Rate the Miami Heat big 3 era [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

TheMarkMadsen

09-24-2014, 08:11 PM

My grade C.

Context:

When they teamed up they were expected to win every single year, the league was composed of aging stars on old teams and young stars on young teams..

They themselves even said they expected to win it every year, the entire point of this collusion was to win rings (plural) , nothing else... And they barely did that.

If you told me the day after they all signed with the HEAT that they would only end up with 2 rings.. I would have been very underwhelmed.

They stacked the deck in their favor and weren't even able to accomplish more than other teams with a lot less talent have done in the past.

No other team has ever had the 3 players of this caliber in their primes all sign with the same team before like this.. So I expected to see something we haven't seen before/in a long time..

Such as a 4peat, or a 3peat + 2 more rings eventually.

But then again.. I didn't expect 1/3 of the team to bail immediately when things got tough

TheMarkMadsen

09-24-2014, 08:13 PM

:facepalm Kobe stans.
The Heat signed Lebron and Bosh in the summer of 2010, therefore that is the year the big 3 era began. Understand?

Dumbass

OP says rank the 2010 - 2014 heat.

The 2010 heat weren't part of the big 3 era.

Now log on to Dubeta and try again you foggot

Beastmode88

09-24-2014, 08:18 PM

Enlighten me

I guess the mod enlightened you with a ban. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Marchesk

09-24-2014, 08:25 PM

A

4 years, 4 finals trips, 2 championships

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swfD5uFSg_E

The actual rating is: 2/8

JT123

09-24-2014, 08:37 PM

2.5/5

They were built to win from day 1. They should have won more than they did. I can't think of another team in sports history that was ever put together from scratch the way the Heat were, with the sole purpose of winning a title from day 1.
2007-08 Celtics
2012-13 Lakers
2003-04 Lakers
2013-14 Nets
How long have you followed the NBA? :biggums:
When you think about it, the Heat were basically the only "super team" that lived up to the hype.

Sarcastic

09-24-2014, 09:02 PM

2007-08 Celtics
2012-13 Lakers
2003-04 Lakers
2013-14 Nets
How long have you followed the NBA? :biggums:
When you think about it, the Heat were basically the only "super team" that lived up to the hype.

They weren't put together from scratch the way the Heat were.

imdaman99

09-24-2014, 09:03 PM

2007-08 Celtics
2012-13 Lakers
2003-04 Lakers
2013-14 Nets
How long have you followed the NBA? :biggums:
When you think about it, the Heat were basically the only "super team" that lived up to the hype.
None of them were in their prime. Try again, typical insecure branstan fodder.

JT123

09-24-2014, 09:10 PM

None of them were in their prime. Try again, typical insecure branstan fodder.
Doesn't change the fact that they were thrown together in the off season and expected to win a Championship in year 1. :confusedshrug:
The Celtics were expected to win a lot more than 1, especially since they were the only Eastern team with multiple future hall of famers for their first 3 seasons together.

red1

09-24-2014, 09:18 PM

Considering the health issues with Wade and the fact that Bosh pulled a houdini act in the playoffs the last 2 seasons, I would say they overachieved. They had the worst point guard tandem in the league, no inside presence, and filled their bench with a bunch of old men who's only talent was streaky 3 point shooting. Even with all these factors going against them, they still won 2 Championships and became the first team in 30 years to go to 4 straight Finals. :applause: These accomplishments are a testament to their leader.
except they would have won 3 if their "leader" didn't choke like he did in 2011

fpliii

09-24-2014, 09:22 PM

Doesn't change the fact that they were thrown together in the off season and expected to win a Championship in year 1. :confusedshrug:
The Celtics were expected to win a lot more than 1, especially since they were the only Eastern team with multiple future hall of famers for their first 3 seasons together.
To be fair, KG got hurt in their second year together, and that ended his prime. He looked better again towards the end of 09-10 in the playoffs, and for the rest of his time in Boston he was still great defensively, but he'd fallen off too much for them to dominate.

JT123

09-24-2014, 09:49 PM

except they would have won 3 if their "leader" didn't choke like he did in 2011
Technically Wade was still the leader in 2011. Lebron wasn't handed the reigns until the following season, and the rest is history. :rockon:

Smoke117

09-24-2014, 09:50 PM

7/10

Beastmode88

09-24-2014, 09:51 PM

Technically Wade was still the leader in 2011. Lebron wasn't handed the reigns until the following season, and the rest is history. :rockon:

Yes 2014, making history yet again with the highest total point loss in NBA finals history.

MVBallin2K

09-24-2014, 11:26 PM

3/5. 2 championships is impressive regardless of the Finals record overall but for the expectations and hype they had? Nowhere near perfect. All the talk about "Not 1, not 2, not 3..." virtually set the bar high for them and they failed 2 out of 4 times in doing so despite that talk.

HOoopCityJones

09-24-2014, 11:29 PM

2/5

:roll:

Lord Bean

09-24-2014, 11:33 PM

Technically Wade was still the leader in 2011. Lebron wasn't handed the reigns until the following season, and the rest is history. :rockon:
so you are saying wade was clear alpha when he was fully healthy, and lebron could only become leader when wade decline

JohnFreeman

09-24-2014, 11:43 PM

A-

G-train

09-25-2014, 12:02 AM

4 seasons, 4 finals, and 2 titles.. is 5/5 and to think otherwise is not good analysis of the NBA.

3ball

09-25-2014, 12:08 AM

3ball

09-25-2014, 12:14 AM

BigBoss

09-25-2014, 12:42 AM

2 for 5.

#striveforgreatness

aj1987

09-25-2014, 12:52 AM

thefatmiral

09-25-2014, 12:57 AM

2/4 looks good but would have been 1/4 without a ginobili meltdown. with one run being a blow out. its a B.

Kvnzhangyay

09-25-2014, 12:59 AM

you guys realize that Lebron orchestrated to play with the best shooting guard and the best power forward AT THE TIME?

if Jordan had orchestrated to play with Karl Malone and Clyde Drexler, would he be given an "A" for going 2/4, especially when both losses were super-embarrassing?

Your logic is flawed here. Obviously going 2/4 is less than 6/6, but that is ASSUMING we already know that he would have gotten 6/6. In comparison to 6 rings, 2 rings is rather pathetic, so obviously it would be looked down upon. However, if we DIDNT know he could/would have won 6 rings, we would still be thinking he might never win a ring, so winning just one ring by itself is a huge accomplishment. Without winning any championships, as Lebron had not won, the big three winning a single ring would have been seen as a success.

As such, I give the big 3 an A-. People will always have hindsight bias and believe what "could have been had, x not happened"...

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 01:03 AM

Anytime you lose as the favorite, you get an "F", not an A- or B or whatever.

It was a massive failure when Bird, Magic, Jordan, or even a guy like Duncan is the FAVORITE, and they don't win the championship.

So Lebron got two F's for his two Finals failures as the favorite... :D .... then an "A" for 2012, and a B+ for 2013 (his Finals performance was not an elite one).... So that averages out to a C- overall grade.
.
How exactly was he a favorite this year?

His team was clearly a shell of itself from the couple years prior. Wade showed flashes here and there but was all in all nowhere near 80%, let alone 100% Flash. We can argue about Bosh's role back and forth..but what isn't disputable at all is that he wasn't even close to the best PF like you somehow think he was in 2010.

The Spurs got their shit together in game 7 against Dallas, it just clicked. And after that they raped every team on their way to the finals, and then a Miami team that, outside of Lebron, played like they just wanted to go home and relax.

The Spurs at their best, from game 7 of the 1st round on, were honestly the best team I've seen since the 01 Lakers. I'm putting that Spurs team up there with any team in the modern era except maybe the 86 Celtics and 96 Bulls.

