Quote:
Originally posted by mickydaniels
Even if the Lakers are down 3-0, I wouldn't get too excited because these are the Lakers. Remember how they beat Minnesota by 30 after they lost Rick Fox?
Until they are officially eliminated, I don't care.
|
Hmm, there is a huge difference... when have the Lakers in these three years EVER been down two games to an opponent?
They were down 2-3 to Blazers, and down 2-3 to Sacremento, and down 1-2 to Minnesota... those were thier three hardest series. They have yet to be down two games, and even worse, they haven't even won one game in this series, so they don't know if they can even beat them in one game, let alone 4.
From the begining of this season I have been barking that last year was the end of thier streak.
Spurs are the perfect team to beat them too, they are much deeper, and much more fundementally sound... The difference between these Spurs and the Kings of 2002, Blazers of 2000, and T'Wolves of 2003, is that Spurs are simple deeper and
better. Much like the Lakers, they are a well defined team and they know who thier leader is, but at the same time thier leader has WAY more support from the rest of his team than Kobe and Shaq have... They are almost like a version of Sacremento where Webber is the best player in the leauge.
Quote:
|
Trying to force another game in San Antonio would be an accomplishment for the Lakers, who have some key injuries and have lost all six meetings between the teams this season. Including the postseason, San Antonio has just eight losses since February 20.
|
http://www.nba.com/games/20030507/LALSAS/recap.html