Bigger Upset: 2004 NBA Finals or 2011 NBA Finals?

[HighFlyer23]

And who played worst? Kobe or Lebron?

[dubeta]

2004 Finals


Lakers had 4 top 30 players all time


Pistons had none

[KembaWalker]

2011 easy, someone post that table that Bron stans love to bring up to show how 'weak' his supporting casts have been

2011 Mavs bottom 5 by that criteria

[ZMonkey11]

2004 Finals


Lakers had 4 top 30 players all time


Pistons had none

First time i ever read something from dubeta that i can agree with.

2004 by far.

[imdaman99]

2004 was an upset but not that big an upset. 2004 Pistons were a great team that came at you in waves. And it's not as if they were an isolated winning team, they contended for years before and after that. Meanwhile the Mavs got swept the year after in the 1st round.

[ArbitraryWater]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lScgwGwF3nc

[WayOfWade]

I'd say 2011. The Heat had just steamrolled the Eastern Conference, taking down the EC Champ Celtics and the MVP in the process. Even more so, the Heat were up 1-0 and 15 in the 4th quarter of game 2, and were heavily favored having 2 top 25 players all time and in their prime as well as another all-star. The Mavs/Dirk stunned everyone against a superior opponent (albeit mentally weak).
2004 (although I didn't watch) was definetly an upset, but the Lakers were a highly dysfunctional squad with inner turmoil going up against a GOAT defense.

[Fallen Angel]

2011

[NBAplayoffs2001]

I thought the Lakers would win 2004 in 5-6 games not lose in 5, so I would say 2004 finals.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lScgwGwF3nc

wow nice find

[G0ATbe]

Definitely 2011. 3 superstars in their prime with a free guaranteed ride to the finals with Wade still playing godlike. But sadly LeChoke happened. 2004 was understandable because Lakers just came off 3 straight titles and were fatigued. Shaq, Payton, Malone were washed up.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lScgwGwF3nc

Frank fell far too much in love with the aura that the early 2000s Lakers had to casual NBA fans.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

About equal. I might lean toward 2011 just because they had 3 superstars in their prime, and didn't have the dysfunction LA did.

LeBron was worse than Kobe, in my opinion.

[JT123]

2004 was an upset but not that big an upset. 2004 Pistons were a great team that came at you in waves. And it's not as if they were an isolated winning team, they contended for years before and after that. Meanwhile the Mavs got swept the year after in the 1st round.
:roll: half the mavs roster was different the next year. Are all Kobe stans this retarded? :hammerhead:

[choppermagic]

Definitely 2011. 3 superstars in their prime with a free guaranteed ride to the finals with Wade still playing godlike. But sadly LeChoke happened. 2004 was understandable because Lakers just came off 3 straight titles and were fatigued. Shaq, Payton, Malone were washed up.


This. Malone was battling injuries and GP was a shadow of his former self. LA was pretty thin on role players after that and they were burnt out from 4 straight runs to the Finals in a tough Western Conference. Still surprising but not as much of an upset as the 2011 Finals. It was just Dirk getting hot at that point facing three franchise stars in their primes. 2011 Finals Lebron didn't even come close to meeting expectations and the rest is history.

[Rose'sACL]

it is pretty hard to choose but i saw some plays where shaq had great position in the post and kobe just wouldn't pass to him.

most people don't realise it but kobe in 2004 finals had as bad of a series as lebron in 2011 finals.

[HighFlyer23]

it is pretty hard to choose but i saw some plays where shaq had great position in the post and kobe just wouldn't pass to him.

most people don't realise it but kobe in 2004 finals had as bad of a series as lebron in 2011 finals.

The difference is that Kobe shut out Shaq and got shut down and Lebron simply choked

Kobe hit a game tying shot at the end of regulation so that is the only reason why you could put him above Lebron

Kobe lost by trying to be the man and Lebron didn't want to be the man

[sportjames23]

The question should be "Who sabotaged their team more--Kobe or Lebron?".

[Rake2204]

I would select the 2004 NBA Finals as the biggest perceived upset. It was very, very difficult to find folks outside Michigan who didn't believe Los Angeles was working toward a quick four or five game victory.

Sportscenters' intro after the Pistons won just about summed it up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT4MvxoGjSE

"All of you who had Detroit in five... no you didn't."

In contrast, Dirk Nowitzki was god moding before Dallas reached the finals. The Mavs kind of dismantled a few squads I didn't expect them to dismantle.

