As I keep saying, this guy is a troll. He'll always take shots at Tim Duncan.
The two sided coin works, but the Mavs were just as good as the Spurs in 2003 (60-22 tie) but the Spurs peaked at the end of the season whereas the Mavs had peaked early. The East was way down no doubt, but the West was stacked back then. The Suns were a ing nightmare for us and had been all season despite being only 45-37 (and the 8 seed) they had Spurkiller Starbury who had made Parker his personal sex slave all year until game 5 of that series. Not to mention the Lakers were 50-32 after starting out 19-23 and riding into the playoffs on fire that year, the "burnout" had easily worn off by February 2003.
But on the flip side it wouldn't be fair to take anything away from 2014 OKC, they were every bit the very definition of elite and a true contender that year, the Spurs just... eked it out and won.
As I keep saying, this guy is a troll. He'll always take shots at Tim Duncan.
I wouldn't trade Leonard for any player in the NBA right now.
I think we are in the dark age as well now. More ty teams than ever, whereas the 2000's had the greatest western conference of all time.
The NBA is in a ty place right now for me, it's pretty much the Warriors and everyone else.
because back in the 2000s there were never more than 2 superstars on the same team. Blame the '08 Celtics for starting the trend because that was really the first time ever even if they were each a little over the hill.
Not even Kawhi Leonard?
Depends what you mean..if you're referring to parity, then yes, but that's because the Warriors have 4 stars, including 2 of the top 3 players in the leagueit would be almost the equivalent of adding Ray Allen and Shawn Marion to the 2003 Lakers..
I was referring to the state of the league, though..2003 to 2007 were the dark days for the NBA(worst since the 70s) in terms of popularity and watch-ability..it had its worst ratings since the 70s and that era of basketball(following LA's 3-peat until the big 3 Celtics) has been forgotten by the media and fans, it's an afterthought, which is part of the reason Duncan's peak has been overshadowed..
I think you mean underestimating, but I'm not doing either. Since it was an ensemble cast, virtually every rotation player was a key one (with the possible exception of Belinelli, they couldn't have done without any) and he was something like co second best, but because mid way through the following season he broke out and emerged as one of the ten best players in the league, there was almost instantaneous revisionist history when it came to his role.
Except I don't. I remember debating it right after we won. This isn't revisionist history. I have an excellent mind for these things.
With your hands holding your ankles and your ass up awaiting a schlonging from Kawhi.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)