PDA

View Full Version : Who would have won? 2002 Kings or 2006 Heat



TmacsRockets
04-01-2009, 03:26 PM
Who would have won? 2002 Kings or 2006 Heat

tastystaci
04-01-2009, 03:28 PM
The fact that one was screwed out of a Championship and the other was handed a championship on a David Stern silver platter, there's no question to me. The 2002 Kings would win, probably in 5.

iDunk
04-01-2009, 03:29 PM
2006 Heat definitley.

Myth
04-01-2009, 03:34 PM
I think it would be a good battle. Hard to say.

tastystaci
04-01-2009, 03:41 PM
2006 Heat definitley.

The Kings were better than that 2002 Lakers team. It took a corrupted officiating job in game 6 just to give the Lakers a chance. So are you saying the 2006 Heat were better than those great Lakers teams also. :roll: If you do then you fail sir. Beyond comprehension you fail.

qrich
04-01-2009, 03:43 PM
I say the 02 Kings easily.

twolvesfan
04-01-2009, 03:47 PM
06 miami easily since wade would be going to the line on every possession

Showtime
04-01-2009, 03:48 PM
Well, it depends really. What time period are they playing? 2002 or 2006? Because in 2006, Wade is more likely to get those easy calls than in 2002.

TheGreatDeraj
04-01-2009, 05:25 PM
The 2002 kings were a much better team. They may have been better than the Lakers in 2002, until This happened (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=769f_gjkDaA).

The heat were a good team, but with an older Shaq, a worse SG(at the time) in Wade and worse overall role players the kings would finish them off in 5.

BankShot
04-01-2009, 05:27 PM
The fact that one was screwed out of a Championship and the other was handed a championship on a David Stern silver platter, there's no question to me. The 2002 Kings would win, probably in 5.

Tastystaci: ISH's newest entry to the "most annoying troll" category

tedloc
04-01-2009, 05:30 PM
the 02 kings

should've won it all in 2002...
that team was a very good team.

tastystaci
04-01-2009, 05:43 PM
Tastystaci: ISH's newest entry to the "most annoying troll" category

How was that a troll statement. Like 90% of this thread agree's. :lol Just get off me son.

Mdog1
04-01-2009, 05:48 PM
Kings I think, but I do believe that it would be closer than some think. Wade would still play out of his mind IMO, maybe Shaq wouldn't be in foul trouble, but Wade wouldn't get as many easy points because the Mavs sucked. Good series.

White Chocolate
04-01-2009, 05:49 PM
Mike Bibby > Jason Williams
Doug Christie < Dwyane Wade
Peja Stojakovic > Antoine Walker
Chris Webber > Udonis Haslem
Vlade Divac < Shaq


Bobby Jackson > Gary Payton
Scot Pollard < Alonzo Mourning
Hedo Turkoglu = James Posey


Kings win.

R.I.P.
04-01-2009, 05:49 PM
That would be a ****ty crowded field. They would need three refs that are for the Heat and three refs that are against the Kings.

#1SportsFan86
04-01-2009, 05:51 PM
Mike Bibby > Jason Williams
Doug Christie < Dwyane Wade
Peja Stojakovic > Antoine Walker
Chris Webber > Udonis Haslem
Vlade Divac < Shaq


Bobby Jackson > Gary Payton
Scot Pollard < Alonzo Mourning
Hedo Turkoglu = James Posey


Kings win.

That don't mean nothing...If Stern wants D-Wade to win then he's gonna win.

tastystaci
04-01-2009, 05:52 PM
That don't mean nothing...If Stern wants D-Wade to win then he's gonna win.

Watch out, you will be called a troll for such language. I should know, it's already been done to me :lol

White Chocolate
04-01-2009, 05:54 PM
That don't mean nothing...If Stern wants D-Wade to win then he's gonna win.


The Mavs had a ton of calls go against them, not to mention Stackhouse being suspended, but they blew it themselves. They were up 2-0, leading by 13 half way through the 4th quarter of game 3. With the Kings, if Kobe gets called for the foul, Bibby wins it on free throws, it's Kings/Nets in the Finals.


The Mavs had multiple opportunities to win. The Kings, with the correct call win the game and the series is over.

tastystaci
04-01-2009, 05:57 PM
The Mavs had a ton of calls go against them, not to mention Stackhouse being suspended, but they blew it themselves. They were up 2-0, leading by 13 half way through the 4th quarter of game 3. With the Kings, if Kobe gets called for the foul, Bibby wins it on free throws, it's Kings/Nets in the Finals.


