[3onDubs]

Lakers in 6

[LACA335i]

Originally Posted by 3onDubs

Lakers in 6

i would say and bet on the lakers in 7

[3onDubs]

Originally Posted by LACA335i

i would say and bet on the lakers in 7

Meh....5 or 6 imo...

Game 1: Lakers
Game 2: Boston
Game 3: Lakers
Game 4: Lakers
Game 5: Boston
Game 6: Lakers

[LACA335i]

Originally Posted by 3onDubs

Meh....5 or 6 imo...

Game 1: Lakers
Game 2: Boston
Game 3: Lakers
Game 4: Lakers
Game 5: Boston
Game 6: Lakers

yupe in 7

cause this is a classic rival since the 80's. The owner for both team wants their money from the advertise and fans. They want a fill up standium. Each ticket worth from 500 to 35000. it is depend on who got heavy pocket.

These day Basketball is not the same as the previous era. Everything is overrated. Players want more money from the owner. Owner raised price in ticket to pay these guy. These day alot of players are overrated. They are not as good as the previous era. 80 and 90 players.

[txusa03]

lakers 7 (my prediction) Then riots all over LA and Phil will retire going out with a championship ring...

[Mondolemite]

Originally Posted by LACA335i

yupe in 7

cause this is a classic rival since the 80's. The owner for both team wants their money from the advertise and fans. They want a fill up standium. Each ticket worth from 500 to 35000. it is depend on who got heavy pocket.

These day Basketball is not the same as the previous era. Everything is overrated. Players want more money from the owner. Owner raised price in ticket to pay these guy. These day alot of players are overrated. They are not as good as the previous era. 80 and 90 players.

What are you talking about??

[3onDubs]

Originally Posted by Mondolemite

What are you talking about??

I think he's saying that the 'owners' won't let the series end before game 7 because of all the potential money to be made off of advertisements/ticket sales/etc...which isn't too far fetched...I believe it.

[///sniper]

Celtics in 6...

The Celtics killed them by double-digits in both games they played. Although Gasol wasn't part of the team at the time, they still had a healthy Bynum. Yes, the two are not that comparable. However, both can be seen as an asset to the team. Both teams benches are relatively deep and both use roughly the same amount of time on the court. It'll depend on the match-ups and who starts. The current line-up for both teams has pros and cons. One being much bigger, the other being much faster. Each game will be close...

[bartman32]

Originally Posted by 3onDubs

Meh....5 or 6 imo...

Game 1: Lakers
Game 2: Boston
Game 3: Lakers
Game 4: Lakers
Game 5: Boston
Game 6: Lakers

I have to agree 100%! However I think it might be game 4 we lose instead of 5.

[Mondolemite]

Originally Posted by 3onDubs

I think he's saying that the 'owners' won't let the series end before game 7 because of all the potential money to be made off of advertisements/ticket sales/etc...which isn't too far fetched...I believe it.

In that case that's not a very good analysis. The money the team makes off of one (or even 2) extra playoffs games is nothing compared to the money that can be made when you market yourselves as "NBA Champions." Being champs increases t-shirts (and other paraphernalia) sales, practically guarantees a sell-out at every game the next season (or even 2 seasons) even if ticket prices increase, gives you more leverage in TV/radio/stadium deals, increases the chances free agents will want to sign for below market value, keeps your stars (Kobe, Pierce) happy and not wanting to leave, allows you to retain good coaching and support staff, and probably a host of other things that I forgot that are financially fruitful for years following the championship.

Don't believe the hype, the ONLY thing that is important is winning the title. No intelligent owner (Donald Sterling is not included) would want to risk a title to get a measly game or 2 of extra profits.

"Just win baby!"
-Al Davis, owner, Oakland Raiders

[3onDubs]

Originally Posted by Mondolemite

In that case that's not a very good analysis. The money the team makes off of one (or even 2) extra playoffs games is nothing compared to the money that can be made when you market yourselves as "NBA Champions." Being champs increases t-shirts (and other paraphernalia) sales, practically guarantees a sell-out at every game the next season (or even 2 seasons) even if ticket prices increase, gives you more leverage in TV/radio/stadium deals, increases the chances free agents will want to sign for below market value, keeps your stars (Kobe, Pierce) happy and not wanting to leave, allows you to retain good coaching and support staff, and probably a host of other things that I forgot that are financially fruitful for years following the championship.

