West Coast Connection Forum

Lifestyle => Sports & Entertainment => Topic started by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 16, 2008, 10:44:14 PM

Title: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 16, 2008, 10:44:14 PM
Lakers are not close to peaking...we're 21-3

Boston is playing their hearts out...they're 23-2


If you know what Phil Jackson is up to and you're a Laker fan, you can't wait until April. 8)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Turf Hitta on December 16, 2008, 10:49:32 PM
nice reach
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: ωεεźγ ғ on December 16, 2008, 10:51:03 PM
does a peak mean that they will be on their way down sometime soon?
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 16, 2008, 10:54:22 PM
does a peak mean that they will be on their way down sometime soon?


Phil Jackson teams are known for peaking in the playoffs, when it counts, and it stays that way until the job is done...this is not a reach. if ya'll have been watching the Lakers play, then you KNOW they're not peaking right now. You know there's much better ball to come, and it feels good to have your team go 21-3 when they're months away from the real deal. 8)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: ωεεźγ ғ on December 16, 2008, 11:06:00 PM
does a peak mean that they will be on their way down sometime soon?


Phil Jackson teams are known for peaking in the playoffs, when it counts, and it stays that way until the job is done...this is not a reach. if ya'll have been watching the Lakers play, then you KNOW they're not peaking right now. You know there's much better ball to come, and it feels good to have your team go 21-3 when they're months away from the real deal. 8)

a long long way to go buddy
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: 7even on December 17, 2008, 03:19:39 AM
The Lakers sure looked at their peak during the last game of the past season
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 17, 2008, 07:25:23 AM
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
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Chamillitary Click on December 17, 2008, 02:04:14 PM
^because some bullshit went down; what else can be the reasoning when the Lakers lose? ;) :P
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: thisoneguy360 on December 17, 2008, 03:26:23 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

The Celtics were the more powerful physical team last year...we'll see what happens this year.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Rick McCrank on December 17, 2008, 04:22:47 PM
NIK you look quite pathetic

stop scraping the bottom for reasons to get excited about the Lakers

cause we all know the way they play these days it's hard to get excited
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: thisoneguy360 on December 17, 2008, 04:36:14 PM
NIK you look quite pathetic

stop scraping the bottom for reasons to get excited about the Lakers

cause we all know the way they play these days it's hard to get excited

I wouildn't say that...
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 18, 2008, 01:15:30 AM
NIK you look quite pathetic

stop scraping the bottom for reasons to get excited about the Lakers


I wouldn't say that...


on point
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 18, 2008, 01:16:16 AM
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:
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: hisairness on December 18, 2008, 10:13:51 AM
Tool.

Always have a bullshit excuse.

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

(http://www.thebostontraveler.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/boston-celtics-2008-nba-champions_nc.jpg)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 18, 2008, 02:49:38 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
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: GangstaBoogy 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.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: 7even on December 18, 2008, 05:15:55 PM
Being relatively injury free is not dumb luck, it's a quality.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson 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
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned 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:

(http://www.thebostontraveler.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/boston-celtics-2008-nba-champions_nc.jpg)


yea...I'm really making an excuse for having a 21-3 record, ya douchebag. :stupid:
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned 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.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 18, 2008, 07:45:13 PM
17 >14

get over that :D
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: thisoneguy360 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
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 18, 2008, 07:46:23 PM
17 >14

get over that :D


Having a dynasty every decade>20+ years without a relevance
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson 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
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned 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)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson 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
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Turf Hitta 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.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned 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.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 19, 2008, 01:35:37 PM
10 titles in 11 years


lakers cant sniff that
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned 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
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: GangstaBoogy on December 19, 2008, 01:45:13 PM
How many rings did the Celtics win in the 90s?
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 19, 2008, 01:46:00 PM
How many rings did the Celtics win in the 90s?


wait a minute...they made the playoffs in the 90s? :D
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Chamillitary Click on December 19, 2008, 02:07:56 PM
and they say Yankees fans live in the past. ::) :P
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Turf Hitta on December 19, 2008, 02:43:24 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.

