JVG: "Miami will break the 72 win record"

[namlook]

This is the same Van Gundy that last year said the Cavs were clearly the best team in the NBA and that he can't see anyone beating them for the championship.

[HarlemHeat37]

Van Gundy's opinion is irrelevant, that's not the reason anybody believes Miami will win 72..

The opinions of analysts and such are overrated, especially when you see that some of them still believe that Kobe is the best player in the NBA, which is clearly false..

[TIMMYtoZO]

The Yankees are the best team in baseball and were last year too..so are you trying to say that the Heat are going to win, Ducky?..

Wait. You are a Heat AND a Yankees fan? Wow. Why are you in here acting like such a badass defending the heat? I don't mind you riding the heat but the Yankees too? What a ing frontrunning fan.

[Chillen]

The Heat with James, Bosh and Wade and team that surrounds them have a shot at breaking the Bulls 72-10 record, but so did the Celtics in 2008, they got off to a great start. They have the potential to be amazing with that core, but if injurys happen or they have off games, people are in for a huge reality check. Boston has a deeper team, but Miami has 3 superstars. I wouldn't rule it out but like I said people including the Miami players are probably in for a reality check. The Heat need to focus on having a great season and being ready for the playoffs, they could go 82-0 and lose to Boston or the Lakers in the playoffs. The Bulls always said it best, 72-10 don't mean a thing without the ring.

[HarlemHeat37]

Wait. You are a Heat AND a Yankees fan? Wow. Why are you in here acting like such a badass defending the heat? I don't mind you riding the heat but the Yankees too? What a ing frontrunning fan.

I'm not a Heat fan, nor am I a Yankees fan, I'm a Lebron fan..I'm not a die-hard baseball fan..

Are you going to say that the Yankees haven't been the best team in baseball?..they are the defending Champs, and they have the best record in baseball..

[mingus]

i don't see how anyone can argue against the reality of this. Lebron already led one of his Cavs teams to a 66 win season and now he's on a much better team. This team can definitely be 7 wins better than that 66 win team.

[lotr1trekkie]

Unless the Heat are going to score 120 per game who is else is going to be allowed to shot. The Magi averaged ,together, 80 per game. Who will sacrifice? If they all give up 8 pts. a game it might work. The big O is a shooter. Howard is so old his teammates on the Fab 5 are long retired. Miller is a great shooter but how many looks is he going to get.
Too early to predict. I would hate to try and coach the Magi.

[Red Hawk #21]

This should be a really fun season. Personally, I don't think the Heat should even bother trying to win 72 games. I'm not saying they shouldn't win as much as they can, but I think going after the Bulls record will exhaust them by the end of the season. They should just try to win as much as possible, and try to keep getting better as the season progresses. Then when it's playoff time, they have bring their "A" game. Because that's when the other teams will be attacking, and playing their hardest.

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

Trolling abd whipping your sorry ass is so easy:

Do you have a link that says these teams were expected to win 70 games?..

They all exist and you know it. Many are right here at SpursTalk, do a search. I am not going to trace them all down, but you know when the Lakers added Malone and Payton they were saying 70 wins. Plus, how many did the Mavs win in 2007? Mavs were supposed to get revenge and do better in 2008.
Here's just a couple answering your request:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba-195434
Then theres's this one from last year tracking Lakes and Cavs wins. There was one the year before and sometimes Boston was on it and whoever was in third place was dropped.
http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/features/best

You didn't explain anything ..you gave poor analysis that was centered around the "hunger" of other teams, completely ignoring the on-court part, completely focusing on unquantifiable arguments like "hunger"..

Poor analysis? Your opinion only. Yet you base your reasoning on the "On-Court" part which is extremely speculative. How many games have the Miami superfriends played together? None. LMAO, talk about flawed logic, you excel at it! Every team has hunger and those with experience do well. History is full of examples, wake up and look. I don't have to prove this, any knowledgeable fan knows it. Why did the Celtics go so deep into the playoffs last season? Hunger and experience. You fail.

The fact that you continue to update your sig with poor examples of "owning" people is hilarious..

Again, your opinion, that you hold alone. Everyone else is enjoying the ass ing you are getting from me.

So your only explanation here is that Bosh isn't good enough..would you like to explain why he's a "weak link"?..instead of just making statements and not backing them up, as you always do..

