Let me get this right...The Celtics beat the Lakers both times this year,have home court advantage, and have the better starting team, defense and bench ---and are +140 underdogs to win the Championship??? I guess the same clowns who made the NE Patriots 12-14 point favs in the Super Bowl made these odds!! Yeah , I heard of Kobe Bryant---and I also remember MJ torching the Celts for 63 points in a playoff game-and losing!!! And who will cover KG...that softie, Pau Gasol?? Celts in 6- a real live dog!!
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Let me get this right...The Celtics beat the Lakers both times this year,have home court advantage, and have the better starting team, defense and bench ---and are +140 underdogs to win the Championship??? I guess the same clowns who made the NE Patriots 12-14 point favs in the Super Bowl made these odds!! Yeah , I heard of Kobe Bryant---and I also remember MJ torching the Celts for 63 points in a playoff game-and losing!!! And who will cover KG...that softie, Pau Gasol?? Celts in 6- a real live dog!!
and have the better starting team, defense and bench -
Are you telling me Rondo, Allen, Pierce, Garnett and Perkins are better than Fisher, Radmanovic, Kobe, Odom and Gasol?? It's close but the Lakers have the better starting lineup.
They also have a much better bench, and that one isn't close.
It's true the Celts have the better defense, but when you look at defensive numbers what do you look at? Points allowed? If so, stop. True the Celts give up much less points but the Lakers play at a much higher pace. Did you know that in the 2008 playoffs the Lakers defensive FG% is only 1 point lower than Bostons? And that comes with the Lakers having to stop Denver, Utah and San Antonio, while the Celts have had to pay the juggernaut offenses of Atlanta, Cleveland and Detroit.
Oh, and you're missing the most important point, Phil vs Doc, and it's a no contest.
0
and have the better starting team, defense and bench -
Are you telling me Rondo, Allen, Pierce, Garnett and Perkins are better than Fisher, Radmanovic, Kobe, Odom and Gasol?? It's close but the Lakers have the better starting lineup.
They also have a much better bench, and that one isn't close.
It's true the Celts have the better defense, but when you look at defensive numbers what do you look at? Points allowed? If so, stop. True the Celts give up much less points but the Lakers play at a much higher pace. Did you know that in the 2008 playoffs the Lakers defensive FG% is only 1 point lower than Bostons? And that comes with the Lakers having to stop Denver, Utah and San Antonio, while the Celts have had to pay the juggernaut offenses of Atlanta, Cleveland and Detroit.
Oh, and you're missing the most important point, Phil vs Doc, and it's a no contest.
and have the better starting team, defense and bench -
Are you telling me Rondo, Allen, Pierce, Garnett and Perkins are better than Fisher, Radmanovic, Kobe, Odom and Gasol?? It's close but the Lakers have the better starting lineup.
They also have a much better bench, and that one isn't close.
It's true the Celts have the better defense, but when you look at defensive numbers what do you look at? Points allowed? If so, stop. True the Celts give up much less points but the Lakers play at a much higher pace. Did you know that in the 2008 playoffs the Lakers defensive FG% is only 1 point lower than Bostons? And that comes with the Lakers having to stop Denver, Utah and San Antonio, while the Celts have had to pay the juggernaut offenses of Atlanta, Cleveland and Detroit.
Oh, and you're missing the most important point, Phil vs Doc, and it's a no contest.
will someone please support this common statement I keep hearing that the Lakers have a better bench?? who luke walton???
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
and have the better starting team, defense and bench -
Are you telling me Rondo, Allen, Pierce, Garnett and Perkins are better than Fisher, Radmanovic, Kobe, Odom and Gasol?? It's close but the Lakers have the better starting lineup.
They also have a much better bench, and that one isn't close.
It's true the Celts have the better defense, but when you look at defensive numbers what do you look at? Points allowed? If so, stop. True the Celts give up much less points but the Lakers play at a much higher pace. Did you know that in the 2008 playoffs the Lakers defensive FG% is only 1 point lower than Bostons? And that comes with the Lakers having to stop Denver, Utah and San Antonio, while the Celts have had to pay the juggernaut offenses of Atlanta, Cleveland and Detroit.
Oh, and you're missing the most important point, Phil vs Doc, and it's a no contest.
will someone please support this common statement I keep hearing that the Lakers have a better bench?? who luke walton???
