-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
2012 NBA Playoffs |OT2| OKC VS LA: Black on Black Crime
- Thread starter reilo
- Start date
- Status
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
1. Nash isn't demanding a trade to the Lakers
2. Nash especially at his age isn't defending Westbrook/Parker any better than Sessions
3. Nash isn't going to make Pau and Bynum turn into inspired and capable players
4. Nash isn't going to transform the Lakers bench
5. Nash isn't going to turn Brown into a capable coach
6. Nash isn't going to help the Lakers beyond a third seed second round exit.
2. Nash especially at his age isn't defending Westbrook/Parker any better than Sessions
3. Nash isn't going to make Pau and Bynum turn into inspired and capable players
4. Nash isn't going to transform the Lakers bench
5. Nash isn't going to turn Brown into a capable coach
6. Nash isn't going to help the Lakers beyond a third seed second round exit.
The Chosen One
Member
Bron Bron is a frontrunner. Wade blew the game open in the 3rd quarter last game so Lebron continued to play well. Had nothing to do with Granger antics.
Lebron's disappearing acts are usually dependent if they're trailing in the 4th quarter when there's actual pressure. In those situations, Granger's antics can be effective to compound on Bron Bron's emotional issues.
MorisUkunRasik
Member
It's getting under Bron's skin enough for Bron to talk about it (though he was probably just answering a bait question) but its not negatively affecting his game as evident with his monster performance.
The best Danny can hope for is that Bron gets a tech for throwing elbows lol good luck.
The best Danny can hope for is that Bron gets a tech for throwing elbows lol good luck.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
LeBron would have to break someones arm on purpose, choke a bitch, or throw a ref into the stands WWF style in order to be suspended. Even then the league would just push the suspension out until game one next regular season.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
None of this is true and you know that.
iamshadowlark
Banned
Are you Skip Bayless?
Black Mamba
Member
A Nash-Kobe-MVVP-Pau-Bynum lineup would be nuts and you know it. Who is stopping that team?
Bench don't matter. How many times must I say this?
Nash's defense don't matter. It's the offense that needed help. Lakers controlled tempo vs OKC in 3 games.
But yeah, I don't actually see Nash coming. post was kind of in jest. But if he did come, Lakers are instant faves.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Come on man. Bench matters and the Lakers didn't have one. Defense matters and the Lakers couldn't stop Westbrook. Even with Nash (one year older mind you) they're not favorites because Bynum is still Bynum, Gasol is still Gasol, and we're still not deep enough.
The Chosen One
Member
Pretty much this. Even if Lebron was hiding a switch-blade in his headband, the league would probably suspend Joel Anthony instead.
Black Mamba
Member
What bench did the Lakers have in 2009 and 2010? benches don't matter during the playoffs, just ask Chicago how that worked out last season.
Lakers still have a good defense without stopping the PG. Denver and OKC both scored below their normal rate in the games Lakers were in especially until the very end when they tired out from a lockout year.
How can you on one hand rave about Miami winnin it all this year and then complain about Lakers having no bench? MIami has one of the worst benches, no depth, and shit for role players. This league has been and will always be about great players. Nash on this team would make Kobe/Bynum/Pau's scoring much much easier. You're fucking nuts. Adding Nash to one of the 5 best team won't improve them a bunch? lol
I don't think he'd ever hurt Wade
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Lakers didn't have to get through an Okc and SA team in 2009-2010. They didn't have to face a Miami team in the East in 2010.
Nash at his age isn't going to stop Westbrook and Parker. And yes, defense is important. When the opposing PG can score 25-30ppg during a series? You bet defense is vital. Lakers lost this series 4-1. Whether they were close or not, they still lost. Nash at his age isn't changing that outcome.
The Frankman
Banned
wat
why
why
Dominican Power
Member
Black Mamba
Member
Yeah, they were all weaker teams than the Lakers and Boston. So fucking what?
if you don't think nash tilts the series considering how close it was, you're nuts. Your hate for Pau is crazy.
I love his reasoning "I'm focusing on shutting down Lebron on defense"
Lebron james: 40pts 18rebs 9 asts
Actually ALL of this is true. When is the last time Lebron James led his team from a tough fourth quarter deficit to get a big playoff win?
Lebron has always been great when the pressure is minimized or there is a cushion, he's the absolute definition of a front runner.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
So what? So what that the competition is greater, thereby creating a bigger challenge to the Lakers? Um, its the difference of the Heat facing the East with the Pacers and old Celtics to the them facing the Spurs and Thunder.
My hate for Pau stems from him not showing up when it matters in the last couple of years. Call me crazy.
Black Mamba
Member
no competition isn't greater for the Lakers now than 2 or 3 years ago. I don't agree at all.
And you blame Pau even though Kobe cost them 2 games with selfish play.
iamshadowlark
Banned
Dude just stop it. Also to answer your question last year ECF game 5.
Since when is a 4-1 series ever considered "close"?
