Moderators: zimpy27, infinite11285, Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77
Liam_Gallagher wrote:I think it's legit because they were the best team before the season got suspended.
SK21209 wrote:those other two teams imploded spectacularly
Harry Garris wrote:I can't go there because if the 2020 title wasn't legit that retroactively puts so many other championships in question. How many titles have we had where the outcome was changed based on injuries alone? Quite a few... And people have speculated in the past about lockout seasons changing the outcome in the playoffs, such as when the Knicks made the title in 1999 over better and more talented teams.
If we put an asterisk on the 2020 finals then how can we not also put one on:
The Bucks' 2020 title (outcome changed by injuries to Nets)
The Raptor's 2019 title (outcome changed by injuries to Warriors)
The Warrior's 2015 title (outcome changed by injuries to Cavs)
The Mav's 2011 title (lockout season)
The Heat's 2006 title (highly questionable officiating)
The Laker's 2002 title (straight up corrupt officiating)
The Spurs' 1999 title (lockout season)
Hell even the 1989 finals since the Lakers likely win if Magic didn't get hurt
And that's just scratching the surface, I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting. A third or more of the championships in NBA history may have play out differently if injuries or questionable officiating or lockouts didn't happen. At least in 2020 the Lakers were the most talented team and them winning the title was the most likely outcome if all else was equal anyway. In a lot of the examples I listed above that didn't even happen.
NZB2323 wrote:Harry Garris wrote:I can't go there because if the 2020 title wasn't legit that retroactively puts so many other championships in question. How many titles have we had where the outcome was changed based on injuries alone? Quite a few... And people have speculated in the past about lockout seasons changing the outcome in the playoffs, such as when the Knicks made the title in 1999 over better and more talented teams.
If we put an asterisk on the 2020 finals then how can we not also put one on:
The Bucks' 2020 title (outcome changed by injuries to Nets)
The Raptor's 2019 title (outcome changed by injuries to Warriors)
The Warrior's 2015 title (outcome changed by injuries to Cavs)
The Mav's 2011 title (lockout season)
The Heat's 2006 title (highly questionable officiating)
The Laker's 2002 title (straight up corrupt officiating)
The Spurs' 1999 title (lockout season)
Hell even the 1989 finals since the Lakers likely win if Magic didn't get hurt
And that's just scratching the surface, I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting. A third or more of the championships in NBA history may have play out differently if injuries or questionable officiating or lockouts didn't happen. At least in 2020 the Lakers were the most talented team and them winning the title was the most likely outcome if all else was equal anyway. In a lot of the examples I listed above that didn't even happen.
2012 was the lockout season, not 2011.
SK21209 wrote:Liam_Gallagher wrote:I think it's legit because they were the best team before the season got suspended.
/thread. The consensus all season was that the Lakers, Clippers and Bucks were the top tier and those other two teams imploded spectacularly. There is no argument against the Lakers being the best team in 2019-2020, bubble or not.
KrAzY3 wrote:First off, I do have to say technically the title is legit.
For years though I had to hear about how the Warriors titles with Durant don't count and trying to discount what they achieved. Those are real titles though! Even if circumstances were to their favor. You can't asterisk those and pretend the Covid title doesn't deserve one.
It is in fact one of the more dubious NBA titles because it occurred under extremely abnormal circumstances. The extended layoff clearly benefited some teams more than others as well.
Technically legit, but as deserving of an asterisk as any NBA title ever has...SK21209 wrote:those other two teams imploded spectacularly
Are we going to pretend that the bubble itself had nothing to do with that? The Bucks went on to an NBA title the next season while the Lakers went on to first round elimination...
PistolPeteJR wrote:Stalwart wrote:C3H6N6O6 wrote:According to LeBron haters Kawhi who needs rest more than any other star didn't benefit from the 4 month layoff but somehow Lakers did. Clippers were the favorite to win it all at start of the season.
How do you guys try to act like you are not biased?
Everyone here was calling out the Lakers as not being mentally strong to win in the bubble when they lost games at start of the bubble.
Half this forum and most of Reddit was thinking that Blazers/Rockets will win the series when Lakers lost the first game of the series.
Do you understand the concept of chemistry and teams building up a rhythm and momentum through out the season? Well all that goes away with a 4 month break. Typically when the NBA takes 4 months off they call it an offseason. They when the NBA comes back after 4 months its considered a new season.
But the Lakers were the exception to the rule and somehow preserved their chemistry during the same 4-month break that every team was subjected to? Okay lol.
Joker wrote:The biggest reason to de-value the bubble title, regardless of who would've won it, is that a major part in winning a title normally is dealing with the playoff crowd distraction and pressure, whether home or away. It's easy for players, especially role players, to hit shots in an empty gym, but it's radically different than having to hit a 4th quarter shot on the road in a packed arena going crazy. The playoffs don't just test which teams are more talented, execute better, or play harder --- they also serve to test who has more poise under those conditions.