Is the Suns vs Mavs the best rivalry?

[SpursDynasty]

Best NBA Rivalry: Suns-Mavs, Spurs-Mavs, Heat-Pistons

Mike Breen is an idiot, by the way.

[pking]

I personally feel like it's the Spurs/Mavs. Two of the Spurs/Mavs games being so early when nobody knows how good the teams would be and one being so late that the game doesnt really matter kinda made the rivalry seem not as intense -- the Suns/Mavs games have been at much better times.

[Spurminator]

These matchups are a lot of fun. I look forward to the next Suns-Mavs matchup next season.

[jman3000]

spurs - bucks

[angel_luv]

It is a good rivalry...
As far as best... I think it is a close call between Spurs/ Mavs and Suns/ Mavs.

[Chris Childs]

IDK, I think 'right now' it's the Suns and Mavs but the Spurs and Mavs are a good rivalry too. It's close but I have to give the edge to Suns and Mavs just because of the buildup from previous years.

[Amare_32]

How about the Bulls/Heat rivalry. That is a increasingly nasty rivalry. Both teams seemed to have a dislike for each other. Plus Posey always seems to get suspended because of a flagrant foul on a Bulls player.

[aaronstampler]

I hope y'all enjoyed the last Phx/Dal game of the season.

[monosylab1k]

I hope y'all enjoyed the last Phx/Dal game of the season.

I wish we ended our last game vs the Suns by kicking their ass, but we'll gladly let you guys enjoy that honor.

[1Parker1]

These matchups are a lot of fun. I look forward to the next Suns-Mavs matchup next season.


:lol :tu

[1Parker1]

I like Spurs vs Mavs better. Though I still don't think the Mavs Spurs rivalry is on the same level as the Lakers Spurs rivalry from back in the day :(

[Dirk Nowitzki]

As much as I am pissed about this loss, I get a kick at the Spurs fans here who act like the Suns are no real threat to them. Honestly, get over yourselves! The Suns have a great chance to beat the Spurs in a 7 game series. You homers think it will actually go 5 games!! :drunk :drunk :drunk IMO the Suns would give us so much more hell then the Spurs would.

[confined]

IMO the suns rivals are the lakers

but in reality there is only one real rivalry in the nba and thats mavs vs spurs....and the grueling 7 game seris last year prooves it

[JMarkJohns]

The Suns have no geographical rivals and so they don't really have one of these range wars ala Dallas V San Antonio or whatnot. Lakers are about as close as they have and that's a stretch on the Lakers part. Suns have three semi-rivals, Dallas, San Antonio and Los Angeles. I say semi because one (San Antonio) you can't really count a rivalry since the Spurs kick the Suns ass 70% of the time, another (Dallas) is shared by players but separated by a thousand miles for fans and the other (Los Angeles) is 14 Titles for the Lakers to 0 for the Suns.

Take what you can get, I guess.

[King]

Is the Suns/Mavs even a rivalry? Just because two teams are good - it doesn't make it a rivalry. They have no bearing on each other at all.

San Antonio and Dallas are at least in the same state.

San Antonio/LA was a rivalry when they always met in the playoffs.

Phoenix/Dallas isn't a rivalry. It's two good teams, but no different from two other good teams - and the Steve Nash factor doesn't make it a rivalry.

[dirk4mvp]

Best rivalry? Maybe. Two funnest teams to watch play each other, definately.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Best rivalry? Maybe. Two funnest teams to watch play each other, definately.


most fun*

[dirk4mvp]

w/e This isn't english class.

[da_suns_fan__]

I must have blacked out during the great "Spurs/Lakers" rivalry.

I remember the Lakers handing the Spurs their collective asses in 2001, and then making short work of them in 2002.

The Spurs 2003 victory was more a product of Shaq being overweight and the lakers being unmotivated after winning three straight championships.

And just to prove it, the Lakers came back and took out the Spurs in six in 2004.

Thats not exactly a rivalry. Teams have to exchange victories for it to be a rivalry.

The Spurs beat the Lakers in 2003, but it seemed like "right place/ right time".

Now the Lakers/Kings matchup from around the same time...THAT was the rivalry. You had Shaq calling them the "queens". Phil calling Sac-town a "cowtown" etc.

You could see how much those teams hated each other.

The Spurs were/are too boring to ever produce a real rivalry.

[THE SIXTH MAN]

I must have blacked out during the great "Spurs/Lakers" rivalry.

I remember the Lakers handing the Spurs their collective asses in 2001, and then making short work of them in 2002.
What about in 1999?



The Spurs 2003 victory was more a product of Shaq being overweight and the lakers being unmotivated after winning three straight championships.

And just to prove it, the Lakers came back and took out the Spurs in six in 2004.
:lol Way to contradict your self there. Bottom line is, if they were good enough to win in 04' then they were good enough to win in 03'.



Thats not exactly a rivalry. Teams have to exchange victories for it to be a rivalry.
:rolleyes Since 99' only 4 teams have won the NBA title. The spurs and lakers are two of those four teams.


The Spurs were/are too boring to ever produce a real rivalry.
:lol Yeah, last years western conference semis was pretty boring. :drunk

[StylisticS]

Now what I would like to see are these so called nba rivalries last. That's one thing I love about the NFL. The rivalries last even when the team sucks. Who remembers the 2001 game between 0-5 Dallas vs 0-5 Washington on MONDAY NIGHT? :lol

[bdictjames]

Clearly, this is best rivalry.

Cuban is a fool for letting the soon to be "3-time" MVP walk away.

If he had a brain, he would've kept Nash and traded Nowitzki away for someone who had a pair of balls.
Nowitzki/Marion/Amare sounds pretty scary to me.

Who's gonna be the receiving end of Nash's assists? Diop? Dampier? You gotta be kidding me.

[mabber]

The Suns vs. the Mavs games are more fun to watch but the Spurs/Mavs is a bigger rivalry for sure. At least to the players and fans (of San Antonio & Dallas).

[SpursDynasty]

I must have blacked out during the great "Spurs/Lakers" rivalry.

