PDA

View Full Version : How would you rate the Lebron-Wade-Bosh tenure in Miami?



lavell12
07-09-2016, 09:24 AM
With Wade going to Miami, Bosh's career in jeopardy, and Lebron going back to Cleveland how would you rate their success for the franchise in Miami?

Positives: 4 nba finals and 2 championships in 4 seasons.

Negatives: 1 terrible finals choke against Dallas, ending with a blowout by the
Spurs a year after they should have lost before

BKLYNpigeon
07-09-2016, 09:40 AM
Incredibly successful.

Can't expect to win the final every year. I think only 7 teams won back to back.

BKLYNpigeon
07-09-2016, 09:42 AM
If my warriors can go 3 out of 5. I'd be a happy man.

J_M_B
07-09-2016, 09:44 AM
I think it was a success. Obviously there were some poor moments, but every team is going to face adversity at some point.

The only thing I wish they prevented was that pep rally back in 2010. I understand it was for the locals, but that put such a bad taste in everyone's mouth not affiliated with the Heat ... and LeBron's famous not 1 not 2 not 3 ... other than that they were incredible, no team had been to four straight finals since the Celtics/Lakers in the 80s. Both of those teams spilt those finals 2-2 as well. I feel like the big 3 helped rejuvenate the interest in basketball all around the world too, so all around they were as good as one can really expect.

IndyRealist
07-09-2016, 09:45 AM
They were in the Finals every year, and had the most terrifying defense of the decade. A+.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 09:52 AM
Expectations were higher than the end result. Unprecedented maneuver at the time that was supposed to bring all time great results. Didn't have any competition in the conference, struggled too much against far inferior competition. "Not 1, not 2, not 3..." - should have stopped at not 1 cause there was only 2.

Solid B-.

Toronto Homer
07-09-2016, 10:07 AM
I live in a city that hasn't won a major sports championship since 1993. I would take their success any day of the week.

J_M_B
07-09-2016, 10:20 AM
Expectations were higher than the end result. Unprecedented maneuver at the time that was supposed to bring all time great results. Didn't have any competition in the conference, struggled too much against far inferior competition. "Not 1, not 2, not 3..." - should have stopped at not 1 cause there was only 2.

Solid B-.

No competition? That should be reserved for today's EC ... Chicago in 2011? Boston 2012? Even Indy in '13, the last year in LeBron's tenure in Miami was the only supposed "cakewalk". At the time, there were many people that would argue that Bulls team with a healthy Rose was a championship caliber roster, same with Boston. Today, you can can't name a team outside of Cleveland in the conference.

R. Johnson#3
07-09-2016, 10:42 AM
With Wade going to Miami, Bosh's career in jeopardy, and Lebron going back to Cleveland how would you rate their success for the franchise in Miami?

Positives: 4 nba finals and 2 championships in 4 seasons.

Negatives: 1 terrible finals choke against Dallas, ending with a blowout by the
Spurs a year after they should have lost before

Choke? Dirk put on a performance for the ages that whole post season. Especially the finals.

Chronz
07-09-2016, 10:59 AM
It underachieved based on the hype but if you paid attention you understood why. Like some will bring up their series vs Boston/Indy where they were vulnerable but alot of that was due to injuries to those not named Bron. When they were fully healthy and totally acclimated with their teammates/roles, we saw what they could do with that insane winning streak. People talk about Wade taking a back seat but that was in long part due to his natural decline because during that winning streak, he was matching Bron blow for blow, then he got hurt right before the playoffs. Thats why chasing RS records come with a risk.

Were we right to expect Wade to hold up near his peak form entering into his 30s?

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 11:07 AM
No competition? That should be reserved for today's EC ... Chicago in 2011? Boston 2012? Even Indy in '13, the last year in LeBron's tenure in Miami was the only supposed "cakewalk". At the time, there were many people that would argue that Bulls team with a healthy Rose was a championship caliber roster, same with Boston. Today, you can can't name a team outside of Cleveland in the conference.

