There are no upsets in the NBA playoffs.

Its been said numerous times. It has also been proven correct every time. If a team looses a playoff series and you know why, then that means that it wasn't an upset. Something can always be pointed out as the reason why you lost a seven game series.

For instance, everyone made sure that we all heard about how soft that the Lakers were after they lost to the Celtics in the 2008 finals. We could have used Bynum that year. When the Dallas Mavericks got humiliated by the 8th seeded Golden State Warriors, it was made clear that the Mavs mainly lacked a leader. Dirk even blamed himself for that disaster.

Most commentators and NBA experts agree that the Lakers are the ''Most talented'' team. Some use the phrase ''Best team'' even though there isn't a difference. If the Lakers are the best team (which they are), then it will be proven. If the Lakers are NOT the best team, then we will know why!

Oh the irony that a team with Kobe (best perimeter player) and Shaq (most dominant center at the time) won three straight championships... When they lost to the Pistons in the finals, we knew why. Shaq was out of shape, the Pistons crazy front court, and the Pistons smothering defense. If opposing teams are not as talented as your team, then they can't win a seven game series. Simple as that...

If you take a look at the current Laker roster, then compare it to every other teams roster its not even close. Every other team is missing a lot of things that the Lakers have. The only real advantage that some other teams have is the PG position. Notice that that hasn't really kept us from winning rings. Some could argue that some other teams have better benches, but when their starting lineups aren't good enough, then that doesn't matter at all.

It shouldn't be shocking if the Lakers win the championship this year. It would be shocking if they didn't. As much as we may complain about the Lakers... Everybody can agree with me that the good things about this Laker team outweigh the bad things.

If someone needs me to clarify something, then feel free...

NBAtruthwriter: I need some clarification. I do agree with you that talentwise we do trump a lot of teams, but that is on paper. How about the variables that go with that like being hungry, playing hard, playing as a team, etc... I think I could argue that Portland had a more talented team from top to bottom back in 2000 when we actually came back from 15 down in game 7 of the WCF to beat them. On a side note, the Laker's play yesterday kind of gave me a confidence boost in regards to the Lakers playing Denver. Denver is less-talented but they all play hard, something that the Lakers don't always do.

I think that everybody in the NBA is hungry. Everybody plays hard in the playoffs. The good thing about the Lakers is that they are led by Phil Jackson. He's great at making teams play together. Kobe's leadership will be important too. I think that the extra focus that comes from playing in the playoffs will work in the Lakers favor. They wouldn't want to ruin a golden opportunity at a 3 peat. I think that Kobe and Artest's style of play will guide the team in the right direction. Another good thing is that the Lakers know what they will have to do to get the job done.

Portland was a great team in 2000, but since they didn't finish it off... You tend to think that the team with arguably 2 of the top 5 players of all time in Shaq and Kobe were just too much in the end. Those two players were a team to me. I think that its possible for a team to not be as deep as another team, but still be more talented because of the Caliber of the good players.

For example, lets say that a team of 12 Paul Pierces faced a team with 5 Lebrons and 7 Kwame Browns. I would take the team that has 5 Lebrons.

I would tend to agree about 2000. I also thought that man for man, the Portland team had the superior talent. However, the reason that they lost, and I have seen several of those games in the last year, and the seventh game about three times, is because they had such a simplistic offense. I think that if Portland had had just about any other Coach, that they would not have lost that seventh game. Lucky for us that they had one of the most offensively impeded, rotation impeded, crunch time impeded Coaches in the history of the game, and in all of these years, he has not improved. Would anybody like to give this cretinous Coach a name? A little pop quiz...

NBAtruthwriter: I agree Phil does do a good job of bringing teams together and right now given his timeout usage, he's starting to bring in the reigns a little bit which I feel this team needs. I think Artest will be the one guy along with Kobe who will lead us because of of his defense which is becoming more and more impressive. I also believe Fish will come to life a little bit also.

