Does the Lakers-Kings rivalry still exist?

[hoopsfan]

Instead of careening into the above avenue (I think I am finished with my post on page two), I will have fun with Hoopsy.

Hoops, look at Kings113's stas (thanx 113) I agree with him that we will see some fun here this year! 25 points is 10 less than last years average for him. I say in games with Ron, he will average 15-20 points this year.

I agree that Ron is a better defender than Doug. My first response was to the poster that said Christie was the player that "had Kobe's number!" 15-20...come on. Most guys would love to average 25 a game...
We shall see what happens this year...let the games begin!!

 

[Kingzrool]

We shall see what happens this year...let the games begin!!

Lets do it!!!........no wait GP needs a little more time.

 

[Gargamel]

It's part and parcel of the very complex North v. South dynamic, Gargy.

I'm gonna run my hose in the gutter all day tomorrow.

 

[Oscar]

The Kings/Lakers rivalry is dead. Maybe it will be revived after the Kings move to Orange County. If that last statement doesn't sit well with you, better get out and vote in November or the Maloofs will leave town.

 

[Kingzrool]

You guys are silly with this "the rivalry is dead". Have not read the thread?? Didn't the NBA, just last year, Have The Kings vs. lakers play on there well publicized "Rivalries Week"? We battled it out with them for the 7th position last year and that easily could have been the 8th spot if NO did not drop out like an anchor. There are more than just "team dynamics" involved. Most lakers and Kings fans have embraced the rivalry. And the fact that this thread exists and is still going (7 pages) is a product (and evidence) of the rivalry. The energy at a Kings vs. lakers game at Arco or Staples is off the charts, more like a playoffs game.

If you must, or it makes you feel better, by all means, deny reality (it seems to work for most ).

What is that they say around here?? Agree to disagree....

 

[Padrino]

You guys are silly with this "the rivalry is dead". Have not read the thread?? Didn't the NBA, just last year, Have The Kings vs. lakers play on there well publicized "Rivalries Week"? We battled it out with them for the 7th position last year and that easily could have been the 8th spot if NO did not drop out like an anchor. There are more than just "team dynamics" involved. Most lakers and Kings fans have embraced the rivalry. And the fact that this thread exists and is still going (7 pages) is a product (and evidence) of the rivalry. The energy at a Kings vs. lakers game at Arco or Staples is off the charts, more like a playoffs game.

If you must, or it makes you feel better, by all means, deny reality (it seems to work for most ).

What is that they say around here?? Agree to disagree....

the nba's so-called "rivalry week" is incredibly gimmicky and doesn't really mean a whole lot.

and the only people who seem to "deny reality" are the people who try to keep these silly rivalries alive without much cause. when the kings and lakers see each other in the playoffs year after year again, then i'll hop on the rivalry bandwagon. until then, its just an illusion created by the fans. this is, of course, my humble opinion, and i'm sure i'll get plenty of firy responses from those who disagree, but i believe its the truth. give me cause, and i'll say the rivalry is reborn. and both teams fighting for the bottom rung of playoff berths can hardly be considered a rivalry. without a proper cause, there's really no rivalry. no cowbells. no insults from phil jackson or shaquille o'neal. no playoff series against each other in the last four years. no rivalry.

 

[Jerryaki]

i agree with padrino, because rivalries can come and go. it's tough to feel like you're in a rivalry when each team is just a shell of their former selves. if the kings-lakers of today are considered a "rivalry," you might as well dig up the celtics and lakers of today and call that a rivalry.

 

[Jkbiker]

Of course the rivalry is still there!!!

Of all the 20 regular season games i attended last year, the Jan 19th game had more loud screaming kings fans than any game of the year.

Only in the playoff games did I see this level of crowd intensity.

Sure Kobe went off on us for 51 points, but kings battled up to the end, Odem screwed up turning ball over with 22 sec, and miller buried a 3 pt with 4 sec in reg. The crowd went wild!!!

