JordansBulls wrote:Franco wrote:OdomFan wrote:
And your retort is what? Being just another person bringing up the 73 wins in a season despite it being against completely different competition so it does nothing to prove how well they'd do agianst Utah or any other team outside of their era in a basketball game. However if that's how you want to play it that Jazz team won 64 games in 97 and 62 the following year so it's not like they're far off from this highs scale you want to try and sit the Modern Warriors up on.
I like how you just say Van Exel and co didn't play well as if you never heard of what defense is. That Jazz team played some of the best team ball I've ever seen and they could score just as well as anybody. Had great coaching and great ball movement as an overall team to be able to give anyone you can think of a run for their money and i'll stand by that any day of the week.
Btw that Lakers team won 61 games as well that year and they were running through everyone in those playoffs until they reached Utah so if that sounds like nothing special to you than yeah. You don't have a clue.
Malone and Stockton were able to play at a high level and lead teams to the playoffs for nearly 3 decades and it wouldn't be any different if they were playing now.
The Jazz weren't some pushover team, nobody is saying that they're the Nets of 2017. But is ridiculous to think that they could beat a team that is basically build like the 90's Bulls that beat them twice.
Yeah, the Dubs don't have the same defensive prowess, but their offensive arsenal more than makes up for it. The Jazz's defense would get slaughtered game in and game out, that's no knock agains't them, but there isn't a team in history who would win by trying to outgun the Warriors. Cleveland just put up an ATG ORtg and still got beatdown in 5 games.
Let's say that even if Malone and Stockton played KD and Curry to a standstill (they can't)... who would match Klay's and Green's production? Hornacek?JordansBulls wrote:The only time Lebron went against an elite big in there primes was in 2009 against Dwight and he lost and he had HCA in it. I'm not going to hold 2007 losing to Duncan but his play was dreadfull in that one. Lebron also has been down every year of his career in the playoffs in a series at least 3-2 even 5 years in a row with HCA to inferior teams.
Uh... what? During the last 5 years he was down 3-2 (or worse) on these ocasions:
2013 Finals Vs Spurs (won 4-3)
2014 Finals Vs Spurs (lost 1-4)
2015 Finals Vs Warriors (lost 2-4)
2016 Finals Vs Warriors (won 4-3)
2017 Finals Vs Warriors (lost 1-4)
He only had HCA in 2013, and still won that finals.
In every other series he had an inferior cast AND didn't have HCA.
No he was down 5 years in a row with HCA. 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013. 3 years in a row lost with HCA. 2012 was down 3-2 to Boston and 2013 down 3-2 to the Spurs. That is what I am talking about. Besides like I said he has been down in a series every year of his career at least 3-2.
And that means... what exactly?
Being down in a series where he averaged 38/8/8 on 59TS% when his 3 next best scorers COMBINED for 43ppg on 50TS% was his fault?
In 2010 it was his fault that the Celtics won game 5, there's no way around it... but when 37 years-old Shaq is your most productive teammate that says a lot about your team structure.
In 2011 there's no context, he simply choked hard.
In 2012 he played great against the Celtics, no idea how you can fault him for falling to 3-2 with HCA when in game 5 nobody outside of him and Wade scored 10 points and Bosh was injured.
2013... you're kidding right? What difference does it make that he was down 3-2 or 3-0 if he won the series?