lol the point is that your homerism is unparalleled. you are constantly trying to make the lakers out to be better than they actually are/were. there is no point in introducing logic into the discussion because it just doesnt register with you when it comes to the lakers.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 19, 2008, 04:03:55 PM
How many rings did the Celtics win in the 90s?

same as the Lakers = 0


jesus, you dont even know what year your Lakers won the finals in :D
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 19, 2008, 04:07:18 PM
and they say Yankees fans live in the past. ::) :P


why would we live in the past when we just won the west and are top contenders for the title? LOL :grumpy:
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 19, 2008, 04:08:00 PM
How many rings did the Celtics win in the 90s?

same as the Lakers = 0


jesus, you dont even know what year your Lakers won the finals in :D


we won in 99-00 and were relevant throughout the decade.  :-*
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 19, 2008, 04:09:17 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.

lol the point is that your homerism is unparalleled. you are constantly trying to make the lakers out to be better than they actually are/were. there is no point in introducing logic into the discussion because it just doesnt register with you when it comes to the lakers.


how am I trying to make them seem better? I truly believe were the top team in the league...you would to if you were a Laker fan and you watched every single game.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 19, 2008, 04:23:59 PM
How many rings did the Celtics win in the 90s?

same as the Lakers = 0


jesus, you dont even know what year your Lakers won the finals in :D


we won in 99-00 and were relevant throughout the decade.  :-*

yes...you won in 2000


1990-1999 = 0 rings

1960s = lakers had no rings  (despite it being "so easy" for Boston, right?)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Chamillitary Click on December 19, 2008, 05:14:36 PM
and they say Yankees fans live in the past. ::) :P


why would we live in the past when we just won the west and are top contenders for the title? LOL :grumpy:

then talk about this year. who cares how these teams were in the 70's & 80's; you guys probably werent even alive to see it.

you both seem confident that this years Celts are better than this years Lakers & vice versa, dont go back and forth on whose the better franchise. its basically even, Lakers do it in bunches, Celtics do it more but in different years.

let this years Finals put the end to the feuding! ;)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 19, 2008, 05:44:42 PM
he tried that last year C.C. and it didn't work....guess he's holding onto hope that Bynum woulda made a 41 point difference in game 6 last year ;)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 19, 2008, 06:48:44 PM
^there wouldn't have been a game 6 with bynum in the lineup. :-*
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Turf Hitta on December 19, 2008, 08:18:03 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.

lol the point is that your homerism is unparalleled. you are constantly trying to make the lakers out to be better than they actually are/were. there is no point in introducing logic into the discussion because it just doesnt register with you when it comes to the lakers.


how am I trying to make them seem better? I truly believe were the top team in the league...you would to if you were a Laker fan and you watched every single game.

For some reason that doesn't come as a huge surprise... :D
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 19, 2008, 08:32:45 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.

lol the point is that your homerism is unparalleled. you are constantly trying to make the lakers out to be better than they actually are/were. there is no point in introducing logic into the discussion because it just doesnt register with you when it comes to the lakers.


how am I trying to make them seem better? I truly believe were the top team in the league...you would to if you were a Laker fan and you watched every single game.

For some reason that doesn't come as a huge surprise... :D


yea...so it's not like I'm being biased and say shit just to say it. it's what I really think, and it's an educated analysis, not some bs i pull put my ass.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 19, 2008, 09:07:52 PM
actually it is


25-2 defending champs, or 21-4 w/ softee's like Odem and Gasol?
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 19, 2008, 09:50:18 PM
actually it is


25-2 defending champs, or 21-4 w/ softee's like Odem and Gasol?



Lakers > Celtics



got any money on December 25th?
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Citizen-Y on December 19, 2008, 09:56:41 PM
actually it is


25-2 defending champs, or 21-4 w/ softee's like Odem and Gasol?



