PDA

View Full Version : LaMarcus Aldridge chooses Spurs; signs 4 year / 85 million deal.



NoGameSpit
07-04-2015, 11:25 AM
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13197710/free-agent-lamarcus-aldridge-says-sign-san-antonio-spurs

His deal will be a four-year maximum contract worth more than $80 million, with an opt-out after the third year, a source told ESPN's Marc Stein.



http://i.imgur.com/VjLRPug.png

Sources said the pitch Aldridge received Friday in Los Angeles ‎from Spurs coach Gregg Popovich -- about playing with Tim Duncan his final days in the NBA and then taking over for him as the Spurs' frontcourt linchpin alongside Kawhi Leonard -- resonated strongly with Aldridge.

It was the Spurs' second meeting with Aldridge. Popovich, Duncan, Leonard and Tony Parker all pitched Aldridge directly Wednesday morning, sources said.

Aldridge, who had spent his entire nine-year career with the Portland Trail Blazers, also met twice with the Los Angeles Lakers and entertained offers from the Houston Rockets, Dallas Mavericks, Phoenix Suns, Toronto Raptors and Miami Heat.

The NBA offseason just got interesting. Looking forward to the season ahead.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 11:37 AM
This day marks the end of the Spurs franchise as we know it. The dynasty is over. Huge mistake by the Spurs to bring a dynamic shifting presence like LaMarcus into their team.

NoGameSpit
07-04-2015, 11:40 AM
This day marks the end of the Spurs franchise as we know it. The dynasty is over. Huge mistake by the Spurs to bring a dynamic shifting presence like LaMarcus into their team.

Dude is better than "Can't stay healthy" Kevin Love. Thats for a fact.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 11:46 AM
Dude is better than "Can't stay healthy" Kevin Love. Thats for a fact.

This is the Spurs first big step away from their franchise core that we've seen. And it's a dramatic step. This is too immediate and drastic of a change for a player like Aldridge.

People are acting oblivious to it but this is the beginning of the end of the Spurs. Aldridge is the worst signing of 2015 on the low. I'll let the history books confirm it.

CobyWan
07-04-2015, 11:49 AM
This is the Spurs first big step away from their franchise core that we've seen. And it's a dramatic step. This is too immediate and drastic of a change for a player like Aldridge.

People are acting oblivious to it but this is the beginning of the end of the Spurs. Aldridge is the worst signing of 2015 on the low. I'll let the history books confirm it.


Of course they needed a big step away from their core. Their core is on their very last legs. They needed someone to pair with Kawhi for the future.

NoGameSpit
07-04-2015, 11:50 AM
This is the Spurs first big step away from their franchise core that we've seen. And it's a dramatic step. This is too immediate and drastic of a change for a player like Aldridge.

People are acting oblivious to it but this is the beginning of the end of the Spurs. Aldridge is the worst signing of 2015 on the low. I'll let the history books confirm it.

You're bitter that LA didn't sign the Lakers. LMAO. LMFAO @ lakers fans.

LA is no longer a free agency destination.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 11:53 AM
Of course they needed a big step away from their core. Their core is on their very last legs. They needed someone to pair with Kawhi for the future.

He's not the future. He's 30. His career will last as long as his 3 year contract. He's not good enough to carry the mantle. He's only good enough to destroy what they have.

This is, undoubtedly, the first and biggest sign that we have that the Spurs dynasty is over.

We'll look back on this day as the end of the Spurs era, and the beginning of the poverty LaMarcus era. It'll be separate sections on Wikipedia fosho. Let the history books tell it.

GingerBrah84
07-04-2015, 11:53 AM
You're bitter that LA didn't sign the Lakers. LMAO. LMFAO @ lakers fans.

LA is no longer a free agency destination.

lol this. dude is devastated the Lakers didn't get him so he's trashing LMA http://i.imgur.com/WCX145S.png

Marronis
07-04-2015, 11:56 AM
What a little phaggot this guy is for leaving his team to try and win championships. It's all about loyalty in this business that fuker

Hardcore_D00d
07-04-2015, 12:02 PM
kobe: "come to l.a, u will be my sidekick. be my gasol and meet with celebrities in da clubs"

who would want to play with this guy? chased away all the free agents lmao

ZBrahhh
07-04-2015, 12:10 PM
He's not the future. He's 30. His career will last as long as his 3 year contract. He's not good enough to carry the mantle. He's only good enough to destroy what they have.

