Dynasty or Luck?

Yet another writer begging for attention. Fire off if you are so inclined... (from today's Daily):

"Laker Title Run Will Soon End: On closer inspection, perhaps this isn't such a dynasty. There's no way the Lakers should have won the NBA title in 2000, not with Portland holding a 15-point fourth-quarter lead in Game 7 of the conference finals. Even Phil Jackson knows that. There's no way the Lakers should have won their third consecutive title in 2002, not with that ridiculous Robert Horry three-pointer in Game 4 of the conference finals and some curious officiating in Game 6. Rick Adelman knows that. Is it greatness or luck? Do teams lose because of the Lakers' transcendence or their own ineptitude? If it keeps happening, it must be excellence. But this Laker team that eliminated the Minnesota Timberwolves in six games?"

source: http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/lakers/la-sp-views4may04,1,7413943.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dsports%2Dnba%2Dlakers

Somebody mentioned this before in another thread, but notice how the writer never mentioned the 2001 season where they sweeped all of these so-called power house teams in the west. The article is a product of complete bias and selective memory.

Luck is involved, for instance, I hate it when people refer to Horry's 3 as a lucky shot, it was a lucky play, not a lucky shot.

Bottom line is, the ball has bounced the way of the Lakers for the past 3 years, how much more will it continue to roll their way?

Anonymous wrote:Somebody mentioned this before in another thread, but notice how the writer never mentioned the 2001 season where they sweeped all of these so-called power house teams in the west. The article is a product of complete bias and selective memory.

yepp
heres the thread

http://www.clublakers.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=241

Oh yea, another thing, "LUCK" won't get you 3 rings, and well on your way to four...

Every championship team in every sport has luck go their way at one time or another in their championship run.

Once may be luck, twice may be coincidence, but three times? Great teams of talent, skill, and knowledge push the balance of luck in their favor, and that's what the Lakers do. The ability and resolve to persevere through a 15 point deficit...the poise to hit the big shots...the size, strength, and determination to take it to the heart of a defense.

This is a dynasty, one of the greatest ever, and will be for years to come.

mellow yellow wrote:Every championship team in every sport has luck go their way at one time or another in their championship run.

Once may be luck, twice may be coincidence, but three times? Great teams of talent, skill, and knowledge push the balance of luck in their favor, and that's what the Lakers do. The ability and resolve to persevere through a 15 point deficit...the poise to hit the big shots...the size, strength, and determination to take it to the heart of a defense.

This is a dynasty, one of the greatest ever, and will be for years to come.

yeapp!
you spoke my mind!

I GUESS IT WAS LUCK WHEN PORTLAND MISSED MOST OF THEIR SHOTS IN 2000 WCF TO LOSE A 15 POINT LEAD.

I GUESS IT WAS LUCK THAT THE QUEENS LOST THAT BIG LEAD IN GAME 4, WHEN HORRY MADE THAT SHOT.

I GUESS IT WAS LUCK THAT THE QUEENS MISSED ALL THEIR FREE THROWS IN GAME 7, THAT COST THEM THE GAME.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!!

LUCK DOES NOT SIMPLY HAPPEN ON CHANCE. LUCK IS A RESULT OF HARD WORK AND DETERMINATION.

CALLING THE LAKERS LUCKY IS ANOTHER LAKER HATER COMMENT.
THATS WHAT I THINK.

Kobe_One_Kenobi_8 wrote:I GUESS IT WAS LUCK WHEN PORTLAND MISSED MOST OF THEIR SHOTS IN 2000 WCF TO LOSE A 15 POINT LEAD.

I GUESS IT WAS LUCK THAT THE QUEENS LOST THAT BIG LEAD IN GAME 4, WHEN HORRY MADE THAT SHOT.

I GUESS IT WAS LUCK THAT THE QUEENS MISSED ALL THEIR FREE THROWS IN GAME 7, THAT COST THEM THE GAME.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!!

LUCK DOES NOT SIMPLY HAPPEN ON CHANCE. LUCK IS A RESULT OF HARD WORK AND DETERMINATION.

