Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
Does Phoenix have an edge at any position? Seriously. Point guard, I guess. But it's not like Nash can stop Harris or Terry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Phoenix has the edge in 3 point shooting and fast breaking. That's really all they've ever had and it's worked for them.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

td,

FWIW the overwhelming consensus here in Phoenix is that the Suns have some chance against the Mavs, but virtually none against the Spurs, including reasons addressed above. The Spurs at full strength seem to have had the Suns number the past two years.

This could be why at a crowded sports bar last night 95% of the crowd wanted Dallas to win. It could also be that we're tired of Big Shot Bob, Captain Flop (Ginobili), and boring finals games.

Finally, I didn't bother to read comments about last night's game in that thread because it read like a chat room and didn't make much sense out of context, but just want to point out that some of those calls Duncan got were RIDICULOUS. And this was echoed by pretty much everyone in the joint.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does Phoenix have an edge at any position? Seriously. Point guard, I guess. But it's not like Nash can stop Harris or Terry.

[/ QUOTE ]

Phoenix has the edge in 3 point shooting and fast breaking. That's really all they've ever had and it's worked for them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. With Phoenix thinking position by position doesn't make as much sense, at least when they have the ball. When Dallas has the ball and NO ONE can defend Dirk, Terry, or Harris, then it matters some. Not to mention Howard, Stackhouse. Too many weapons.

Dallas is very athletic also. I don't think even the Suns can outrun them. (I don't mean that Dallas is going to try to run with them, rather that they'll be able to get back and defend and not worry as much about getting killed by missed shots leading to easy transition baskets as most teams do versus the Suns.)

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Were the Heat missing Shaq for one or two of the early games versus Detroit?

Of course that makes a difference, but it still is interesting to me that the Pistons owned the Heat in the regular season, while the Mavs and Suns split, but everyone (including me) thinks Dallas has the easier series.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

The 7 game Pistons Cavs series was a little misleading. Even though the final score was 4-3, all 3 of the Cavs wins were by a few points or less, and 3 of the 4 Pistons wins were blowouts.
Pistons in 6
Mavs in 6

Pistons over Mavs 4-2.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

tuq,

I do see your point, I just think that everyone is going to think this...I mean a ton of people had Dallas still as not even a slight favorite when the series was 3-1 and said they had no chance at all in game 7. I had a bet with a Cuban on my team for $200 in game 7, he said that SA was going to win by 20+ points, he was that confident. There is a lot of fear of SA b/c of what they have done in the past, ok, they earned that, great but Dallas outplayed them and they did with a lot of what has worked for SA (other than a great big guy) in the past.

I think the Suns have some chance against anyone just b/c they are dangerous, they can shoot it lights out and when they get into that frenzy and that pace nobody beats them. The champs are always going to get more love than the team that is known for choking and known for what has happened in the past. But the truth is that the team the Suns beat last year isn't the same team, so all of those people may be misinformed just b/c they haven't been watching this Dallas team very closely all year. The people around me right now didn't even know Dallas was any different this year, right now I am in Connecticut, and they just thought they were the same offense only team from the past so why wouldn't Suns fans root against the Spurs?

I say 6 games b/c that pace the Suns play at is dangerous.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Detroit in 6.
Dallas in 6.

Yes, predicting both win away. These are both the better teams, and have proven they can win on the road. Strongly feel these are the winners, and if selecting 2nd choice # of games, lean towards Detroit in 7 and Dallas in 5.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

TD
All of it was also because the Spurs were playing at home for Game 7.
After watching most of the games I thought Dallas should win the series for sure given the Spurs problems of the past...no one on the bench ever shows up..continued into this years playoffs. Also Parker will always vanish.

Spurs are not a Dynasty, never were.
It is a huge win for Dallas obviously given their past, but its not like they knocked of the best team in the league(Pistons).

The one thing the Suns have going for them is they have nothing to lose. If I was a Mavs fan I'd be slightly worried about how everyone is saying the Mavs are a lock for the Finals and will basically sweep the Suns.

No one expects the Suns to do well in this round...so if they play loose and shoot well-defending Harris,Howard etc won't be a worry. If the score is 115-120....the Suns will almost always come out with the win.

Dallas needs to win the first two home games.

Dallas in 7
Heat in 6

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

I wonder if its possible for the PreGame show to talk about the Heat any more. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Round 1: 3/5 games on NBA TV
Round 2: LBJ LBJ LBJ
Round 3: Wade Shaq Wade Shaq Wade Shaq

Seems like the Finals made be the first time people notice the Pistons are playing. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Not that I'm complaining. Just an observation.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Frankly I'm surprised by the Heat love. Is this a sexy underdog pick, or are people jumping onto the bandwagon that quickly? The Heat just don't match up well with the Pistons, period. They (and Shaq) have a pretty poor record the last few years vs the 'Stones.