Game 2 vs. Spurs - 34 points....12-27 Field Goals ***30-point win***
Game 1 vs. Spurs - 21 points....6-18 Field Goals
Celtics bench production vs. Pistons:
Game 6 vs. Pistons - 11 points....3-12 Field Goals
Game 5 vs. Pistons - 3 points....1-4 Field Goals
Game 4 vs. Pistons - 11 points....1-3 Field Goals
Game 3 vs Pistons - 23 points....5-14 Field Goals
Game 2 vs. Pistons - 8 points....3-11 Field Goals
Game 1 vs. Pistons - 15 points....6-11 Field Goals
Lakers - 23.4 PPG on 38% Field Goals Celtics - 14.2 PPG on 34% Field Goals
Celtics have a much better starting lineup...all 5 guys contribute big time, while the primary contributors of the Lakers are Kobe and Gasol. Sorry robbie, you wanted the numbers, and there ya go!! Celtics certainly go DEEPER than the Lakers, with the ability to easily use 9 or 10 guys while the Lakers use only 7 or 8.
0
Lakers bench production vs. Spurs
Game 5 vs. Spurs - 22 points....7-17 Field Goals
Game 4 vs. Spurs - 19 points....7-25 Field Goals
Game 3 vs. Spurs - 21 points...8-18 Field Goals
Game 2 vs. Spurs - 34 points....12-27 Field Goals ***30-point win***
Game 1 vs. Spurs - 21 points....6-18 Field Goals
Celtics bench production vs. Pistons:
Game 6 vs. Pistons - 11 points....3-12 Field Goals
Game 5 vs. Pistons - 3 points....1-4 Field Goals
Game 4 vs. Pistons - 11 points....1-3 Field Goals
Game 3 vs Pistons - 23 points....5-14 Field Goals
Game 2 vs. Pistons - 8 points....3-11 Field Goals
Game 1 vs. Pistons - 15 points....6-11 Field Goals
Lakers - 23.4 PPG on 38% Field Goals Celtics - 14.2 PPG on 34% Field Goals
Celtics have a much better starting lineup...all 5 guys contribute big time, while the primary contributors of the Lakers are Kobe and Gasol. Sorry robbie, you wanted the numbers, and there ya go!! Celtics certainly go DEEPER than the Lakers, with the ability to easily use 9 or 10 guys while the Lakers use only 7 or 8.
Let me get this right...The Celtics beat the Lakers both times this year,have home court advantage, and have the better starting team, defense and bench ---and are +140 underdogs to win the Championship??? I guess the same clowns who made the NE Patriots 12-14 point favs in the Super Bowl made these odds!! Yeah , I heard of Kobe Bryant---and I also remember MJ torching the Celts for 63 points in a playoff game-and losing!!! And who will cover KG...that softie, Pau Gasol?? Celts in 6- a real live dog!!
i guess u missed the nba finals last year
0
Quote Originally Posted by luckylogan:
Let me get this right...The Celtics beat the Lakers both times this year,have home court advantage, and have the better starting team, defense and bench ---and are +140 underdogs to win the Championship??? I guess the same clowns who made the NE Patriots 12-14 point favs in the Super Bowl made these odds!! Yeah , I heard of Kobe Bryant---and I also remember MJ torching the Celts for 63 points in a playoff game-and losing!!! And who will cover KG...that softie, Pau Gasol?? Celts in 6- a real live dog!!
i too have BOS +165 very large, i think the line is based on the thought that no one can stop Kobe. No doubt, he is the best player on the court but i have to say, give me home court and 3 guys who are going to be so hungry for this, add to that 65% on my money and i cannot pass. I see BOS in 6.
If BOS wins game 1, they will go to +110, if they win game 2, they go to -170, so i thibk the smart play is BOS now and if you like LA, wait until after game 1.
0
i too have BOS +165 very large, i think the line is based on the thought that no one can stop Kobe. No doubt, he is the best player on the court but i have to say, give me home court and 3 guys who are going to be so hungry for this, add to that 65% on my money and i cannot pass. I see BOS in 6.
If BOS wins game 1, they will go to +110, if they win game 2, they go to -170, so i thibk the smart play is BOS now and if you like LA, wait until after game 1.
i too have BOS +165 very large, i think the line is based on the thought that no one can stop Kobe. No doubt, he is the best player on the court but i have to say, give me home court and 3 guys who are going to be so hungry for this, add to that 65% on my money and i cannot pass. I see BOS in 6.