I remember the Lakers handing the Spurs their collective asses in 2001, and then making short work of them in 2002.

The Spurs 2003 victory was more a product of Shaq being overweight and the lakers being unmotivated after winning three straight championships.

And just to prove it, the Lakers came back and took out the Spurs in six in 2004.

Thats not exactly a rivalry. Teams have to exchange victories for it to be a rivalry.

The Spurs beat the Lakers in 2003, but it seemed like "right place/ right time".

Now the Lakers/Kings matchup from around the same time...THAT was the rivalry. You had Shaq calling them the "queens". Phil calling Sac-town a "cowtown" etc.

You could see how much those teams hated each other.

The Spurs were/are too boring to ever produce a real rivalry.

Say what you want about 2003, but the Spurs eliminated the Lakers AND went all the way - a true dethroning. If they were unmotivated, why was Kobe crying, Derek Fisher too? We remember their faces after that elimination. By the way, if a team supposedly is "unmotivated", why even play in the playoffs? Stop making excuses. LA has been dead since 2003.

The 2004 Lakers team should have been the NBA Champions with the lineup they had. You probably won't ever see a lineup with that kind of caliber again - 4 NBA Hall of Famers, 2 who took drastic pay cuts. But by the team they reached the Finals, they felt the championship was owed to them and stopped playing.

It doesn't matter who's "supposed" to win - You still have to go out and play (Dallas, take note.)

[da_suns_fan__]

Say what you want about 2003, but the Spurs eliminated the Lakers AND went all the way - a true dethroning. If they were unmotivated, why was Kobe crying, Derek Fisher too? We remember their faces after that elimination. By the way, if a team supposedly is "unmotivated", why even play in the playoffs? Stop making excuses. LA has been dead since 2003.

The 2004 Lakers team should have been the NBA Champions with the lineup they had. You probably won't ever see a lineup with that kind of caliber again - 4 NBA Hall of Famers, 2 who took drastic pay cuts. But by the team they reached the Finals, they felt the championship was owed to them and stopped playing.

It doesn't matter who's "supposed" to win - You still have to go out and play (Dallas, take note.)


Let me say that the 2003 team was definately the best team that year...but for there to be a "rivalry", I think players from both sides have to really hate/love playing each other. I can't remember there being a drawn out, trash talking series between those two teams. If you asked Laker fans which teams they hated the most, I think they would say Heat, Suns and Kings (maybe Boston around ten-fifteen years ago).

That being said, I don't think the Suns/Mavs have a great rivalry. There's no bad blood between these two teams. The only bad blood is between Nash and Cuban, and even then Nash hasn't really said a thing since he signed with the Suns.

[dallaskd]

spurs-mavs by far.

[Rip-Hamilton32]

there is no real mav vs suns rival, people just assume that when the top 2 teams play that its a rivalry imo its just another game for both teams

[Cry Havoc]

I like Spurs vs Mavs better. Though I still don't think the Mavs Spurs rivalry is on the same level as the Lakers Spurs rivalry from back in the day :(

Not yet.

[Cry Havoc]

Thats not exactly a rivalry. Teams have to exchange victories for it to be a rivalry.

By your logic, the Suns can't have rivalries with any elite teams in the west, then. :lol

[da_suns_fan__]

By your logic, the Suns can't have rivalries with any elite teams in the west, then. :lol


I guess you weren't around when the Suns eliminated the Mavs two years ago.

[Cry Havoc]

I guess you weren't around when the Suns eliminated the Mavs two years ago.

The Mavs were elite two years ago?

Really? Someone should have told the rest of the NBA. No one had them going past the WCF. In fact, the Suns were heavily favored in that series.

To review: The Suns have never defeated an elite WC team in the Steven Nash era.

[da_suns_fan__]

The Mavs were elite two years ago?

Really? Someone should have told the rest of the NBA. No one had them going past the WCF. In fact, the Suns were heavily favored in that series.

To review: The Suns have never defeated an elite WC team in the Steven Nash era.

What a clown...they beat a Mavs team that won 58 games. Same roster and coach thats got 61 wins right now. Thats not elite?

But the real point is that I never said that the Suns have a rivalry with the Mavs or Spurs, did I?

I said that Spurs fans were kidding themselves claiming they had a rivalry with the Lakers earlier in the decade.

Getting your asses handed to you three out of four years without your opponent even blinking an eye isn't a rivalry.

I saw all I needed to see in 2001 when the over-hyped WCF showdown between the Spurs and Lakers ended in a collosal sweep.

[THE SIXTH MAN]

But the real point is that I never said that the Suns have a rivalry with the Mavs or Spurs, did I?

I said that Spurs fans were kidding themselves claiming they had a rivalry with the Lakers earlier in the decade.

Getting your asses handed to you three out of four years without your opponent even blinking an eye isn't a rivalry.

I saw all I needed to see in 2001 when the over-hyped WCF showdown between the Spurs and Lakers ended in a collosal sweep.
Whats funny is that you cant even fallow your own argument. Not only that, but your also showing that you lack bringing up the facts when it comes to the series between the two teams. If your going to argue head to head playoff match ups do some research before talking out of your ass first. The Spurs have faced the Lakers in the playoffs 5 times since 99'.

99' Conference semis- Spurs win 4-0
01' Conference finals- Lakers win 4-0
02' Conference semis- Lakers win 4-1
03' Conference semis- Spurs win 4-2
04' Conference semis- Lakers win 4-2

05' L.A. didn't even make the playoffs, and in 06' they lost in the first round. And as of right now, were set to meat again in the first round of this years playoffs. Now by your logic a team has to "exchange victories" for it to be a rivalry. Right now in recent history the current exchange between the two is 3-2 in favor of the Lakers. But that can change if we win the first round match up this year, making it a 3-3 tie. So whats your excuse now?

[ponky]

Spurs-Mavs, hands down. On a similar topic, the tix for the last Spurs/Mavs game are the highest I've seen all seaosn on Ebay...$300 and up for upper level seats which sell from between $18-38. I think the high prices are a result of the Spurs-Mavs rivalry and fan appreciation day (cuban gave away airline tix last season). I'd rather save that money for playoff tix, especially because I'm thinking Avery will rest his guys.

