RealGM

Aki is the one of the biggest homers I've ever seen. Guy won't admit to any flaw

You can say "Pau Gasol broke a nail" and he would try to come up with some way to defend it

PP 4 Three wrote:

AChand90 wrote:Because KG got injured.

Yup.

Oh god here we go again.

Jwade wrote:

Blue_and_Whte wrote: Yeah like that's changed.

I'd say players going to different teams via trades or FA signings.

No one said it's changed sherlock. That was one of 3 contributing factors.

Welcome to English.

Wow...Here you go miss

Joke answer: Because the spurs decided they'd only win on odd numbered years.

But seriously, it's a pretty small sample size so in the absence of a truly dominant team, it's not out of the ordinary to not see a repeat champion in the span of 6 years.

Another team didn't three peat since 2002 because there was still 1 team good enough to consistently beat SA - the Lakers.

its simple...its an extremely hard feat to do. Only the best of the best teams do it.

Which is why I laugh when some people claim the Spurs are the best team of the decade over the Lakers when they couldn't defend even one championship title.

That's okay because the Lakers are repeating this year.

Many more good players, teams are more balanced with eachother

LOL, 5 peat for Spurs WoW

What's funny is that the Pistons were the ones who came closest. Just eight points off.

There is a lot of luck involved too. But, if you're lucky and good, you can repeat.

But it starts with a coach that sees the regular season as a tuneup for the post season.
Don't burn the players out trying to win every game when you can save them for later.
Experiment during the season with different lineups even at the expense of losing some games.
Match ups, this is a huge reason that some teams always get back to the championship.
Motivation, probably the best asset a coach can have.

Weren't the Kings suppose to beat them one of those years, except the refs blatantly fixed the game. Sorry if I got my nba history twisted.

because

Crowley wrote:Weren't the Kings suppose to beat them one of those years, except the refs blatantly fixed the game. Sorry if I got my nba history twisted.

I'd say the officiating in the Mavs vs Warriors series when the Mavs won 67 games was worse, the Mavs weren't getting the benefit of the calls. No, the Kings choked. They had plenty of chances to win.

Because Lakers > NBA amirite

Crowley wrote:Weren't the Kings suppose to beat them one of those years, except the refs blatantly fixed the game. Sorry if I got my nba history twisted.

what does suppose to mean? Had home court advantage, had chance to go up 3-1, went to gm 7 at home and lost? I guess ALL our Laker championship were FIXED and a team like Mia won it FAIR and SQUARE

wone wrote:

Sedale Threatt wrote:

Spurtatcus wrote:.4 and Manu's foul.

Otherwise, there's a Spurs 5-peat.

/thread

The Spurs haven't even strung TWO together and you're dreaming about five?!?!

Although I'm not so sure the Spurs would've beaten the '04 Pistons had not .4 happened, I know for a fact that they would've beaten Miami....Wade doesn't go off on Bowen like that and Tim Duncan never loses in the Finals..

Can't get to the finals if you keep losing in the confenrece finals.

2002 WCF game 6 . enough said.

I'm sure stern will find a way to string together a few consec. championships for Lebron + his sidekick, once they move them into a better market.

Duncecaps: The Lakers three peated. If you want to discount the 2002 title, change the 4th digit in the header from 2 to 1.

Sting3r wrote:its simple...its an extremely hard feat to do. Only the best of the best teams do it.

Which is why I laugh when some people claim the Spurs are the best team of the decade over the Lakers when they couldn't defend even one championship title.

These best of the best teams are immune to injury or what?