Bryant: "Lakers-Kings No Longer a Rivalry"
- Thread starter Purple Reign
- Start date
Yeah, I think I'll buy him a case of kaopectate. Seriously though, the rivalry as we knew it is over but I can say without any doubt that it won't take much to reignite it. As long as the lakers are around I will relish in any pitfalls that they go through. Kobe is the only player left that I have any real animosity towards anyway but, he counts for alot and I'm sure I can grow to dislike Butler, Grant, and Odom easily.
Hell NO Mr. Bryant !!!!!!!!!!!!! (sorry for cursing)
We hate the front of the jearsy too. not just the back. No downplaying please. We did not forgett anything. Not Your elbow agains Bibby, not Your retarded comments every year. Yes, You have Vlade - so there is one player we do not hate. Plenty of hate going around here for the rest of you. Only way for you to avoid a rivalry is to suck so bad that there is no suspense in a single game. Feel free to do that. I hope You lose all 82 games.
We hate the front of the jearsy too. not just the back. No downplaying please. We did not forgett anything. Not Your elbow agains Bibby, not Your retarded comments every year. Yes, You have Vlade - so there is one player we do not hate. Plenty of hate going around here for the rest of you. Only way for you to avoid a rivalry is to suck so bad that there is no suspense in a single game. Feel free to do that. I hope You lose all 82 games.
I'm truly suprised at how many people think the rivalry is over. Of course the rivalry is not over.
Was the rivalry between the Giants and the Dodgers over when Bobby Thompson, or Juan Marichal and Johnny Roseboro quit? Joe Morgan? Of course not.
Is the Sox and Yankees rivalry over because their rosters have changed?
Will the Raiders and Broncos rivalry die when Mike Shanahan retires, or when Al Davis dies?
The fact of the matter is just because Shaq and Phil started the battle doesn't mean the Kings and Lakers no longer play in the same division, because they do. The fact of the matter is the Kings are a Nor Cal team and the Lakers are a So Cal team, and we still hate their phony Hollywood/cellphone attitude, and they still hate our cowbells. The fact of the matter is we are still the two best teams in the Pacific Division.
You're damn straight there's still a rivalry. There's no single team I would get more enjoyment from seeing the Kings rip apart in the playoffs, than the Lakers.
Was the rivalry between the Giants and the Dodgers over when Bobby Thompson, or Juan Marichal and Johnny Roseboro quit? Joe Morgan? Of course not.
Is the Sox and Yankees rivalry over because their rosters have changed?
Will the Raiders and Broncos rivalry die when Mike Shanahan retires, or when Al Davis dies?
The fact of the matter is just because Shaq and Phil started the battle doesn't mean the Kings and Lakers no longer play in the same division, because they do. The fact of the matter is the Kings are a Nor Cal team and the Lakers are a So Cal team, and we still hate their phony Hollywood/cellphone attitude, and they still hate our cowbells. The fact of the matter is we are still the two best teams in the Pacific Division.
You're damn straight there's still a rivalry. There's no single team I would get more enjoyment from seeing the Kings rip apart in the playoffs, than the Lakers.
Yawn. 
Seriously. The Yankees and Red Sox have been rivals for something approaching a century. The Kings and Lakers really only BECAME rivals in the last 5 years. And it was really based on the personalities on the teams as much as anything. That and running into them 4 years in the row in the playoffs. Could it become the basis for a long term rivalry? Maybe. Maybe not. But many other great NBA rivlaries of the recent past, Detroit/Chicago, New York/Chicago, New York/Miami etc. have all faded after the players and coaches who really hated each other moved on.
I'll settle for lingering dislike until they get obnoxious again.
P.S. Watch out for Phoenix -- could well be better than the Lakers.
Seriously. The Yankees and Red Sox have been rivals for something approaching a century. The Kings and Lakers really only BECAME rivals in the last 5 years. And it was really based on the personalities on the teams as much as anything. That and running into them 4 years in the row in the playoffs. Could it become the basis for a long term rivalry? Maybe. Maybe not. But many other great NBA rivlaries of the recent past, Detroit/Chicago, New York/Chicago, New York/Miami etc. have all faded after the players and coaches who really hated each other moved on.
I'll settle for lingering dislike until they get obnoxious again.
P.S. Watch out for Phoenix -- could well be better than the Lakers.
Well, they said there was a rivalry but I don't know if it was a "real" rivaly when the Kings never beat the Lakers in a series. The Lakers won them all. But now, the tables are turned - it's time for the Kings to bully the Lakers. It's their turn. This time, it will be the Lakers who will try to be in the same level as the Kings.
Ah, this tired old line. Perhaps the biggest bunch of hooey ever invented by the obnoxious Laker fan. Always found it curious that the Knicks/Bulls were never rivals, and that the Bulls/Pistons weren't rivals either until the Bulls finally broke through and effectively ENDED the rivalry -- the Pistons rapidly declined thereafter and within 2 years nobody cared.
