Are the Cavs the worst team ever in the NBA Finals?

[ArgSpursFan]

just wondering though.I was trying to remember all the finals in the last 20 yrs,and I can´t find such a diference between the 2 teams playing the finals.
S.A. probably played one of the worst games in the post season yesterday,and a game like that it would´ve been a lost against ANY team that the spurs played in the playoffs,besides Cleveland Of course.
I mean,the cavs are so no contenders for the spurs,it´s not even exciting to watch these series.

[Armando]

The Cavs just lucked out that the East was so bad this year. Next season I don't see them getting past Miami if Wade is healthy. Chicago will be back, Orlando will be better. Also Detroit and the Wizards will be in the mix.

[LEONARD]

Yes

[41times]

It sure looks like it. That 3rd quarter was absolutely Brutal last night. I think there was about a 4 minute span where neither team made a basket. Horrible, just horrible. No wonder nobody's watching this. It's ugly.

This does not help the Spurs much either. But hey, a Title is a Title. It's just too bad that the Finals werent the Suns series. At least that was a competitive series.

See we need that new playoff bracket!

[souriciergris]

Yes I think so, the Cavs are probably the worst team ever in NBA finals, LBJ's supporting cast is horrible, the Cavs simply shouldn't be here. It shows the weakness of the eastern conference when a team which still needs so much tinkering still made it to the finals.

The first 2 games were a slaughter and in game 3 the Spurs played like **** and still managed to win.

I am almost sad for LBJ and I'm a diehard Spurs fan !

[MajorMike]

In all fairness, I don't think you can say worst ever. They for certain aren't one of the better ones, but how often has this Spurs D made a team look just plain bad? The Jazz certainly weren't a bad team, but we made them look like it.

Along those lines, I think you can say that this Cavs team, even if they win a game or 2, may be the most out-matched team in Finals history.

[romain.star]

I'd rather be an ugly champion than a beautiful loser

[timvp]

I don't think so. Their defense is impressive. I think their defense alone puts them ahead of teams like the 2002 Nets.

[romain.star]

the 2004 Lakers were funny...

[ambchang]

2001 6ers were pretty bad, and eerily similar to this Cavs team. Defensive oriented, one single superstar with an over-the-hill center.

[ArgSpursFan]

In all fairness, I don't think you can say worst ever. They for certain aren't one of the better ones, but how often has this Spurs D made a team look just plain bad?

true.the spurs play the best D in the league.but now give me a team that was worst tham the cavs in the NBA finals.Since Bill Russell era if you want.
I mean It really hurts my eyes to watch them play.


The Jazz certainly weren't a bad team, but we made them look like it.
yes,but the spurs never played that bad vs The Jazz like they did last night,otherwise they would´ve lost.


Along those lines, I think you can say that this Cavs team, even if they win a game or 2, may be the most out-matched team in Finals history.

Of course I realize that the spurs make them look worst that what they already are.
Pop certenly found the way to stop Lebron,and M.Brown got outcoached real bad.

[SAGambler]

In all fairness, I don't think you can say worst ever. They for certain aren't one of the better ones, but how often has this Spurs D made a team look just plain bad? The Jazz certainly weren't a bad team, but we made them look like it.

Along those lines, I think you can say that this Cavs team, even if they win a game or 2, may be the most out-matched team in Finals history.

Exactly. They have no 4th and 5th option on their team. Gibson, who was going to be their second option after James had what....1 of 10 or something like that. Spurs are just way too deep for a team like that.

Overmatched is an understatement. It's almost like leading the sheep to slaughter. If the big 3 don't all have a horrible shooting night, it's another complete blowout.

But respect the Cavs for trying their best. It's just this time their best wasn't anywhere near good enough. But, you do have to give them props for playing good enough to win the East and take out Detroit. That is a big accomplishment for the Cavs. And look for them to come back stronger next year. Surely they will get James some help in the off season.

And remember, you are watching what is most probably a future HOFer struggleing in his FIRST Finals. They just didn't put enough weapons around him. Look for that to change.

[Vinnie_Johnson]

the 2004 Lakers were funny...

Funny yes but had a healthy Shaq and Kobe so no not the worst by a long shot.

[MajorMike]

I can give you the easy worst Finals team since the Russell era.

Some contenders would be the 89 or 83 Lakers, the 90 Snailblazers, and the Bullets (75, 79). I also considered the 95 Magic.

By far, it would be the 71 Bullets. 42-40, got to Finals, swept by the Bucks (and were never in a single game) after sqeaking by the Sixers and Knicks (both in 7). Would have most likely gone down to the Sixers if not for the fact they won their awful division by 6 over the 36-46 Hawks and got the #2 seed. The Sixers were 47-35 and 2nd to #1 seed Knicks at 52-30. Even the Atlantic 3rd place Celts were better at 44-38, however didn't make the playoffs because only the top 2 in each division got in, so the Hawks got in instead of the Celts.

They were lead by Wes Unheld and Earl Monroe.

[ArgSpursFan]

I can give you the easy worst Finals team since the Russell era.

[QUOTE]Some contenders would be the 89 or 83 Lakers, the 90 Snailblazers, and the Bullets (75, 79). I also considered the 95 Magic.
My bad I shouldn´t said since Russell era.Since I was borned in 75. :p:
Now going to the 80´s and 90´s ,in my opinion the lakers were better tham these cavs team,and the 95 magics were just too young,but talented.And played probably one of the all times best teams in the NBA,same thing for the 80´s lakers.
about the 90´s blazers,I don´t think they were worst tham the cavs.At least the didn´t look so clueless out on the floor


By far, it would be the 71 Bullets. 42-40, got to Finals, swept by the Bucks (and were never in a single game) after sqeaking by the Sixers and Knicks (both in 7). Would have most likely gone down to the Sixers if not for the fact they won their awful division by 6 over the 36-46 Hawks and got the #2 seed. The Sixers were 47-35 and 2nd to #1 seed Knicks at 52-30. Even the Atlantic 3rd place Celts were better at 44-38, however didn't make the playoffs because only the top 2 in each division got in, so the Hawks got in instead of the Celtics
They were lead by Wes Unheld and Earl Monroe..

Like I said before I can´t go that back in time,but thanks for the data.
Great NBA knowledge of yours. :toast