1998 Chicago Bulls vs. 1999 San Antonio Spurs

[QUOTE=SwooshReturns][B]Most consistent, hardly the best ... 2001 Lakers and [U]2008 Celtics[/U] were the all-around best and most dominant.[/B] Both book ends to teams that would be dynastys. Well the early 2000 Lakers were a dynasty ... but the 2008 Celtics should've been had KG never got hurt. All superior to the scavenger Spurs team of the 2000s. [B]Hell, I take the Pistons run of greatness in 2004 over any in particular Spurs team.[/B]
:facepalm[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231705[/url]

No. Dominant means winning a series in at least 6 games or plainy game7 with that crappy teams or making 16-10 in the playoffs? 2008 Celtics highly overrated because the Boston finally won a title after Bird and the big 3 got their rings. But they were not better than 2005 Spurs.

Also didn't the Spurs beat the Pistons in 2005 NBA Finals?:facepalm :facepalm

And if we start uses ifs, that would favour the Spurs because they lost to a miraculous shot and Ginobili's idiotic foul. They could be the first team won 5 straight titles after the '60s Celtics.

Spurs sure were a dominating dynasty ... never even going to back to back championships and all.

:oldlol:

[QUOTE=SwooshReturns]Spurs sure were a dominating dynasty ... never even going to back to back championships and all.

:oldlol:[/QUOTE]
And weren't you the claim 2008 Celtics team was [B]more dominant[/B] / better 2005 Spurs team?:oldlol:

[QUOTE=Odinn]And weren't you the claim 2008 Celtics team was more dominant / better 2005 Spurs team?:oldlol:[/QUOTE]
I do believe that yes ... 2008 Celtics and 2001 Lakers are the best teams I've seen since the 90's Bulls.

So the 2008 Celtics had two seven game series with youthful athletic teams that played to their disadvantages? They still won.

And then they put a pillow over the faces of the Lakers and smothered them to death.

I'm pretty sure they would've got back and won in 2009 had KG never went down with an injury that ended him prematurely ...

Guy was in legit MVP talks the season before.

2005 Spurs were the best Spurs team, IMO ... but I would rank them 4th or 5th best out of the championship teams of the 2000's

1) 2008 Celtics
2) 2001 Lakers
3) 2004 Pistons
4) 2005 Spurs
5) 2010 Lakers

[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]1999 Spurs. And it isn't even close.[/QUOTE]
Bulls SRS 7.84 23rd best regular season of all time in spite of Scottie Pippen playing only 44 games. So unless we're saying Scottie doesn't get to play, the Bulls are actually even better than that number.

Spurs an impressive 7.48 SRS (33rd) but that was with a healthy team. And then there's the fact the from '90-91 to 98 nobody beat the Bulls at full strength.

[QUOTE=SwooshReturns]I do believe that yes ... 2008 Celtics and 2001 Lakers are the best teams I've seen since the 90's Bulls.

So the 2008 Celtics had two seven game series with youthful athletic teams that played to their disadvantages? They still won.

And then they put a pillow over the faces of the Lakers and smothered them to death.

I'm pretty sure they would've got back and won in 2009 had KG never went down with an injury that ended him prematurely ...

Guy was in legit MVP talks the season before.

2005 Spurs were the best Spurs team, IMO ... but I would rank them 4th or 5th best out of the championship teams of the 2000's

1) 2008 Celtics
2) 2001 Lakers
3) 2004 Pistons
4) 2005 Spurs
5) 2010 Lakers[/QUOTE]
What an awful list.

2005 Spurs basically defeated 2004 Pistons. But not gonna talk about just Spurs. 2001 Lakers should be #1. And 2010 Lakers team wasn't a team of 2000's also not better than 2009 Lakers.

[QUOTE=Odinn]2005 Spurs basically defeated 2004 Pistons.[/quote]
Yea but 2004 Pistons's overall body of work was more impressive to me.

[QUOTE=Odinn]But not gonna talk about just Spurs. 2001 Lakers should be #1.[/quote]
This is MY list ... how I saw things.

True, forgot about 2010 technically not being a decade team ... then I would fill that slot with the 2006 Heat.

[QUOTE=SwooshReturns]I do believe that yes ... 2008 Celtics and 2001 Lakers are the best teams I've seen since the 90's Bulls.

