What were some SAVAGE playoff series beatdowns by a great team over another great team?

[CKRT]

'17 Warriors over Cavs? Last years Cavs team was a title team most years and the Warriors blew them out 3/5 games.

[Joey Wheeler]

Whatever. Two great teams and OKC won that series pretty convincingly.

Hella lmao bro.

We’re talking SAVAGE beatdowns, not “pretty convincing”.

Anyways, a series in which they get outscored overall and are a 1 point game from it going 7 isn’t even convincing.

I thought it was pretty savage. OKC had long stretches where they completely dominated the Spurs, regardless of what the score showed at the end. I certainly didn't expect it.

It was about as close a series as it can possibly get. OKC won game 2 by 1 point. In the final 14 seconds of the game, there was an offensive foul on Ginobili that'd likely have won the Spurs the match + Parker had an open potential game winner. If the Spurs win that game, the series is probably theirs.

Even putting that aside, with the Spurs leading 2-1, they were also up going into the 4th quarter of game 4, where Durant had a massive quarter to tie the series. With the series at 2-2, Spurs led the match going into the final minutes of game 5 and had multiple chances to pull away...

In other words, the Spurs were a could easily have won the series, it was decided by a few calls/plays/shots. Tbh, if the Thunder had closed out game 6 of the WCF vs the Warriors, that series would have a better case for being a 'savage beatdown' than the Spurs series, given how much of a blowout games 3 and 4 were in OKC.

[CodeBreaker]

2017 Spurs against 2017 Warriors in WCF Game 1...

[pandrade83]

I think '89 Finals needs taken off the board. Why punish the Lakers when they were without Magic AND Scott? Might as well put '17 W's over Spurs while you're at it.

'91 Bulls over '91 Pistons

[Rapcity_11]

'17 Warriors over Cavs? Last years Cavs team was a title team most years and the Warriors blew them out 3/5 games.

Eh, the series was a coinflip from being 2-2. And game 5 was absolutely not a blowout.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

83' Sixers over Lakers
85' Celtics over Sixers
89' Pistons over Lakers
95' Rockets over Magic
96' Bulls over Magic
98' Jazz over Lakers
04' Pistons over Lakers
11' Heat over Bulls
14' Spurs over Heat

The 95 Finals? I'm forever happy at the outcome of that series as a Rockets/Dream fan but I think to this day if that series was replayed 99 out of 100 times that series that 4-0 result doesn't happen and I'd go as far as to say the Magic could've won that series if replayed. 2 of the 4 games were decided by less than 5 points. I don't think on paper the Rockets were anymore talented than they were.

Horry and Elie has incredible series by their standards that they never closely replicated at any point of the rest of their careers.

I think the game 1 loss just sunk Orlando mentally and they didn't know how to deal with adversity. They'd bought into a lot of the media hype about it being "their time" and it didn't turn out that way in game 1.

The 91 Finals was a real savage beat down. Chicago with peak MJ were a pack of hungry wolves. That series even if worthy and Scott were healthy would've probably had the same result of the games outcomes.

I remember Magic talking to reporters I think they were down 3-1....."they're kicking our butts"

[Pg81]

83' Sixers over Lakers
85' Celtics over Sixers
89' Pistons over Lakers
95' Rockets over Magic
96' Bulls over Magic
98' Jazz over Lakers
04' Pistons over Lakers
11' Heat over Bulls
14' Spurs over Heat

The 95 Finals? I'm forever happy at the outcome of that series as a Rockets/Dream fan but I think to this day if that series was replayed 99 out of 100 times that series that 4-0 result doesn't happen and I'd go as far as to say the Magic could've won that series if replayed. 2 of the 4 games were decided by less than 5 points. I don't think on paper the Rockets were anymore talented than they were.

Horry and Elie has incredible series by their standards that they never closely replicated at any point of the rest of their careers.

I think the game 1 loss just sunk Orlando mentally and they didn't know how to deal with adversity. They'd bought into a lot of the media hype about it being "their time" and it didn't turn out that way in game 1.

The 91 Finals was a real savage beat down. Chicago with peak MJ were a pack of hungry wolves. That series even if worthy and Scott were healthy would've probably had the same result of the games outcomes.

