2010-2011 NBA Playoffs Thread Pt.2

[Sticksboi05]

The thing that has amazed me is Wade's health this year. The one factor that no one really considered is how having Lebron might preserve his career. He's not having to single-handidly pull the Heat into the playoffs each year. And he can take a quarter off here and there and not hurt his team. I've always thought the heat had a small window because Wade is so fragile' date=' but now I'm wondering if that is true.

And the scary thing is this: The Heat should get better. If they win this year, they might three or fourpeat. A Chris Bosh with a championship ring and a few 30 point games in the ECF is a Chris Bosh who should no longer have to listen to the voices saying, "You don't belong."

And the rest of the team is only going to get better around them. I think they understand how that team is going to work now. And it involves players like Haslem and Anthony. God forbid they find players better than Haslem and Anthony to fill those roles.

This reminds me of that first Shaq-Kobe title team. That team took forever to get going, but once it found the formula, it was over....[/quote']

The alley-oop in the 2000 WCF began it all.

[Gator Bait]

i am sorry.... but this post is just PURE whiney, moist-panties. Jeez, get a grip. .

sorry..just gets frustrating to read stupid posts like the one you just composed.

If Miami wins it all this year, then I will have to say that at this point in their respective careers, Lebron tops both Kobe and Jordan. He will have shown that he can do MORE without a supporting cast (finals, with NOBODY else on his team) and he can also win it all with an incomplete supporting cast (they will be much better next year with a few quality role players)

so first you are assuming that Miami wins this year...not to mention...wasn't Jordan working on his 2nd championship by this time in his career...pretty sure he was. You are correct that Jordan had better role players...those are very important...but LeBron has a long way to go before his career can be compared to MJ's

the probem is that we are ALL going to start getting bored with a miami juggernaught, unless something happens to break-em-up. Here's hoping that Wade starts making googly-eyes at Lebron's mom this offseason....

Miami is going to have zero room under the new CBA to add all the role players they will need to go on a Chicago-LA type three peat.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

so first you are assuming that Miami wins this year...not to mention...wasn't Jordan working on his 2nd championship by this time in his career...pretty sure he was. You are correct that Jordan had better role players...those are very important...but LeBron has a long way to go before his career can be compared to MJ's

You know what? I ****ing get it. Lebron is not as good as Jordan. Kobe is not as good as Jordan. Magic is not as good as Jordan. No one is ****ing as good as Jordan. So stop arguing that he has anything to do with anything.

Seriously, are we going to spend the next 50 years watching the NBA and ****ing that no one is as good as the greatest player ever? Seriously?

I mean...****ing seriously?

Seriously?

Who cares if he is not as good as Jordan. And who gives a shot about Scottie Pippen right now except his creditors?

Jesus Christ.

Is this was baseball was like in the 40s? NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.

NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.NotasgoodasRuth.

Miami is going to have zero room under the new CBA to add all the role players they will need to go on a Chicago-LA type three peat.

Any CBA is not going to go into effect in full immediately. And if there is an Allen Houston rule, there might suddenly be a lot of talent available on the cheap. At this point, corpses would be better than Big Z, Howard, Chalmers, and Miller.

[Brad_Edwards_Fan]

you also said robinson and hakeem were way better than shaq. can i say rings. followed by the fact that robinson and hakeem were all time greats but they needed another big to carry the load in both of thier title hunts, not shaq he had mark madsen at one point.

So what other big did Hakeem need to win his titles, and dont say robert horry who scored half his points from three. And you realize that for his 1995 title Hakeem (33 ppg) outplayed Shaq (28 ppg) in what was Shaq's one of Shaqs top 3 statistical years. Shaq didnt look more dominant when he was in LA because he was that much better, he looked more dominant because other centers in the league were that much worse. Not to mention that you didnt have to pull Hakeem out of games in cruch time due to his inability to shoot.