[mabber]

Spurs-Mavs, hands down. On a similar topic, the tix for the last Spurs/Mavs game are the highest I've seen all seaosn on Ebay...$300 and up for upper level seats which sell from between $18-38. I think the high prices are a result of the Spurs-Mavs rivalry and fan appreciation day (cuban gave away airline tix last season). I'd rather save that money for playoff tix, especially because I'm thinking Avery will rest his guys.

Yep, that's why I'm selling my tix on EBay. I think I'll get a lot more than they're worth (particularly for a game that won't matter).

[Marklar MM]

Too bad the Pacers have self destructed...we always could count on a good fight taking place every game.

[Cry Havoc]

What a clown...they beat a Mavs team that won 58 games. Same roster and coach thats got 61 wins right now. Thats not elite?

But the real point is that I never said that the Suns have a rivalry with the Mavs or Spurs, did I?

I said that Spurs fans were kidding themselves claiming they had a rivalry with the Lakers earlier in the decade.

Getting your asses handed to you three out of four years without your opponent even blinking an eye isn't a rivalry.

I saw all I needed to see in 2001 when the over-hyped WCF showdown between the Spurs and Lakers ended in a collosal sweep.


haha, too bad. You've been so thoroughly owned by THE SIXTH MAN that I barely need to respond to this now.

[da_suns_fan__]

LMAO @ Spurs fans bringing up the lockout year.

Some people never learn.

[RonMexico]

haha, too bad. You've been so thoroughly owned by THE SIXTH MAN that I barely need to respond to this now.

No, he hasn't... THE SIXTH MAN's post was terrible.

First off, when you shorten years, the apostrophe is supposed to go in front of the year (i.e. '99 instead of 99').

Secondly, I'm pretty sure da_suns_fan was talking about how the Mavs and Suns have split EVERY game they've played in the past 3 years... as in, they've split the season series and they each beat the other 4-2 in consecutive years in the playoffs.

Therefore, the Lakers are NOT up simply 3-2 on the Spurs... they are in fact, up 14-11 based on the playoff data THE SIXTH MAN provided. Now, if you want to compare them the way we do the Suns/Mavs, then you need to find regular season data since '99 for the Spurs/Lakers and try to show how close that rivalry was.

[Cry Havoc]

Now, if you want to compare them the way we do the Suns/Mavs, then you need to find regular season data since '99 for the Spurs/Lakers and try to show how close that rivalry was.

Comparing a rivalry based upon regular season data?

Yep. Definitely a Suns fan. :lol

Rivalries are made in the POST-SEASON. Not because you've played two series in the past 10 years and traded punches.

[LAKERS4LIFE]

No, he hasn't... THE SIXTH MAN's post was terrible.

First off, when you shorten years, the apostrophe is supposed to go in front of the year (i.e. '99 instead of 99').

Secondly, I'm pretty sure da_suns_fan was talking about how the Mavs and Suns have split EVERY game they've played in the past 3 years... as in, they've split the season series and they each beat the other 4-2 in consecutive years in the playoffs.

Therefore, the Lakers are NOT up simply 3-2 on the Spurs... they are in fact, up 14-11 based on the playoff data THE SIXTH MAN provided. Now, if you want to compare them the way we do the Suns/Mavs, then you need to find regular season data since '99 for the Spurs/Lakers and try to show how close that rivalry was.


Well Said.

Funny how everyone in SA Called the LAKERS their Rivals.
:lol :lol :lol :lol

[Findog]

Suns-Mavs for most entertaining rivalry.

Spurs-Mavs for most important rivalry.

As for which rivalry is "best", that's a judgment call.

[ducks]

it is not heat vs lakers

[Xylus]

Suns-Mavs for most entertaining rivalry.

Spurs-Mavs for most important rivalry.

As for which rivalry is "best", that's a judgment call.
Sounds about right to me.

If the Suns eliminate the Spurs in the 2nd round, though, I imagine Suns-Mavs will become the more important rivalry.

Can't we just have a three-way rivalry? :lol

[da_suns_fan__]

Well..the Lakers/Spurs "rivalry" might get some juice if the Lakers beat the Spurs this year.

Judging by their season series, I'd say thats a possibility.

[Cry Havoc]

Well..the Lakers/Spurs "rivalry" might get some juice if the Lakers beat the Spurs this year.

Judging by their season series, I'd say thats a possibility.

The Nuggets would have made the same assumption in the past. :lol

[dallasmavsnfuego214]

as a Mavs fan i say the Spurs-Mavs. the Suns have never beaten an elite team. they beat the Mavs two years ago with mostly the same roster, BUT no Diop, Devin Harris has come a long way since, Howard has improved, Dirk has stepped his game way up.

sure we won 58 games but that was just the regular season

[THE SIXTH MAN]

No, he hasn't... THE SIXTH MAN's post was terrible.

First off, when you shorten years, the apostrophe is supposed to go in front of the year (i.e. '99 instead of 99').
Nit picky are we? :dramaquee


Secondly, I'm pretty sure da_suns_fan was talking about how the Mavs and Suns have split EVERY game they've played in the past 3 years... as in, they've split the season series and they each beat the other 4-2 in consecutive years in the playoffs.
Well your assuming wrong on behalf of da_suns_fan, he even said it himself that he wasn't talking about the mav/suns rivalry. I'm going by his logic, as in playoff match ups. Go back and reread his posts. Again strictly by his logic. Besides who the fuck goes by season series when deciding NBA rivalries? For example the games that are to be played with in the next couple of weeks will be meaningless due to teams sitting out their best players. So therefore regular season data wouldn't hold much weight in that regard.


Therefore, the Lakers are NOT up simply 3-2 on the Spurs... they are in fact, up 14-11 based on the playoff data THE SIXTH MAN provided.
It doesn't matter how you want to look at it. The bottom line is victories were exchanged and regardless if you look at it 3-2 or 14-11 there isn't a wide gap between the two.

