Jump to content

Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Can The Lakers Be Beat??(Official 3-Peat Thread)

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
277 replies to this topic

#1 of 278 OFFLINE   Dan Keefe

Dan Keefe

    Second Unit

  • 408 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 28 2000

Posted April 27 2002 - 04:01 AM

In short the answer is no. I really thought Portland, being as physical as they are, would give the Lakers a run. Guess I was wrong. It looks like the Lakers step up to another level after sleepwalking through the season. The only team that has a chance to beat them is Mavericks. They seem to score at will. I think the only way the Lakers do not 3-Peat is if Shaq gets hurt. They can win without Kobe, but seem to get lost with out the big guy.

any thoughts???


#2 of 278 OFFLINE   Tim Abbott

Tim Abbott

    Second Unit

  • 283 posts
  • Join Date: May 10 1999

Posted April 27 2002 - 05:17 AM

I agree, Dan. I wondered if anyone else out there was paying attention to the NBA playoffs. I guess this answers my question Posted Image

Even though they are a 4 seed, Dallas looks pretty good. The came into Boston and throttled the Celtics towards the end of the year. I do realize that the Celtics are not one of the elite teams in the NBA, but they are decent. We were down by almost 40 towards the end of the 3rd quarter when everyone basically quit playing.

Regarless of what happens in the east, who ever wins the west will end up winning the title. The two conferences are so unbalanced that its not funny.

On a side note, I've been to the first two Celtics-Sixers games. The atmosphere is positively electric. I don't have much else to compare it to, as I am only 23 and didn't really get into the sports thing until the late 80's, and by then just about everything was on the way down. But still, everytime the Celtics/Bruins have a playoff game, or the Red Sox are playing, the town has a buzz to it. It is probably hard to understand, but after the Patriots won, its almost like a fog lifted.

I can't wait to see who the C's are going to play next round!!

I'll go with the Maverics as my final answer.

#3 of 278 OFFLINE   andrew markworthy

andrew markworthy


  • 4,766 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 1999

Posted April 27 2002 - 05:58 AM

In reply to your title question - no, but they might be *beaten*.

#4 of 278 OFFLINE   JasonK


    Supporting Actor

  • 678 posts
  • Join Date: May 10 2000

Posted April 27 2002 - 07:02 AM

Since the Bucks took such a glorious nose dive straight out of the postseason, I've been paying a little less attention than in past years to the NBA postseason.

However, I do think the Lakers can be beaten. I thought after Portland beat them in OT a few weeks ago that perhaps they could steal a game or 2 from LA. That does not seem to be the case, as seeing Dale Davis get booted from game 2 out of frustration does not bode well for Portland. Yet another implosion may be Portland's future. I'm not sure why Mo Cheeks isn't lettin Ruben Patterson D up on Kobe a little more. He claims to be the Kobe stopper, so hey let him prove it.

But the Lakers do have to worry about the Kings and Mavs. Both teams can shoot the lights out, and the Kings will hold home court over either team. Arco is a difficult venue to win in, but Webber will have to have a huge series, along with Peja.

As for Dallas, provided they can make 11 3's in a game, they could let Kobe and Shaq get their points, and try to keep the role players in check, they could perhaps upset LA-LA. (Highly unlikely though.)

As for the East...I have no idea. I thought the Sixers would beat the Celts...no they're down 0-2. I still am not sold on New Jersey, and in a rarity I'm pulling for the Pacers to win that series.

The Pistons look great on D, but can they beat a better offensive team that can also crash the boards and D up? (IE Charlotte.)

Provided Charlotte has a healthy Mash, I look for them to come out of the East and then move to New Orleans. (Now then, back to the game...Charlotte and Orlando tied with under a minute to play...)

Proud Recipient of the C. Montgomery Burns Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence

XBOX Live Gamertag: Pudwacker

#5 of 278 OFFLINE   Christopher Chung

Christopher Chung

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 203 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 28 2001

Posted April 27 2002 - 12:42 PM

Personally, I really don't like the Lakers, with their "swagger" and all. But I have to admit, they are a very dominating team.

