West and East; Overrated and Underrated

Brenice · Post #1 » by **Brenice** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:17 pm

Do you folks think the East is really as bad as they say, compared to the West? I think maybe the experts are gutless and make their predictions based on previous seasons. Like favoring San Antonio pre-season and not hyping New Orleans. And while New Orleans pretty much led the West thru out the season, they still said San Antonio come playoff time.

In the same manner they act like the East is garbage. Like the East has only 1 or 2 teams that can compete with the best western teams.

What do you think?

Post #2 » by **bleu** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:28 pm

Umm...Yes.

Lazy Faizy · Post #3 » by **Lazy Faizy** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:31 pm

Well I don't think San Antonio is overrated at all. They turn it up a notch come playoff time every yr, as evident in the first round this season (whooped the Suns ass). And I think Boston and Detroit are the only East teams that can compete with the top teams in the West this year (Spurs, Hornets, Lakers), so yeah, the "experts" are pretty much right.

TAI8 · Post #4 » by **TAI8** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:35 pm

New Orleans was the real deal. Anyone who thought Dallas was going to win was a blind fool. They deserve props for posing the toughest challenge and threat to the defending champs. Boston is the only team in the East that can truly contend for the title.

Lazy Faizy · Post #5 » by **Lazy Faizy** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:35 pm

TAI8 wrote:New Orleans was the real deal. Anyone who thought Dallas was going to win was a blind fool. They deserve props for posing the toughest challenge and threat to the defending champs. Boston is the only team in the East that can truly contend for the title.

I'd take Detroit over Boston to win the title any day of the week.

Rccanes2311 · Post #6 » by **Rccanes2311** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:41 pm

Da Next Tmac wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I'd take Detroit over Boston to win the title any day of the week.

Gotta agree with this. You must have no watched that Boston Atl series where they almost lost to the worst team in the playoffs. Boston is not as good as their regular season record at least they haven't been from what I've seen so far.

shaqfan1 · Post #7 » by **shaqfan1** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:41 pm

There are a few West teams that get hyped every year for winning a lot of games, but come playoff team, these teams get trounced. The problem is the West has a few teams that are really good at offense, but have no clue on defense. During the regular season you can outscore your opponents and not play any defense, but the playoffs are all about defense. I'm talking about teams like Denver, Dallas, and Phoenix.

A.J. · Post #8 » by **A.J.** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:45 pm

The East is overrated. A lottery team in the West would have made the playoffs.

Brenice · Post #9 » by **Brenice** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:50 pm

Winning the championship is not the point. Boston may not make it out of the East. New Orleans could lose to Detroit, Boston, and Cleveland. The Lakers too. Boston had problems with Atlanta. Detroit had problems with Philly(one of the hottest teams in the NBA at the end of season). Cleveland had problems with the Wizards(who swept New Orleans) with an ineffective Gilbert Arenas. For the Spurs, outside of Duncan, Manu, and Parker, they are an old team and as a whole, the team is not as good. They are just like Boston, 3 man teams that are overrated because of a lack of quality depth. Any of the remaining teams could win it. If you ask me who is the best, I say the Lakers or Detroit. They all are pretty close though. That is why there are a lot of 7 game series. In both conferences.

massey1992 · Post #10 » by **massey1992** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:52 pm

No it's just that the East isn't as good as the west haha.

sixer4ever · Post #11 » by **sixer4ever** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:52 pm

A.J. wrote:The East is overrated. A lottery team in the West would have made the playoffs.

How is the East overrated?? Everyone says it sucks so I guess you think it sucks 3 times as bad as people say?

Also, as bad as the Hawks were, Seattle would not have beat them out for the 8th spot (same goes for the T-wolves, Grizzlies, and Clippers). I agree that the East sucks and that only Detroit and Boston would have any shot at competing in the West but the East is definitely not overated.

Brenice · Post #12 » by **Brenice** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:55 pm

A.J. wrote:The East is overrated. A lottery team in the West would have made the playoffs.

How is the East overrated? I did not say that the east is the best conference. Nobody says that. I just don't think they are as sorry as people say and the west is not as good as they say. To say the east is overrated is to mean that it is sorrier than most people say.

A.J. · Post #13 » by **A.J.** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:56 pm

sixer4ever wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

How is the East overrated?? Everyone says it sucks so I guess you think it sucks 3 times as bad as people say?

Also, as bad as the Hawks were, Seattle would not have beat them out for the 8th spot (same goes for the T-wolves, Grizzlies, and Clippers). I agree that the East sucks and that only Detroit and Boston would have any shot at competing in the West but the East is definitely not overated.

If the Hawks were in the West they would battle for a top 5 or 10 pick in the lottery.

The Blazers would have been a 7 or 8th seed, and the Warriors would have been a 7th or 8th seed.

