Are there any basketball fans here? I tend to ignore the NBA regular season, then read the results of the playoffs, then maybe watch the finals. This year, tho, I've actually started watching a series earlier - Sacramento may send the Lakers packing! :goodjob:

The Lakers and Boston have won what, 2/3 of all NBA titles? YAWN. I love seeing teams win championships for the first time, so seeing these two lose will make the title series interesting for its novelty.

Besides, Kobe Bryant deserves to lose. What an arrogant sod. I find it rather satisfying that he has missed his last few would-be-game-winning shots (too bad Horry bailed him out), and gets burned badly on defense. I don't mind O'Neal, he was fun to watch in college, too.

im surprised that europeans watch the NBA. is it big over there? do you guys watch college BB as well? interesting.

id like to see the lakers lose just because the media is continually creaming themselves over shaqdaddy and kobe. everbody was predicting a blowout in this series. nothing makes me happier then when all the pretentious ESPN types are wrong.

I have been watching the the last two series, I think it will be the Kings vs the Nets, with the Kings as champs.

I'm tired of Shaq's constant offensive fouling and incessent whining, and Kobe's arrogence and one-on-one, I'll be glad if they get eliminated.

joycem10, I now live in minnesota (since '93), so watching is no problem! When I lived in the Netherlands, there were often games on one of the channels. Usually just the top teams, and always Indiana - Rik Smits is dutch, so they followed his career. College ball wasn't followed, but there was plenty of news about the march tournament.

The teevee guys love Bryant way too much. Sure he scores 25 points per game. They forget to tell you it's because he takes 40 shots and 10 free throws. I think they try to pump him up to be the next Jordan. Sorry, Jordan made his shots, made his teammates better, and was a class leader. Bryant is 0-3 on that score. :goodjob:

I love to see the Lakers lose.
I would feel that was even if I wasn't a Boston sports nut.

The only reason I watch the NBA is to cheer against the Lakers and hope they lose. I was a big NBA fan growing up but have become an even bigger hockey fan. Hockey is so much more exciting than basketball and you do not have all the hype surrounding certain players (shaq, Kobe, Kidd, etc)

Speaking of college basketball . . .

GO ANTONIE WALKER! GO CELTS!

Obviously I am a UK fan! 2003, the cats are cutting the nets!

Back to the NBA though, the Nets are going to take them out unless Walker and Pierce take the ball to the rack. No more threes and ridiculous fade away shots.

I will say the Nets are probably the best "passing" team I have seen all year. I watch a few regular season games, but don't have nearly enough time to keep up. The playoffs are when I really get involved.

I just pull for players on teams and against the likes of Kobe, he gets on my last nerve. Too much unearned fame and admiration for a Jordan wannabe.

College basketball is the REAL DEAL!

Please tell me you are not comparing hockey to basketball? Hockey is about as painful as men's tennis. I'll pass, a poor man's soccer I say.

Hockey = Schmockey!

Originally posted by maddskillz

Back to the NBA though, the Nets are going to take them out unless Walker and Pierce take the ball to the rack. No more threes and ridiculous fade away shots.

I will say the Nets are probably the best "passing" team I have seen all year. I watch a few regular season games, but don't have nearly enough time to keep up. The playoffs are when I really get involved.

I agree with you. The GM in Phoenix should be fired...how could anyone trade Kidd, especially for a player with even more baggage. He's gutted the team in the past few years.

I don't think the Laker/Kings series is over yet, and I'll wager there is no way Shaq fouls out tonight. Being a Jailblazer fan (which is a burden in itself), I am fed up with hearing about the Lakers...and even more sick of hearing of the supposed genius of Phil Jackson....jeez!

Bill

Jailblazers, that is a good one. I always thought they were the Trailgangsters. Go Kings! I hope Kobe goes 2 for 30 from the floor tonight.