Well, how much playoff experience does Bosh have? How will he handle the physical play that's going to rough him up on the inside? This has all been discussed before. If he was tough like Kendrick Perkins he wouldn't be a weak link.

Once again, this is your argument..you continue to make statements, yet you don't back anything up..

"Miami just isn't ready"

"Why?"

"They just aren't, that's my opinion"

See below. Also, much of your argument is your opinion.

1- Miami has NBA Finals experience too..also, lack of Finals experience didn't stop many teams from winning..'99 Spurs, 2000 Lakers, 2004 Pistons, 2008 Celtics, just from this era alone..all those teams had less championship experience than the 2011 Heat will have..

LOL. Major fail. Miami as constructed has no championship experience. That's like saying the current Lakers team can count 2000-02 as champiobship experience from that team. 2 players from each team have championship experience going back to their old les. Kobe, Fisher, Wade, and Haslem.

2- hunger..why isn't Miami "hungry"?..

As mentioned above every team is hungry. Not every team will win either.

3- What does this even mean?..

You don't understand this? Man you are stupid. I'll repeat it:
3) They can't be counted out until their teams windows closed? I even gave the years.
So you don't understand that the Spurs are contenders for as long a Duncan is playing, the Celtics are contenders while Pierce, Garnett, and Allen are playing, and the Lakers are contenders for as long as Kobe and Gasol are playing. That's it, go ahead and write these teams off. Last year, how many people wrote the Lakers and Celtics off early? Lakers were going to lose to the Thunder and Miami was going to beat Boston. Ask Bill Simmons about that. You might as well just hand the trophy to Miami in April and skip the playoffs for the next 8 years. You can't write teams with championship experience off, period. Ask the 1968 and 1969 Celtics who upset the Sixers and the Lakers (everyone else before that as well). Ask the 1995 Rockets who upset everyone.

4- ..

You scoff at this point?
4) That there may be more great teams now than at any time in NBA history?
I said there may be, and you laugh. I'll play your trick. Show me why we don't have a bunch of great teams and show me a year where we had more. Man, you are digging yourself into a deep hole.

5- Of course Lebron needed help, he's never had any..that's irrelevant though, what does this point have to do with the Heat winning a le next year?..

How much help LeBron had may be best decided by how the Cavs do this year, without him. It does have a lot to do with the Heat winning a le because LeBron is taking on a new role, from a leader to a follower. Someone has to lead, someone has to follow. We don't know yet how it will play out. Again, with 0 games in the bank, it's all speculation on your part.

6- You're talking about hypothetical FA signings now? ..

yep, I sure am. as noted before the NBA is going to adjust to the Heat, just as it adjusts to champions. A Knick team with CP3 and Melo is another contender for the Heat to go through. that means things are tougher for the superfriends. As noted elsewhere, suppose the Heat play those Knicks. Say Miami has a 55% shot of winning. You would have us believe it's 100% and it isn't. The series have to be played.

7- On notice..yes, that will beat Miami, the rest of the league is "on notice"!..

Yep, explained above

8- Here's the hunger argument again, as usual..

Yep, and it's a good one when combined with championship experience.

9- So in other words...hunger?....

Yes, it's a completely valid point. Lakers, Spurs, Celtics and Mavs pretty much have to win now with their key pieces or forget it. The Heat are young and have plenty of time to win. It took West and Chamberlain years to win a le. same with Oscar Robertson, Julius Erving, and Moses Malone. How about Hakeem and Drexler? You just think they win now and for the next 8 years. Congratulations, you bought LeBron's spin.

10- What does this have to do with the Heat winning les right now?..

If the Heat don't win right now, the pressure is on every year through 2014. That's what it has to do with the Heat winning now or not.

I know your username has the word troll in it, and when you combine that with your hilarious arguments, it would make sense that you're a troll, but whatever, I spent time arguing with you anyways, I gave you what you wanted..now take me out of your sig, it's embarrassing for you..

Tell you what. I'll fight as long as you wish, but you are clearly beaten. Come back for more if you want. No, I won't take you out of my signature. you want me out because I rained on your parade and your precious little posting award.

You think you won this battle I say you clearly lost? Let's see who comes to your assistance. No, your alter egos don't count. Neither does your or my opinion on the issues. however snce no one else has challenged me, I say everyone thinks I have whipped you. I don't think anyone is going to come to your aid because they don't wish to get owned as badly as you have.