I still believe that the Trailblazers talentwise from 1-12 had more talent, no they didn't have the dominant players like Shaq and Kobe, but we couldn't match their talent when comparing the other players. Portland didn't have much of a drop off when going to the bench to use Bonzi Wells, Detlef and others. I personally don't beleive that the caliber of Kobe and Shaq and our role players trumped Portland. Portland had a 15 point lead and blew the game, which I would say is a combination of a few things they did wrong, or like Cuckoo said, their offense being simplistic, but I don't think it was due to them lacking talent when compared to the Lakers

Cuckoo: I think it was Adelman at that time still.

Gem,

You should have understood that it could not have been Adelman, a Coach that has always been a very good Coach wherever he landed. Adelman was with Portland from 1989 - 1994. So, just think of the dumbest Coach in the last decade, and you probably will get it in the first two guesses.

Just imagine a rebus with an image of a Dodo + a southern river effluent carrying water to the Gulf surrounded by earthen embankments - might give you the name of the cretinous Coach.

The 2000 Portland team had Sabonis, Pippen, Schrempf, Wallace, Steve Smith, Damon Stoudemire, Wells, Jermaine O'Neal, etc.

Im really concerned not for the team, but for Kobe. He really looks like his feet are heavy. He just doesnt have the same lift or explosiveness he had a few seasons ago. He honestly looks like he is running out of gas. That break look like it did nothing for him, except heal that injury. If the team plays like they did yesterday and Kobe is efficient, there is no way they lose, but 3-17? wow... thats a L everytime.

You might want to remember that he just came back after being out for about three weeks because of a high ankle sprain - give him time to regain a bit of "explosiveness"!

cuckooroller: Thank you for saying that because I'm not sure if I'm as understanding to posters who say things like that when a guy clearly has came back from injury and then we are talking about Kobe here where most NBA players would still be out for a few more weeks.

Cuckooroller: I'm trying not to cheat and google who the coach was. I'm sitting here at my desk trying to think who it was. It may come to me.

Also, you're right about Adelman, being a good coach, I just can't remember who replaced him and now they have Mcmillan there. It's killing me who was sandwiched between the two coaches.

Was the coach Mike Dunleavy???

When I think back to the replays of that game, I imagine a "rebus with an image of a Dodo + a southern river effluent carrying water to the Gulf surrounded by earthen embankments".

That's not really what I imagine, but that's who I "think" it is.

dunleavy

Cuckooroller: Honestly I never would have guessed Mike Dunleavy. He is so much of an under the radar coach that I sometimes forget he was one, I only remember him coaching us to the finals and coaching the Clippers.

BTW- I cheated, I couldn't figure it out.

Yeah, Dumb (as a Dodo) + levee (an earthen embankment channeling a water affluent (or effluent).

After Adelman, there was Carlesimo, then Dunleavy, then Cheeks, then Pritchard, and now McMillan

The funny thing about that game 7 comeback vs. Portland in 2000 was that it was primarily ignited by the veteran "role players" like Brian Shaw and Robert Horry. When they started draining those 3's we finally had a spark of hope. Shaq and Kobe eventually did a lot to take it "home" but they were inexplicably freezing up earlier in the game. Our team looked like they were trudging through mud instead of running on a basketball court. It appeared as though the comeback never would have happened without the heroics and timely shots of those guys that we're rating as lesser players than the guys that Portland had on their team. I don't even want to think about how much Lakers history (and Trailblazers history) turned in that one single quarter of basketball. All I can say is it's good to be a Lakers fan!!

To this day Blazer fans won't shut up about the 2000 Western Conference Finals. From their perspective, the Blazers gave that game away, as if it was somehow rightfully theirs to win. 2000 sparked the seed of Laker hatred throughout all of Oregon and it has not subsided since.

Lakeshow, I can only imagine how much that sticks in Blazers fans minds. And then when you tack on the major beatdowns that they received from the Lakers in subsequent years...ouch upon ouch upon ouch!! It's a source of amusement for me, but I'm sure they have some deep-seated misery. Better them than us!

Hey, any sports fan has to carry a little pain or they haven't really earned their stripes. I don't like to think about it, but we have ours too. And if you really want to go deep into Lakers history, those guys had some major disappointments to say the least. Jerry West has lived with that his entire life. The old, old guys still talk about how Celtics history would have been different if Frank Selvy would have just hit that little wide open jumper at the buzzer to win the championship over the Celtics in 1962. Sports can be cruel...I'm just glad that history has been far better to us than most.