I would love to see a Lakers-Celtics final. It would be great to see Pierce take on Bryant. But it looks like it probably won't happen. Still, all 4 teams in the playoffs are excellent, and both conference finals have been exciting. If it turns out to be Nets-Kings, that should still be a very fun matchup (Kidd vs. Bibby).

Long time Kings season ticket holder here. The Lakers reign of terror is over. Seriously though, Shaq looks old, overweight and tired. That is why he fouled out.

Go Kings!!!

Aox

Originally posted by Bill_in_PDX
...and even more sick of hearing of the supposed genius of Phil Jackson....jeez!

Ah, grasshopper, ConPhilcius say "one must only coach most talent to look smart"

Originally posted by maddskillz
College basketball is the REAL DEAL!

you couldn't be more right. I like the Celtics, but the only other reason I watch the NBA is to see former college favorites

Agreed about the former collge players... It's the only reason I watch the regular season.

The playoffs are exciting though, and it looks as if the Kings may have their moment in the sun...

I can only hope that Tim Duncan goes to the Celts next year, and brings that team to the championship...:D

As a LA fan and Resident, I want the Lakers to three-peat. Although, I sincerly dislike Kobe. Horry and Shaq all the way!

It's the Nets in the East! :)

C'mon Sacramento! I'm royally sick of LA, and nothing would improve my mood quicker than to see Kidd schooling Bibby five or six nights these next two weeks :D

Lakers fan here!!!
THREE-PEAT!!!

Go Kings go!!

Originally posted by Plexus
As a LA fan and Resident, I want the Lakers to three-peat. Although, I sincerly dislike Kobe. Horry and Shaq all the way!

And I'm another Lakers fan! I'd love to see them get the three-peat, although I think the chances are small since they play like garbage against Sacramento. I hate the arrogancy of LA as well...but I'm not that kind of fake fan that changes when he doesn't like something. Of my friends I'm the only one to support LA, last year they were al Sixer-fans, the year before that Pacers and this year they're all King-fans. Fake people :p

I wish LA lost. Kobe acts like a monkey, probably chewing same gum all the game. I have such an aversion for him and Shaq too. We'll just have to wait till Sunday.

*Looks up* :rolleyes:

I think that Shaq is the best center of all time. That doesn't mean I like him, but he is simply unstoppable. When Wilt Chamberlain was 6 inches taller than the rest of the competition, people whined about that too.

Kobe is a pretty good player who will only get better. The Lakers are a great team that is playing horribly at the moment. They won't lose to the Kings, and they most definitely won't get beat by the Nets.

But I think a roster shuffle will be imminent after the season is over.

As a die hard Celtics fan, all I can say is GET TIMMY DUNCAN!

Timmy D don't shoot the three :D What would you guys want with him? ;)

The Celtics can't afford Tim Duncan :D

I find the Lakers annoying too, but I can't deny how darn GOOD those two kids are. Especially Shaq... we've seen the Lakers without Shaq, it wasn't pretty, and Kobe was no superstar.

The NBA Champion will be determined tomorrow... unless anyone actually thinks the Nets stand a chance against either of the West teams.

But Timmy will be able to at least rebound all those damn bricks that Kenny Anderson keeps putting up.

P.S. Was anyone else impressed with Erick Strickland's play? He's from Bellevue NE :goodjob:, and I actually played against him once in a pickup game in Omaha.

Needless to say, he's pretty damn good.

Mmm... Tim Duncan?? Really?? He´s a power forward like Antoine Walker. Ok, he can play in the center position; but why don´t you try to sign a good point guard???
Because, that Kenny Anderson!!!:eek: :eek: :eek:

Flatlander Fox, you're forgetting about Walter Dukes and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who were inches taller than Chamberlain.

