dollar that in the 80's majic here still called them the Los Angeles Lakers, even though they resided in Inglewood  (which is a dump, btw).  Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!".

    And I responded with

    "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers."

    OK, prove that what I said, about the Lakers fans don't care about whether the titles were won in MN, Inglewood, or LA, is what your feeble mind thinks as my claim: "YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. "

    Before you can prove that, there is nothing I need to worry about. No matter how you beg me...

    But knowing that you are desparate, I'll give you a hand. Your best bet would be

    "Prove it. Prove that all Lakers fans count 16 championships for the Lakers. If you can't prove it, it's only your opinion that the Lakers fans consider the Lakers had won 16 championships".

    Why don't you try it?

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to MajicMVP's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to your "Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!".

    Go ahead and deny that's what you wrote. That's interesting.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, I wrote that, and I stand behind it..........now,on to you - prove what you wrote, or admit it was just your opinion!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Not yet, you said:


    "So, lakers fans don't care if the lakers reside in LA, Inglewood, MN or any other venue?  IN YOUR OPINION!!! "

    So, where did  I express that Lakers fans don't care if the lakers reside (note the present tense) in LA, Inglewood or any other venue? AS MY OPINION? Notice you said that "Lakers fans (present tense) don't care if the Lakers reside in LA, Inglewood or any other venue". Not to mention your lie in the same vein:

    "YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. "

    You confessed that

    "Fierce, I'll bet you a dollar that in the 80's majic here still called them the Los Angeles Lakers, even though they resided in Inglewood  (which is a dump, btw).  Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!".

    And I responded with

    "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers."

    OK, prove that what I said, about the Lakers fans don't care about whether the titles were won in MN, Inglewood, or LA, is what your feeble mind thinks as my claim: "YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. "

    Before you can prove that, there is nothing I need to worry about. No matter how you beg me...

    But knowing that you are desparate, I'll give you a hand. Your best bet would be

    "Prove it. Prove that all Lakers fans count 16 championships for the Lakers. If you can't prove it, it's only your opinion that the Lakers fans consider the Lakers had won 16 championships".

    Why don't you try it?

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You're  insane!

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    You're  insane!

    [/QUOTE]


    See, you are toasted when you are challenged for proofs. Calling me insane is not going to save you...

    Are you going to prove your words: "YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. " or not?

    I bet you'll play dumb. "I am not going to prove that  Lakers fans would still follow the team even  they didn't play in LA to bail you out". It's your easy way out when you can't furnish the proof.

    Nope, for the record, I do NOT challenge you to furnish that proof. I challenge you to furnish the proof of "YOU said ....".  I can't wait...

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    How can I be toasted when you refuse to abide by the rules of arguing?  It's you who are backing out of this.  You made a statement, I challenged it, then you said, "I will prove it, but only AFTER you prove  XYZ"

     

    Not how it works.................so, the next step will be - you prove your statement:

     

    Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers.

     


    Failure to prove this statement is surrender.  I asked you very nicely to prove it before you asked me for anything.  If you choose not to be civil, you lose.

    And any "you are toast, you can't get out of it, not even close" comments shall also implicate your surrender.

    My challenge, my rules.  We abided by yours when you made the challenge - now we will abide by mine - or don't I don't really care - but either prove your statement, or I win!!

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    How can I be toasted when you refuse to abide by the rules of arguing?  It's you who are backing out of this.  You made a statement, I challenged it, then you said, "I will prove it, but only AFTER you prove  XYZ"[/QUOTE]

    Of course, you challenge it, yet "it" was NOT what I said. It was something you fabricated.

    Why should I have obligation to prove something not I said but you made up out of thin air?

    Are you going to prove what I said what you claimed I said?

     [QUOTE

    Not how it works........... [/quote]

    Then how does it work? that you fabricate something as what I said and I have to prove it?

    Is that your protocol of arguing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    so, the next step will be - you prove your statement:

     

    Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep, in the context of your statement

    "Fierce, I'll bet you a dollar that in the 80's majic here still called them the Los Angeles Lakers, even though they resided in Inglewood  (which is a dump, btw).  Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!".

    Do you deny that "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers." was a response to the context of your statement? i.e. the titles won by the Lakers from various places? yes or no?

    Is that what you want me to prove? I bet you dare not answer this...

     

    [QUOTE]

    Failure to prove this statement is surrender.  I asked you very nicely to prove it before you asked me for anything.  If you choose not to be civil, you lose.[/QUOTE]

    OK, then failure to prove that  your claim "YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. " is surrender. And failure to prove that

    ""So, lakers fans don't care if the lakers reside in LA, Inglewood, MN or any other venue?  IN YOUR OPINION!!! "

    is also surrender. Glad that you set up such a great rule...