[THE SIXTH MAN]

Judging by their season series, I'd say thats a possibility.
:jack Again judging a rivalry by regular season victories is weak. We have a series split 1-1 with the Bobcats this season, I guess we can consider them rivals too huh? :rolleyes

[Dalhoop]

Currently its Mavs-Spurs.

I like watching the Mav-Suns games as much as the next guy, but there is no rivalry. Now if Nash had a problem with the Mavs and talked about "sticking it to the Mavs" then you might have something to start a rivalry, but he has no problem with the Mavs and is on very good terms with the players. He understands that its all business.

The Spurs and Mavs are in the same division and are always battleing for the division lead (if not league lead). The Dirk injury in the playoffs a few years ago helped the rivalry (I don't think the Mavs would have won, but it would have went to game seven) and to follow that up with last years meeting in the playoffs.

It is the best not only right now, but the best is a long time in the NBA. Heat-Knicks was good, but those teams were not at the "Elite" level, everyone knew that the Bulls would win when it mattered, not either of those teams. The Mavs-Spurs are at the "Elite" level. They play games that are not just rivalry games, but games were the winner can claim that they are the best in the NBA at that time.

Please don't start with the three rings thing, thats not what the thread is about.

In a way the same is true with the Suns-Spurs, Suns-Mavs. The winner is the best in the NBA, at that moment.

The Suns simply dont bring out the "Hatred" in the fans. Mavs fans still look fondly at Nash. The same isn't true with Finley, he went to the Spurs (our rival) to get a ring. Letting both players go was business, Finley made it personal with where he went afterward.

AJ is also a focus for the rivalry. He is loved by Spur fans, for good reason, but now has given the one thing that the Mavs needed to them, a Spurs focus on defense. We love him, Spurs love him, but I think that deep down, some Spurs fans are saying "Why the Mavs, Little G, any team but them"

It makes for great drama, and the best basketball in the NBA in a long time.

[Findog]

Now if Nash had a problem with the Mavs and talked about "sticking it to the Mavs" then you might have something to start a rivalry, but he has no problem with the Mavs and is on very good terms with the players. He understands that its all business.

Uh, you're dead wrong here. Yes, he's best buds with Dirk, he recalls his time here fondly, but there is nothing he wants to do more than stick it to Cuban. It drives and animates him. He's said many times that he "didn't feel wanted" after his tenure in Dallas and he wants to prove Cuban wrong for not valuing his contributions enough to match Phoenix's offer.


The Suns simply dont bring out the "Hatred" in the fans. Mavs fans still look fondly at Nash

I still like Nash and all, but I HATE the Suns. Don't know why. I think it might be because both franchises are so close to a title and I want the Mavs to get there first. It will sting like hell if the Suns beat us to it. I'll be happy personally for Nash, but that's about it.


The same isn't true with Finley, he went to the Spurs (our rival) to get a ring. Letting both players go was business, Finley made it personal with where he went afterward.

Give me a break, this is pure horseshit. As much I loved Finley (hence my handle), I understood it made too much financial sense not to use the Houston exemption on him. And at that point, he owed the Mavericks franchise nothing. The Spurs were the defending champs at the time. There's nothing wrong with going to the place where you think you have the best chance of getting that elusive ring. He guessed wrong last year. He may yet be right though. Loyalty is a two-way street, you can't cut a guy and then get mad at him if he goes to your biggest rival. Minnesota and Denver were hot for him as well. What was he supposed to do, go to a lottery team so he could still get his 40 minutes a night? Time's running out for Finley, and Mavs fans have no right to complain about his destination. This line of reasoning irritates me to no end.

[da_suns_fan__]

Nit picky are we? :dramaquee


Well your assuming wrong on behalf of da_suns_fan, he even said it himself that he wasn't talking about the mav/suns rivalry. I'm going by his logic, as in playoff match ups. Go back and reread his posts. Again strictly by his logic. Besides who the fuck goes by season series when deciding NBA rivalries? For example the games that are to be played with in the next couple of weeks will be meaningless due to teams sitting out their best players. So therefore regular season data wouldn't hold much weight in that regard.


It doesn't matter how you want to look at it. The bottom line is victories were exchanged and regardless if you look at it 3-2 or 14-11 there isn't a wide gap between the two.

I stand guilty of not counting the lockout year...no Phil jackson, shortented season..nothing even worth remembering.

However, during the Lakers run with Phil Jackson, the Lakers were 14-7 against the Spurs in the playoffs.

Thats not a rivalry. Sorry.

Again, the Kings and Lakers had a nice rivalry going around the same time, and they actually had a series worth remembering.

[Dalhoop]

Uh, you're dead wrong here. Yes, he's best buds with Dirk, he recalls his time here fondly, but there is nothing he wants to do more than stick it to Cuban. It drives and animates him. He's said many times that he "didn't feel wanted" after his tenure in Dallas and he wants to prove Cuban wrong for not valuing his contributions enough to match Phoenix's offer.

Your arguement hold little water. It doesn't drive him in game vs the Mavs, if it did he would SAY SOMETHING. Don't you think that in the ESPN age if he came out and said everytime the played the Mavs "I am going to stick it to the Mavs" that it would be reported?

You see the difference is hidden in your own post, He wants to stick it to Cuban, not the Mavs and his buddies on the team. Not liking an owner that doesn't pay you what you think that your worth, is not something that a rivalry can be based on. Its something that happens all the time in the NBA .. Its old hat.


I still like Nash and all, but I HATE the Suns. Don't know why. I think it might be because both franchises are so close to a title and I want the Mavs to get there first. It will sting like hell if the Suns beat us to it. I'll be happy personally for Nash, but that's about it.

I like Nash too and sense he runs the team, I find it hard to dislike the Suns. Add to that the fact that they play a very intertaining brand of Basketball and its even harder for me to dislike them. Now do I want them to win over the Mavs? No, but the same is true of every team. I may like them, but not that much. The only team that I do not like is the Pistons, I don't like the way they play or some of the personalities on the team.


Give me a break, this is pure horseshit.