In historical context those teams are nobodies, not even worth mentioning when you mention great teams from specific era's, will not be remembered as great "almost" teams like 90s Knicks, Pacers, early 00 Kings, 00s Suns and the like.

Dade County
07-09-2016, 11:09 AM
C-

They should have won 3 titles (Lbj giving Dallas a title). They should have broken the bulls 72 mark at that time (weak east).

& i believe the leauge took over that team, so other teams fan bases & the teams of the East; had a false since of they are not really unbeatable.

Fake extended Pacer playoff series, not just running through teams.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 11:11 AM
Boston was supposed to be a 2 year experiment that was extended to 4 because the East was so bad. The fact that they took Miami to 7 and had a 3-2 lead was far more a knock on Miami then it was a testament to Boston. The support pieces around the 35 year old big 3 were completely atrocious. Greg Stiemsma and Marquis Daniels were their key support pieces.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 11:14 AM
Those Bulls teams were never a real contender, everybody knew they were toast once they met Miami in the playoffs. Pacers were laughable talent wise after George. Those are not real "foes" for a historical team like Miami.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 11:17 AM
It underachieved based on the hype but if you paid attention you understood why. Like some will bring up their series vs Boston/Indy where they were vulnerable but alot of that was due to injuries to those not named Bron. When they were fully healthy and totally acclimated with their teammates/roles, we saw what they could do with that insane winning streak. People talk about Wade taking a back seat but that was in long part due to his natural decline because during that winning streak, he was matching Bron blow for blow, then he got hurt right before the playoffs. Thats why chasing RS records come with a risk.

Were we right to expect Wade to hold up near his peak form entering into his 30s?

I honestly think that is fair. I think "fit" of the stars more than pure talent was the reason for the sidekicks underachieving though. I think were seeing now with guys like Love that pure talent doesn't always translate well into lower level roles. Now we are seeing first hand that 2-way support is more important than a watered down all star scorer turning into a 3rd option. Bosh turning into a defender might have been their saving grace from pure embarassment.

Talent wise, Wade early 30s decline or not, they were lightyears ahead of the rest of the pack in the East. Paul George and Roy Hibbert's Indy and the big 3 grandpa's Celtics should not have put a dent in Miami like they did. That team was built to annihilate the competition ala Shaq/Kobe Lakers.

AllBall
07-09-2016, 11:20 AM
It was entertaining. A hell of a ride. Changed the landscape of the modern NBA. From and X's and O's standpoint brought some interesting use of small ball, position-less, pace and space basketball.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 11:23 AM
It was entertaining. A hell of a ride. Changed the landscape of the modern NBA. From and X's and O's standpoint brought some interesting use of small ball, position-less, pace and space basketball.

From a pure basketball standpoint and a not a historical standpoint I can jive with this. That swarming, attack heavy, perimeter anchored defense was on some MJ/Scottie/Rodman ish.

Ty Fast
07-09-2016, 11:28 AM
Choke? Dirk put on a performance for the ages that whole post season. Especially the finals.

Bron did choke. In one game he only scored 8 points.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 11:32 AM
Historical context needs to be gauged with respect to expectations. They flopped all things considered. If Golden State lets the Grizzlies take them to 7 B2B years and gets beat by the East 2/4 trips and wins the other 2 chips they will be scrutinized the same way (even moreso obviously).

breakbad
07-09-2016, 11:49 AM
I think Riley and Wade and Bron had seen what the Suns pulled off with D'antoni and Nash and 7 seconds or less, and how extremely potent and dangerous it was.
I think they saw the only thing keeping that team from dynastic achievements was an all time lack of defensive emphasis, and just being poor defensively in general.
So they said okay, we'll let Bron and Wade play Nash, except they both attack the rim with the best ever, whereas Nash couldn't jump, lmoa
The Suns would get the rebound and get it to Nash and the three shooters get right to your positions, and Nash will pull his Magic and find you if you have an open shot, otherwise wait for Amare, pick and roll, and go with whatever the D gives you.

