It's been only 7 games since Kidd arrived in Dallas, so I'm not panicking yet. But let's look at our wins and losses. Hornets - L Spurs - L Lakers - L Wolves - W Grizzlies - W Kings - W Bulls - W I'll exclude the game against the Hornets for obvious reasons. Now against both the Lakers and Spurs we couldn't pull out a win. Dallas kept it very close throughout both games, but in the end ended up losing. Like I said, I'm not panicking yet, but it does raise some minor concerns. Anybody else feel this way?
you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case.
I wouldn't panic yet, but you have to wonder. If you can't beat the elite teams, you're not going to have much playoff success. It's always nice to pound on the inferior competition, but at some point they have to beat a good team.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> What don't you follow? Kobe does not need to produce bigtime to beat the Mavs, however, on this particular night he did. Should the Mavs be worried? Not really, they played well with two great teams.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 3 2008, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> What don't you follow? Kobe does not need to produce bigtime to beat the Mavs, however, on this particular night he did. Should the Mavs be worried? Not really, they played well with two great teams. </div> Read my comments carefully. Anyway, Kobe does not need to produce big to beat the Mavs? Easier said than done.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters. </div> Really now? Here's a prediction for you. Come playoff time, if and when the Mavs and the Lakers meet, Dallas will come out winning the series. You can quote me on this!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters. </div> Really now? Here's a prediction for you. Come playoff time, if and when the Mavs and the Lakers meet, Dallas will come out winning the series. You can quote me on this! </div> And what exactly is your proof for that? Or are you just pulling crap out of you ass just to save face. OMGZZZ!!! COME PLAYOFF TIME, IF AND WHEN THE SUNS AND SPURS MEET, PHOENIX WILL COME OUT WINNING THE SERIES. YOU CAN QUOTE ME ON THIS! OMGZZZZ!!!! I'M A GENIUS!!!! retard
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters. </div> Really now? Here's a prediction for you. Come playoff time, if and when the Mavs and the Lakers meet, Dallas will come out winning the series. You can quote me on this! </div> And what exactly is your proof for that? Or are you just pulling crap out of you ass just to save face. OMGZZZ!!! COME PLAYOFF TIME, IF AND WHEN THE SUNS AND SPURS MEET, PHOENIX WILL COME OUT WINNING THE SERIES. YOU CAN QUOTE ME ON THIS! OMGZZZZ!!!! I'M A GENIUS!!!! retard </div> I got this from your " Kobe does not need to score big to win" delusion. Retard? That's your comeback? Better dig deep in your little pink diary for better ones.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters. </div> Really now? Here's a prediction for you. Come playoff time, if and when the Mavs and the Lakers meet, Dallas will come out winning the series. You can quote me on this! </div> And what exactly is your proof for that? Or are you just pulling crap out of you ass just to save face. OMGZZZ!!! COME PLAYOFF TIME, IF AND WHEN THE SUNS AND SPURS MEET, PHOENIX WILL COME OUT WINNING THE SERIES. YOU CAN QUOTE ME ON THIS! OMGZZZZ!!!! I'M A GENIUS!!!! retard </div> I got this from your " Kobe does not need to score big to win" delusion. Retard? That's your comeback? Better dig deep in your little pink diary for better ones. </div> What the **** are you talking about. My comeback is that we aren't completely heathly, and that Kobe didn't hit his freethrows. Can you read? Come playoff time Kobe won't have to score big. We'll have Bynum back, along with Ariza, and Radmanovic in the lineup. Had Kobe hit most of his freethrows, like he does in a "normal" game, the game wouldn't have even gone to overtime. Had the Lakers been heathly, like the Mavericks, the game would have been much closer. Here's my post. Maybe you should read it this time: "So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters." And the reason why I called you a retard was because of your stupid prediction, without any reasoning behind it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters. </div> Really now? Here's a prediction for you. Come playoff time, if and when the Mavs and the Lakers meet, Dallas will come out winning the series. You can quote me on this! </div> And what exactly is your proof for that? Or are you just pulling crap out of you ass just to save face. OMGZZZ!!! COME PLAYOFF TIME, IF AND WHEN THE SUNS AND SPURS MEET, PHOENIX WILL COME OUT WINNING THE SERIES. YOU CAN QUOTE ME ON THIS! OMGZZZZ!!!! I'M A GENIUS!!!! retard </div> I got this from your " Kobe does not need to score big to win" delusion. Retard? That's your comeback? Better dig deep in your little pink diary for better ones. </div> What the **** are you talking about. My comeback is that we aren't completely heathly, and that Kobe didn't hit his freethrows. Can you read? Come playoff time Kobe won't have to score big. We'll have Bynum back, along with Ariza, and Radmanovic in the lineup. Had Kobe hit most of his freethrows, like he does in a "normal" game, the game wouldn't have even gone to overtime. Had the Lakers been heathly, like the Mavericks, the game would have been much closer. Here's my post. Maybe you should read it this time: "So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters." And the reason why I called you a retard was because of your stupid prediction, without any reasoning behind it. </div> You should review mine to find the reasoning to my statements. So now it's stupid? Tsk tsk tsk. So should I throw a tantrum now and pull my hair?
