PDA

View Full Version : Identifying the TRUE NBA Finals



Chronz
07-24-2013, 09:01 PM
Dont care what anyone says, the NBA Finals are not always the leagues top 2 teams going at it. The series that determines the NBA champion can come in the Conference Finals, sometimes sooner.

Take 2002, wouldn't you point to the Kings-Lakers series as the one that determined the eventual Champion? If that wasn't the true NBA Finals then which was, it certainly wasn't the Nets, who were quickly swept away.

Im not sure how often this happens tho, so feel free to name any series that you felt was the true NBA Finals for that year.

Aside from NJ-LAL series, the Cavs-Spurs borefest is an obvious false Finals. But who was the leagues 2nd best team that year?

D-Leethal
07-24-2013, 09:06 PM
Dont care what anyone says, the NBA Finals are not always the leagues top 2 teams going at it. The series that determines the NBA champion can come in the Conference Finals, sometimes sooner.

Take 2002, wouldn't you point to the Kings-Lakers series as the one that determined the eventual Champion? If that wasn't the true NBA Finals then which was, it certainly wasn't the Nets, who were quickly swept away.

Im not sure how often this happens tho, so feel free to name any series that you felt was the true NBA Finals for that year.

Aside from NJ-LAL series, the Cavs-Spurs borefest is an obvious false Finals. But who was the leagues 2nd best team that year?

Off the top of my head was that the year Nash got hipchecked?

Spurs-Suns had to be the true Finals one of those years in the mid-late 00s.

SoFreshNsoClean
07-25-2013, 02:24 AM
Those scenarios occur because the East has been weak in the past. The Nets that year (2002) woulda got smacked by LA or Sacramento equally bad

Orlando/LA finals was also a similar series and year compared to 02'

MTar786
07-25-2013, 06:15 AM
In 2000 Lakers.and blazers Wcf was the true nba finals. 01 it was Lakers vs spurs wc finals. In 02 it sure as hell was the wcf Lakers vs kings.
03 was spurs vs Lakers imo (wcsf)
04 was Lakers vs wolves (but I guess by pistons winning it all I'm wrong)
05 it was spurs vs pistons (nba finals)
06 was nba finals
07 was spurs vs suns
08 was nba finals
09 was nba finals
10 was nba finals
11 was nba finals
12 was ecf heat vs Celtics
13 was nba finals

7/14 of these championships were truly decided in the.nba finals imo

JasonJohnHorn
07-25-2013, 07:10 AM
I think this was true for the first part of the 00's. A large part of that is because the East was so weak, but ironically in 04 the Pistons/Nets series went to 7 games and the Pistons/Pacers went to six while the NBA finals only went to 5 games. I think that season that the two best teams would have been Detroit and Minny, but... that didn't happen.


I think we have seen the best teams in the finals the last few years.


The 90's often saw the two best teams in the eastern playoffs. NY vs. CHI in 92 for example, or CHI. vs. IND in 98. Sometimes a team like Indy can take the champs to 7 games in the conference playoffs, whilst a team like the Jazz only takes the champs to 6 games, but they can still be the better team despite losing in fewer games.


But yea.... LAL v POR LAL v SAC... LAL v SAS, SAS v PHO I think in 06 it may very well have been MIA vs. DET. 09 may have been LAL vs. HOU since Houston took LAL to 7 games and every other team LAL played failed to win more than one game.

In 1991 there was no NBA finals. Just a series of exhibition games before the Bulls was awarded the trophy which was clearly belonged to them by the All-Star break.

Chronz
07-25-2013, 02:41 PM
In 2000 Lakers.and blazers Wcf was the true nba finals. 01 it was Lakers vs spurs wc finals. In 02 it sure as hell was the wcf Lakers vs kings.
03 was spurs vs Lakers imo (wcsf)
04 was Lakers vs wolves (but I guess by pistons winning it all I'm wrong)
05 it was spurs vs pistons (nba finals)
06 was nba finals
07 was spurs vs suns
08 was nba finals
09 was nba finals
10 was nba finals
11 was nba finals
12 was ecf heat vs Celtics
13 was nba finals

7/14 of these championships were truly decided in the.nba finals imo

Nice rundown man, 2003 is one that I have trouble with. Lakers were defending champs but they didn't have a great year and entered the playoffs hurt. Everyone but the Spurs got hurt that year.