[/ QUOTE ]

it's no secret, they've been playing badly. if they keep playing badly they're gonna lose. even if they don't, they might lose. This isn't the same Heat team as last year? It isn't the same Pistons team either.

Pistons in 7, Mavs in 6

[/ QUOTE ]

the pistons would need to play worse then they did against the cavs to lose this.

[/ QUOTE ]

well obviously. why would they have to play better to beat a better team?

.....

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Charlie,

Why weren't the Spurs a dynasty?

Their record & accomplishments for the last eight years:

2004-05 59 23 .720 NBA Champions
2003-04 57 25 .695 L to Lakers in Conf Semis

[ QUOTE ]
The 2004 postseason marked the seventh consecutive playoff appearance for the Spurs … the Spurs have made the playoffs in 14 of the last 15 years, missing only the 1996-97 season in which David Robinson played only six games … in their NBA history, the Spurs have earned a playoff berth in 24 out of their 28 NBA seasons … only the Lakers, with 26 postseason appearances, have made more trips to the playoffs during the 28-year span … the Spurs have an all-time NBA postseason record of 105-101 (.510) which is sixth best among current NBA franchises.

[/ QUOTE ]

2002-03 60 22 .732 NBA Champions
2001-02 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Semis
2000-01 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Finals
1999-00 53 29 .646 L to Suns in 1st Rnd. (Ton of injuries including Tim Duncan)
1998-99 37 13 .740 NBA Champions
1997-98 56 26 .683 L to Jazz in Conf Semis

This is a pretty stout resume considering they have played in the brutal West. I guess when we hear dynasty we have a knee jerk reaction of the old Celtics teams or the 80's Lakers/Celtics or the 90's Bulls but I definately think the late 90's and early 00's Spurs can be classified in there as well. They have done it for a long enough time.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

wtf, anyone else find it hard to believe that Ben Wallace is only 240 pounds?

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Three random sound clips here. These were on the Mavericks website as ringtones. I got a chuckle

link1
link2

link 3 (the song)

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Because flashy great individual players sell. Great Team O/D don't (which the Pistons haven't been playing lately, at least on O). People outside of Detroit can certainly acknowledge that Ben and Chauncey and the like are excellent players, but no one outside of Detroit really revels in a chance to watch them, while plenty of outsiders will tune in just to see Lebron/Kobe...people have huge fetishes for flashy guards.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

You need to win multiple titles in a row to be a dynasty in my book.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

2002-03 60 22 .732 NBA Champions
2001-02 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Semis
2000-01 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Finals
1999-00 53 29 .646 L to Suns in 1st Rnd. (Ton of injuries including Tim Duncan)
1998-99 37 13 .740 NBA Champions
1997-98 56 26 .683 L to Jazz in Conf Semis


2/6 is a Dynasty...damn. LOL

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

I don't think the Spurs are even close to a dynasty. The Lakers had a mini dynasty when they won 3 in a row. The Bulls winning 6 in 8 years is a dynasty.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
You need to win multiple titles in a row to be a dynasty in my book.


[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. So then you are saying the 80's Celtics weren't a dynasty? But by this logic the Bad Boy late 80's Pistons and the mid 90's Rockets could be?

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
2002-03 60 22 .732 NBA Champions
2001-02 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Semis
2000-01 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Finals
1999-00 53 29 .646 L to Suns in 1st Rnd. (Ton of injuries including Tim Duncan)
1998-99 37 13 .740 NBA Champions
1997-98 56 26 .683 L to Jazz in Conf Semis


2/6 is a Dynasty...damn. LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

why would you choose those years, and not 98/99 - 04/05 where they won 3 out of 7? are you just trying to be a dick?

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
2002-03 60 22 .732 NBA Champions
2001-02 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Semis
2000-01 58 24 .707 L to Lakers in Conf Finals
1999-00 53 29 .646 L to Suns in 1st Rnd. (Ton of injuries including Tim Duncan)
1998-99 37 13 .740 NBA Champions
1997-98 56 26 .683 L to Jazz in Conf Semis


2/6 is a Dynasty...damn. LOL



[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you do this? I could easily do this...


2004-05 59 23 .720 NBA Champions
2003-04 57 25 .695 L to Lakers in Conf Semis
2002-03 60 22 .732 NBA Champions


2/3 is a Dynasty...damn. LOL.