I'd have to say that Wilt was the greatest center and most athletic player in NBA history. In his prime, he had a vertical leap of 55 in. and could benchpress 450+ pounds. Despite foul-shooting woes (the only reason Shaq is compared to him), he had fifteen-foot fadaway range. His scoring average waned only because he began to defer to his teamates (becoming the only non-guard ever the lead the league in assists) and shoot a higher percentage of his shots (reaching a 73% field goal percentage in his final season). He was also a better shotblocker than anyone in the league today (his career average was projected to be seven bpg).

Not only that, but the league of only sixteen teams had to be interested in parity if it was to survive, so dominant players like Chamberlain were targeted by officiating, whereas Shaq can get away with pancake blocks, elbows to the jaw and horrible footwork. Officials like Dick Bavetta (the 2001-02 Fakers are 7-1 with him officiating) either fear his reprisals or are remunerated by market-happy David Stern. Probably the latter, since phantom fouls are called on his defenders, who, though not outside the circle (since Shaq's range is limited to five feet), have their feet planted, hands up and make no contact. Just look at how Scot Pollard, who played a total of ELEVEN minutes in game six, fouled out.

Why does the league want this? Aren't the ratings of NBC's playoff coverage, which is in its death throes, sinking? Nobody wants to see the Fakers win (barring posers and Hollywood bozos). The Kings are poised to become the saviors of professional basketball!

But man did they get robbed of game six. On the inbounds player after the Kings were within one - despite the fact that the Fakers attempted 27 foul shots in the final quarter - Kobe Bryant backed into Mike Bibby (who may have been grabbing his waist, but shouldn't have been a call) and had to make a move... so he elbowed him! Of course, Bavetta, who was inches away from the contact, couldn't even call a double-foul. The NBC-sanctioned officials HANDED the Fakers game six.

I think I'm on to something. Did you see those ads: Lakers...Kings...Sunday...*if necessary*? And yet they did not use that same commercial format for the Eastern Conference Finals (Bavetta handed the Nets game four, incidentally). The league is a blatantly-scripted soap opera.

I blame NBC. Since it assumed NBA coverage, game pace has slowed arithmatically each season and the league's talent-pool has been diluted by expansion and a poor style of play. David Stern can then ensure that Shaq/Bryant/Jones/Van Exel are on the same big-market franchise - and that it succeeds. Of course, the officials can decide low-scoring games if the Fake Dynasty encounters any competetion (which is actually good, because it can protract series and increase ratings).

The Fakers of today would be ten-point underdogs to the real Laker dynasty of the '80s. In fact, reasonably-competitive teams of that era would be 72-win teams today. The 88-89 Hawks, for instance, had two top-twenty players (Moses Malone, Dominique Wilkins), three potential all-stars (Doc Rivers, Reggie Theis, Kevin Willis) in addition to the highest-scoring bench in the league and still could not top 52 wins.

The league front office has so much leverage on the outcome of games that one-dimensional CBA-level players (Allan Houston, for example) could average 20 ppg and make the max - only if officials let them. With the absence of talent, excruciatingly slow-paced games and a plethora of ticky-tack calls, why watch the NBA? The NCAA offers a much superior version of basketball. An example of this is the fact that the penalty is seldom used in full twenty-minute halves, while NBA teams find themselves with five team fouls after three minutes of twelve-minute quarters.

If the Kings fall in game seven, I'm never going to even think about the NBA until it cleans up its act - if it ever does...

[EDIT: I reread this post, and realized that I had erred. The Fakers attempted 27, not 25, foul shots in the final quarter of game six!]

While agree with much of what you have said, I cannot help but hope that it's not really that way.

The officiating, especially this year, has seemed to really fall off the deep end. Consistancy is nowhere within reach. The main problem with the NBA is the overall sameness of every single game. And the mind-numbing pace is at times too much to bear.

While I am not a Lakers fan, I still can appreciate the talent of Shaq and Kobe. While they might not be able to occupy the same court as the Showtime Lakers, or even Nique's Hawks, they are the best thing going (For now).

I would sincerely hope that the Nets could beat either team from the west, but I am not holding my breath.