CALLING THE LAKERS LUCKY IS ANOTHER LAKERS HATER COMMENT.
THATS WHAT I THIMK.

Thank you!! Why do writers always refer to the Lakers as being a "lucky team!!" They dont even comment about our it was "luck" that all the lost opportunities their oppenents lost!! Wussup wit that?? Gimme a break!!!

Like I said in my new article, "count the rings baby"

Just one more example of someone who is jealous of the Lakers. As I have said before, if the Lakers didn't deserve to win, then how could a team that lost to them deserve it anymore? You might get "lucky" with winning one championship... but it's not going to happen three years in a row, possibly going on four. Heck, you could come up with a ton of reasons why the Lakers didn't win the championship sooner. Like the Queens would have never had a chance to get to game 7 with the Lakers if Kobe hadn't been food poisoned. And regardless of what people want to say about the officiating in Game 6 or 7, the officiating was bad both ways - no one is ever going to be happy. If you want to harp on officiating problems, then let's look at the fact that after the first 4 or 5 games, the Queens had take over 20 more free throws then the Lakers. Now, that sounds a little interesting. But we'll let people say what they want... it doesn't change that the Lakers have 3 rings.

Nice point LQueen about the free throw disparity in the first 4 to 5 games of that series. Great call!!!!

All the crybabies (Queen fans) do is whine like their loser team. The biggest whiner of them all is their coach, along with the Bafoons, oh I'm sorry, the Baloofs, damn, I meant Maloofs!!!!!!

TALK BOUT WHINING ! THATS DAH QUEENS SPECIALITY!!!!!!





AND OF COURSE HTE HOWL OF WEBBAH

LOL!! Where do u get these pictures from!!! LMAO

LINK: http://www.lakersbrethren.com/Kings_Sized_Comedy.html

Great site Reddy. Thanks.

As for the "luck" crap people are talking, it just shows a lack of class. I guess Magic and Kareem were "lucky" to win 5 titles in the 80s. I guess Jordan was "lucky" to win 6.

All this Laker Hating just makes the winning that much better.

Once again, it'll be a great rivarly if the Queens ever win a series against us.

Also, we do have something no other team has, we do have Zen

kobegotskillz wrote:Great site Reddy. Thanks.

As for the "luck" crap people are talking, it just shows a lack of class. I guess Magic and Kareem were "lucky" to win 5 titles in the 80s. I guess Jordan was "lucky" to win 6.

All this Laker Hating just makes the winning that much better.

Once again, it'll be a great rivarly if the Queens ever win a series against us.

COOL!

As 4 Zen. LD2k, if he wins this one he will be the ringgiest coach in teh history of sports
WOW EH?

Even if "he" doesn't, hell still go down as one of the best coaches ever, he had done a great job, but never forget that he has been aside people like Tex Winter. All of them deserve credit for the rings... Were all blessed to have a staff like this for our Lakers. Something I will never be ungreatful for...

What about the Chicago Bulls? I guess they were lucky as well.

They were lucky that the Knicks didn't eliminate them in that 7 game series in the mid 90's. Lucky MJ or Scottie didn't go down with injury. Lucky the refs coddled Jordan. Anyone can appear lucky with the right WORDING. Why is it luck when the Lakers do it, but amazing and a miracle when other teams do it? Why is Robert Horry's 3 in game 4 lucky but MJ's (offensive foul) game winner in utah amazing? Why is the Portland lead lost in game 7 luck but the Utah Jazz leads in both game 6s (in Utah) lost in the '97 and '98 finals skill by Chicago? What determines the difference between luck and skill? What if KJ had made that full court shot instead of getting blocked in the Phoenix Suns finals? What if John Stockton had missed that 3 that beat the Houston Rockets, would they have beaten Chicago? What if Charles Barkley had been healthy for that Bulls Suns finals? What if Paxson had missed that shot, or Kerr? What if the Blazers had drafted MJ? What if Shaq were 5 years older? Luck and or skill is in the eye of the beholder!