Moreover, as overpowered as the Heat were, they didn't always seem to know what they were doing, in terms of how to play basketball together. It was maddening to watch because it was kind of a testament to how unfair I viewed that situation to begin with. They didn't play good team basketball and were still good enough to reach the finals relatively handily. That said, it also made them vulnerable, and the Mavs were coming through hot.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

11 by far. 04 wasnt much of an upset, Lakers were imploding and Glove and Mailman were washed. and Detroit after the Sheed trade was playing GOAT level defense. And they only had Sheed for like 20 games so their regular season numbers arent reflective of the level of team they were. They had a stretch of over a week in March where they held teams consecutively below 70pts. In the eastern conference playoffs they had the best defense since the Bad Boys statistically

No one expected Dallas to shut down Lebron completely. The talent gap was massive but Dirk had a top 5-10 playoff run ever and carried prolly the weakest cast to a title ever

[VIP2000]

11 by far. 04 wasnt much of an upset, Lakers were imploding and Glove and Mailman were washed. and Detroit after the Sheed trade was playing GOAT level defense. And they only had Sheed for like 20 games so their regular season numbers arent reflective of the level of team they were. They had a stretch of over a week in March where they held teams consecutively below 70pts. In the eastern conference playoffs they had the best defense since the Bad Boys statistically

No one expected Dallas to shut down Lebron completely. The talent gap was massive but Dirk had a top 5-10 playoff run ever and carried prolly the weakest cast to a title ever

Uh, no one was expecting the Pistons to win. They weren't even favored against the Pacers or Nets (who swept them the previous year, although with no Rasheed). Not to mention the Pistons just blew out the Lakers in pretty much all the games, and the Lakers only win came in OT due to a miracle Kobe shot.

The Heat were competitive for the first few games, and then LeBron's lack of aggressiveness came to bite the Heat in the ass.

I would say it was about equal.

[Mr. Jabbar]

2004.

no1 expects lebron to win in the finals

[jbryan1984]

2004 easily. Didn't they win in 5 games? Like someone else said, Lakers had 4 HOFers, two in their prime. Pistons had a bunch of top position players, no superstar.

2011, Miami was new. They didn't mesh well in the beginning of the season, it was bound to catch up in the post season, it just didn't in the weak east. A lot of those guys in Dallas had been together for so long, I am mainly talking about Dirk and Terry. And I am glad it happened for that Dallas team, for Dirk and Jason Terry. They played together a long time and deserved it.

[KnittingRyu]

Easily 2004. The Lakers still had Kobe and Shaq from the 3-peat Lakers and added HOFers Malone and Payton, and while Malone and Payton were not in their primes, Kobe was in his, and they went against the Pistons who were relatively inexperienced still. The 2011 Heat were a newly formed team compared to the 2004 Lakers, and the 2011 Mavs were way more experienced than the 2004 Pistons.

[Rake2204]

Pardon the Interruption's response the day after the Pistons won: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c72eu0a2_2c

"I don't believe what I just saw."

"Ben Wallace looked like Wilt." (open to interpretation depending upon how one feels about Wilt Chamberlain)

"I was literally stunned and dumbfounded."

[Reggie43]

2011 easily. People seem to forget the nobodies that were playing crucial minutes for the Lakers in 2004 because of injuries to their key players in that series.

[Pointguard]

2004 was definitely the bigger upset. Detroit should have lost the previous two series, but were very fortunate to get two key injuries to survive the Nets and Indiana.

But Lebron's play was more of a disappointment than Kobe's - so be it, Kobe looked like he didn't have a clue. But Kobe gets points for effort and desire, both of which Lebron didn't have and no player should leave home without it. While Kobe looked confused, Lebron was playing without heart or a goal, the weirdest thing to see. Still an all-time great but very strange.

[Bankaii]

2011 easily. People seem to forget the nobodies that were playing crucial minutes for the Lakers in 2004 because of injuries to their key players in that series.
The Heat were literally the Big 3 and scrubs.

[Reggie43]

The Heat were literally the Big 3 and scrubs.

Atleast they were Three, the Lakers in 2004 had Shaq, Kobe and an injured Karl Malone as their 3rd best player averaging 5ppg that series with nobody scoring higher than 6.4ppg(fisher) I was surprised when I looked it up, never remembered that it was That bad.

