Beware of premature dynasty claims

[dirk4mvp]

Keep shifting your argument since you know that your position was indefensible.

I started my "argument" about how the neither the Spurs nor the Mavericks are or are close to being dynasties. That is where I'm still currently standing. The Spurs or the Mavericks are not dynasties.

[Mavs<Spurs]

History is your favorite subject isn't it? You, just like every other Spur fan, go back to the same ass argument about the 3 rings. When will you all wake up and realize who bested the God-almighty untouchable Spurs in the second round?

No, it's math.

It's just like the old saying, denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

What I have written is true. You mentioned facts, but you wanted to use them selectively and omit the most relevant ones.

To claim some sort of dynasty or some sort of great superiority over all other NBA teams, you're going to have to offer something other than your word.

You have nothing.

Will you repeat? If not, then you are certainly no better than the 2005 Spurs and might be less than the 2007 Spurs.

And that is assuming that you win.

When you're just a one timer and you have this kind of big head, you don't think anyone is going to say anything about it?

And the fact still remains:

Tim Duncan 3 championships, 3 finals mvps
Dirk 0 championships and 0 finals mvps

You still have no answer to this fact.
It is true so you must try desperately to discount it.
But if you win 1 championship, it will mean everything (but then it will be last year we won = history). But we can't do this.

Tim's championships aren't relevant.
but if Dirk wins a championship, that will be relevant.

In 2007?

[Mavs<Spurs]

I started my "argument" about how the neither the Spurs nor the Mavericks are or are close to being dynasties. That is where I'm still currently standing. The Spurs or the Mavericks are not dynasties.

I am going to try to find some middle ground. It's probably hopeless since most of you all seem to want to be punks and trolls, but I'll give it a shot:

In 2007, neither the Mavs nor the Spurs will be prohibitive favorites to win the west.

[dirk4mvp]

So you want me to say Timmy is a great player who has 3 pieces of nice finger jewelry? He is. But you also discount Dirk and the boys have a legit shot at winning. So then what? Until it's tied, you always say," Oh well still Spurs-3 Mavs-1. Oh well Spurs-3 Mavs-2" That would be complete BS.

[dirk4mvp]

I am going to try to find some middle ground. It's probably hopeless since most of you all seem to want to be punks and trolls, but I'll give it a shot:

In 2007, neither the Mavs nor the Spurs will be prohibitive favorites to win the west.

I don't think I've in any way, shape, form or fashion have trolled. Just tried to have good basketball talk with fans of such.

[Mavs<Spurs]

There will be no consensus favorite to win it all or win the west in 2007.

That is the main point that I am getting at and probably at the heart of this thread.

The statement by Spurs<Mavs that the Mavs have a dynasty that will rule the league over the next 4 to 6 years is a denial of the above view.

Surely, you can admit this to be true. In 2007, There will be basketball analysts who think that Mavs > Spurs and others who think that Spurs>Mavs. And it will be evenly divided, more or less.

[dirk4mvp]

In my eyes, 4-5 teams have a good shot at it.

In no particular order:

Suns
Mavs
Spurs
Grizz(gotta go with the hometown guys)
Kings

[Mavs<Spurs]

So you want me to say Timmy is a great player who has 3 pieces of nice finger jewelry? He is. But you also discount Dirk and the boys have a legit shot at winning. So then what? Until it's tied, you always say," Oh well still Spurs-3 Mavs-1. Oh well Spurs-3 Mavs-2" That would be complete BS.

I offered a middle ground: In 2007, there will be no prohibitive favorite to win the west.
Spurs have found repeating hard. Other teams have found it difficult to repeat as well. Mavs have not yet repeated. It is difficult to do and there are a lot of really good teams now.

If you all don't shout dynasty or claim that you are significantly better than the Spurs, probably you will do okay here.

As I said earlier, I was all about giving you all props. You could see that in a number of my posts recently. However, when one of your Mavs fans takes that and tries to say that the Mavs are a dynasty and will rule the league the next 4 to 6 years and are vastly superior to the Spurs, then you are likely to find it an inhospitable environment unless you call the fellow Mavs fan on it.

If you say that you all are a great team, I can agree with that. I think that you all will win the Finals this year. And while I still support my team, the Spurs, and it is my personal opinion that the Spurs will beat the Mavs next year, I recognize that this is a very controversial and debatable viewpoint.

So, I don't go around as a flamethrower, pushing my viewpoint on others.

In fact, as I said above, I was giving you all a lot of credit. But when you all turn into trolls like Spurs<Mavs did and claim that the Mavs will rule the league for the next 4 to 6 years, I am going to object and it appears to be the case that I can make a strong case for why in 2007, the Spurs will be at least as good as the Mavs. Or at a minimum, that there is no solid ground for claiming that the Mavs are significantly better than the Spurs.

[Mavs<Spurs]

In my eyes, 4-5 teams have a good shot at it.

In no particular order:

Suns
Mavs
Spurs
Grizz(gotta go with the hometown guys)
Kings

I can accept this and out of respect for hometown loyalty, I will say that without pf (ie with a healthy Pau), the Grizz have a good team.


So, we found a reasonable middle ground.

Good work!

The other poster just was blowing smoke and I went to go put it out before it got to be a fire.

And I did predict and I still predict (after game 4) that Mavs will win it.

[dirk4mvp]

Yay!

[Mavs<Spurs]

Yay!

Thanks for being reasonable.

After that other poster, I decided to be unreasonable back.

But it doesn't help contribute if I do that.

Cool.

[MadDog73]

On a side note, if Shaq wins a Ring this year, will he be better than Tim Duncan since he'll have 4?

[dirk4mvp]

I don't think so. He'll just be fufilling his dream on his IcyHot commercial. Remember, "I want another ring so bad, it hurts"

[MadDog73]

I don't think so. He'll just be fufilling his dream on his IcyHot commercial. Remember, "I want another ring so bad, it hurts"

[violentkitten]

bump