3ball

09-25-2014, 01:04 AM

Your logic is flawed here. Obviously going 2/4 is less than 6/6, but that is ASSUMING we already know that he would have gotten 6/6. In comparison to 6 rings, 2 rings is rather pathetic, so obviously it would be looked down upon. However, if we DIDNT know he could/would have won 6 rings, we would still be thinking he might never win a ring, so winning just one ring by itself is a huge accomplishment. Without winning any championships, as Lebron had not won, the big three winning a single ring would have been seen as a success.

As such, I give the big 3 an A-. People will always have hindsight bias and believe what "could have been had, x not happened"...
We don't know what Jordan would have done with Malone and Drexler, but it is always considered a failure when you lose the championship and you were the favorite... that is ALWAYS considered a failure... amirite??...

So anytime you fail to win it all where your team is the favorite and you are an all-time great, you get an "F"... Most of the TRUE all-time greats would give themselves an F if they lost as the favorite... Only the fakers would still allow themselves a moral victory when they had the better talent and were favored but couldn't live up to expectation.

3ball

09-25-2014, 01:06 AM

How exactly was he a favorite this year?

Going into the season, every single ESPN analyst picked the Heat to win it all.

Going into the Finals, half of the analysts still picked the Heat... :confusedshrug:

3ball

09-25-2014, 01:07 AM

Lol @ Bosh being the best PF.

Do you have to bring up MJ in every thread? The way you're riding him.. :wtf:
Blame the media for saying a guy is on Jordan's level, when that guy has to jump ship and organize to play with the best talent in order to win all his rings.

Again, Lebron gets two F's for his two Finals-failures-as-the-favorite...

An "A" for 2012.... and a B+ for 2013 (his Finals performance was not elite).

So that averages out to a C- overall grade.

I think that is very fair... just do the math - 2/4 is a far cry from the expectation of "not 6, not 7, not 8".
.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 01:15 AM

Still waiting on that explanation as to how and why the Heat were favorites to win it all this year. Something other than the garbage "DEFENDING CHAMPS" argument.

3ball

09-25-2014, 01:21 AM

JT123

09-25-2014, 01:24 AM

Going into the season, every single ESPN analyst picked the Heat to win it all.

Going into the Finals, half of the analysts still picked the Heat... :confusedshrug:
Actually they didn't. Most of them picked "the field," but said if they had to chose a team it would be the Heat, but only out of respect for them being the defending champs. Most of the TNT analysts said the Heat wouldn't even make it out of the East.
Going into the Finals, I think Stephen A was the only analyst to chose the Heat, and he is never right with his Finals predictions. :lol
And are you seriously trying to compare Bosh to Karl Malone? :biggums: FAIL!

3ball

09-25-2014, 01:27 AM

Actually they didn't.

Every single one of them did... and half still did going into the Finals.

And are you seriously trying to compare Bosh to Karl Malone? :biggums: FAIL!
It's not my fault today's bigs have fallen off so much... :confusedshrug:

you walked right into that one boss

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 01:29 AM

You missed the last post on the previous page.
So we're listening to ESPN analysts now? And it's not like they're notorious for sucking Lebron's dick on a day to day basis..

http://www.sportsgrid.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/chris-broussard-memphis.jpg

Geniuses like this guy who can't spell the name of an NBA city and use random tweets as sources :oldlol:

Did you watch the playoffs? If so do you honestly think, after seeing the Spurs' run through the WC, that Miami should've been favored to beat that team? Don't know if watched the same league..because there was zero doubt in my mind that the Spurs would win that series, and that the only way Miami had a real shot was if Wade played like pre-2013 form, Bosh gave them a consistent 18/10, and Lebron came out to play every night. Only one of those things was actually likely to happen, and it happened. And then predictably the Heat got stomped.

FPJ

09-25-2014, 01:32 AM

Good, now someone do one for the Lakers BIG 5 era (Nash, Kobe, MWP, Gasol and D'ho).

3ball

09-25-2014, 01:33 AM

So we're listening to ESPN analysts now?

http://www.sportsgrid.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/chris-broussard-memphis.jpg

Geniuses like this guy who can't spell the name of an NBA city and use random tweets as sources :oldlol:

do you honestly think, after seeing the Spurs' run through the WC

Spurs did not run through the Western Conference... that is recency bias because the memory of them blowing out the Heat lingers strongly.

But the Spurs almost lost in the first round to Dallas, who took them 7.

Then in the Conference Finals, they went to double OT in Game 6 with OKC, after Ibaka was hurt and didn't play for the first two games.

So they didn't run through the Western Conferience as you said they did.

Their offense only went bonkers against the Heat... and they only blew out the Heat and to a lesser extent Portland... this is a fact.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 01:34 AM

Blame the media for saying a guy is on Jordan's level, when that guy has to jump ship and organize to play with the best talent in order to win all his rings.
:facepalm

He should've wasted his entire career on the Cavs waiting for a top 25 GOAT in Pippen and the GOAT coach in Phil, right?

An "A" for 2012.... and a B+ for 2013 (his Finals performance was not elite).
25/11/7/2/1 is not elite now? I guess. Bird was an average Finals performer, right? As was MJ in '96. Etc..

I think that is very fair... just do the math - 2/4 is a far cry from the expectation of "not 6, not 7, not 8".
.
The expectation existed when Wade wasn't injury prone and Bosh didn't turn into a bitch.

Micku

09-25-2014, 01:34 AM

4 seasons, 4 finals, and 2 titles.. is 5/5 and to think otherwise is not good analysis of the NBA.

I think 5/5 is more like threepeat or more deal. Only a few teams have done it in NBA history. Regardless, it's was a great accomplishment to be in the finals since the time they were together until they time they split up.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 01:44 AM

Spurs did not run through the Western Conference... that is recency bias because the memory of them blowing out the Heat lingers strongly.

But the Spurs almost lost in the first round to Dallas, who took them 7.

Then in the Conference Finals, they went to double OT in Game 6 with OKC, after Ibaka was hurt and didn't play for the first two games.

So they didn't run through the Western Conferience as you said they did.

Their offense only went bonkers against the Heat... and they only blew out the Heat and to a lesser extent Portland... this is a fact.
As I said..they got their shit together in game 7 against Dallas. They stomped Dallas in that game, took a shit on Portland the whole series, then had a somewhat tough series against OKC. 2 straight blowouts, then had to readjust their game plan after Ibaka came back..which they did, by destroying OKC in game 5 by almost 30 with Ibaka, and then holding off OKC in game 6 despite Westbrook/Durant/Ibaka combining for 81/25/13/7/7. Yeah, they weren't dominant every single game. But they were good enough to deserve being the favorites going into the finals.

Really the only team that could've taken out the Spurs at their best, in the form they were at the later end of the playoffs, was OKC with a fully healthy and defensively dominant Ibaka, and Durant/Westbrook playing at their absolute best. Only team in the league with the firepower to match that Spurs team. And obviously Durant was underwhelming, and Ibaka in the 4 games he played was exceptional in just 1.

3ball

09-25-2014, 02:06 AM

As I said..they got their shit together in game 7 against Dallas. They stomped Dallas in that game, took a shit on Portland the whole series, then had a somewhat tough series against OKC. 2 straight blowouts, then had to readjust their game plan after Ibaka came back..which they did, by destroying OKC in game 5 by almost 30 with Ibaka, and then holding off OKC in game 6 despite Westbrook/Durant/Ibaka combining for 81/25/13/7/7. Yeah, they weren't dominant every single game. But they were good enough to deserve being the favorites going into the finals.