Thanks for being my .

[DPG21920]

I agree with HH. Your arguments suck.

[HarlemHeat37]

They all exist and you know it. Many are right here at SpursTalk, do a search. I am not going to trace them all down, but you know when the Lakers added Malone and Payton they were saying 70 wins. Plus, how many did the Mavs win in 2007? Mavs were supposed to get revenge and do better in 2008.

I know no such thing..especially about the 2008 Mavs, what the ?..

Here's just a couple answering your request:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba-195434
Then theres's this one from last year tracking Lakes and Cavs wins. There was one the year before and sometimes Boston was on it and whoever was in third place was dropped.
http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/features/best

Rasheed Wallace saying that about his own team is proof that the Pistons were expected to win 70?..

Your 2nd link is an article that talks about the projected wins for teams that were already on pace to come close or surpass 70 with a bunch of games having been already played..those teams had already played the games, and neither of them were "expected" to win 70 games..

You haven't shown that any team has been "expected" to win 70..even the Bulls team that won 72 wasn't expected to win that many games..nobody expects a team to win that many, let alone the fact that you named like 10 teams that you said were expected to win that many..

Poor analysis? Your opinion only. Yet you base your reasoning on the "On-Court" part which is extremely speculative. How many games have the Miami superfriends played together? None. LMAO, talk about flawed logic, you excel at it! Every team has hunger and those with experience do well. History is full of examples, wake up and look. I don't have to prove this, any knowledgeable fan knows it. Why did the Celtics go so deep into the playoffs last season? Hunger and experience. You fail.

It's not my opinion only, look at what DPG says..anybody that reads any of your arguments can see how horrible they are..

I just gave you examples of many teams from this era alone that didn't have much le experience, yet they ended up winning the NBA le..

The "on court" analysis part is clearly valid..these guys aren't rookies, they have played in the NBA for years..the fact that you have no ability to analyze their styles of play and how they will fit together speaks volumes on your lack of knowledge in regards to basketball..

Again, your opinion, that you hold alone. Everyone else is enjoying the ass ing you are getting from me.

Please, stop making comments like this, it's really embarrassing..

See below. Also, much of your argument is your opinion.

No, I've already given my reasons for Miami winning a le in many threads..I actually gave arguments, as I always do..

LOL. Major fail. Miami as constructed has no championship experience. That's like saying the current Lakers team can count 2000-02 as champiobship experience from that team. 2 players from each team have championship experience going back to their old les. Kobe, Fisher, Wade, and Haslem.

Miami has Dwyane Wade and Haslem that have won an NBA le, so apparently that equals no championship experience? ..Lebron led a team to the NBA Finals, is that irrelevant?..

Again, '99 Spurs, 2000 Lakers, 2004 Pistons, 2006 Heat(using your logic) and 2008 Celtics had no championship experience, yet they won les..how do you explain that?..

Your logic makes no sense in regards to the Spurs..the Spurs only have 3 players with le experience, yet you keep using them as an example of an "experienced team", while disregarding the Heat because they only have 2 players with le experience..how does that make any sense?..what kind of contradictory is that?..

You don't understand this? Man you are stupid. I'll repeat it:
3) They can't be counted out until their teams windows closed? I even gave the years.
So you don't understand that the Spurs are contenders for as long a Duncan is playing, the Celtics are contenders while Pierce, Garnett, and Allen are playing, and the Lakers are contenders for as long as Kobe and Gasol are playing. That's it, go ahead and write these teams off. Last year, how many people wrote the Lakers and Celtics off early? Lakers were going to lose to the Thunder and Miami was going to beat Boston. Ask Bill Simmons about that. You might as well just hand the trophy to Miami in April and skip the playoffs for the next 8 years. You can't write teams with championship experience off, period. Ask the 1968 and 1969 Celtics who upset the Sixers and the Lakers (everyone else before that as well). Ask the 1995 Rockets who upset everyone.

What does this have to do with anything?..I believe Miami is better than these teams, I've already explained why..

The Spurs window is closed, most Spurs fans will agree..

Who the wrote the Lakers off?..why are you making up?..

4) That there may be more great teams now than at any time in NBA history?
I said there may be, and you laugh. I'll play your trick. Show me why we don't have a bunch of great teams and show me a year where we had more. Man, you are digging yourself into a deep hole.

