Lifestyle > Sports & Entertainment
The Official Los Angeles Lakers thread
Now_Im_Not_Banned:
--- Quote from: Hack Wilson on December 25, 2008, 03:04:43 PM ---
--- Quote from: Now_I_Know on December 25, 2008, 02:36:17 PM ---
--- Quote from: Hack Wilson on December 25, 2008, 09:50:27 AM ---17 > 14
27 wins > 22
the big 3 > kobe + gumby 1 and gumby 2
atleast you guys have jack nickelson...
--- End quote ---
29 Finals appearances > 20 Finals appearances
56 playoff appearances > 46 playoff appearances
Getting a ring in every era > doing the majority of your damage in one era (a weak one, at that)
--- End quote ---
1-nobody celebrates losing the NBA finals. nobody. try going 17-3 in the finals :D if my math is correct, the Lakers have a LOSING record in the finals?
2-the Lakers didn't win any rings from 1955-1970, so unless "era" can mean a 16 year span they dind't get any rings during the Bill Russell era. Oh, and the Lakers didn't win anything in the 1990's either. Summer of 2000 doesn't count.
--- End quote ---
1.So, somehow, not making the Finals is better than making the Finals? LMAO. Great logic.
2.That's one era they didn't win a ring in, but they were still relevant during that time...nothing comparable to the Celtics from 1988-2008. :-X
OG Hack Wilson:
what i'm sayin is that being 17-3 in the NBA finals is alot better than being 14-15. being 14-15 means you lose over half the time you make it...that's not very spectacular
you say being 14-15 is better, I say winning 85% of the time you make it is better...AND havin more titles too.
to each his own
Now_Im_Not_Banned:
--- Quote from: Hack Wilson on December 25, 2008, 04:47:47 PM ---what i'm sayin is that being 17-3 in the NBA finals is alot better than being 14-15. being 14-15 means you lose over half the time you make it...that's not very spectacular
you say being 14-15 is better, I say winning 85% of the time you make it is better...AND havin more titles too.
to each his own
--- End quote ---
Ummm...but the Celtics are 17-3, because they weren't good enough to make the Finals those other 50+ years the NBA has been around. Lakers would be worse off if they were 14-3, not BETTER off...winning the west 15 times without a title is better than not winning anything at all, ya feel me?
In essence, you aren't winning 85% of the time...it's just that you weren't good enough to even be in the Finals 85% of the time. LOL.
Teddy Roosevelt:
--- Quote from: Hack Wilson on December 20, 2008, 07:00:52 PM ---losing streaks?? what are those?
--- End quote ---
Now you know.
Now_Im_Not_Banned:
--- Quote from: Ted Since `87 - Fuck the Broncos on December 27, 2008, 10:35:53 AM ---
--- Quote from: Hack Wilson on December 20, 2008, 07:00:52 PM ---losing streaks?? what are those?
--- End quote ---
Now you know.
--- End quote ---
Pau!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version