Bryant: "Lakers-Kings No Longer a Rivalry"

[rhuber]

Well... rivalry or no rivalry, as a long-time kings fan, one of the first things I do when the NBA schedule is released each season is check to see when and where the Kings meet the Lakers... I did the same thing this year. I have no hatred for the Lakers, and I can’t really say that I ever did... but I can’t deny that watching the Kings meet up with (and hopefully beating the snot out of) the Lakers is one of the greatest highlights of the season for me each year. Perhaps the teams themselves feel differently now... but my own anticipation is hasn’t changed. Old habits I guess, but it sure adds to the fun on my end just the same.

 

[Heuge]

Why do you have a pic of Shaq as your avatar?

LoL
It's Oliver Miller.
Shaq is slim now

 

[Bballkingsrock]

no u guys, thats robert traylor! LOL

 

[Bricklayer]

And yet you still prove my point. "Rivalries" are far more defined by off the court BS than anything else. The media feeds off of this, and it predictably gets fans of both teams going (apparently you were one of them).

However, anyone who has thought it through realizes that a real, on the court rivalry is the only thing that should matter in a basketball conversation. And in terms of basketball, the Bulls-Pistons of the 90's or Celtics-Lakers of the 80's or Spurs-Lakers of this decade were all actual rivalries, and all had different outcomes in the end.

You can call it a rivalry if you want, I have no problem with that. Just realize that the actual definition of rivalry applies to all teams that have more or less the same abilities. Which means you need that off the court stuff for your "It's a rivalry, just ask ESPN!" BS to be true. And yes Brick, according to your friends and precious ESPN, the Kings-Lakers had a great rivalry. Unfortunately for you, it was mostly off the court.

You may have missed this but the Bulls/Pistons was a great rivalry right UP to the point where the Bulls finally won. Then it abruptly died. The Bulls became da Bulls, the Pistons rapidly faded away. The tension which had made it great was gone. However, the years BEFORE that event were tremendous. THAT was the rivalry. If the Bulls had lost that last series with the Pistons it wouldn't have taken a thing away from it.

Lakers/Celtcis was obviously fairly unique. Basketball's version of the Steelers/Cowboys of the 70's. Two evenly matched teams at exactly the same point in their development. And starting out very young so it could keep on for a full decade. Happens once in a generation at most. Once in 50 years for basketball.

Lakers/Spurs was barely a blip. And much of the blip itself was based around extraneous stuff -- the asterisk, did Bowen try to hurt Kobe etc.

 

[KA_2]

You may have missed this but the Bulls/Pistons was a great rivalry right UP to the point where the Bulls finally won. Then it abruptly died. The Bulls became da Bulls, the Pistons rapidly faded away. The tension which had made it great was gone. However, the years BEFORE that event were tremendous. THAT was the rivalry. If the Bulls had lost that last series with the Pistons it wouldn't have taken a thing away from it.

No, but it added a necessary element to the rivalry. The Bulls, who had lost to the defending champs in 90, beat them in 91. While most people like to remember everything prior to 91, that year was indeed the year that defined the end of rivalry. That last year was a very important year purely in basketball terms, which is the only thing that should matter.

Lakers/Celtcis was obviously fairly unique. Basketball's version of the Steelers/Cowboys of the 70's. Two evenly matched teams at exactly the same point in their development. And starting out very young so it could keep on for a full decade. Happens once in a generation at most. Once in 50 years for basketball.

OK, I'll give you that. Then again, don't those type of rivalries define their sport? In fact, wasn't the Celtics-Lakers rivalry where the obsession with NBA team rivalries came from?

Lakers/Spurs was barely a blip. And much of the blip itself was based around extraneous stuff -- the asterisk, did Bowen try to hurt Kobe etc.

Barely a blip, it was 6 years long. It started with the Spurs beating the Lakers and winning the title in 99 and the Lakers beating the Spurs (but losing the title) in 2004, with three Lakers titles and one Spurs title in between. That's the definition of a rivalry, with two great teams losing it and winning it different years, and with it being all about on the court performances.