This is, undoubtedly, the first and biggest sign that we have that the Spurs dynasty is over.

We'll look back on this day as the end of the Spurs era, and the beginning of the poverty LaMarcus era. It'll be separate sections on Wikipedia fosho. Let the history books tell it.

Why will his career last 3 more years? He's a PF, will probably be able to put up 20/10 till hes 36-37, which is 6-7 years from now

nikeoneplatinum
07-04-2015, 12:15 PM
I'm pretty sure you can pencil in a Spurs Cavs finals.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 12:25 PM
lol this. dude is devastated the Lakers didn't get him so he's trashing LMA http://i.imgur.com/WCX145S.png

I can only deliver the facts. This is officially the day when the Spurs dynasty took a large step away from perpetual contenders to the LaMarcus era of mediocrity. This was a bad direction to go in. They could have transitioned to the next era by building up a younger player with more potential. Not someone who's just barely good enough to redefine their franchise but not good enough to actually carry it.

LaMarcus is the Trojan Horse to the Spurs franchise. You can see it as hate, or you can see it as knowledge being delivered by the poster with the most basketball knowledge on sports misc.

Xgamer791
07-04-2015, 12:29 PM
Popavich is the best head coach in the league right now, lmao if you think this is a mistake. Bunch of peasants think you know better than pop?

CalmWind
07-04-2015, 12:31 PM
LA is no longer a free agency destination.

Since Shaq in 1995........ can you name any Superstars that the Lakers have signed as a Free agent?

The lakers do all their work in trades. They were never a FA destination.

GingerBrah84
07-04-2015, 12:36 PM
I can only deliver the facts. This is officially the day when the Spurs dynasty took a large step away from perpetual contenders to the LaMarcus era of mediocrity. This was a bad direction to go in. They could have transitioned to the next era by building up a younger player with more potential. Not someone who's just barely good enough to redefine their franchise but not good enough to actually carry it.

LaMarcus is the Trojan Horse to the Spurs franchise. You can see it as hate, or you can see it as knowledge being delivered by the poster with the most basketball knowledge on sports misc.

So explain to me why a few days ago you wanted LaMarcus in LA if he is so bad? http://i.imgur.com/JE2DXto.png

Spill512
07-04-2015, 12:37 PM
So explain to me why a few days ago you wanted LaMarcus in LA if he is so bad? http://i.imgur.com/JE2DXto.png

LaMarcus's press conference for the Spurs.

YbiR6IMf5KQ

GingerBrah84
07-04-2015, 12:52 PM
LaMarcus's press conference for the Spurs.


Keep avoiding the facts breh http://i.imgur.com/15aW6Mg.png

myProgress
07-04-2015, 01:02 PM
Wtf mobile, I didn't click this chitty thread

CobyWan
07-04-2015, 01:29 PM
I can only deliver the facts. This is officially the day when the Spurs dynasty took a large step away from perpetual contenders to the LaMarcus era of mediocrity. This was a bad direction to go in. They could have transitioned to the next era by building up a younger player with more potential. Not someone who's just barely good enough to redefine their franchise but not good enough to actually carry it.

LaMarcus is the Trojan Horse to the Spurs franchise. You can see it as hate, or you can see it as knowledge being delivered by the poster with the most basketball knowledge on sports misc.


As if every single team in the history of the league isn't trying to develop young players to lead their team.


(psssssstt...it isn't that easy)

Tony_S
07-04-2015, 01:44 PM
This is the Spurs first big step away from their franchise core that we've seen. And it's a dramatic step. This is too immediate and drastic of a change for a player like Aldridge.

People are acting oblivious to it but this is the beginning of the end of the Spurs. Aldridge is the worst signing of 2015 on the low. I'll let the history books confirm it.


youre literally the dumbest poster on this board and I feel embarrassed for you every time I read one of your posts.




Spurs instant favorites to win it all with this signing. can't wait for next season

HoustonMiscer
07-04-2015, 01:47 PM
I'm pretty sure you can pencil in a Spurs Cavs finals.