It making sense and me liking it are too different things, its the difference between a rivalry and not. There were only two or three teams that logicaly Finley would have went to, he went to the Spurs. I am sure that it made sense on all fronts, that doesn't mean that, as a Mavs fan, he should still be loved. I do think that his number will be retired in the future and I will honor that (He did some great things for the franchise), but as a player right now, him playing for the hated Spurs and the Spurs being the main road block between the Mavs and a Championship.

He is just on the wrong side.


Loyalty is a two-way street, you can't cut a guy and then get mad at him if he goes to your biggest rival. Minnesota and Denver were hot for him as well. What was he supposed to do, go to a lottery team so he could still get his 40 minutes a night? Time's running out for Finley, and Mavs fans have no right to complain about his destination. This line of reasoning irritates me to no end.

Explain why I, as a fan, cannot be mad at him for playing for a rival? Because it makes sense? So what. Because he didn't want ot play for a lotto team? So what. Players do what is best for themselves all the time, some are good for the team, others not. Do I care about the reasons? No at all.

What does matter is that at one time he was the face of the franchise, now he is playing for the enemy. Explain why I cannot hate him for those simple facts.

[Findog]

that doesn't mean that, as a Mavs fan, he should still be loved.

Considering he carried the franchise for years, yes, he should still be loved. I won't forget what he did for the Mavericks no matter what uniform he wears.


Explain why I, as a fan, cannot be mad at him for playing for a rival? Because it makes sense?

I didn't say you couldn't root against him when the Spurs play the Mavs. Should we meet in the conference finals, I hope he has a shitty series, as well as his teammates. And you can be mad at him and "hate" him all you want, you're free to believe and feel as you wish. My point is that Finley himself has done nothing to earn your vitriol. Once a player is kicked the curb by a franchise, he no longer should feel under any obligation to help that franchise out. I suppose it would've been best for the Mavs if he had gone to a lotto team. Well Findog cares more about winning at this stage of his career. Hard to fault him for that.


Explain why I cannot hate him for those simple facts.

I didn't say you couldn't hate him. It's a free country. I just think being mad at him for signing with the Spurs is irrational and unreasonable.

[Findog]

You see the difference is hidden in your own post, He wants to stick it to Cuban, not the Mavs and his buddies on the team.


Really, what is the difference? Mark Cuban IS the Dallas Mavericks. There was a quote from Dirk after the double overtime game, something to the effect that Nash loves sticking it to Dallas. It's a rivalry, just read Jack McCallum's 7 seconds or less book. There's a passage in there when he's writing about the conference finals from last season, and he goes on to enumerate all of the reasons why the Suns players, coaches and front office HATE the Mavericks. They certainly respect Avery and the talent we have, but there is a visceral dislike on the part of the Suns and their fanbase towards the Mavericks. I think Cuban is a wonderful owner and he's resurrected a dead franchise. But he's widely despised around the league for his antics. The Mavericks are widely despised around the league because Cuban has turned the AAC into a WWE-like atmosphere. I think there's a qualitative difference between this rivalry and the one we had with the Webber/Peja Kings. That was more like a sibling rivarly between two teams that played similar styles, had similar iconoclastic owners and had an enormous amount of mutual respect and admiration for one another. The Suns and the Mavs respect each other alright, but there's a dynamic there of loathing -- the Suns graduating to elite status thanks to stealing away our pointguard, a feeling on Phoenix's part that the Mavericks players and staff acted arrogant and took the Suns lightly during the 04-05 semifinals loss. No love lost between these two teams. I get the sense that Spurs-Mavs is all business, there's no real animosity except between the two fanbases.

[Cry Havoc]

I stand guilty of not counting the lockout year...no Phil jackson, shortented season..nothing even worth remembering.

However, during the Lakers run with Phil Jackson, the Lakers were 14-7 against the Spurs in the playoffs.

Thats not a rivalry. Sorry.

Again, the Kings and Lakers had a nice rivalry going around the same time, and they actually had a series worth remembering.

Classic troll post, with the, "Only the games I am old enough to remember as a fan count."

And of course, it discounts the fact that many people around the U.S. consider the Red Sox - Yankees the greatest rivalry in baseball, if not all of sports, despite the fact that the Yankees have until recently have a nearly unblemished record in the post-season against the Sox.

But keep wandering through your own little dreamland.

[Dalhoop]

Really, what is the difference? Mark Cuban IS the Dallas Mavericks.

I have seen this many times. Still don't understand it. I haven't seen Cuban play and don't really care too, he wouldn't make the team, so he is not what he trots out onto the floor at game time.

He had determained the course of the team, but others have steered the path, most resently Avery. Now he does like to be close to the players and take part in non-gametime decisions, but thats only natural concidering that he does own the team.

Explaining why the Suns players hate the Mavs matters very little to me, I mean, who cares if another team doesn't like us. The Suns need a rival, they don't have anyone that they can call that. Now because maybe (I say maybe because it could be a case of a team trying to stur up hatered to form a rivalry) they don't like the Mavs that means that its the greatest rivalry iin the NBA? I don't think so.

Why should I hate the Suns? Because they beat us in the playoffs a few years ago? Because they offered Nash two extra years on a contract?

Why do they hate the Mavs again?


A feeling on Phoenix's part that the Mavericks players and staff acted arrogant and took the Suns lightly during the 04-05 semifinals loss.

They hate the Mavs because they beat the Mavs in the playoffs? Does that make any sense? (Maybe you can hate a team when you loose to them, but when you win .. ?) They hate us because we thought that we should have put up a better fight?


The Mavericks are widely despised around the league because Cuban has turned the AAC into a WWE-like atmosphere.

Do you mean like playing music load and having dancers and entertainment during stopages? All teams do that, Did Cuban start that? Way to go Cubes. Because he understands that after paying you money for a ticket you should be entertained? Because he likes to get the croud loud?

What exactly does that mean?


But he's widely despised around the league for his antics.

And here is that key.

"Widely Dispised" ... Those are big words, how many owners have spoken out about him? How many players have said that he is bad for the league and wouldn't play for his team? How many GM's have said that is a bad owner?

I can understand Fan hatred, they see a good owner that is excited about his team and wish they had an owner that is as interested in the basketball as in the money to be made as owner.