    And any "you are toast, you can't get out of it, not even close" comments shall also implicate your surrender.

    Your failure to prove you said what I said is, by your own rule, surrender.

    [QUOTE]

    My challenge, my rules.  We abided by yours when you made the challenge - now we will abide by mine - or don't I don't really care - but either prove your statement, or I win!!

     [/QUOTE]

    That's really funny.

    1) your rules? you don't abide by your own rule, so you admit that you lose. Your own rule is that you can't even prove that I said X. Now you demand me to prove X?

    2) You abide by my rule when I made the challenge? You mean claiming A=>B != !A=>!B is MY rule? I don't have the monopoly of using logic. It's out there for everyone.

    So either prove that

    i) I said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA, and

    ii) I stated the opinion that  lakers fans don't care if the lakers reside in LA, Inglewood, MN or any other venue,

    or

    surrender.

    Your rule. Of course, you can tell me that you set up the rule but you don't abide by it...

     

     

     

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

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    Yep - I win!!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yep - I win!!

    [/QUOTE]


    See, you can't argue, and you declare yourself winner...

    Typical spoiled child behavior...

    But by your own rule, you already surrender, TWICE. Maybe in your book, surrender == win...

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to MajicMVP's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yep - I win!!

    [/QUOTE]


    See, you can't argue, and you declare yourself winner...

    Typical spoiled child behavior...

    But by your own rule, you already surrender, TWICE. Maybe in your book, surrender == win...

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Show me where I said I surrender.......I said YOU surrendered by being a wuss and changing the rules of engagement on the fly - not allowed.

     

    I do not surrender, YOU can't argue - so I win!!

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    Authentic frontier gibberish - stopped reading after first line - "wimp-out, let you off the hook" was not allowed.  So you surrender.  And, by the way, I WON the Gasol argument, notice we aren't discussing that anymore, either.

     

    See, you lost your bet as well.

     

    Still waiting to see the post where I  said I surrender - not YOU said I surrender, because I don't!!!

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Authentic frontier gibberish - stopped reading after first line - "wimp-out, let you off the hook" was not allowed.  So you surrender.  And, by the way, I WON the Gasol argument, notice we aren't discussing that anymore, either.[/QUOTE]

    Of course we aren't discussing. You won the Gasol trade if you can show us how

    A=>B is equivalent to !A=>!B

    Are you willing to?

    [QUOTE]

    Still waiting to see the post where I  said I surrender - not YOU said I surrender, because I don't!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow, that's cool. You are like a person convicted of a crime yapping: "still waiting to see when I confess to the crime. Show me the confession!!!"

    Easy, you incriminate yourself by your own rule: "Failure to prove this statement is surrender. " Are you going to abide by your rule or not?

    Where is the proof of your statements

    "YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. " and

    "So, lakers fans don't care if the lakers reside in LA, Inglewood, MN or any other venue?  IN YOUR OPINION!!! "

    Are you going to prove them or not?

    See, you don't have to confess that you surrender, but your own rule lock you into it...

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    More quotes for you to enjoy the Gasol trade, from Lakers fans:

     

     

    - Cardom

    Bynum is on schedule. ESPN idiots were just trying to justify why the trade happened. The truth is it would have happened even if Bynum was healthy cause it's an utter rape of the Grizzlies.

     

    - Exick

    If Bynum is 100% healthy and this deal is available, it still gets done.

     

    - Futuristic

    /*quote*/ Otherwise why would they give up this much for Gasol if there wasn’t something seriously wrong with Bynum’s knee? /*quote*/

    Nope. It's about making the team better.

     

    - gng930

    You don't need a reason other than common sense to trade a piece of scrap metal and several pieces of coal for a diamond.

     

    - limchrc

    My guess is, this deal is on the table (regardless of Bynum's condition) and I'm happy that we got it done.

     

     

    - davidse

    but when a deal is this lop sided, such a no brainer - there is NO reason to assume it had anything to do something other than taking advantage of a great opportunity.

     

    - Tony Almeida

    This trade was an absolute no-brainer. The upgrade in talent is undeniable, the championship window for the near term just flung wide the hell open, and the future championship window remains intact. If this trade was offered when Bynum was healthy, it still gets done, period.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    Lakers FANS -

    I showed quotes from Kupchak, Jackson, and presented an article from Sports Illustrated.  And you counter with lakers FANS????

     

    Not even worth responding to.  Got any LEGITIMATE proof??

    Thought not!!

     

    You don't know how to argue, and I've eaten you alive 4 of 5 times!!

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Lakers FANS -

    I showed quotes from Kupchak, Jackson, and presented an article from Sports Illustrated.  And you counter with lakers FANS????[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, A=>B, anything else?

    Next time you are going to counter with "A=>B" implies "!A=>!B", right?

     

    [QUOTE]

    Not even worth responding to.  Got any LEGITIMATE proof??[/QUOTE]

    Oh, so your legitimate proof is to tell us A=>B is equivalent to !A=>!B? Is that your legitimate proof?

    [QUOTE]

    Thought not!![/QUOTE]

    No thought required, your proof is absolutely illegitimate, by simple logic!!!

    [QUOTE]

    You don't know how to argue, and I've eaten you alive 4 of 5 times!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Talk is cheap. You kept saying "I win", "I ate you alive", or trash like that. I've got you hooked, painted you into a corner, so how did you get out?

    You try to get the last say? no chance.

    You try to argue? you got shot in every argument, and wind up with those "I am done with you", "you are insane", "bye" types of one-liner, means I shut you up, render you to "NO MORE ARGUMENT".

    So how are you going to win? by your own thumping the chest "I win", "I win", "I win"?

    Wake up, the way we've been going for the past 2+ years - continuous back-and-forth, trade posts for posts, the only WAY to win is to get the other side to give up, render the other side to no more arguments...

     

     

     

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    Look - let's start over again:

     

    did you say"

    "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers." 

       or not?  Yes or no.....no "yes in response to..."

    try to pretend you live in a civilized society - did you say:

    "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers." 

       yes or no?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Look - let's start over again:

    [/QUOTE]

    Good!!!

     

    [QUOTE]

    did you say"

    "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers." 

       or not?  Yes or no.....no "yes in response to..."

    [/QUOTE]

    Why not?

    [QUOTE]

    try to pretend you live in a civilized society - did you say:

    "Well, as if Lakers fans care whether it's  l.a. Lakers, Inglewood Lakers or Minn. Lakers." 

       yes or no?

    [/QUOTE]


    Yes, in response to

    '"Fierce, I'll bet you a dollar that in the 80's majic here still called them the Los Angeles Lakers, even though they resided in Inglewood  (which is a dump, btw).  Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!""

    Yes or no?

    No, then you lie.

    Yes, then the context is about caring where the Lakers won their championships, not about the thing you made up ""YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. "

    So yes or no? your pick.

    And you have no more argument about what Kupchak/Phil said was only A=>B, not !A=>!B? So that's a sign of you have NO MORE ARGUMENT. You get shut up again on the Gasol trade. Don't think I'll let you off the hook even if you don't respond.

    Better beg more of your Laker adversaries to support your opinion that "had Bynum not injured, there won't have been the Gasol trade". But given that since I posted what the Lakers fans posted on Lakersground.net, you've already given up that route, i.e. begging for others to support your wishy washy...

     

     

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    So, is all that crap a YES or a NO?

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, is all that crap a YES or a NO?

    [/QUOTE]

    See, one liner response is your easy wimp-out. I manage to render you to "no more argument" again. You are so predictable that it isn't even funny...


    Don't worry, this whole issue will re-surface in at most 2 days. That's your smarting limits...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to KingShaq's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, is all that crap a YES or a NO?

    [/QUOTE]

    See, one liner response is your easy wimp-out. I manage to render you to "no more argument" again. You are so predictable that it isn't even funny...


    Don't worry, this whole issue will re-surface in at most 2 days. That's your smarting limits...

    [/QUOTE]


    Okay, so that is a YES??

    A wimp is someone who refuses to answer a direct question, because he knows he may get caught in the follow-up.  Doesn't matter how many words or lines one uses, a wimp out is circumventing a direct answer with a bunch of Scottish BS.

    And the only reason it takes two days is because you are of the "insult-an-run" variety, which makes your responses even more wimpy!!

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     



    Okay, so that is a YES??

    A wimp is someone who refuses to answer a direct question, because he knows he may get caught in the follow-up.  Doesn't matter how many words or lines one uses, a wimp out is circumventing a direct answer with a bunch of Scottish BS.

    And the only reason it takes two days is because you are of the "insult-an-run" variety, which makes your responses even more wimpy!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Nope, a wimp is someone, when runs out of arguments, or when shut up in an argument, use these smart-S one-liner trying to dodge the argument. Yet when smarting for 2 days, try to revive the argument from another angle...