Fuk the formalities. Let's just fast forward to next June. Not srs gtfo red

Spill512
07-04-2015, 02:01 PM
youre literally the dumbest poster on this board and I feel embarrassed for you every time I read one of your posts.




Spurs instant favorites to win it all with this signing. can't wait for next season

Literally every time I read your posts I remember this post by Shweezy and you admitting you have a folder of foot pictures.


I've been mod negged more times than you've asked samantha08 about her feet.

DYELBRO
07-04-2015, 02:28 PM
This day marks the end of the Spurs franchise as we know it. The dynasty is over. Huge mistake by the Spurs to bring a dynamic shifting presence like LaMarcus into their team.

Calm down Nostradamus, the dynasty was coming to an end with or without Aldridge. They're all old as ****. Now is the time to take some risk to get that one last ring.

arman24
07-04-2015, 02:33 PM
Potato move he should've signed with the Rockets. Spurs will not win next year, Pop/Tim/Manu will retire, Parker has already fell off, and the Spurs will be chit. The Rockets core is way younger (as of right now) and has more talent, Howard and Harden>>> Kawhi and Danny Green.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 02:34 PM
Potato move he should've signed with the Rockets. Spurs will not win next year, Pop/Tim/Manu will retire, Parker has already fell off, and the Spurs will be chit. The Rockets core is way younger and has more talent, Howard and Harden>>> Kawhi and Danny Green.

I think he wanted to be a first option. Rockets make much more sense, but he'd be playing second fiddle to Harden.

arman24
07-04-2015, 02:35 PM
I think he wanted to be a first option. Rockets make much more sense, but he'd be playing second fiddle to Harden.

He can be the first option all he wants while he's getting eliminated in the first round after the core retires.

TexasMajor
07-04-2015, 02:42 PM
This day marks the end of the Spurs franchise as we know it. The dynasty is over. Huge mistake by the Spurs to bring a dynamic shifting presence like LaMarcus into their team.


What dynasty breh?


Cant be considered a dynasty if you've never defended your title or three-peated.

FIREnICE
07-04-2015, 02:51 PM
and why should players be loyal when teams aren't?


What dynasty breh?


Cant be considered a dynasty if you've never defended your title or three-peated.

well that's a load of shiit. they're a dynasty. they've been a consistent force in the west for 2 decades.

dankydank
07-04-2015, 02:53 PM
People act like the Spurs won't sign another player after Duncan/Manu retires and the cap explodes to keep a core of Leonard/Aldridge/X/Green

TexasMajor
07-04-2015, 02:58 PM
and why should players be loyal when teams aren't?



well that's a load of shiit. they're a dynasty. they've been a consistent force in the west for 2 decades.

They've been consistent at never being able to defend their title.

BenchWellington
07-04-2015, 03:03 PM
LOL @ everyone who has been saying the Spurs are done for like 10 years now.

Duncan/Ginobili/Parker too old you say?

Well then let me introduce you to LMA/Leonard/Green, not to mention whatever Euro sleepers they find as well. San Antonio gonna be good for a long time brahs.

FIREnICE
07-04-2015, 03:07 PM
They've been consistent at never being able to defend their title.

people like to throw that around to push their agenda but i don't agree. the lakers were only a dynasty for those 3 championships while the spurs have been a dynasty since late 90s

Xgamer791
07-04-2015, 03:10 PM
No spurs fans here, what else is new...

arman24
07-04-2015, 03:10 PM
LOL @ everyone who has been saying the Spurs are done for like 10 years now.

Duncan/Ginobili/Parker too old you say?

Well then let me introduce you to LMA/Leonard/Green, not to mention whatever Euro sleepers they find as well. San Antonio gonna be good for a long time brahs.


People act like the Spurs won't sign another player after Duncan/Manu retires and the cap explodes to keep a core of Leonard/Aldridge/X/Green

Who are these players you speak of? Durant and Westbrook are basically the only free agents in the next year or two and neither of them are going to San Antonio.