HouRealCoach
07-25-2013, 02:44 PM
If any of you thought Celtics would have beaten the Thunder in 2012 are delusional

kobe4thewinbang
07-25-2013, 03:13 PM
I think the last true NBA finals were the two Lakers/Celtics showdowns and Detroit/San Antonio.

Otherwise, I think Miami/Boston was more remarkable than Miami/OKC. OKC appeared to be legit, but Miami ran away with it.

IKnowHoops
07-25-2013, 06:18 PM
Dont care what anyone says, the NBA Finals are not always the leagues top 2 teams going at it. The series that determines the NBA champion can come in the Conference Finals, sometimes sooner.

Take 2002, wouldn't you point to the Kings-Lakers series as the one that determined the eventual Champion? If that wasn't the true NBA Finals then which was, it certainly wasn't the Nets, who were quickly swept away.

Im not sure how often this happens tho, so feel free to name any series that you felt was the true NBA Finals for that year.

Aside from NJ-LAL series, the Cavs-Spurs borefest is an obvious false Finals. But who was the leagues 2nd best team that year?

A few times when the Lakers or Spurs won from 99-07, the championship game was when the two of them met each other. Maybe once, maybe twice. Not every time because they swept each other out of the playoffs too, but at least once that was the championship game.

IKnowHoops
07-25-2013, 06:19 PM
I think the last true NBA finals were the two Lakers/Celtics showdowns and Detroit/San Antonio.

Otherwise, I think Miami/Boston was more remarkable than Miami/OKC. OKC appeared to be legit, but Miami ran away with it.

This year was a true NBA finals where the two best teams met. No question. They each gave each other there toughest test in the playoffs.

sportsfan222
07-25-2013, 07:14 PM
I think the last true NBA finals were the two Lakers/Celtics showdowns and Detroit/San Antonio.

Otherwise, I think Miami/Boston was more remarkable than Miami/OKC. OKC appeared to be legit, but Miami ran away with it.that is true, and correct me if i am wrong, but wasn't the title of the thread, basically to show which years the nba conference finals was like the championship, and we knew that going in, not in hindsight?

like for example, the 02 wcf between the lakers and kings, we all knew that whichever team won that series was going to destroy the nets, regardless whether it was the lakers or kings. that was the nba finals right there, because whichever team won that series was winning the nba title.

so in ur example, while the celtics heat series may have ended up better, no one thought that whoever won game 7, be it the celtics were just going to steamroll the thunder, and truth is, even with the heat, plenty of people thought the thunder had a very good shot.

TheNumber37
07-25-2013, 07:22 PM
fans need to push for the top 16 format.

News Flash. This generation of NBA fans don't care about east and West. in this internet age we are way more connected and familiar with players in other parts of the country.

lol, please
07-25-2013, 10:17 PM
Dont care what anyone says, the NBA Finals are not always the leagues top 2 teams going at it. The series that determines the NBA champion can come in the Conference Finals, sometimes sooner.

Take 2002, wouldn't you point to the Kings-Lakers series as the one that determined the eventual Champion? If that wasn't the true NBA Finals then which was, it certainly wasn't the Nets, who were quickly swept away.

Im not sure how often this happens tho, so feel free to name any series that you felt was the true NBA Finals for that year.

Aside from NJ-LAL series, the Cavs-Spurs borefest is an obvious false Finals. But who was the leagues 2nd best team that year?
Ahhh. The ever popular, "just because you won a title doesn't make you the best team that season" argument. That one is easily dispelled with, "which team would you rather be? the champion or the team with the best statistical season/better team on paper?" Most would take the first. I know I would.

luravua
07-25-2013, 10:30 PM
Those scenarios occur because the East has been weak in the past.http://www.camj.info/7j1.jpg

Chronz
07-26-2013, 01:59 AM
Ahhh. The ever popular, "just because you won a title doesn't make you the best team that season" argument. That one is easily dispelled with, "which team would you rather be? the champion or the team with the best statistical season/better team on paper?" Most would take the first. I know I would.

Nah, the best team is still the one that won the title. Im talking strictly about choosing the runner-up

kblo247
07-26-2013, 04:23 PM
Nice rundown man, 2003 is one that I have trouble with. Lakers were defending champs but they didn't have a great year and entered the playoffs hurt. Everyone but the Spurs got hurt that year.