The entire 80s had more "great teams" than the current NBA, for starters..there wasn't a "great team" last year..

yep, I sure am. as noted before the NBA is going to adjust to the Heat, just as it adjusts to champions. A Knick team with CP3 and Melo is another contender for the Heat to go through. that means things are tougher for the superfriends. As noted elsewhere, suppose the Heat play those Knicks. Say Miami has a 55% shot of winning. You would have us believe it's 100% and it isn't. The series have to be played.

Again, you're giving me hypothetical situations about FA signings ..

Ok, how about this..what if the Heat split the MLE next year on Carmelo Anthony and Tim Duncan?..wow, amazing..

Yes, it's a completely valid point. Lakers, Spurs, Celtics and Mavs pretty much have to win now with their key pieces or forget it. The Heat are young and have plenty of time to win. It took West and Chamberlain years to win a le. same with Oscar Robertson, Julius Erving, and Moses Malone. How about Hakeem and Drexler? You just think they win now and for the next 8 years. Congratulations, you bought LeBron's spin.

So the Heat are going to bend over for the older teams because those teams have to "win now" and the Heat will have time to "win later"?..

Tell you what. I'll fight as long as you wish, but you are clearly beaten. Come back for more if you want. No, I won't take you out of my signature. you want me out because I rained on your parade and your precious little posting award.

You think you won this battle I say you clearly lost? Let's see who comes to your assistance. No, your alter egos don't count. Neither does your or my opinion on the issues. however snce no one else has challenged me, I say everyone thinks I have whipped you. I don't think anyone is going to come to your aid because they don't wish to get owned as badly as you have.

Thanks for being my .

Please, stop, raise the bar..

[DPG21920]

But he is trolling so.....

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

I agree with HH. Your arguments suck.

If you don't say why my statements suck, your post has no credibility. HH37 is still on his own, no support. Want to join my biyotch list? There is room for more, just join the argument. If you look at my posts, you''ll find I always have good comments about the Spurs, and used some of my arguments today to show why the Spurs may beat the Lakers next year. HH37 is not a Spurs fan. He signed up with Heat in his name and Spurs as his team and no one caught on until the superfriends came together.

[DPG21920]

What does painting the Spurs in a positive light have to do with anything? Your Heat arguments suck. As Harlem took the time to explain.

But I don't troll, so I am done with you.

[HarlemHeat37]

I don't understand what me being "on my own" has to do with anything ..I'm supposed to have a crew or something?..

By saying that the current Spurs can beat the Lakers in a 7-game series, it doesn't make you appeal to our fanbase more, it just makes you look like an idiot..most Spurs fans don't believe our team can beat the Lakers, at least I hope they don't..

[Killakobe81]

[QUOTE=HarlemHeat37;4568727]Van Gundy's opinion is irrelevant, that's not the reason anybody believes Miami will win 72..

The opinions of analysts and such are overrated, especially when you see that some of them still believe that Kobe is the best player in the NBA, which is clearly false..[/QUOTE]

Please stop, we know you feel already ...Kobe is overrated and Lebron is Mj incarnate ...


Did you swallow Chrisrichards or something? You used to be better ..you ALSO need to raise the bar.

[DPG21920]

Kobe is not overrated. He is great. He is just not the best in the NBA player any more.

[Supergirl]

hmm, sounds like what I said in a thread a week ago

The Heat were the 3rd best defensive team in the league last season, WITH JERMAINE O'NEAL PLAYING CENTER!

Subtract Jermaine O'Neal (went to Boston)
Add Chris Bosh, Big Z, Juwan Howard

Everything else is pretty much the same at the PF and C spots.

Expect 72-10 to be broken

I just don't see the average to below average teams have any shot to beat the Heat in regular season games.

LOL, I'm not sure defensively speaking that Bosh is an upgrade over Jermaine ONeal. Bosh couldn't defend his way out of a paper bag. I'll be surprised if moving 2000 miles south magically changes that.

Is it just me or does this happen every year? Team X is so, so good, they will definitely break the 72 game mark. Blah blah blah.

It's not gonna happen. Reality is, the Heat will be considered a major bust if they don't win at least 60 games and a championship next year. But neither of those things are by any means guaranteed. It's a long season.

[Supergirl]

Kobe is not overrated. He is great. He is just not the best in the NBA player any more.

Who are you suggesting is better than him right now? I don't like Kobe much, and I hate the Lakers, but he's CLEARLY the best player in the NBA right now.