TexasMajor
07-04-2015, 03:16 PM
people like to throw that around to push their agenda but i don't agree. the lakers were only a dynasty for those 3 championships while the spurs have been a dynasty since late 90s

Apparently the Lakers three straight finals appearances 2008-2010, aren't considered dynasty material.


LMFAO. Sit the fck down you clueless cockroach.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 03:18 PM
the lakers were only a dynasty for those 3 championships while the spurs have been a dynasty since late 90s

j6JANDIO41E

Tony_S
07-04-2015, 03:24 PM
Literally every time I read your posts I remember this post by Shweezy and you admitting you have a folder of foot pictures.

i don't know what's more sad; the fact that you try and use a fetish as an insult or the fact that you have that quote by whoever the hell "schweezy" is available on standby to use. just a pathetic, sad human being all around.

i can tell you're inbred just from your posts. hopefully you don't have any siblings.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 03:27 PM
i don't know what's more sad; the fact that you try and use a fetish as an insult or the fact that you have that quote by whoever the hell "schweezy" is available on standby to use.

Probably the fact that you have a folder called feet on your computer.

You jerk off to toes dog. Go take a seat. You're making everyone uncomfortable with your "fetish."

Tony_S
07-04-2015, 03:51 PM
Probably the fact that you have a folder called feet on your computer.

You jerk off to toes dog. Go take a seat. You're making everyone uncomfortable with your "fetish."


lol the more you post the more confirmation we have that your mom and dad are brother and sister.





dog.

Spill512
07-04-2015, 04:01 PM
lol the more you post the more confirmation we have that your mom and dad are brother and sister.

http://magyarno.com/wp-content/uploads/lab5.jpg

How wet are you?

FIREnICE
07-04-2015, 04:01 PM
Apparently the Lakers three straight finals appearances 2008-2010, aren't considered dynasty material.


LMFAO. Sit the fck down you clueless cockroach.

you know what i meant... i guess i have to spell out everything for you.

were the lakers a dynasty inbetween those championship years when they sucked? according to you, they weren't. so dynasty for 3 championships and dynasty for 2. both are separate if we use your logic. in actuality, they were a dynasty for a whole decade and a constant force in the west regardless if they won a trophy.

but i notice that laker fans get butthurt quite fast nowadays. they also try to insult the spurs with every opportunity they get. speaking as a knicks fan, we've sucked for so long, that a lot of us have become neutral and can see things from different perspectives compared to fanboys.


tl;dr spurs have been a dynasty since timmy was drafted and pop became coach


*Los Angeles Bakeshow*

*Dallas Cowboys*

how can anyone take you seriously? you're also quick to rage/insult without actually debating. clear indicator of low iq



j6JANDIO41E

i threw his woman logic back at him. wasn't actually serious

adamsz
07-04-2015, 04:02 PM
My only consolation is that at least it's not the Lakers or the Rockets :(

brianphi
07-04-2015, 04:20 PM
My only consolation is that at least it's not the Lakers or the Rockets :(

I think that's how every Portland fan feels. Those are by far the two most disliked teams.

TexasMajor
07-04-2015, 04:34 PM
you know what i meant... i guess i have to spell out everything for you.

were the lakers a dynasty inbetween those championship years when they sucked? according to you, they weren't. so dynasty for 3 championships and dynasty for 2. both are separate if we use your logic. in actuality, they were a dynasty for a whole decade and a constant force in the west regardless if they won a trophy.

but i notice that laker fans get butthurt quite fast nowadays. they also try to insult the spurs with every opportunity they get. speaking as a knicks fan, we've sucked for so long, that a lot of us have become neutral and can see things from different perspectives compared to fanboys.


tl;dr spurs have been a dynasty since timmy was drafted and pop became coach


*Los Angeles Bakeshow*

*Dallas Cowboys*

how can anyone take you seriously? you're also quick to rage/insult without actually debating. clear indicator of low iq




i threw his woman logic back at him. wasn't actually serious

Since 1996:

Lakers- 7 finals appearances, 1 three peat, One two-peat.

Spurs- 6 Finals appearances, TITLE NEVER ONCE DEFENDED.

You cant be considered a dynasty if YOURE NOT WINNING. Lakers have won more, that simple and they've won more convincingly.