[raprap]

04. Nobody expected the Lakers to lose to the Pistons. Even some Piston fans I knew didn't think they had a chance, most of them were just happy to even reach the finals.

[Rake2204]

Atleast they were Three, the Lakers in 2004 had Shaq, Kobe and an injured Karl Malone as their 3rd best player averaging 5ppg that series with nobody scoring higher than 6.4ppg(fisher) I was surprised when I looked it up, never remembered that it was That bad.I think this whole topic may depend upon how we define an upset. In terms of mass perception, I believe the 2004 Pistons were the bigger upset. The overwhelming majority seemed to believe they were dead to rights, with most apparently believing it'd be a quick and easy series for the Lakers, what with the Pistons barely slipping through the Eastern Conference while averaging something like 75 points per game in their series against the Pacers.

Regarding the Lakers' supporting cast, that did not seem to be a problem for the Lakers... until it became a problem for the Lakers. The Karl Malone injury is a legit knock, in my opinion. However, the rest of that group contributed so little in the Finals in large part due to what the Pistons were able to impose.

I think the Lakers may have still been able to operate and succeed, even sans 40-year-old Malone, if Detroit played them like everyone else did; that is, doubling Shaquille O'Neal hard and hoping the Lakers' supporting didn't hit too many shots. While banking to play off of defensive collapses, guys like Fisher, Payton, and even Kareem Rush had a handful of moments in the sun prior to that Finals series (Rush was 6 of 7 from deep in the Game 6 clincher against Minny).

Instead, as is widely known, the Pistons stuck to single coverage on O'Neal, daring him to dominate and counting on Kobe Bryant breaking the offense to get his own once O'Neal began getting too many (rightful) touches. The lack of doubles thus reduced the potential effectiveness of the Lakers' offensive support.

Before that Finals series, the Lakers probably had five players nearly averaging double figures (O'Neal, Bryant, Malone, Payton, and Fisher). Actually, taking a closer look, Fisher was probably averaging between 8 and 9 points per game before hitting the finals. But point being, there was a semblance of support there until the Pistons took it away.

[The_Pharcyde]

this is such a loaded question

during the time it was forsure the 2004 lakers... but in retrospect the 2011 mavericks seems to be the answer

there was way too much dissarray within the laker organization to win the title that year that we know now and somewhat did back then

they were banged up too

2011 is a weird case because the heat choked.... lebron looked way too hesistant to do anything... it was surprising that he would play like that especially after losing to the celtics in 2010 and his performance in game 5(weirdest game by a superstar I had ever seen, something was up)
he vindicated himself however in game 6 2012 vs boston

but yeah during the moment the 2004 pistons were a bigger upset but they proved to be a force many years after
the 2011 mavericks disassembled after the title so it is hard to judge their greatness

both failures are focused on players but for the opposite reason

kobe for being way too aggressive with the game and lebron for being way too hesitant

[Reggie43]

I think this whole topic may depend upon how we define an upset. In terms of mass perception, I believe the 2004 Pistons were the bigger upset. The overwhelming majority seemed to believe they were dead to rights, with most apparently believing it'd be a quick and easy series for the Lakers, what with the Pistons barely slipping through the Eastern Conference while averaging something like 75 points per game in their series against the Pacers.

Regarding the Lakers' supporting cast, that did not seem to be a problem for the Lakers... until it became a problem for the Lakers. The Karl Malone injury is a legit knock, in my opinion. However, the rest of that group contributed so little in the Finals in large part due to what the Pistons were able to impose.

I think the Lakers may have still been able to operate and succeed, even sans 40-year-old Malone, if Detroit played them like everyone else did; that is, doubling Shaquille O'Neal hard and hoping the Lakers' supporting didn't hit too many shots. While banking to play off of defensive collapses, guys like Fisher, Payton, and even Kareem Rush had a handful of moments in the sun prior to that Finals series (Rush was 6 of 7 from deep in the Game 6 clincher against Minny).

Instead, as is widely known, the Pistons stuck to single coverage on O'Neal, daring him to dominate and counting on Kobe Bryant breaking the offense to get his own once O'Neal began getting too many (rightful) touches. The lack of doubles thus reduced the potential effectiveness of the Lakers' offensive support.

Before that Finals series, the Lakers probably had five players nearly averaging double figures (O'Neal, Bryant, Malone, Payton, and Fisher). Actually, taking a closer look, Fisher was probably averaging between 8 and 9 points per game before hitting the finals. But point being, there was a semblance of support there until the Pistons took it away.

Yep the Lakers were overwhelming favorites before the series and before Malone's injury. Malone kept that team together and losing him was a huge blow. He was their glue guy who moved the ball, played tough defense and scored when needed. He was the Lakers Rasheed before the injury and that would be hard to replace by the like Slava or Luke Walton who were very capable of shutting themselves down because of lack of skill than giving all the cred to the pistons D. If you think it was easy to play without a key player hobble someone like tayshaun(5th most impt piston) Lakers win the series no question and Kobe explodes every game.

[Naero]

2004 Lakers easily

[Magic 32]

2004 was only an upset because nobody at the time realized that the Wallace trade had created the first truly great eastern conference team of the decade.

Nobody was talking about after 2005 and 2006. Hell, the Pistons were one Robert Horry shot away from a dynasty.

[KnittingRyu]

Atleast they were Three, the Lakers in 2004 had Shaq, Kobe and an injured Karl Malone as their 3rd best player averaging 5ppg that series with nobody scoring higher than 6.4ppg(fisher) I was surprised when I looked it up, never remembered that it was That bad.
That had more to do with Kobe than how bad the supporting cast was.

[AirFederer]

2004 Finals


Lakers had 4 top 30 players all time


Pistons had none

https://i.imgflip.com/qq8ri.gif

[JohnnySic]

Neither was an upset. The better team won both times.

[Gileraracer]

2011, LeBron colluded with 2 stars and had a fkn cakewalk to the finals just to get embarassed by a sickened Dirk

[ArbitraryWater]

How is the Lakers collapsing or whatever it was even an excuse against it being an upset? :lol

[West-Side]

2004 Finals


Lakers had 4 top 30 players all time


Pistons had none

:oldlol:

Yeah 40 year old Payton & Malone were really in their prime.
Shaquille & Malone weren't injured either in that series, right? :rolleyes:

Dirk & role players beat LeBron, Bosh & Wade is not a bigger upset than one of the greatest defenses of all-time upsetting a top heavy Laker squad with 2 of them playing hurt.

Only on ISH people, only on ISH.

[Rake2204]

:oldlol:

Yeah 40 year old Payton & Malone were really in their prime.
Shaquille & Malone weren't injured either in that series, right? :rolleyes:

Dirk & role players beat LeBron, Bosh & Wade is not a bigger upset than one of the greatest defenses of all-time upsetting a top heavy Laker squad with 2 of them playing hurt.

Only on ISH people, only on ISH.Again, I think this question sort of depends upon whether we're talking about the perception of an upset at the time of the event or in present day, knowing what we know now.

If it's the former, I think the answer is pretty easily the 2004 Pistons. Odds were overwhelmingly in the Lakers' favor heading into the Finals in 2004. Could a 40-year-old Karl Malone have made a difference? Possibly. But I also believe the Lakers were heavy favorites with or without Malone. Many, many folks believed the Pistons' supposed inability to score, alongside their lack of a good matchup for Shaquille O'Neal (while also having to worry about Kobe Bryant), would result in a bit of a thrashing.

The Mavericks, meanwhile, had a very impressive road to the finals in 2011. Dirk Nowitzki's god mode was established well before the Miami series. That team was hitting on all cylinders and while the Heat may have been the favorites simply because of LeBron James and Dwyane Wade, there was at least a fair bit of uncertainty on account of the way Dallas rolled into the finals combined with the Heat's struggle with cohesion throughout the season.

Of course, if we're talking about the biggest upset in hindsight, I think it's very difficult to say, because both the 2004 and 2011 NBA Finals result makes sense. As in, the right teams won when considering the circumstances in each event. Dallas played the right way, played as a team, and let the game come to them while Miami was a mess.

Similarly, Detroit operated on the Lakers in 2004 - people didn't buy it before that Finals series began but their defense ended up being as good as advertised. Meanwhile, the Lakers helped the cause by allowing their deep-seeded issues to bubble to the surface.

[houston]

2004 nba finals

[riseagainst]

People gotta remember who coached the mid 00's Pistons. A top 3 GOAT coach, Larry Brown.

:bowdown:

[HurricaneKid]

This. Malone was battling injuries and GP was a shadow of his former self. LA was pretty thin on role players after that and they were burnt out from 4 straight runs to the Finals in a tough Western Conference. Still surprising but not as much of an upset as the 2011 Finals. It was just Dirk getting hot at that point facing three franchise stars in their primes. 2011 Finals Lebron didn't even come close to meeting expectations and the rest is history.