So the 2008 Celtics had two seven game series with youthful athletic teams that played to their disadvantages? They still won.

And then they put a pillow over the faces of the Lakers and smothered them to death.

I'm pretty sure they would've got back and won in 2009 had KG never went down with an injury that ended him prematurely ...

Guy was in legit MVP talks the season before.

2005 Spurs were the best Spurs team, IMO ... but I would rank them 4th or 5th best out of the championship teams of the 2000's

1) 2008 Celtics
2) 2001 Lakers
3) 2004 Pistons
4) 2005 Spurs
5) 2010 Lakers[/QUOTE]
:hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead:

[QUOTE=SwooshReturns]Most consistent, hardly the best ... 2001 Lakers and 2008 Celtics were the all-around best and most dominant. Both book ends to teams that would be dynastys. Well the early 2000 Lakers were a dynasty ... but the 2008 Celtics should've been had KG never got hurt. All superior to the scavenger Spurs team of the 2000s. Hell, I take the Pistons run of greatness in 2004 over any in particular Spurs team.


That's too many "ifs" though.


I'd say 67 - 69 wins ... pushing 70 games, much like the '97 Bulls.

Hell in being honest both the '96 Bulls team and the '97 team each had like 3 - 4 games they should've won but lost for some dumb lucky reason.

The '96 Bulls should've been like 75 - 7

And the '97 Bulls should've been like 72 - 10

The sickness

:facepalm[/QUOTE]
Lol I agree

[QUOTE=Eric Cartman]That awkward moment when Steve Kerr is guarding himself.[/QUOTE Lol

the 08 Celtics are so overrated. They got taken to 7 against the Hawks, were a PJ brown jumper from losing to Lebron and Delonte West, beat a washed up Pistons team, and played LA without Bynum. DOMINATION!!!

[QUOTE=SwooshReturns]I honestly don't think so ...

I don't think any version of the Spurs could beat the '98 Bulls.

And that's probably the worst actual Bulls championship team, even if they were entertaining dominating through will power alone.

The Spurs were like the scavanger championship team. Always picking up rings on the down end of some dynasty, or before the up swing and creation of a new one.

Consistently very good (much like a microcosm for Duncan himself) ... never truly dominating and great.

People over-rank the hell out of Duncan and the Spurs, this guy never even went to back to back Finals, let alone win two of them in a row.

:oldlol:[/QUOTE]

worst post ever. spurs never dominated?? spurs were never great?? I guess having the best winning percentage in ALL OF AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL SPORTS IN AN 11 YEAR SPAN that KEEPS GROWING. I guess that isnt domination?? Thats domination of america. not just the NBA kid. the record of greatest winning percentage is still going to.

[QUOTE=Odinn]What an awful list.

2005 Spurs basically defeated 2004 Pistons. But not gonna talk about just Spurs. 2001 Lakers should be #1. And 2010 Lakers team wasn't a team of 2000's also not better than 2009 Lakers.[/QUOTE]

yah im telling you this swoosh guy is a complete joke. he just said 2004 pistons were better then 2005 spurs would beat the pistons in the finals :facepalm


everything he says is trollish just ignore him

[QUOTE=SwooshReturns]I do believe that yes ... 2008 Celtics and 2001 Lakers are the best teams I've seen since the 90's Bulls.

So the 2008 Celtics had two seven game series with youthful athletic teams that played to their disadvantages? They still won.

And then they put a pillow over the faces of the Lakers and smothered them to death.

I'm pretty sure they would've got back and won in 2009 had KG never went down with an injury that ended him prematurely ...

Guy was in legit MVP talks the season before.

2005 Spurs were the best Spurs team, IMO ... but I would rank them 4th or 5th best out of the championship teams of the 2000's

1) 2008 Celtics
2) 2001 Lakers
3) 2004 Pistons
4) 2005 Spurs
5) 2010 Lakers[/QUOTE]


Are you saying the 08 Cavaliers were youthful and atheltic? They had a starting lineup of Delonte West, Wally Szcerbiak, Lebron, Ben Wallace, and Big Z. And they played at one of slowest paces in the NBA. Watch the games jackass. Don't talk out your ass.

swoosh is getting owned all over the place. too easy to spot a troll