Could the 2004 Lakers beat the '72 Lakers 33 in a row?
Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:11 am
Dec 12 Dallas
Dec 13 @Portland
Dec 19 Denver
Dec 21 Phoenix
Dec 23 @Golden State
Dec 25 Houston
Dec 28 Boston
Jan 2 @ Seattle
Jan 4 @ L.A.Clippers (at the Clippers
)
Jan 6 @Minnesota
Jan 7 @ Denver
Jan 8 Atlanta
Jan 9 Cleveland
Jan 12 Denver
Jan 16 @Sacramento
Jan 17 L.A. Clippers
Jan 19 Phoenix
Jan 21 @Memphis
Jan 22 @Dallas
Jan 24 @Utah
Jan 28 Seattle
Jan 30 Minnesota
Feb 1 @Toronto
Feb 2 @Indiana
These games in bold seem to be the toughest, especially the @Memphis, @Dallas and @Utah in 4 nights, but Karl Malone will destroy Utah on the fourth night, it's Memphis at home and Dallas at home, Memphis plays pretty tough at home with pressure defense, sometimes extending it full court and trapping for 48 minutes, though Hubie Brown may know better than to fuck with Kobe and Payton and have Shaq being fed from 3/4's court for thunder! But at Dallas with Nowitzki, we'll see if Dallas can break their zero forever at Staples this week, but the later game could be a tough one, I guess
at Portland, Minnesota and Denver can be tough stops as well, but at Sacramento could be very tough, but then again Brad Miller could be looking for Shaq to punch his lights out or just be so slow that he eats monsterous dunks for 40 minutes. At the very end they start a huge East Coast trip, though not many teams in the east do anything but lay on backs and let everyone have a turn on them, even at home, the first two on the trip and the last two to break the record come at Indiana and Toronto, both are pretty solid these days, but I can't imagine Chris Bosh or Jerome Moiso holding Shaq down.
http://www.nba.com/history/lakers33_moments.html
I really think this team could do it. If everyone stays healthy and Steve Nash doesn't loose any teeth.
Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:52 am
No I dont think they can do it. Sacramento will get them imo
Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:57 am
Yeah I agree NBAFan, they still haven't played Sacramento yet, and I do think Sacramento can beat the Lakers.
Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:53 am
No way, the Lakers lack focus when it comes to weak teams. The get bored and then say to hell with it. You should have put teams like the Clipps and Denver in Bold.
Last edited by RedTorro on Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:54 am
Yes I think they can do it, even though the chance is bigger that they will fail, but they have won 10 in a row already and they played against 3 teams that could be a threath for them (Dallas and San-Antonio) including 4 blowout games
Dallas 93 Lakers 109
San Antonio 87 Lakers 103
Indiana 77 Lakers 99
Dallas 103 Lakers 114
The only team that remaining that may be a threath for them are the Queens, who are doing a great job without their best player, but imo are not on the same level as the Lakers. The Kings have the home court advantage though, and the atmosphere in Sacramento is 1 of the best in the entire NBA so its gonna be hard for the Lakers to get a win over there. But the Lakers should take care of them, the only threath in Sacramento is basicly Peja Stojakovic (and Webber if he returns), so Devean George should really work on his D till the gameday comes. Plus, I expect Kobe to be 100% healthy till then and dont forget that Rick Fox is already practicing in 5 on 5 games so then we will hopefully see the best Lakers team yet this season
Dallas 93 Lakers 109
San Antonio 87 Lakers 103
Indiana 77 Lakers 99
Dallas 103 Lakers 114
The only team that remaining that may be a threath for them are the Queens, who are doing a great job without their best player, but imo are not on the same level as the Lakers. The Kings have the home court advantage though, and the atmosphere in Sacramento is 1 of the best in the entire NBA so its gonna be hard for the Lakers to get a win over there. But the Lakers should take care of them, the only threath in Sacramento is basicly Peja Stojakovic (and Webber if he returns), so Devean George should really work on his D till the gameday comes. Plus, I expect Kobe to be 100% healthy till then and dont forget that Rick Fox is already practicing in 5 on 5 games so then we will hopefully see the best Lakers team yet this season
Thu Dec 11, 2003 9:01 am
Well the Rapers (im going to call them that until people stop calling the kings the"queens"), so anyways, the rapers can do it, there is a chance. but there is also a chance orlando can do the same thing, hypothetically of course. And Mike Bibby isnt a threat? My goodness, it a year and half ago this cat almost single handedly knocked the rapers out of the playoffs. Brad Miller has been huge and Vlade has been solid as usual. Minnesota is playing great ball as well, and hey if "lil bean" (hehe 
) cant gaurd shandon anderson what hope does he have against spree?
) cant gaurd shandon anderson what hope does he have against spree?
Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:38 am
Well the first time the Grizz played the Lakers at home we won. The 2nd time they beat us by sinlge digits. the 3rd time, kobe hit a game winner right at the buzzer and the next time the grizz won.
Thu Dec 11, 2003 11:23 am
It's definitely possible. They're already on a long winning streak, and they have an awesome lineup at their disposal. But as Redbulls said, they tend to lose focus at times, allowing weaker teams to steal victories here and there. The Kings (Queens is the most unoriginal, uninspired, immature and pathetic disrespectful nickname I've ever seen, by the way ) are better than a lot of people give them credit for. Some people seem to have written them off after the 2002 playoffs.
I think the 2004 Lakers winning 33 to tie or 34 to beat the record isn't as easy as it appears.
) are better than a lot of people give them credit for. Some people seem to have written them off after the 2002 playoffs.
I think the 2004 Lakers winning 33 to tie or 34 to beat the record isn't as easy as it appears.
Thu Dec 11, 2003 11:25 am
they are going to have a long winning streak but at most 20. no more.
Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:31 pm
I don't think the Lakers are playing to break any record... but the most consecutive regular season home wins is there. I think they will lose before they face the Queens Jan. 16.
Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:19 pm
scubilete wrote:I don't think the Lakers are playing to break any record... but the most consecutive regular season home wins is there. I think they will lose before they face the Queens Jan. 16.
Yeah I think it's like 27 in a row now.
Most consecutive home games won 44
Chicago Bulls
(3/30/95 - 4/4/96)
(7 gms-1994-95; 37 gms-1995-96)
Best home record season 40-1
1985-1986 Celtics
Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:50 pm
I think anyone can beat the Lakers...cause the Lakers can get tired...they only lost to New Orleans after that double-O game vs. Spurs...and maybe they will lose after back-to-back-to-back games!
Who knows....I hope Yao and Houston beat them first though!
Who knows....I hope Yao and Houston beat them first though!
Thu Dec 11, 2003 9:53 pm
Well the Rapers (im going to call them that until people stop calling the kings the"queens")
So I guess I will only see "The Rapers" in your Lakers posts
And Mike Bibby isnt a threat?
Not with 1 of the best defensive guards of all-time on the Lakers team
and hey if "lil bean" (hehe
If you talk like that, then I really doubt that you actually saw kobe play this season. Because if U would see the game, you would have noticed that his knees are not that strong yet on both offensive and defensive ends, which causes a slower defensive reaction when a offensive player wants to go past a defender. Box scores and higlights dont tell you these things
(Queens is the most unoriginal, uninspired, immature and pathetic disrespectful nickname I've ever seen, by the way )
The Rapers isnt?
Fri Dec 12, 2003 5:07 am
i'm glad nba fan brought this up. i was going to make a new thread about this...
what's with the fixation of numerous lakers fan on this forum referring to the kings as the 'queens'? i'm not a true fan of either team and was curious to know. i understand how there is a heated rivalry and not so nice comments have been exchanged between the two teams and their fans but i don't understand this.
i remember cheering against the bulls hated rivals- the knicks and pistons. nicknames like 'lame-beer', zeke the geek, ewing the monkey would come up but nothing like to the degree of queens.
if i'm not mistaken, shaq was the one who coined this queens thing. yet another comment which makes the lakers look arrogant and very disrespectful to their opponents. i do agree that 'queens' is very unoriginal, uninspired, immature, pathetic, etc. and i will say it's pretty shallow for shaq to say this and even more shallow for anyone else to follow his lead.
any laker fans want to chime in on this?
what's with the fixation of numerous lakers fan on this forum referring to the kings as the 'queens'? i'm not a true fan of either team and was curious to know. i understand how there is a heated rivalry and not so nice comments have been exchanged between the two teams and their fans but i don't understand this.
i remember cheering against the bulls hated rivals- the knicks and pistons. nicknames like 'lame-beer', zeke the geek, ewing the monkey would come up but nothing like to the degree of queens.
if i'm not mistaken, shaq was the one who coined this queens thing. yet another comment which makes the lakers look arrogant and very disrespectful to their opponents. i do agree that 'queens' is very unoriginal, uninspired, immature, pathetic, etc. and i will say it's pretty shallow for shaq to say this and even more shallow for anyone else to follow his lead.
any laker fans want to chime in on this?