When you think of who dominated the 2000s, you think of the Lakers in the same sense you think of the Bulls in the 90s. Mere consistency doesn't make you a dynasty.

FIREnICE
07-04-2015, 05:18 PM
Since 1996:

Lakers- 7 finals appearances, 1 three peat, One two-peat.

Spurs- 6 Finals appearances, TITLE NEVER ONCE DEFENDED.

You cant be considered a dynasty if YOURE NOT WINNING. Lakers have won more, that simple and they've won more convincingly.

When you think of who dominated the 2000s, you think of the Lakers in the same sense you think of the Bulls in the 90s. Mere consistency doesn't make you a dynasty.

spurs were in the hunt for a championship ever year. that to me says dynasty. which other team in the league has been able to seriously threaten for a championship every year for over a decade?

TexasMajor
07-04-2015, 05:48 PM
spurs were in the hunt for a championship ever year. that to me says dynasty. which other team in the league has been able to seriously threaten for a championship every year for over a decade?

The fcking Los Angeles Lakers. Holy fcking chit you are stupid.

7 Finals appearances in ten years in the 2000s.


I think we're done here.

DONT REPLY ANYMORE.

HankScorp1o
07-04-2015, 06:21 PM
I would wager a guess that the effective tax rate difference between San Antonio and Portland/LA/everywhere else probably played into his decision in a substantial way.

FIREnICE
07-04-2015, 06:25 PM
The fcking Los Angeles Lakers. Holy fcking chit you are stupid.

7 Finals appearances in ten years in the 2000s.


I think we're done here.

DONT REPLY ANYMORE.

one look at your post history says it all. just another troll. record speaks for itself kid. cry more.

ten years in the 2000s....LMAO!!!


http://www.nba.com/lakers/history/season_by_season

Tommy12Orr4
07-04-2015, 06:27 PM
spurs were in the hunt for a championship ever year. that to me says dynasty. which other team in the league has been able to seriously threaten for a championship every year for over a decade?

Who in their right mind considers a team that hasn't repeated a dynasty? There have been very few dynasty's in any major U.S. sport in the past 20 years, and the Spurs are not one of them. They have been very consistent, but they are far from a dynasty. You have the most lose and factually incorrect definition of a dynasty.

FIREnICE
07-04-2015, 06:30 PM
Who in their right mind considers a team that hasn't repeated a dynasty? There have been very few dynasty's in any major U.S. sport in the past 20 years, and the Spurs are not one of them. They have been very consistent, but they are far from a dynasty. You have the most lose and factually incorrect definition of a dynasty.

everyone has their own definition for dynasty. spurs are most definitely a dynasty in my book.

lakers + spurs have been the only 2 since bulls

TexasMajor
07-04-2015, 06:34 PM
everyone has their own definition for dynasty. spurs are most definitely a dynasty in my book.

lakers + spurs have been the only 2 since bulls

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/183/3366/320/retards%20for%20dummies.jpg

Tommy12Orr4
07-04-2015, 06:40 PM
everyone has their own definition for dynasty. spurs are most definitely a dynasty in my book.

lakers + spurs have been the only 2 since bulls

If your definition of a dynasty doesn't require a team to win at a BARE MINIMUM of back to back titles, you're definition if flat out wrong. There's really nothing else to say about it.

slinginmango
07-04-2015, 06:44 PM
LOL @ everyone who has been saying the Spurs are done for like 10 years now.

Duncan/Ginobili/Parker too old you say?

Well then let me introduce you to LMA/Leonard/Green, not to mention whatever Euro sleepers they find as well. San Antonio gonna be good for a long time brahs.

Doubt it. SA will go as far as Pop takes them. Once Timmy goes, Pop goes, and so does that system that was so successful for 20 years, to be replaced with god knows who. Maybe if Coach Bud came back to SA they'd be able to keep it up.


If your definition of a dynasty doesn't require a team to win at a BARE MINIMUM of back to back titles, you're definition if flat out wrong. There's really nothing else to say about it.

This. I love the Spurs (u wot m8) but they aren't a dynasty, just a really really good team for a really long time.

hundieMachine
07-04-2015, 08:18 PM
The fcking Los Angeles Lakers. Holy fcking chit you are stupid.

