jaze89 wrote:NYK_89 wrote:ChiCitySPORTS#1 wrote:Good God just shut up. The Pacers finished the season on fire that year after Frank Vogel took over. They were and are a good team. The Heat-Bulls series was very close in every game except for game 1 in which the Bulls won.
Game 1 was a blow out Bulls win
Game 2 it was a 3 point game with 2 miuntes to go
Game 3 the Heat had a 7 point lead with 3 minutes to go
Game 4 went into Overtime.
Game 5 LeBron and Wade closed a 10 point lead to win the game by 3
Every game was close except for game 1, which was a Bulls win. Stop crying.
4-1 is not close, dunno what to tell you where you got in in your head that i said the games wern't close i don't even know but ****.. Don't get so **** butt hurt. Yeah the games were close but 4-1 is just not for a ECF
Also on fire????????? 20-18 yeah he sure tore the league up, Knicks were like 20-7 underwoodson look what the Heat did to them series was never even close last year.
If that's the case why the hell are you arguing? Losing a series 4-1 against the Heat = not close, Winning a series 4-1 against the Pacers = close series.
....? Damn what are you guys even responding with, there is a difference between two 58+ win teams squaring off in the ECF and the 8th seed who is 37-45 playing a 62 win team. Was the series close to going the pacers way obviously not but where the hell did i ever say that, i just said the series was weirdly close and anyone who watched those games would agree. You expected a 4 game sweep all by 20 points not absolute battles where the bulls come back and win in crunch time.
There is nothing impressive about that series whatsoever, ALL I AM SAYING. Anyone looking at the overall context rather then trying to take some out of context piece of information and using it to attack me could see that.
Since you have edited in the hawks i will tell you this.
1. They were a second round team due to the lack of depth in the east, those 2 wins where their first 2 wins in the 2nd round of the era. Which one does not fit here. Chicago Boston(defending EC champ) Miami Atlanta Memphis OKC Dallas, and the defending champion Lakers... They were by far the weakest 2nd round team, as the 1 seed they earned that and the series once again was without doubt Chicago the whole time. Just saying that going to 6 against the hawks is not something you look back on and and are proud of.
In the original context i just argued that they were not as impressive that year as i expected. And i 100% stand by that, if I was a betting man i would have taken the sweep in each series and a 10+ point differential average over the course, Its the playoffs and these things happen because teams are going all out etc (see Boston) but again at the same time I cannot say i looked at those 2 series and thought anything other then wow they better get it together or else they aren't going to have a chance.