Reply With Quote
'08 Lakers.
Discuss.
'08 Lakers.
Mavs. The Heat shoulda been no compe ion. This year's Celts were pretty much expected to win it all from jump street.
Cmon, there's no such a thing as a "fluke". both teams earned their spots.
Which team was luckier? I would say the 2006 Mavericks because I feel the Spurs were the better team that year. the Lakers were better than all 3 of their opponents this year, even though I felt they received some officiating assistance against the Jazz and the NBA has admitted the same about game 4 of the Spurs series.
06 Dallas
Runner up 08 Lakers
06 Mavs, they didn't have shady trades going there way.
'06 Mavs weren't really a fluke. They got some gift calls in Game 3 and Game 4 against the Spurs but they beat the Spurs fair and square in Game 7. You can say those Mavs overachieved but you can't call them fluke.
The '08 Lakers beat an injured and tired Spurs team after getting their second best player gifted to them by an ex-GM. I don't know if that's fluke but I know it's lame.
the Mavericks was the biggest choke.
Miami was not as good as the Celtics today. The Celtics won-2-0 against LA in their season games if I am not mistaken, if that's important.
but the Lakers - they're the bigger fluke to win over the Spurs than the Mavs. I don't think they can win against Duncan if both team rested 2-3 days before that series.
Last edited by milkyway21; 06-12-2008 at 11:57 PM.
well look at the record. if the celtics close it out on father's day than obviously it's the 08 Lakers. if it goes past that then it's up for debate.
I agree with you on the '08 Lakers, But the Mavs were definitely more fortunate. They played the Spurs with Tim playing on one foot, Manu pretty banged up, Tony playing with a strained hip (courtesy of Artest) and a deep thigh bruise from Harris in game 2, when he took a knee from Harris drawing a charge.
Games 1 and 2 of both series the Spurs got screwed with the scheduling, and if not for the homecourt against the Mavs would have been down 0-2 both times. They played on adrenaline in both game 1's, completely emptied their tanks, and had nothing left for game 2.
Although the most egregious officiating error came against the Lakers (i.e. game 4) the officiating didn't cost the Spurs against the Lakers, like it did against the Mavs. , Game 3's fourth quarter might need further review after everything that's come to light. People always like to talk about Wade in the finals, but if IIRC didn't Dirk set a record for free-throws made or attempted in a post-season?
The thing that clinches who was more fortunate though was there being no Amare against Dallas in the WCF's. Let's not forget that the Mavs never had gotten over the hump against Phoenix. Everyone talks about the mental hump the Mavs needed to overcome against the Spurs, but they had the same hump to overcome against the Suns.
So since the Lakers came out of what was considered the best western conference maybe ever, and the Mavs played the Griz,(one of the worst playoff teams ever) Spurs, and Suns(both at less than 100% to say the least) I'd say the Mavs were definitely more fortunate. I won't say fluke, because it takes away any kind of credit they do deserve. They had some fortunate cir stances, but you still have to give them credit for being able to take advantage of them.
Funny how every Spur playoff loss is entirely due to injury and not the other team outplaying them. Health is something that affects EVERY team in the playoffs, how you overcome injuries determines who the real champions are each season.
Sorry... We really shouldn't let the facts get in the way of coming to a conclusion.
Injuries didn't really factor much in 06, because Timmy put up amazing numbers with the PF. People forget Manu had pretty good playoff numbers masked by his foul and not being as healthy as in 2005.Sorry... We really shouldn't let the facts get in the way of coming to a conclusion.
The calls in that series though were kinda crazy though.
Refs kinda sucked a lot in that series. But Mavs won legitimately on a coinflip.
You're an idiot. the Grizzlies won 49 games that year.
You keep mentioning a bunch of "what ifs".... thats basketball dude. I'm not gonna discredit the Spurs for their les but I could say something like Dirk got injured in the WCF in 2003 and bring up the Amare suspension last year... but whatever happens happens. The Spurs deserved their les, just like the Mavs deserved their Finals trip in 2006.
And then i could say teh Spurs NOT winning a le in 2004 is a "fluke" because of Fisher's "fluky" shot.
A bunch of things have to fall into place for a team to win a championship, any championship can be viewed as a "fluke".
Exactly, it's always a fluke when the Spurs lose.....but when they win it's because the Spurs have the heart of a champion and imposed their will on the other team. ing morons. I've yet to see a fanbase so unwilling to just admit that they lost and got outplayed by a better team in my life.
I think it's becoming more and more abundantly clear that every championship since David Stern was named commissioner of the league were flukes. Every single one.
Everything I mentioned is a fact..... Idiot!
Oh, and how many playoff games have the Grizzlies won??? Yeah, I wasn't exaggerating.
Yeah you're right, every team needs a little luck or fortune to win a le. Notice how I said nothing of a fluke? You see if you had actually read what I wrote you would notice that I said fortunate, and not fluke.
I realize no fan wants to feel like their teams accomplishments are ever being on, so I understand the defensiveness. The Mavs and Lakers both deserve credit for taking advantage of fortunate cir stances, but to pretend(just because it makes you feel better) that you didn't benefit from them is ignorance.
Look, I realize the Spurs have had their fair share of fortune, and I've never denied it. If I'm ever asked a question, or to analyze something I gather all the facts I can find. No matter how hard it can be to confront the facts and see the truth, I'd much rather be correct than politically correct.
The Grizz won 49 games that year, yeah they got swept... yeah they were like 0-12 in a 3 year span... but they also played some very good teams in the Spurs, Suns, and Mavs. So I don't know what makes them one of the worst playoff teams of all time.
I'm not denying there was luck in the Mavs run to the Finals, but it wasn't really a fluke. They were a 60 win team and had the 2nd best record in the west. Yeah I'd concede the Spurs were a better team, but only slightly ... sometimes the slightly inferior team wins, even in a 7 game series.
You are exactly right!!! Now how about you leave?
Definitely the Lakers. I'm glad this Finals series is almost over.
08 Celtics>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>06 Miami Heat.
I'd say it was a bigger shame to lose to that Miami Heat team, esp after being up 2-0 with a huge lead in the 4th quarter of Game 3 to all but put the series away, and then losing 4 STRAIGHT. Esp considering the Mavs had HCA in that series.
Say what you want about the 08 Lakers, but they did manage to have the best record in the toughest Western Conference in recent times and they pretty much beat the Spurs, Injured Ginobili or Not.
I vote for the 06 Mavs.
Spurs got gift calls in game 5 and 6. It evened out.
Well, proabably because you see what the Spurs do every year that they don't have a serious injury to their important players...They win a championship
That is the case for a lot of good teams in history. but again, injuries are part of the game. no need to whine about it. yall got 4 les. and yall havent had to deal with Stern fixing outcomes so that your team doesnt win championships. for a team with 4 championships, their fans sure do whine an awful lot...Well, proabably because you see what the Spurs do every year that they don't have a serious injury to their important players...They win a championship
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
