Heat: If Lebron repeats, I'll put him in the elite category

[Jumi]

Damn, this was a totally destruction!! Well done!

[Killakobe81]

I think every ESPN analyst chose us (except Legler IIRC), mostly because we beat the Spurs convincingly and Celts were pushed in every round. I remember being real nervous before game one because lately (USC/Texas) teams that were so overwhelmingly favored kept losing ...

One of my HC b-ball teammates text me and said Lakers in 5 maybe 6 if Celts are lucky ...and I said I dont see how we in a game 7 in Boston, this was not the Showtime Lakers and if they lost one or both in Boston we were in trouble ... I so wish I was wrong. The only finals lost that hurt more was 1984.

When the Pistons swept us in 1989 ... we were banged up and DEtroit was really good. Ditto 2004.
1983 Moses would not let his team lose ...
But 2008 to allow those Green bas s to get 17 off of us ...especially with that comeback in Game 4 ... urggggh!!! But they were better than us much better. The analysts were idiots.

[NRHector]

How many trolls do you have Lakaluva?

[stretch]

The 2008 Celtics team was a very good team.

They got pushed to 7 by the Hawks and Cavs mainly because Joe Johnson was having an outrageous series, and of course the Cavs had Lebron and anything can happen with him.

People try to dismiss them a bit because of those two series, but I still think that is one of the best individual teams of all time. Extremely well rounded, strong defense, and a go-to CLUTCH scorer in Paul Pierce.

That team probably repeats if KG didn't get hurt the next year, and could have won again the following year if Perkins didn't get hurt against the Lakers.

They had a legit shot at a 3-peat, but it got derailed by injuries.

[TIMMYtoZO]

The Celts ed around against the Hawks and Cavs as both game 7's were never in doubt. They dominated the Hawks in game 7 and had the lead the entire game 7 against the Cavs. They took the Pistons out in 6. They relied on homecourt in the first 2 rounds, but when they had to win on the road in the ECF, they did. Those series going 7 games had more to do with Boston than it did with Atlanta/Cleveland.

[Latarian Milton]

The 2008 Celtics team was a very good team.

They got pushed to 7 by the Hawks and Cavs mainly because Joe Johnson was having an outrageous series, and of course the Cavs had Lebron and anything can happen with him.

People try to dismiss them a bit because of those two series, but I still think that is one of the best individual teams of all time. Extremely well rounded, strong defense, and a go-to CLUTCH scorer in Paul Pierce.

That team probably repeats if KG didn't get hurt the next year, and could have won again the following year if Perkins didn't get hurt against the Lakers.

They had a legit shot at a 3-peat, but it got derailed by injuries.

they were desperate to win it that year which was the most important reason they won, like them mavs in 11 imho. however after winning the le that year, they lost such level of hunger and never put up a serious push for the championship again despite maintaining a solid team that made the finals and conference finals. teams like 08 celts and 11 mavs are supposed to be one-and-done champions imho

[Deuce Bigalow]

kobe's 5 rings are overrated. lakers won the first 3 in the post-jordan era when the league was pretty weak overall, spurs dominated the middle of 00s but began to decline starting from 07, which allowed the lakers to win another 2 during the post-spur era, but the papertigers eventually got exposed in the hands of them mavs in 2011, with a crisp 4-0 sweep. lakers have never been really that good since the end of magic era imho.

Lets take a look at 2012

Stern vetoes the trade of CP3 to the Lakers
Rose tears ACL
Dwight has surgery on his back
Avery Bradley was injured and didn't play

2006.... Many people don't even count that championship lol

[TacoMeatJackson]

Bron elite because the elite. That's it. And he better than that snitchass busta ever was in his raping life.

[Asif Ali Zardari]

The Celtics won 65+ games and they were the le favorites all year. The Lakers were playing without 2 starters. Despite the ESPN picks, the Lakers were underdogs.

The Mavs were favorites to win the series, most people were just afraid to pick them, based on their previous choking in big playoff series's.

[spurraider21]

The Celtics won 65+ games and they were the le favorites all year. The Lakers were playing without 2 starters. Despite the ESPN picks, the Lakers were underdogs.

The Mavs were favorites to win the series, most people were just afraid to pick them, based on their previous choking in big playoff series's.

Mavs were NOT favorites. Don't kid yourself.

[stretch]

they were desperate to win it that year which was the most important reason they won, like them mavs in 11 imho. however after winning the le that year, they lost such level of hunger and never put up a serious push for the championship again despite maintaining a solid team that made the finals and conference finals. teams like 08 celts and 11 mavs are supposed to be one-and-done champions imho

um

The Celtics went 27-2 to start the season right after they won the championship, and went 42-12 in games with KG during the season.

They certainly were not one-and-done type champs. They had a very solid chance of repeating, and took a 3-2 series lead against LA in the finals the following season, and lost the following 2 when Perkins went down. And what were they severely lacking in those games? Rebounding. Perk would have made a MASSIVE difference. Not to mention the officiating in the second half of game 7 was absolutely atrociously in favor of the Lakers.

[stretch]

The Celtics won 65+ games and they were the le favorites all year. The Lakers were playing without 2 starters. Despite the ESPN picks, the Lakers were underdogs.

The Mavs were favorites to win the series, most people were just afraid to pick them, based on their previous choking in big playoff series's.

Your first statement is absolutely true.

Your second statement is a load of .

[BatManu20]

Duncan is really good, but I never feared him. He's a top 20 player in history but he's not a guy you could just give the ball to and let him carry you to a win.

Lol you're trolling. The Spurs '03 and '05 Championships were when Duncan literally carried us. He was everything to that team, both offensively and defensively. Parker and Ginobili weren't even All-Stars yet. As a matter of fact, Parker played terrible down the stretch in the playoffs in '03, and was benched for Speedy Claxton. Duncan dominated Shaq and in post against the Lakers in '03 in the playoffs even though the Lakers knew exactly what the Spurs were going to do. Literally every play on offense went through him in the post, and the Lakers still couldn't stop him. So, I think historical evidence counters your claim that he "isn't a guy you could just give the ball to and let him carry you to your win."

[BatManu20]

Lebron is elite as it is. He doesn't need to win back-to-back ring to prove that. He's the best basketball player in the world right now, and when he retires he'll be top 3 all-time. He's just a special player that we shouldn't take for granted cause we'll likely never see another player like him.

[BoricuaCJA]

If you want to be compared with Jordan, Magic, Kobe, Hakeem, Shaq and the others, you have to repeat as NBA champion. Its a sign of sustained excellence and consistent dominance. It's the reason I can't include Larry Bird in this group but at least Bird can say he played in an era where there was another superteam against him.

James has no excuse. I hate him but I'll give him credit if he does this. All the elite players in history have have defended their championship.

Agree or disagree?

Larry Bird, Jerry West, Wilt Chamberlain, Tim Duncan???? Just to name a few that they did not repeat the year after winning a championship...