Re: The difference is...
posted at 4/27/2013 7:25 PM EDT
In response to lakersavenger's comment:
...the Lakers are totally and completely devastated from injuries going back to the beginning of the season and getting progressively worse. The Celtics on the other hand are just plain laughably bad. The Lakers at least have a good excuse and no one can blame them, the Cs just stink, period. No pride no nothing.
I am a long time Celtic fan going back to Cousey/Sharman days and am many times biased. However, there is some truth to your post. But the 2 best players, hall of famers, KG & PP, don't stink, they just are too old. And Rondo too would be desired on many teams. In fact, if he were a Laker, they'd compete and if Howard & Gasol were Celtics, we'd compete. But for the future, all the rest could go as far as I'm concerned. Green, Sully, Bradley and maybe Melo if he developes could be saved but Green is not the Celtic allstar answer---he's too eratic.
I think that the Lakers if Kobe had not gotten hurt would be giving the Spurs a battle. Kobe, I may not like him, is a gifted athlete, he and LeBron best since MJ, has more heart than PP, I think. Why the Lakers have been competitive past few years is they have dominated in an area where Boston lacked, in the Post with Bynum & Gasol & now, Howard & Gasol. They are the 2 best twin towers in the game and when you can get 10+ rebs, put the ball in or toss it out, even mediocre shooters with 2nd chances start making shots. It's the old "Even a blind chipmonk finds an acorn occasionally" !!!