[MattFancy]

LKB I agree, can we please stop comparing every single player to MJ! What other sport does that? Not every baseball player is compared to Ruth or Cy Young. Not ever football player is compared to Unitas or Butkus. So why does every single NBA player have to be compared to MJ? There's more talent in the NBA now than there ever has been. No we may not see another MJ, but let's enjoy the players we can see now.

[Going Commando]

Not me, but I guess I'm old school. I still hate the Skins the most of an NFL team. In terms of NFC East hate, it goes in this order for me: Skins, Eagles, Giants.

But in terms of the fans, it easily goes: Eagles, Giants, Skins.

But my hate for any of those teams doesn't even compare to my hate for the cHeat.

I don't know why, but that's actually reassuring to hear RP .

To hear most Dallas fans around here talk, they laugh at the Skins more than actively hate them. They don't see us as threatening any more.

Older NFC East fans still seem to properly hate the Redskins. One of my friends's dad is a huge Eagles/Philly fans and he said NOTHING was worse than playing the Redskins in the 80's. He said there was nothing worse then going down by 7-10 points early in the game and knowing that it was already over. It was the way we won that did it. It didn't matter what you tried on defense you simply couldn't stop the running game or the clock.

[Sticksboi05]

You know what? I ****ing get it. Lebron is not as good as Jordan. Kobe is not as good as Jordan. Magic is not as good as Jordan. No one is ****ing as good as Jordan. So stop arguing that he has anything to do with anything.

Seriously' date=' are we going to spend the next 50 years watching the NBA and ****ing that no one is as good as the greatest player ever? Seriously?

[/quote']

If the media has anything to say about it yes. They do it with every exceptional talent that comes out for what reason I don't know. It's funny because basketball is the only sport this happens. Nobody endlessly compares Ovechkin to Lemieux.

[royallypwned]

I don't know why, but that's actually reassuring to hear RP .

To hear most Dallas fans around here talk, they laugh at the Skins more than actively hate them. They don't see us as threatening any more.

Older NFC East fans still seem to properly hate the Redskins. One of my friends's dad is a huge Eagles/Philly fans and he said NOTHING was worse than playing the Redskins in the 80's. He said there was nothing worse then going down by 7-10 points early in the game and knowing that it was already over. It was the way we won that did it. It didn't matter what you tried on defense you simply couldn't stop the running game or the clock.

I don't let current trends change who should be our top rival. The Skins are meant to be the Cowboys' most hated team. It's just supposed to be that way. Sure, you could say the Eagles have been a bigger threat the last several years, but I don't care. What I do care about is the history, in particular how the Cowboys were formed.

[MattFancy]

If the media has anything to say about it yes. They do it with every exceptional talent that comes out for what reason I don't know. It's funny because basketball is the only sport this happens. Nobody endlessly compares Ovechkin to Lemieux.

But why in basketball are players constantly compared to MJ? Like you said, no other sport does it. So why does the media and the fans, feel like they have to constantly compare people to MJ and look for the MJ?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

If the media has anything to say about it yes. They do it with every exceptional talent that comes out for what reason I don't know. It's funny because basketball is the only sport this happens. Nobody endlessly compares Ovechkin to Lemieux.

But why do people here do it?

Lebron could dunk from the three point line in triple overtime of game seven of the Finals and there would be three posters here within 15 minutes saying, "Call me when he gets his sixth ring."

The Jordan comparisons and the "ring" arguments are tiresome. Charles Barkley was awesome. Having a ring would not have made him any more awesome. It simply would have allowed him to check that box on the list of completely arbitrary things you are supposed to achieve.

[Monte51Coleman]

Lebron could dunk from the three point line in triple overtime of game seven of the Finals and there would be three posters here within 15 minutes saying' date=' "Call me when he gets his sixth ring."

[/quote']

First they'd say he traveled. Then they'd say it was fixed.

Then they'd bring up Jordan.