Really the only team that could've taken out the Spurs at their best, in the form they were at the later end of the playoffs, was OKC with a fully healthy and defensively dominant Ibaka, and Durant/Westbrook playing at their absolute best. Only team in the league with the firepower to match that Spurs team. And obviously Durant was underwhelming, and Ibaka in the 4 games he played was exceptional in just 1.
you said the spurs ran through the west... they did NOT.

you can make all the excuses you want for them, but nothing you said changes that.

however, there actually have been other teams, TRULY dominant teams, that HAVE run roughshod through their conference by either not losing at all, or barely losing on their way to the Finals.. this spurs team was NOT one of them.

also, remember that SEVERAL teams out of the west would have also beaten the heat - the spurs obviously, OKC, Dallas and Clippers... they all beat the heat... heck, maybe houston and portland too - the spurs didn't beat portland as bad as they did the heat.

THAT's why the spurs played so much better in the Finals then they did against any other opponent - all of a sudden there was a major drop-off in competition when they played the eastern conference... just facts... :confusedshrug:

aj1987

09-25-2014, 02:16 AM

you said the spurs ran through the west... they did NOT.

you can make all the excuses you want for them, but nothing you said changes that.

however, there actually have been other teams, TRULY dominant teams, that HAVE run roughshod through their conference by either not losing at all, or barely losing on their way to the Finals.. this spurs team was NOT one of them.

also, remember that SEVERAL teams out of the west would have also beaten the heat - the spurs obviously, OKC, Dallas and Clippers... they all beat the heat... heck, maybe houston and portland too - the spurs didn't beat portland as bad as they did the heat.

THAT's why the spurs played so much better in the Finals then they did against any other opponent - all of a sudden there was a major drop-off in competition when they played the eastern conference... just facts... :confusedshrug:
I think you should stick to MJ topics. :facepalm

:oldlol: @ the '14 Mavs and Clips beating the Heat.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 02:18 AM

you said the spurs ran through the west... they did NOT.

you can make all the excuses you want for them, but nothing you said changes that.

however, there actually have been other teams, TRULY dominant teams, that HAVE run roughshod through their conference by either not losing at all, or barely losing on their way to the Finals.. this spurs team was NOT one of them.

also, remember that SEVERAL teams out of the west would have also beaten the heat - the spurs obviously, OKC, Dallas and Clippers... they all beat the heat... heck, maybe houston and portland too - the spurs didn't beat portland as bad as they did the heat.

THAT's why the spurs played so much better in the Finals then they did against any other opponent - all of a sudden there was a major drop-off in competition when they played the eastern conference... just facts... :confusedshrug:
Literally all this post does is further prove why the Heat shouldn't have been the favorite in the finals. Complete contradiction.

Multiple teams in the West could've taken out Miami?

So the Spurs came out of that brutal conference, with teams that could've also beat Miami as you stated, with 8 out of 18 games played being blowouts? 44%..you could count on them destroying the opposing team almost every other game.

And yet they're still not the favorites?

3ball

09-25-2014, 02:22 AM

I think you should stick to MJ topics. :facepalm

:oldlol: @ the '14 Mavs and Clips beating the Heat.
my post makes a ton of sense... the 2014 mavs would have destroyed the heat... it would have been amazing because just like 2011, it would have been unexpected and Dirk would own Lebron again.

you DO realize that the heat got beat worse than anyone in Finals history right?... that's a far cry from taking the Spurs 7 games.

the spurs beat the Heat way worse than anyone they faced - so it isn't illogical at all to say that several western conference teams would have beaten the heat... it's quite logical.

AnaheimLakers24

09-25-2014, 02:22 AM

boring cheaters/10

or 2/5

3ball

09-25-2014, 02:27 AM

Literally all this post does is further prove why the Heat shouldn't have been the favorite in the finals. Complete contradiction.

Multiple teams in the West could've taken out Miami?

So the Spurs came out of that brutal conference, with teams that could've also beat Miami as you stated, with 8 out of 18 games played being blowouts? 44%..you could count on them destroying the opposing team almost every other game.

And yet they're still not the favorites?
no one knew the heat's talent was that underutilized and would underperform that severely in the Finals...

that's the beauty of it - the heat were EXPOSED in the Finals... it amazes me how after getting beat worse than anyone in history, fans still are in denial about this.... the loss wasn't due to a talent deficit - ray allen, chalmers, cole and birdman are more talented than patty mills, diaw and the like in Spur-land... the historic loss was due to a strategic and chemistry inferiority.. the Spurs had thoroughly figured the Heat out, after being historically motivated and learning from last year's heartbreak.

you have to understand, the Spurs only played great offensively against the Heat... only the Heat... all their other opponents held them in check..

Not only were the Heat the only team to allow the Spurs play great offensively, but the Heat's offense happened to score by far the least points of any Spurs opponent - the Heat's horrible offense actually hurt them as as much as their defense.

A better offense can limit the Spurs offensive momentum by not letting the Spurs get consecutive buckets all the time, which gets their confidence, adrenaline, optimism and energy going - it's easier to score (or do anything) with those things... It's easier for a fighter to have confidence to go in for the kill if he knows he isn't getting hit back, or to keep beating the crap out of a helpless victim with increasing intensity..

It's not a coincidence that the Spurs could do these things and have more confidence and a better offense against the Heat than anyone else - the Heat's offense was the most limp and therefore could curb the Spurs' momentum the least.. So no surprise that the Spurs momentum boiled over and made it harder for the Heat's defense than it would have if the Heat's offense didn't generate by far the least number of points of any Spurs opponent.

So the Heat's offense was figured out by the Spurs, who had been heartbroken the previous year, and the Heat's suboptimal offense got exposed in the Finals... This is a fact.

And this is what Chalmers refers to when he says he'll be better next year - he feels he'll get to playmake more, which is better than his normal spot-duty, sporadically-used ball-handler he was last year... So the Heat's offense might be a little worse overall, but it will be better utilized than when Lebron's need to play on-ball a little too much prevented players from playing to their strengths... And you never know, the Heat offense might not end up being a little worse next year - it should be interesting with Bosh getting bumped up to permanent #2 status and probably more than just a floor-spreader... and of course with Wade's health and new status as the lead guy again.
.

houston

09-25-2014, 02:30 AM

I give it a grade C. Wade and Lebron failed each other just winning 2 chips is a failure

SamuraiSWISH

09-25-2014, 02:32 AM

Sincerity? I can't go higher than a C+ with context.

On paper, it's fantastic they won back to back championships. Who can hate on actual rings? If it is just based on that then I'd give them a solid B.

In reality? They gave one away in 2011 that should've been theirs. Then the Heat's 2012 ring came in a lock out season. Quality, but should be noted. In 2013 they had a miracle series saving shot, and an epic choke job from the opposition in order to win. Kind of flukey in retrospect. Especially considering in the rubber band match in 2014 they got throttled by that same team. Only this time no gag jobs.

Making 4 straight Finals is amazing. A true feat, never done in the modern era. Then the devil reveals itself in the details. Their road within conference to the Finals:

2011 East was very good
2012 East was average
2013 East was terrible
2013 East was pathetic

Then you add in the fact it was 3x players (2x MVP caliber) from the same draft class, roughly the same age, roughly the same overlapping peaks / primes colluding to stack the deck to win, verbatim as they explain in essence as easily as possible.

"Not 6, not 7, not 8."

