Official NBA Discussion Thread

LiquidSwords · May 10, 2011

In more relevant matters, some great games last night. Can't remember the last time two playoff games went to overtime the same day. And the first 3-OT playoff game since Bulls/Celtics a couple of years ago. I like both the Thunder and the Grizzlies, but I really want to see the Thunder in the finals. They were my upset pick western champions before the Spurs and Lakers both managed to choke. Durant's a great shooter who plays underrated defense, Russell Westbrook reminds me of an early Dwayne Wade (although he occasionally makes really bad decisions due to his youth), and Serge Ibaka is one of my favorite players in the league. That said, Shane Battier is another of my favorite players, so I won't be mad if the Grizzlies get to the finals, either.

I'm still not sold on the Heat going all the way, although it's looking bad for the Celtics. You really have to question the Green/Perkins trade right about now.

The main reason why Perkins was trade because the Celtics believed that they could not afford to resign him in the offseason. It was a dumb trade because now the Celtics don't have a decent center and Perkins was a young player that they could still have on the team once Allen, Pierce, and Garnett retire.

The Wizards are going to have new uniforms next season. I wish they could change the name and logo because the Wizards is just a bad name.

http://www.washingtonwizardsstore.com/

MGreene78 · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>More nostalgia: Some things never change. You really crack me up. I bring up overwhelming evidence that 1. we've already done this song and dance, and 2.an explanation why nobody shares your opinion, and you have the gall to say something like this? Do I say anything about you personally? You're the one that consistently resorts to insults and dismissiveness when somebody, horror of horrors, argues one of your opinions. Do you not understand how saying something like this is just encouraging a negative response in kind? You don't come off as a hero stalwartly standing up to the majority opinion, you come off like someone who would rather rely on cheap tactics to avoid making real points. I don't avoid, insult, or otherwise treat you in a way that necessitates this kind of response, and it says a lot more about you than anyone else that you would be so rude as to post "you are someone on here that I would like to avoid." Completely 100% uncalled for. Note that I haven't turned around and made personal attacks against you, because there's no reason to. Clearly my secret plan is to have a reasonable exchange of ideas until the point I get rudely told that I am basically a troll for showing why someone's arguments look like swiss cheese. If only real life arguments were so easy.</div></blockquote> I like his opinnion about Phil but for a different reason. I don't see any coach being number 1 honestly. I think it's a group of coaches who a forum like this will argue back and forth about. I like Phil (love Bulls and Lakers), but I also love Larry Brown, Red, Pops and others. I like how they all bring different things to the table and they all hide their flaws. Phil to me did get lucky with Bulls. He helped the team and built them up. I believe the main talent was there already and he put together the other talent. Same thing with the Lakers, he took a team that had the main talent around just were missing a couple pieces. Now while saying all this again he did have flaws, I don't personally believe we will ever see how great of a game calling coach he was because he never had to build a team, but again 11 titles makes that okay to me. Also his greatest draft pick was Andrew Bynum. Phil always had solid management above him who helped him hide these flaws. He is arugably the best modern day coach. Red was great at finding talent and developing them. While the C's still won when he left if I am correct he hand picked the next coach and was team president. He had great talent and like it's been said 9 HOF'er, but he built that team up, they weren't winners before he got there and even though all that talent was there is had multiple MVP's and not just one main guy like Jackson (Jordan, Kobe) His biggest knock will probably always be what would he have been like in modern day NBA will free agents and more teams Larry Brown is honestly one of my favorites he won at ever level and with every team (I don't include the Knicks that was him getting that check lol) He was a great defensive coach and took teams like the 76ers and Pistons to the finals and the only true superstar on any of thoses teams was Iverson. He coached the Bobcats to the playoffs last year (even though it was in a weak East) and had no one on that team who was truely a game changer. His knocks are truely not being a team guy, he would always leave his teams when things didn't go his way or when he got bored. Pops is another one of those high respect type of guys. He has coached Elliot, Rodman, Duncan, Parker, Manu, Robinson, Blair, and many other names. He has kept his team together and Duncan is still one of the best PF in the league (and the best ever) and his late age. I don't really see a huge knock on Pops. He has been extremely good at drafting and developing and he honestly stayed away from big time free agents. You don't hear about the Spurs doing bad stuff off the court. People probably don't like his style on offense of slow tempo, rebounding, and team defense, but it gets the job done. Jerry Sloan has helped develop the likes of Malone, Stock., Williams, and others. His biggest knock will be never winning a title with probably the best PG ever and a great PF. I am not taking sides in this because I can tell it's personal. I hope you two can get over this and that people have their own opinnion whether the other agrees or not. It's just thoughts about a subject. I don't know what is going to happen to Phil, I think he might not be done with the Lakers. Phil has one of the biggest egos in the world and if he can make money and pad his stats he would go back. The Lakers are probably sure they wont find some better to replace him (unless they go after Rambis or promote Shaw to be a co-coach for a couple season) I always liked Rambis and think he would do great in LA with the talent. I think he has been hurt with the lack of talent in Minn and the fact the GM is retarded with draft picks. Rubio and Rambis go to LA together lol.

lazorbeak · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MGreene78" data-cite="MGreene78" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> Phil to me did get lucky with Bulls. He helped the team and built them up. I believe the main talent was there already and he put together the other talent. Same thing with the Lakers, he took a team that had the main talent around just were missing a couple pieces.</div></blockquote> Again though, Jordan never won a title without Phil, even though he was a dominant player. Shaq and Kobe had been together three years and went 0/3 before Phil. Only Shaq and role players have won outside of Phil's system after winning with him. <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MGreene78" data-cite="MGreene78" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Now while saying all this again he did have flaws, I don't personally believe we will ever see how great of a game calling coach he was because he never had to build a team, but again 11 titles makes that okay to me. Also his greatest draft pick was Andrew Bynum. Phil always had solid management above him who helped him hide these flaws. He is arugably the best modern day coach.</div></blockquote> Except he did turn around a 34 win Lakers team from a one man squad into a team that has consistently gotten deep into the post season, appearing in 3 finals in a row. I don't disagree with some of the other things you're saying but I don't think it can be emphasized enough that he won 11 championships after free agency and a 30 team league. Nobody else in NBA coaching history can compare to numbers like that. I agree with you about Pop though: he's a pretty unassuming guy but he's quietly been an outstanding coach for the Spurs. The only knock on him is he's kind of a jerk when it comes to dealing with the press. Also when he was GM he fired the Spurs coach 19 games into the Robinson-less season, then took over as coach himself. His four rings in the past 12 years is respectable, although he's still pretty far off of Jackson's pace of winning championships in over 50% of the seasons he coached in. Seriously, lots of teams are talented every year; it's ridiculous how many titles Jackson has won, regardless of talent. Pat Riley had Kareem, Magic, and James Worthy, and still only won 4 rings in 10 years. And when Riley guaranteed a repeat title in '87, it was the first repeat champion in two decades. Phil Jackson coached 3 separate 3-peats, something nobody in history can even approach.

michgcs · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Again though, Jordan never won a title without Phil, even though he was a dominant player. Shaq and Kobe had been together three years and went 0/3 before Phil. Only Shaq and role players have won outside of Phil's system after winning with him. </div></blockquote> Revisionist history? Shaq wasn't even the Finals MVP the one time he won without Phil Jackson... EDIT: or did you mean Shaq, and other role players (like Horry)?

lazorbeak · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="michgcs" data-cite="michgcs" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Revisionist history? Shaq wasn't even the Finals MVP the one time he won without Phil Jackson... EDIT: or did you mean Shaq, and other role players (like Horry)?</div></blockquote> I'm not sure what you mean by "revisionist history"? My point is nobody has had the same success afterwards. O'Neal won once, when Wade was the focus. Horry had already won two rings as a role player for another team and would win even more elsewhere. Otherwise Steve Kerr is the most successful Jackson coached player to go off on his own, as far as rings go. Will Purdue got a ring for sitting on the bench, so he's tied with Shaq on that score. Oh, did you think I meant that Shaq was the star and the rest of the Heat were role-players in 2006? How would that make any sense re: my thesis that Jackson is necessary or that most guys don't have success without him? Let alone Wade obviously being the reason the Heat won that series.

BHK1978 · May 11, 2011

This is truly my last comment on this (yeah I feel like Brett Favre here.). This is a general comment not meant to be directed at anyone.

Phil knows when to fold em. He knows when to walk away. The Bulls were not going to win anything without Jordan and the team was going to be taken apart so Phil headed out of Dodge. Now the talk of Jordan not being able to win a title without is true. However, Phil could not win a title without a Jordan-less Bulls team either.

In the two years without Jordan (Which come on Mike you are no Bo.) Phil was unable to lead basically the same team to glory. Why? No Jordan, no championship that is why. Yes people can claim Jordan needed Phil but it is painfully obvious that Phil needed Jordan just as much if not more.

Whe he saw that the handwriting was on the wall during his first stint as Lakers Coach he left. He did come back after a year and they did have a bad record but the team he came back to was also more talented than the team that Rudy T. had coached in the previous season (Just my opinion.). And the team he won the last two championships with were a lot better. Now that handwriting is once again on the walls and it seems obvious that the Lakers man not be as good, Phil is leaving once again.

Now I am not saying he is not one of the best, because he is. However, to say he is outright the best is just not something I can agree with. One can call him the greatest opportunist and I would be in full agreement with that.<img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> Truly I am done and I shall not post anymore about Phil in this thread.

michgcs · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm not sure what you mean by "revisionist history"? My point is nobody has had the same success afterwards. O'Neal won once, when Wade was the focus. Horry had already won two rings as a role player for another team and would win even more elsewhere. Otherwise Steve Kerr is the most successful Jackson coached player to go off on his own, as far as rings go. Will Purdue got a ring for sitting on the bench, so he's tied with Shaq on that score. Oh, did you think I meant that Shaq was the star and the rest of the Heat were role-players in 2006? How would that make any sense re: my thesis that Jackson is necessary or that most guys don't have success without him? Let alone Wade obviously being the reason the Heat won that series.</div></blockquote> Yeah, I read your statement wrong. That's why I was asking you about it, because it didn't make sense when I read it as "Shaq and role players"

crownsy · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="LiquidSwords" data-cite="LiquidSwords" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The main reason why Perkins was trade because the Celtics believed that they could not afford to resign him in the offseason. It was a dumb trade because now the Celtics don't have a decent center and Perkins was a young player that they could still have on the team once Allen, Pierce, and Garnett retire. <a href="http://www.washingtonwizardsstore.com/" rel="external nofollow">http://www.washingtonwizardsstore.com/</a></div></blockquote> Well, yes and no. As a Celtics fan who hated the trade, I agree that the trade itself was bad. But i understand the reasoning, perkins got 9 million dollars per from OKC. they weren;t going to pay him that, nor should they have. Perk was one of my favroite celtics, but he is what he is. He's a great defensive center, ok rebounder and toughness inside. that's great when you have the peices in place, as the Celtics did for the past 3 years and OCK does now going forward, but your not paying that guy 10 million Per and trying to build around him, thats to much of your cap. In OCK he's perfect, they already have Durrant and Westbrooke locked up, so he's a perfect compliment to that, he handles thier toughness on defense while two transcendent offensive players handle the scoring. On the celtics going forward he's a defensive minded center who can't score except on putbacks paired with a PG who needs shooters to run the offense. That would be 25 million of our cap tied up in two guys, they are going to need all the flex spave they can get in 2-3 years to pair Rondo with young guys who can score and move the basketball (in 2 years they'll ditch the KG and Ray contracts, assuming they make no long term singings the only commitments they have in 2013 are rondo and pierce in his final year) The Celtics cap is actually set up nicely to rebuild, but it's going to mean the next few years are rough. 2012-2013 is really when we'll have a shot to open up the checkbook and go after FA's. Also there are (in my mind unrealistic but hey, you never know) rumors that the reason they set there contracts up to all expire sans rondo is that it allows them to offer TWO max contracts in 2012, which is when alot of good FA's come up. The name most thrown around by wishful thinkers is DHoward if Orlando continues to not preform. He's said he would love to play with a playmaking PG, and has had high praise for rondo as one of them. I hated the trade because I thought it put to much focus on the future, I would have rather had him for this years playoffs, taken one more shot at the ring, and then let him walk in the offseason. But I can't say that one of the reasons i hated it was the thought of a perk rondo pairing in the future. PErk's the last piece of a puzzle, not a building block.

MGreene78 · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Again though, Jordan never won a title without Phil, even though he was a dominant player. Shaq and Kobe had been together three years and went 0/3 before Phil. Only Shaq and role players have won outside of Phil's system after winning with him. Except he did turn around a 34 win Lakers team from a one man squad into a team that has consistently gotten deep into the post season, appearing in 3 finals in a row. I don't disagree with some of the other things you're saying but I don't think it can be emphasized enough that he won 11 championships after free agency and a 30 team league. Nobody else in NBA coaching history can compare to numbers like that. I agree with you about Pop though: he's a pretty unassuming guy but he's quietly been an outstanding coach for the Spurs. The only knock on him is he's kind of a jerk when it comes to dealing with the press. Also when he was GM he fired the Spurs coach 19 games into the Robinson-less season, then took over as coach himself. His four rings in the past 12 years is respectable, although he's still pretty far off of Jackson's pace of winning championships in over 50% of the seasons he coached in. Seriously, lots of teams are talented every year; it's ridiculous how many titles Jackson has won, regardless of talent. Pat Riley had Kareem, Magic, and James Worthy, and still only won 4 rings in 10 years. And when Riley guaranteed a repeat title in '87, it was the first repeat champion in two decades. Phil Jackson coached 3 separate 3-peats, something nobody in history can even approach.</div></blockquote> Michael was in his 40's playing on the Wizards (who stunk) and they still contended for the playoffs. He only had a couple of years before Phil was there so we don't really know what Jordan would have done in his prime with out Phil. Remember Phil didn't draft BJ, Horace, Jordan, or Pipen. Also please, please throw out the hey he turned around a 34 win Laker team. That was a team that started winning then our coach retired because of health issues and then Kobe and Lamar (two top players on the team) missed I believe a combined 40 games. You are right though, no matter what anyone say Phil is best winning coach in history no one is close. Again I agree with the last part of Jackson he is a great coach. I don't look at just wins on this I look at everything. Also I am not saying that Phil is going to probably end up on the top of the list. Give me some time I will put a bunch of stuff together and figure out a formula. I will give full details when it is done.

lazorbeak · May 11, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MGreene78" data-cite="MGreene78" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Michael was in his 40's playing on the Wizards (who stunk) and they still contended for the playoffs. He only had a couple of years before Phil was there so we don't really know what Jordan would have done in his prime with out Phil. Remember Phil didn't draft BJ, Horace, Jordan, or Pipen.</div></blockquote> He turned 40 in his last season, and they missed the playoffs both times. More significantly though, he put up gaudy numbers (over 30 points, 7 rebounds, 7 assists, and almost 3 steals a game) before Jackson without even reaching a conference championship. Also I don't see how who Phil did or didn't draft matters as my point is he's the greatest coach of all-time. <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MGreene78" data-cite="MGreene78" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Also please, please throw out the hey he turned around a 34 win Laker team. That was a team that started winning then our coach retired because of health issues and then Kobe and Lamar (two top players on the team) missed I believe a combined 40 games.</div></blockquote> First of all, when Lamar Odom is the #2 guy on your team, you are not a very good team (ask the Clippers). And secondly, Kobe missed only 16 games. That doesn't explain a 34 win season. What does explain it is they were completely one-dimensional with a bunch of over-paid three point shooters. And Phil wasn't able to magically make them contenders overnight, but they made the playoffs his first season back and pushed a better Suns squad to 7 games. It was the year after that that's basically a wash due to injuries to everyone but Kobe, where Phil suffered the only 7 game losing streak in his professional career (and that includes the two years without Jordan). But the year after that they won 57 games, then 65 in their first title win with Gasol, than 57, then 57 again. And if you'll recall, both seasons, people acted like the sky was falling in Los Angeles because these teams only won 57 games a year. And Phil is so used to being completely dominant the only time he's ever won coach of the year is when the Bulls won 72 games, the best record in the history of basketball. Like I said I don't think it can be under-stated that he led 3 different teams to 3-peats, something no other coach in any pro sport in history has ever done. Pat Riley had two of the top 10 players of all time and James Worthy on the floor at the same time and couldn't do it. I mean granted Kareem was getting on it years but he was still an awesome center being fed by one of the first true point-forwards in the game.

MGreene78 · May 11, 2011

He turned 40 in his last season, and they missed the playoffs both times. More significantly though, he put up gaudy numbers (over 30 points, 7 rebounds, 7 assists, and almost 3 steals a game) before Jackson without even reaching a conference championship.

Also I don't see how who Phil did or didn't draft matters as my point is he's the greatest coach of all-time.

First of all, when Lamar Odom is the #2 guy on your team, you are not a very good team (ask the Clippers). And secondly, Kobe missed only 16 games. That doesn't explain a 34 win season. What does explain it is they were completely one-dimensional with a bunch of over-paid three point shooters. And Phil wasn't able to magically make them contenders overnight, but they made the playoffs his first season back and pushed a better Suns squad to 7 games. It was the year after that that's basically a wash due to injuries to everyone but Kobe, where Phil suffered the only 7 game losing streak in his professional career (and that includes the two years without Jordan). But the year after that they won 57 games, then 65 in their first title win with Gasol, than 57, then 57 again. And if you'll recall, both seasons, people acted like the sky was falling in Los Angeles because these teams only won 57 games a year. And Phil is so used to being completely dominant the only time he's ever won coach of the year is when the Bulls won 72 games, the best record in the history of basketball.

Like I said I don't think it can be under-stated that he led 3 different teams to 3-peats, something no other coach in any pro sport in history has ever done.

Pat Riley had two of the top 10 players of all time and James Worthy on the floor at the same time and couldn't do it. I mean granted Kareem was getting on it years but he was still an awesome center being fed by one of the first true point-forwards in the game.

Agian your arugment about the Lakers losing season is blindsided. You keep making it sound like this team was horrible. Lamar Odom had a nice year that year for them, Rudy T lead the team to a 22-19 record until he retired because of health. Kobe missed those 19 games and the team pretty much stunk then Odom got hurt and it was over.

You keep beating it in the Jackson is the greatest ever and I didn't argue that, and there is more to figuring out who the greatest is outside of winning. I never stated Jackson wasn't the greatest winning coach ever. The fact that I am getting this when he coaches my favorite team is amazing. We all know how much you love him and idealize him, it's okay, calm down.

lazorbeak · May 11, 2011

Agian your arugment about the Lakers losing season is blindsided. You keep making it sound like this team was horrible. Lamar Odom had a nice year that year for them, Rudy T lead the team to a 22-19 record until he retired because of health. Kobe missed those 19 games and the team pretty much stunk then Odom got hurt and it was over.

I'm not sure what you mean by "blindsided"? My argument didn't see something coming?

You keep beating it in the Jackson is the greatest ever and I didn't argue that, and there is more to figuring out who the greatest is outside of winning. I never stated Jackson wasn't the greatest winning coach ever. The fact that I am getting this when he coaches my favorite team is amazing. We all know how much you love him and idealize him, it's okay, calm down.

I keep 'beating it in' because that's what I said a year ago, and someone else brought it up. Show me where I did anything other than list a few facts? Did I give an empassioned plea that everyone must conform their point of view, or go on an emotional rant about how much Phil Jackson means to me and just not notice it (blinded as I am by the heavenly radiance of Phil Jackson)? Who am I, Jeannie Bus over here?

Seriously I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I love or idealize anyone or why exactly I need to "calm down" because I used some facts to support the things I say.

Capelli King · May 13, 2011

The Lakers got demolished and to be honest they had no chance whatsoever. The game against Dallas it showed their obvious weaknesses, in general though here is a few conclusions i came to.

#1 They cannot defend the perimeter, especially when that perimeter is packed with talent

#2 That Gasol is not the future of the franchise

#3 That Bryant made some critical mistakes late in the games which cost them dearly

#4 Getting rid of Ariza for Artest was a mistake

lazorbeak · May 13, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Capelli King" data-cite="Capelli King" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The Lakers got demolished and to be honest they had no chance whatsoever. The game against Dallas it showed their obvious weaknesses, in general though here is a few conclusions i came to. #1 They cannot defend the perimeter, especially when that perimeter is packed with talent #2 That Gasol is not the future of the franchise #3 That Bryant made some critical mistakes late in the games which cost them dearly #4 Getting rid of Ariza for Artest was a mistake</div></blockquote> Definitely. They became one dimensionally bigger and stronger than just about any other team, but you still have to be able to guard people to win games, and their bigger guys were just unwilling or unable to play defense off the pick and roll. It's clear that Bynum needs to start being the focus, as he still has room to improve: Gasol is not getting any better and he is not nearly selfish enough on offense to be a "star." He's not demanding the ball when there's mis-matches, he's settling for bad shots, and he's not doing enough on the offensive glass. I don't know that I completely agree about Artest and Ariza though. Artest was designed to help them muscle up against the Paul Pierce's and LeBron's of the world, and he's pretty good at that. However, he couldn't one on one Dirk (nobody on the Lakers could), and taking away Butler or Marion doesn't do a lot when Barrea's lighting up your back court. While Ariza would've probably fit better into the scheme against Dallas, I don't think he makes even a one game difference. The biggest reason to keep Ariza is he can score and he's getting better, while Artest's offense is rapidly disappearing. I think the Lakers need a true point guard, they need to get rid of either Odom or Gasol, and they need one more athletic guard off the bench, and they could be contenders again. But they need to stop trying to play giant-ball against everybody. Against teams with quickness at the 1-3 positions they're going to get burned. Also the Bulls finally looked like a #1 seed out there last night, absolutely demolishing the Hawks. Rose looked much more comfortable and wasn't forcing things: 14 shots to score 19, 12 assists vs. 3 turnovers. Not as flashy as his 44 point game, but a 20 point road win is pretty impressive.

michgcs · May 19, 2011

I know it's a day late, but I just gotta say that performance by Dirk was one for the ages.

I'm rooting for him to finally win a Championship this year <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

Capelli King · May 24, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div> I think the Lakers need a true point guard, they need to get rid of either Odom or Gasol, and they need one more athletic guard off the bench, and they could be contenders again. But they need to stop trying to play giant-ball against everybody. Against teams with quickness at the 1-3 positions they're going to get burned.</div></blockquote> I agree there, i hear they want to bring in Howard which means Bynum will be out, i would also ship out one of those 2 (probably Gasol) and get someone which can play point guard or a proper SF and dump Artest. A team with Howard Odom\Gasol, a proper SF or PG and Bryant will still be a force and will be allot more mobile.

Capelli King · May 24, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="michgcs" data-cite="michgcs" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I know it's a day late, but I just gotta say that performance by Dirk was one for the ages. I'm rooting for him to finally win a Championship this year <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></div></blockquote> Second that

Mattywood · May 26, 2011

And the Mavericks are in the Finals! Hopefully they can win it all this time! <img alt="

" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> Listening to the Mavericks post game show on 1310 the Ticket as we speak.

Craig Edwards · May 26, 2011

If the heat get into the finals which it looks like they will they have 3 games to win one they heat are mostly likely to be the Mavs as they have someone who can shut down Dirk in James

Stennick · May 26, 2011

I'm calling it right now. Heat sweep the Mavs, if they don't sweep they finish it in five.

BHK1978 · May 26, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Stennick" data-cite="Stennick" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm calling it right now. Heat sweep the Mavs, if they don't sweep they finish it in five.</div></blockquote> Sadly I think you are right. I am not sure if it will be a sweep, I think the Heat will take it in six. I really do not want the Heat to win it all but it seems like destiny.

Stennick · May 26, 2011

BHK with the way the Heat have been playing lights out I think you're being generous giving Dallas two wins in this thing. That being said the Heat came together at the right time.

I'm not sure they have the intensity needed to make a run at the Bulls single season record though. It seems like they take games off even playoff games. Maybe I'm wrong and certainly jumping the gun but the Heat look like the playoff team kind of like the Lakers they flip the switch at the end of regulation and gon on a terror in the playoffs.

lazorbeak · May 26, 2011

Not saying I disagree with the Heat winning, but the Mavs have been playing pretty lights out themselves, embarrassing the former champs and beating the Thunder in 5. Marion can at least slow down LeBron and force him into taking some bad shots, and the Heat are beatable when they settle into shooting jump shots. But if Wade shows up to play the Mavs really have no more answer for him than they did a few years ago. If he's able to get to the rim, the Mavs will definitely struggle.

But for the Mavs to have a chance their bench will have to absolutely destroy Miami's bench. Terry, Peja, and Barrea can't afford to take nights off.

Tha Black Phenom · May 26, 2011

I really wanted Thunder/Bulls... too bad that seems like it was far out in fantasy land now.

jwt13 · May 26, 2011

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Tha Black Phenom" data-cite="Tha Black Phenom" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="27836" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I really wanted Thunder/Bulls... too bad that seems like it was far out in fantasy land now.</div></blockquote> yea since thunders out now. Bulls will come back though.<img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />

Sign In

Official NBA Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

CQI13

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation