jeffdrums22
02-17-2007, 12:13 PM
3 championships in the Tim Duncan/Gregg Poppovich era counts as a dynasty, period. Also, in Duncan/Poppovich era, we are the winningest team in all of professional sports for the last 10 years. And if we get another championship with Parker, Bowen, and Ginobili, we solidify as a dynasty, that would be 3 championships with the group of Parker, Ginobili, and Bowen. The league has gotten a lot more tough to win in since the end of the Lakers 2000-2002 championship run. No team has won a back to back championship since then.
If you really think about it, the only 2 West teams to win any championships since the end of the Bulls' 90's run are the Spurs and the Lakers. Those two teams have won 6 out of the 8 championships since Jordan's domination ended. Then you have Pistons and Heat. The Lakers in 2004 were just too overhyped by the NBA media and they masked the truth throughout the whole year: 4 players and everyone else is non-existant. It's in the Finals where you find out if a team is for real or not. Same with Dallas in 2006, overhyped while masking the truth: Only one dominant player with everyone else riding his back. Those were two teams who just didn't have what it takes. There is no "the better team lost" in the Finals, period. If there is such a thing, we might as well not have an NBA Finals anymore.
The NBA is a league nowadays where one play can decide a whole series. If Fisher's 0.4 shot doesn't go in in 2004, and Manu doesn't foul Nowitzki at the end of Game 7 last year, we're talking 4 straight championships.
Of course, those are only IF's and nothing more.
If you really think about it, the only 2 West teams to win any championships since the end of the Bulls' 90's run are the Spurs and the Lakers. Those two teams have won 6 out of the 8 championships since Jordan's domination ended. Then you have Pistons and Heat. The Lakers in 2004 were just too overhyped by the NBA media and they masked the truth throughout the whole year: 4 players and everyone else is non-existant. It's in the Finals where you find out if a team is for real or not. Same with Dallas in 2006, overhyped while masking the truth: Only one dominant player with everyone else riding his back. Those were two teams who just didn't have what it takes. There is no "the better team lost" in the Finals, period. If there is such a thing, we might as well not have an NBA Finals anymore.
The NBA is a league nowadays where one play can decide a whole series. If Fisher's 0.4 shot doesn't go in in 2004, and Manu doesn't foul Nowitzki at the end of Game 7 last year, we're talking 4 straight championships.
Of course, those are only IF's and nothing more.