Diesel

The Wolves suck. Other than KG there is nothing to that franchise and they failed year after year to put a championship team around a hall of fame bigman in his prime. Boston accomplished the feat in one year. They trade Foye for Roy, Love for Mayo, and even Rubio doesn't want to play for a loser franchise. Other than the Grizzlies their probably the worst.

Magic, He revolutionized the game. Kobe isn't even close.

I'm going to go with either the Grizzlies or the Timberwolves. They always seem to make retarded decisions and both of them routinely blow dong year after year. The Clippers are in this discussion as well, but I don't think their AS bad.

Iverson and Zach Randolph on the same team is going to be hilarious. It's really funny how they got rid of Pau Gasol a legit all-star and then traded for Randolph who they are paying even more for. The Grizzlies should just shoot themselves. I hope it works out though for AI.

Good to see you admit Matt Stairs blows.

It wasn't me(Shaggy) - Kobe Bryant

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/4741/jrsmithumad.jpg And how did you know? I <3 Kobe!!

It either comes down to the Phoenix Suns or the Utah Jazz. I'd go with Phoenix though. Other than LA, Boston, and SA Spurs(which are IMO the top 3 franchises) they have the highest winning percentage out of any team. They have MVP's in Nash and Barkley. They have been a winning team for the most part. I'd go with them.

See Philly isn't so bad On the otherhand I would just like to point out that Kobe Bryant would never get a reception like that from a Philly crowd if it was his final game. People say MJ was just as hated, but not nearly.

Well I don't have the access the Sixers staff does to seeing Brand in action/practicing right now. Usually you can get a feel of where the player is at. To the fans it's a mystery. Honestly I'd probably do the trade seeing as how even with a 20/10 Brand this team isn't a contender and Boozer's contract expires first. Boozer is a solid big man. Not as good as a healthy Brand, but it's a lower risk with him.

Yeah I wouldn't get that even if it was free. I wouldn't feel good about having Spiderman on my chest for the rest of my life. It is sick though and mad hard to do. Really expensive I'm sure and it took many hours.

Cool tips, I tried the kidney thing against some guy, but it didn't seem to work too well. Maybe I was not pushing in hard enough, but I don't want to be dirty in pickup games haha. The jab step thing works really well though. I'm not a good driver, but it helped me get to the rim on a few occasions.

My roomate in college gets high/drunk every night and routinely leaves roaches/alcohol in the room so it's usually an interesting surprise I get when I get back. I don't do any of that stuff though. I've never smoked anything, but I have drunk a little, but never to the point where I got drunk or anything. I don't find it that enjoyable and I'm with the other dudes in here.

Defense does win championships. Did you guys know the Bobcats were the only team to sweep the Lakers? They've owned them the past few years actually and the Lakers are very fortunate they didn't meet the Bobcats in the Finals.

Way to cut off the sentence. You've admitted Shaq isn't your most hated player anymore. So the reason you posted that is because I exposed your beloved Kobe Bryant in which you were mad. And nope I'm not mad. I don't take nonsense seriously.

Do you have the day and time of that event as well?

If Brand is the player he was in LAC then I do not do the trade. If he isn't that player I do this trade seeing as how his contract is far worse and I'm not even sure if an injury riddled Brand is better than Boozer alone. All depends on the health of Brand.

Heat: 1 title Celtics: 1 title Playoff Appearences Heat: 8 playoff appearences Celtics: 6 playoff apearences 50 win seasons Heat: 5(as well as a 66% win team in 99 that feature DPOY Alonzo Mourning) Celtics: 2 Other than the past two years the Celtics have been pretty irrelevant for the decade. They had an ECF run in them at a point when the Eastern Conference was the worst conference the league was ever seen, but that's it other than that. The Heat have had stars such as Mourning, Wade, Shaq for a large part of the decade and have been more meaningfull for the long haul. Just because the Celtic have the best individual team in 2008 doesn't make them the best team of the decade. I probably argued that Shaq > Duncan about 3 years ago for this decade. In the past 3 years Duncans performance has been vastly superior to Shaq's which is the reason for the change of heart.

Nope, just replying to the original post. Real Deal is definetly mad though since Shaq isn't his most hated player anymore, but he still feels the need to post a two paragraph post about him as his most hated because he was upset by how I exposed the real Kobe Bryant.

It's one playoff series, Kobe does this in regular season games against defenses that are much less physical. That's the point I was getting out. And no some of those just weren't fouls. And I don't know what the point of that video is. Clearly the video creator thinks the Lakers got shafted by the refs which is laughable in it's own right.

The Suns don't have the same amount of rings as the Celtics though. Nice try. Yes. Duncan is the better player if only considering those years. Career Wise it's easily Shaq, but if you only take those years, it's Duncan. That is the prime of Duncan's career right there and Shaq only had about 4-5 years of true dominance. Give me Duncan for that time frame.

I can play that game too. Would you rather play the Spurs at their worst? Or the Lakers at their worst? I don't have to go any further with this.

The Spurs dropped the Lakers twice in the playoffs and the series would most likely be even if not for a Fisher 0.4 shot. And I don't see why "superstar players" matters at all. It's a team game and I don't see why having two superstars gives you bonus points despite winning the same amount of titles. If anything it just shows how great Tim Duncan was never having a true superstar when he won the title. They won the same amount of titles so the "level of players and coaches" is the same during the timespan. The "dominance" argument in this thread is retarded seeing as how that "dominance" won them the same amount of titles. The Spurs were just as dominant over the long haul. It's not about what was the best individual team of the decade, but the best franchise over the decade.

you mad?

The Spurs. They have been more consistant throughout the decade and I'm not sure on this, but I'd be willing to bet they have the highest winning % of the decade too. They have won 50 games every year of the decade and were contenders every year. The Lakers had a 3 year window of being irrelevant. I could care a less if the Lakers got 3 titles in a row. The end result is they have 4 titles in the decade and the Spurs have 4 as well. The teams have an equal amount of MVP Winners as well with Duncan racking up two and Shaq/Kobe each getting one. However the string of 50 win seasons combined with the titles wins it for me. Bufords and Popovich's ability to consistantly add talent around Duncan while never visiting the lottery does it for me.