2007-09-18 17:03:24 · 22 answers · asked by stagner16 2 in Sports ➔ Basketball
Los Angeles Lakers.
2007-09-18 17:17:42 · answer #1 · answered by WestCoastin4Life 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Very good question. Thought provoking and interesting, fun to think about. There are some horrible answers out their, so let me start by saying why others are wrong.
It's NOT the Lakers. I understand people may be jealous of Kobe Bryant and Phil Jackson. But, not only do these two provide much needed fodder durring the offseason, but on the court Kobe is absolutly glorious and does things only a handful of others alive could do on a ball court.
It is hard to answer this question objectivly. B/c teams are a reflection of the players (more so of the star players), so it depends on which guys you like and which ones you hate.
The Knicks popped into my head for a second. I hate, hate, hate Marbury. He's never done anything to show me he is a bonna fied superstar in the leage. But they got the gunslinger, Jamal Crawfor. Who, if allowed by his coach and teammates is ready to go off for 50 any given night. He's got balls, and he has the game to back up the swag. He is so fun to watch that he makes watching a Knicks game bearable.
Just a few years ago I may have answered with Golden States. Cursed with with a bad time zone, not even J Rich could provide enough spark to make me care. Enter Baron Davis. Besides for the Steve Nash (and bigs Shaq and Dunc) I cant think of a guy who makes the team he is on THAT much better than B Diddy - Maybe a young Garnett or Rasheed, but not many others.
My Finalists: Bucks, Clippers, Bobcats, Hornets.
The Bucks and the Clips get a pass, both are capable of playing some good ball, both have some ballers.
The Hornets of Oklahoma City were cool because there crowd was so hype it made their games seem more entertaining than they really were.
The Loser is: Bobcats. I dont think a GM could have chosen a less exciting player to build their team around than Emeka Okafor. Unless he starts beasting on people soon (a la Carlos Boozer). Bonus Points, a franchise already failed in Charlotte once, Las Vegas, New York or Toronto would have been a better choice.
Philadelphia is going to be lame without AI, but not as a lame a the bobcats. Terrible name terrible team, in a city that couldnt keep the hornets- a team that actualy won games.
2007-09-19 02:07:31 · answer #2 · answered by Borislaw 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Phoenix Suns, San Antonio Spurs, Los Angeles Lakers
2007-09-19 07:18:23 · answer #3 · answered by B.Y (The Green Movement) 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Off the top of my head, the Pacers or Bucks... At least the Bobcats are young and the Hawks got Horford and Law in the draft, both of who I'm interested in watching... The Bucks and Pacers are bad teams and their best players aren't really THAT good. JO and Redd might be more like second bananas.
Oh yeah, the 76ers and Wolves should be pretty boring to watch, too.
2007-09-19 02:26:31 · answer #4 · answered by Cliff 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
New Orleans Hornets, Los Angeles Clippers, Memphis Grizzlies, and the 76ers
2007-09-19 02:23:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Phoenix Suns
2007-09-19 01:14:10 · answer #6 · answered by ???? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'd say the Bucks. They were as if like not in the NBA league at all. Seldom hear any news from them except for recently.
2007-09-19 01:35:10 · answer #7 · answered by Beach bum 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Toronto Raptors.
2007-09-19 00:41:33 · answer #8 · answered by cuhris84 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The San Antonio Spurs
I'd rather watch paint dry then watch this team...and dont tell me im not a real basketball fan if i dont enjoy watching them. i prefer the run and guns.
2007-09-19 02:05:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
least interested - used to be the Celtics but now they got KG
dislike the most - MEMPHIS Grizzlies, for leaving Vancouver
2007-09-19 01:21:03 · answer #10 · answered by baypae 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