skinsfanthru&thru
06-16-2004, 03:00 PM
The difference between the Lakers and the Redskins, is the NFL has a salary cap. The NBA can amass as much talent in one place as they want. They have a salary cap, but it's set so high that it doesn't matter for shit. I've never liked the whole aura of the Yankees or the Lakers. Even before they were great. However, I do see parallels between how the Redskins are run and how those other franchises get run.
the spending of the lakers and yankees is vastly different as to the fact that the friggin yankees lately have had a total team salary equal to that of 4 or 5 other teams combined whereas the the nba has a cap in place that takes into account not only player salaries but the coaches salaries as well i believe. the lakers pretty much have most of their cap put into shaq, kobe, and phil jackson. the only reason they got payton, who was the worst offseason pick up in the nba last year, and malone for as small amount of money the lakers gave them was that the lakers offered them the best oppurtunity to win that elusive ring.
I'm a diehard lakersfan, but i'm also a smart fan who can recognize when another team is better. the pistons were vastly superior athletically but the uneven foul calls was ridiculous. i'm not saying the fouls the lakers commited weren't fouls, but virtually nothing was called against the pistons especially in regards to the defense of kobe. i really think this would have been a different series if malone was healthy and the team consistently went to shaq cuz if he'd had as many shots as kobe if not a bit more, shaq would have averaged around 40-50 points a night.
all in all i'm extremely dissapointed the lakers could play so well against the spurs and wolves and then just pretty much not show up at the most important time especailly against a team that barely got by the nets and the pacers.
the spending of the lakers and yankees is vastly different as to the fact that the friggin yankees lately have had a total team salary equal to that of 4 or 5 other teams combined whereas the the nba has a cap in place that takes into account not only player salaries but the coaches salaries as well i believe. the lakers pretty much have most of their cap put into shaq, kobe, and phil jackson. the only reason they got payton, who was the worst offseason pick up in the nba last year, and malone for as small amount of money the lakers gave them was that the lakers offered them the best oppurtunity to win that elusive ring.
I'm a diehard lakersfan, but i'm also a smart fan who can recognize when another team is better. the pistons were vastly superior athletically but the uneven foul calls was ridiculous. i'm not saying the fouls the lakers commited weren't fouls, but virtually nothing was called against the pistons especially in regards to the defense of kobe. i really think this would have been a different series if malone was healthy and the team consistently went to shaq cuz if he'd had as many shots as kobe if not a bit more, shaq would have averaged around 40-50 points a night.
all in all i'm extremely dissapointed the lakers could play so well against the spurs and wolves and then just pretty much not show up at the most important time especailly against a team that barely got by the nets and the pacers.