Must also really suck that perhaps the best rivalry in all of sports is playing out in dramatic fashion in baseball right now, and what does it feature? One team who has gotten its *** kicked for 85 YEARS by the other team. Would come as a shocker to both New York and Boston fans to discover that they actually aren't rivals (and yes, I've heard the same line from a few of the more arrogant Yankees fans, but their venom belies their B.S.).
Simple as this -- you wouldn't even be on this board if we weren't rivals at one point.
Must also really suck that perhaps the best rivalry in all of sports is playing out in dramatic fashion in baseball right now, and what does it feature? One team who has gotten its *** kicked for 85 YEARS by the other team. Would come as a shocker to both New York and Boston fans to discover that they actually aren't rivals (and yes, I've heard the same line from a few of the more arrogant Yankees fans, but their venom belies their B.S.).
Simple as this -- you wouldn't even be on this board if we weren't rivals at one point.
Last edited:
Mr. S£im Citrus said:
Uh, Brick, doesn't that essentially contradict what you wrote an hour ago?
But that doesn't mean that it wasn't the best rivalry in the NBA there for a good long stretch. Trying to deny it ever existed in the first place is just silly and immature. Mostly just about getting a rise.
hating each other doesn't instill the same rivarly we had 2-3 years ago. when it mattered, when the players were all still there, we lost. people have to admit that. it dont matter what kobe says or why he's saying it. i still hate the lakers with a passion, but we lost when it counted and when the "rivalry" was at its peak.
If it was a "rivalry," I believe the Lakers-Spurs was a bigger rivalry (and a true one at that) because they took turns winning the championship over a 5-year period and for the most part, both teams had to go through each other to win. The hate may not be as much, but it was more of a "rivaly" than the Kings-Lakers.
The hate IS the rivalry. The passion is the lifeblood of any one that is remembered.
BTW, you can yap all you want, but the ratings undermine your entire argument (improted from lg.net I suspect). The most popular games in the entire league for most of this decade were Kings/Lakers matchups. Why? Because 99% of the people could see through the silly L.A. charade -- they were RIVALS. As in don't like you, want to embarass you, might even punch you rivals.
Trying to deny it is silly. As I mentioned, you are here. I presume you do not keep a persona on a Suns board, or a Wolves board.
BTW, you can yap all you want, but the ratings undermine your entire argument (improted from lg.net I suspect). The most popular games in the entire league for most of this decade were Kings/Lakers matchups. Why? Because 99% of the people could see through the silly L.A. charade -- they were RIVALS. As in don't like you, want to embarass you, might even punch you rivals.
Trying to deny it is silly. As I mentioned, you are here. I presume you do not keep a persona on a Suns board, or a Wolves board.
Last edited:
Ok, ok, ok...It may not be a "rivalry" in the truest sense of the word, but more of a "dislike," hatred even, amongst fans. Are Giants and Dodgers "rivals" every year? No, but I've never met a Giants fan that liked the Dodgers and vise versa. The Angels and A's were I guess "rivals" this year, but it hasn't always been like that, and I don't know of an A's fans who like the Angels. Its more of an intrastate thing. As I said before, as a NorCal resident, I've never liked any SoCal teams.
Besides, we got to get to the real crux of the issue here, if the rivalry is "dead" then what are supposed to do with all of the kids who were born and who have grown up in the last 3-5 years being taught to hate those yellow and purple people down south?
Besides, we got to get to the real crux of the issue here, if the rivalry is "dead" then what are supposed to do with all of the kids who were born and who have grown up in the last 3-5 years being taught to hate those yellow and purple people down south?
Last edited:
It's a rivalry among hardcore fans of both teams based solely on a preseason fight between Christie and Fox and all the stuff said off the court. The rivalry often had little to do with play on the basketball court except for the 2002 WCF, where the end result was still the same. This "rivalry" was probably the most overblown rivalry of the past 20 years, though nothing can top the "rivalry" of the Red Sox and Yankees. And no, Sox-Yankees is not a real rivalry, it's just hate among fans. Yes, because the Yankees win every time, it's not much of a baseball rivalry, just one hell of an off the field and media-hyped rivalry.
You know you understand the viewpoint Brick, you just don't want to admit that any rivalry with the same income isn't much of a true rivalry.
And in case you're wondering, here's what rivalry means:
1 a : one of two or more striving to reach or obtain something that only one can possess b : one striving for competitive advantage
2 obsolete : COMPANION, ASSOCIATE
3 : one that equals another in desired qualities : PEER
You know you understand the viewpoint Brick, you just don't want to admit that any rivalry with the same income isn't much of a true rivalry.
And in case you're wondering, here's what rivalry means:
1 a : one of two or more striving to reach or obtain something that only one can possess b : one striving for competitive advantage
2 obsolete : COMPANION, ASSOCIATE
3 : one that equals another in desired qualities : PEER
