The most cockblock games that prevented a great(er) series

Usually game 1s that steered series in a clear direction or game 4s that went 3-1 instead of 2-2...So shorter series', like 4-5 game stuff, that could have well deserved more games.

I mean, you usually want to get the most out of conference finals and finals, where technically series shoud be close if the league had balance at the top.

Since 2000:

HM: 2001 Lakers-Sixers Game 3 (Philly was cooked after that loss), 2002 Mavs-Kings Game 4 (Mavs lost Game 4 at Home in OT, destined to lose probably, but robbed of a couple more nice games)

Im sure others would include the 2012 Finas Game 4.


2003 WCF: Spurs-Mavericks Game 6 - Prospect of Dirk coming back for game 7? Could have been a cassic.

2007 WCR1: Mavericks-Warriors Game 4 - Mavs were very close to re-grabbing HC, would have almost assuredly set up 7 games. Sentimental pick.

2008 WCF: Lakers vs. Spurs Game 4 - Series never shoud have been just 5 games. Deserved more intrigue.

2009 ECF: Cavaliers-Magic Game 4: Cavs very close to tying it up, setting it up for 7 games and a possibe Kobe-LeBron Final.

2012 WCR1: Thunder vs. Mavericks
Mavericks lost like 3 cose games and especially games 1-2 on the road were comically close. This was during peak OKC/Durwhistle days when they got all the calls. Series never shoud have been a sweep. Could have been a nice 6-7 game series.

2014 Finals Game 5: It would have been nice to see a bigger sampe size on the Spurs hot shooting, and if Miami finally coud have woken the **** up and supplied LeBron with some help. Of course that simply did not happen in game 5 either so its kind of a cheaty inclusion. It wasnt really close. LeBron went for 20+ in the first quarter and even the Heats defense coud not help him, as Battier gave Ginobili several cheap fouls for FTs (Manu flopping included).


2015 WCF Game 2: Warriors vs. Rockets
Rockets were never good enough to win 2 straight home games, but their effort and Hardens play in the first 2 road games, should have been rewarded with a win. It would have made it a nice 6-7 game series. Sadly, everything came a little too easily for GSW, who were definitey still a little green behind the ears, in their first big run.

2017 WCF Game 1: Warriors vs. Spurs

Need I say more?


and the biggest of them all...

2018 Finals.


[IMG]https://i.gyazo.com/0da55abbc906e2bcd1b47c93b70af8a3.jpg[/IMG]


The Cavaliers and more specifically LeBron James did everything right in order to take game 1 against a GSW team caught by surprise a bit and KD who hadn't found his touch at all yet.

They set it up, LeBron got the game sealing stop on KD, it was overturned, a couple teammate ****-ups later and they lost the game and the air was out of it. I think the series was a foregone conclusion at that point. GSW payed with house money.

However, had the Cavs won game 1, you can be damn sure they'd have won 1 of the 2 home games, perhaps even game 3, which would have at minimum given us 6 games...

with the legacies at play, LeBron in the form he was in, KD and Curry on the other side, it truly would have been a historical series. Basketball was robbed that year. Just like the Rockets and Cavs.

The Lakers - Sixers was over after game 2. The Lakers came in undefeated and the Sixers needed a monster game by Iverson to barely win. Game 2 was a statement and it was understood by the 76ers.

Still G1 is one of the most memorable finals games and a longer series would've been nice.

Also I think 2018 is overrated it for the same reasons. Basically the same scenario. The Cavs needed that kind of game out of Lebron to make it to OT and you think the can take 2 or more?

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14762291]Usually game 1s that steered series in a clear direction or game 4s that went 3-1 instead of 2-2...So shorter series', like 4-5 game stuff, that could have well deserved more games.

I mean, you usually want to get the most out of conference finals and finals, where technically series shoud be close if the league had balance at the top.

Since 2000:
[B]
HM: 2001 Lakers-Sixers Game 3 (Philly was cooked after that loss),[/B]


[/QUOTE]


Yeah this is an interesting one that I still think what if.

The Sixers essentially choked in game two. They had their chances to win the game but Iverson and Mckie uncharacteristically bricked a heap of free throws in the 4th and and Fisher made some clutch threes to seal it for L.A.