But "Widely Dispised" ... Everyone during interviews say that he is good for the league, a breath of fresh air, a catalist for change, changes that needed to be made.

When word got out that he thought about selling the Mavs after the playoffs the storys were not about "Damn, he didn't get out of the NBA" they were about "His loss as an owner would hurt the NBA"

"Widely Dispised" I don't think so.

[Findog]

The Suns need a rival, they don't have anyone that they can call that.


Ahem. There's a team from Los Angeles whose colors are purple and gold.



Why should I hate the Suns? Because they beat us in the playoffs a few years ago? Because they offered Nash two extra years on a contract?

I didn't say you SHOULD hate the Suns. I said I hated the Suns. I already stated my reasons.






They hate the Mavs because they beat the Mavs in the playoffs? Does that make any sense?

No, of course not, but that's not what I said. I said they disliked the Mavs because of perceived disrespect.


Do you mean like playing music load and having dancers and entertainment during stopages? All teams do that, Did Cuban start that? Way to go Cubes. Because he understands that after paying you money for a ticket you should be entertained? Because he likes to get the croud loud?

What exactly does that mean?

I should have been more specific. I was talking about Humble Billy Hayes.

[da_suns_fan__]

Classic troll post, with the, "Only the games I am old enough to remember as a fan count."

And of course, it discounts the fact that many people around the U.S. consider the Red Sox - Yankees the greatest rivalry in baseball, if not all of sports, despite the fact that the Yankees have until recently have a nearly unblemished record in the post-season against the Sox.

But keep wandering through your own little dreamland.


You want to compare Yankees/Redsocks to Lakers/Spurs and then tell me that Im in "dreamland"?

:drunk

You still haven't convinced anyone the Spurs/Lakers had anything resembling a rivalry.

Let me ask you something? When was the defining moment of this "rivalry", huh? When did things get REALLY heated?

Surely this imaginary rivalry would have a climax!

[FromWayDowntown]

IAgain, the Kings and Lakers had a nice rivalry going around the same time, and they actually had a series worth remembering.

When, exactly, did the Kings ever beat the Lakers when it mattered? I somehow don't seem to remember that EVER happening. In fact, during the "heyday" of that "rivalry," the Lakers were 11-5 against the Kings in playoff games and 3-0 in playoff series. Given your definition of a rivalry, which seems to require that the teams generally split games (among other things), calling Kings-Lakers anything more than a bad blood matchup is disingenuous.

[FromWayDowntown]

You want to compare Yankees/Redsocks to Lakers/Spurs and then tell me that Im in "dreamland"?

:drunk

You still haven't convinced anyone the Spurs/Lakers had anything resembling a rivalry.

Let me ask you something? When was the defining moment of this "rivalry", huh? When did things get REALLY heated?

Surely this imaginary rivalry would have a climax!

You'd be a fool to think that the Spurs didn't make every move between 2000 and 2004 aiming to beat LA. And you'd be a fool to think that the Lakers didn't make every move between 1999 and 2004 aiming to beat the Spurs.

Those games didn't create a rivalry in the sense that there was any bad blood between the teams. But it was apparent to anyone who watched those games that there was an unbelievable level of respect between the teams, with each tending to bring out the best in the other, particularly after the 2001 WCF.

If you want a climax to that rivalry, look at Game 5 of the 2004 WCSF. The .4 game. Spurs fans still hurt over that; and Lakers' fans printed t-shirts within hours of that game to celebrate their incredible good fortune. You don't do that kind of stuff if there isn't a significant rivalry going on.

[monosylab1k]

Considering he carried the franchise for years, yes, he should still be loved. I won't forget what he did for the Mavericks no matter what uniform he wears.

Thank you. I've said this alot, but I still think that the most embarrassing, shameful moment in Mavericks history was Finley getting booed in Dallas. Worse than any 11 win season.

[da_suns_fan__]

When, exactly, did the Kings ever beat the Lakers when it mattered? I somehow don't seem to remember that EVER happening. In fact, during the "heyday" of that "rivalry," the Lakers were 11-5 against the Kings in playoff games and 3-0 in playoff series. Given your definition of a rivalry, which seems to require that the teams generally split games (among other things), calling Kings-Lakers anything more than a bad blood matchup is disingenuous.

Hey Junior,

The "heyday" of that rivalry was in 2002, when they met in the western conference finals and had a seven game series where the seventh game went into overtime.


Educate yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakers-Kings_rivalry

This guy makes all spurs fans look bad.

[monosylab1k]

Hey Junior,

The "heyday" of that rivalry was in 2002, when they met in the western conference finals and had a seven game series where the seventh game went into overtime.


Educate yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakers-Kings_rivalry

you have to beat a team before it's a rivalry.

[FromWayDowntown]

From page 1 of this thread:


Thats not exactly a rivalry. Teams have to exchange victories for it to be a rivalry.

Again, when exactly did the Kings ever beat the Lakers?

It's your criteria, not mine.

[FromWayDowntown]

The "heyday" of that rivalry was in 2002, when they met in the western conference finals and had a seven game series where the seventh game went into overtime.

Besides, if that was any sort of criteria, then what exactly do Suns/Mavs games have over Spurs/Mavs games? After all, the last time the Spurs and Mavs met in the playoffs, the series went to 7 games and Game 7 went to OT.

[da_suns_fan__]

Besides, if that was any sort of criteria, then what exactly do Suns/Mavs games have over Spurs/Mavs games? After all, the last time the Spurs and Mavs met in the playoffs, the series went to 7 games and Game 7 went to OT.


I also don't believe the Suns/Mavs have a great rivalry going.

They're both great teams, but there's not HATRED there for each other.

[FromWayDowntown]

I also don't believe the Suns/Mavs have a great rivalry going.

They're both great teams, but there's not HATRED there for each other.

So it's not a rivalry until there are flagrant fouls being thrown around AND there is smack running between the teams AND they play great basketball games AND they split results? Is that what you're saying?

