NBA Playoffs

Originally Posted by dalakhani

i agree with this and i actually agree with the argument that this Laker team is probably the worst i have seen besides the 07 spurs team which was really bad. I think this team beats that 07 spurs team hands down.

Of course I dont.
That Spurs team played much better defense
than any of the teams we have seen the past 2years.
Not even close.

The Spurs boring teams are easy to pick on.
They just won games almost every fourth quarter
by playing superior help D. That D is now very old,
very slow, and the Spurs are very bad.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Of course I dont.
That Spurs team played much better defense
than any of the teams we have seen the past 2years.
Not even close.

The Spurs boring teams are easy to pick on.
They just won games almost every fourth quarter
by playing superior help D. That D is now very old,
very slow, and the Spurs are very bad.

The Knicks are very bad. The Spurs are just old.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Of course I dont.
That Spurs team played much better defense
than any of the teams we have seen the past 2years.
Not even close.

The Spurs boring teams are easy to pick on.
They just won games almost every fourth quarter
by playing superior help D. That D is now very old,
very slow, and the Spurs are very bad.

It could be argued that that team was given a ride into the championship game after the fight with Phoenix. The cleveland team they beat was about the worst championship finalist ever.

That spurs team would have gotten beaten by this laker team in my opinion.

Originally Posted by dalakhani

It could be argued that that team was given a ride into the championship game after the fight with Phoenix. The cleveland team they beat was about the worst championship finalist ever.

That spurs team would have gotten beaten by this laker team in my opinion.

The Spurs beat a bad Knicks team in 99,
a bad NJ team in 03, a decent Detroit team in 05,
a bad Cleveland team in 07. The Spurs have never
beaten a good team in any playoff.

We are not on the West or East coast, we cant be good.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by pgardn

The Spurs beat a bad Knicks team in 99,
a bad NJ team in 03, a decent Detroit team in 05,
a bad Cleveland team in 07. The Spurs have never
beaten a good team in any playoff.

We are not on the West or East coast, we cant be good.

The spurs have been the most consistently good team in the NBA over the course of the last 15-20 years. The team that lost to the Lakers in 04 should have won the title. In those years the spurs made it to the title round, getting past the western conference final was really the championship. They beat some tough teams those years.

07 was a funky year and the stars aligned. Golden State took care of the topseeded Mavs that year and then there was the controversial fight with Phoenix. I dont think anyone in their right mind would tell you that San Antonio was the best team in the west in 2007. It was a very weak year and in the east it was even weaker which resulted in the worst finals in recent memory...in my opnion.

Originally Posted by dalakhani

The spurs have been the most consistently good team in the NBA over the course of the last 15-20 years. The team that lost to the Lakers in 04 should have won the title. In those years the spurs made it to the title round, getting past the western conference final was really the championship. They beat some tough teams those years.

07 was a funky year and the stars aligned. Golden State took care of the topseeded Mavs that year and then there was the controversial fight with Phoenix. I dont think anyone in their right mind would tell you that San Antonio was the best team in the west in 2007. It was a very weak year and in the east it was even weaker which resulted in the worst finals in recent memory...in my opnion.

People said the same thing about all of those playoffs
that I mentioned. Everyone of them. When they beat NY
in the shortened season, Phil Jackson said put an * next
to that championship.

The series with Detroit was a disappointment ratings wise
so the teams were both obviously bad. You have to beat
a good LA team or a good Boston team to be considered
legitimate champions.

Conclusion:
The Spurs got lucky every year, one way or another.
Just not flashy enough. That does not work in this NBA.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by pgardn

People said the same thing about all of those playoffs
that I mentioned. Everyone of them. When they beat NY
in the shortened season, Phil Jackson said put an * next
to that championship.

The series with Detroit was a disappointment ratings wise
so the teams were both obviously bad. You have to beat
a good LA team or a good Boston team to be considered
legitimate champions.

Conclusion:
The Spurs got lucky every year, one way or another.
Just not flashy enough. That does not work in this NBA.

Oh I think the whole "our team doesnt get the credit it deserves" thing is pretty bunk. San Antonio got a ton of respect those years. In 05, they were favored all year long in the future books to win the title and the pistons were the defending champs. The spurs could play any tempo and win...kind of like this laker team and most good championship teams. Its just the 07 team just happened to be the weakest championship of the dynasty and to me the weakest in my lifetime. It doesnt take away from the accomplishments of the other teams and that team certainly can't be criticized for winning a title. Either way, that team has nothing to do with any of their other teams.

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Oh I think the whole "our team doesnt get the credit it deserves" thing is pretty bunk.

So you think the Spurs on the West coast or East
Coast would be treated the same...
I say no way.

Duncan would be a God in Boston.

Last night they crew on ABC/ESPN went
through the best big men in the past 3 years.
Garnett, Gasol, Shaq and Howard.

No mention of Duncan.
Obviously the votes
for all star donts see it like this nor do the coaches.

Sure, its all bunk.

Originally Posted by pgardn

We are not on the West or East coast, we cant be good.