And 2 out of 4, damn near 1 out of 4 just isn't cutting it. Not with that amount of talent, not in that putrid conference. In fact, it's actually kind of bad. Their C+ score is only redeemed by the fact they did win 2 in a row, because Duncan / Spurs choked in 2013. They also weren't near as dominant, regular or post season as would've been expected in that summer of 2010.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 02:43 AM

no one knew the heat's talent was that underutilized and would underperform that severely in the Finals...
Underutilized talent was not the only reason. If you're banking on 39 year old Ray Allen, Mario ****ing Chalmers, 36 year old Birdman, 35 year old Rashard Lewis, etc. to give you significant production, I don't know where you're setting your standards for talent. They were old and worn out..as an MJ fan you should know that not everyone is MJ, and that mental and physical exhaustion, along with age, are very real things in the NBA.

that's the beauty of it - the heat were EXPOSED in the Finals... it amazes me how after getting beat worse than anyone in history, fans still are in denial about this.... the loss wasn't due to a talent deficit - ray allen, chalmers, cole and birdman are more talented than patty mills, diaw and the like in Spur-land... it was due to a strategic and chemistry inferiority.
Again, acting like Mario Chalmers, Norris Cole, and grandfather Ray Allen are these insane talents levels above the Spurs players, is just delusional.

Boris Diaw can ball. I don't care what your initial thought is when his name is brought up..but the dude can play, period. I'd take him on my team over every single player on the Heat except for the big 3 and it's not even that close for everyone else.

And even if the Heat WERE more talented, why are we acting like talent has never been beaten before in the NBA? The Spurs were the better TEAM. A better team can still be favored over a better roster.

the Spurs only played great offensively against the Heat... only the Heat... all their other opponents held them in check..
More revisionist history. The Spurs raped the Blazers, and aside from 2 surprise games with Ibaka coming back and making them readjust their game plan, they were clearly the better team against OKC, with 3 of their 4 wins being slaughters.

Please stop acting like the Spurs were just your run of the mill contender..they weren't. They were a special team, and the only team that made them look less than that was Dallas, when the Spurs were clearly playing below their standards.

Not only were the Heat the only team to allow the Spurs play great offensively, but the Heat's offense happened to score by far the least points of any Spurs opponent - this worst offense actually hurt them as as much as their defense and in more ways than the obvious.
This wouldn't happen be because Wade was a shell of himself physically, and 4 of their 6 biggest contributors after the big 3 being 35 years old, would it?

A better offense can limit the Spurs offensive momentum by not letting the Spurs get consecutive buckets all the time, which gets their confidence, adrenaline, optimism and energy going - it's easier to score (or do anything) with those things... It's easier for a fighter to have confidence to go in for the kill if he knows he isn't getting hit back, or to keep beating the crap out of a helpless victim with increasing intensity..

It's not a coincidence that the Spurs could do these things and have more confidence and a better offense against the Heat than anyone else - the Heat's offense was the most limp and therefore could curb the Spurs' momentum the least.. So no surprise that the Spurs momentum boiled over and made it harder for the Heat's defense than it would have if the Heat's offense didn't generate by far the least number of points of any Spurs opponent.
Again, I have no idea what you're actually trying to argue. The Heat were old, slow, and totally devoid of any real, TALENTED firepower outside of Lebron. Bosh was trash for "all-star PF" standards and Wade looked like a fringe NBA player at times, not one of the greatest 2 guards ever.

You're totally wrong that the Heat had a ton of talent, and you're arguing that their offensive system was critically flawed...combine the two...and can you seriously not see how calling them the favorites makes no sense?

And this is what Chalmers refers to when he says he'll be better next year - he feels he'll get to playmake more, which is better than his normal spot-duty, sporadically-used ball-handler he was last year... So the Heat's offense might be a little worse overall, but it will be better utilized than when Lebron's need to play on-ball a little too much prevented players from playing to their strengths... And you never know, the Heat offense might not end up being a little worse next year - it should be interesting with Bosh getting bumped up to permanent #2 status and probably more than just a floor-spreader... and of course with Wade's health and new status as the lead guy again.
.
Pretty eloquent way of saying "Lebronball sucks."

Their offense is going to take a hit. If you're seriously expecting Chalmers to step up big time, I don't know what to tell you.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 02:44 AM

my post makes a ton of sense... the 2014 mavs would have destroyed the heat... it would have been amazing because just like 2011, it would have been unexpected and Dirk would own Lebron again.

you DO realize that the heat got beat worse than anyone in Finals history right?... that's a far cry from taking the Spurs 7 games.

the spurs beat the Heat way worse than anyone they faced - so it isn't illogical at all to say that several western conference teams would have beaten the heat... it's quite logical.
:roll: :roll:

Are you actually being serious? I'll just repost Milbuck's previous post.

As I said..they got their shit together in game 7 against Dallas. They stomped Dallas in that game, took a shit on Portland the whole series, then had a somewhat tough series against OKC. 2 straight blowouts, then had to readjust their game plan after Ibaka came back..which they did, by destroying OKC in game 5 by almost 30 with Ibaka, and then holding off OKC in game 6 despite Westbrook/Durant/Ibaka combining for 81/25/13/7/7. Yeah, they weren't dominant every single game. But they were good enough to deserve being the favorites going into the finals.

Really the only team that could've taken out the Spurs at their best, in the form they were at the later end of the playoffs, was OKC with a fully healthy and defensively dominant Ibaka, and Durant/Westbrook playing at their absolute best. Only team in the league with the firepower to match that Spurs team. And obviously Durant was underwhelming, and Ibaka in the 4 games he played was exceptional in just 1.

The Mavs and Clips didn't have the ball movement and the defense the Spurs had. Who's gonna guard Wade, Bosh, and LeBron? Neither of those teams have a defender on Kawhi's level.

the loss wasn't due to a talent deficit - ray allen, chalmers, cole and birdman are more talented than patty mills, diaw and the like in Spur-land

Did you just compare Miami's starting PG to the Spurs' backup PG? Manu, Timmy, Kawhi, Green, Parker, Diaw, etc.. Those guys aren't talented? :facepalm

As I said, stick to MJ topics.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 02:51 AM

The Mavs and Clips didn't have the ball movement and the defense the Spurs had. Who's gonna guard Wade, Bosh, and LeBron? Neither of those teams have a defender on Kawhi's level.
Never said either of those teams would beat Miami. Definitely wouldn't favor the Mavs. Clippers...I don't know. I'd probably give Lebron's team the edge because he's Lebron, but Blake and DJ would be really tough to deal with for Miami, and CP3 would destroy Chalmers. Lebron would undoubtedly get his but I have no idea which version of Wade and Bosh would've showed up.

JT123

09-25-2014, 02:51 AM

the loss wasn't due to a talent deficit - ray allen, chalmers, cole and birdman are more talented than patty mills, diaw and the like in Spur-land...
So you would honestly take Chalmers and Cole over Mills and Diaw? :biggums: :roll: :roll: :roll:
You started off okay, but your trolling is getting a little too obvious now. Just letting you know. :cheers:

chazzy

09-25-2014, 03:15 AM

You started off okay, but your trolling is getting a little too obvious now. Just letting you know. :cheers:
But in your case, you were never okay

3ball

09-25-2014, 03:23 AM

And even if the Heat WERE more talented, why are we acting like talent has never been beaten before in the NBA? The Spurs were the better TEAM. A better team can still be favored over a better roster.

When the talent is not a factor, what makes one team lose?... It's because the talent of that team is suboptimally utilized compared to the other team - but WHY was the Heat's talent suboptimally utilized??

Here's why - The offense is set up for Lebron to do his thing, for him to shoot awesome and get his... but for that to happen, everyone else has to play out of their comfort zone and isn't allowed to play to their strengths...THIS IS A FACT... Bosh has to play floor-spreader.... Chalmers doesn't get to playmake and also has to play floor-spreader... Wade has to play off-ball when his strength is the primary ballhandler role.

This worked for a couple years, first against the super-inexperienced baby of a team in OKC, and then they got kind of lucky and escaped the next year due to the very Ray Allen that you bash... but in 2014, they were exposed for this suboptimal use of their talent.... completely exposed.. :confusedshrug:

More revisionist history.

No not revisionist history - the Spurs had a 120.8 Ortg against the Heat... The best the Spurs did against anyone else was a 114.4 Ortg... sorry buddy.. the East was just THAT bad... :confusedshrug:

The Spurs were a special team, and the only team that made them look less than that was Dallas.

OKC made them look less too... don't leave them out... and remember, the best the Spurs did against anyone ELSE was 114.4 Ortg... but against the Heat, they got a whopping 120.8 Ortg.. that's the drop-off the Spurs enjoyed when they played the East - it must have been like "Oh wow, a junior high team"... :lol

The Heat's bad offense wouldn't happen to be because Wade was a shell of himself physically, and 4 of their 6 biggest contributors after the big 3 being 35 years old, would it?

No, the Heat's bad offense had to do with the aforementioned suboptimal use of talent and lack of synergy within the team.. Also, after last year's heartbreak, the Spurs were determined to get revenge and FIGURE OUT the Heat... They clearly did.

But another thing you have to understand - Lebron averaged 28ppg on 57%.... BUT THAT'S IT... he only averaged 4 assists per game and had as many turnovers as assists, so HIS PASSING ADDED NOTHING.

28ppg with NOTHING ELSE (including letting your defensive assignment get Finals MVP), is NOT elite, it is not all-time great, it's not even that good period... so stop acting like Lebron played super-great... he DIDN'T.. that would be the worst Finals performance of Jordan's career.

The Spurs simply figured the Heat out, including Lebron - one of the ways they figured out Lebron was to understand his aversion to risk - he hates to take a lot of shots and he avoids tough shots.... so with the threat of Lebron taking a lot of shots not there, the Spurs could stay at home on his teammates and play him straight up, knowing he would still only get 28ppg and take the same number of shots... This is one of the main reasons the supporting cast didn't play well - the Spurs D was on them like white on rice because Lebron's "safe" style didn't attract enough defensive attention to free up teammates... But it allowed him to shoot 57% so it's all good right?
.

2swift4u

09-25-2014, 03:33 AM

4/5.

4 straight finals and 2 chips & a 27 games winning streak are some great accomplishments.

However they should have won the 2011 chip as well. they really blew that series against Dallas. Last year no team would have beaten San Antonio so I don't really blame them.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 03:33 AM

Good god 3ball. You are spitting pure delusion post after post.

You seriously think the Heat were substantially more talented than the Spurs...and were just "underutilized"?

Yes, if they had better used the supremely talented Mario Chalmers, Norris Cole, Chris Andersen, grandpa Ray, and Haslem/Battier/Lewis, they would've won. Who would've predicted an all-star group of guys like that would've sucked so much ass against a legitimate championship caliber team?

And now that we've drifted pretty damn far from the actual argument, let me bring it back and ask you my question from the start, which you've pretty much ran around for several posts now...

If the Heat were feasting on a wack ass conference, and were fundamentally flawed in how they used their guys, why the **** should they have been the favorites going into the finals against a team that got past a brutally tough conference that you explicitly stated had multiple teams that would've beaten the Heat?

aj1987

09-25-2014, 03:38 AM

Never said either of those teams would beat Miami. Definitely wouldn't favor the Mavs. Clippers...I don't know. I'd probably give Lebron's team the edge because he's Lebron, but Blake and DJ would be really tough to deal with for Miami, and CP3 would destroy Chalmers. Lebron would undoubtedly get his but I have no idea which version of Wade and Bosh would've showed up.
That was in response to 3ball saying that the Mav's and Clips would've destroyed the Heat. Was just using your post in response to him saying the Mav's would destroyed the Heat because they took the Spurs to 7. Wrong placement is all.

But another thing you have to understand - Lebron averaged 28ppg on 57%.... BUT THAT'S IT... he only averaged 4 assists per game and had as many turnovers as assists, so HIS PASSING ADDED NOTHING.
He didn't get more assists because the team sucked ass. Wade's and Bosh's offense was non-existant. The PG's were a liability. They were a net negative. The bench was 3948739 years old on average. His passing would've probably added something if his teammates made their shots. Anyways, I've said this before. offense wasn't the problem. The defense was. The Heat sucked ass defensively. Also, Kawhi was hitting some ridiculous shots. He went '13 Danny Green on the Heat.

28ppg with NOTHING ELSE (including letting your defensive assignment get Finals MVP), is NOT elite, it is not all-time great, it's not even that good period... so stop acting like Lebron played super-great... he DIDN'T.. that would be the worst Finals performance of Jordan's career.
28/8/4/2 on 68% TS is not elite?

Again with the Jordan shit. Nobody gives a shit dude. Why are you bringing up Jordan? Are you that insecure?

3ball

09-25-2014, 03:40 AM

Millbuck, i disproved every single one of your claims.

you said the spurs crushed everyone offensively - falsehood fueled by severe denial and bias - they had a 120.8 Ortg against the Heat and only 114.4 against the next highest opponent.

you thought lebron played great in the finals... i showed you that he actually didn't and how his "safe" style got exploited.

i also showed you how lebron's style and pursuit of high efficiency comes at a cost of everyone else having to sacrifice their games to get Lebron off... :confusedshrug:

then, after limiting everyone's game for a few years and overpromising, he bolts again in search of better talent.... :facepalm ... lebron doesn't have a leg to stand on.

JT123

09-25-2014, 03:43 AM

But in your case, you were never okay
Ouch. Don't be so mean chazzy. :(

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 03:44 AM

Millbuck, i disproved every single one of your claims.

you said the spurs crushed everyone offensively - falsehood - they had a 120.8 Ortg against the Heat and only 114.4 against the next highest opponent.

you thought lebron played great in the finals... i showed you that he did not and that his safe style got exploited.

i also showed you how lebron's style and pursuit of high efficiency comes at a cost of everyone else having to sacrifice their games to get Lebron off... :confusedshrug:

then, after limiting everyone's game for a few years, he bolts again in search of better talent.... :facepalm ... lebron doesn't have a leg to stand on.
No, you actually didn't disprove a damn thing.

You ran around every single argument I made with a totally irrelevant point, mostly a more sophisticated version of the "Lebronball sucks" argument that you'd expect from blatant trolls.

And once again, you completely avoided my question, the question that started this entire back and forth.

3ball

09-25-2014, 03:46 AM

No, you actually didn't disprove a damn thing.

You ran around every single argument I made with a totally irrelevant point, mostly a more sophisticated version of the "Lebronball sucks" argument that you'd expect from blatant trolls.

And once again, you completely avoided my question, the question that started this entire back and forth.
you said the spurs destroyed EVERYONE offensively... i definitely proved that this was false.

the Spurs offense clearly only went crazy against the Heat, and the Heat only.

right there, your post loses all credibility... can't argue with numbers.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 03:53 AM

you said the spurs destroyed EVERYONE offensively... i definitely proved that this was false.

the Spurs offense clearly only went crazy against the Heat, and the Heat only.

right there, your post loses all credibility... can't argue with numbers.
What a surprise, you spew more bullshit and twist words.

I said they turned their game up to another level in game 7 against Dallas and were clearly the best team in basketball after that point....which is exactly what happened, when they slaughtered Dallas in that game. And then crushed the Blazers. And then destroyed OKC in back to back games, and lost 2 games when Ibaka's return made them completely alter their game plan...and then proceeded to figure out OKC again and destroy them a third time. And they closed the series out despite Westbrook/Durant/Ibaka going OFF.

They played 18 games in the WC playoffs. 8 of those games were blowout wins. That means they were destroying the opposition damn near every other game they played. And that was in a brutally tough conference that YOU said had multiple teams, including the ****ing 8th seed, could've taken out Miami.

That's not 2001 Lakers domination, but that's pretty damn impressive.

Answer this question.

If the Heat were feasting on a wack ass conference, and were fundamentally flawed in how they used their guys, why the **** should they have been the favorites going into the finals against a team that got past a brutally tough conference that you explicitly stated had multiple teams that would've beaten the Heat?
Enough with the irrelevant arguments. Either answer the question with a direct response that clearly addresses the question, or just come out and say you have no ****ing idea what you're talking about.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 03:54 AM

you said the spurs destroyed EVERYONE offensively... i definitely proved that this was false.

the Spurs offense clearly only went crazy against the Heat, and the Heat only.

right there, your post loses all credibility... can't argue with numbers.
Spurs RS ORTG - 110.5
1st Round - 113.1
Semis - 113.1
WCF - 114.4

They were above their ORTG against every team.

Spurs RS PPG - 105.4
1st Round - 103.1
Semis - 108.8
WCF - 108.7
Finals - 105.6

Also, doesn't that prove that Miami's DEFENSE and not its offense was the main problem? Way to contradict yourself there.

3ball

09-25-2014, 03:56 AM

oh one more reason why the Heat's offense was the worst of any Spurs opponent (other than the Heat's suboptimal use of talent, the Heat sacrificing team chemistry and making guys play out of their comfort zone to make sure Lebron gets his, and the Spurs thoroughly figuring out the Heat and Lebron's basic style/gameplan)....

Lebron didn't shoot enough.... :confusedshrug:

In 21 out of the 24 years since 1991, the team leader in shot attempts (#1 option) on the Finals-winning team took more than 25.56% of the team's shots - which means that the load Lebron took on in 2014 Finals (25.56% of his team's shots) was not a large load, and the notion that he couldn't have done more, or that no one else would have done more, is wrong - 21 out of the last 24 did more.

The data clearly shows that it's reasonable to ask Lebron to take more shots - it WAS feasible - and since it was feasible and his team needed it, he should be blamed for not providing it.

The Heat needed it because they had the worst offense of any Spurs opponent - and even though the media ignores this fact, the Heat's offense hurt them as much as their defense.

Various plays can be easier or tougher for a team based on the level of confidence, optimism, energy, adrenaline, etc that they have at the time of the play - said another way, momentum... The Heat's bad offense and inability to answer the Spurs buckets contributed to the Spurs' momentum and the way the games progressed as much as bad defense... The Heat's defense had a harder job due to their bad offense that couldn't limit the Spurs momentum.

A more consistent effort throughout the games from Lebron would have made the difference in limiting the Spurs momentum - the only games the Heat had a chance to win were Games 1 and 2, where he was either on pace for, or actually got 35 points on 22 shots exactly - all coming when it mattered.

So people don't really know what they are talking about when they say it wouldn't have mattered if Lebron had shot more (like he did in Games 1 and 2)... They don't realize that 6 or 7 more ppg from Lebron doesn't just add to the Heat's offense, it makes their defense better too.. Dallas, OKC and Portland all had better offenses that could limit Spurs momentum to make it easier on their defense, and consequently, they all did better vs the Spurs than the Heat.

But despite it being both feasible for Lebron to take on a larger load (4th smallest load in 24 years) and necessary (the Heat had the worst offense which hurt them as much as bad defense) Lebron opted to continue his high efficiency, low-shot-attempt style like a fat cat on Wallstreet, hoarding his FG% and low-risk load like profits during an economic meltdown - but this approach failed to disrupt the Spurs defense or attract sufficient defensive attention to free up his teammates.

So I'll ask again - since when does a guy that didn't pass (turnovers equaled his assists) or play defense (blew his assignment on the Finals MVP) or take on a large load (4th smallest in 24 years) - so he basically just GOT HIS in a blowout loss - get to walk away without any blame?.. only when it makes monetary sense to keep up the MJ comparisons.
.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 03:57 AM

Also, doesn't that prove that Miami's DEFENSE and not its offense was the main problem? Way to contradict yourself there.
The dude is scrambling hard, he has no idea where he's going with his points or what he's actually arguing.

On one hand he NEEDS to argue that Lebron's Heat were the favorites going into the finals, to push his bullshit "greats don't lose as favorites" agenda..which is what I originally called him out on.

And then he proceeds to contradict EVERYTHING about that.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 03:58 AM

3ball. Answer the question.

If the Heat were feasting on a wack ass conference, and were fundamentally flawed in how they used their guys, why the **** should they have been the favorites going into the finals against a team that got past a brutally tough conference that you explicitly stated had multiple teams that would've beaten the Heat?

This whole argument started because of your retarded agenda about Lebron losing with his team being the favorites.

Stand your ground and argue your point, and stop squirming around it with the same recycled garbage you post in every other thread.

JT123

09-25-2014, 04:01 AM

3ball is trolling the shit outta these dudes. :oldlol:
I can't tell if they are just bored, or if they actually expect to get reasonable unbiased responses out of him.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 04:03 AM

3ball is trolling the shit outta these dudes. :oldlol:
I can't tell if they are just bored, or if they actually expect to get reasonable unbiased responses out of him.
Considering I don't know who the **** he is, and also considering he can actually put together some semblance of a coherent argument...as flawed as it may be...he didn't come off as a blatant troll.

3ball

09-25-2014, 04:13 AM

3ball. Answer the question.

I answered this question, but maybe my posts are too involved for you to be able to read them in their entirety.

If the Heat were feasting on a wack ass conference, and were fundamentally flawed in how they used their guys, why the **** should they have been the favorites going into the finals against a team that got past a brutally tough conference that you explicitly stated had multiple teams that would've beaten the Heat?

The answer is obvious and one I stated previously - how could anyone know the Spurs were going to expose the Heat?

We only found out how fundamentally flawed the Heat were after the Spurs beat them... Up until then, everyone thought Lebron was like Jordan and would 3-peat... pretty dumb in hindsight right?
.

Milbuck

09-25-2014, 04:19 AM

3ball is trolling the shit outta these dudes. :oldlol:
Yeah, you were right.

JT123

09-25-2014, 04:31 AM

Yeah, you were right.
That should have been obvious as soon as he claimed Chalmers, Cole, and 40 year old Ray Allen were better than the Spurs role players. :oldlol:
Prior to that he was doing a pretty good job of low key trolling.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 05:41 AM

In 21 out of the 24 years since 1991, the team leader in shot attempts (#1 option) on the Finals-winning team took more than 25.56% of the team's shots - which means that the load Lebron took on in 2014 Finals (25.56% of his team's shots) was not a large load
.
Wrong again, dumbass. KG took 22.62% of the shots.

Lets do it year by year:

2014 - 25.56%
2013 - 26.26%
2012 - 28.12%
2011 - 28.66%
2010 - 30.52%
2009 - 32.45%
2008 - 22.62%
2007 - 25.69% (0.13% difference)
2006 - 31.80%
2005 - 25.64% (0.08% difference)
2004 - 25.13%
2003 - 24.38% (Didn't Duncan carry hi team in '03?)
2002 - 29.06%
2001 - 28.27%
2000 - 30.66%
1999 - 28.18%
1998 - 36.20%
1997 - 35.18%
1996 - 25.94% (0.34% difference)
1995 - 33.81%
1994 - 28.68%
1993 - 36.58%
1992 - 32.21%
1991 - 27.97%

Three 3 took a fewer % of shots than LeBron. Not only that, most of them are within 0.1%-4% of LeBron. Not a huge difference. Why stop at '91 though? Lets go back a few more years and make it an even 1980.

1990 - 22.11%
1989 - 20.82%
1988 - 22.59%
1987 - 22.42%
1986 - 21.40%
1985 - 20.44%
1984 - 19.36%
1983 - 20.05%
1982 - 20.87%
1981 - 18.23%
1980 - 24.09%

Is there a reason why you chose to arbitrarily cut off the year at 1991?

3ball

09-25-2014, 05:47 AM

Wrong again, dumbass. KG took 22.62% of the shots.

Lets do it year by year:

2014 - 25.56%
2013 - 26.26%
2012 - 28.12%
2011 - 28.66%
2010 - 30.52%
2009 - 32.45%
2008 - 22.62%
2007 - 25.69% (0.13% difference)
2006 - 31.80%
2005 - 25.64% (0.08% difference)
2004 - 25.13%
2003 - 24.38% (Didn't Duncan carry hi team in '03?)
2002 - 29.06%
2001 - 28.27%
2000 - 30.66%
1999 - 28.18%
1998 - 36.20%
1997 - 35.18%
1996 - 25.94% (0.34% difference)
1995 - 33.81%
1994 - 28.68%
1993 - 36.58%
1992 - 32.21%
1991 - 27.97%

Three 3 took a fewer % of shots than LeBron. Not only that, most of them are within 0.1%-4% of LeBron. Not a huge difference. Why stop at '91 though? Lets go back a few more years and make it an even 1980.

1990 - 22.11%
1989 - 20.82%
1988 - 22.59%
1987 - 22.42%
1986 - 21.40%
1985 - 20.44%
1984 - 19.36%
1983 - 20.05%
1982 - 20.87%
1981 - 18.23%
1980 - 24.09%

Is there a reason why you chose to arbitrarily cut off the year at 1991?
Uhhhhh.... so let me get this straight.... you DON'T DISAGREE WITH MY NUMBERS...

Lebron tried to win a Finals by taking what would have been the 4th smallest load of any #1 option in the last 24 years.... YOU CONCUR WITH THIS.

Why bring up what people were doing before 1991, before Jordan changed the way the game was played (people thinking you needed a dominant inside presence to win)?

Lebron tried to undertake the 4th smallest load in the last 24 years.. and you agree with this, so there's nothing to talk about other than to agree that he should have shot more.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 05:52 AM

Uhhhhh.... so let me get this straight.... you DON'T DISAGREE WITH MY NUMBERS...

Lebron tried to win a Finals by taking what would have been the 4th smallest load of any #1 option in the last 24 years.... YOU CONCUR WITH THIS.

Why bring up what people were doing before 1991, before Jordan changed the way the game was played (people thinking you needed a dominant inside presence to win)?

Lebron tried to undertake the 4th smallest load in the last 24 years.. and you agree with this, so there's nothing to talk about other than to agree that he should have shot more.
:facepalm

TP took a team high of 20.16%. Guess which team won.

Please stop posting, dude. You're just embarrassing yourself.

3ball

09-25-2014, 05:54 AM

If the Heat were feasting on a wack ass conference, and were fundamentally flawed in how they used their guys, why the **** should they have been the favorites going into the finals against a team that got past a brutally tough conference that you explicitly stated had multiple teams that would've beaten the Heat?

Yeah, you were right.
Let me try to explain again..

As you can see at the bottom, many people favored the Heat... so why were they favored when I've been saying they were just feasting on a historically weak conference and using their guys suboptimally?

Since the reports below show that half of the public and media thought the Heat would win, it's clear that those people DIDN'T KNOW that the Spurs were going to thoroughly destroy and expose the Heat... They obviously DIDN'T KNOW the Heat used their guys suboptimally or the extent of the conference's weakness, and must have at least thought the Heat were the one shining jewel of the conference.

They only learned the truth about the Heat's flaws and the extent of the conference's apparent weakness after seeing the Spurs play so much better against the Heat than they did against anyone else before that (by putting up a 120.8 Ortg against the Heat and only a high of 114.4 against anyone else).

So obviously, the Spurs were playing a far crappier team than they had faced up until that point, but we didn't know that until the series started and the Spurs were able to play so much better than they had against anyone previously.

Is that a better explanation??.. I thought I had said that the first time when I said "the Spurs exposed the Heat", meaning they revealed to us how bad the Heat were.

Media Reports of 2014 Finals Predictions

52% of 61,000 survey respondants on Bleacher Report said the Heat would beat the Spurs... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2082513-san-antonio-spurs-vs-miami-heat-2014-nba-finals-preview-and-predictions

USA Today was split evenly down the line on who would win.... http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/playoffs/2014/06/01/finals-predictions-san-antonio-spurs-vs-miami-heat/9844993/

47% of espn analysts said the Heat would beat the Spurs.. http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/11031913/nba-finals-forecast

7 of 14 experts from Yahoo, Sports Illustrated, and CBS Sports said the Heat would beat the Spurs... http://www.nj.com/knicks/index.ssf/2014/06/nba_finals_2014_experts_predict_whether_the_heat_o r_spurs_will_come_out_on_top_in_the_finals_rematch .html
.

3ball

09-25-2014, 05:55 AM

:facepalm

TP took a team high of 20.16%. Guess which team won.

Please stop posting, dude. You're just embarrassing yourself.
what are you talking about?

lebron took the 4th smallest load in the last 24 years...

are you saying it's the 5th smallest?... okay.. fine... the 5th smallest.. lebron tried to undertake what would have been the 5th smallest load in 24 years...

anything else?.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 06:05 AM

what are you talking about?

lebron took the 4th smallest load in the last 24 years...

are you saying it's the 5th smallest?... okay.. fine... the 5th smallest.. lebron tried to undertake what would have been the 5th smallest load in 24 years...

anything else?.
What's your point? 4 players did it already. Most of the others are within 0.1-3% of 25.56% anyways. You don't beat a team like the Spurs with a single player averaging 40PPG a game on 45%. You need good defense and role-players to hit their shots. Neither of those two happened. Also, LeBron taking ill-advised shots would be detrimental to the team as Miami is a shitty rebounding team. How hard is that to understand?

JebronLames

09-25-2014, 06:05 AM

More like a big 1 era: LeBron James

DCL

09-25-2014, 06:10 AM

spurs almost made it 1/5 for lebron if it wasn't for ray allen

3ball

09-25-2014, 06:16 AM

What's your point? 4 players did it already. Most of the others are within 0.1-3% of 25.56% anyways. You don't beat a team like the Spurs with a single player averaging 40PPG a game on 45%. You need good defense and role-players to hit their shots. Neither of those two happened. Also, LeBron taking ill-advised shots would be detrimental to the team as Miami is a shitty rebounding team. How hard is that to understand?
Nah, Lebron's 28ppg with NO PASSING and NO DEFENSE is not a very good performance for a supposed all-time great player.... great players are held to higher standards than normal guys - don't hold Lebron to normal-guy standards.

Also, guys like Bosh, Wade and Chalmers played out of their comfort zone specifically so that Lebron could play IN HIS comfort zone to get those 28ppg.... and my point is that the return Lebron gave them for sacrificing was not sufficient - if Lebron is only going to get 28ppg with nothing else, than why not let those guys play to THEIR strengths (Bosh posting, Wade as primary ballhandler, Chalmer getting to playmake more) and Lebron just fit in off-ball and get his 28ppg that way?... It's because his off-ball game isn't good enough to play primarily off-ball without his production dropping off - so Lebron has to do it HIS way, and other players have to fit in around HIM... No wonder this approach eventually got figured out and destroyed.

And if he can't play primarily off-ball so those guys can play to their strengths, than why not go for broke and drop 41ppg like Jordan did in the 1993 Finals or average 27 shots per game like he did in the 1998 finals when Pippen and rodman were MIA???... But no, he's not good enough to do that either.. :confusedshrug:

Warfan

09-25-2014, 06:18 AM

spurs almost made it 1/5 for lebron if it wasn't for ray allen

Great insight, astounding conclusion :applause:

What's your point? 4 players did it already. Most of the others are within 0.1-3% of 25.56% anyways. You don't beat a team like the Spurs with a single player averaging 40PPG a game on 45%. You need good defense and role-players to hit their shots. Neither of those two happened. Also, LeBron taking ill-advised shots would be detrimental to the team as Miami is a shitty rebounding team. How hard is that to understand?