That seems to be a ridiculously high standard -- if that's what you think, then you must believe that there are no existing rivalries in the NBA and haven't really been any since Pistons/Bulls in the late 80's and early 90's.

[TonyParkerSux]

Spurs-Mavs for sure. lots of history between the two, they are in the same division, and have been two of the best teams in the league foe several seasons now. they always seem to be battling in the regular season for the best conference record and for SW division supremecy, and they often collide in the post season.

Detroit Miami is pretty good over in the East also...

[da_suns_fan__]

So it's not a rivalry until there are flagrant fouls being thrown around AND there is smack running between the teams AND they play great basketball games AND they split results? Is that what you're saying?

That seems to be a ridiculously high standard -- if that's what you think, then you must believe that there are no existing rivalries in the NBA and haven't really been any since Pistons/Bulls in the late 80's and early 90's.

Great Rivalries since the Pistons/Bulls rivalry:

Knicks/Bulls in the early ninetees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulls-Knicks_rivalry

Heat/Knicks in the late ninetees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knicks-Heat_rivalry

Kings/Lakers in the early 2000s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakers-Kings_rivalry

I don't think San Antonio has the persona to create a "great rivalry". They have nothing but nice things to say about everybody. They have super quality guys, but as far as rivalries go....

:sleep

[monosylab1k]

Great Rivalries since the Pistons/Bulls rivalry:

Knicks/Bulls in the early ninetees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulls-Knicks_rivalry

Heat/Knicks in the late ninetees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knicks-Heat_rivalry

Kings/Lakers in the early 2000s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakers-Kings_rivalry

I don't think San Antonio has the persona to create a "great rivalry". They have nothing but nice things to say about everybody. They have super quality guys, but as far as rivalries go....

:sleep

lol so it's not a rivalry unless wikipedia says so?

Lakers-Kings was NOT a rivalry, it can't be a rivalry when one team always wins.

[Cry Havoc]

Getting your asses handed to you three out of four years without your opponent even blinking an eye isn't a rivalry.



Kings/Lakers in the early 2000s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakers-Kings_rivalry


:lol :lol :lol :lol


Any more brazen idiocy you want to share with us in your posts?

[da_suns_fan__]

:lol :lol :lol :lol


Any more brazen idiocy you want to share with us in your posts?


Gotta nothin new to add? I take it your done with this "Lakers/Spurs rivalry" garbage?

btw..Kings had more wins against the Lakers in 2000-2002 than the Spurs did.

Spurs only managed....uh...one.

(and you were trying to convince me of a rivalry).

[loveThe23]

lol so it's not a rivalry unless wikipedia says so?

Lakers-Kings was NOT a rivalry, it can't be a rivalry when one team always wins.

It so was. 02-03, that's where it ended. they didn't always win. it's complete zero rivalry now, but it was back then.... we were the true winners, you know.. :dramaquee :pctoss

[monosylab1k]

Gotta nothin new to add? I take it your done with this "Lakers/Spurs rivalry" garbage?

btw..Kings had more wins against the Lakers in 2000-2002 than the Spurs did.

Spurs only managed....uh...one.

(and you were trying to convince me of a rivalry).

yet again, a Suns fan putting huge significance in the regular season. Typical.

did the Kings EVER beat the Lakers in a playoff series? No. Not a rivalry.

did the Spurs beat the Lakers in a playoff series. Yes. Multiple times. and the Lakers did the same to the Spurs. There were players swapping sides and animosity towards each other. Rivalry.

And counting only 2000-2002 is just retarded. i swear, as soon as I start thinking that Suns fans have a freakin' clue, they pull this shit...

[da_suns_fan__]

yet again, a Suns fan putting huge significance in the regular season. Typical.

did the Kings EVER beat the Lakers in a playoff series? No. Not a rivalry.

did the Spurs beat the Lakers in a playoff series. Yes. Multiple times. and the Lakers did the same to the Spurs. There were players swapping sides and animosity towards each other. Rivalry.

And counting only 2000-2002 is just retarded. i swear, as soon as I start thinking that Suns fans have a freakin' clue, they pull this shit...

I was talking about Playoffs.

Kings took the Lakers to elimination games in both 2000 (first round best of five) and 2002.

They managed five wins.

During that same time, Spurs faced the Lakers in two seven game series, and went 1 for 9.

You need to think before you type pal. ESPECIALLY before you go talking about people "pulling this shit".

[monosylab1k]

I was actually talking about Playoffs.

Kings took the Lakers to elimination games in both 2000 (first round best of five) and 2002.

They managed five wins.

During that same time, Spurs faced the Lakers in two seven game series, and went 1-9.

You need to think before you type pal.

LOL wow. You're competing with Nashfan for biggest idiot Suns fan on this board now...

The Spurs BEAT the lakers in 1999 and 2003 in the PLAYOFFS...meaning of course they WON THE SERIES OVER THE LAKERS just so you get it...or do those PLAYOFF SERIES WINS not count simply because adding any more years to your tiny little 3 year window would not fit your flimsy little argument?

[Cry Havoc]

LOL wow. You're competing with Nashfan for biggest idiot Suns fan on this board now...

The Spurs BEAT the lakers in 1999 and 2003 in the PLAYOFFS...meaning of course they WON THE SERIES OVER THE LAKERS just so you get it...or do those PLAYOFF SERIES WINS not count simply because adding any more years to your tiny little 3 year window would not fit your flimsy little argument?

:lmao

Dude. Just give it up. He clearly doesn't have the capacity for any logic beyond his own schizophrenia. You're talking to a wall. He probably thinks that a great offense is the key to winning multiple titles as well, and that Nash should be the DPoY, just edging out Amare. :lmao

[da_suns_fan__]

LOL wow. You're competing with Nashfan for biggest idiot Suns fan on this board now...

The Spurs BEAT the lakers in 1999 and 2003 in the PLAYOFFS...meaning of course they WON THE SERIES OVER THE LAKERS just so you get it...or do those PLAYOFF SERIES WINS not count simply because adding any more years to your tiny little 3 year window would not fit your flimsy little argument?