[Killakobe81]

I dont think they will win 72 ...but I hope they waste energy during the regulkar season TRYING to get there ...

As for Kobe I think everyone knows on a day in day out basis Lebron passed Kobe as player.
BUT you still need a le to cement that or to "pass the torch" ...
MJ was better than Magic, Bird and Isiah BEFORE he got a le ...but until you ring that le of best player is awfully hollow.And is not validated.
So you guys can annoint Lebron the best player all you want and make excuses but the best in the game needs les ...period. Without one the MVP's PER le etc are all bull .
Dirk, nash, Malone Lebron all have MVP's and cases were made they were the best player at one point or another ...
Duncan, Shaq, Kobe and Wade have rings THAT is what matters.

I think It's only a matter of time before Lebron wins ..and when he does I won't be mad because I respect his game. BUT he does not win that argument without hesitation until he does ...

[mystargtr34]

Lol Jordan was bad-ass

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

I know no such thing..especially about the 2008 Mavs, what the ?..




Rasheed Wallace saying that about his own team is proof that the Pistons were expected to win 70?..

Your 2nd link is an article that talks about the projected wins for teams that were already on pace to come close or surpass 70 with a bunch of games having been already played..those teams had already played the games, and neither of them were "expected" to win 70 games..

You haven't shown that any team has been "expected" to win 70..even the Bulls team that won 72 wasn't expected to win that many games..nobody expects a team to win that many, let alone the fact that you named like 10 teams that you said were expected to win that many..

Did you search this forum for fans that predicted 70 wins? no, I bet you didn't. Go look, they're there.

Where did I say the Pistons were going to win 70 game?

The espn link the last two years was updated game by game because there was an interest if the Bulls record would be broken. This in itself suggests predictions were made and that there was an interest if it could be done. Today, the local sports paper compared graphs of Nicklaus's and Wood's major wins and the time frame they did them in. Woods has 14 and needs 18 and is ahead of Nicklaus's pace by age. His play just sucks this year.

There is always an interest when records may be broken. Houston's 22 game streak in 2008, Celtics string of game 7 wins over the Lakers, etc, etc.

I have shown plenty that teams were expected to win 70 games. You have shown nothing to say they won't and a search (even here at SpursTalk) is going to kill your case. You lost, end of discussion on 70 game teams, Unless you wish to make a financial wager.

It's not my opinion only, look at what DPG says..anybody that reads any of your arguments can see how horrible they are..

and I answered DPG, go read it. Let's see if he takes my challenge.

I just gave you examples of many teams from this era alone that didn't have much le experience, yet they ended up winning the NBA le..

Ok, I agree teams do win without championship experience, that's by force. otherwise we would have a 64 time champion. however, more teams are winning recently with championship experience than not. 3 exist as constructed by their cores today:

Spurs 3 les
Lakers 2 les
Celtics 1 le.

Heat of 2006, Pistons of 2004 do not exist today as they were back then.

The "on court" analysis part is clearly valid..these guys aren't rookies, they have played in the NBA for years..the fact that you have no ability to analyze their styles of play and how they will fit together speaks volumes on your lack of knowledge in regards to basketball..

It isn't valid. It's simple and pure speculation. Malone and Payton played for years and couldn't win with the Lakers. Wilt joined two losers, West and Baylor, and couldn't win with them either. Barkley played for years and couldn't win with the Suns. You're homerism and speculation fails to my basketball knowledge.

I don't see any point in analyzing how the Miami superfriends will play together when they haven't played a single game. It's all pure speculation. Who gets the ball the most? How will the egos mesh? It's all speculation. Until they have a season under their belt, it's anyone's guess. Granted, there have been many opinions speculating how Miami will play, but until they do it's pure speculation. Speculation in an argument doesn't work. This was proven millennia ago by great minds such as Plato and Aristotle. Do you know more than they do? At least teams with championship experience can be forecast a lot easier. If you're going to speculate you have to weigh what has gone on before rather than what has yet to happen as far more valuable. Those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it. That's why teams win multiple championships, they remember the past and repeat it.

Please, stop making comments like this, it's really embarrassing..

Yeah, it's embarrassing you, and you brought it on yourself.

No, I've already given my reasons for Miami winning a le in many threads..I actually gave arguments, as I always do..

Yep, and you speculate. Already dealt with.