03 still came down to a Horry 3 though in game 5. For all the injuries, Horry has an Horry moment in that comeback and the spurs lose that series.

01 to me didn't have a true finals, kobe and Shaq went on a seek and destroy I've never seen before or repeated after. It was more like lineup for this *** whuppin.

I agree the blazers - lakers was it in 00. Rose just evened the field purposely hurting kobe.

Add 09 in this, Denver vs la was the real finals, not Orlando vs la

Chronz
07-26-2013, 07:23 PM
03 still came down to a Horry 3 though in game 5. For all the injuries, Horry has an Horry moment in that comeback and the spurs lose that series.
Couldn't Spurs fan just claim, If Jacko doesnt choke on that FT, the game goes into OT at best. The dump the Spurs took in LA the next game makes its less likely that LA closes them out. Still, looking at Dallas, they never stood a chance without Dirk so yea. Its between them or the Nets.


Add 09 in this, Denver vs la was the real finals, not Orlando vs la
Solid mentioning, Im inclined to agree. Seems like some of Orlando's run was driven by chance, their 4-1 offense had the highest volatility in the league over the SVG era, it was mostly always hot so its hard to call it a fluke but their shooters seemed really locked in during that playoff stretch, it carried them past the Cavs and Celtics but you knew they wouldn't keep it up for an entire run. They were still a formidable team because of their defense but yea, that kind of offense irritates me.

kblo247
07-26-2013, 08:18 PM
That's a plausible claim, but it really goes with the territory. I think game 6 can be taken either way. I was a gut wrencher, same with .4 the next year in game 5. Fisher hit what Horry missed. Is just as plausible to say if the lakers won that game 5, the like would be sucked out the spurs. Like its plausible to say the lakers would've been deflated had fisher missed. I think game 5 decided the series both years all the way downnto the final buzzer, the Lakers and Spurs both came out with their heads hanging after the results respective years. I mean Tim didnt even try to contest Kobe dunking on him in game 6 of 04, they were just dead fight wise, like the lakers the year before.


As for 09, it was never a question of if they could beat Orlando. They held Dwight to the point he couldn't even dunk to a fastbreak in game 3. That series really lacked moxy for lack of a better term in terms of Orlando fighting back when Kobe and Fisher swung the knockout blows. Two things always stick out, Fishers game 4 threes followed by that got em smile, and the rebound sequence between Kobe and Dwight where Kobe threw elbows, cussing,,fussing, and Dwight says its me Kobe your friend. That was it, they were so far different from Denver and Melo. Melo was a force, tossing bodies arounds, making Kobe, Luke, Sasha, Lamar, and Trevor fight him. He was hungry. Denver with Birdman, Kenyon, Chauncey were hungry. You had to plan things out to final possessions. There were plays where the lakers were literally pushed back into corners and had to fight back the young lion that was the nugget team, like Oddom dunking on Birdman. The WCF in 09 was much more emotional, more hard fought, and more satisfying besides not getting the Larry. At least that's how I felt watching it unfold. Hell the Denver series is the direct reason they paid Artest, they feared facing Melo or another SF like him in Bron or Pierce in a playoff series after that display

kblo247
07-26-2013, 08:27 PM
2004. I will say the thing that may have been the most important series of the whole playoffs could be argued was NJ vs Detroit. Who the hell knows what happens if Kidds knee just doesnt give out on him in game 7. I'm quite sure that moment in history changed the landscape of the league. Kenyon left Jersey, Detroit won a title and stayed near the top of the east for half a decade seemingly, and LA broke up. Kobe and Shaq couldn't beat Detorit without Malone or Horace but who knows what all breaks down had Kidd been Kidd for game 7 and continues his owning of the Pistons, as LA may very well win, and Kobe and Shaq may stick together because of yet another ring

goingfor28
07-27-2013, 02:54 PM
Lakers kings 02. But that **** was blatantly rigged

Pablonovi
07-29-2013, 06:33 PM
Guys and Gals,
In the first 20 posts of this thread the quality level has just been awesome.
Makes one feel honored to be a part of PSD NBA.
Kudos to every one of you.
Kudos to High Horse Cronz for the OP,
(In that Laker 3-peat, probably the West's 4th best team could have won the finals).
But returning to my comments about the thread:
Just wow.