Fri Dec 12, 2003 5:32 am
What about "Lackers, Rapers and how you like to call it....Mr Adulterer...I guess thats not immature, pathetic etc
Fri Dec 12, 2003 7:42 am
um thanks for the contribution 804mvp. i was hoping to get an explanation to why some lakers fan refer to the kings as the queens, rather then you just pointing the finger elsewhere. i guess your remarks should come as no surprise.
i can't speak for the lacker or raper deal, but the adulterer situation is entirely different from this queens thing. yes it is immature and pathetic for bryant to committ adultery, not immature and pathetic for calling him this (but maybe to you, since you grip this guy so bad). the adulterer nickname is deserved, as he infact did committ the act, not before lying 3 times about it.
as for this queens thing, i'm still in the dark here. there are some lakers fans here that can fill me in here rather then just make accusations...right?
i can't speak for the lacker or raper deal, but the adulterer situation is entirely different from this queens thing. yes it is immature and pathetic for bryant to committ adultery, not immature and pathetic for calling him this (but maybe to you, since you grip this guy so bad). the adulterer nickname is deserved, as he infact did committ the act, not before lying 3 times about it.
as for this queens thing, i'm still in the dark here. there are some lakers fans here that can fill me in here rather then just make accusations...right?
Fri Dec 12, 2003 8:06 am
I'm a Lakers fan and I hate that "Queens" nickname, as I think it's just lame. Then again I also like the Sacramento Kings as well so maybe that's why 
Fri Dec 12, 2003 9:31 am
Queens...I say it cuz C-Webbs face is always like this when he plays LA (or any other dominating team for that matter)--> 
He and Floppy are always crying about non exsistant calls against any team. (Not saying that LA doesnt get away with many of these calls, but still...quit whining and play ball)
Oh while on the topic of "the rapers"...tis supposed to be rapists...rapers isn't a word...
He and Floppy are always crying about non exsistant calls against any team. (Not saying that LA doesnt get away with many of these calls, but still...quit whining and play ball)
Oh while on the topic of "the rapers"...tis supposed to be rapists...rapers isn't a word...
Fri Dec 12, 2003 9:41 am
So I guess I will only see "The Rapers" in your Lakers posts
Run a search and you will see that i call them the rapers, untill this queens thing stops. Its fucked, and I dont even like sacramento..
Not with 1 of the best defensive guards of all-time on the Lakers team
That maybe true, but offense always beats out defense in basketball. Plus Sacramento will be running payton through a few screens to free him up and all bibby needs is half a second to shoot that shot of his. Bibby won't be able to create off the dribble with payton, but look for him to be effective off the ball.
If you talk like that, then I really doubt that you actually saw kobe play this season. Because if U would see the game, you would have noticed that his knees are not that strong yet on both offensive and defensive ends, which causes a slower defensive reaction when a offensive player wants to go past a defender. Box scores and higlights dont tell you these things
Re read what I said about Kobe and stop making excuses. The simple fact is that if he cant stop Shandon Anderson from driving, what hope does he have against spree who is one of, if not the, best at slashing to the hoop. If kobes poor knees cant take it just yet maybe he should take shaqs advice?
And if you put Payton on him (spree) then cassell will take advantage of the slower, weaker kobe. The rapers will still have an advantage inside becuase shaq is a gun, but the game isnt a given becuase of the backcourt problems the rapers will have..The Rapers isnt?
Thats the whole point of it, to show how lame "the queens" as a name is..
Fri Dec 12, 2003 7:44 pm
but the adulterer situation is entirely different from this queens thing. yes it is immature and pathetic for bryant to committ adultery, not immature and pathetic for calling him this (but maybe to you, since you grip this guy so bad
so I guess youre saying that everyone who ever commited adultery should be named "Mr Adulterer" ? I think calling some one "mister *enter bad word here*" is very immature and pathetic, but thats just me. U can continue with it if it makes you feel special
Re read what I said about Kobe and stop making excuses
"and hey if "lil bean" (hehe ) cant gaurd shandon anderson what hope does he have against spree?"
I re read it, now what? my opinion wont change. You are just saying that Kobe cant guard Spree because he couldnt stop Shandon Anderson. Im not making any excuses, because if you saw the game...which you didnt I guess, you would have agree with me, this is not a 100% healthy Kobe that you saw on the game highlights. The Minnesota - Lakers game isnt until the 6th of January, and they expected that Kobe would be recoverd by the end of December. Maybe he cant stop Sprewell now if they played tonight. But the game isnt untill next month so you cant say "what chance does he have against Sprewell if he cant stop Shandon Anderson"
Thats the whole point of it, to show how lame "the queens" as a name is..
If you think that naming a team like that is pathetic and immature, why are you doing the same thing then? Yes the "Queens" is pathetic and immature....but its funny because of the whole rivaly, I think Shaq agrees with me
Fri Dec 12, 2003 8:25 pm
My point about the "Queens" nickname is that it's right up there with "So's your Mum (or Mom if you prefer)" and "That is so gay." when it cames to lame insults. The whole idea of the insult is to suggest the Kings are feminine, that they "play like girls", etc.