If BOS wins game 1, they will go to +110, if they win game 2, they go to -170, so i thibk the smart play is BOS now and if you like LA, wait until after game 1.
if you like la i think picking your spots is a better approach then the series price.
0
Quote Originally Posted by fetsch14:
i too have BOS +165 very large, i think the line is based on the thought that no one can stop Kobe. No doubt, he is the best player on the court but i have to say, give me home court and 3 guys who are going to be so hungry for this, add to that 65% on my money and i cannot pass. I see BOS in 6.
If BOS wins game 1, they will go to +110, if they win game 2, they go to -170, so i thibk the smart play is BOS now and if you like LA, wait until after game 1.
if you like la i think picking your spots is a better approach then the series price.
Let me get this right...The Celtics beat the Lakers both times this year,have home court advantage, and have the better starting team, defense and bench ---and are +140 underdogs to win the Championship??? I guess the same clowns who made the NE Patriots 12-14 point favs in the Super Bowl made these odds!! Yeah , I heard of Kobe Bryant---and I also remember MJ torching the Celts for 63 points in a playoff game-and losing!!! And who will cover KG...that softie, Pau Gasol?? Celts in 6- a real live dog!!
Just wanted to point out that the two regular season meetings are completely irrelevant...both meetings were prior to Pau Gasol joining the Lakers who are now 34-7 with Gasol in the lineup.
0
Quote Originally Posted by luckylogan:
Let me get this right...The Celtics beat the Lakers both times this year,have home court advantage, and have the better starting team, defense and bench ---and are +140 underdogs to win the Championship??? I guess the same clowns who made the NE Patriots 12-14 point favs in the Super Bowl made these odds!! Yeah , I heard of Kobe Bryant---and I also remember MJ torching the Celts for 63 points in a playoff game-and losing!!! And who will cover KG...that softie, Pau Gasol?? Celts in 6- a real live dog!!
Just wanted to point out that the two regular season meetings are completely irrelevant...both meetings were prior to Pau Gasol joining the Lakers who are now 34-7 with Gasol in the lineup.
Game 2 vs. Spurs - 34 points....12-27 Field Goals ***30-point win***
Game 1 vs. Spurs - 21 points....6-18 Field Goals
Celtics bench production vs. Pistons:
Game 6 vs. Pistons - 11 points....3-12 Field Goals
Game 5 vs. Pistons - 3 points....1-4 Field Goals
Game 4 vs. Pistons - 11 points....1-3 Field Goals
Game 3 vs Pistons - 23 points....5-14 Field Goals
Game 2 vs. Pistons - 8 points....3-11 Field Goals
Game 1 vs. Pistons - 15 points....6-11 Field Goals
Lakers - 23.4 PPG on 38% Field Goals Celtics - 14.2 PPG on 34% Field Goals
Celtics have a much better starting lineup...all 5 guys contribute big time, while the primary contributors of the Lakers are Kobe and Gasol. Sorry robbie, you wanted the numbers, and there ya go!! Celtics certainly go DEEPER than the Lakers, with the ability to easily use 9 or 10 guys while the Lakers use only 7 or 8.
THANKS CMJ......
0
Quote Originally Posted by CMJohnson1:
Lakers bench production vs. Spurs
Game 5 vs. Spurs - 22 points....7-17 Field Goals
Game 4 vs. Spurs - 19 points....7-25 Field Goals
Game 3 vs. Spurs - 21 points...8-18 Field Goals
Game 2 vs. Spurs - 34 points....12-27 Field Goals ***30-point win***
Game 1 vs. Spurs - 21 points....6-18 Field Goals
Celtics bench production vs. Pistons:
Game 6 vs. Pistons - 11 points....3-12 Field Goals
Game 5 vs. Pistons - 3 points....1-4 Field Goals
Game 4 vs. Pistons - 11 points....1-3 Field Goals
Game 3 vs Pistons - 23 points....5-14 Field Goals
Game 2 vs. Pistons - 8 points....3-11 Field Goals
Game 1 vs. Pistons - 15 points....6-11 Field Goals
Lakers - 23.4 PPG on 38% Field Goals Celtics - 14.2 PPG on 34% Field Goals
Celtics have a much better starting lineup...all 5 guys contribute big time, while the primary contributors of the Lakers are Kobe and Gasol. Sorry robbie, you wanted the numbers, and there ya go!! Celtics certainly go DEEPER than the Lakers, with the ability to easily use 9 or 10 guys while the Lakers use only 7 or 8.
will someone please support this common statement I keep hearing that the Lakers have a better bench?? who luke walton???
robbie- the bench for the lakers is much better for this reason only. They have great SHOOTERS on the bench not to say that the players are better but the they are better shooters. This will make boston commit to playing the great shooters and free up kobe a little more. If you don't guard saha or farmer or walton they will burn you. This offense that phil runs is pretty good don't you think? 9 rings good. Again I'm not hating here but it's the matchups that will hurt Boston. GL I like KG hope he plays great.