Miami took that idea, Bron, Wade and three shooters. They added in a huge helping of all time great Defense, and TADA, you have a little mini-dynasty. What the Suns woulda had had they played ANY D.

Okay, so fast forward to the epic Old Man Spurs vs. young prime Heat, and the mind games and ball movement and the ways the Spurs, or Pop, used his brain to negate the insane talent and athletic gap between the two teams.
A team was being constructed while this was going on, by the greatest ever at team building, Jerry West. Add in Kerr where Pop is one of if not his biggest influence, and they merge what Miami was doing on both sides of the ball with Pop's ball movement system, but was able to put their own flavor on it seeing as they had drafted the legit two best shooters in the league, one of which is now considered the greatest shooter ever. And then you have the demo version of the Warriors that we've been watching, lmfao
Now they about to let out the actual track now that they've landed KD, and yeah, good luck everyone else.

But I do think all these teams were stealing and remixing from the most recent great team, starting with them Suns. Or maybe starting all the way back with the Showtime Lakers, idk. Whatever. hahaha

valade16
07-09-2016, 11:53 AM
Can't give them an A because they fell short of expectations however going to 4 straight Finals and winning 2 is still very impressive. I would give them a B.

Heediot
07-09-2016, 12:11 PM
B grade. Underachieved IMO.

lamzoka
07-09-2016, 12:48 PM
B-

The expectations were too high and I think they felt short. Everyone including the heat players thought they were just gonna come and dominate the league.

They are the main reason why a lot of people are not crowning GS champion already for next season. I hear a lot of "they still have to play".

If Bosh didn't grab arguably the biggest rebound in NBA history, they would've been 1-4 in the finals.

celtNYpatsHeels
07-09-2016, 12:54 PM
B. Fell short of expectations however 2 championships are nothing to sneeze at.

If it wasn't for Ray, would it have been an F? "Only" 1 ring.

Chronz
07-09-2016, 01:30 PM
I honestly think that is fair. I think "fit" of the stars more than pure talent was the reason for the sidekicks underachieving though. I think were seeing now with guys like Love that pure talent doesn't always translate well into lower level roles. Now we are seeing first hand that 2-way support is more important than a watered down all star scorer turning into a 3rd option. Bosh turning into a defender might have been their saving grace from pure embarassment.

Talent wise, Wade early 30s decline or not, they were lightyears ahead of the rest of the pack in the East. Paul George and Roy Hibbert's Indy and the big 3 grandpa's Celtics should not have put a dent in Miami like they did. That team was built to annihilate the competition ala Shaq/Kobe Lakers.

Thats a tricky thing to gauge tho, I recall an article on how no other Big-3 in history was as productive collectively as these 3 were, Ill look it up but Im sure there various barometers at least suggest an elite standard. The Boston Celtics Big-3 may have "fit" better but they were less productive overall and had even more struggles with inferior teams despite being far healthier. Thats where the talent part of the equation comes in but I think people over hyped the team.



That was without Bosh and with Wade abit hobbled (not as bad as he would get in the coming playoffs tho), I dont see this gaping talent disparity you speak of. The team lost their All-Star bigman and were squaring off against the 2 teams with brutish/tall frontcourts. Poor Battier took a beating those playoffs and it really took a toll on him to end his career. Kobe and Shaq were very much vulnerable in many of their championship runs. If you're talking about 01, well very few have had the right situations to pull that off but I do consider them the best duo ever and they had alot going for them that year outside their big-2. Frankly I dont believe Bron was on Shaqs level and I dont believe Wade was on that Kobe's level, at best they are debatable but definitely not with Wade hobbled and Bosh missing. If all 3 remained healthy and in peak form, then I have a feeling we would've seen that kind of dominance at some point.

