RealGM

I always thought, in general, the eastern conference played with more grit and toughness than western conference teams. In the thunder-heat series it looked to me like the thunder got hit in the mouth and didn't know what to do. The heat just kept punching. I think the celtics would have beaten them too

mark my words, eastern conference teams will take the title a lot more times this decade

If im not mistaken there has only been 3 eastern champs in the past 13 years. It was no myth.

Now 4 Eastern Champs since the new millennium began.

This is a new era. I kept on telling fools on the the general board they had no idea how good the top (Not bottom-feeders) Eastern teams are on the defensive end. They didn't care, they thought the Western teams are too good offensively to be stopped and that we'd be massacred.

The same people now saying OKC sucks were saying the Heat were going down in 5 games max 10 days ago.

James Harden didn't magically start sucking. Those drives he got against the Spurs, Lakers, and Mavericks were not allowed by the Heat defense. Trapped him. His jumpshot did leave him, I'll give that.

Edit:
The West is better overall, however the top teams in the East can compete with them. It's not like previous years when the East was sending out trash and the "real Finals" were the WC Finals.

True, but theres only one team who can compete with the west from the east TODAY. And thats the Heat. SO i wouldnt go so far as saying they would take more titles thsi decade. P.S i dont think the Celtics would have beat the Thunder. Heat won because Thunder had no answer for Lebron. Certainly the Celtics dont have a player equivalent to Lebron

Bulls would beat the Thunder with a healthy roster

SweetTouch wrote:Bulls would beat the Thunder with a healthy roster

The Bulls would destroy the west with a fully healthy roster. We would have more trouble because of our size disadvantage, but we still would win.

I agree the advantage is very overrated. The West has won so many championships b/c they have the two best teams from the past decade. The Spurs and Lakers have won 9 of the last 14 championships. There are very few year in there were the eastern conference team was a pushover. Every year there are a bout 6 or so legitimately good teams in the NBA and they are pretty much split evenly. The West gets a lot of credit for parody but their bottom seeds would get swept by the easts top seeds.

Also I do think the Celtics would have played the thunder well. The Celtics make you play 24 seconds on both sides of the ball and the Thunder are not smart enough to handle that. I also think the Celtics would be better able to handle the Thunder defensively b/c the could contain westbrook and even harden better. The one major problem would be Durant but I think it would have been a very similar series where it was 1-1 after 2 and then came down to who executed down the stretch.

SweetTouch wrote:Bulls would beat the Thunder with a healthy roster

I don't know about that. who other than Rose is going to score on them, assuming he can get a lay up over Ibaka?

With the exception of Dallas, the spurs and lakers are the only teams to play in and win the finals since 99. People say the west is stronger because it has more contenders than the east, but I think that's a load of crap. The west has just always had the 2 best teams.

Absence of bosh made the difference. Hence why we suffered vs indiana, and boston.
With bosh, and much weaker team last year we won boston 4 - 1. It was going to be same scenario.
But bosh absence gave KG room to do all what he wants.

Thats why I think OKC would win indiana, so would they win boston.

babycry14 wrote:

SweetTouch wrote:Bulls would beat the Thunder with a healthy roster

The Bulls would destroy the west with a fully healthy roster. We would have more trouble because of our size disadvantage, but we still would win.

Really? we underrating Thunder already? Bulls were still a one man team last year and that would be their downfall again until Rose got some help.

905 to 416 wrote:If im not mistaken there has only been 3 eastern champs in the past 13 years. It was no myth.

No kidding .

There has only been 3 teams that has won out of the West the past 13 years.... that doesn't mean the West has been superior, it means the superior teams have just been in the West.

I don't see anyone challenging the Thunder, the Lakers don't have the money to do it, unless they trade Pau for like 3-4 people.

Spurs, I officially give up on them. I thought we'd meet them in the Finals, but this same Thunder team we beat in 5 and they lost 4 in a row to them, WHILE being up 2-0 lol.


Nuggets look really stacked though... good lord. But their 3 point line defense was the worst ever, we are the best when our 3's are falling. That's a whole other story though.

Right now only teams that can challenge Miami is Boston if Ray Allen stays and if they improve their roster, Bulls ( if Rose back, 2nd option scorer, etc etc), and New York. I expect us to come out of top for the next 2-3 years lol.

But when we are done winning titles, it will be the Thunder's turn IMO.

Yeah I think we could stop Thunder winning titles in the next 2-3 years but after that I can see them winning a few in a row.

As good as our defense was OKC still averaged 98 ppg over the series, compared to our 102 ppg.

In addition to good defense you have to be able to score at a high rate in order to beat them, which is exactly what the Heat did.

I don't think Boston/Chicago/etc could have kept pace with them. Westbrook Durant killed us. Not sure if the other teams out East have the firepower. Who is going to score points? Loozer? They don't sweep, but I think OKC takes the series.

I think Boston or Chicago could have beaten the Thunder. The Pacers would have pushed them to at least 6. The top of the East knows how to ball.

Knicks are going to be good too next year after a full training camp. Much though it pains me to say. They'll take Boston's spot if Boston blows it up.

The great thing is that besides the Celtics we have a mental edge on all of the other top teams in the east right now, where it will take more than just outplaying us, they'll have to get past the mental blocks that tell them they have no chance.

EscapoTHB wrote:I think Boston or Chicago could have beaten the Thunder. The Pacers would have pushed them to at least 6. The top of the East knows how to ball.

Knicks are going to be good too next year after a full training camp. Much though it pains me to say. They'll take Boston's spot if Boston blows it up.

The great thing is that besides the Celtics we have a mental edge on all of the other top teams in the east right now, where it will take more than just outplaying us, they'll have to get past the mental blocks that tell them they have no chance.

Yeah Celtics are the only team that isn't scared of the Heat, but the Heat have also been the team that ended their title hopes two years straight. And may as well have ended their big 3 run

I see the media hyping up Brooklyn vs the Heat soon

Moggs24 wrote:I agree the advantage is very overrated. The West has won so many championships b/c they have the two best teams from the past decade. The Spurs and Lakers have won 9 of the last 14 championships. There are very few year in there were the eastern conference team was a pushover. Every year there are a bout 6 or so legitimately good teams in the NBA and they are pretty much split evenly. The West gets a lot of credit for parody but their bottom seeds would get swept by the easts top seeds.

Also I do think the Celtics would have played the thunder well. The Celtics make you play 24 seconds on both sides of the ball and the Thunder are not smart enough to handle that. I also think the Celtics would be better able to handle the Thunder defensively b/c the could contain westbrook and even harden better. The one major problem would be Durant but I think it would have been a very similar series where it was 1-1 after 2 and then came down to who executed down the stretch.

Well, they took the Heat to 7, given the Thunder were just a copycat with slightly less talent and inept coaching, the Celtics probably mow them down in 6.

I'd agree ^^. I think Celtics would have handled some business. For all the talk about their inability to generate offense, they seemed to be generating plenty against us, and our defense is superior to what the Thunder would have shown.

The western conference have more good teams 1 thru 8 than the east and more fun to watch. But we had the two best teams in the NBA in Miami and Chicago.