Easiest Finals path ever??

[poop]

there was this one year...i still refer to it as the Year of the Injuries as there was an Unprecedented amount of star players hurt all at once, in the same year.

that year was 2009. before the playoffs even stared, many major teams were sidelined. Garnett was out for boston. Ginobili was out for the Spurs. Amare was out for the suns.

lets look at the path of the *champion* of that year's path:

1st round: Utah Jazz: tiny market team with only 48 wins comprised of mostly white players

2nd round: Houston Rockets: top 2 scorers injured; top 2 centers injured; left to face Lakers with only a 6-6 center; still pushed them to the edge

3rd round: Denver Nuggets: reach the conference finals and have the...denver nuggets waiting. nothing else need be said. considering major injuries to the Spurs and Suns

Finals: face a young, noobie orlando team only there because Boston faced major injuries



The Only contender in 2008-2009 to not face major, catastrophic injuries come playoff time:.. the lakers.

2009: Weakest Finals run in NBA history

[Calico_Jack]

Bynum. Him being out only enhances Kobe's legacy

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

Historically, there are plenty of easy paths to a title.

1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks were clearly the class of the league. The highly anticipated finals matchup was going to be between them and the defending champion New York Knicks.

In round 1, the Bucks beat Golden State, 41-41, in 5 games.
In the Western Conference finals they did the same to the Lakers, 48-34, who were without Elgin Baylor and Jerry West due to injuries, and 6th man Keith Erickson who fell ill and required an appendectomy.

Willis Reed got hurt vs. the 42-40 Baltimore Bullets in the eastern conference finals and New York fell in 7 games.

Bucks swept the finals 4-0.

The first 8 Boston Celtics titles were ridiculously easy, back when there were about 8 teams in the league.
Step 1 Win the east, get a first round bye.
Step 2 host the ECF against the winner of the 2nd and 3rd eastern seeds.
Step 3 host the finals.

[crazylakerfan001]

you talking about the spurs with ginobili refer to 2008.

you talking about the suns with amare refer to 2010.

i guess ginobili being hurt was a blessing in disguise for you. Had we played and swept the spurs you would have probably killed yourself.

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

To add more about that 1970-71 season, and not to diminish the accomplishments of Kareem and Oscar with Milwaukee, the playoff seeding was flawed and was soon corrected. The top 2 teams from each division made the playoffs, and division winners hosted round 1 no matter who had the better record. The Bullets had HCA the 76rs in round 1 who had a 47-35 record, and Baltimore prevailed in 7 games, hosting the critical finale. The rebuilding Celtics missed out with 44-38, and Atlanta at 36-46 got in as fodder for the Knicks.

In the west, the Bulls had a better record, 51-31 than the Lakers but didn't get HCA and lost in 7, with the home team winning every game. Fellow midwest teams Phoenix 48-34 missed the playoffs with the same record as the Lakers, as did the Pistons, at 45-37. However, Golden State, 41-41 got in because they came 2nd in the Pacific.

The NBA changed it for the 1973-74 season.

[IronMexican]

D_O_A_T, how old are you?

[Koolaid_Man]

there was this one year...i still refer to it as the Year of the Injuries as there was an Unprecedented amount of star players hurt all at once, in the same year.

that year was 2009. before the playoffs even stared, many major teams were sidelined. Garnett was out for boston. Ginobili was out for the Spurs. Amare was out for the suns.

lets look at the path of the *champion* of that year's path:

1st round: Utah Jazz: tiny market team with only 48 wins comprised of mostly white players

2nd round: Houston Rockets: top 2 scorers injured; top 2 centers injured; left to face Lakers with only a 6-6 center; still pushed them to the edge

3rd round: Denver Nuggets: reach the conference finals and have the...denver nuggets waiting. nothing else need be said. considering major injuries to the Spurs and Suns

Finals: face a young, noobie orlando team only there because Boston faced major injuries



The Only contender in 2008-2009 to not face major, catastrophic injuries come playoff time:.. the lakers.

2009: Weakest Finals run in NBA history


I know this...the easiest path to Koolaid's success and fame is no doubt the fucking SpurTalk idiots...

[Giuseppe]

Kobe: 5

Duncan: 4

Good morning, Arizona!

[VBM]

Spurs in 07 had an easy go of it, tbh. Dallas got knocked out by Golden St. The Nash bloody nose plus the Amare suspension. Utah in the WCF, and then a one-man Cavs team in the Finals (instead of a Detroit squad that took them to 7 in 05). I'm all for attempting to troll Laker fans, but SA benefitted from a similar situation in 07

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

D_O_A_T, how old are you?

Old enough to be your grandpa but young enough to remember what transpired way back when.

Actually, the years 1969-1974 are quite full of what ifs for the Bucks, Knicks, Celtics, and Lakers.

The Knicks are arguably the best team of this span. They lost to Russell's Celtics in 1969 with HCA in the ECF. In 1970 they were champs. 1971, they were picked to beat Milwaukee, having won 4 of 5 regular season games, but Reed went down to injury. Same in 1972, but they still made the finals without him and lost to Lakers. They upset Boston in 1973, then beat LA w/o HCA. In 974, reed went down again and they lost to Boston.

The Bucks: Kareem came into the league in 1969-70 as Lew Alcindor and they played in the east that year, and lost ECF to the Knicks in 5. Next yer, Oscar Robertson arrived. As mentioned, they won it all in 1971 not having to play the Bulls or Knicks if playoff seeding done fairly and injuries hadn't happened. Bucks and Knicks were co-favorites in 1971-72 but the Lakers surprised everyone. 1973, the Bucks tied Lakers for best record in west and won coin flip for HCA, but lost quickly to the Warriors in the first round. 1974, Chamberlain was gone from LA and West was out injured so they breezed to the finals. They probably would have beaten Boston, but key player Lucius Allen was injured and Oscar was about done, a lingering abdominal injury from 1971-72 did him in. He retired after that year. Kareem couldn't lead the Bucks to the playoffs in 1974-75 and was traded to the Lakers.

Lakers played in 4 finals from 1969-73 and won one. They were favored in 3. Boston won in 1969, and broke the team up, Russell and Sam Jones retired. They had best record in east from 1972 on, but were upset by Knicks for 2 years.

The point of all the above is, the Knicks arguably could have won 6 titles in a row 1969-74 and their fans had a sour grapes beef about 1971. Which is what this thread is about, or it's just trolling. A Lakers fan can say they beat Boston in 2009, twice, in Boston w/o Bynum. They justified 2009 title winning in 2010 over Celtics. Since the injury card is being played, if Bynum and Bryant are healthy, Lakers sweep that series. At the very worst, a healthy Bryant goes 18-24 in a potential game 7.

Once again, injuries are part of the game. You can make a case for another NBA champion just about every season due to them. However, 2009 was nowhere near the easiest path to an NBA finals championship. 1971 may be, or any of the first 8 Celtics titles.

Lesson: Live for reality, not what ifs!

[AussieFanKurt]

bouncy boobies

[Venti Quattro]

The 2007 Spurs are strong contenders

1st round: Denver
2nd round: Phoenix
3rd round: Utah
Finals: Cleveland

[Bartleby]

D_O_A_T bringin' the old school goods. :toast

[frodo]

07' cavs got the easiest path to the finals, only to get curbstomped 0-4 by the spurs. eastern conference were always that weak prior to the boston big3 union.