Originally Posted by Flash Demon

If we are talking about dynasties, let's start from '99. Spurs = 3. Lakers = 3. Heat = 1. Pistons = 1.

Unless the Heat or Pistons win one or 2 of the next 2-3 years, only 2 teams should be mentioned in "dynasties" of recent years. Spurs will have 4 in the past 8 years if they win this year.

Originally Posted by Nec

I know I'm a little late, but I think the Cavs deserved to win the series against Detroit. Of course, regardless of who lost there will always be the fans who cry out their team underestimated the other, or they simply didn't play their best. For crying out loud, it's the playoffs. If you don't bring your A-game, you bet you'll be looking in from the outside. I don't think the "they underestimated the Cavs" story really works, considering what I just said. One team simply out played the other, and it showed. Four straight wins after dropping the first two is highly unlikely just chance. I think it really showed in Game 6 though, when some of the true colours of some Piston players came out. I'm not a huge basketball fan, but I still follow what happens. All I can say is Detroit was outworked and outplayed regardless of what statistics show.

I think the Spurs vs. Cavs series will interesting. After all, they weren't expected to beat Detroit, and look what happened. Even if they don't win, if they can carry over the game they're playing now, they can at least give the Spurs a run for their money.

Originally Posted by Crimson Phoenix

How did they think they had it in the bag, when the Cavs had a chance to win both of the games? You don't know what was goign through the whole pistons team so you don't know if they were slacking or not. They just got beat. It isn't their year. Face it.

Originally Posted by zz99

That's no the point. They probably figured even if subconsciencely "We won the first two games without even putting much effort into it, we can do this throughout the whole series."

I know they got beat, they tried in the last two games and lost, by the time they figured out they had to put full effort forth, they already lost the series.

Also, you could tell they were slacking. Look at their percentages between games 1 & 2 to 3 & 4, and then compare all four of those to 5 & 6. They were like two completely different teams in those games.

Originally Posted by Gypsy

They were lucky they didn't get swept.

Andobo, the Patriots have won 3 superbowls in 6 years now. 4 in 8 for the Spurs would be equally if not more impressive.

Originally Posted by zz99

That's no the point. They probably figured even if subconsciencely "We won the first two games without even putting much effort into it, we can do this throughout the whole series."

I know they got beat, they tried in the last two games and lost, by the time they figured out they had to put full effort forth, they already lost the series.

Also, you could tell they were slacking. Look at their percentages between games 1 & 2 to 3 & 4, and then compare all four of those to 5 & 6. They were like two completely different teams in those games.

Originally Posted by Crimson Phoenix

That's because of defensive attunements, you can't base it on because they were "slacking."


If that was the case, then they were only slacking between Cav's defensive picked it up.

Originally Posted by Spit_Fire

I predict Spurs to take Cavs in 5.