0
Quote Originally Posted by robbie0570:
will someone please support this common statement I keep hearing that the Lakers have a better bench?? who luke walton???
robbie- the bench for the lakers is much better for this reason only. They have great SHOOTERS on the bench not to say that the players are better but the they are better shooters. This will make boston commit to playing the great shooters and free up kobe a little more. If you don't guard saha or farmer or walton they will burn you. This offense that phil runs is pretty good don't you think? 9 rings good. Again I'm not hating here but it's the matchups that will hurt Boston. GL I like KG hope he plays great.
Celtics have a much better starting lineup...all 5 guys contribute big time, while the primary contributors of the Lakers are Kobe and Gasol. Sorry robbie, you wanted the numbers, and there ya go!! Celtics certainly go DEEPER than the Lakers, with the ability to easily use 9 or 10 guys while the Lakers use only 7 or 8.
Those 4 players contributed EVERY game of the Spurs series, that looks like 9 deep to me, maybe 10 if Phil uses Ariza for his defense. I just don't know where you came up with 7-8 deep.
0
Quote Originally Posted by CMJohnson1:
Celtics have a much better starting lineup...all 5 guys contribute big time, while the primary contributors of the Lakers are Kobe and Gasol. Sorry robbie, you wanted the numbers, and there ya go!! Celtics certainly go DEEPER than the Lakers, with the ability to easily use 9 or 10 guys while the Lakers use only 7 or 8.
Those 4 players contributed EVERY game of the Spurs series, that looks like 9 deep to me, maybe 10 if Phil uses Ariza for his defense. I just don't know where you came up with 7-8 deep.
Why do you think that Boston had such a hard time aganist Cleveland? They had Lebron, in this series they have kobe to play aganist. If cleveland would of had another consistint SHOOTER on that team than well, cleveland would have won that series. Detroit, and atlanta didn't have that super star player on there team that boston had to contain. The roll players for the Lakers or "great shooters" have made this lakers team good. Boston is great team, But they have run up aganist a better TEAM.
0
Why do you think that Boston had such a hard time aganist Cleveland? They had Lebron, in this series they have kobe to play aganist. If cleveland would of had another consistint SHOOTER on that team than well, cleveland would have won that series. Detroit, and atlanta didn't have that super star player on there team that boston had to contain. The roll players for the Lakers or "great shooters" have made this lakers team good. Boston is great team, But they have run up aganist a better TEAM.
Celtics backers better get this line now because this is as good as it is gonna get. I hope Lakers fans can at least admit that this is the best team they have played so far in the playoffs. I might hedge some on the Lakers to win the championship if they lose the first two games. (I think they might steal game 2 though)
0
Celtics backers better get this line now because this is as good as it is gonna get. I hope Lakers fans can at least admit that this is the best team they have played so far in the playoffs. I might hedge some on the Lakers to win the championship if they lose the first two games. (I think they might steal game 2 though)
L8kerfan, while gasol was not active for either of their prior meetings, bynum was active and if you look at the stats and overall inside presence, they are very similar players. bynum 13 ppg & 12 rbs, gasol 18 ppg & 8 rbs. Now i realize this is the playoffs and the lakers r hot, but losing twice by double digits is not something to be dismissed. It only builds up the celtics' confidence. can't wait for a well fought series
0
L8kerfan, while gasol was not active for either of their prior meetings, bynum was active and if you look at the stats and overall inside presence, they are very similar players. bynum 13 ppg & 12 rbs, gasol 18 ppg & 8 rbs. Now i realize this is the playoffs and the lakers r hot, but losing twice by double digits is not something to be dismissed. It only builds up the celtics' confidence. can't wait for a well fought series
Those 4 players contributed EVERY game of the Spurs series, that looks like 9 deep to me, maybe 10 if Phil uses Ariza for his defense. I just don't know where you came up with 7-8 deep.
the only clear bench presence slightly favoring L.A is Vujacic...who i'm already pissed at because of that useless 3 pointer...anyhow....he's a great shooter no question, but turiaf cannot score, i'd take powe or pj brown over him...i'd definately take posey over walton not only because he's an experianced vet, but he can knock down jumpers and he's one of the best straight up defenders on either squad....the combination of cassell and eddie house i'd for sure want on my side over jordan farmar....I think its fairly even...sasha's shooting range may give a slight edge.