Lakers > Celtics



got any money on December 25th?

you gonna lose your chinese food money?
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 20, 2008, 01:41:48 AM
^??
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: 7even on December 20, 2008, 02:26:30 AM
I don't even like the Celtics, but I can't wait until they shut Nik's ass up.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Rick McCrank on December 20, 2008, 02:45:59 AM
as a Laker fan, it's tough to see NIK as the head cheerleader around here

reading his comments almost makes me dislike the Lakers for a second
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: wcsoldier on December 20, 2008, 02:52:13 AM
Do we really need all these Lakers/Celtics here ? I don't see any interesting B-Ball discussion in those topics ... the only truth is that if we don't get out of the big  slump we are right now , Christmas game will be a 20 pts + loss
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 20, 2008, 05:28:15 AM
as a Laker fan, it's tough to see NIK as the head cheerleader around here

reading his comments almost makes me dislike the Lakers for a second

lol


he's got his chaunikah $$$ riding on dec 25th
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: HD on December 20, 2008, 06:43:37 AM
as a Laker fan, it's tough to see NIK as the head cheerleader around here

reading his comments almost makes me dislike the Lakers for a second

his posts about the lakers always crack me up
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: jeromechickenbone on December 20, 2008, 08:40:58 AM
Guys, eventually you will learn not to take a bball discussion w/ Elior serious.  He gives all Laker fans a bad rep on here.   
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 20, 2008, 09:58:14 AM
LOL@people getting mad for me believing in my team...



...all you pessimist shitheads can suck a fatty when the Lakers win it all. 8)



and LOL@Jromo getting excited as if he even has the right to discuss basketball on a serious tip in here. you've never even made 1 post in this section that would make one believe you're anything more than a casual NBA fan. :-X
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: jeromechickenbone on December 20, 2008, 11:46:00 AM
LOL@people getting mad for me believing in my team...



...all you pessimist shitheads can suck a fatty when the Lakers win it all. 8)



and LOL@Jromo getting excited as if he even has the right to discuss basketball on a serious tip in here. you've never even made 1 post in this section that would make one believe you're anything more than a casual NBA fan. :-X

Hey man, I'm just reinforcing what everyone already knows and is always saying.  You are so delusional and completely obsessed with Kobe / Lakers that it's impossible to have a discussion with you.  You def have knowledge of the game but you are so blinded by your bitchmade homerism / haterism that it completely shreds your credibility.

You should take notes from say Antonio.  That cat is knowledgeable as fuck, is a big Lakers fan but is also completely rational and reasonable when discussing them and other teams / players in the league.   
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 20, 2008, 11:54:46 AM
LOL@people getting mad for me believing in my team...



...all you pessimist shitheads can suck a fatty when the Lakers win it all. 8)



and LOL@Jromo getting excited as if he even has the right to discuss basketball on a serious tip in here. you've never even made 1 post in this section that would make one believe you're anything more than a casual NBA fan. :-X

Hey man, I'm just reinforcing what everyone already knows and is always saying.  You are so delusional and completely obsessed with Kobe / Lakers that it's impossible to have a discussion with you.  You def have knowledge of the game but you are so blinded by your bitchmade homerism / haterism that it completely shreds your credibility.

You should take notes from say Antonio.  That cat is knowledgeable as fuck, is a big Lakers fan but is also completely rational and reasonable when discussing them and other teams / players in the league.   


Me and Antonio have the same exact views...I'm just more passionate and enthusiastic expressing them, being a hardcore born-and-raised in LA Lakers fan and all. If you really look at it, nothing I say is unreasonable or lacks credibility. In fact, all my claims are valid and definitely rational...I might lean towards the Laker side more often than not, because that's by far the team I watch closest. I'm still not over-the-top bias, like some people make it seem, though...PeACe
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: thisoneguy360 on December 20, 2008, 12:25:40 PM
Lakers are gonna get some revenge on Christmas...I'm calling it  8)
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 20, 2008, 06:36:18 PM
hey nik, be a fan, not a fanatic


even laker fans are callin u out hahaha
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Citizen-Y on December 20, 2008, 06:46:52 PM
Phil shooting zen bolts at the Lakers by making them lose to the Magic.  I behold the master plan!
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on December 20, 2008, 06:50:30 PM
hey nik, be a fan, not a fanatic


even laker fans are callin u out hahaha


Laker fans don't talk shit 'bout their team.
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: OG Hack Wilson on December 20, 2008, 06:57:01 PM
Phil shooting zen bolts at the Lakers by making them lose to the Magic.  I behold the master plan!
LOL LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Title: Re: The difference between the Lakers and the Celtics...
Post by: HD on December 21, 2008, 04:38:45 AM
we deeeeed it, magic looking real strong this year