Don't believe the hype, the ONLY thing that is important is winning the title. No intelligent owner (Donald Sterling is not included) would want to risk a title to get a measly game or 2 of extra profits.

"Just win baby!"
-Al Davis, owner, Oakland Raiders

Not the money that the team makes....the money that the network makes (includes tv stations, stadium sales, local tourism, etc.)

[Mondolemite]

Originally Posted by 3onDubs

Not the money that the team makes....the money that the network makes (includes tv stations, stadium sales, local tourism, etc.)

All of your arguments for this conspiracy are full of holes. Networks make $0 off of local tourism and stadium sales. The stadium owner gets the stadium sales, the city gets the local tourism, the network gets the advertising, the league gets a piece of concessions and advertising and the team owners get a piece of the stadium, concessions and other stuff.

So now you are proposing that in some dark room somewhere all of these interested parties (team owners, league officials, city government, network executives and stadium/arena owners) get together every year and plot about how many games the series should go to maximize their profits? Then, they find a way to rig the games (pay off players, coaches, referees, etc.) so that each series goes perfectly according to plan?

Absolutely ridiculous. Just stop it.

[bartman32]

I'm so sick of the rigged mentality! Come on! You really think players and coaches throw games? And if it was just the refs you'd see a LOT more complaining!

[3onDubs]

Originally Posted by Mondolemite

All of your arguments for this conspiracy are full of holes. Networks make $0 off of local tourism and stadium sales. The stadium owner gets the stadium sales, the city gets the local tourism, the network gets the advertising, the league gets a piece of concessions and advertising and the team owners get a piece of the stadium, concessions and other stuff.

So now you are proposing that in some dark room somewhere all of these interested parties (team owners, league officials, city government, network executives and stadium/arena owners) get together every year and plot about how many games the series should go to maximize their profits? Then, they find a way to rig the games (pay off players, coaches, referees, etc.) so that each series goes perfectly according to plan?

Absolutely ridiculous. Just stop it.

Angry much?


First off, they weren't my arguments, but since you insist, i'll perpetuate them....

You obviously are not understanding the argument: I never said that TV stations make money off of stadium sales....they make money off of advertisements. Yes, stadium sales benefit the team and the associated organizations and yes, local tourism benefits the city.

As far as sitting in a dark room somewhere...who knows, could be lighted...

[3onDubs]

Originally Posted by bartman32

I'm so sick of the rigged mentality! Come on! You really think players and coaches throw games? And if it was just the refs you'd see a LOT more complaining!

I'm not drawing any conclusions, but it's definitely possible....

[Mo]

You forgot a huge advantage the lakers have; Phil Jackson.... Doc rivers cant even be mentioned in the same breath as Phil. Plus, it took boston 7 games to beat Atlanta, 7 to beat the Cavaliers, and 6 to beat detroit. Not one of these teams is as good as the Lakers. Im not saying lakers will run away with the title, but there is no way it will be Boston in 6.....

Originally Posted by ///sniper

Celtics in 6...

The Celtics killed them by double-digits in both games they played. Although Gasol wasn't part of the team at the time, they still had a healthy Bynum. Yes, the two are not that comparable. However, both can be seen as an asset to the team. Both teams benches are relatively deep and both use roughly the same amount of time on the court. It'll depend on the match-ups and who starts. The current line-up for both teams has pros and cons. One being much bigger, the other being much faster. Each game will be close...

[///sniper]

Originally Posted by Mo

You forgot a huge advantage the lakers have; Phil Jackson.... Doc rivers cant even be mentioned in the same breath as Phil. Plus, it took boston 7 games to beat Atlanta, 7 to beat the Cavaliers, and 6 to beat detroit. Not one of these teams is as good as the Lakers. Im not saying lakers will run away with the title, but there is no way it will be Boston in 6.....

