GS Losing This Finals Would Be One Of Biggest Upsets Ever

[DMAVS41]

Well its not crazy to think the Cavs should have won in '10 either. In fact, most thought they should have. LeBron, to catch's point, played below his standards. Clearly.

2009 is the one year between both seasons you could legitimately excuse him for.

I do think there is far less reason to think the Cavs "should have won" than they "should have lost" though.

Again, it was a terrible matchup for that Cavs team as they had no answer for KG or Rondo.

It's similar to saying the 08 Lakers should have beat the 08 Celtics. In fact, I'd argue that the 08 Lakers had a better chance. And I know he doesn't feel that way.

And that is the double standard here. 9 of the 10 experts on ESPN picked the 08 Lakers to beat the Celtics. Does that mean the Lakers should have won? According to this logic, perhaps yours (not sure), the answer must be yes. And if that's the case...then it seems like that statement has no meaning.

Either Lebron is being held to absurd standards...or the 10 Celtics are being dramatically under-rated here.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I do think there is far less reason to think the Cavs "should have won" than they "should have lost" though.

Again, it was a terrible matchup for that Cavs team as they had no answer for KG or Rondo.

It's similar to saying the 08 Lakers should have beat the 08 Celtics. In fact, I'd argue that the 08 Lakers had a better chance. And I know he doesn't feel that way.

I don't see the correlation between the two. Bynum and Ariza were both hurt in 2008 (DNP). Not only that, but unlike the Lakers, Cleveland had HCA in that series. And yeah, LeBron's game 5 or "Lelbow" was shocking to everyone; lowkey one of the worst performances and efforts from a superstar ever. That stuff matters. A lot.

Dunno, I feel like you're excusing LeBron for his terrible play by bringing up his supporting cast. When you play the way Bron does in Games 4 and 5, his "help" shouldn't even be mentioned, tbh.

[DMAVS41]

I don't see the correlation between the two. Bynum and Ariza were both hurt in 2008 (DNP). Not only that, but unlike the Lakers, Cleveland had HCA in that series. And yeah, LeBron's game 5 or "Lelbow" was shocking to everyone; lowkey one of the worst performances and efforts from a superstar ever. That stuff matters. A lot.

Dunno, I feel like you're excusing LeBron for his terrible play by bringing up his supporting cast. When you play the way he does in Games 4 and 5, his "help" shouldn't even be brought up, tbh.

Of course they are comparable.

9 of 10 experts picked the Lakers to beat the Celtics on ESPN. They were favored in Vegas.

Kobe averaged 26/5/5 50% TS with a 98 ortg and a 111 drtg...

Lebron averaged 27/9/7 56% TS with a 106 ortg and a 105 drtg...


To act like one guy deserves the blame and the other guy gets a pass speaks to the double standard I'm referencing.

How about when Kobe gave up the biggest finals comeback ever or something along those lines in the swing game of the series? Let me guess...it wasn't his fault? That game wasn't "shocking"...when Kobe went 6 of 19 and sat there watching his team crumble and basically lose a chance at the title? That wasn't "shocking"???

Do you really not see the double standard?

Like I said before...Lebron does deserve blame for his play in games 4 and 5 in that series, but it doesn't change the fact that the 10 Celtics were better.

But...just no...you can't have it both ways. The 08 Lakers were favored and Kobe was at least as bad as 10 Lebron...probably worse all things considered.

[Solefade]

I don't see the correlation between the two. Bynum and Ariza were both hurt in 2008 (DNP). Not only that, but unlike the Lakers, Cleveland had HCA in that series. And yeah, LeBron's game 5 or "Lelbow" was shocking to everyone; lowkey one of the worst performances and efforts from a superstar ever. That stuff matters. A lot.

