Author Topic: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...  (Read 1061 times)

GangstaBoogy

Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #15 on: December 18, 2008, 04:49:12 PM »
what a jackass



NIK, why didn't phil jackson's team peak in the playoffs last year??? or the last 5 years for that matter


Gee, I wonder why we didn't PEAK...maybe because we were INJURED. :stupid:

inured in 2003,04, 05, 06 AND 07? 

i don't think the Lakers, the 2nd rank franchise in NBA history, should be blaming things on injuries

Fine, this year let us have a healthy roster and you guys play us without Garnett and without your 6thm man.
"House shoes & coffee: I know the paper gone come"

 

7even

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 11283
  • Karma: -679
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #16 on: December 18, 2008, 05:15:55 PM »
Being relatively injury free is not dumb luck, it's a quality.
Cause I don't care where I belong no more
What we share or not I will ignore
And I won't waste my time fitting in
Cause I don't think contrast is a sin
No, it's not a sin
 

OG Hack Wilson

Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2008, 06:19:25 PM »
Being relatively injury free is not dumb luck, it's a quality.

very true


people who blame losing on injuries are funiny.  the 1990 giants won a superbowl with JEFF HOSTETLER after phil simms got hurt.

the Celtics lose Posey, the Lakers add Bynum back, and the C's are still the NBA's best team.  how ironic.


the word "team" is deeper than just a collection of players
Quote from: Now_I_Know on September 10, 2001, 04:19:36 PM
This guy aint no crip, and I'm 100% sure on that because he doesn't type like a crip, I know crips, and that fool is not a crip.


"I went from being homeless strung out on Dust to an 8 bedroom estate signed 2 1 of my fav rappers... Pump it up jokes can't hurt me."-- Mr. Joey Buddens
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2008, 07:38:06 PM »
Tool.

Always have a bullshit excuse.

I was expecting to open this thread and see the biggest difference being:




yea...I'm really making an excuse for having a 21-3 record, ya douchebag. :stupid:
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2008, 07:39:57 PM »
what a jackass



NIK, why didn't phil jackson's team peak in the playoffs last year??? or the last 5 years for that matter


Gee, I wonder why we didn't PEAK...maybe because we were INJURED. :stupid:

inured in 2003,04, 05, 06 AND 07? 

i don't think the Lakers, the 2nd rank franchise in NBA history, should be blaming things on injuries


'03, '04=yes, injuries
'05=rebuilding season
'06, '07=we peaked around playoff time

Lakers=number 1 franchise in NBA history. get over it.
 

OG Hack Wilson

Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #20 on: December 18, 2008, 07:45:13 PM »
17 >14

get over that :D
Quote from: Now_I_Know on September 10, 2001, 04:19:36 PM
This guy aint no crip, and I'm 100% sure on that because he doesn't type like a crip, I know crips, and that fool is not a crip.


"I went from being homeless strung out on Dust to an 8 bedroom estate signed 2 1 of my fav rappers... Pump it up jokes can't hurt me."-- Mr. Joey Buddens
 

thisoneguy360

  • Guest
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #21 on: December 18, 2008, 07:45:36 PM »
Being relatively injury free is not dumb luck, it's a quality.

very true


people who blame losing on injuries are funiny.  the 1990 giants won a superbowl with JEFF HOSTETLER after phil simms got hurt.

the Celtics lose Posey, the Lakers add Bynum back, and the C's are still the NBA's best team.  how ironic.


the word "team" is deeper than just a collection of players

There's a lot of basketball left to be played bro
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #22 on: December 18, 2008, 07:46:23 PM »
17 >14

get over that :D


Having a dynasty every decade>20+ years without a relevance
 

OG Hack Wilson

Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #23 on: December 18, 2008, 08:07:35 PM »
17 >14

get over that :D


Having a dynasty every decade>20+ years without a relevance

no team can be relevant every year. look at the Yankes, the 1980's didn't hurt them that bad did it? 

 check LA's 1954-1970 ....so 16 years of being bostons bitch can be acceptable?

17 > 14, nomatter how you size it

have the lakers had a decade long dynasty? :D
« Last Edit: December 18, 2008, 08:10:05 PM by Hack Wilson »
Quote from: Now_I_Know on September 10, 2001, 04:19:36 PM
This guy aint no crip, and I'm 100% sure on that because he doesn't type like a crip, I know crips, and that fool is not a crip.


"I went from being homeless strung out on Dust to an 8 bedroom estate signed 2 1 of my fav rappers... Pump it up jokes can't hurt me."-- Mr. Joey Buddens
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #24 on: December 18, 2008, 08:30:58 PM »
17 >14

get over that :D


Having a dynasty every decade>20+ years without a relevance

no team can be relevant every year. look at the Yankes, the 1980's didn't hurt them that bad did it? 

 check LA's 1954-1970 ....so 16 years of being bostons bitch can be acceptable?

17 > 14, nomatter how you size it

have the lakers had a decade long dynasty? :D


at least we were relevant within those 16 years.

17>14, yes...but 14 spread out>17 with a majority of the titles bunched into one era (an era with much less competition, to say the least).

and actually, yea, we did have a decade long dynasty with the Magic-Kareem-Worthy Showtime Lakers. 8)
 

OG Hack Wilson

Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2008, 07:32:39 AM »
hey NIK

the celtics last year won more games than any magic-kareem-worthy lakers team (66 to 65)


dynasty?  they never won 10 titles in 11 years
Quote from: Now_I_Know on September 10, 2001, 04:19:36 PM
This guy aint no crip, and I'm 100% sure on that because he doesn't type like a crip, I know crips, and that fool is not a crip.


"I went from being homeless strung out on Dust to an 8 bedroom estate signed 2 1 of my fav rappers... Pump it up jokes can't hurt me."-- Mr. Joey Buddens
 

Turf Hitta

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Posts: 3374
  • Karma: 13
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2008, 10:55:05 AM »
hey NIK

the celtics last year won more games than any magic-kareem-worthy lakers team (66 to 65)


dynasty?  they never won 10 titles in 11 years

lol why does anybody still try? He is impervious to logic when it comes to the Lakers.
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #27 on: December 19, 2008, 01:32:43 PM »
^yea...cuz the Celtics last year were better than the Showtime Lakers, huh, ya dumbfuck? ::)


Come on, now...the competition the Celtics faced last season is like D-League ball compared to what the Showtime Lakers were up against.
 

OG Hack Wilson

Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #28 on: December 19, 2008, 01:35:37 PM »
10 titles in 11 years


lakers cant sniff that
Quote from: Now_I_Know on September 10, 2001, 04:19:36 PM
This guy aint no crip, and I'm 100% sure on that because he doesn't type like a crip, I know crips, and that fool is not a crip.


"I went from being homeless strung out on Dust to an 8 bedroom estate signed 2 1 of my fav rappers... Pump it up jokes can't hurt me."-- Mr. Joey Buddens
 

Now_Im_Not_Banned

  • Guest
Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
« Reply #29 on: December 19, 2008, 01:43:00 PM »
10 titles in 11 years


lakers cant sniff that


how many teams were in the league when that happened? ???



 :-* ;D