Miami has Dwyane Wade and Haslem that have won an NBA le, so apparently that equals no championship experience? ..Lebron led a team to the NBA Finals, is that irrelevant?..

It is championship experience for 2 players, not for a team. Dwight Howard led a team to the NBA finals, so did Dirk. As long as they play, they are itching to get back. So is LeBron. However, they all still lack championship experience.

Again, '99 Spurs, 2000 Lakers, 2004 Pistons, 2006 Heat(using your logic) and 2008 Celtics had no championship experience, yet they won les..how do you explain that?..

Dealt with this above. someone new has to win, else we'd have 1 champion for 64 years. What's key is 99 spurs and 2000 Lakers capitalized on their championship experience and won multiple les. Shaq's Lakers won 3, Kobe's Lakers won 2. Duncan and DRob won 2, Duncan, Ginobili and Parker won 3, crossing over with DRob in 2003. Celtics won one and are still in the hunt. that's the team that's I think will beat Miami in 2011, and may win banner 18.

Your logic makes no sense in regards to the Spurs..the Spurs only have 3 players with le experience, yet you keep using them as an example of an "experienced team", while disregarding the Heat because they only have 2 players with le experience..how does that make any sense?..what kind of contradictory is that?..

geez, you really are stupid. The core of the Spurs is Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili, all 3 are the key comtributors.
2000-02 Lakes the core was Shaq and Kobe
2009-10 Lakers the core is Kobe and Gasol
Note: Derek Fisher was not a core piece in either Lakers era

You are placing Haslem as a core piece to Miami from 2006 to 2011? LOL, he is the Derek Fisher or worse to the Heat.

here's your core, in case you forgot:

Wade
James
Bosh

Unless one guy can join the party, a la Rajon Rondo in Boston and their big 3, that will be the Heat core if they stay together. If they haven't won by 2014, I say it breaks up.

What does this have to do with anything?..I believe Miami is better than these teams, I've already explained why..

You still don't think championship experience counts? well, history says it does. It's all been pointed out.

The Spurs window is closed, most Spurs fans will agree..

Really? Do you have statistics to back this up? What percentage of Spurs fans say they are done? Link please. Need a sample size that is statistically significant, and purely random. you do understand the laws of statistics I hope, it took centuries for the great mathematical minds to develop them. By the way, I have taught statistics in college before and tutor grad students as well.

By the way, a lot of Spurs fans have given up, and a lot haven't. Look here: http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160431
Why should Spurs fans even bother rooting for them if they're done?

Who the wrote the Lakers off?..why are you making up?..

A lot of Lakers fans wrote the Lakers off in April when they lost most their ending regular season games. Even Lakers fans quit on them against OKC. No you don't get a link. It won't look good for you if I do. Just visit any Lakers board about that time, you'll see.

The entire 80s had more "great teams" than the current NBA, for starters..there wasn't a "great team" last year..

Whoah, whoah, whoah Nelly! Read the question. I asked for a given year to compare with 2010-11. you throw a whole decade at me!
In the 1980's there were usually 3 great teams.
1980-84, Celtics, Sixers, Lakers
1985-87 Celtics, Lakers.
1988-89 Lakers, Pistons, Celtics.
Bulls came along in the 1990s.

2011 best teams:

Celtics
Magic
Heat
Bulls
Lakers
Spurs
Mavs
OKC
Blazers
Nuggets

That's 10 teams. Throw half out and you still have 5. Show me a year with more than 5.

there wasn't a great team last year? Well, some said the 2010 Celtics were better than the 2008 Celtics. So when was there a great team in the NBA? Lakers and Celtics proved to be the best two last year. the other potentially great teams didn't make it, someone has to lose.

Again, you're giving me hypothetical situations about FA signings ..

Ok, how about this..what if the Heat split the MLE next year on Carmelo Anthony and Tim Duncan?..wow, amazing..

yes, it's hypothetical. something will happen along this line a well as other players decide to try to win as well. I say it's more likely to happen than it not happening. That's my opinion and it's perfectly logical.

So the Heat are going to bend over for the older teams because those teams have to "win now" and the Heat will have time to "win later"?..

the Heat will be bent over. That's my opinion. the Heat have plenty of time to win. First, they have to learn to play together. You expect too much too soon. Prepare to be disappointed at first. then take it season by season. Heat haven't even won yet, let alone learned how hard it is to repeat. Do that, and you have a right to boast. Right now, you impress no one but yourself.