If they make their free throws, they go back to Philadelphia up 2-0. From there anything could of happened.

AI was banged up and still carrying his tail bone injury which caused him to miss a game in the ECF, Eric Snow had a broken foot wich the full extent of wasn't known till after the Finals.

Ultimately they just squeezed every last once out of their team till they had nothing else to give and were over powered by the stacked, superior and healthy Lakers.

But had the Sixers taken that very winnable game 2 it really would have made it extremely difficult for LA and made them fight for their lives to win that series.

[QUOTE=fourkicks44;14762306]Yeah this is an interesting one that I still think what if.

The Sixers essentially choked in game two. They had their chances to win the game but Iverson and Mckie uncharacteristically bricked a heap of free throws in the 4th and and Fisher made some clutch threes to seal it for L.A.

If they make their free throws, they go back to Philadelphia up 2-0. From there anything could of happened.

AI was banged up and still carrying his tail bone injury which caused him to miss a game in the ECF, Eric Snow had a broken foot wich the full extent of wasn't known till after the Finals.

Ultimately they just squeezed every last once out of their team till they had nothing else to give and were over powered by the stacked, superior and healthy Lakers.

But had the Sixers taken that very winnable game 2 it really would have made it extremely difficult for LA and made them fight for their lives to win that series.[/QUOTE]

As you said it took everything from them while Shaq basically cruised to a near quad double. I never rewatched the series, but from my memory the 76ers were done after that game.

Maybe if they lucked out they could've surprised the world, just like the overcame the imo better Bucks, but as said I had no doubt after game 2.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14762302]The Lakers - Sixers was over after game 2. The Lakers came in undefeated and the Sixers needed a monster game by Iverson to barely win. Game 2 was a statement and it was understood by the 76ers.

Still G1 is one of the most memorable finals games and a longer series would've been nice.

Also I think 2018 is overrated it for the same reasons. Basically the same scenario. The Cavs needed that kind of game out of Lebron to make it to OT and you think the can take 2 or more?[/QUOTE]


This thread is not to say the osing team woud have won, just that the series woud have extended and the nature of the games woud have remained competitive. But anything can happen.

In any case, I clearly stated why the 2018 finals would have been close. Its easy to say now "oh they got swept, it never would have been close". You arent really understanding momentum in that case.

As for 2001, again, the Sixers probaby succumb, but at least wed get at least 3 more games, a of which MATTER. So 3 high stakes games. After that just 1 game has to go in their favor and wed be on for 7.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14762315]As you said it took everything from them while Shaq basically cruised to a near quad double. I never rewatched the series, but from my memory the 76ers were done after that game.

Maybe if they lucked out they could've surprised the world, just like the overcame the imo better Bucks, [B]but as said I had no doubt after game 2[/B].[/QUOTE]


Well, of course. Most people did after game 2. But had the Sixers come away with game 3....you see what this thread is getting at? ^^

Yeah it was over by the end of game two.

Game three broke the Sixers' spirit and the gas tank was empty.

Even if they won game two, LA still overwhelming most likely would have still won but I think the series wouldn't have deflated so quickly as it did in the gentlemen sweep that transpired.

People talk down on that Sixers team unfairly tho, injuries from the brutal Eastern Conference playoffs was the major issue for the team. IMHO the Lakers where the only team better than them.

Larey Brown got everything out of that squad but that Lakers team was just too good, especially offensively with shooters like DFish, Fox, Shaw behind Kobe and Shaq. It just created a scoring onslaught that over 5 games just couldn't be matched by the Sixers who relied so heavily on AI and where completely gassed.

But if they did win game two, the pressure was on LA and they had a fight on their hands like they didn't have all playoffs.

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14762318]This thread is not to say the osing team woud have won, just that the series woud have extended and the nature of the games woud have remained competitive. But anything can happen.

In any case, I clearly stated why the 2018 finals would have been close. Its easy to say now "oh they got swept, it never would have been close". You arent really understanding momentum in that case.

As for 2001, again, the Sixers probaby succumb, but at least wed get at least 3 more games, a of which MATTER. So 3 high stakes games. After that just 1 game has to go in their favor and wed be on for 7.[/QUOTE]

I got both of your points. You're just overstating momentum in 2018's case. I'm sure it ends up 4-1 if the Cavs would've taken G1.