While I agree the college game is fundamentally better, the talent flees to the NBA before those idiots at the NCAA can exploit them.

So I cannot watch a second tier team like Maryland win the NCAA championship, all the while thinking to myself that a Kwame Brown, Mike Miller led Florida team (For example) would take those Terps apart.

The funny thing is that I was saying the same things you are saying now about the worthless Chicago Bulls five years ago. Now THOSE guys were hacks.:)

Well, with the western conference final on 3-3, I think the Kings still have the better chances. They have the home advantage, and the Lakers aren't doing their best...The winner of Western Conference will win the NBA-titel though, if you ask me.

Originally posted by Flatlander Fox


P.S. Was anyone else impressed with Erick Strickland's play? He's from Bellevue NE :goodjob:, and I actually played against him once in a pickup game in Omaha.

Needless to say, he's pretty damn good.

Eric Strickland was the only guy on the Celtics that really wanted to win that game. Antoine and Pierce weren't really trying, and look where they are now.

:cry:

Since I have been transplanted to NJ and have been to a few games (last year you could walk up 10 minutes after the game started and get floor tickets). These guys have captured what little imagination the Soprano state can muster. Don't be surprised if they rise up and slap the Western Conference around a little bit...

Guess it's been one of those years so far...the defending champs in the other major sports have been big underdogs with Carolina??? and the Nets up next...

Ya never know.....

My money is on the Lake-Show tonight, and the Nets in the Finals against either team.

It really depends on the officiating, which is usually the case.

flatlander fox, calling O'Neal the best ever is a big stretch. One reason is that he is unstoppable - he's really not had much need to improve his game. Sure, he can score and rebound and block - but he can't shoot from beyond 8 feet, has only a few moves. He doesn't consistently make great decisions on the defensive end. If time could be warped, I think anybody putting together a team would pick Abdul-Jabbar before O'Neal.

As for good basketball, the Nets are a good team - not just a bunch of guys in matching shirts. I don't care who wins, as long as it isn't L.A.

LA won!

That seals it; I'm never watching another NBA game. Ever. I hope Webber, Bibby and Divac unleash a tirade and get inordinately fined by the league. The Lakers only won one game legitimately.

bvd - While it would be easier to blame officiating on the Kings loss, one only has to look at the free throw numbers to know where to blame the Kings loss. 16 missed free throws?!?!?!
As an objective observer I thought the game was called rather fairly. No 27 free-throw quarters for the Lakers (like game 6) and no ticky tack fouls called for the Kings.

It all comes down to who can put the ball in the hole and the Kings just didn't get it done...besides the missed free thows, the Kings threw up two air balls when they had wide open looks and Webber looked like he didn't want anything to do with the ball.

All in all it was a good series and while I think the best team may be sitting out of the Finals, the team that was stronger mentally is in the championship for the third straight year.

I agree that the game was called evenly. Probably the best officiating of the entire series was done in THAT game.

It came down to crunch time, and the Kings froze up. Nobody wanted to take the big shot, except for Doug Christie. And he was having a horrible game. Peja couldn't MAKE a shot, and NOONE could make their free throws.

I disagree about the best team though. When the Lakers move the ball around (Like last night) nobody can beat them. When they become too predictable, or Kobe goes on a "me" tangent, then they run into problems.

It will be an interesting finals though. I still think that the Nets will win, but I am not as sure as I was before.:)

All is going so nice :D We had a poul, and I've predicted every winner correct, except for that I predicted both the Lakers and Nets to win 4-2. Lakers - Nets.....I expect a three-peat...4-1 was my original entry....now I think it'll be 4-2.

The Celtics have to learn to stop shooting jump shots, especially threes. They took 30 (!) threes in their game 6 loss to the Nets. I dont know how many they made, but I know they missed their last 10. Basically, they were shooting jump shots well in their Detriot series and then they came down to earth and stopped making the tough shots against NJ. Walker and Pierce need to stop taking the outside shot and drive to the hoop. Only shoot outside when there is nothing else or if you are wide open. And stop McCarty and Williams from taking threes.