Kenny schooled Luke walton with 6 straight pts in OT, followed by a 3 pt shot by Garcia

I awlays look forward to the Laker games, always filled with "Beat LA" chants, loudest games in reg season, very competitive games, it doesnt get much better than these games shaq or no shaq.

Now we have the Kobe-Artest matchups, Phil still around to get an earful of cowbell, plus we are always seem to be neck and neck in the seeding. Last game this season is with Lakers, if it turns out to be a meaningful game in the standings, ARCO will be rocking big time!!


GO KINGS!!!

BEAT LA, BEAT LA, BEAT LA!!

 

[VF21]

the nba's so-called "rivalry week" is incredibly gimmicky and doesn't really mean a whole lot.

and the only people who seem to "deny reality" are the people who try to keep these silly rivalries alive without much cause. when the kings and lakers see each other in the playoffs year after year again, then i'll hop on the rivalry bandwagon. until then, its just an illusion created by the fans. this is, of course, my humble opinion, and i'm sure i'll get plenty of firy responses from those who disagree, but i believe its the truth. give me cause, and i'll say the rivalry is reborn. and both teams fighting for the bottom rung of playoff berths can hardly be considered a rivalry. without a proper cause, there's really no rivalry. no cowbells. no insults from phil jackson or shaquille o'neal. no playoff series against each other in the last four years. no rivalry.

You hit upon the real answer, but apparently didn't realize it.

EVERYTHING about paying money to watch millionaires play a game is "an illusion created by the fans." A rivalry is just a part of it.
If some people think the rivalry is dead, it is dead - to them. If some people think the rivalry is alive, it is alive - for them. It doesn't have to be all one way or the other.

Some people think chocolate ice cream is the best, other prefer vanilla. That doesn't mean either of them is right or wrong.

For me, the rivalry with the Lakers is as real as anything else about this sport I love.

 

[Padrino]

You hit upon the real answer, but apparently didn't realize it.

EVERYTHING about paying money to watch millionaires play a game is "an illusion created by the fans." A rivalry is just a part of it.
If some people think the rivalry is dead, it is dead - to them. If some people think the rivalry is alive, it is alive - for them. It doesn't have to be all one way or the other.

Some people think chocolate ice cream is the best, other prefer vanilla. That doesn't mean either of them is right or wrong.

For me, the rivalry with the Lakers is as real as anything else about this sport I love.

well this i'm gonna have to disagree with a bit. the players themselves certainly aren't illusory. the games aren't illusory. the verbal barbs slung back and forth between players and coaches don't seem to be illusory, though fans may certainly read into them more than is healthy. the 2002 western conference finals sure as hell didn't feel illusory, though we'd like to think watching the kings lose was all an illusion. those are the key components of a rivalry. when those components no longer exist, all that is left are those illusory elements, and that's only half the battle. i agree, you need the mystique created by the fans for a rivalry to exist. however, the teams have to be competitve and there has to be some fire amongst the players of both teams for the rivalry to live and breathe like the beast that it is. i dunno, maybe it is chocolate and vanilla. i just know that i like my ice cream to be damn tasty. i don't want any watered-down, half-assed rivalry. i want the real deal. i'm not saying the rivalry between the kings and lakers will never exist again. i'd like to think that those flames could be rekindled. kobe/artest is a good start. in the meantime, though, maybe "dead" isn't the best way to describe this "rivalry." maybe "dormant" is a better term.

 

[Jerryaki]

Some people think chocolate ice cream is the best, other prefer vanilla. That doesn't mean either of them is right or wrong.

come on, everyone knows coffee is the best flavor.

i do remember webber, when asked about the rivalry after the shaq trade, said something along the lines of, "nah, no more rivalry. we're just two teams trying to make it to the playoffs."

ETA: no rivalry to me, but i do still hate LA.