[QUOTE=Overdrive;14762343]I got both of your points. You're just overstating momentum in 2018's case. I'm sure it ends up 4-1 if the Cavs would've taken G1.[/QUOTE]
It still robbed us of LeBron’s greatest game. Absolute cheating by the refs late. I agree Cavs win one more max but that would have been such a legendary game. Refs literally ignored rules to overturn a call. Horseshit

Others that OP didn’t mention

2008 Finals Game 4: Looked like we were guaranteed a 2-2 series before the Celtics epic comeback.

2011 Finals Game 6: The hype on that Game 7 would be preposterous :lol I would’ve loved to see how LeBron would’ve played in that scenario.

2019 Finals Game 6: Klay was in Game 6 form, really felt like we were headed for a Game 7 before his injury. Considering they barely lost with Klay missing the entire 4th, it would’ve set up a very interesting Game 7.

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater;14762291]Usually game 1s that steered series in a clear direction or game 4s that went 3-1 instead of 2-2...So shorter series', like 4-5 game stuff, that could have well deserved more games.

I mean, you usually want to get the most out of conference finals and finals, where technically series shoud be close if the league had balance at the top.

Since 2000:

HM: 2001 Lakers-Sixers Game 3 (Philly was cooked after that loss), 2002 Mavs-Kings Game 4 (Mavs lost Game 4 at Home in OT, destined to lose probably, but robbed of a couple more nice games)

Im sure others would include the 2012 Finas Game 4.


2003 WCF: Spurs-Mavericks Game 6 - Prospect of Dirk coming back for game 7? Could have been a cassic.

2007 WCR1: Mavericks-Warriors Game 4 - Mavs were very close to re-grabbing HC, would have almost assuredly set up 7 games. Sentimental pick.

2008 WCF: Lakers vs. Spurs Game 4 - Series never shoud have been just 5 games. Deserved more intrigue.

2009 ECF: Cavaliers-Magic Game 4: Cavs very close to tying it up, setting it up for 7 games and a possibe Kobe-LeBron Final.

2012 WCR1: Thunder vs. Mavericks
Mavericks lost like 3 cose games and especially games 1-2 on the road were comically close. This was during peak OKC/Durwhistle days when they got all the calls. Series never shoud have been a sweep. Could have been a nice 6-7 game series.

2014 Finals Game 5: It would have been nice to see a bigger sampe size on the Spurs hot shooting, and if Miami finally coud have woken the **** up and supplied LeBron with some help. Of course that simply did not happen in game 5 either so its kind of a cheaty inclusion. It wasnt really close. LeBron went for 20+ in the first quarter and even the Heats defense coud not help him, as Battier gave Ginobili several cheap fouls for FTs (Manu flopping included).


2015 WCF Game 2: Warriors vs. Rockets
Rockets were never good enough to win 2 straight home games, but their effort and Hardens play in the first 2 road games, should have been rewarded with a win. It would have made it a nice 6-7 game series. Sadly, everything came a little too easily for GSW, who were definitey still a little green behind the ears, in their first big run.

2017 WCF Game 1: Warriors vs. Spurs

Need I say more?


and the biggest of them all...

2018 Finals.


[IMG]https://i.gyazo.com/0da55abbc906e2bcd1b47c93b70af8a3.jpg[/IMG]


The Cavaliers and more specifically LeBron James did everything right in order to take game 1 against a GSW team caught by surprise a bit and KD who hadn't found his touch at all yet.

They set it up, LeBron got the game sealing stop on KD, it was overturned, a couple teammate ****-ups later and they lost the game and the air was out of it. I think the series was a foregone conclusion at that point. GSW payed with house money.

However, had the Cavs won game 1, you can be damn sure they'd have won 1 of the 2 home games, perhaps even game 3, which would have at minimum given us 6 games...

with the legacies at play, LeBron in the form he was in, KD and Curry on the other side, it truly would have been a historical series. Basketball was robbed that year. Just like the Rockets and Cavs.[/QUOTE]

that there is a COCKblock :facepalm

i would slap the fucc outta OP with my c0ck and make him call me papi