One thing that will always make a man willing to fight is an attack on his sexuality or masculinity. Of all the insults that may be hurled in the schoolyard, calling a guy gay or a girl is going to strike a nerve. Obviously, level-headed people can laugh off these insults and avoid physical confrontation. But we males aren't always level-headed when we are challenged in this way.
That's what makes "Queens" such an uninspired insult. On the surface, it appears clever, conveniently switching their team name with one that suggests they are weak and feminine. But it's a cheap shot, and one that doesn't take a whole lot of creativity to muster.
The shots at Kobe and the Lakers are also cheap shots, no question. But this Queens stuff has been going on for a long time. It isn't mature to retaliate with the anti-Kobe/Laker sentiment, I grant you that. But the Queens reference is really getting tired. The only person who looks bad because of the reference is Shaq. He's the one showing the worst sportsmanship and coming off as unprofessional.
One thing that will always make a man willing to fight is an attack on his sexuality or masculinity. Of all the insults that may be hurled in the schoolyard, calling a guy gay or a girl is going to strike a nerve. Obviously, level-headed people can laugh off these insults and avoid physical confrontation. But we males aren't always level-headed when we are challenged in this way.
That's what makes "Queens" such an uninspired insult. On the surface, it appears clever, conveniently switching their team name with one that suggests they are weak and feminine. But it's a cheap shot, and one that doesn't take a whole lot of creativity to muster.
The shots at Kobe and the Lakers are also cheap shots, no question. But this Queens stuff has been going on for a long time. It isn't mature to retaliate with the anti-Kobe/Laker sentiment, I grant you that. But the Queens reference is really getting tired. The only person who looks bad because of the reference is Shaq. He's the one showing the worst sportsmanship and coming off as unprofessional.
Fri Dec 12, 2003 11:08 pm
If people want to refer to the Kings as "Queens", then what does that say about the Lakers who barely won that series (which some people will argue that they didn't win ) ? Not bloody much.
) ? Not bloody much.
Sat Dec 13, 2003 12:04 am
LOL, Andrew, I don't think calling them Queens is because they play like girls or soft but because they cry too much.
When someone refers to the Lakers as "Rapers", that's just telling me the whole team raped some other team, they are saying the Lakers are too strong for whoever & the deals they got raped the whole league, which is nothing but getting the team better.
Kobe is not the Lakers, so if they are calling the Lakers "Rapers" cause Kobe is there, then everyone will start calling the Warriors "Bastards" for J. Richardson, Sacramento "Illegals" for Webber, and so on,
.
The name is related in the way they are married (Kings & Queens). Anyway, I know many people wouldn't feel that way if the guy making those comments was MJ, so the hate is against Shaq not against anyone making comments like those,
The shots at Kobe and the Lakers are also cheap shots, no question.
When someone refers to the Lakers as "Rapers", that's just telling me the whole team raped some other team, they are saying the Lakers are too strong for whoever & the deals they got raped the whole league, which is nothing but getting the team better.
Kobe is not the Lakers, so if they are calling the Lakers "Rapers" cause Kobe is there, then everyone will start calling the Warriors "Bastards" for J. Richardson, Sacramento "Illegals" for Webber, and so on,
.The only person who looks bad because of the reference is Shaq. He's the one showing the worst sportsmanship and coming off as unprofessional.
The name is related in the way they are married (Kings & Queens). Anyway, I know many people wouldn't feel that way if the guy making those comments was MJ, so the hate is against Shaq not against anyone making comments like those,
Sat Dec 13, 2003 12:19 am
Quote:
but the adulterer situation is entirely different from this queens thing. yes it is immature and pathetic for bryant to committ adultery, not immature and pathetic for calling him this (but maybe to you, since you grip this guy so bad
so I guess youre saying that everyone who ever commited adultery should be named "Mr Adulterer" ? I think calling some one "mister *enter bad word here*" is very immature and pathetic, but thats just me. U can continue with it if it makes you feel special
Yo dont let the adulterer thing get to ya man, its just some technical bullshit word for cheating.
pfft! man it prolly happens every"bloody"day so dont worry about it.
If calling the Kings, Queens, gets to people then who cares, they always bring up shit and try get us laker fans going anyway.
Sat Dec 13, 2003 1:11 am
Andrew wrote:He's the one showing the worst sportsmanship and coming off as unprofessional.
Sure, that's bad sportsmanship...yet falling down while you're merely touched, isnt...didnt Floppy fall down when he was touched by Jamal Tinsely last season?? Woohoo, great sportsmanship.
Now alot of people will come and say it's tactics, to win. Lambeer did it...and they won. Game tactics right?
In that case, Shaq calling them the Queens are Mind Tactics...like Rodman used to do...now that isn't bad sportsmanship now is it Andrew?
Or how bout the time MJ said to GP that he will school him and his trash talking??