Nor is he ever mentioned. I'm sure it's quite obvious that Rivers doesn't make the Celtics what they are today. As Jackson is in the same 'ranks' as the best coaches in NBA history, if not the best, it will really depend on who wants 'it' more. It's also no surprise as to the amount of games each team took to get to the Finals. Your point would be? If the series goes to 7, that would mean what by your statement? That the Lakers are on the same level as the Hawks and Cavs? If/When the Celtics win, that mere blemish will be forgotten. It's the playoffs, anything can happen. Celtics seem to want it more and the Lakers seem to expect it. Like I said, each game will be close...

Fun Fact: Lakers never took the season series from Atlanta, Cleveland or Detroit. Cleveland actually took both games and Atlanta/Detroit split it 1 a piece...

[Mondolemite]

Originally Posted by ///sniper

Nor is he ever mentioned. I'm sure it's quite obvious that Rivers doesn't make the Celtics what they are today. As Jackson is in the same 'ranks' as the best coaches in NBA history, if not the best, it will really depend on who wants 'it' more. It's also no surprise as to the amount of games each team took to get to the Finals. Your point would be? If the series goes to 7, that would mean what by your statement? That the Lakers are on the same level as the Hawks and Cavs? If/When the Celtics win, that mere blemish will be forgotten. It's the playoffs, anything can happen. Celtics seem to want it more and the Lakers seem to expect it. Like I said, each game will be close...

Fun Fact: Lakers never took the season series from Atlanta, Cleveland or Detroit. Cleveland actually took both games and Atlanta/Detroit split it 1 a piece...

OK, you're a Celtics fan. That's cool. But, on one hand you dismissed the importance of the Celtics struggling to win their playoff series' then you talk about how the Lakers played against the exact same teams in the REGULAR SEASON?

Who cares? This is Celtics v. Lakers. Everything else goes out the window. It's winnin' time!

[///sniper]

Originally Posted by Mondolemite

OK, you're a Celtics fan. That's cool. But, on one hand you dismissed the importance of the Celtics struggling to win their playoff series' then you talk about how the Lakers played against the exact same teams in the REGULAR SEASON?

Who cares? This is Celtics v. Lakers. Everything else goes out the window. It's winnin' time!

I'm actually a Magic/Mavericks fan but, okay...

Doesn't matter how long it takes to win. If the Celtics get it done in 4 or if they get it done in 7, it won't matter...

Didn't really dismiss anything. Do I honestly just have to requote myself?

Originally Posted by ///sniper

Nor is he ever mentioned. I'm sure it's quite obvious that Rivers doesn't make the Celtics what they are today. As Jackson is in the same 'ranks' as the best coaches in NBA history, if not the best, it will really depend on who wants 'it' more. It's also no surprise as to the amount of games each team took to get to the Finals. Your point would be? If the series goes to 7, that would mean what by your statement? That the Lakers are on the same level as the Hawks and Cavs? If/When the Celtics win, that mere blemish will be forgotten. It's the playoffs, anything can happen. Celtics seem to want it more and the Lakers seem to expect it. Like I said, each game will be close...

Fun Fact: Lakers never took the season series from Atlanta, Cleveland or Detroit. Cleveland actually took both games and Atlanta/Detroit split it 1 a piece...

Edit: Next time, read. It does wonders...

[Mondolemite]

Originally Posted by ///sniper

I'm actually a Magic/Mavericks fan but, okay...

Doesn't matter how long it takes to win. If the Celtics get it done in 4 or if they get it done in 7, it won't matter...

Didn't really dismiss anything. Do I honestly just have to requote myself?


Edit: Next time, read. It does wonders...

The line you quoted doesn't actually make any sense and is grammatically poor.

[///sniper]

Originally Posted by Mondolemite

The line you quoted doesn't actually make any sense and is grammatically poor.

It actually implicates that I made reference as to how the Celtics and Lakers made it to the Finals. It can be taken one way or another. I made the statement insinuating that no one is obvlious in regards to the amount of games it took. If you or anyone else couldn't grasp that concept, I really won't lose any sleep over it. Like I said, it won't matter how long the series takes. A win is a win. However, the fact that you like Star Wars and that you hail from the almighty state of Delaware, I won't hold it against you...

[Mo]

Lets stop talking and let the games begin..... Tonight at 6pm (west coast time) i haven't been this excited in a long long long time!!!!!!!! YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!