April 3, 201115 yr Should be good coming down the stretch and we will start another thread once the playoffs begin.
April 3, 201115 yr Author Anyone thought the Spurs would be in danger of losing their overall #1 seed status 2 weeks ago?
April 3, 201115 yr Anyone thought the Spurs would be in danger of losing their overall #1 seed status 2 weeks ago? You know what, I don't think the Lakers want to do that. Playing OKC in the 2nd round, and then the Spurs as they're rounding back into shape from these injuries is worse than letting them battle & only having to play one of them. Lakers will be the decided favorites in either series, but the last 3 years I do not think they have played 2 teams in the West in back to back series that could really beat them. That would be a lot of wear & tear on their bigs even before the championship round. If I'm them I stay at #2, beat the crap out of Dallas in the 2nd round & take out the winner of the Thunder Spurs bloodbath.
April 3, 201115 yr The Lakers want a better record than the best team from the East. That is their stated goal. That being said...I hope they get the one seed. I don't think there is a team in the West that can beat them in 7 games. Especially not the Spurs. The Nuggets, maybe(the Melo-less Nuggets are an unknown for me), but Spurs....no. OKC....no. As for the East: Celtics.....yes, but not as much as last year. Bulls....uh...no. Heat......they shoudn't but...yeah...kind of.
April 3, 201115 yr Author The Lakers want a better record than the best team from the East. That is their stated goal. That being said...I hope they get the one seed. I don't think there is a team in the West that can beat them in 7 games. Especially not the Spurs. The Nuggets, maybe(the Melo-less Nuggets are an unknown for me), but Spurs....no. OKC....no. As for the East: Celtics.....yes, but not as much as last year. Bulls....uh...no. Heat......they shoudn't but...yeah...kind of. I think their biggest concern is staying ahead of the Heat and Celtics.
April 3, 201115 yr Author You know what, I don't think the Lakers want to do that. Playing OKC in the 2nd round, and then the Spurs as they're rounding back into shape from these injuries is worse than letting them battle & only having to play one of them. Lakers will be the decided favorites in either series, but the last 3 years I do not think they have played 2 teams in the West in back to back series that could really beat them. That would be a lot of wear & tear on their bigs even before the championship round. If I'm them I stay at #2, beat the crap out of Dallas in the 2nd round & take out the winner of the Thunder Spurs bloodbath. It would not shock me if San Antonio is thinking the same thing. The Spurs generally own the Mavs.
April 3, 201115 yr The Lakers want a better record than the best team from the East. That is their stated goal. That being said...I hope they get the one seed. I don't think there is a team in the West that can beat them in 7 games. Especially not the Spurs. The Nuggets, maybe(the Melo-less Nuggets are an unknown for me), but Spurs....no. OKC....no. As for the East: Celtics.....yes, but not as much as last year. Bulls....uh...no. Heat......they shoudn't but...yeah...kind of. I agree the Lakers should win the West, but back to back match ups with OKC & then SA would be bad for them longterm IMO. Playing against Perkins would make it to where the LA bigs feel like they've already made a Finals run. With Bynum's health being the most important thing for LA's title chances IMO (outside of losing Kobe obviously), they cannot afford for him to wear down or get hurt. If Bynum is beat up the Spurs can beat them. I don't think they would beat the Heat without a healthy Bynum. The Bulls would be a difficult challenge without a healthy Bynum. The Celtics would be down right scary against LA without a healthy Bynum, but I don't think they can beat LA if he's healthy. JMO It would not shock me if San Antonio is thinking the same thing. The Spurs generally own the Mavs. I actually have thought that might be their thinking of late, but I feel they would want & need home court against LA. LA is a poor road team in the playoffs.
April 3, 201115 yr I agree the Lakers should win the West, but back to back match ups with OKC & then SA would be bad for them longterm IMO. Playing against Perkins would make it to where the LA bigs feel like they've already made a Finals run. With Bynum's health being the most important thing for LA's title chances IMO (outside of losing Kobe obviously), they cannot afford for him to wear down or get hurt. If Bynum is beat up the Spurs can beat them. I don't think they would beat the Heat without a healthy Bynum. The Bulls would be a difficult challenge without a healthy Bynum. The Celtics would be down right scary against LA without a healthy Bynum, but I don't think they can beat LA if he's healthy. JMO I actually have thought that might be their thinking of late, but I feel they would want & need home court against LA. LA is a poor road team in the playoffs. Nah.....Artest owns Durant so OKC is a non factor to me. Spurs are just too old to me. Not scared of either one. I disagree with LA being a poor road team in the playoffs. You can go back to each playoffs series the Lakers have had the last two years and find a pivotal road game that they have won. You only need to win one road game in each playoff series.
April 3, 201115 yr Nah.....Artest owns Durant so OKC is a non factor to me. Spurs are just too old to me. Not scared of either one. I disagree with LA being a poor road team in the playoffs. You can go back to each playoffs series the Lakers have had the last two years and find a pivotal road game that they have won. You only need to win one road game in each playoff series. Artest though he's playing better, is a step slower this year. Hardin is much better this year, Sefolosha is a tough defender on Kobe. Ibaka was a bench guy last year, & someone like Krstic was their center. Totally different team IMO. & the Spurs are old, but if they're healthy I would think they'd have at least a chance to beat LA.
April 3, 201115 yr Artest though he's playing better, is a step slower this year. Hardin is much better this year, Sefolosha is a tough defender on Kobe. Ibaka was a bench guy last year, & someone like Krstic was their center. Totally different team IMO. & the Spurs are old, but if they're healthy I would think they'd have at least a chance to beat LA. Nahh...the Spurs haven't been relevant since their last championship. No concern there at all. As for OKC, Ron is a step slower but he frustrates the crap out of Durant. I agree that Westbrook is key to OKC's success if Durant plays bad then OKC will lose and Durant hasyet to figure out how to play consistently well against Artest's defense.
April 3, 201115 yr You know what, I don't think the Lakers want to do that. Playing OKC in the 2nd round, and then the Spurs as they're rounding back into shape from these injuries is worse than letting them battle & only having to play one of them. Lakers will be the decided favorites in either series, but the last 3 years I do not think they have played 2 teams in the West in back to back series that could really beat them. That would be a lot of wear & tear on their bigs even before the championship round. If I'm them I stay at #2, beat the crap out of Dallas in the 2nd round & take out the winner of the Thunder Spurs bloodbath. I was just going to say the same thing. If the make the Finals they will hopefully have have home court advantage over the anyone but the Bulls (Only 1 back in the win column) anyway so #2 is a better spot for them IMO.
April 3, 201115 yr ESPN's player comparison was between Durant & Blake Griffin today. Said Griffin was the better player going forward. They said Durant was weak defensively, and his game did not really make teammates all that much better. At least someone other than me and PP are not salivating at KD's game.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.