Dunno, I feel like you're excusing LeBron for his terrible play by bringing up his supporting cast. When you play the way Bron does in Games 4 and 5, his "help" shouldn't even be mentioned, tbh.

it's funny how laker fans laugh when you mention bynum/ariza were key pieces in their 2009/2010 chips but use them as an excuse in 2008

[KembaWalker]

https://vine.co/v/ehYxnYOgL3D

[DMAVS41]

it's funny how laker fans laugh when you mention bynum/ariza were key pieces in their 2009/2010 chips but use them as an excuse in 2008

it's not even a valid point to begin with.

bynum and ariza didn't even play in the Spurs series in the WCV essentially.

no difference in me saying that the Cavs didn't have Big Z...who was hurt for the Celtics series.

You'll find they create absurd double standards constantly.

[Legends66NBA7]

it's funny how laker fans laugh when you mention bynum/ariza were key pieces in their 2009/2010 chips but use them as an excuse in 2008

You're confusing Laker fans with Kobe stans. No Laker fan I've come across doesn't think they were much needed for their title runs (Ariza was only there for 09). Off course they could made a difference in 08, but we'll never know.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

They were favored in Vegas.

Link?

Kobe averaged 26/5/5 50% TS with a 98 ortg and a 111 drtg...

Lebron averaged 27/9/7 56% TS with a 106 ortg and a 105 drtg...


To act like one guy deserves the blame and the other guy gets a pass speaks to the double standard I'm referencing.

This is where stats are misleading though. Their numbers look similar. No doubt; but Kobe did not have anywhere near the performances LeBron did in Games 4 and 5. And by "performances", I mean playing absolutely horrific.

That is the disconnect I have, along with the HCA and the Lakers missing 2/5 of their starters.

Not the same thing. Not seeing it.

Lebron does deserve blame for his play in games 4 and 5 in that series, but it doesn't change the fact that the 10 Celtics were better.

Had LeBron played up to his potential in games 4 and 5, there's a strong posisiblity that Cleveland beats them and makes the finals, which they were predicted to do.

Not sure why you're separating the two, when it's actually a cause and effect.

it's funny how laker fans laugh when you mention bynum/ariza were key pieces in their 2009/2010 chips but use them as an excuse in 2008

Those Kobe fans are in denial. Ariza was better than Artest was in '10, imo ...

[DMAVS41]

Link?



This is where stats are misleading though. Their numbers look similar. No doubt; but Kobe did not have anywhere near the performances LeBron did in Games 4 and 5. And by "performances", I mean playing absolutely horrific.

That is the disconnect I have, along with the HCA and the Lakers missing 2/5 of their starters.

Not the same thing. Not seeing it.



Had LeBron played up to his potential in games 4 and 5, there's a strong posisiblity that Cleveland beats them and makes the finals, which they were predicted to do.

Not sure how why you are separating the two, when it's actually a cause and effect.



Kobe/Laker fans are in denial. Ariza was better than Artest was in '10, imo ...

Odds:

http://sportsgambling.about.com/od/b...8nbafinals.htm


ESPN Picks:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=lalbos


Tell me about Kobe's game 4 in which he wet the bed with 6 of 19 shooting and made no real impact on the game. His team, at home, gave up the biggest lead in finals history at the time.

I could say the exact same thing.

It's cause and effect. Kobe played poorly in the finals and that is why his team lost. He went ghost in the swing game and the series should have been tied 2-2. Hell, he was beyond bad in game 1...he shot ****ing 9/26 and didn't give much effort on the glass (only 3 boards) and his team still had chances to win the game.

In a 6 game series....Kobe had games of:

9/26
6/19
8/21
7/22

For a player that sees his value so tied to scoring unlike Lebron...that is really really really bad. And to use your words..."when you play that horrific...help shouldn't be brought up"

Also, Ariza wasn't a starter for the 08 Lakers. What are you talking about?

You will lose this argument...take the L

It's the definition of a double standard.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Odds:

http://sportsgambling.about.com/od/b...8nbafinals.htm


ESPN Picks:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playof...?series=lalbos


Tell me about Kobe's game 4 in which he wet the bed with 6 of 19 shooting and made no real impact on the game. His team, at home, gave up the biggest lead in finals history at the time.

But, I also blame Kobe for that? Do I place the same blame I do for LeBron who by all intents and purposes quit? Nah.