[sly]

The Jordan comparisons and the "ring" arguments are tiresome. Charles Barkley was awesome. Having a ring would not have made him any more awesome. It simply would have allowed him to check that box on the list of completely arbitrary things you are supposed to achieve.

It actually has quite a lot to do with how a player's legacy is judged. Barkley will never be viewed as a top 15-20 player of all time because he never won a ring. If there are no "arbitrary" goals or achievements a player needs to reach, then 50-100 years from now my grandkids will be looking through an NBA book filled with some pictures and labels that read "awesome" 100 different times.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It actually has quite a lot to do with how a player's legacy is judged. Barkley will never be viewed as a top 15-20 player of all time because he never won a ring.

He should be.

I don't know if he is 15-20, because who is really going to sit down and make that list. But his lack of a "ring" is stupid. He played on a **** Philly team during his prime and then ran into Jordan and Hakeem when he finally got on a good team.

[Sticksboi05]

But why in basketball are players constantly compared to MJ? Like you said, no other sport does it. So why does the media and the fans, feel like they have to constantly compare people to MJ and look for the MJ?

Because Jordan transcended the sport and was a cultural icon. It's almost like he represents the idea of a perfect player with no weakness. So people get intimidated I guess because they think the NBA needs another MJ? I don't know. As great as say, Gretzky was, he was only a cultural icon in Canada. He did help popularize hockey in the U.S. when he came to Los Angeles but he was not a worldwide icon like MJ. I don't know, but for the last decade we've had to hear about the next "Jordan." If anything, it's probably hurting the NBA.

Even Crosby who was called The Next One, isn't compared to #99, he is compared to his current peers. Ovechkin is not compared to Lemieux, he is put up against his current peers. For some reaso, in basketball, it's always, well Jordan did this.

[I_Bleed_B&G]

First they'd say he traveled. Then they'd say it was fixed.

Then they'd bring up Jordan.

Don't forget the crab dribble

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

If there are no "arbitrary" goals or achievements a player needs to reach, then 50-100 years from now my grandkids will be looking through an NBA book filled with some pictures and labels that read "awesome" 100 different times.

That's really how they should look at the NBA.

Baseball is the only sport where you can look at numbers and say, "Well...that guy would be a star in any era." I don't think Tommy Heinsohn was a better forward than Barkley because he has rings on two hands. Frankly, I don't think any player prior to the early to mid 70s should even be in this discussion.

I mean, Russell was awesome, but would Russell even be a center now? He was 6'9 and had no offensive game to speak of. Wouldn't he basically be Joakim Noah now? Could Bob Cousy even be a starter in the league now?

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 02:13 PM ----------

Because Jordan transcended the sport and was a cultural icon. It's almost like he represents the idea of a perfect player with no weakness. So people get intimidated I guess because they think the NBA needs another MJ? I don't know. As great as say, Gretzky was, he was only a cultural icon in Canada. He did help popularize hockey in the U.S. when he came to Los Angeles but he was not a worldwide icon like MJ. I don't know, but for the last decade we've had to hear about the next "Jordan." If anything, it's probably hurting the NBA.

Even Crosby who was called The Next One, isn't compared to #99, he is compared to his current peers. Ovechkin is not compared to Lemieux, he is put up against his current peers. For some reaso, in basketball, it's always, well Jordan did this.

I feel bad for someone like you. If you are 20, you were 8 the last time Michael Jordan had a relevant NBA moment. You couldn't have seen him and experienced him the way an adult did. He's like Santa Claus. And you have been brainwashed to think that nothing else can compare.

This is what annoys me. All the 19, 20, and 21-year olds on this board ****ing the modern players don't compare to the greats of 13 years ago. It's like nostalgia for the very recent past that you still did not experience.

As I've said before, I've been watching the NBA fairly religiously since 1983. And this is the best season I've ever seen with the possible exception of '87.

So ****ing enjoy it, you ungrateful ****s.

[Sticksboi05]

That's really how they should look at the NBA.

Baseball is the only sport where you can look at numbers and say' date=' "Well...that guy would be a star in any era." I don't think Tommy Heinsohn was a better forward than Barkley because he has rings on two hands. Frankly, I don't think any player prior to the early to mid 70s should even be in this discussion.

I mean, Russell was awesome, but would Russell even be a center now? He was 6'9 and had no offensive game to speak of. Wouldn't he basically be Joakim Noah now? Could Bob Cousy even be a starter in the league now?

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 02:13 PM ----------

I feel bad for someone like you. If you are 20, you were 8 the last time Michael Jordan had a relevant NBA moment. You couldn't have seen him and experienced him the way an adult did. He's like Santa Claus. And you have been brainwashed to think that nothing else can compare.

This is what annoys me. All the 19, 20, and 21-year olds on this board ****ing the modern players don't compare to the greats of 13 years ago. It's like nostalgia for the very recent past that you still did not experience.

As I've said before, I've been watching the NBA fairly religiously since 1983. And this is the best season I've ever seen with the possible exception of '87.

So ****ing enjoy it, you ungrateful ****s.

Dude, seriously, wtf is your problem? I simply tried to come up with a reason as to why in basketball every player is compared to Jordan and you lash out at me why? I have watched just about every game of this year's playoffs assuming there aren't any NHL games in the middle in which case I switch back and forth. I've been happily surprised at the plight of the Celtics, Lakers and Spurs this year and happy at the turning of a new page with players like Durant. Honestly, you don't have to be a jerk in every post.

[sly]

That's really how they should look at the NBA. Baseball is the only sport where you can look at numbers and say' date=' "Well...that guy would be a star in any era." I don't think Tommy Heinsohn was a better forward than Barkley because he has rings on two hands. Frankly, I don't think any player prior to the early to mid 70s should even be in this discussion.[/quote']

So you want to base the greats on... how athletic they are and not what they achieved? It's a combination of statistics, awards, and winning. All-time basketball greats might not be based on numbers as much as in baseball, but individual athletes have a greater impact on a basketball game then they do in a baseball game... or any team sport for that matter. That's why it's usually the team with the best set of players that win more and why parity in the NBA is so tough.

It's hard to judge "best of all time" across generations in any sport, but there have to be benchmarks. Being the top player on a championship team in the NBA is a pretty big one.

As I've said before' date=' I've been watching the NBA fairly religiously since 1983. And this is the best season I've ever seen with the possible exception of '87.[/quote']

The last couple years have been great. It's probably the best overall talent the NBA has had since the late 80's or very early 90's.

[Sticksboi05]

So you want to base the greats on... how athletic they are and not what they achieved? It's a combination of statistics, awards, and winning. All-time basketball greats might not be based on numbers as much as in baseball, but individual athletes have a greater impact on a basketball game then they do in a baseball game... or any team sport for that matter. That's why it's usually the team with the best set of players that win more and why parity in the NBA is so tough.

It's hard to judge "best of all time" across generations in any sport, but there have to be benchmarks. Being the top player on a championship team in the NBA is a pretty big one.

It's almost impossible unless you specify a part of the game and even then.

Like I can, with 100% confidence, say Gretzky was the best offensive player in NHL history. When you have more assists than anyone else has points, that says it all. But best ever, some say Bobby Orr, some say Gordie Howe.

And I mean 1985 NHL is over 7 goals per game, the modern game is a little under 4.

Even if you tried to narrow it down and say, well best rebounder ever, the pace of the game, and the talent pool etc. has changed so drastically it's just impossible almost. Plus, taking into account fitness training and the strides made there and equipment etc.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 03:42 PM ----------

How long do you guys think the Thunder and Bulls last each? I'll give the Bulls 0 more games and the Thunder 1 more.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Don't forget the crab dribble

Uh yeah, he got called for traveling on that play. He's the one that came with the crab dribbling bull****.

And please don't make me bust out old youtube vids of him traveling against the Wiz in the playoffs and not getting called for it.

[Sticksboi05]

And please don't make me bust out old youtube vids of him traveling against the Wiz in the playoffs and not getting called for it.

We would've won that series in 06. Completely killed our momentum.

[MattFancy]

Because Jordan transcended the sport and was a cultural icon. It's almost like he represents the idea of a perfect player with no weakness. So people get intimidated I guess because they think the NBA needs another MJ? I don't know. As great as say, Gretzky was, he was only a cultural icon in Canada. He did help popularize hockey in the U.S. when he came to Los Angeles but he was not a worldwide icon like MJ. I don't know, but for the last decade we've had to hear about the next "Jordan." If anything, it's probably hurting the NBA.

I think it has hurt the NBA. It seems like they so desperatly want to find another Jordan, that any player that semi-resembles him in the past 10 years is compared to him. You had Iverson, Carter, Kobe, DWade, LeBron, Melo, and I'm sure I'm missing some. Why can't the NBA just be happy with the amount of star power they have now?

Even Crosby who was called The Next One, isn't compared to #99, he is compared to his current peers. Ovechkin is not compared to Lemieux, he is put up against his current peers. For some reaso, in basketball, it's always, well Jordan did this.

I agree with this. Not every hockey player is compared to Gretzky or Leimieux. As great as Ovie and Crosby are, the NHL is fine with them creating their own names for themselves. Even a sport like baseball, who has a very long and rich history, doesn't have comparisons like the NBA. Pujols isn't constantly compared to Ruth. Roy Halladay isn't constantly compared to Cy Young. Just let these current guys leave their own legacies and not worry about if they are as good as a past great.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

I actually think it's reverse. I think the Thunder are done and the Bulls have one more in them. That **** that happened to OKC the other night was one of the most devestating collapes I've ever seen. They're too young to overcome it.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 03:47 PM ----------

We would've won that series in 06. Completely killed our momentum.

Absolutely.

[Sticksboi05]

I agree with this. Not every hockey player is compared to Gretzky or Leimieux. As great as Ovie and Crosby are, the NHL is fine with them creating their own names for themselves. Even a sport like baseball, who has a very long and rich history, doesn't have comparisons like the NBA. Pujols isn't constantly compared to Ruth. Roy Halladay isn't constantly compared to Cy Young. Just let these current guys leave their own legacies and not worry about if they are as good as a past great.

If you go through the NHL Thread and try to find the # of times Gretzky is brought up, it's down n ear zero but for praying the Capitals become the modern 80s Oilers.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 03:49 PM ----------

I actually think it's reverse. I think the Thunder are done and the Bulls have one more in them. That **** that happened to OKC the other night was one of the most devestating collapes I've ever seen. They're too young to overcome it.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 03:47 PM ----------

Absolutely.

I remember like yesterday. I was eating an amazing Five Guys meal the night of Game 2 in Cleveland. When we won I was like, oh ****. We had Game 3 by a slight grip and then the most blatant travel I've ever seen, let go. And Arenas rims out the game winning 3. Devastating. Bull****.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 03:53 PM ----------

I actually think it's reverse. I think the Thunder are done and the Bulls have one more in them. That **** that happened to OKC the other night was one of the most devestating collapes I've ever seen. They're too young to overcome it.

---------- Post added May-25th-2011 at 03:47 PM ----------

Absolutely.

I just cannot believe that Rose isolated on LeBron was the best the Bulls could come up with for a final shot in the 4th. WTF kind of blunder was that. Of course he airballed. They had Game 4 and blew it, I just cannot see them winning another game. I can see the Mavs getting overzealous and getting edged.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Btw, the Mike Brown hire tells me they're preparing for the beginning of the end. He's a placeholder.