Gimme a break...the lakers owned the league for three straight years (you called it 3 "flimsy" years) and the only team that came even close to challenging them was the Kings. They folded in overtime in game 7, but it was much bettter than what the Spurs (or anyone else) were able to manage (again, one victory).

[monosylab1k]

Gimme a break...the lakers owned the league for three straight years (you called it 3 "flimsy" years)

no i didn't. i called your argument flimsy. learn to fucking read. the lakers had kobe/shaq/phil for longer than 2000-2002. and the spurs beat them twice in the playoffs (once without phil).


and the only team that came even close to challenging them was the Kings.).

funny, i remember Portland being up by 15 on the Lakers in the 4th quarter of a game 7....but you're right, only the Kings...yeah...


They folded in overtime in game 7, but it was much bettter than what the Spurs (or anyone else) were able to manage (again, one victory).

again, you don't even remember the Blazers/Lakers series. forgetting a series like that right there proves that you've got no clue what the hell you're talking about. And I guess the Spurs record versus the Lakers doesn't count the 4 wins they got in 99 or the 4 they got in 03 over the Lakers. did the Kings ever manage 4 playoff wins against the Lakers in one year? no.

your argument is as weak as they come. but thanks for trying.

[Dalhoop]

Ahem. There's a team from Los Angeles whose colors are purple and gold.

Nobody tunes in to watch Suns-Lakers, outside of those cities, or Kobe fanatics. Everybody wants to see the Mavs-Spurs games.


No, of course not, but that's not what I said. I said they disliked the Mavs because of perceived disrespect.

And this is supposed to make the best rivalry? Both team have to have similar feelings to make a rivalry. I am sure that the Hawks feel a little disrespected by most teams in the NBA, they don't have rivals because no other team gives a crap about them.


I should have been more specific. I was talking about Humble Billy Hayes.

And he is different from those in Miami and Detroit in what way?

[Dalhoop]

The Kings were not a rivalry, they were whooping boys. All the talk of the Kings-Lakers was because of one very large talker calling the other team "Queens"

There was never a question when the teams met in the playoffs which team would win, that makes it a "rivalry" for the loosing team and a "stepping stone" for the winner. One need only look at the Spurs-Mavs before the Mavs broke through and started playing competitively with the Champs.

To the Spurs, we were simply a team that was in the way. To the Mavs, it was a rivalry.

Now both teams understand that the other is standing in the way ... That makes a rivalry, both team expect to win each meeting, both teams could win each meeting. in the Kings-Lakers those two things didn't exist.

[Xylus]

Nobody tunes in to watch Suns-Lakers, outside of those cities, or Kobe fanatics. Everybody wants to see the Mavs-Spurs games.
I think the Suns-Lakers rivalry is a result of what was arguably the best playoff series in last year's postseason.

[Dalhoop]

I think the Suns-Lakers rivalry is a result of what was arguably the best playoff series in last year's postseason.

Raise your hand if you thought that the Lakers were going to win the series

....

Raise your hand if you think that if the two teams meet this year that the Lakers would win the series.

....

It was a very good series (Everyone knows which was the best, don't fool yourself), but it didn't make any of their games this year "Must see TV"

[Cry Havoc]

I think the Suns-Lakers rivalry is a result of what was arguably the best playoff series in last year's postseason.

:lol :lol :lol :lol

You Suns fans are entirely too much. You're setting new standards (low ones) with some of these posts.

The Lakers-Suns playoff series last year wasn't even close to the best. It wasn't even in the REALM of being the best series. It won't even be remembered 3 years from now except by Suns and Lakers fans.

Round 2 of the WC Playoffs between the two most complete teams in the NBA, which went down to Game 7 OT will be talked about for years and years, especially if it happens again in the WCF this year.

Get real.

[Xylus]

:lol :lol :lol :lol

You Suns fans are entirely too much. You're setting new standards (low ones) with some of these posts.

The Lakers-Suns playoff series last year wasn't even close to the best. It wasn't even in the REALM of being the best series. It won't even be remembered 3 years from now except by Suns and Lakers fans.

Round 2 of the WC Playoffs between the two most complete teams in the NBA, which went down to Game 7 OT will be talked about for years and years, especially if it happens again in the WCF this year.

Get real.
My mistake, I should have said most entertaining series.

While the Mavs-Spurs was the best showcase of basketball, the Suns-Lakers had the most drama.

1. Every single night it seemed like a new fight was going to break out.

2. Bell clotheslining Kobe in Game 5. In fact, the whole Kobe-Bell feud was the most entertaining thing about the playoffs last year. :lol

3. Tim Thomas hitting the game-tying three in Game 6 to force overtime.

4. The Lakers' miraculous comeback in Game 4 to force overtime, followed by another miraculous comeback in overtime resulting in Kobe's clutch game-winner.

5. Nash and Kobe, two MVP candidates, arguing repeatedly.

It had a lot of drama, a lot of entertainment. Wasn't the tightest series, but it was a whole lot of fun to watch.

[monosylab1k]

My mistake, I should have said most entertaining series.

While the Mavs-Spurs was the best showcase of basketball, the Suns-Lakers had the most drama.

1. Every single night it seemed like a new fight was going to break out.

2. Bell clotheslining Kobe in Game 5. In fact, the whole Kobe-Bell feud was the most entertaining thing about the playoffs last year. :lol

3. Tim Thomas hitting the game-tying three in Game 6 to force overtime.

4. The Lakers' miraculous comeback in Game 4 to force overtime, followed by another miraculous comeback in overtime resulting in Kobe's clutch game-winner.

5. Nash and Kobe, two MVP candidates, arguing repeatedly.

It had a lot of drama, a lot of entertainment. Wasn't the tightest series, but it was a whole lot of fun to watch.

Didn't even come close to the entertainment and drama of the Mavs-Spurs series. Every game except for game 2 went down to the wire, or at least was still anyone's ball game with a few minutes left in the 4th, there was the Terry-Finley nut punching incident, the Popovich-Avery coaching battle, and the overtime game 7 (which completely beat the hell out of the clunker game 7 where the Lakers gave one of the more pathetic efforts ever witnessed in the playoffs).