The Mavs had multiple opportunities to win. The Kings, with the correct call win the game and the series is over.

I agree their was an element of choke, but game 5, after Dirk hits that clutch, Bird-esque 18 footer in overtime to put them up 1, c'mon. This great shot by Dirk is erased because of the phantom foul on Wade that followed. Mavs should've won game 5, been going back to Dallas with a 3-2 lead.

ukplayer4
04-01-2009, 07:00 PM
the kings would destroy that heat team in 5 games tops.


the kings were easily the best team in the league in 02, if it hadnt been for not only pure and admited cheating by the refs in 02 and not to mention many miracle shots and lucky bounces all series the kings beat the lakers in 5...and the 02 lakers i feel were a better team than the 06 heat.

bigkingsfan
04-01-2009, 07:01 PM
The mavs were a minute away from being up 3-0 vs the "mighty" Heat team.

Showtime
04-01-2009, 07:04 PM
I will say this about the Kings and Lakers: the Kings were injured, choked, AND had inconsistent refs, and still took LA to a game 7. If a team is banged up, chokes, and is still just about equal, then that tells me they are probably better overall. With that being said, both the Kings and Lakers were better than the 2006 heat team, and both would beat them in a 7 game series IMO.

dirkdiggler41
04-01-2009, 07:07 PM
lol. The kings would foul out of the lg, but it was done right by the refs, I would put my cash on the kings. The heat was a pretty dam good team though, but not Kings good

Mateo
04-01-2009, 07:10 PM
I don't think the Kings would have beaten the Nets in the finals that year.

plowking
04-01-2009, 07:11 PM
The Heat team of 2006 is nothing special.

I love how we are rated according to the agenda people want to push. When discussing what teams we could beat now or in the past, it's "that team was old" or "they were no where near as talented as this team". Though when discussing Wade's legacy, it's people saying "he had one of the best teams" or "that team had Shaq on it!" or "that team had crafty veterans who would take any team to 7 games". Funny how it all changes...

BTW, my opinion is Wade would have ripped any team apart in that finals series. He was amazing.

Lebron23
04-01-2009, 07:12 PM
Sacramento Kings in 5 games.

nbastatus
04-01-2009, 07:12 PM
the queens

plowking
04-01-2009, 07:13 PM
Sacramento Kings in 5 games.

And theres one of those hypocrites now.

When I ask him about Wade, we apparently had the best team ever...

Try harder trolls. :oldlol:

1987_Lakers
04-01-2009, 07:14 PM
2002 Kings in 6.

ukplayer4
04-01-2009, 07:15 PM
I don't think the Kings would have beaten the Nets in the finals that year.




hilarious, every single non mentally handicapped person thinks the kings would win in 4, the lakers destroyed the nets in 4 and most think the kings were better than the lakers.

White Chocolate
04-01-2009, 07:17 PM
I don't think the Kings would have beaten the Nets in the finals that year.


The Lakers swept the Nets and the Kings were definitely better than the Lakers. The Nets at best would have taken 1 game from either team.

plowking
04-01-2009, 07:19 PM
The Lakers swept the Nets and the Kings were definitely better than the Lakers. The Nets at best would have taken 1 game from either team.

The Mavs were better then Golden State, but look what happened...

plowking
04-01-2009, 07:20 PM
Basketball isn't logic or a maths equation. It's matchups.

nbastatus
04-01-2009, 07:21 PM
The Mavs were better then Golden State, but look what happened...
golden state also killed then in the season.

tastystaci
04-01-2009, 07:22 PM
Basketball isn't logic or a maths equation. It's matchups.

These are all hypothetical opinions. Nobody knows for sure, but when 90% of the basketball world thinks the Kings would win, the sure bet would probably be the kings. If Vegas had a line on the series, I can tell you for sure I would bet everything I had on the Kings. Then again, I am a degenerate gambler :roll:

Mateo
04-01-2009, 07:32 PM
hilarious, every single non mentally handicapped person thinks the kings would win in 4, the lakers destroyed the nets in 4 and most think the kings were better than the lakers.

i think the nets matched up better with the kings. the nets were just in over their heads against the 2 time champs... usually defense wins championships and the Nets were a very good defensive team, the Kings played no defense at all.