7 Finals appearances in ten years in the 2000s.


I think we're done here.

DONT REPLY ANYMORE.

And look at them now.

brb dynasty and getting BLOWN THE PHUCK OUT in game 6 in 08
brb dynasty and missing the playoffs
brb dynasty stretch from 05-07 (lol)
brb dynasty 11-current

Overall, yes. Obviously they're right up there with the celtics as the GOAT franchise. But since the spurs started contending with the Admiral, they haven't stopped.

TexasMajor
07-04-2015, 09:22 PM
And look at them now.

brb dynasty and getting BLOWN THE PHUCK OUT in game 6 in 08
brb dynasty and missing the playoffs
brb dynasty stretch from 05-07 (lol)
brb dynasty 11-current

Overall, yes. Obviously they're right up there with the celtics as the GOAT franchise. But since the spurs started contending with the Admiral, they haven't stopped.


I clearly explained how and what makes a team a dynasty. Being the retard that you are, you listed the downfalls of a franchise.

THE SPURS HAVE NEVER DEFENDED A TITLE. That's something you retards have to live with for the rest of your lives.

Since 1996,

7 Finals appearances (1 three peat, 1 two peat)>6 Finals appearances (ZERO DEFENDED TITLES)

But please continue being an idiot.

SompletelyCober
07-04-2015, 09:30 PM
We talkin bout dynasties?

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m60jc0Txkd1r98qz6o1_500.gif

dtbrehm
07-04-2015, 10:25 PM
lol'ed at people ITT acting like there's precise criteria for a dynasty.

FIREnICE
07-04-2015, 10:37 PM
dy·nas·ty
ˈdīnəstē/
noun
noun: dynasty; plural noun: dynasties

a line of hereditary rulers of a country.
"the Tang dynasty"
synonyms: bloodline, line, ancestral line, lineage, house, family, ancestry, descent, succession, genealogy, family tree; More
regime, rule, reign, empire, sovereignty
"the fourth king of the Shang dynasty"
a succession of people from the same family who play a prominent role in business, politics, or another field.


no insults or emotional posts needed. just facts and intelligence

StrapNScrap21
07-04-2015, 11:01 PM
dy·nas·ty
ˈdīnəstē/
noun
noun: dynasty; plural noun: dynasties

a line of hereditary rulers of a country.
"the Tang dynasty"
synonyms: bloodline, line, ancestral line, lineage, house, family, ancestry, descent, succession, genealogy, family tree; More
regime, rule, reign, empire, sovereignty
"the fourth king of the Shang dynasty"
a succession of people from the same family who play a prominent role in business, politics, or another field.


no insults or emotional posts needed. just facts and intelligence

Clippers bout to be that next dynasty breh

LiftHeavy00
07-04-2015, 11:03 PM
[QUOTE=Spill512;1375060003]This is the Spurs first big step away from their franchise core that we've seen. And it's a dramatic step. This is too immediate and drastic of a change for a player like Aldridge.

Given that Aldridge is going to be essentially pushing Splitter to the bench, I'd say that the "core" is pretty much a non-issue.

Plus, they need to get someone in at PF. Duncan is going to turn 40 next season... The reality is that Aldridge brings size on the inside (something they really struggled with last year especially late in games when their age showed badly).

Aldridge will also open up opportunities for Kawhi who will only get better.

The "core" is approaching their career's end. Its about time Pop started working on a succession plan.

LiftHeavy00
07-04-2015, 11:13 PM
I'm glad that we don't live in an era of dynasties. Its good to see new players and teams emerge rather than watching some variation of the Globetrotters vs the Generals.

That said, its remarkable how the difference between the good teams (GSW, Cavs, Spurs, etc.) and the rest (Nets, Bucks, Celtics) is so wide. It just seems like talent has essentially consolidated into a few markets with the "have nots" unable to capture even B+ level talent anymore (just look at the Celtics inability to bring in Love).

hundieMachine
07-05-2015, 10:10 AM
you aren't a dynasty because you contend for 20 years.

you have to win, and the bare minimum of a dynasty is that you repeat.

2000-2010 lakers are a dynasty. 1996-2014 spurs are not (also strong 18 year dynasty)

Wtf is this? You ARE NOT A DYNASTY IF IN A 10 YEAR STRETCH, HALF THE TIME YOU SUCK.

