RealGM

I come in peace, but would like to get your thoughts on this and I guess it was " bad timing" to ask on the general board.

If the Spurs championship in 1999 was an asterisk championship next to it because they won during a short season, why is the Heat's championship this year any different?

Doesn't bother me either way. a ring is a ring, playoff still the same. maybe try asking over in the heats board or the spurs boards instead.

Has anyone said there won't be an asterisk?

Phil Jackson said the Spur's championship had an asterisk. Phil as great of a coach he is (and I m a big fan of his and for my Lakers) I do believe he has a slightly small character at times when it comes to giving others credit. That is one of the few things I dislike about him.

I believe Miami won this championship truly with emphasis, and through one of the most grueling playoff runs to the last game. They deserve all credit and congrats to them. There will be more for them.

2012 was an asterisk year, Miami was handed that title by Stern.

So because Miami won it was an asterisk season? Get out of here. You wouldn't be pushing this agenda if we won.

CKRT wrote:So because Miami won it was an asterisk season? Get out of here. You wouldn't be pushing this agenda if we won.

If we won in the manner of the Miami Heat, I myself may not "push that agenda", but I wouldn't object to others saying so.

Sports are strictly entertainment, basketball in particular is little more than than the glorification of methodically tossing a spherical object through a toroidal object. Bias need not apply to such trivialities, per my perspective at least. The NBA finals were a poorly officiated joke, regardless of whose names were on front of the jerseys.

A spade is a spade is a spade. Denying it doesn't make you a better fan, it makes you blind.

^ Sorry but your post is nothing but 'smart' babble just for the sake of looking smart.
I'll disregard your first part and answer the second part; yes, it was a poorly officiated finals in some respects , as well as all other playoff series, and all series played in the history of the game.

But to deny a 'special' championship doesnt make one blind, but makes you naive for even considering it.
thanks.

Absolutely, no way Miami could of held up over 82 games.

There should be an asterisk by the championship because there was something different that season from other seasons, but i dont think it cheapens the championship any they had to win 15/16 playoff (cant remember if 1st rd is 5 or 7 game series) games just like any other champion.

702Celtics wrote:2012 was an asterisk year, Miami was handed that title by Lebron.

Fixed

I don't really see how they would be treated differently. I don't really see how/why you can be mad that Phil specifically called the Spurs one not a true championship and didn't comment on this one... he was just frustrated that he didn't win. It's not like he is the keeper of who has one championships and who has not.

To me, both of those teams won the championship in those seasons as much as any team won them in other seasons. I get that a shorter/more compact season gives an advantage to certain teams, but it isn't like every championship ever played in a non-82 game shouldn't be counted or should be thrown out (what about everything prior to '68?)

wizkid27 wrote:I don't really see how/why you can be mad that Phil specifically called the Spurs one not a true championship and didn't comment on this one... he was just frustrated that he didn't win.

Jackson wasn't a coach that season. This makes no sense.