White Chocolate
04-01-2009, 07:34 PM
i think the nets matched up better with the kings. the nets were just in over their heads against the 2 time champs... usually defense wins championships and the Nets were a very good defensive team, the Kings played no defense at all.


The Kings essentially beat the Lakers, so why would the Nets have any more success? The Kings had Pistons-like chemistry and they could kill you with the three ball, or inside. I'm sure Chris Webber would have had his way for the most part with second year Kenyon Martin, not to mention Vlade vs Todd MacCulloch.

plowking
04-01-2009, 07:35 PM
These are all hypothetical opinions. Nobody knows for sure, but when 90% of the basketball world thinks the Kings would win, the sure bet would probably be the kings. If Vegas had a line on the series, I can tell you for sure I would bet everything I had on the Kings. Then again, I am a degenerate gambler :roll:

Good on 90% of the world. The Heat have a championship where as the Kings don't. They can win all they like against us. :ohwell: :lol

plowking
04-01-2009, 07:36 PM
The Kings essentially beat the Lakers, so why would the Nets have any more success? The Kings had Pistons-like chemistry and they could kill you with the three ball, or inside. I'm sure Chris Webber would have had his way for the most part with second year Kenyon Martin, not to mention Vlade vs Todd MacCulloch.

No, they essentially lost to the Lakers...

Hence them not going any further.

White Chocolate
04-01-2009, 07:36 PM
No, they essentially lost to the Lakers...

Hence them not going any further.


You obviously didn't watch game 6.

plowking
04-01-2009, 07:44 PM
You obviously didn't watch game 6.

Yeah, Lakers won.

tastystaci
04-01-2009, 07:47 PM
You obviously didn't watch game 6.

Don't expect a Heat fan to understand this concept. To them, their title isn't tainted and Wade deserved all of those trips to the line. :roll:

BFRESH44
04-01-2009, 07:52 PM
Don't expect a Heat fan to understand this concept. To them, their title isn't tainted and Wade deserved all of those trips to the line. :roll:

:rolleyes:

hayden695
04-01-2009, 09:01 PM
lol. The kings would foul out of the lg, but it was done right by the refs, I would put my cash on the kings. The heat was a pretty dam good team though, but not Kings good


if someone started watching basketball this season they would lose there whole perspective of life by that comment. but i know you mean 02 and whatnot.

i say kings take er but i cant let dwade down so i say it goes to seven.:D

Champion
04-01-2009, 09:01 PM
2006 Heat. D-Whistle.

ukplayer4
04-01-2009, 09:30 PM
No, they essentially lost to the Lakers...

Hence them not going any further.




you are retarded

Micku
04-01-2009, 09:57 PM
*shrugs*

2002 Kings seems to me the better team, but I think Detriot in 04-06 were a better team than the 2002 Kings and look what the Heat did to them. I wouldn't underestimate the Heat, so I don't know who will win. Overall, I think the Kings are a better team, but Wade and Shaq might steal the series.

I would say the Kings because I like them the team better. But I wouldn't mind of the Heat would win. I think the Heat were a better team the year before 2006, but the 2006 team got it together in the playoffs.

Duncan21formvp
04-03-2009, 12:31 AM
*shrugs*

2002 Kings seems to me the better team, but I think Detriot in 04-06 were a better team than the 2002 Kings and look what the Heat did to them. I wouldn't underestimate the Heat, so I don't know who will win. Overall, I think the Kings are a better team, but Wade and Shaq might steal the series.

I would say the Kings because I like them the team better. But I wouldn't mind of the Heat would win. I think the Heat were a better team the year before 2006, but the 2006 team got it together in the playoffs.

Those kings teams were overrated

Wade's Rings
08-17-2015, 02:13 PM
The Heat team of 2006 is nothing special.

I love how we are rated according to the agenda people want to push. When discussing what teams we could beat now or in the past, it's "that team was old" or "they were no where near as talented as this team". Though when discussing Wade's legacy, it's people saying "he had one of the best teams" or "that team had Shaq on it!" or "that team had crafty veterans who would take any team to 7 games". Funny how it all changes...

BTW, my opinion is Wade would have ripped any team apart in that finals series. He was amazing.

:applause:

GIF REACTION
08-17-2015, 02:14 PM
Those kings teams were overrated
:facepalm