Chronz
07-09-2016, 01:38 PM
Boston was supposed to be a 2 year experiment that was extended to 4 because the East was so bad. The fact that they took Miami to 7 and had a 3-2 lead was far more a knock on Miami then it was a testament to Boston. The support pieces around the 35 year old big 3 were completely atrocious. Greg Stiemsma and Marquis Daniels were their key support pieces.

I suppose thats true but those vets showed up when it counted, and Rondo took over for Ray Allen in the Big-3 department. Miami prolly shouldn't have been so close to elimination, Bosh or no Bosh but its not that damning given the injuries. Once Bosh came back we did see them take care of business and thats with him just giving them someone to prevent simple lobs for KG flushes. They did molly whop them the year before with everyone healthy and that was Stage 1 Miami.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 01:38 PM
Thats a tricky thing to gauge tho, I recall an article on how no other Big-3 in history was as productive collectively as these 3 were, Ill look it up but Im sure there various barometers at least suggest an elite standard. The Boston Celtics Big-3 may have "fit" better but they were less productive overall and had even more struggles with inferior teams despite being far healthier. Thats where the talent part of the equation comes in but I think people over hyped the team.



That was without Bosh and with Wade abit hobbled (not as bad as he would get in the coming playoffs tho), I dont see this gaping talent disparity you speak of. The team lost their All-Star bigman and were squaring off against the 2 teams with brutish/tall frontcourts. Poor Battier took a beating those playoffs and it really took a toll on him to end his career. Kobe and Shaq were very much vulnerable in many of their championship runs. If you're talking about 01, well very few have had the right situations to pull that off but I do consider them the best duo ever and they had alot going for them that year outside their big-2. Frankly I dont believe Bron was on Shaqs level and I dont believe Wade was on that Kobe's level, at best they are debatable but definitely not with Wade hobbled and Bosh missing. If all 3 remained healthy and in peak form, then I have a feeling we would've seen that kind of dominance at some point.

I am drawing blanks on that Bosh playoff injury. If you remind me which series that was for I will give them a pass on letting a historically insignificant team take them to 7 for that one.

I think if the Celtics in 08 played better in the early rounds they would be remembered as an all time great team that year. Pretty sure it took 7 to win every round until the Finals - even against a 38 win Hawks team. I don't recall what they put up production wise but I'm not sure it mattered - the C's Big 3 had little help outside of them in 2008 and won 66 games and the title. That BIG 3 performed and complimented each other brilliantly. Not sure collective production is the best way to define the performance of a big 3.

mngopher35
07-09-2016, 02:12 PM
I think given the injuries/decline they had it was pretty successful although I had slightly different opinions than others from the start. The 2011 choke by Lebron is probably the only real negative for them imo. Spurs in 2014 were unbelievable with that ball movement and wade was not at the same level by that time. Not sure they beat that team anyways honestly I loved that spurs team.

Winning 2/4 years together is a positive to me still so maybe a B?

Chronz
07-09-2016, 02:22 PM
The Bron gaffe is really all that prevents this from being an A+ IMO. To me, you cant base rankings/grades off the hype beforehand, you have to see how the team/league evolves and believe me, if Bron had joined Wade and Bosh a mere year or 2 later, nobody would have had a problem with it because we would have seen something similar to what we saw when Bron first left the Heat. A decent team sure, but not historic and certainly not champions.

CardinalRed24
07-09-2016, 02:33 PM
Slightly underachieved IMO. But that's obv very
debatable.

Still, I will never credit Bron for having 3 titles. And Wade himself should only have one.

Bron leaving Cle for South Beach was the biggest joke I've ever seen in any professional sport. The thought of it just makes me cringe. At the very least, he did help himself by going back. But still, to me, it does not make up for the weakest move he ever could have possibly made the first time around.

jimm120
07-09-2016, 02:33 PM
uhmmm..successful as heck.