I think this is the year that they can get de-throned since they seem to just "go with the flow" in many of their games.

As for Dallas, I think that they too are a good team, but c'mon, they are only playing Minnesota. Minnesota has been cut from the first round for the past 5 years or so now. So Dallas's success can be a bit misleading in my opinion.

So who is my pick for this year? I must say, it is San Antonio. With the recent pick-up of their bench play, they will be hard to match up with once Robinson steps back in the line-up.

As for East, I think Charlotte looks really good!

That's my opinion of this years playoffs, and I must say that it is very entertaining! WOOHOOO


#6 of 278 OFFLINE   Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor

  • 9,753 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted April 28 2002 - 05:36 AM

Definitely not by Portland (who might take a game but are done for the series).

Sacramento, San Antonio and Dallas all are capable with good players. But Utah is handing Sac all they can manage (can you say "looking forward to the Lakers?"). SA looks impressive in their series, but Shaq loves to play against The Admiral - due to a perceived (or real, depending on who you believe) slight by the Admiral to a young Shaq who only sought his autograph. Duncan is amazing but not "tough" enough to really take over a series against the Lakers (though he does it regularly to every other team in the league).

Dallas still can't play defense. Neither can SAC, come to think of it. So against those two, if the Lakers can slow the pace of the game down (and history has shown that they can) Dallas and Sac can't win with their defense. SA can.

But do I think anyone will beat the Lakers in a best of 7 this year? Barring injuries, no.

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)

#7 of 278 OFFLINE   Jon_B



  • 1,030 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 27 2000

Posted April 28 2002 - 08:22 AM

Dallas and Sacramento can beat the Lakers.

I'm Back Online

#8 of 278 OFFLINE   Dome Vongvises

Dome Vongvises

    Lead Actor

  • 8,174 posts
  • Join Date: May 13 2001

Posted April 28 2002 - 10:08 AM

- You know you've got problems when a 7-foot guy can shoot threes.

#9 of 278 OFFLINE   Len Cheong

Len Cheong

    Second Unit

  • 381 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2000

Posted April 28 2002 - 02:41 PM

This afternoon's game was definitely one of the sweetest!
5 seconds to go and Hoory sinks in a 3 pointer to win the game. Portland tried hard though.
len cheong

#10 of 278 OFFLINE   Ben Osborne

Ben Osborne

    Second Unit

  • 475 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 09 2002

Posted April 28 2002 - 03:16 PM

Portland is a dysfunctional team. They've not no one to step up to hit the big shot when it matters. Cheeks deserves better personnel. They've got to make some major moves in the off-season. Hopefully Pippin will be headed to Del Boca Vista, if you catch my drift.

#11 of 278 OFFLINE   Juan_R


    Supporting Actor

  • 683 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 04 2001

Posted April 28 2002 - 05:32 PM

Defense wins in the playoffs and Dallas has none. The reason Dallas scores so much is because they play an uptempo game like the Kings. In the playoffs though the experiance teams dont play that uptempo game and it causes problems, ask the Kings about that. The Lakers are not going to let the other teams set the tempo.

The reason why the Lakers are so good is because of Shaq, teams spend to much time trying to stop him that they forget about everything else. I do think that the Lakers are more volnurble this year but just in case you haven't notice they have started the playoffs the same way they did last year, and swepted the best team from 5 to 8.

I think the best series is going to be the Sac and Dallas matchup because of there run and gun mentality, that is what I am looking forward to.

#12 of 278 OFFLINE   Howard Williams

Howard Williams

    Supporting Actor

  • 522 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2001

Posted April 29 2002 - 05:37 AM

Ok, here's my thoughts on the whole playoff thingy. The wierdest thing happened this weekend. I actually rooted for the Jazz and The Celtics. I have always hated both these teams with a passion since I'm a huge lifelong Laker fan.

First of all, can the Lakers be beat?? You better beleive they can. Don't let the sweep of Portland fool you. The last two games could have easily gone either way. Probably the first one too but I don't remember the first game. The West is loaded this year. I would say without reservation that Portland, (one of the first teams eliminated in the West) could still beat everyone in the East. Lakers coming in as the #3 seed was a blessing. It's a good thing they won't have to face Portland, Dallas and Sacramento . That's assuming the Kings get by the Jazz. The Kings could have gotten swept but I think they have finally figured out the Jazz. The Spurs without Robinson shouldn't be a problem. I would prefer to see Dallas beat the Kings because then the Lakers would have home court advantage. I don't think the Mavs will beat the Kings though. They have no answer for Webber, niether do the Lakers for that matter. Kings have inside and outside game. That gives them a huge advantage against the Lakers. The Kings have the best record for a reason. BTW, isn't Walker the most usless piece of crap the Lakers have? I thought Grant last year was bad !! He has to be on at least one game in the playoffs, doesn't he?

A couple things to remember about the Lakers. Shag gets everyone on the other team in foul trouble. If they don't help out, Shaq dominates and puts up big numbers. When they do help, they foul a lot, go to the bench early and then Kobe goes off and/or Shaq starts getting easy dunks. It's an awesome combination. Very difficult to coach against. There only 2 ways to beat the Lakers. 1) Get Shaq into early foul trouble and 2) shoot the lights outs. Jackson taught Shaq how to deal with number 1. When was the last time you saw Shaq miss the first 8 minutes of the last quarter because he was in foul trouble? Most games are sealed or placed in jeapordy in the first 8 minutes of the fouth quarter. As for number 2, it's hard to shoot the lights out for 4 quarters and over a seven game series. Live by the jump shot, die by the jump shot. Just ask last years Bucks.
"I am not what I am"

#13 of 278 OFFLINE   RobertR


    Lead Actor

  • 9,537 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted April 29 2002 - 05:50 AM

Here's an interesting tidbit from ESPN:

With their win Sunday against the Blazers, the Lakers became the first team in the history of the four major pro sports to go 19-1 over a 20-game playoff stretch.

#14 of 278 OFFLINE   Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor

  • 9,753 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted April 29 2002 - 06:05 AM

First of all, can the Lakers be beat?? You better beleive they can. Don't let the sweep of Portland fool you. The last two games could have easily gone either way
You know, I hear a lot of that "could have gone either way" stuff - and it really is skewed to the underdog's point of view.

Last year, everyone said the first 2 games of Sixers v. Lakers "could have gone either way" and everyone took it as Philly could have swept at LA and won it at home.

So when people said "it could have gone either way" they always look at it as "the underdog could have won."

But the fact is that game 1 "could have gone either way" to the Lakers and then guess what? The Lakers would have been the only team in history to go 15-0 in the playoffs (as it was, 15-1 is the best all time in the current playoff format).

So yes, Portland v. Lakers "could have gone either way" but it didn't - it went the Lakers way via sweep. And that's what champions do. Let's face it, there are high quality teams all over the West, and most games could "go either way" but more often than not, they go the way of the team that SHOULD win.

I still think that D wins championships, and that's why San Antonio scares me (as a Laker fan) more than Dallas and Sacramento.


As for "can" the Lakers be beat? Sure, didn't like EVERY LAST PLACE TEAM beat them this year?

but when it comes to crunch time, WILL anyone beat the Lakers this year on the way to a championship? S.A. has the best chance, but if not them, I'm not sure anyone will.

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)

#15 of 278 OFFLINE   Dan Keefe

Dan Keefe

    Second Unit

  • 408 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 28 2000

Posted April 29 2002 - 06:47 AM

I am glad to see people still watching baketball. I for one am hoping for nostalgic reasons to see the Lakers vs. Celtics. I really am surprised how San Antonio is doing without Robinson. Maybe it's time for him to retire.
I can't see the Kings doing anything. They seem to choke against the Lakers.
Like I said, Dallas scares me. But, I didn't stop to think that indeed, they usually do set the tempo of the game. That probably won't happen against LA.

3 down 12 to go...we shall see...

#16 of 278 OFFLINE   Scott Merryfield

Scott Merryfield

    Executive Producer

  • 10,655 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 16 1998
  • LocationMichigan

Posted April 29 2002 - 07:02 AM

With the Pistons back in the playoffs, this is the first NBA postseason that I've paid any attention to in a long time (I'm definitely a fair weather fan when it comes to the NBA). I've never been too fond of the Lakers, so hopefully someone can beat them. Unfortunately, I think the only team with a chance is Sacremento, and I do not care for Chris Webber, either (I'm a bitter Michigan Wolverine fan, too).

Once the Pistons bow out, I'll probably ignore the rest of the playoffs.

#17 of 278 OFFLINE   Mike Broadman

Mike Broadman


  • 4,956 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 2001

Posted April 29 2002 - 07:20 AM

If the Laker's last game proved anything, it's that the Lakers know how to step up when the pressure is on. That took a lot of guts to go for the three pointer at the end. Sure, sometimes they fall asleep, but they can come at ya like you wouldn't believe.

As a resident and fan of the East Coast, I'm not rooting for the Lakers, but I really don't see anyone else taking the title.

#18 of 278 OFFLINE   Howard Williams

Howard Williams

    Supporting Actor

  • 522 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2001

Posted April 29 2002 - 09:08 AM


I really have to disagree with you. When people say "it could have gone either" they mean that the game was close towards the end and with a small break here and there the other team (not necessarily the underdog) could have walked away with the "W". It may be skewed to the losers point of view, but not necessarily the underdogs. My other point was that a sweep should not suggest one team was totally dominate over the other. If the Laker beat Portland 3 straight winning by 1 point, did they kick Portlands butt? No. Any or all of the 3 games could have just as easily gone to Portland.

If things go the way they should, Sac should beat the Lakers. Home court, inside / outside game, they can throw a bench full of people at Shaq, excellent free throe shooting, Bibby is rock solid, no more goofy turnover from J. Will. Basketball is all about match ups and adjustments. If you change the outcome of one game, you change everything about every game that follows, especially in a 5-7 game series.

The Lakers do not match up well against Sac. I guarentee you if the Lakers go on a couple 5-7 minute droughts against Sacramento/Dallas like they did against Portland, when they finally snap out of it they will be down by 25 not 5 like they were against Portland.
"I am not what I am"

#19 of 278 OFFLINE   Juan_R


    Supporting Actor

  • 683 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 04 2001

Posted April 29 2002 - 09:49 AM

I think the Lakers defense is to good and that is where either the Kings or the Mavs will have problems. The Lakers think defense first, the Kings and the Mavs think offense firts and that is there problem. You also have to remember that the Lakers have the best defense againts the 3 pointer and that is were Dallas makes its living.

I am not worried about the Spurs because they are not tuff enough and with Robinsons bad back he is not going to be able to stop Shaq, if he tries then he is going to throw out his back and he will be done for the series. It is going to be fun second round for all the teams.

#20 of 278 OFFLINE   Christopher Chung

Christopher Chung

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 203 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 28 2001

Posted April 29 2002 - 10:25 AM

Ahhh, I love getting into it with all my other NBA freaks!!

I don't know where some people can come off and say that S.A. can't win w/o David Robinson! What have they done in game 1 and 3? Reports say that he is doing better, and I don't think he'd come back for round 2 if he was going to have it "thrown" out again. He will be valuable and make contributions to the Spurs.

Is it just me, or does everybody seem to overplay the Lakers success or what? Their victories were not very dominating, but hey I guess a win is still a win huh? Too many L.A. fans think they are invincible, but if there is any year for de-throning, this is it. I bet you can tell I don't like the Lakers too much, but I give them credit for pulling out the W's.

All and all, I am pulling for the Spurs because of their character, and DEFENSE! See you guys in the Finals! Posted Image


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users