I would rather be a dynasty that competes for championships every year than a dynasty that wins 3 then sucks for 5 years, then loses one and wins two in a row. Wtf kind of logic are you using?

That is like saying the bulls are a dynasty franchise. No, from 1990-1998, yes, they were a dynasty. After and before? Lol brah.

captain_marvel
07-07-2015, 07:47 PM
The fcking Los Angeles Lakers. Holy fcking chit you are stupid.

7 Finals appearances in ten years in the 2000s.


I think we're done here.

DONT REPLY ANYMORE.


Where are the Lakers now phaggot? Now where are the Spurs? STILL there. Sustained greatness......but but didnt win back to back so that erases it all! Teams that cant even make the playoffs are ****. and LMA could have went to play for the lakers but recognized they are absolute ****. So he chose the BETTER franchise. but but but didnt win back to back right! Stop being so stupid.

hardestgainer
07-08-2015, 01:25 AM
Im honestly a bit surprised he didnt go to the Suns, they made tons of moves to have everything he wanted in place and I think he would have been a great fit. They even signed his bff just to show how serious they were lol

StrapNScrap21
07-08-2015, 06:35 AM
2000-2010 (1999-2010 seasons) is 11 years, faker stans http://www.*******.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/patrice.png

TexasMajor
07-08-2015, 08:01 AM
Gather around kids. In this segment, we have the Zen Master teach us the difference between a dynasty and a great team.


"Tim Duncan making the salary he’s making after being part of a dynasty — not a dynasty, I wouldn’t call San Antonio a dynasty — a force, a great force..."

“They haven’t been able to win consecutive championships, but they’ve always been there. San Antonio has had a wonderful run through Tim’s tenure there as a player. He’s agreed to take a salary cut so other players can play with him so they can be this good. And that’s the beginning of team play.”

-Phil Jackson


http://i.imgur.com/72Pd9sY.png?1

sdballer5588
07-08-2015, 08:08 AM
Gather around kids. In this segment, we have the Zen Master teach us the difference between a dynasty and a great team.


"Tim Duncan making the salary he’s making after being part of a dynasty — not a dynasty, I wouldn’t call San Antonio a dynasty — a force, a great force..."

“They haven’t been able to win consecutive championships, but they’ve always been there. San Antonio has had a wonderful run through Tim’s tenure there as a player. He’s agreed to take a salary cut so other players can play with him so they can be this good. And that’s the beginning of team play.”

-Phil Jackson


http://i.imgur.com/72Pd9sY.png?1

Where were you when Phil said unequivocally that kobe was uncoachable, and the he quit solely because he hated kobe?

You faker stans pick and choose WHEN you feel Phil is right and wrong.


Jackson noted the "pronounced" difference in their accuracy, Jordan shooting almost 50% — an "extraordinary figure" — while Bryant had been at 45%.

"No question, Michael was a tougher, more intimidating defender. He could break through virtually any screen and shut down almost any player with his intense, laser-focused style of defense."

lol

Spill512
07-08-2015, 08:22 AM
http://i.imgur.com/72Pd9sY.png?1

Das it. What else is there to argue?

Literally the dictionary definition right there. I was wrong to call them a dynasty. I can't argue with fax.

TexasMajor
07-08-2015, 08:30 AM
Where were you when Phil said unequivocally that kobe was uncoachable, and the he quit solely because he hated kobe?

You faker stans pick and choose WHEN you feel Phil is right and wrong.



lol


Go to the kitchen, take your Ritalin, and please try to stay on topic.

BerimBROlo
07-10-2015, 11:06 PM
Since 1996:

Lakers- 7 finals appearances, 1 three peat, One two-peat.

Spurs- 6 Finals appearances, TITLE NEVER ONCE DEFENDED.

You cant be considered a dynasty if YOURE NOT WINNING. Lakers have won more, that simple and they've won more convincingly.

When you think of who dominated the 2000s, you think of the Lakers in the same sense you think of the Bulls in the 90s. Mere consistency doesn't make you a dynasty.



You are literally so mad right now that you just gained an extra chromosome.