I'm going to try to limit the length of this diatribe.

While officiating is usually a key factor in the Lakers' offensive scheme (they need officials to call fouls loosely on Shaq in the post), I've noticed that there wasn't much of a disparity between FTs they attempted and their opponents' FTAs during the both regular season and playoffs. Still, they go to the line alot, as evidenced by the phantom calls on Shaq's defenders and Bryant's constant arm-flailing while driving to the hoop (contrary to what commentators say, he lacks much offensive creativity).

However, the officials handed the Lakers game six. How can Scot Pollard foul out in ten minutes? How could Lawrence Funderburke pick up three fouls in the final five minutes? That's far worse than Darryl Dawkins or Bubba Wells ever did. How could Mike Bibby have picked up his only personal foul on an inbounds play in which he was elbowed in the face? How could the Lakers attempt as many free throws in the fourth quarter than the Kings scored? Granted, they converted on them (Shaq now guides the ball, having given up learning to follow-through). But still, if this does surpass the realm of bad officiating, what is it?

Call it malicious intent. Call it the NBA.

The Lakers don't even constitute a team (maybe the moniker "marketing ploy" is appropriate). Their roster consists of one player who makes at least one touch/possesion (Shaq), one player who moves without the ball (Bryant), one well-rounded role player who could score in transition (Fox), another role player who doesn't excel at anything (Horry) and about nine CBA-caliber players at any given time. They start a point-guard who is one of the worst playmakers I've ever seen (he'd make a good garbage-minute shooter, though). His backup has no offensive game other than three-point shooting. Samaki Walker offers nothing more that weak-side help. Mitch Richmond is probably healthy enought to offer a team 25 minutes a game, but who would want him?

In fact, the only bench-player who shows NBA-level potential is Jelani McCoy, who is off the playoff roster and has never been given the opportunity to refine his skills.

In short, the Lakers aren't the best the current NBA has to offer. The best team in the NBA is by far the Kings, followed by the Mavericks. The Nets, however, are a good transition team with a very athletic backcourt. They pose major matchup problems for the Lakers and tend not to draw very many fouls. If Kenyon Martin is not forced into doubling Shaq, the Lakers will be hard-pressed for scoring opportunities.

I will not watch the series unless New Jersey takes at least one of two games at Inglewood. If the league lets it happen.

About the Celtics:
Three-point shooting isn't the achilles heel of the team. The fact that they have no major post-player is. Battie is a baseline shooter who cannot draw double-teams. Walker has a well-rounded offensive game (and can make back-bending shots), but team defense can take him out of a game. Pierce can be neutralized in similar way on the perimeter. If they could force the defense inside, they'd have huge three-point opportunities (remember: the Rockets average eight three-pointers/game in their championship run, mainly because teams mistakenly doubled Hakeem. The more the Rockets relied on Hakeem's offense, the less efficient they were).

Since the Celtics flat-out refused to assume any agression in driving to the hoop or competing with the Nets in their transition game, they deserved to lose. For most of the series, they also made no attempt to harass the Nets' ball-movement. O'Brien didn't seem to know that the only way to stop Kidd is to force him to take shots (the reason he often has 1-12 shooting nights). On the other hand, when the Celtics did stand up for themselves, they made great runs.

And, on another note...
Who thinks that game six of the Kings-Lakers series gave David Stern nightmares? Fortunately, game seven made up for it, and Laker apologists can claim that the Kings blew an opportunity (which they did)...

The Lakers still should not have won the game in which Horry hit a three at the buzzer to win it. That final shot by Horry was legit, but Samaki Walker hit a three from halfcourt just as the clock was winding down to halftime. The officials couted the shot even though replays proved that he released the ball AFTER the clock hit 0. Had he not hit that shot, the Lakers probably lose, considering they won by less than 3 points.