Storm Surge · Post #14 » by **Storm Surge** » Sat May 17, 2008 5:56 pm

well Boston "the best team in the league" can't win on the road all of a sudden.

People may say being in the East inflated their record, they are not as good as their record.

Brenice · Post #15 » by **Brenice** » Sat May 17, 2008 6:03 pm

People. The question is NOT which conference is best? Like Stor Surge said "well Boston "the best team in the league" can't win on the road all of a sudden." Boston is OVERRATED, meaning not as good as advertised. But, what is Boston's record against Western Conference teams? My point is that the east is not AS BAD as advertised and the West is not AS GOOD as advertised. I am not saying the West is not the best. I think they are. But the gap is not as big as they say.

RoxFan08 · Post #16 » by **RoxFan08** » Sat May 17, 2008 6:13 pm

Brenice wrote:People. The question is NOT which conference is best? Like Stor Surge said "well Boston "the best team in the league" can't win on the road all of a sudden." Boston is OVERRATED, meaning not as good as advertised. My point is that the east is not AS BAD as advertised and the West is not AS GOOD as advertised. I am not saying the West is not the best. I think they are. But the gap is not as big as they say.

I completely understand what you are trying to say and I, for one, respectfully disagree. We all agree pretty much indisputably that the West far outclasses the East, evidence being a 50 win team (GS) not making the playoffs while a team with a losing record (Atlanta) doing the same (against lesser competition, I might add) in the East.

The West, despite having 4 truly deplorable teams, (Minny, LAC, Seattle, Memphis) had a ridiculour .580 or thereabouts win percentage in interconference play. Really, with the possible exception of Denver, no one would pick any East playoff team besides Detroit and Boston against ANY Western playoff team.

As we've discussed, Boston is perhaps overrated, but I'm not particularly impressed with Detroit either. They are the same, significantly lesser squad they've trudged out the last 5 years, and they are getting older and less good.

Frankly, I think only Boston has a chance of taking whoever comes out of the West, and I think the West will win it all. In fact, I think (call me a homer) that any of the top 4 Western playoff teams would take the trophy against the East.

The definition of sucking is when the real championship is played in one conference finals.

Post #17 » by **bleu** » Sat May 17, 2008 6:15 pm

RoxFan08 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I completely understand what you are trying to say and I, for one, respectfully disagree. We all agree pretty much indisputably that the West far outclasses the East, evidence being a 50 win team (GS) not making the playoffs while a team with a losing record (Atlanta) doing the same (against lesser competition, I might add) in the East.

The West, despite having 4 truly deplorable teams, (Minny, LAC, Seattle, Memphis) had a ridiculour .580 or thereabouts win percentage in interconference play. Really, with the possible exception of Denver, no one would pick any East playoff team besides Detroit and Boston against ANY Western playoff team.

As we've discussed, Boston is perhaps overrated, but I'm not particularly impressed with Detroit either. They are the same, significantly lesser squad they've trudged out the last 5 years, and they are getting older and less good.

Frankly, I think only Boston has a chance of taking whoever comes out of the West, and I think the West will win it all. In fact, I think (call me a homer) that any of the top 4 Western playoff teams would take the trophy against the East.

The definition of sucking is when the real championship is played in one conference finals.

I'm just trying to figure out why you haven't changed your sig yet...

Manocad · Post #18 » by **Manocad** » Sat May 17, 2008 6:25 pm

RoxFan08 wrote:We all agree pretty much indisputably that the West far outclasses the East, evidence being a 50 win team (GS) not making the playoffs while a team with a losing record (Atlanta) doing the same (against lesser competition, I might add) in the East.

To me that's evidence that the lower teams in the West win against each other but lose to all of the top teams, while the lower teams in the East are occasionally competitive with the top teams. So there are some inflated records.

The playoffs have been evidence. When a 50-win team in the West looks like absolute garbage against another 50-win team in the West it certainly appears that the records aren't clear indicators of how competitive the teams are.

Brenice · Post #19 » by **Brenice** » Sat May 17, 2008 6:25 pm

Roxfan

If that is true, why is Boston having so much trouble in the East? They went 7 games with that under .500 team Atlanta(they are an up-and-coming team). And what was Boston's record against the West? I think the best teams overrall are LA and Detroit. Next Boston, NewOrleans, Cleveland or San Antonio. Who wins? Good question.
I am not saying the West is overrated to a point that the east is better.

sixer4ever · Post #20 » by **sixer4ever** » Sat May 17, 2008 6:28 pm

A.J. wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

If the Hawks were in the West they would battle for a top 5 or 10 pick in the lottery.

The Blazers would have been a 7 or 8th seed, and the Warriors would have been a 7th or 8th seed.

I never even hinted at the fact that the hawks would make the playoffs in the West. I was simply pointing out that you were incorrect by saying that any Western Conference lottery team could have made the playoffs in the East.