5 straight finals. 3 championships.

Chronz
07-09-2016, 02:35 PM
I am drawing blanks on that Bosh playoff injury. If you remind me which series that was for I will give them a pass on letting a historically insignificant team take them to 7 for that one.
Abdomen injury, happened in their G1 victory against the Pacers. He missed the rest of the series vs them and returned to action when the Heat were down 3-2 to the Celtics IIRC.


I think if the Celtics in 08 played better in the early rounds they would be remembered as an all time great team that year. Pretty sure it took 7 to win every round until the Finals - even against a 38 win Hawks team. I don't recall what they put up production wise but I'm not sure it mattered - the C's Big 3 had little help outside of them in 2008 and won 66 games and the title. That BIG 3 performed and complimented each other brilliantly. Not sure collective production is the best way to define the performance of a big 3.

Agreed. It sounds trivial but them struggling to win in the playoffs was pretty disheartening based on what we saw all year. I blame almost all of that on Paul Pierce, dude SUCKED in "clutch situations" up until the Finals and they were used to crushing teams.

As for it not being a fair way to define performance, what is there left? The Celtics struggled to win as a unit, the Celtics Big-3 were not as productive, their supporting cast was better than you give them credit for; Rondo was a 2-way guy at the time, Tony Allen was a defensive beast, James Posey was a brilliant 2-way 6th man and gave them the versatility to play small ball(I actually remember a random TOR-BOS game where it was Posey who defended Bosh, not KG), they acquired PJ Brown mid-season and Doc says he made a huge difference, Sam Cassel was picked up but he was just a name at this point, still, I have this theory that vets with reps get 1 year where teams/refs dont really know their true ability any more. Like teams still wouldn't sag off Cassell like they did Rondo even though both were literally as useful from the perimeter. Then you had Powe and Baby Shaq. Powe was a beast on the boards (very similar to whats his face on the Cavs today) and they had mini Shaq who sucked, but as an end of the bench player was superb.

Boston was stacked, they achieved alot of success but they never dominated as they should have. What would you grade that union? Had KG never gotten injured, Im almost positive they win more than once. Should that really sway what they accomplished, injuries? Its the luck of the draw, Boston overachieved outside their actual championship IMO. They had no business taking the Lakers to 7 and they had no business taking Miami to 7.

AllBall
07-09-2016, 02:42 PM
From a pure basketball standpoint and a not a historical standpoint I can jive with this. That swarming, attack heavy, perimeter anchored defense was on some MJ/Scottie/Rodman ish.

This is what I miss the most in the NBA. Have not seen a team play that "on-a-string", suffocating type defense for extended periods of time since. Celtics of 2008 was another team like that I remember just suffocating the life of the opponent on defense.

Chronz
07-09-2016, 02:54 PM
Slightly underachieved IMO. But that's obv very
debatable.

Still, I will never credit Bron for having 3 titles. And Wade himself should only have one.

Bron leaving Cle for South Beach was the biggest joke I've ever seen in any professional sport. The thought of it just makes me cringe. At the very least, he did help himself by going back. But still, to me, it does not make up for the weakest move he ever could have possibly made the first time around.

Wouldn't the weakest move have been to just join a team that had recently won a championship or been preventing his prior team from winning?

Dude created a new power, he wanted chip support for the first time in his what, 7 year career? Thats understandable man, people looked at the names but failed to recognize the fit and lack of options elsewhere. I get it, Bron+Wade+All-Star should always = title, Im just saying it proved not to be the case for reasons beyond Bron, well save for Y1. And even then I think people underrate just how good a season he had. Dallas upset EVERYONE, thats part of what made them magical, the ultimate swiss army knife, capable of killing "more talented" teams with matchup issues they could present simply by swapping out role players.

