What do you think????
Do you think the Celtics are stepping up?
Do you think the Lakers are choking?
Do you think its a combination of the two?
Printable View
What do you think????
Do you think the Celtics are stepping up?
Do you think the Lakers are choking?
Do you think its a combination of the two?
Neither.
When a team loses in a playoff series, they didn't necessarily choke, and when a team wins, they didn't necessarily "step it up." Maybe it's just because the Celtics are the better team, and the better team wins more often than not.
How about regarding just last nights game?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
I don't know. I didn't watch. I'm not into basketball. I'm just saying, in every sport, people try to explain playoff games by saying one team choked or another stepped up, when usually it's just the better team winning.
I went with both. Boston has played well, but LA keeps falling apart in the clutch.
I guess it depends on what you mean by "choking", did they play sloppy on D, sure they did, but they got out rebounded by a much better rebounding team, they had there offense shut down by the top defence in the league, and their bench got outplayed by a better Boston bench.
But you dont make up a 21 point defecit in the last 18 mins with out one team playing bad and the other playing good.
Part of the problem for LA is that their bench has absolutely disappeared. Has Luke Walton done ANYTHING in this series? He was hitting big shots every game in the previous series'.
Well Phil Jackson isnt even really playing Walton, hes averging less that 10 min a game has only take 10 shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
But really what happened to Jackson being a great coach? Doc is making him look real bad. and what the **** was up with the interview before Q4 in the 4th game ?!?!
his response to Tofoya asking what happend was "I don't know, what happened" ?? was he sleeping? out drinking with Flip Saunders ?
I hate Kobe
Phil has almost been coaching like a bizarro version of himself this series. I mean, you're up by 24 at the half, and Odom has been playing really well, so you take the ball OUT of his hands, and change your whole system for the 2nd half? Huh?
Lakers did well to win the West, but their lack of quality veterans is showing. Celtics appear to have a better veteran goup to handle this series.
I think the NBA rigged the playoffs to get the Lakers and Celtics to distract from their rigging the playoffs 6 years ago to keep Sacramento out of the finals. I'm not really all that interested in a fixed sporting event.
Ridiculous.
Well all sporting events are rigged, didn't you know that, actually they are all controlled by the government in order to distract people from what they are doing. In fact most of the "fans" at games aren't even real fans they are government operatives there to ensure the outcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Passed Ball
Well, either that or the people who think they are fixed are just conspiracy theory morons ...
I stopped watching basketball when I felt that the refs allowed stars to get away with too much (traveling on the way to a dunk, fouls based on the star power of the players involved, etc.), so my vote is for I don't care. Shame too, as I once enjoyed it (even watched the finals back in the '70s when they weren't shown until after the 11pm newscast).
Did I say that I hate Kobe?
I love the Lakers though
Weird...
Kinda like Umps giving star pitchers borderline strike calls? Or borderline walks to star hitters who a know to "have a good eye".Quote:
Originally Posted by SirKodiak
Sadly that kinda stuff happens in all sports.
It does happen a lot in hoops, though. Jordan was undoubtedly a great player, but good LORD did he get away with a lot of traveling!
I picked Neither! Go Yankees!
Kinda. But to me, basketball was at a level more like giving Maddux a strike for any pitch that was within a foot of the strike zone.Quote:
Originally Posted by gRYFYN1
I don't understand the question. The Celtics are better than the Lakers...
The Celtics really are better than the Lakers, so I don't understand why everyone is so surprised they are up 3-2. Celtics have 3 superstars as compared to 1 superstar for the Lakers. Though, with Kobe, anything is possible.
I don't feel the Celtics is the better team. Sadly in a short series, and yes 7 games is short, the poorer team can often snatch victory.
koolzach " At this point in his career, I question Ray Allen being a superstar. Actually, though he's been a great SHOOTER, was he ever a guy who sold tickets? That's my definition of a superstar player in ANY sport.
I would say Pau Gasol's skills are better than Ray Allen's and Fisher is equal to Allen at this point in time, making the 'superstars' actually work out to be around 2 to 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by belial
Allen may not be a "superstar" player anymore but he is alot better than fisher. Fisher would never be asked to guard the other teams best scorer (as allen did the entire Detroit series), he isn't a player that his team can rely on, and only averages 28 mpg, and 11 PPG.
I wouldn't consider Gasol a superstar either, he has a tendancy to vanish for most of games, and while he can dominate at times he doesn't do it consistently , nor to you EXPECT him to. (actually i think Gasol and Allen are a closer comparison)
But I'm not sure why people are surpised either, after all the team with more wins (66-57) better head-to-head record (2-0) better scoring differential (10.3-7.3/game) and better rebounding diff (3.1-1.4/game) is leading.
Ray Allen used to be a superstar. He has worn down a little bit, but still a star. He has one of the best strokes in the NBA, and he is a good defender. Allen has been on video game titles, and up there with the league leaders in ppg; I would classify him as at the very least, a star.
Derek Fisher is NOT even close to a star. I like Fisher, and I think he is a good PG, but he doesn't have very good numbers; he and Rondo are about equal.
Even so, when you got 3 players in a lineup who score around 20 ppg or more, and are veterans with some playoff experience, who are hungry for a ring - The team will be awesome, which is the case with the Celtics.
I still predict that the Lakers will win in 7, though. Might just be that I am a huge Lakers fan, and a huge Kobe fan, but we shall see. As TO says... get the popcorn ready.
Okay, you make some points regarding Allen...I'm willing to concede a bit on that front. I do agree, also, that Fisher was NEVER a star. Nice player, nice piece of a team, but never a star player.
One reason I was favoring the Lakers was that, yes, Boston racked up a ton of wins...but against who? There weren't exactly a lot of good-very good teams out East that presented a big challenge. Teams in the West play a much more competitive schedule right now, because it's a deeper conference. And Boston hadn't impressed me in any playoff round prior to this one.
Interesting thought But look at teh numbers and who they playedQuote:
Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
Boston vs the "deeper [western] conference" was 25-5 an .833 win %
their finals opponent Detroit (the 2nd best record in the league) was 22-8 (.733) both better than the Lakers 20-10 effort vs the "weaker" east or thier .711 vs the west.
The Lakers had to play SA (23-7 v east) to reach the finals (a team without it best scorer, Manu playing uselessly on a bum ankle)
The lakers were were 2-4 vs the PO teams boston played, and 9-7 vs all eastern PO teams
The celtics: 4-2 vs LA PO opponents, and 12-4 vs Western PO teams.
So - - don't believe the hype just cuz Jim Rome and Skip Bayless scream loud enough.
It's a known fact that the Western Conference is much deeper (look at the standings and talent). If I am not mistaken, didn't Boston play a lot of the weaker Western Conference teams?