Why are you trying to be tricky. I was just trying to have a normal discussion about what makes a dynasty is all.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You need to win multiple titles in a row to be a dynasty in my book.


[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. So then you are saying the 80's Celtics weren't a dynasty? But by this logic the Bad Boy late 80's Pistons and the mid 90's Rockets could be?

[/ QUOTE ]
No. Not fair enough. He said 2/6, it's 3/8. The Celtics won three in the 80s, none back-to-back, but are considered a dynasty from '80-'87, also an 8-year stretch. I've never seen the Spurs' numbers consolidated like this, clearly they qualify.

That said, I could do without you making an excuse for why they got pwned by my Suns in the first round in 2000...

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

3 titles in 7 years isn't a dynasty? Tough crowd.

So what if a team wins 50 titles in 99 years, but not in consecutive years?

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
That said, I could do without you making an excuse for why they got pwned by my Suns in the first round in 2000...




[/ QUOTE ]

ssssshhhhh, stay out of this for the time being and I will apologize in a bit.

[ QUOTE ]
No. Not fair enough. He said 2/6, it's 3/8. The Celtics won three in the 80s, none back-to-back, but are considered a dynasty from '80-'87, also an 8-year stretch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically the point I wanted Charlie to get since this is almost identical to the SA franchise. 3 titles in 7 years and not back to back.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Pretty salty start for the Heat.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

They didn't exactly dominate in 2005
They played the short season 2003

they were the Lakers punching bag for a stretch....how is this a dynasty?
they were a very very good team over 7-8 years.

The Lakers with Shaq/KOBE were the last "dynasty".
The Lakers were a great team over 5-7 years.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Charlie now you're just arguing about semantics.

In other news, Pistons defense off to a horrible start.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Hornacek,

I predict a tightening of the screws in the second half, maybe the second quarter. Still early.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

I just have a hard time calling the Spurs a dynasty.
I view teams like the Bulls, Lakers(2000),Yankees, etc dynasties.
I've always viewed dynasties as being a short time period where one team ruled. but thats just me.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

No problem. I think the "Spurs Dynasty" is akin to saying something like a "Red Wings Dynasty" in the NHL from 97-2004.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Gary Payton has to be the worst player getting minutes in the entire playoffs. Great in his day, but this guy needs to retire... quickly.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Lindsay Hunter?

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well the Pistons and Mavs barely got by the Cavs and Spurs...and one break here or there and neither team advances...so they are obviously now going to destroy both teams their playing...lol

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether or not the Spurs were a dynasty, the fact remains that the Mavs barely getting by the defending champs is a hell of a lot different than the Suns tiddlywinkin' around for 14 games against the Lakers and Clippers.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Yeah, going 7 against the Spurs is not an indictment. Giving up 110+ points to the Clippers is.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
Lindsay Hunter?

[/ QUOTE ]

So your power went out in the second half on Sunday?

Edit - on second thought, just on these four teams, you might be right.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lindsay Hunter?

[/ QUOTE ]

So your power went out in the second half on Sunday?

Edit - on second thought, just on these four teams, you might be right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Erick Dampier, Gary Payton, Lindsay Hunter... Raja Bell's been playing pretty badly.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
Erick Dampier, Gary Payton, Lindsay Hunter... Raja Bell's been playing pretty badly.

[/ QUOTE ]
O RRY?

Raja Bell: 49% 2FG, 49% 3FG, 15.8 PPG, 42 MPG, all up from the regular season.

Plus one excellent takedown:

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j307/tuq2k2/Kobe.jpg

Oh yeah, and one epic three pointer:

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j307/tuq2k2/raja.jpg

Sometimes you do better in chat room mode.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lindsay Hunter?

[/ QUOTE ]

So your power went out in the second half on Sunday?

Edit - on second thought, just on these four teams, you might be right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Erick Dampier, Gary Payton, Lindsay Hunter... Raja Bell's been playing pretty badly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lindsay hasn't been playing poorly, though. He's just limited. He's giving what they need from him.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Raja Bell no way, Lindsay Hunter maybe, Dampier... i dunno. he had a bad matchup in round 2, picked up a lot of questionable fouls against Duncan, will be interesting to see how he does vs Pheonix.

Who will get the minutes at center for Dallas? Dampier and Diop gonna have trouble following Johnson around, do you just play Keith Van Horn most of the game instead of those two?

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

I dont think Damp and Diop are going to play much you cant really put them on anyone on the suns.

Re: ** NBA Conference Finals **
 

Pistons = Brick city