Payton won the title two years later as the starting PG and hit the series clinching shot.

Dallas had just swept the B2B champ Lakers and were a small underdog going into the Finals. Bibby and Z were starting for that Heat team.

Anyone who says 2011 is probably a baby or a LeBron hater. Its not even close to the right answer.

[Pointguard]

Detroit was made up of a bunch of players nobody wanted. If Kidd was healthy the semi finals don't go seven games or in the Pistons favor. Indiana had major injuries to their center and point guard their two best players and the series still went six or seven games. At best Detroit was the third best team in the East. They had little experience in the playoffs against healthy teams. They needed an ambush and got it. This hodgepodge of players dictated to LA how the game was going to be played. LA with waaay more experienced players could not adjust and didn't have a counter.

[dubeta]

How is this still a debate? The Lakers basically had the championship guaranteed, meanwhile the Heat were not even supposed to make the finals

[jlip]

2004 Pistons easily

Regarding the 2011 Mavs- How is a 57 win team from the "strong" West beating a 58 win team from the "weak" East a major upset? (Isn't that the typical way ISH looks at things?) The Mavs also went 2-7 without Dirk that season. Had he played 80 games they more than likely would have won 60 games that season.

[kennethgriffin]

the 2011 heat were healthy


2004 lakers = kobe torn shoulder/knee surgery rehabing all year. wasnt the same

karl malones last season,40 years old, not good anymore...hurt in the finals

shaq overweight by 50-60 pounds

payton sucked ... 40 years old

no team chemistry

coach about to quit

no bench






its amazing they made it to the finals TBH



heat were built to win. they were all healthy. they were all prime.

lebron threw the series because he didnt want wade to be finals mvp

[DaSeba5]

Miami wasn't exactly a lock to make the Finals. They started off really bad and were laughed at. Then they turned it around, but they weren't the #1 seed in the East. People picked Boston and Chicago against them. I'm not saying they were underdogs, but people look back on it like they were huge favorites over everyone. They were't. My point is Miami had star power, but they didn't click that well the first year and they had a lot of problems. But yah if LeBron didn't choke, they still probably would have won. And it's not like the Mavs were some 40 win team. They win 50+ games every year so people tend to take that for granted.

Regardless, I think a lot of people wrote off the Pistons. They didn't have any stars. And of course LA did. So my answer is the Pistons.

[tpols]

2004 Pistons easily

Regarding the 2011 Mavs- How is a 57 win team from the "strong" West beating a 58 win team from the "weak" East a major upset? (Isn't that the typical way ISH looks at things?) The Mavs also went 2-7 without Dirk that season. Had he played 80 games they more than likely would have won 60 games that season.

the mavs were actually expected to be a second round team at best with many predicting Portland to beat them.. idk what the odds were when each started there playoff runs (pistons and mavs that is) but I cant imagine dallas had much better odds at a title than Detroit did. Nobody thought they would win shit.. it would've been like if Houston or memphis won the title last year out of nowhere while usually being just a second round exit-ish team.


Detroit was consistently good for much longer than dallas was.. they built from the ground up from early to mid 00s into an eventual very strong contending team. Dallas was a one hit wonder, and it was pathetic how overmatched they looked to start the 2011 Finals up until the Heats enormous choke in game 2.. it didn't even look fair.

[JohnnySic]

Payton wasn't 40 years old that year. He was 35 going on 36. Lets get out facts together, people. :D

[DaSeba5]

People remember players like Ray Allen, Shane Battier, and Mike Miller, but they forget Miami had Eddie House, Big Z, Jamaal Magloire, Joel Anthony, Mike Bibby, Carlos Arroyo, ect. playing for them in 2011. That team had problems. Their bench was trash. That doesn't excuse LeBron, but that team was not full of world beaters.

[tpols]

People remember players like Ray Allen, Shane Battier, and Mike Miller, but they forget Miami had Eddie House, Big Z, Jamaal Magloire, Joel Anthony, Mike Bibby, Carlos Arroyo, ect. playing for them in 2011. That team had problems. Their bench was trash. That doesn't excuse LeBron, but that team was not full of world beaters.

LA was the exact same way.. bunch of old has beens + Shaq and Kobe. They were both top heavy teams.. except LA had no third option like Miami had.