None of the Spurs-Lakers rivalry was based on extraneous stuff. Phil's asterisk comments were made before the 99 campaign. Heck, that one Phil quote not even related to the Spurs at the time is still the only off the court thing Spurs or Lakers fans could refer to during the rivalry. The other 99% of the time, that rivalry was all about the game, their players, or a series. And I'm not aware of any controversial incident where Bowen hurt Kobe. And there was no “etc.”.

 

[Kingsgurl]

Why are you HERE, and not on the spurs board then?

 

[vladetomiller]

well i kinda agree with ka2, the lakers/spurs rivalry kinda existed and not sure if it does anymore from the lakers side. i was able to from the lakersboard last year that they hated the spurs more than the kings in the playoffs and many considered that a rivalry. probably the way the kings ended the season had something to do with it and maybe the fact they didnt draw the kings in the playoffs added to that. But all the playoffs from 99 do seem to have the lakers spurs matchup except when the suns eliminated the spurs in 00.

Plus the spurs have beaten the lakers in the playoffs which the kings didnt, though they did give a better fight in the two series in 00 and 02. There was real animosity between the fans throughout the season, so you can call that a rivalry in a way. But a few lakers fans i spoke to pitied the kings last year, for the way they ended the season and the way they kept losing games in the end. Though they did put up a good fight against the wolves, the lakers fans didnt think they were a serious threat and some even wanted to play the kings in the WCF. That pity doesnt happen in rivalries and even when the other team is not doing well they want to beat the rival badly, which i dont see in the lakers fans. Even when the own team is not good and the rival is far better (like the one percieved by many lakers and kings fans now ) they want their team to atleast beat the rival, which i dont see now with the lakers fans. There are quite a few fans but not that many in that category.

But i am able to see the rivalry from the kings side, they want to beat the lakers badly and are happy to see them struggle. Probably thats cos of all the playoff losses to the lakers.

From the players point of view i am not sure if its the same as before, they just may not get pumped up to play odom and butler as they would have to play shaq and fox.

 

[VF21]

I still find it terribly amusing that Laker fans are so adamant about coming to Kings boards and arguing that there isn't a rivalry. This thread has gone on for 4 pages why exactly?

We get it. Laker fans - from high atop their ivory towers - look down upon us poor Kings fans. They pity us and our team because we're pathetic. They wanted the Lakers to play the Kings in the WCF because the Kings weren't worthy opponents.

I agree most heartily with Kingsgurl. If we're so pathetic and so pitiful, why don't you guys bop on over to spursreport and post there? You're repeating the same tired comments over and over and over again. Who are you trying so hard to convince? We, the unworthy followers of the pitiful Kings? Or yourselves??

 

[Lamar_Odom]

Why has the rivalry died without both teams meeting in one "real" game this season? Is a rivalry about personnel or competition?

If the Lakers win 2 games vs. the Kings in this regular season, would Kings fans in this board consider the Lakers worthy of being a rival? Or must the Lakers beat them in a playoff series?

 

[Lamar_Odom]

So in April when Kobe is watching the Kings in the Play offs while Dr. Buss is assuring him that some of the top 5 picks they have to choose from look promising, Kobe can then reasure himself that the Rivelery is over... untill the Lakers can rise to the level of worthy oponent.

That's actually not too bad of a scenario. The Lakers pick a player from the draft, and a top 5 player at that. I won't mind that one at all. Too bad, you're going to be a false prophet.

 

[Gargamel]

That's actually not too bad of a scenario. The Lakers pick a player from the draft, and a top 5 player at that. I won't mind that one at all. Too bad, you're going to be a false prophet.

Are there any Emekas in next year's draft?

 

[Lamar_Odom]

I normally don't check the kids out untill during the NCAA.

 

[KA_2]

Why are you HERE, and not on the spurs board then?

I post far more regularly at a Spurs board than I do here, thank you very much. My being here says nothing about the rivalry, it just so happens that the Sacramento Kings have a very good message board on the Internet. Of course, I wouldn't be caught dead on a Hawks board, but that's only because I like talking to fans of teams that actually have good/interesting teams, and clearly that applies to the Kings.