    When I said, "Yes, in response to <your statement on the Lakers 5, 6, 5 distribution of championships from various places>", what's wrong with this statement? Wasn't my statement a response to this context? Yes or no?


    Yet you dare not answer, because you know full well answering that statement would lock you into lying about what I said. Can't blame you for that.

    That's why you have to come up with this wimpy "So, is all that crap a YES or a NO?"

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    "You dare not respond"

    "You are cooked"

    "You have no choice"

    "You need remedial reading"

    "I might suggest logic 101 for you"

    "You wimp out because you have no answer"

     

    According to YOUR definition of a wimp, your use of those one-liners indicated you wimped out long ago.................

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from KingShaq. Show KingShaq's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "You dare not respond"

    "You are cooked"

    "You have no choice"

    "You need remedial reading"

    "I might suggest logic 101 for you"

    "You wimp out because you have no answer"

     

    According to YOUR definition of a wimp, your use of those one-liners indicated you wimped out long ago.................

    [/QUOTE]


    Ummm... my statements always come with some other arguments, as part of a long response. How are they one-liners? You know the meaning of one-liner?

    Better yet, are you going to respond to your "start over again"? You responded to my post with the "So, is all that crap a YES or a NO?" one-liner. I'll give you a 2nd chance:

     

    ============================

    Yes, in response to

    '"Fierce, I'll bet you a dollar that in the 80's majic here still called them the Los Angeles Lakers, even though they resided in Inglewood  (which is a dump, btw).  Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!""

    Yes or no?

    No, then you lie.

    Yes, then the context is about caring where the Lakers won their championships, not about the thing you made up ""YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. "

    So yes or no? your pick.

    And you have no more argument about what Kupchak/Phil said was only A=>B, not !A=>!B? So that's a sign of you have NO MORE ARGUMENT. You get shut up again on the Gasol trade. Don't think I'll let you off the hook even if you don't respond.

    Better beg more of your Laker adversaries to support your opinion that "had Bynum not injured, there won't have been the Gasol trade". But given that since I posted what the Lakers fans posted on Lakersground.net, you've already given up that route, i.e. begging for others to support your wishy washy...

    ===========================

    Are you going to use the one-liner response again?

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Update: Darko is a Celtic

    In response to KingShaq's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to hedleylamarr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "You dare not respond"

    "You are cooked"

    "You have no choice"

    "You need remedial reading"

    "I might suggest logic 101 for you"

    "You wimp out because you have no answer"

     

    According to YOUR definition of a wimp, your use of those one-liners indicated you wimped out long ago.................

    [/QUOTE]


    Ummm... my statements always come with some other arguments, as part of a long response. How are they one-liners? You know the meaning of one-liner?

    Better yet, are you going to respond to your "start over again"? You responded to my post with the "So, is all that crap a YES or a NO?" one-liner. I'll give you a 2nd chance:

     

    ============================

    Yes, in response to

    '"Fierce, I'll bet you a dollar that in the 80's majic here still called them the Los Angeles Lakers, even though they resided in Inglewood  (which is a dump, btw).  Yep, MN won 5 titles, and Inglewood won 6 titles, so the LOS ANGELES Lakers have really only won five!!""

    Yes or no?

    No, then you lie.

    Yes, then the context is about caring where the Lakers won their championships, not about the thing you made up ""YOU said lakers fans would still follow the team even they didn't play in LA. "

    So yes or no? your pick.

    And you have no more argument about what Kupchak/Phil said was only A=>B, not !A=>!B? So that's a sign of you have NO MORE ARGUMENT. You get shut up again on the Gasol trade. Don't think I'll let you off the hook even if you don't respond.

    Better beg more of your Laker adversaries to support your opinion that "had Bynum not injured, there won't have been the Gasol trade". But given that since I posted what the Lakers fans posted on Lakersground.net, you've already given up that route, i.e. begging for others to support your wishy washy...

    ===========================

    Are you going to use the one-liner response again?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You don't argue, you contradict.  That is the lowest form of arguing.  You are afraid to argue, because you don't know how to.  You have ZERO etiquette.  It is a complete waste of time trying to make a point with you - you won't even stand behind your comments.  Your "sources" are fellow lakers fans, who, in general, are the most ill-informed fans on the planet, and who, despite what you might think, are fair-weather fans who will jump off the bandwagon the day kobe retires.  How many fans in LA still follow the Rams??  None from this generation...............which is, of course, my point.  IF the lakers ever moved out of LA, they would lose a huge following.  Not saying that would happen, but can you really see all these kobe-crazed idiots rooting for the Seattle Lakers???

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share