Those 4 players contributed EVERY game of the Spurs series, that looks like 9 deep to me, maybe 10 if Phil uses Ariza for his defense. I just don't know where you came up with 7-8 deep.
the only clear bench presence slightly favoring L.A is Vujacic...who i'm already pissed at because of that useless 3 pointer...anyhow....he's a great shooter no question, but turiaf cannot score, i'd take powe or pj brown over him...i'd definately take posey over walton not only because he's an experianced vet, but he can knock down jumpers and he's one of the best straight up defenders on either squad....the combination of cassell and eddie house i'd for sure want on my side over jordan farmar....I think its fairly even...sasha's shooting range may give a slight edge.
Those 4 players contributed EVERY game of the Spurs series, that looks like 9 deep to me, maybe 10 if Phil uses Ariza for his defense. I just don't know where you came up with 7-8 deep.
I was basically going by minutes played, as Vujacic, Farmar, and Walton are the only ones who see considerable action (at least 12-15 minutes per game)...the Celtics give minutes to Posey, Cassell, Brown, Powe, and Davis. The Lakers certainly CAN go 9 or 10 deep, but they usually don't...of course that comes down to coaching and there is obviously no comparison there. Doc Rivers is the equivalent of Joan Rivers on the sidelines IMO
Those 4 players contributed EVERY game of the Spurs series, that looks like 9 deep to me, maybe 10 if Phil uses Ariza for his defense. I just don't know where you came up with 7-8 deep.
I was basically going by minutes played, as Vujacic, Farmar, and Walton are the only ones who see considerable action (at least 12-15 minutes per game)...the Celtics give minutes to Posey, Cassell, Brown, Powe, and Davis. The Lakers certainly CAN go 9 or 10 deep, but they usually don't...of course that comes down to coaching and there is obviously no comparison there. Doc Rivers is the equivalent of Joan Rivers on the sidelines IMO
L8kerfan, while gasol was not active for either of their prior meetings, bynum was active and if you look at the stats and overall inside presence, they are very similar players. bynum 13 ppg & 12 rbs, gasol 18 ppg & 8 rbs. Now i realize this is the playoffs and the lakers r hot, but losing twice by double digits is not something to be dismissed. It only builds up the celtics' confidence. can't wait for a well fought series
The point was, the Lakers are a TOTALLY/COMPLETELY/ENTIRELY different team than they were when they played the Celtics in the regular season. First meeting, Bynum had not emerged YET. Second meeting the Lakers fucked up and went out in the 1st half with those stupid "short-shorts" for the 1st half. Kobe was way off in those "short-shorts" as he was 6-25 from the field including 0-6 on 3's. Kobe shooting 28% from the field doesn't happen too often. On top of that, Odom 6-17 from the field as well. Bynum never really got into the game as he was in foul trouble very early before eventually fouling out, he ended up just 2-2 from the field. So, like I said, TOTALLY different team. Those mentions of the regular season meetings are completely useless.
0
Quote Originally Posted by savagehenry13:
L8kerfan, while gasol was not active for either of their prior meetings, bynum was active and if you look at the stats and overall inside presence, they are very similar players. bynum 13 ppg & 12 rbs, gasol 18 ppg & 8 rbs. Now i realize this is the playoffs and the lakers r hot, but losing twice by double digits is not something to be dismissed. It only builds up the celtics' confidence. can't wait for a well fought series
The point was, the Lakers are a TOTALLY/COMPLETELY/ENTIRELY different team than they were when they played the Celtics in the regular season. First meeting, Bynum had not emerged YET. Second meeting the Lakers fucked up and went out in the 1st half with those stupid "short-shorts" for the 1st half. Kobe was way off in those "short-shorts" as he was 6-25 from the field including 0-6 on 3's. Kobe shooting 28% from the field doesn't happen too often. On top of that, Odom 6-17 from the field as well. Bynum never really got into the game as he was in foul trouble very early before eventually fouling out, he ended up just 2-2 from the field. So, like I said, TOTALLY different team. Those mentions of the regular season meetings are completely useless.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