I agree most heartily with Kingsgurl. If we're so pathetic and so pitiful, why don't you guys bop on over to spursreport and post there? You're repeating the same tired comments over and over and over again. Who are you trying so hard to convince? We, the unworthy followers of the pitiful Kings? Or yourselves??

This is a discussion board, is it not?

I normally don't check the kids out untill during the NCAA.

Same here. I'd love lottery this year if it bags the Lakers an Elton Brandish type of player and the Lakers go on to win it in 2006.

 

[VF21]

You didn't answer my question.

You've repeated the same mantra for multiple posts. We get it. You don't think there's a rivalry. Feel free to continue striking the equine, but I'm pretty sure the poor creature assumed room temperature quite some while ago...

 

[VF21]

Why has the rivalry died without both teams meeting in one "real" game this season? Is a rivalry about personnel or competition?

If the Lakers win 2 games vs. the Kings in this regular season, would Kings fans in this board consider the Lakers worthy of being a rival? Or must the Lakers beat them in a playoff series?

I don't think the rivalry is dead. I don't think it will be dead, contrary to what some of my fellow Kings fans say...

I will NEVER count the Lakers out. I don't think your chances are too good this year, but I will never underestimate the ability of the purple and gold to rip my heart from my chest, throw it to the ground, stomp on it, kick it across the street, pick it up and then try to make me eat it.

On the other hand, I will never approach a Kings-Lakers contest without the firm belief it will be a good game, regardless of which team is ranked higher.

Luckily for fans of both teams, there are enough of us who still want the rivalry to continue to make this board pretty interesting at times. I would much rather argue with a Laker fan than someone from the state of Texas, for example. Them people just ain't right...

 

[PejaFanatic]

I still find it terribly amusing that Laker fans are so adamant about coming to Kings boards and arguing that there isn't a rivalry. This thread has gone on for 4 pages why exactly?

We get it. Laker fans - from high atop their ivory towers - look down upon us poor Kings fans. They pity us and our team because we're pathetic. They wanted the Lakers to play the Kings in the WCF because the Kings weren't worthy opponents.

I agree most heartily with Kingsgurl. If we're so pathetic and so pitiful, why don't you guys bop on over to spursreport and post there? You're repeating the same tired comments over and over and over again. Who are you trying so hard to convince? We, the unworthy followers of the pitiful Kings? Or yourselves??

Agreed with what VF said.

Plus I would like to add something, man I ain't gonna check this thread anymore...same shiet over and over again. LOL

 

[KA_2]

You didn't answer my question.

You've repeated the same mantra for multiple posts. We get it. You don't think there's a rivalry. Feel free to continue striking the equine, but I'm pretty sure the poor creature assumed room temperature quite some while ago...

No, it's another kind of rivalry. And Brick was still disagreeing with me, hence the reason why I continued to post.

 

[John from Hemet]

How pathetic is that?

Kobe Bryant having to say "Their center plays for us now....we got out of the rivalry without them beating us once in the playoffs."

Yeah, whatever.

Our team isn't the one that imploded. And, quite frankly, our starting center is still right where he is supposed to be - wearing #52 and getting ready for tonight's game.

I guess we should just take solace from the fact that the mighty Bryant at least acknowledged there WAS a rivalry, even if it's gone now.

BTW? Someone should let the Laker fans know. Some of them are talking about tonight's game as though it's the second round of the playoffs. Apparently they didn't get the memo about the rivalry being over.

VF.....

Just to let you know....most lakers fans are taking our win the other night with a grain of salt.....we know you guys were jetlagged and that your played your younger guys for a lot of minutes....

We as lakers fans were just happy to see some of our new guys like Cris Mihm keep up the good play.....the center position is a scary one with the big fella gone.....but we feel better and better about it with each passing game

 

[VF21]

John - I understand where you're coming from. You guys took a real shot in the gut when the Large Lving Room Suite (etc.) left, regardless of how you felt about him. The drama with Kobe can't have been easy to go through; the stuff with Webber was minor compared to the possible outcomes...

I want to see your team be competitive. That way, when our team kicks you to the curb, the satisfaction will be all the more rewarding.