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Simmons has lived in LA for the past several years.

Same difference.
East or West as previously posted.

Just not the middle of the country.
No good teams in the middle.

[dalakhani]

the greatest sports thread of all time!

[King Glorious]

Late

First round
Chicago in 5
Miami in 4
Boston in 6
Orlando in 7
SA in 6
LA in 4
Dallas in 6
OKC in 5

Second round
Orlando over Chicago in 7
Miami over Boston in 6
OKC over SA in 6
LA over Dallas in 7

CF
Miami over Chicago in 5
LA over OKC in 7

Finals
LA over Miami in 6

That was what I had prior to the playoffs starting. After round one, I picked
Atlanta over Chicago in 6. I just don't think Chicago is that good. To me, they were outplayed in the first four games by Indiana and Atlanta is a much better team than Indiana and is on a high with their confidence right now. They have too much overall athleticism for the Bulls.

Miami over Boston in 6. Neither team looked particularly good in round one but Boston was especially bad, having a ton of trouble with a severely depeleted Knicks team. Without that inside defensive presence of Perkins, they will need Garnett to play more minutes and be more of an enforcer and I don't know that he can still do that. James and Wade will both be dialed in extremely high for this series as it's personal to them and the fact remains that they are the two best players on the court and two of the three best in the world.

OKC over Memphis in 6. I really like Memphis but I think that the young athleticism of OKC wears them down a little. As Dalakhani said in another thread, Harden is on/off and when he's on, it makes them hard to beat. If he's on three times in this series, I give OKC two of those games. The brilliance of Durant will come out in at least one more and that will be three. Memphis needs huge games from Randolph everytime to have a shot and with Ibaka and Perkins down there, you have to figure that they slow him a couple of times.

LA over Dallas in 7. I had Dallas winning game one and then LA taking one in Dallas to make it a best of three at the end. I really with Caron Butler was playing here. I'd take Dallas then but without that scoring option, Dallas is just going to be too limited and I only think this goes seven because the Lakers allow it too. Nowitzki's big advantage has always been his quickness over the opposing big forward but with the Lakers, they can throw out Odom and Artest and negate that advantage. Terry can be defended by Bryant or Brown and I think Brown and Fisher can do a good job on Kidd since he's not that quick, penetrating type of guard that gives LA trouble like Chris Paul or Aaron Brooks or Deron Williams. The key will be keeping the games close for Dallas. If they do, Kobe tends to forget about passing the ball and the Lakers size advantage goes out of the window.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Late

First round
Chicago in 5
Miami in 4
Boston in 6
Orlando in 7
SA in 6
LA in 4
Dallas in 6
OKC in 5

Second round
Orlando over Chicago in 7
Miami over Boston in 6
OKC over SA in 6
LA over Dallas in 7

CF
Miami over Chicago in 5
LA over OKC in 7

Finals
LA over Miami in 6

That was what I had prior to the playoffs starting. After round one, I picked
Atlanta over Chicago in 6. I just don't think Chicago is that good. To me, they were outplayed in the first four games by Indiana and Atlanta is a much better team than Indiana and is on a high with their confidence right now. They have too much overall athleticism for the Bulls.

Miami over Boston in 6. Neither team looked particularly good in round one but Boston was especially bad, having a ton of trouble with a severely depeleted Knicks team. Without that inside defensive presence of Perkins, they will need Garnett to play more minutes and be more of an enforcer and I don't know that he can still do that. James and Wade will both be dialed in extremely high for this series as it's personal to them and the fact remains that they are the two best players on the court and two of the three best in the world.

OKC over Memphis in 6. I really like Memphis but I think that the young athleticism of OKC wears them down a little. As Dalakhani said in another thread, Harden is on/off and when he's on, it makes them hard to beat. If he's on three times in this series, I give OKC two of those games. The brilliance of Durant will come out in at least one more and that will be three. Memphis needs huge games from Randolph everytime to have a shot and with Ibaka and Perkins down there, you have to figure that they slow him a couple of times.

LA over Dallas in 7. I had Dallas winning game one and then LA taking one in Dallas to make it a best of three at the end. I really with Caron Butler was playing here. I'd take Dallas then but without that scoring option, Dallas is just going to be too limited and I only think this goes seven because the Lakers allow it too. Nowitzki's big advantage has always been his quickness over the opposing big forward but with the Lakers, they can throw out Odom and Artest and negate that advantage. Terry can be defended by Bryant or Brown and I think Brown and Fisher can do a good job on Kidd since he's not that quick, penetrating type of guard that gives LA trouble like Chris Paul or Aaron Brooks or Deron Williams. The key will be keeping the games close for Dallas. If they do, Kobe tends to forget about passing the ball and the Lakers size advantage goes out of the window.

I am pretty much in agreement, I think Memphis may well take OK City to game 7 but in the end Durant and company have a little to much firepower for the young Memphis squad. Miami outplayed Boston twice in Miami but it will be interesting to see if they can do same in Boston...if they win one then the series probably goes 5.