They also had a perfect storm going for them. Portland was without Roy, IIRC the only game they won was when Roy had a vintage performance. They beat LAL, a HUGE upset at the time that people seem to disregard for some reason, but even they had internal strife. Namely Pau and Bynum no longer seeing eye to eye among other rumors. OKC was good but as good as they would become the following year.

Then theres Y1 Miami. The team that didn't even know Chalmers was its best PG option. A team that played the corpse of Dampier who takes forever to just flush a memorable behind the back pass from LeBron. This wasn't "Space and Pace" Miami, that took Bosh's injury to fully realize. This was "Get stops, do what you want" Miami. Bron choked regardless, but the dude was carrying the biggest load of anyone all year and was faced against the soon to be DPOY just waiting for him at the rim, along with Marion/Kidd tag teaming him on the perimeter. He deferred to Wade more than he should have but it did benefit his teammates game.

Like when people cite his 4th quarter performances, they focus only on his buckets. He made a few plays out there that dont happen without the attention on him, he was clamping down on JET for the first 3 games of the series (JET readily admits this btw). He wasn't just a complete net negative, I actually found his performance vs the Spurs to be worse despite the fact I knew he wasn't going to win. Bron was a much better player in his Finals vs Dallas than he was as a youngster with the Cavs vs the Spurs. Its just we consider one worse simply because of the expectations beforehand. Bron should have won and Bron should have lost matter more than Bron played better or he played worse.

Chronz
07-09-2016, 03:00 PM
This is what I miss the most in the NBA. Have not seen a team play that "on-a-string", suffocating type defense for extended periods of time since. Celtics of 2008 was another team like that I remember just suffocating the life of the opponent on defense.

Im sure both of you remember the day Lin came to visit that vaunted defense. Very MJ-Bulls like. Heres the thing, MJ-Pippen were at their most suffocating early in their careers. The pressure defense applied by the Bulls was at its peak during the first 3-peat vs the 2nd. Horace Grant was their Bosh, only he had the strength to hold his own vs the likes of Hakeem whereas Bosh struggles vs Hibbert. Bron and Wade began playing this defense when one of them reached his 30's, which isn't too much longer until Pippen starts suffering from back issues. Lets say there was a world where Bron and Wade came up together, you best believe they would have topped MJ-Pippen.

Yanks All Day
07-09-2016, 03:03 PM
The Miami Heat have made it to 5 NBA Finals in their history. 4 of them came from the LeBron-Wade-Bosh era. Any way you slice it, those 4 years were wildly successful.

I'd say I'd rank it an A because they got 2 titles in 4 years. It's not an A+ because obviously the 2011 Dallas series is a letdown. I don't hold the last Spurs series against them at all. The way San Antonio played and shot, they would have run any team in history off the court. Still: 4 years, 4 Finals appearances, 2 titles. That's a massive success.

I don't think people really appreciate how hard it is to even MAKE the Finals. It's not something that happens often, and we're spoiled by watching LeBron do it every year.

Jordan played 13 years in Chicago - made it 6 times.
Kobe played 20 years in Los Angeles - made it 7 times.
Kareem played 20 years - made it 10 times.
Larry Bird played 13 years - made it 5 times.
Wilt played 14 years - made it 6 times.
LeBron has played 13 years - made it 7 times.


The point is, stars are often in the Finals, but they don't make it every year. Only Magic going 9/13 is really an outlier there in modern times. The usual rate is once every 2 or 3 years. Miami did it every year. Now, LeBron doing it every year is super impressive. 6 in 6 is silly good. And 4 in 4 for Miami was just as impressive. You can hate the team, but you can't diminish the accomplishment.

Sportsguy9695
07-09-2016, 03:18 PM
Incredibly successful.

Can't expect to win the final every year. I think only 7 teams won back to back.

i agree 100 percent. going to 4 finals isnt that bad. of course you would love to see 4 finals appearances and 4 final victories. but fifty percent isnt too bad at the end of the day

lamzoka
07-09-2016, 03:19 PM
uhmmm..successful as heck.

