RealGM

2 Teams evenly matched, who would take this series?

2003-2004 Minnesota Timberwolves (58-24)
PG Cassell/Darrick Martin
SG Sprewell/Fred Hoiberg
SF Hassell/Wally Szczerbiak
PF Garnett/Mark Madsen
C E.Johnson/Michael Olowokandi

vs

2005-2006 Dallas Mavericks - (60-22)
PG Terry/Harris
SG Griffin/Stackhouse
SF Howard/Daniels
PF Dirk/Van Horn
C Diop/Dampier

NOTE: Dallas gets Homecourt due to the better record.

Mavericks. The Timberwolves had really sad depth, even though 2003-04 Garnett would be the best player on the court by a wide margin (with no disrespect meant to Dirk, who is quite a stud).

I might favor the wolves in 7, if fully healthy. Like shawngoat23 said, KG was a monster that year, and Sam was a killer in the clutch that year.

It could go either way though, Mavs are certainly much deeper.

the mavs would sweep that wolves team

UDRIH14 wrote:the mavs would sweep that wolves team

Haha, ok.

I would take Dallas in 6 or 7 games because they had more depth.

Dallas in 5

People realize this team beat a good kings team in 7, and were up on the Shaq/Kobe/GP/Malone Lakers before Cassell and then Hudson got hurt right? Those Lakers would demolish Dirk and his crew.

NO-KG-AI wrote:People realize this team beat a good kings team in 7, and were up on the Shaq/Kobe/GP/Malone Lakers before Cassell and then Hudson got hurt right? Those Lakers would demolish Dirk and his crew.

That's not correct. They were never up on the Lakers:
G1: LAL 97, MIN 88
G2: MIN 89, LAL 71 (Cassell goes down, playing 1 minute)
G3: LAL 100, MIN 89 (Cassell plays 26 minutes)
G4: LAL 92, MIN 85 (Cassell plays 5 minutes)
G5: MIN 98, LAL 96 (Cassell did not play)
G6: LAL 96, MIN 90 (Cassell did not play)
Hassell didn't play the entire series.

The Timberwolves did take it to six games, and none of the game were blowouts in the Lakers' favor, but I felt the Lakers were in control the entire series. Maybe those Lakers would destroy the Mavericks, or maybe the Mavericks punk them like the Pistons did. Either way, it's kind of iffy to use a transitive property logic, especially considering the Timberwolves lost and those Mavericks never played those Lakers.

Those Mavericks weren't exactly chopped liver either. I don't think they're a historically great team (or even a historically very good team), but they should have won the championship that year. (I know Heat fans will grill me for that comment, so I'll add that the Heat earned the championship by performing when it mattered.)

In any case, it's really a testament to how incredibly good Kevin Garnett was that year. That team had a bunch of scrubs, and under his leadership, they came reasonably close to making the finals with Darrick Martin playing major minutes at PG. And while Kevin Garnett is certainly the type of player that can win a series by himself, I'll take my money on the more talented and far deeper team in Dallas.

that's fine, but a sweep? or in 5?

NO-KG-AI wrote:that's fine, but a sweep? or in 5?

Yeah, I certainly disagree with those predictions. The "Mavs in 5" prediction came from a Mavs fan, so he might be a bit optimistic. Not sure what to make of the sweep prediction.

They're certainly entitled to their opinions. I guess after all, this is a speculative question.

Nah, the mavs fan did it to piss me off, BUT HE SUCKS AT LIFE!!

The Mavs fan >>>> Sal

I say the Mavs win is 6.

though everything on our squad worked out fine back in 2004 aside from the injuries and we had a great defensive squad I think I'd give the egde to the Mavs but probably only b/c of HC.

p.s.: I wouldn't say that Flip is a great coach but IMO a bit better than Avery is plus Flip is way more experienced. I wouldn't say it makes a big difference though

ss_maverick wrote:The Mavs fan >>>> Sal

valid point