Sorry, I kind of have a problem with someone just completely brushing away my post and posting something with absolutely no substance. Factor that in with me feeling completely exhausted from getting barely any sleep yesterday... So yeah, not in my best mood right now. Probably need to get some sleep...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 01:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sorry, I kind of have a problem with someone just completely brushing away my post and posting something with absolutely no substance. Factor that in with me feeling completely exhausted from getting barely any sleep yesterday... So yeah, not in my best mood right now. Probably need to get some sleep...</div> Maybe you should review insiders comments first. He was simply referring to the Mavs fans concerns. He was simply making points that there are no reasons for them. Nothing more. He wasn't bashing the Lakers or anything till your comments. Lighten up dude.
Last post of the day <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 01:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 3 2008, 12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 12:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 2 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (insider @ Mar 2 2008, 11:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BasX @ Mar 2 2008, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you won the games your suppose to, and the spurs and lakers games you were in it, no need to be concerned yet</div> I agree. Dallas is on the right track. If anything, L.A. and San Antonio has to be concerned. It took Kobe's 52 and overtime no less, to beat the Mavs. The Spurs needed a 31 point, 15 rebound performance from Duncan who was averaging under 20 points to pull off a 3 point win. And this with Kidd on the bench for the most crucial of plays. The Lakers has had Gasol for what? 13 games? The Spurs has been together for the longest time. Jason Kidd has played for 7 games. Except of course for the New Orleans game, Dallas has shown what it can be in its last 6 games. A need for concern? Definitely! But not for Dallas. But for the rest of the NBA. </div> I don't know about that, the Lakers got almost no offensive production from anyone else either. So while Kobe probably won't have as big a game next time, you can count on Gasol/Farmar/Sasha/Odom to produce. I'd just give the edge to the home team in that case. </div> I'm confused? So what's your argument? Like I said, Kobe needed to produce big time to get the win. If not for his 52 points, the outcome could have been different. Which led me to say that there is no cause for concern. So what's your point again? </div> So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters. </div> Really now? Here's a prediction for you. Come playoff time, if and when the Mavs and the Lakers meet, Dallas will come out winning the series. You can quote me on this! </div> And what exactly is your proof for that? Or are you just pulling crap out of you ass just to save face. OMGZZZ!!! COME PLAYOFF TIME, IF AND WHEN THE SUNS AND SPURS MEET, PHOENIX WILL COME OUT WINNING THE SERIES. YOU CAN QUOTE ME ON THIS! OMGZZZZ!!!! I'M A GENIUS!!!! retard </div> I got this from your " Kobe does not need to score big to win" delusion. Retard? That's your comeback? Better dig deep in your little pink diary for better ones. </div> What the **** are you talking about. My comeback is that we aren't completely heathly, and that Kobe didn't hit his freethrows. Can you read? Come playoff time Kobe won't have to score big. We'll have Bynum back, along with Ariza, and Radmanovic in the lineup. Had Kobe hit most of his freethrows, like he does in a "normal" game, the game wouldn't have even gone to overtime. Had the Lakers been heathly, like the Mavericks, the game would have been much closer. Here's my post. Maybe you should read it this time: "So? Kobe scored 52 points because we weren't even healthy. We're still missing out on our third best player, Andrew Bynum, who will be back in the playoffs. Our second best defender, Trevor Ariza, has been injured. And one of our top three point shooters, Vladamir Radmanovic, was injured as well. And had this been a "normal" game, there wouldn't have been any need for overtime. You won't be seeing Kobe brick as many free throws as he had earlier on in the game. I believe at one point he was shooting under 50%. When was the last time that happened? If Kobe hit his freethrows like he normally does, the game would have been over after 4 quarters." And the reason why I called you a retard was because of your stupid prediction, without any reasoning behind it. </div> You should review mine to find the reasoning to my statements. So now it's stupid? Tsk tsk tsk. So should I throw a tantrum now and pull my hair? </div> You stated Kobe needs to score big in order to win against the Mavs. In response, I stated that the Lakers are not completely healthy. They are missing some key players to the roster, all of which are expected to return in the playoffs. Kobe shot horribly from the free throw line early on, which doesn't occur very often. And again, had he made his freethrows, or had we been healthy, the game wouldn't have even been this close. Do you understand this? Do I have to repeat myself once again?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AMS_ICE @ Mar 3 2008, 01:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 01:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sorry, I kind of have a problem with someone just completely brushing away my post and posting something with absolutely no substance. Factor that in with me feeling completely exhausted from getting barely any sleep yesterday... So yeah, not in my best mood right now. Probably need to get some sleep...</div> Maybe you should review insiders comments first. He was simply referring to the Mavs fans concerns. He was simply making points that there are no reasons for them. Nothing more. He wasn't bashing the Lakers or anything till your comments. Lighten up dude. </div> Again, I'm kind of out of it right now, and I'm not in a good mood. So I apologize if I'm acting like a prick Peace out I'm gonna get some rest.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 01:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AMS_ICE @ Mar 3 2008, 01:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 3 2008, 01:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sorry, I kind of have a problem with someone just completely brushing away my post and posting something with absolutely no substance. Factor that in with me feeling completely exhausted from getting barely any sleep yesterday... So yeah, not in my best mood right now. Probably need to get some sleep...</div> Maybe you should review insiders comments first. He was simply referring to the Mavs fans concerns. He was simply making points that there are no reasons for them. Nothing more. He wasn't bashing the Lakers or anything till your comments. Lighten up dude. </div> Again, I'm kind of out of it right now, and I'm not in a good mood. So I apologize if I'm acting like a prick Peace out I'm gonna get some rest. </div> Happens to the best of us dude.