 

[VF21]

well this i'm gonna have to disagree with a bit. the players themselves certainly aren't illusory. the games aren't illusory. the verbal barbs slung back and forth between players and coaches don't seem to be illusory, though fans may certainly read into them more than is healthy. the 2002 western conference finals sure as hell didn't feel illusory, though we'd like to think watching the kings lose was all an illusion. those are the key components of a rivalry. when those components no longer exist, all that is left are those illusory elements, and that's only half the battle. i agree, you need the mystique created by the fans for a rivalry to exist. however, the teams have to be competitve and there has to be some fire amongst the players of both teams for the rivalry to live and breathe like the beast that it is. i dunno, maybe it is chocolate and vanilla. i just know that i like my ice cream to be damn tasty. i don't want any watered-down, half-assed rivalry. i want the real deal. i'm not saying the rivalry between the kings and lakers will never exist again. i'd like to think that those flames could be rekindled. kobe/artest is a good start. in the meantime, though, maybe "dead" isn't the best way to describe this "rivalry." maybe "dormant" is a better term.

I didn't say the players were an illusion. I didn't say the playing of the game is an illusion. BUT it is all a game.

It isn't a question of life or death for the fans. It won't put food on their tables or keep the roof over their head. It's not a necessity of life. It may be a necessity of life for some of us, but it's by choice.

Bottom line is - it's entertainment. Don't get me wrong - I love basketball and have followed the NBA for over 40 years. But it's still entertainment. And pretty much everything about entertainment is one kind of illusion or another. That's why it's called "entertainment" and not life.

 

[Peja]

I think there is no need to ask before every season if Lakers are still our arch rivals.Even if one team is first and the other last on the league table,those games will always be different then some other games.It's just like that...

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

well this i'm gonna have to disagree with a bit. the players themselves certainly aren't illusory. the games aren't illusory. the verbal barbs slung back and forth between players and coaches don't seem to be illusory, though fans may certainly read into them more than is healthy. the 2002 western conference finals sure as hell didn't feel illusory, though we'd like to think watching the kings lose was all an illusion. those are the key components of a rivalry. when those components no longer exist, all that is left are those illusory elements, and that's only half the battle. i agree, you need the mystique created by the fans for a rivalry to exist. however, the teams have to be competitve and there has to be some fire amongst the players of both teams for the rivalry to live and breathe like the beast that it is. i dunno, maybe it is chocolate and vanilla. i just know that i like my ice cream to be damn tasty. i don't want any watered-down, half-assed rivalry. i want the real deal. i'm not saying the rivalry between the kings and lakers will never exist again. i'd like to think that those flames could be rekindled. kobe/artest is a good start. in the meantime, though, maybe "dead" isn't the best way to describe this "rivalry." maybe "dormant" is a better term.

Players come and go. Fans dictate rivalries.

Since I suddenly felt compelled to repeat myself.

 

[Padrino]

Since I suddenly felt compelled to repeat myself.

i think you cats are missing my point. i'm not claiming that the perception of rivalry doesn't exist between the kings and lakers, because that is exactly what fans create: perception. my definition of rivalry just happens to differ from the rest of yours, it seems. my definition of rivalry doesn't really have any shades of gray. i happen to believe that the fans are only one side of the coin when it comes to professional sports rivalry. its true, players come and go. and, imo, as the players come and go, the rivalries come and go. when both the kings and lakers have elevated themselves outta the mediocrity of the western conference, then maybe we'll see a true rivalry revival.

until then, though, nobody has really convinced me that a rivalry still exists. i've got plenty of the token laker animosity responses, and i've got canned "entertainment value" responses, but until mike bibby or ron artest says "yeah...this game means a bit more, cuz its the lakers, and they're our rivals," i ain't buying it. i mean, you all can't honestly tell me that we can take the players out of the equation entirely, can you? i mean, shoot, the lakers-celtics rivalry of the 80's had absolutely nothing to do with a coupla guys named magic and larry? psh. laker fans and celtics fans may still hate each other, just like kings fans and laker fans still hate each other...but that doesn't equate to rivalry. it just equates to fan animosity. rivalry is the next step up from fan animosity. its the time at which two teams and their fans clash head on, and do so repeatedly. the rivalry is perhaps one of the greatest long standing traditions in sports, and i guess i just don't like to think of the currently mediocre kings and lakers franchises as rivals. like i said earlier, kobe/artest is a very interesting dynamic, and could help fuel the competative fire necessary to rekindle an old rivalry, but with nothing readily at stake (except an 8th seed ), i see no rivalry.

 

[VF21]

i think you cats are missing my point. i'm not claiming that the perception of rivalry doesn't exist between the kings and lakers, because that is exactly what fans create: perception. my definition of rivalry just happens to differ from the rest of yours, it seems. my definition of rivalry doesn't really have any shades of gray. i happen to believe that the fans are only one side of the coin when it comes to professional sports rivalry. its true, players come and go. and, imo, as the players come and go, the rivalries come and go. when both the kings and lakers have elevated themselves outta the mediocrity of the western conference, then maybe we'll see a true rivalry revival.

until then, though, nobody has really convinced me that a rivalry still exists. i've got plenty of the token laker animosity responses, and i've got canned "entertainment value" responses, but until mike bibby or ron artest says "yeah...this game means a bit more, cuz its the lakers, and they're our rivals," i ain't buying it. i mean, you all can't honestly tell me that we can take the players out of the equation entirely, can you? i mean, shoot, the lakers-celtics rivalry of the 80's had absolutely nothing to do with a coupla guys named magic and larry? psh. laker fans and celtics fans may still hate each other, just like kings fans and laker fans still hate each other...but that doesn't equate to rivalry. it just equates to fan animosity. rivalry is the next step up from fan animosity. its the time at which two teams and their fans clash head on, and do so repeatedly. the rivalry is perhaps one of the greatest long standing traditions in sports, and i guess i just don't like to think of the currently mediocre kings and lakers franchises as rivals. like i said earlier, kobe/artest is a very interesting dynamic, and could help fuel the competative fire necessary to rekindle an old rivalry, but with nothing readily at stake (except an 8th seed ), i see no rivalry.

Perception is everything, grasshopper.

 

[Padrino]

Perception is everything, grasshopper.

indeed it is.

 

[ArDiKa]

I think so. Well I still hate the Lakers.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

... i mean, shoot, the lakers-celtics rivalry of the 80's had absolutely nothing to do with a coupla guys named magic and larry? psh...

I think that the Lakers and Celtics were rivals since several years before Bird and Magic.

 

[hoopsfan]

^^ Go back a few decades.

 

[Padrino]

I think that the Lakers and Celtics were rivals since several years before Bird and Magic.

that's why i specified: "lakers-celtics rivalry of the 80's."

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

that's why i specified: "lakers-celtics rivalry of the 80's."

Which is, in turn, why I wanted to point out that the Lakers/Celtics rivalry was not unique to the eighties, that it existed before Magic/Bird and, as far as any Lakers and Celtics fans I've ever encounted are concerned, has continued to exist long after they have no longer been competitive against each other in the post-season.

Postseason matchups intensify rivalries; they are not the sole defining characteristic, and are not necessarily even the most important characteristic.

 

[Oscar]

Which is, in turn, why I wanted to point out that the Lakers/Celtics rivalry was not unique to the eighties, that it existed before Magic/Bird and, as far as any Lakers and Celtics fans I've ever encounted are concerned, has continued to exist long after they have no longer been competitive against each other in the post-season.

Postseason matchups intensify rivalries; they are not the sole defining characteristic, and are not necessarily even the most important characteristic.

The Lakers/Celtics rivalry is way different that whatever the Lakers and Kings have/had. And that's because the Lakers and Celtics always met in the finals, something the Lakers/Kings can never do. The finals is a whole different ballgame, that's why in it's heyday, the Lakers/Celtics rivalry was so intense.

 

[popcKic1]

still feuding?oh well

The Rivalry between the Kings and Lakers brings the "game" to it's finest. It's what gets the game going!lol