I remember Magic talking to reporters I think they were down 3-1....."they're kicking our butts"

That Lakers team was a far cry from its 80s glory though. Not only were Scott and Worthy injured, they had lost Cooper, their best interior defender and Kareem as well. On top of that they were all in their early 30s and clearly past their prime.
I for once dare say that Magic did a better job than MJ would have in the same situation. Just my opinion though.

[rebirthoftheM]

Some pretty loose definitions of "great" in here.

This. Perhaps people are reading great within the context of a season though.. so X team is great if we focus on that season alone. Historically though, there are only a handful of great teams.

83 Sixers v Lakers is definitely a worthy contender. Lakers had their main guys playing yet got thrashed.

89 though? Nahhh. Magic was out of sorts health wise. Barely played. And B-Scott was missing. Pistons probably would have taken the series in any case, but that was not a fair fight.

[AdagioPace]

I think '89 Finals needs taken off the board. Why punish the Lakers when they were without Magic AND Scott? Might as well put '17 W's over Spurs while you're at it.

'91 Bulls over '91 Pistons

it was a beatdown
but it was not against a great team

unless you want credit for beating Patty freaking Mills starting at point (with a rookie as the second PG) and Kyle Anderson getting major minutes

[andrewww]

Some pretty loose definitions of "great" in here.

This. Perhaps people are reading great within the context of a season though.. so X team is great if we focus on that season alone. Historically though, there are only a handful of great teams.

83 Sixers v Lakers is definitely a worthy contender. Lakers had their main guys playing yet got thrashed.

89 though? Nahhh. Magic was out of sorts health wise. Barely played. And B-Scott was missing. Pistons probably would have taken the series in any case, but that was not a fair fight.

+1000. This term is being thrown around too loosely. When you have matchups that are expected to be close to 50/50 between elite teams (public perception) that end up being a beat down, then some of these series being mentioned like OKC/SAS absolutely does not fit the criteria.

The most notable beatdowns post 2000 for me:

2001 WCF Lakers over Spurs
2014 Finals Spurs over Heat
2017 Finals Warriors over Cavs

Notice how Lebron's teams are on the receiving end of two of these beat downs? Both on the heels of some extremely fortunate and league extended 4-3 comebacks from the year before lol.

[Kabookalu]

They're not a "great" team in the historical context, Portland was a really good team that won 54 games in the west, but the Spurs over the Blazers in 2014 was a surprising beat down. The season series was split 2-2, the Spurs were coming off a surprisingly tough series against the 8th seeded Mavericks while the Blazers took care of a really damn good Rockets team in one less game, yet when the two met they didn't look like they were playing the same sport.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Some pretty loose definitions of "great" in here.

The 1986 WCF was imho THE most impressive playoff series beat down in NBA history:

62-20 LA were like 7-1 over 2 seasons vs Houston's Twin Towers and flat out owned them preceding that series.

They were in the midst of winning titles. Boston vs LA rematch was thought to be a foregone conclusion.

Magic n Worthy were at their peaks. Kareem was still a all star calibre C and dumping in 40 pt games vs Houston.

Hakeem and Ralph were relatively inexperienced and had no real playoff mettle. Starting 15 ppg PG Lucas was suspended for the season. Lloyd and Wiggins were battling drug abuse behind the scenes.

Nobody saw that coming. That was the only time a "healthy" Magic/Kareem/Worthy led team were utterly destroyed in the playoffs.

[pandrade83]

I think '89 Finals needs taken off the board. Why punish the Lakers when they were without Magic AND Scott? Might as well put '17 W's over Spurs while you're at it.

'91 Bulls over '91 Pistons

it was a beatdown
but it was not against a great team

unless you want credit for beating Patty freaking Mills starting at point (with a rookie as the second PG) and Kyle Anderson getting major minutes

The W's reference was to point out how silly the '89 Finals was. Detroit won Game 1 - no Byron Scott. Lakers were leading late in the 3rd of Game 2 when Magic pulled his hamstring. If Kawhi stays on the court, it doesn't mean SAS wins - but it's a different series.

If Magic stays on the court, it doesn't mean LA wins - but it's a different series. Same concept.

[ardee]

2001 Lakers over Spurs
2014 Spurs over Thunder

Are the first ones that come to mind.