5 straight finals. 3 championships.

5 Finals? 3 championships?

Where the ***** have I been?
How about 4 finals. 2 championships.

Kush McDaniels
07-09-2016, 04:43 PM
B+

The only real stain was that they blew it against Dallas (I still think the Heat were a much better team). The loss to the Spurs was understandable. I don't think anyone could stop that Spurs team.

CHANGO
07-09-2016, 05:21 PM
A.

Anytime you can get to the Finals 4 times in a row and win 2 rings, that's a win in my books.

D-Leethal
07-09-2016, 05:23 PM
Im sure both of you remember the day Lin came to visit that vaunted defense. Very MJ-Bulls like. Heres the thing, MJ-Pippen were at their most suffocating early in their careers. The pressure defense applied by the Bulls was at its peak during the first 3-peat vs the 2nd. Horace Grant was their Bosh, only he had the strength to hold his own vs the likes of Hakeem whereas Bosh struggles vs Hibbert. Bron and Wade began playing this defense when one of them reached his 30's, which isn't too much longer until Pippen starts suffering from back issues. Lets say there was a world where Bron and Wade came up together, you best believe they would have topped MJ-Pippen.

That was essentially the day the Linsanity died. I felt bad for the kid it was so damn suffocating. I didn't watch USA vs Croatia in 1992 but I would imagine it was similar to MJ and Scottie going after Kukoc on the dream team.

TylerSL
07-09-2016, 07:14 PM
Too short. One of the greatest four year runs in NBA history.

2 NBA championships
4 conference championships
27 consecutive wins
A road playoff win in every playoff series we played in
a 283-116 (.709) record including playoffs

All while being the center of the basketball universe. They were just getting into the conversation of being one of the greatest teams of all time. If we had stayed together even 2 more years people would think about the Heat of the 10's as one of the great teams in league history. They still might but we were close.

mightybosstone
07-10-2016, 12:48 AM
I'd give it a solid B+. Any franchise that goes to the Finals four straight years and wins two championships in that timeframe has done a remarkable job. And when you considering that Wade experienced a pretty substantial dropoff in production and efficiency during this period, it's particularly hard to be disappointed with what the team accomplished.

However, there will always be "what ifs" with this team. They obviously were more talented than the Dallas squad and 2011 and didn't live up to the trio's potential. And if Wade doesn't drop off and continues playing at his Hall of Fame level with Lebron coming back after those first four years, could they have accomplished more? The "what if" is the reason why I can't give them an "A."

LA_Raiders
07-10-2016, 03:16 AM
They did well, but not to their standards. Not one, not two, not three, not....seven...

Shlumpledink
07-10-2016, 04:12 AM
The team up was wildly successful

Tony_Starks
07-11-2016, 09:15 AM
When you compose a Superteam and it goes to the Finals every year as a result it can only be called tremendously successful.

Pretty impressive when you look at how they basically did the pg and center positions by committee.

I will also remember the great snipers who are often left out of the story. To be able to have Mike Miller, James Jones, Ray to save the day on any given night was something to behold. Even Battier who provided them great 3 and D, especially in the Finals.

RowBTrice
07-11-2016, 09:39 AM
Extremely disappointing. Winning 2 titles was a given. The expectation was 6+. They never got close. Maybe they shouldn't of put such ridiculous expectations on themselves.

Hawkeye15
07-11-2016, 09:57 AM
I mean, it depends. Were we to believe Wade's style was going to hold up for long playoff seasons into his 30's? On paper it looked like it would yield about what it yielded. But I think the media, fans, and hell, even the trio themselves, overhyped that team.

I would say A-/B+ if I am giving a grade.

FlashBolt
07-11-2016, 12:04 PM
B+. They should have won 3/4 rings. That Mavs series makes it impossible to give them an A.