Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ
Rob Diaz wrote:The early 2000s Lakers went up against a terrible group of perimeter players.
.barborous wrote:Posters are pretending this is a "who would actually win the matchup" thread, but like every other longitudinal team/player comparison thread, it's actually a "evaluate how much general admiration is associated with each team" thread.
To be completely honest, the 14 Spurs would absolutely eviscerate older teams, including the heralded 01 Lakers, that had no idea how to defend the 3. The game has evolved. More recent teams would stand a better chance. I think the 14 Spurs should be favored against everyone except maybe the 12 Heat and the 08 Celtics, which are tossups.
Peja Stojakovic wrote:Jimmy butler, with no regard for human life
therealbig3 wrote:Yep, the same team that the 2014 Mavs took to 7 games would take out a far superior 2011 Mavs team, with a far superior version of Dirk, in 5 games.
Blackfyre wrote:Rob Diaz wrote:The early 2000s Lakers went up against a terrible group of perimeter players.
Jason Williams, Peja Stojakovic, Mike Bibby, Penny Hardaway, Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion, Scottie Pippen, Steve Smith, Jalen Rose, Reggie Miller, Mark Jackson, Allen Iverson, Richard Jefferson.
They all sucked
barborous wrote:Posters are pretending this is a "who would actually win the matchup" thread, but like every other longitudinal team/player comparison thread, it's actually a "evaluate how much general admiration is associated with each team" thread.
To be completely honest, the 14 Spurs would absolutely eviscerate older teams, including the heralded 01 Lakers, that had no idea how to defend the 3. The game has evolved. More recent teams would stand a better chance. I think the 14 Spurs should be favored against everyone except maybe the 12 Heat and the 08 Celtics, which are tossups.
mademan wrote:therealbig3 wrote:Yep, the same team that the 2014 Mavs took to 7 games would take out a far superior 2011 Mavs team, with a far superior version of Dirk, in 5 games.
Be conistent with that logic. Atl and a mediocre Cavs teams with Lebron struggling for most of the series took the Celtics to 7. But you have them as better than the Spurs.
therealbig3 wrote:mademan wrote:therealbig3 wrote:Yep, the same team that the 2014 Mavs took to 7 games would take out a far superior 2011 Mavs team, with a far superior version of Dirk, in 5 games.
Be conistent with that logic. Atl and a mediocre Cavs teams with Lebron struggling for most of the series took the Celtics to 7. But you have them as better than the Spurs.
Um, already addressed the point about Atlanta (maybe I did that in another thread). That was maybe the most lopsided 7-game series ever if you look at point differential.
As for the Cavs-Celtics series...yeah, Boston was hella lucky to win that series, they were actually outscored during that series. LeBron struggled...but so did Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. I'm not going to act like Boston toyed around with Cleveland before finishing them off...that wasn't the case.
Playoff series are about matchups. I think the 08 Celtics match up well with the Spurs, and they have the defensive IQ and personnel to slow down their offense more than anyone else this year was able to. Kevin Garnett, with Thibs and Rivers on the sidelines, is exactly what immediately comes to mind when I think about what kind of defense I would need to slow down the 2014 Spurs.
With regards to the 2014 Mavs...they're built pretty similarly to the 2011 Mavs...just with worse players. So the matchups would be similar if the 2011 Mavs played the 2014 Spurs...but the 2011 Mavs would have superior talent compared to their 2014 team.
Just because the 2014 Spurs weren't beaten doesn't mean they're unbeatable. They were pushed to the brink by the Mavs in the 1st round, and after taking care of business against Portland, they lucked out somewhat by facing OKC without Ibaka for the first 2 games. I still think the Spurs win that series if OKC had Ibaka, but considering that with Ibaka, the Spurs and Thunder split the last 4 games of the series, it's totally possible that OKC would have beaten them. And remember, they also faced by far the weakest Heat team in the big 3 era.
therealbig3 wrote:And if we're going to talk about how the 14 Spurs would present major problems to the Shaq-Kobe Lakers...what about Shaq and Kobe and the problems they present to the 14 Spurs? The Spurs don't have ANYBODY that can guard Shaq, and Kobe routinely raped the Spurs during their defensive heyday.
How do the Spurs slow them down?
Basketballefan wrote:Surprised there was so many people that Picked 2012 Heat over them. It doesn't make sense to me, the 2012 Heat were not better than 2013 heat imo. Also i don't see how this isn't the best Spurs team ever.
therealbig3 wrote:Basketballefan wrote:Surprised there was so many people that Picked 2012 Heat over them. It doesn't make sense to me, the 2012 Heat were not better than 2013 heat imo. Also i don't see how this isn't the best Spurs team ever.
I think the fact that Wade was a lot better in 2012 than he was in 2013, and LeBron being about the same level in 2012, would have made a bigger difference. Bosh did get injured during the playoffs, so picking the 2012 Heat would be dependent on Bosh being able to play full minutes, like he did in the 2012 Finals. Role players like Battier and Miller stepped up big in the playoffs that year too, and Chalmers wasn't completely useless, he could actually be counted on to hit some 3s and have some randomly good games here and there.