The 2010 Thunder team was better than the Jazz and Injured Clippers the Spurs just faced, so were the Phoenix Suns that year. And considering the smaller, less deep, older, 2012 Celtics team is about to beat the Heat...so were the 2010 Celtics.
I mean, Jazz with Boozer and Deron Vs. Jazz with Favors / Jefferson? Really?
You've been too much of a homer to notice, it's ok. The next time you see Lebron be passive/wilt...check the score and the time. And the next time he scores 35-40...see if his team is ahead and in control during most the game. Just pay attention from now on.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
I blame Kobe too but at least he didn't shrink from the games. And yes, the competition is greater. Show me a team like the Thunder and Spurs in 2010 in the west. Show me a team like Miami in the east. You can't because they didn't exist at the time.
The Spurs haven't lost since April
This Celtics team isn't beating the Heat
There wasn't a team in 2010 that the Lakers faced that had a threesome like Harden, Westbrook, and Durant. Don't even try it.
Black Mamba
Member
Lakers had what should have been leads big enough to win 2 of the games. Come on, game 2 and game 4 should have been wins and you know it.
So if a team win 4 games all by 1 point, you wouldn't consider it close?
he didn't shrink? he threw the ball straight to Durant when all he needed to do was milk the clock. Then he took shots for no reason that were terrible. If he didn't "shrink" then he panicked. Same shit to me.
Miami is a deeply flawed team, not the super team you think they are. The '09 and '10 Lakers would have made mince meat out of them. As would the Boston teams and Orlando teams.
Did you read what I just wrote? Also, The 2010 Celtics would beat this years Thunder team...no question. But we'll revisit this series of posts if the Celtics make the Finals this year, and we'll see how they do against the West.
Should have = did?
When you're from LA or NY.
Black Mamba
Member
Ignoring the question about it being close. Did they choke? yes. Was is still a close series? yes.
Again, answer the question. If a team wins 4-0 all by 1 point victories, would you say it wasn't close?
No, it's not close.
MorisUkunRasik
Member
Not everyone has the luxury of playing Atlanta and Philly.
iamshadowlark
Banned
I had plenty of people here telling me how close the CHI/BOS series were.
Where were you about a month ago?
Nope. Orlando fans are still bitching they lost 4-1 because they let two games go to overtime and lost both, despite getting a courtney lee layup and a defensive blown assignment against fisher that made both go to overtime in the first place.
The loser team in the playoffs always does this "it was close" bullshit. It wasn't. Playoff games are close...that's normal, and unless you lose the series 4-3...it wasn't close. The Thunder have shown that their late game execution has arrived, they outclutched the Lakers and the Mavs TWICE EACH...two of the best closers in the game with Veterans and championship experience to boot.
The Thunder destroyed LA this series, it wasn't close. We dominated the tempo for 4 straight games and still couldn't beat them. That used to be us when we won chips. Teams would stay close, and then in 2-3 minutes we'd go on 10-0 runs and break the game open...that's a mark of a superior team when the runs are always one sided as they were this series.
Black Mamba
Member
Your point is?
That's quite the moral victory outlook you got there. I didn't think Lakers fans had it in them.
But no, 4-1 is not a close series. This is not soccer, your margin of victory has no bearing.
Black Mamba
Member
It's not a moral victory. I am not happy it was closer opposed to not.
But you still haven't answered my question. If a team wins 4-0 all on 1 point victories, is that a close series to you?
And what else to you define "closeness" other than margin of victory. lol.
Would you consider a 4-0 1 point every game not as close as a 4-1 with 4 blowouts and 1 close loss?
reilo said:
??
You define "closeness" by how many games are played between the teams. C'mon now.
Plus, how can you call a series CLOSE where two of the victories were by 29 and 16 points?
Pretty sure he answered that.
MorisUkunRasik
Member
Enjoy playing shitty teams in the playoffs now cause soon Boston is going to be those shitty teams, if they're lucky.
Black Mamba
Member
I asked about 4-0 all 1 point victories, not the Laker series. You've yet to answer that.
That is an obviously stupid way to approach it if it is the only criteria.
If Portland lost to whomever 4-0 on 4 game winning shots to win by 1, would you stand up and say "fuck, we got blown out of that series?"
marathonfool
Member
When you get blown out in 2 of the 4 loses in 5 games. The series isn't close.
You aren't making much sense. To combat your ESPN quality argument, the Lakers were only one game better than the Hawks.
Why are you switching your argument from reality to a hypothetical? There is no point in me answering a question unrelated to the original argument at hand only for you to use it as fodder to say, "therefore you think a 4-1 series is close!" You're reaching.
You are the one changing the criteria.
Yes.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
The Lakers series wasn't close. A couple of the games were but the series overall wasn't close.
4-0 is never a close series.
4-1 isn't a close series.
A few games may be close but the series wasn't.
On what planet would you celebrate your team's inability to win a single game?
HINT: I've already given you the two planets.
Black Mamba
Member
Hahaha. You expect anyone to believe you here? Done trying this with you.
Who is celebrating the losses? WTF are you talking about?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked