Official NBA Discussion Thread

[GatorBait19]

Yes, because the Sonics and Blazers had to play 50 win teams 50 times a year. Funny how that causes you to be a bad team. I mean the T-Wolves aren't a playoff team in the East, but they look even worse when they play in a division where every other team won 50 games. The Nets played the Knicks and the 76ers 4 times each and still managed to put up the worst record in the league.

 

 

 

Why do you want me to remember something that I didn't dispute because it is numbingly obvious? In other news, water is wet. Yes, once the East was better. For a long time you could win 35 games and make the playoffs in the West. But it's undeniably the deeper conference and has been for a decade, which is what I said.

 

Because of the simple fact that your are making people remember stuff they didn't dispute (from what I read), you are sitting here talking about how the West owned the decade, I don't remember anyone arguing with that, they said this year East was better (to them)

 

That's great that the West is the deeper league....... with just one true team that can play for the title, and don't come back with the Spurs can as well, they have gotten old and Suns proved this year they aren't what they once were. Mavs are a playoff team that's only good for the 1st round, Suns are talented but not enough to beat the Lakers, Den is the same. None of the West top three are good enough to beat the Magic, C's, and Cavs (but once again, that's my opinion)

 

Also I found that comment about the Wolves funny, because they beat all of 1 playoff team in the East (the Heat by 3) where they beat Dallas, Uath, and Denver a combined 4 times (3 on the road) and there other East wins were the likes of 6ers, Wiz, and Nets. So yeah they looked pretty bad in the East too

 

Now let's get back to real topics that are current, because no one will ever agree with each other, and this forum has forgotten at times that people have their own opinions and to live with them.

 

Is the West Deep...... who cares..... all that matters is who is the Best, West or East, last year it was the West. Who will it be this year?

[lazorbeak]

Because of the simple fact that your are making people remember stuff they didn't dispute (from what I read), you are sitting here talking about how the West owned the decade, I don't remember anyone arguing with that, they said this year East was better (to them)

 

Now let's get back to real topics that are current, because no one will ever agree with each other, and this forum has forgotten at times that people have their own opinions and to live with them.

 

If you have nothing to add to the topic, don't post. From your total mis-statement of what I said and what I was responding to, it's clear you have no idea what I was talking about, but nevertheless felt compelled to jump in and add absolutely nothing of any value. No, nobody said the East was better to them, and even if they had, it's an opinion that is not supported by evidence. Your own limited sample size indicates the East isn't better, and when we look past your arbitrary cap of 4 teams (since, you know, 8 teams go to the playoffs and all), the West starts emerging as statistically better. All opinions are not created equal. I'm not "making people remember" stuff, I'm pointing out that arguing I "overvalue" the West is nonsense because the West has been and still is measurably better. Completely failing to understand a point that wasn't directed at you, you proceed to say "let's get back to the real topic." My solution is: don't address points you 1) don't understand and 2) aren't directed towards you.

[GatorBait19]

If you have nothing to add to the topic, don't post. From your total mis-statement of what I said and what I was responding to, it's clear you have no idea what I was talking about, but nevertheless felt compelled to jump in and add absolutely nothing of any value. No, nobody said the East was better to them, and even if they had, it's an opinion that is not supported by evidence. All opinions are not created equal. I'm not "making people remember" stuff, I'm pointing out that arguing I "overvalue" the West is nonsense because the West has been and still is measurably better. Completely failing to understand a point that wasn't directed at you, you proceed to say "let's get back to the real topic." My solution is: don't address points you 1) don't understand and 2) aren't directed towards you.

 

 

Yeah, see, the point was you overvalue the west and believe everything in the west is better, I argued

 

If I remember right you stated that you overvalued them because they have been dominate for years, i disagreed. While they dominated the first 5 that was all, last 5 have been equal in championships, and before that they were blown away by the East since the start of the NBA and BAA

 

You, stated that the East got old players from the West, I argued and said Shaq came from ORL, and the other two were raised in the East

 

then you talked about KG and Allen being 34, and I said who cares if they are 34. Are you saying Jordan at 40 didn't scare you?

 

you also talked about of Paul P. hasn't show up for the playoffs in which he has been their best player in the conf finals

 

And I say the East is better than the West. You can continue to sit on your horse and scream about the 50 wins, while I can still sit here and say that's great. ticket for 15 to the Lakers headed for Boston. You're only proof that the West is deep is 50 game winners. But in this decade that was dominated by the West, how many NBA Champions came from the West..... if I remember right, just 2 (Lakers and Spurs) to were the East had 3(C's, Heat, and Pistons)

 

Oh and by the way crownsy also mentioned how he overvalues the East as well, so someone did mention it

 

So now, let's stay on this topic.

 

You stated that the Lakers of two years ago, are better. Well aren't the C's..... you wouldn't say Rondo is looking like the best PG in the NBA? the fact that KG is healthy and Allen is still a sharp shooter with Paulie P playing lights out in the conf. finals?

 

Ariza might just be a better player than Artest? besides of the fact that Ariza isn't going to run in the stands and attack someone let's look at stats

 

Ariza had better stats despite playing 5 less games, also Ariza wasn't brought in to be just a defender, he was also brought in to help the offense, where Artest was brought in for the main purpose of defending... now is you pointed out that Battier is the best defensive player on Rockets, well Kobe is the best on the Lakers.

 

so now bring your evidence that today the West is a better conf. than the East, and please leave your played out 50 wins at home. leave the 2000-2009 season alone. Give me solid proof that today, the West would dominate the East.

 

also one more thing, the west is old.... the East is were the action is

[GatorBait19]

top 5 under 30

 

East:

 

PG: Rondo

SG: Wade

SF: James

PF: Bosh

C: Howard

 

West

 

PG: Paul

SG: C. Anthony (not his position

SF: Durant

PF: A. Stoudemire

C: Jefferson

[lazorbeak]

Wow, that post was an incoherent mess. Failure to form complete sentences, made up verb tenses, inexplicable commas. That post had it all! Seriously, I can't even argue with you if I have absolutely NO IDEA what you're saying.

[GatorBait19]

Wow, you're talented. You use on the fact that I didn't reread my post (to make sure there were no errors) to not support your answer. Hm, well how about this.

 

I want you to give me support that claims the West is the best today. Stop giving me crap about 50 win teams, when we all know the only true contender is the Lakers.

 

I am sorry I didn't check and make sure my post was perfect before I submitted it.

[lazorbeak]

Wow, you're talented. You use on the fact that I didn't reread my post (to make sure there were no errors) to not support your answer. Hm, well how about this.

 

I want you to give me support that claims the West is the best today. Stop giving me crap about 50 win teams, when we all know the only true contender is the Lakers.

 

I am sorry I didn't check and make sure my post was perfect before I submitted it.

 

There's a difference between demanding perfection and not being able to understand run-on non-sentences that make no sense and don't have anything to do with anything.

 

And you want me to prove the West is better but you don't want me to bring up the fact that it is significantly deeper, that all 8 playoff teams had some chance to win it all? How about the defending champs being from the West? And you say that the only contender in the West is the Lakers but that is just because they are the best team in the west: that doesn't mean the Nuggets, the Jazz, the Suns, and the Spurs couldn't run with the top teams in the East. Hell, it was only 3 years ago that the Spurs embarrassed the Cavs in 5. What teams pushed the Lakers on their championship run? The Rockets took 7 games, how about the Magic?

 

But since I'm arguing the West is deeper, and more talented right now, in the present, and not based on where the players grew up (seriously that is the most irrelevant argument I could even think of), the fact that the conference's 8 best teams have more wins and are all talented enough to challenge for a title is relevant, and the fact that you don't get that, combined with your inability to communicate in sentences tends to indicate to me that this isn't going to be a particularly rewarding back and forth of information.

[GatorBait19]

probably not.

 

So the 8 teams over there are all Championship teams. Well, sense the Mavs can't make it out of the 1st round, Den can't beat Lakers, Jazz can't beat Lakers I'd assume you are right.

 

See the biggest argument is the 50 wins and more talent. I don't get where you get more talent from at all. Also you failed to see that if the Lakers are the best team in the West and proven that the last three years, then were is the championship contenders in the West? See you can say that they are all champion contenders in the West. When everyone truly knows the Lakers are the team to beat....... well then there truly aren't contenders out there.

 

Once again, I don't get your argument about the top talent either. Since (in your words) have given no proof to back it up. At least when I said the West isn't that deep, I cited the fact that only two teams from the West have won a championship in the last 12 years. The East on the other hand has had 4.

 

So go ahead, say the West and it's talented 50 wins team is the best conference. In the East people will continue to watch an an old broken down team, with a lousy SF and two 34 year old shells of themselves players whip up on the Magic. Then the West best

[LoganRodzen]

The only basketball I've been able to watch was back in HS and when I played it growing up I disliked it. There is a significant difference in fouls called between HS, College and Pro basketball that I don't understand. Keep in mind I've never watched a full NBA game. It's my least favorite sport besides baseball.

 

Why did I post in this thread? To post my anti-NBA opinion that nobody will care about.

[GatorBait19]

The only basketball I've been able to watch was back in HS and when I played it growing up I disliked it. There is a significant difference in fouls called between HS, College and Pro basketball that I don't understand. Keep in mind I've never watched a full NBA game. It's my least favorite sport besides baseball.

 

Why did I post in this thread? To post my anti-NBA opinion that nobody will care about.

 

lol, I believe it's for protection of high school players. Kind of why I never understood NCAA and NFL don't follow the same rules?

[lazorbeak]

See the biggest argument is the 50 wins and more talent. I don't get where you get more talent from at all.

 

You see, talent results in WINS. The west wins more, and is therefore more talented. See how this works? Also let's look at recent MVP winners for examples of top talent. MVP winners not named LeBron James from the past decade? Steve Nash, Dirk Nowitzki, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, Shaquille O'Neal... all playing for the West. It's starting to get somewhat balanced but it's still not even close in terms of total talent. In a 7 game series I'd take the Blazers over the Magic, but unfortunately the Blazers don't play in a tissue-paper soft division where they can rack up 55-60 wins and host playoff series against a team like the freaking Bobcats. Instead, because they play in the significantly more competitive conference, they had to go to Phoenix and play against a team that they didn't match up with all that well, and still pushed them to 6 games. And that's the difference between the East and West. In the West, even the first round match-ups are extremely competitive. In the East, they're just not. Outside of watching an anemic Hawks squad struggle to take out a donut-shaped Bucks squad, the Eastern first round was a snooze-fest.

 

Once again, I don't get your argument about the top talent either. Since (in your words) have given no proof to back it up. At least when I said the West isn't that deep, I cited the fact that only two teams from the West have won a championship in the last 12 years. The East on the other hand has had 4.

 

See, here is where BASIC REASONING SKILLS are so valuable. You say that I haven't given any proof that the west has more talent, yet the only 3 times out of the past 10 that the East has beaten the West it was the same year they traded for a major talent from the West. Every. Time. See, the East has to load up a team for a single season to compete with the talent the West produces organically every year. Note that I have already explained this. Also: the fact that the West has won the majority of those titles also tends to support having more talent. And the fact that the Heat, Pistons and Celtics all won a single title doesn't mean the East is stronger: if anything, it means the East is WEAKER because they haven't been able to produce consistently great teams the way the west has for over a decade. The Heat were a 45 win team, brought in Shaq, won a title, lost Shaq, and are now... a 45 win team. In that same time the Mavs and Spurs haven't had a single season where they didn't win at least 50, and each have had 60 win seasons in the past 5-6 years, the Spurs won a title and the Mavs lost one. And you're telling me this is evidence the East is better? Seriously?

 

So go ahead, say the West and it's talented 50 wins team is the best conference. In the East people will continue to watch an an old broken down team, with a lousy SF and two 34 year old shells of themselves players whip up on the Magic. Then the West best

 

Yes, the West is (currently, right now, at this moment, in time, not 50 years ago, not when Jordan played...) the better conference. Anyone who argues otherwise is either ignoring recent history or statistical evidence. And no, player's freaking hometowns is not rebuttal evidence.

[BHK1978]

The only basketball I've been able to watch was back in HS and when I played it growing up I disliked it. There is a significant difference in fouls called between HS, College and Pro basketball that I don't understand. Keep in mind I've never watched a full NBA game. It's my least favorite sport besides baseball.

 

Why did I post in this thread? To post my anti-NBA opinion that nobody will care about.

 

Well the NBA tends to give leeway to their superstars in regards to fouls. What I mean is a foul called on a bench player would probably not be called on a star player.

[GatorBait19]

Talent is old. Mavs are a wonderful 50 win team.... until playoff time. Anyone can contend with any team for a 7 game series and the Magic proved that last year against the Cavs.

 

Also, you say these teams contend..... but do the win the series?

 

For the last time, Shaq started with ORL, not the West. Also, I believe I said today, how is a bunch of older vets who won those MVP back before the new talent, make them the best talent of today? See you keep bring up the last 10 years, in which I keep asking for today. Dirk isn't a superstar like you think (hell can't win in the playoffs). Your beloved KG couldn't either (in fact I remember most people gave him that MVP after his team made it out of the first round, and there was many who question if he didn't would he have won it), Tim (can't argue with him or Kobe). I mean if you look at history of the last 20 years West owns the MVP race. Now here is the grand question, in the last 20 years, how many MVP's have won titles? What 6 or 7 I believe.

 

Last, how can you throw out the Magic would be beaten by the Blazers? See there goes your urge to overvalue again.

[lazorbeak]

Talent is old. Mavs are a wonderful 50 win team.... until playoff time. Anyone can contend with any team for a 7 game series and the Magic proved that last year against the Cavs.

 

Not in the East, where the Bobcats, Bulls, and Heat won a combined TWO games in their 7 game series. Which I brought up a post ago. In the West, every series was competitive, even 1 vs. 8. See, that's what's called "parity." It's what happens when you have a lot of teams playing at a high level.

 

Also, you say these teams contend..... but do the win the series?

 

Funny how contenders seem to lose to the very best teams in the league, right? The Lakers, Spurs, Mavericks, and Suns, have been contenders for years, and the Nuggets and Jazz are right there too. In the East, you've got the Cavs, the Celtics, and the Magic. That's it. The Hawks have never gotten out of the second round, and the Pistons mortgaged their franchise. Note that the Magic and Cavs contend while not winning, too. The Heat were one hit wonders who put together exactly one great season and then took the team apart again.

 

Last, how can you throw out the Magic would be beaten by the Blazers? See there goes your urge to overvalue again.

 

Because I watched that Blazers team push a Houston Rockets team that was better than the Magic (based on their ability to win 3 games vs. Orlando's ONE against the Lakers), even when they weren't healthy. Granted it's not fair to dream up a hypothetical healthy Blazers team as that squad was rarely healthy, but even with injuries to Oden, Roy, Batum, Fernandez, and Pryzbilla, they still played at a competitive level in a superior conference. But based on their ridiculous front-court that features Pryzbilla, Camby, Oden, and Aldridge, they'd be able to guard Dwight Howard one on one, and history has shown that the Magic struggle to create their own shot when they can't get open 3's off double teams.

 

Edit: I keep ignoring that Shaq started in Orlando because it is completely irrelevant to any point I've tried to make. My point has always been about the teams in the West being stronger over the past ten years and that trend continuing into today. That has absolutely nothing to do with where Shaq was born, where he was drafted, or how well Kazam did at the box office. Since he was an MVP in the West, where the best teams played and continue to play, it supports my argument no matter where he started.

[GatorBait19]

Not in the East, where the Bobcats, Bulls, and Heat won a combined TWO games in their 7 game series. Which I brought up a post ago. In the West, every series was competitive, even 1 vs. 8. See, that's what's called "parity." It's what happens when you have a lot of teams playing at a high level.

 

 

 

Funny how contenders seem to lose to the very best teams in the league, right? The Lakers, Spurs, Mavericks, and Suns, have been contenders for years, and the Nuggets and Jazz are right there too. In the East, you've got the Cavs, the Celtics, and the Magic. That's it. The Hawks have never gotten out of the second round, and the Pistons mortgaged their franchise. Note that the Magic and Cavs contend while not winning, too. The Heat were one hit wonders who put together exactly one great season and then took the team apart again.

 

 

 

Because I watched that Blazers team push a Houston Rockets team that was better than the Magic (based on their ability to win 3 games vs. Orlando's ONE against the Lakers), even when they weren't healthy. Granted it's not fair to dream up a hypothetical healthy Blazers team as that squad was rarely healthy, but even with injuries to Oden, Roy, Batum, Fernandez, and Pryzbilla, they still played at a competitive level in a superior conference. But based on their ridiculous front-court that features Pryzbilla, Camby, Oden, and Aldridge, they'd be able to guard Dwight Howard one on one, and history has shown that the Magic struggle to create their own shot when they can't get open 3's off double teams.

 

Personally I was disappointed with the Bulls, after their great playoff series last year I expected more.

 

Blazer will never be healthy, it's their curse for passing on talent (Jordan and Durant).

 

I guess we will see who the best conf. is here in about 2 weeks

 

Edit: But it does have something to do with the fact you keep saying he was a west guy, he became a star in the East. So you can keep using Sheed and KG, but Shaq no. That and the fact I never really believe Sheed was the reason Piston won that title

[lazorbeak]

Personally I was disappointed with the Bulls, after their great playoff series last year I expected more.

 

Blazer will never be healthy, it's their curse for passing on talent (Jordan and Durant).

 

I guess we will see who the best conf. is here in about 2 weeks

 

See, there's a difference between "best conference" and "best team." Even if the C's are the best team, does that make the entire conference the best, despite the fact that as a conference it didn't win as many games and let some downright poor teams into the playoffs?

 

And as far as the Bulls go, they have a core to build from with Rose, Deng, and Noah. All 3 are very young and are guys to shape a franchise around. But they're dreadful at the 2 and 4 spots. Kurt H. is a back-up point guard, not a starting 2-guard, and Ronald Murray isn't the answer either. At 4, Taj Gibson is barely bigger than Deng, and it's too early to see if he'll develop better than Tyrus Thomas did. If they upgrade their offense and their bench, they'll be a very good team as early as next year.

[GatorBait19]

See, there's a difference between "best conference" and "best team." Even if the C's are the best team, does that make the entire conference the best, despite the fact that as a conference it didn't win as many games and let some downright poor teams into the playoffs?

 

And as far as the Bulls go, they have a core to build from with Rose, Deng, and Noah. All 3 are very young and are guys to shape a franchise around. But they're dreadful at the 2 and 4 spots. Kurt H. is a back-up point guard, not a starting 2-guard, and Ronald Murray isn't the answer either. At 4, Taj Gibson is barely bigger than Deng, and it's too early to see if he'll develop better than Tyrus Thomas did. If they upgrade their offense and their bench, they'll be a very good team as early as next year.

 

There was talk on ESPN today about Jackson going to Chicago. To me, for that to happen James would have to sign. Then Bosh would probably want a sign and trade there. You could probably say good bye to this years draft picks and more than likely Taj and maybe Kurt H.

[BHK1978]

There was talk on ESPN today about Jackson going to Chicago. To me, for that to happen James would have to sign. Then Bosh would probably want a sign and trade there. You could probably say good bye to this years draft picks and more than likely Taj and maybe Kurt H.

 

Well if he thinks he can win another championship by going there of course he will go there.

[GatorBait19]

Well if he thinks he can win another championship by going there of course he will go there.

 

Plus the Bulls would probably give him more than the 5 million dollar cap the Lakers put on him

[PeterHilton]

I guess we will see who the best conf. is here in about 2 weeks

 

 

Having just readthrough this debate, I just wanted to say that you're wrong and lazorbeak is right.

 

Also...you can't say that any kind of Finals match up proves who's the better conference; it just proves who's the better team is in that particular match up.

 

I'd be like saying "oh well USC beat Florida in some bowl game, that proves the Pac 10 is better than the SEC"

 

It's bad logic.

[Stennick]

Peter your logic will be sorely missed when you leave.

[PeterHilton]

Thanks. It will more than likely only be through June and some of July.

 

I needto do something while I'm at work. (besides working of course)

[Stennick]

Yeah who works at work in 2010?

[jbergey_2005]

I cant really see how anyone can say the East is better than the West. In fact I am having a hard time coming up with one argument that the East is better. It has been pretty much agreed upon by most people that the West is a better conference right now and most stats will back that up.

[PeterHilton]

Amazing game tonight. Even as a Lakers fan that was fun to watch..

 

This is EXACTLY how the Suns wanted to see the games play out. The Lakers had better control the pace, work harder to get entry passes inside to Gasol and Odom, and start playing some defense or else they are going to lose this thing.

 

Also, for a team that was supposed to have learned to be tougher last year, it's disturbing how they are getting physically overmatched by a finesse Suns team. Artest hasn't even knocked anyone down.