Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Frankly, it's a nice bragging point, but ultimately a hollow accomplishment if you don't win the title. Ask the 67-15 2007 Mavericks if challenging for the all-time mark makes up for getting ousted in the first round.
Frankly, it's a nice bragging point, but ultimately a hollow accomplishment if you don't win the title. Ask the 67-15 2007 Mavericks if challenging for the all-time mark makes up for getting ousted in the first round.
The Spurs have a better shot at winning 72 games than the LAL. Of course neither team will accomplish the feat because it's too unrealistic and there's too much parity in the league for it to happen.
The Spurs have a better shot at winning 72 games than the LAL. Of course neither team will accomplish the feat because it's too unrealistic and there's too much parity in the league for it to happen.
Keep in mind that the Lakers have played 2 more games than the Spurs so far so the difference between the two teams is essentially identical. Spurs did a good job against the Jazz last night but the Lakers also won all 3 games on the road this week [though the teams they played weren't very effective: Minneapolis, Milwaukee and Detroit].
The Spurs have a better shot at winning 72 games than the LAL. Of course neither team will accomplish the feat because it's too unrealistic and there's too much parity in the league for it to happen.
OK, LOL. No way in hell Spurs end up with a better record than the Lakers let alone even touch 72 wins. Regarding the Lakers, they will not get 72 wins because thats not what they want. Kobe and crew could care less about having that many wins in the regular season. Their key players are older so pushing for that many wins would not be wise.
OK, LOL. No way in hell Spurs end up with a better record than the Lakers let alone even touch 72 wins. Regarding the Lakers, they will not get 72 wins because thats not what they want. Kobe and crew could care less about having that many wins in the regular season. Their key players are older so pushing for that many wins would not be wise.
You don't think SA can end with a better record than the LAL? Why not? Because they're not supposed to? They're better than the Lakers in all facets of the game now and look to improve even more as the season rolls on. Especially the defense. San Antonio can win the West without a doubt.
You don't think SA can end with a better record than the LAL? Why not? Because they're not supposed to? They're better than the Lakers in all facets of the game now and look to improve even more as the season rolls on. Especially the defense. San Antonio can win the West without a doubt.
Their best years are way behind them. The Spurs have a ton of good role players but they do not have anyone who is good enough to be a starter if one of the starters go down. Basically, no one on their bench can put down 20 points in a game if the starters are slow.
Lakers have Brown and Odom if and when Bynum comes back.
Magic have Pietrus and Reddick
Celtics have Davis and West
Spurs are in the same boat as the Heat. They have three good players and the rest of their roster is weak compared to the REAL contenders.
Their best years are way behind them. The Spurs have a ton of good role players but they do not have anyone who is good enough to be a starter if one of the starters go down. Basically, no one on their bench can put down 20 points in a game if the starters are slow.
Lakers have Brown and Odom if and when Bynum comes back.
Magic have Pietrus and Reddick
Celtics have Davis and West
Spurs are in the same boat as the Heat. They have three good players and the rest of their roster is weak compared to the REAL contenders.
I won't elaborate on how many ways you're wrong. Suffice to say that you don't have a clue of what you're talking about. If the Spurs are so weak why do they have the best record in the league? And we'll see about that tissue paper so called contender Magic on Monday when they roll into San Antonio.
Their best years are way behind them. The Spurs have a ton of good role players but they do not have anyone who is good enough to be a starter if one of the starters go down. Basically, no one on their bench can put down 20 points in a game if the starters are slow.
Lakers have Brown and Odom if and when Bynum comes back.
Magic have Pietrus and Reddick
Celtics have Davis and West
Spurs are in the same boat as the Heat. They have three good players and the rest of their roster is weak compared to the REAL contenders.
is this a joke?
the lakers have had the weakest bench of any contender ofert the last 5 yrs its not even funny. the lakers starters have carried the load more then just about any team in the league. brown has been ok, barnes has been TERRIBLE with the exception of one game, and bynam is a walking paper factory.
pietris? reddick? LMAO
big baby? dolonte "shotgun" west LMAO where do you get this ****
the spurs are KILLING teams right now. they have had as weak a schedule as the lakers and yet are better. the spurs with dyse, splitter, hill, and now gary neal are killing.
while it is early, the spurs are playing as good or better then any team in the league and provided no injures pop up, will be NASTY come play off time.
so go back, take another drink of the laker coolaid, take a nap, and come back when you pull your head out.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.