LeBron's energy and demeaner were absent. Calling him Casper the friendly ghost is an understatement.

Like I said, that shit matters. Maybe not to you, but to anyone that's ever played a sport in their life, it does.

I could say the exact same thing.

Of course you can, but you wouldn't make sense in doing so. Not all performances/stats are equal. You are thinking inside the box; get out of it.

[gts]

it's funny how laker fans laugh when you mention bynum/ariza were key pieces in their 2009/2010 chips but use them as an excuse in 2008

dumb comment, first off no Laker fan bangs on Ariza for his 2009 playoffs run.. he put up better numbers in the playoffs than he did in the reg season so you're just making up shit there to be an asshole.. Ariza was great for the Lakers that year

in 2008 they were injured, Ariza tried to soldier through but missed 3/4s of the playoff games and Bynum who had been a solid contributor up until his injury but both were non factors in the finals run

in 2009 Bynum gets downplayed by knowledgeable Laker fans because once again he was injured and despite playing in every game was basically a non factor.. Laker fans downplay his contributions because idiots try and make his contributions greater than what they were

Bynum reg season 15 ppg 8 rebounds 2 blks and 30 minutes of play
Bynum playoffs 6ppg 4 rrebounds and -1 blk in 18 minutes of play

Idiots "Bynum is why they won the 2009 championship" That's why Laker fans laugh

in 2010 your ignorance shows through again because Bynum was once again injured and Ariza was no longer a Laker

[DMAVS41]

But, I also blame Kobe for that? Do I place the same blame I do for LeBron who by all intents and purposes quit? Nah.

LeBron's energy and demeaner were absent. Calling him Casper the friendly ghost is an understatement.

Like I said, that shit matters. Maybe not to you, but to anyone that's ever played a sport in their life, it does.



Of course you can, but you wouldn't make sense in doing so. Not all performances/stats are equal. You are thinking inside the box; get out of it.

You are too emotional.

There is virtually no difference between Kobe's game 4 and Lebron's game 5. They both cost their teams a chance to win the series.

Want to know the real difference? Lebron plays like shit and his team loses by 32 points.

Kobe plays like shit and his team is up going into the 4th and had a 24 point lead at one point iirc.

LOL

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]

Also, Ariza wasn't a starter for the 08 Lakers. What are you talking about?

He and Bynum would have gotten starter minutes.. They were far more valuable than Z was to Cleveland. You're reaching hard. lol.

[DMAVS41]

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

He and Bynum would have gotten starter minutes.. They were far more valuable than Z was to Cleveland. You're reaching hard. lol.

Ariza wasn't a starter. This is a fact. It's not reaching at all.

Ariza played 24 games for the Lakers in the regular season and started 3. He did not start a game in the playoffs.

He averaged 18 minutes in the regular season and 6 minutes in the playoffs.

Reaching? LOL

I agree Bynum was more important than Big Z, but Bynum didn't play at all in the playoffs. So it's not like the Lakers wouldn't have been favored without him or something. Everyone knew he was out and everyone still picked/favored the Lakers...so that really isn't a good argument. And while Z wasn't amazing or anything...he did play a real role on that Cavs team. He played over 20 minutes per game.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You are too emotional.

There is virtually no difference between Kobe's game 4 and Lebron's game 5. They both cost their teams a chance to win the series.

Want to know the real difference? Lebron plays like shit and his team loses by 32 points.

Kobe plays like shit and his team is up going into the 4th and had a 24 point lead at one point iirc.

LOL

I have no vested interest other than stating the facts. But to your point, yes there was a difference.

Kobe played with energy. Sure he didn't play well, but nobody thought he quit. LeBron played bad in game 4, but his team only lost by 10, on the road, and they were in it for most of the game. Matter of fact, it was a 2 point game in the 4th quarter despite him playing awful.

Game 5 though? LeBron was absent in large stretches, and totally looked uninterested. This was a point of discussion on nearly every sports radio show the day after.

When a team who's "mismatched" like you claim...has their main superstar checking out...its literally a trickle down effect. I've seen it all the time in sports.

I'll reiterate once more: stats are not equal