Please, stop, raise the bar..

Dude, get a clue. Everything you say I turn against you and expose your weak arguing skills further.

[Daddy_Of_All_Trolls]

I don't understand what me being "on my own" has to do with anything ..I'm supposed to have a crew or something?..

By saying that the current Spurs can beat the Lakers in a 7-game series, it doesn't make you appeal to our fanbase more, it just makes you look like an idiot..most Spurs fans don't believe our team can beat the Lakers, at least I hope they don't..

How do we settle who won? If someone wants to back you up, they can state their case and argue with me. you can jump in too. If someone wants to say I won, they can state their case and you can argue with them.

your flawed logic proves you are an idiot. I don't care if anyone likes me here or not. So far, I have gotten pretty decent respect. However, I am here to argue with idiots if that's what they want. It's what you want. I called you out for not arguing and look what happened, you got your ass handed to you when you engaged me. It's only going to get worse if you keep it up.

[HarlemHeat37]

Did you search this forum for fans that predicted 70 wins? no, I bet you didn't. Go look, they're there.

The opinion of random fans is relevant, how?..I bet you I could find many, many more fans that predicted that teams wouldn't win 70, as opposed to the 1 or 2 fans that predicted 70, which is what you're claiming..

Where did I say the Pistons were going to win 70 game?

I meant Rasheed's Celtics, my mistake..

The espn link the last two years was updated game by game because there was an interest if the Bulls record would be broken. This in itself suggests predictions were made and that there was an interest if it could be done. Today, the local sports paper compared graphs of Nicklaus's and Wood's major wins and the time frame they did them in. Woods has 14 and needs 18 and is ahead of Nicklaus's pace by age. His play just sucks this year.

Like I said, they brought it up because those teams were ON PACE, not because they were expected to do it..simple logic..

I have shown plenty that teams were expected to win 70 games. You have shown nothing to say they won't and a search (even here at SpursTalk) is going to kill your case. You lost, end of discussion on 70 game teams, Unless you wish to make a financial wager.

You didn't show anything, what the ..you gave links for 3 teams..1 of them was a player that actually played for that team making that prediction..the other link was about 2 teams that were on pace to compete with the record, well into the season..

and I answered DPG, go read it. Let's see if he takes my challenge.

stupidity..DPG is a respected poster here, he shouldn't bother with you..

Ok, I agree teams do win without championship experience, that's by force. otherwise we would have a 64 time champion. however, more teams are winning recently with championship experience than not. 3 exist as constructed by their cores today:

Spurs 3 les
Lakers 2 les
Celtics 1 le.

What the are you talking about? ..

You're going against your point here..the 2003 Spurs won with only Duncan and Robinson having experience, the 2009 Lakers won with only Kobe and Fisher having experience, and the Celtics had no experience..

If you're going to bring up their current cores as an example of experience, you're completely contradicting your previous point that teams need experience to win les..you can't bring up these teams and ignore the 2003 Spurs, 2008 Celtics and 2009 Lakers lacking experience by your chosen logic..

I don't see any point in analyzing how the Miami superfriends will play together when they haven't played a single game. It's all pure speculation. Who gets the ball the most? How will the egos mesh? It's all speculation. Until they have a season under their belt, it's anyone's guess. Granted, there have been many opinions speculating how Miami will play, but until they do it's pure speculation. Speculation in an argument doesn't work. This was proven millennia ago by great minds such as Plato and Aristotle. Do you know more than they do? At least teams with championship experience can be forecast a lot easier. If you're going to speculate you have to weigh what has gone on before rather than what has yet to happen as far more valuable. Those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it. That's why teams win multiple championships, they remember the past and repeat it.

The same way I predicted the 2008 Celtics would win the le..the same way a lot of people predicted the 2008 Celtics would win..there's plenty of reason to believe Miami will win, just by thinking logically..the 2 best players in the NBA, an all-star big man, a great balance of inside-outside offense, a good bench, good spacing, great rebounding, a good defensive system..

Dealt with this above. someone new has to win, else we'd have 1 champion for 64 years. What's key is 99 spurs and 2000 Lakers capitalized on their championship experience and won multiple les. Shaq's Lakers won 3, Kobe's Lakers won 2. Duncan and DRob won 2, Duncan, Ginobili and Parker won 3, crossing over with DRob in 2003. Celtics won one and are still in the hunt. that's the team that's I think will beat Miami in 2011, and may win banner 18.

You're contradicting yourself, once again..

You even just brought up the '99 Spurs and 2000 Lakers to try to help your argument, when in fact, it completely proves your argument about "experience" to be false..

geez, you really are stupid. The core of the Spurs is Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili, all 3 are the key comtributors.
2000-02 Lakes the core was Shaq and Kobe
2009-10 Lakers the core is Kobe and Gasol
Note: Derek Fisher was not a core piece in either Lakers era

You are placing Haslem as a core piece to Miami from 2006 to 2011? LOL, he is the Derek Fisher or worse to the Heat.

Haslem will play a lot of minutes beside Bosh, but that's not the point..

You're disregarding the fact that Miami has more championship and Finals experience than many of the teams that completely lacked Finals experience during this era, yet still won the le..'99 Spurs, 2000 Lakers, 2004 Pistons, 2008 Celtics..that was my original point, which you continue to disregard..

Using your logic, which is that an entire team has to have experience, than the 2003 Spurs, 2006 Heat and 2009 Lakers had no experience either..

So overall, using your logic, the only teams that had any championship experience during this era were the 2001 and 2002 Lakers, the 2005 Spurs, the 2007 Spurs and the 2010 Lakers..

The Heat core has Finals experience, Wade and Lebron, their 2 best players, and the 2 best players in the NBA....

You still don't think championship experience counts? well, history says it does. It's all been pointed out.

No, history says that championship talent wins..

Really? Do you have statistics to back this up? What percentage of Spurs fans say they are done? Link please. Need a sample size that is statistically significant, and purely random. you do understand the laws of statistics I hope, it took centuries for the great mathematical minds to develop them. By the way, I have taught statistics in college before and tutor grad students as well.

Go make a thread about it on the Spurs board..any logical Spurs fan will tell you that the chances of the Spurs making the Finals are very poor..

A lot of Lakers fans wrote the Lakers off in April when they lost most their ending regular season games. Even Lakers fans quit on them against OKC. No you don't get a link. It won't look good for you if I do. Just visit any Lakers board about that time, you'll see.

The Lakers were the favorite to win the NBA le..nobody gave up on them..

Whoah, whoah, whoah Nelly! Read the question. I asked for a given year to compare with 2010-11. you throw a whole decade at me!
In the 1980's there were usually 3 great teams.
1980-84, Celtics, Sixers, Lakers
1985-87 Celtics, Lakers.
1988-89 Lakers, Pistons, Celtics.
Bulls came along in the 1990s.

2011 best teams:

Celtics
Magic
Heat
Bulls
Lakers
Spurs
Mavs
OKC
Blazers
Nuggets

That's 10 teams. Throw half out and you still have 5. Show me a year with more than 5.

Wait, which ones are the great teams?..why are you naming all those teams?..Nuggets? Blazers? OKC? Dallas? SA? Chicago? Orlando? ..

there wasn't a great team last year? Well, some said the 2010 Celtics were better than the 2008 Celtics. So when was there a great team in the NBA? Lakers and Celtics proved to be the best two last year. the other potentially great teams didn't make it, someone has to lose.

Who said the 2010 Celtics were better than the 2008 Celtics?..seriously?..

the Heat will be bent over. That's my opinion. the Heat have plenty of time to win. First, they have to learn to play together. You expect too much too soon. Prepare to be disappointed at first. then take it season by season. Heat haven't even won yet, let alone learned how hard it is to repeat. Do that, and you have a right to boast. Right now, you impress no one but yourself.

How does this prove your ridiculous argument that the Heat are at a disadvantage because other teams "have to win now"?..

[SomeCallMeTim]

I actually said "barring injury" from the beginning..Blessings being Blessings..



Laker fans..

You do realize your "gutsy" call covers most Finals-losing teams or preseason favorites of the past decade, right? Your qualification would excuse the last 2 Lakers losses in the Finals, for example. Would also cover Boston this year and I've seen plenty make the excuse for Orlando last year ("Jameer was rusty, came back too early" "Jameer was still hurt"). The '99 Knicks, '00 Spurs, '01 Sixers, '03 Lakers all say hi, too.

Way to run with the favorites and still manage to hedge your bets. Really out on a limb there.