[ArbitraryWater]

LA was the exact same way.. bunch of old has beens + Shaq and Kobe. They were both top heavy teams.. except LA had no third option like Miami had.

2004 healthy Malone was quoted by Phil as their best player in the Houston series.. still had big ass impact, better than 2011 Bosh before his injury.

Difference is one had prime Shaq, the other didnt, that simple really.

[Wade's Rings]

Payton won the title two years later as the starting PG and hit the series clinching shot.

Dallas had just swept the B2B champ Lakers and were a small underdog going into the Finals. Bibby and Z were starting for that Heat team.

Anyone who says 2011 is probably a baby or a LeBron hater. Its not even close to the right answer.

Williams was the starter not Payton.

[tpols]

2004 healthy Malone was quoted by Phil as their best player in the Houston series.. still had big ass impact, better than 2011 Bosh before his injury.

Difference is one had prime Shaq, the other didnt, that simple really.

uh.. wade was equal if not better than shaq in their respective finals and its pretty funny to see you guys bring up all of the washed up Miami guys like bibby etc and then still have the audacity to mention Karl and his 5 ppg on LA's side. Nice.

[kamil]

Anyone and everyone that said 2011 is an idiot.

[HurricaneKid]

Payton wasn't 40 years old that year. He was 35 going on 36. Lets get out facts together, people. :D

And two years later hit the Finals clinching shot. He was FAR from worthless at that time.

[Wade's Rings]

And two years later hit the Finals clinching shot. He was FAR from worthless at that time.

He averaged 4 Points in the 2004 Finals. Hitting 1 shot in '06 doesn't mean he was extremely valuable in '04.

[West-Side]

[QUOTE]Karl Malone missed half the season after Scott Williams rolled into his knee. That meant that his replacement, the immortal Stanislav Medvedenko, actually played more minutes than Malone that season (1442 to 1373). And while Medvedenko had the second-best WP48 of his career, Medvedenko sucked in general. His 2004 WP48 of -0.005 meant that he cost the Lakers wins. Had Malone been able to play those minutes instead, and maintained his pace, he would have produced another 5 wins, putting the Lakers up at around 60 wins.

Indeed, the Lakers

[tpols]

^ the only people saying 04 was a bigger upset are bran stans.. if you had knowledge of the context surrounding the 04 Lakers by the time Finals came around, its not that crazy they lost.

The Heat no one expected to lose especially after the start to the series.. it looked like dirk + looney tunes vs the monstars until the heat started to choke out of nowhere.

[ArbitraryWater]

^ the only people saying 04 was a bigger upset are bran stans.. if you had knowledge of the context surrounding the 04 Lakers by the time Finals came around, its not that crazy they lost.

The Heat no one expected to lose especially after the start to the series.. it looked like dirk + looney tunes vs the monstars until the heat started to choke out of nowhere.

sure, everyone is a bran stan now.. lets actually count the votes, because I'm sure just about everyone IN ISH has strong sympathies for Kobe.. Rake is a known Bron hater, though

[Rake2204]

sure, everyone is a bran stan now.. lets actually count the votes, because I'm sure just about everyone IN ISH has strong sympathies for Kobe.. Rake is a known Bron hater, thoughHaha, I really, really disliked that whole superteam thing those guys created down in Miami during those years but that was mostly because I thought James was more than good enough to win without overkilling so hard in his favor. I've loved watching him in Cleveland before and after his Heat stuff. He's the second best player I've ever watched live and I always liked how he helped create a new template of superstar who was more interested in making the right play, even if that meant passing, than shooter mid-range jumpers over double teams all game (and I don't mean that as a stab at anyone in particular).

That said, if you were just being sarcastic to begin with, then that definitely went right over my head.

[sd3035]

I was far more upset in 2011; as a huge Heat fan, it tore me apart to see what was supposed to be a cake walk choked away by my favorite balding player

[ArbitraryWater]

Haha, I really, really disliked that whole superteam thing those guys created down in Miami during those years but that was mostly because I thought James was more than good enough to win without overkilling so hard in his favor. I've loved watching him in Cleveland before and after his Heat stuff. He's the second best player I've ever watched live and I always liked how he helped create a new template of superstar who was more interested in making the right play, even if that meant passing, than shooter mid-range jumpers over double teams all game (and I don't mean that as a stab at anyone in particular).

That said, if you were just being sarcastic to begin with, then that definitely went right over my head.

Lol, it was sarcastic :cheers:

[JT123]

^ the only people saying 04 was a bigger upset are bran stans.. if you had knowledge of the context surrounding the 04 Lakers by the time Finals came around, its not that crazy they lost.

The Heat no one expected to lose especially after the start to the series.. it looked like dirk + looney tunes vs the monstars until the heat started to choke out of nowhere.
:oldlol: You Kobe stans are such a joke. Every objective poster in this thread has said 04 was the bigger upset. The ONLY posters saying 2011 are Kobe stans and known Bron haters.

[West-Side]

:oldlol: You Kobe stans are such a joke. Every objective poster in this thread has said 04 was the bigger upset. The ONLY posters saying 2011 are Kobe stans and known Bron haters.

Probably because most people don't remember that Rasheed didn't join Detroit until almost March that year. Detroit was 34-24 before his arrival and finish the year 19-3 with him in the lineup.

:rolleyes:

[JT123]

Probably because most people don't remember that Rasheed didn't join Detroit until almost March that year. Detroit was 34-24 before his arrival and finish the year 19-3 with him in the lineup.

:rolleyes:
I guess having the 2 best players in the NBA and the GOAT coach just wasn't enough to beat a team of role players. :facepalm
The Mavs had an ATG in Dirk. The Pistons had no one even close to Dirk's caliber.

[West-Side]

I guess having the 2 best players in the NBA and the GOAT coach just wasn't enough to beat a team of role players. :facepalm
The Mavs had an ATG in Dirk. The Pistons had no one even close to Dirk's caliber.

Again, consider the context.
LA won 56 games that year.
They had no backup for Karl Malone.
Gary Payton was atrocious the entire playoffs.
Kobe had off-court issues and was feuding with Shaq.
Shaq was at least 40 pounds over weight and was battling the toe injury all season.
Phil Jackson was another distraction due to his retirement.

They faced pressure after game 1 loss; Karl Malone got injured and they collapsed. Detroit was a far more dangerous team than Dallas. They had FIVE all-star caliber players, solid bench, legendary coach AND one of the best defenses of all-time.

[West-Side]

:oldlol: @ role players.
I guess you forgot when 4 Piston players made the all-star team, right?

Honestly, I'm pretty much done with this conversation. I have a feeling I'm debating with 15 year old kids who have no clue about the NBA pre-2011.

[Rake2204]

Lol, it was sarcastic :cheers:Haha, you had me all introspective and whatnot.


Again, consider the context.
LA won 56 games that year.
They had no backup for Karl Malone.
Gary Payton was atrocious the entire playoffs.
Kobe had off-court issues and was feuding with Shaq.
Shaq was at least 40 pounds over weight and was battling the toe injury all season.
Phil Jackson was another distraction due to his retirement.

They faced pressure after game 1 loss; Karl Malone got injured and they collapsed. Detroit was a far more dangerous team than Dallas. They had FIVE all-star caliber players, solid bench, legendary coach AND one of the best defenses of all-time.Not to repeat and/or think too deeply about all of this, but I really think it depends upon what qualifies as being an upset. Are upsets simply a matter of perception?

In one of the dorkiest moves ever, I looked up "upset" on the internet, via Wiki:


An upset occurs in a competition, frequently in electoral politics or sports, when the party popularly expected to win (the favorite), is defeated by an underdog whom the majority expects to lose, defying the conventional wisdom. The underdog then becomes a giant-killer.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upset

Using that definition, I feel the 2004 Finals featured the biggest upset of the two. The Lakers were heavily favored, and there's a fair bit of literature and video citations (multiple posted in this thread) that back that up.

To be perfectly honest, as a lifelong Pistons fan, I very much struggled to comprehend why everyone was treating the Pistons as such underdogs. As other posters have pointed out, they went on a tear after picking up Rasheed Wallace and I thought they took down some stronger-than-given-credit-for squads in the East by playing incredible defense. My whole life, I'd heard "Defense wins championships", so I was flummoxed to hear virtually all corners of the media (and board folks, I was lurking at ISH back then, too) who gave the Pistons absolutely no chance.

Still, whether intelligent in hindsight or not, the Pistons were treated as a much more severe underdog than the Mavericks prior to their respective series.

If we're talking now, knowing everything we know in hindsight, I'm not sure there's an answer, because we now know they were both superior to their opponents and they won because they played better.