I agree for the most part, but bron didnt show up or play well enough in key quarters/halves in the last 3 games. The only game where he managed to play great throughout was game 2.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 07:15 AM

Nah, Lebron's 28ppg with NO PASSING and NO DEFENSE is not a very good performance for a supposed all-time great player.... great players are held to higher standards than normal guys - don't hold Lebron to normal-guy standards.
As I said, he would have MORE assists, if the role-players hit their shots. God, you're dense. No defense? He was average to above average on the defensive end.

Also, guys like Bosh, Wade and Chalmers played out of their comfort zone specifically so that Lebron could play IN HIS comfort zone to get those 28ppg.... and my point is that the return Lebron gave them for sacrificing was not sufficient - if Lebron is only going to get 28ppg with nothing else, than why not let those guys play to THEIR strengths (Bosh posting, Wade as primary ballhandler, Chalmer getting to playmake more) and Lebron just fit in off-ball and get his 28ppg that way?... It's because his off-ball game isn't good enough to play primarily off-ball without his production dropping off - so Lebron has to do it HIS way, and other players have to fit in around HIM... No wonder this approach eventually got figured out and destroyed.
You do realize that they went to 4 straight Finals and won 2 rings in a row, right? They've beaten #1 defenses and good offensive teams as well. Don't be asinine. The Heat team was old and the role-players sucked ass. Wade was often injured and choked his ass off in the Finals (and this is coming from a HUGE Wade fan). Bosh was... well, just Bosh. A guy who is 6'11" and doesn't want to play in the post. He said that himself. Chalmers is one of the worst starting PG's in the league. He was terrible before LeBron and still is. You would know that if you watched a single game of the Heat, instead of jerking it to MJ videos. Chalmers/Cole would be, at best, 2nd or 3rd string PG's on any other team. 38 year old Allen played backup SG and played the 4th highest minutes. The guy who is a liability on the defensive end. Lewis was decent, but playing Lewis is not going to win you a ring. Do you even know how Miami's defense works? You might want to watch a few videos form '11, '12, and '13. Miami's defense sucked the entire season and I've said it numerous times as well. You're not going to beat the Spurs with that kind of defense.

And if he can't play primarily off-ball so those guys can play to their strengths, than why not go for broke and drop 41ppg like Jordan did in the 1993 Finals or average 27 shots per game like he did in the 1998 finals when Pippen and rodman were MIA???... But no, he's not good enough to do that either.. :confusedshrug:
BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BEAT THE SPURS PLAYING HERO BALL. They're gonna destroy you with their passing and offense. LeBron would've need to score 42 PPG to beat the Spurs. Whenever LeBron go hot, they quickly doubled and tripled him. Also, your complaints seem to be more about the coaching than LeBron.

For the millionth time, defense, not Lebron scoring was the main problem. The rest of the team playing like garbage as well.

tpols

09-25-2014, 01:15 PM

I really dont see how the Heat were less talented than the spurs last year.. they just didnt play with any heart or comradery.. while the spurs played with 1000% of that.

tpols

09-25-2014, 01:19 PM

spurs almost made it 1/5 for lebron if it wasn't for ray allen

yup.. they were 1 shot away from a D rating.. but I'd give it a C overall.

You had the big three dancing on stages proclaiming a dynasty.. and they came a shot away from going 1 for 4.. had one of the biggest chokes ever in 2011, and were the recipients of the biggest Finals beatdown in NBA history in 2014 before disentegrating.

Baller1986

09-25-2014, 02:47 PM

2012 Miami Heat beat some good teams in the playoffs
2013 Miami Heat. Lebron and the heat became the first team to beat Duncan in the NBA Finals.
2014 Miami Heat. Lebron was a one man army in the finals.
2011 Miami Heat. Reverse 2014. Heat were 4/5 vs. Dallas.

Baller1986

09-25-2014, 02:48 PM

yup.. they were 1 shot away from a D rating.. but I'd give it a C overall.

You had the big three dancing on stages proclaiming a dynasty.. and they came a shot away from going 1 for 4.. had one of the biggest chokes ever in 2011, and were the recipients of the biggest Finals beatdown in NBA history in 2014 before disentegrating.

Who cares?? the better team won that series. And Lebron scored 37 points in Game 7 of the NBA Finals. A better game 7 performer than your favorite player Kobe Bryant.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 03:32 PM

yup.. they were 1 shot away from a D rating.. but I'd give it a C overall.

You had the big three dancing on stages proclaiming a dynasty.. and they came a shot away from going 1 for 4.. had one of the biggest chokes ever in 2011, and were the recipients of the biggest Finals beatdown in NBA history in 2014 before disentegrating.
Wow! A Kobetard talking about choking in the Finals. Kobe was one Shaq and one Pau from away from never making the Finals. Ever.

lilteapot

09-25-2014, 03:34 PM

OP made this thread specifically so that someone would respond 2/5

Baller1986

09-25-2014, 03:39 PM

OP made this thread specifically so that someone would respond 2/5

The sheep is still thinking it's a good insults. Once Lebron wins his 3rd NBA title. These fake internet tough guys are going to label it as another asterisk ring.

Magic is 5/9 in the NBA Finals.
Wilt is 2/6 in the NBA Finals
West is 1/9 in the NBA Finals
Bird is 3/5 in the NBA Finals.

tpols

09-25-2014, 03:53 PM

Wow! A Kobetard talking about choking in the Finals. Kobe was one Shaq and one Pau from away from never making the Finals. Ever.

What? Thats like saying mj wouldve never made finals without pippen.. shaq wouldnt have made it without kobe, wade or penny.. lebron wouldve never made it if he didnt have wade or bosh.. and earlier if he didnt play in one of the weakest conferences of all time.

That line of thinkings been debunked a million times here.. its just a nothing argument.

Dont see whats so bad about my ranking given expectations. The heat self proclaimed themselves a dynasty.. and they won 2 lost 2.. Kobe did more with pau and odom than bran did with wade and bosh in an even weaker conference.. and of course most said LA/Kobe would never win post shaq.. so given expectations they did even that much better.

lilteapot

09-25-2014, 03:57 PM

tpols

09-25-2014, 04:00 PM

How did Kobe do more when he won just as many titles but made it to less Finals?

making the finals is not much of an accomplishment out east.. 2011 and 2012 lakers wouldve had a very good shot at making the finals if they played in miami's place out east.

aj1987

09-25-2014, 04:01 PM

What? Thats like saying mj wouldve never made finals without pippen.. shaq wouldnt have made it without kobe, wade or penny.. lebron wouldve never made it if he didnt have wade or bosh.. and earlier if he didnt play in one of the weakest conferences of all time.

That line of thinkings been debunked a million times here.. its just a nothing argument.

Dont see whats so bad about my ranking given expectations. The heat self proclaimed themselves a dynasty.. and they won 2 lost 2.. Kobe did more with pau and odom than bran did with wade and bosh in an even weaker conference.. and of course most said LA/Kobe would never win post shaq.. so given expectations they did even that much better.
Dude, my point was that Wade wasn't Wade after '12. Bosh became a bitch who doesn't like playing in the post (he even said it himself). You really can't expect LeBron to win in '14 though. That Spurs team was an all time great team.

making the finals is not much of an accomplishment out east.. 2011 and 2012 lakers wouldve had a very good shot at making the finals if they played in miami's place out east.
:oldlol:

They aren't getting past the '11 and '12 Heat. As a matter of FACT, they would've gotten curb stomped.