Ice

[G-Rob da great]

Shut up dude.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailyd...ilydime-070615

CLEVELAND -- All throughout the Finals, a lot of folks have been asking me where I rank each of these teams in the list of the top 60 post-merger finalists that I created prior to the Finals. Now that all the results are in the books, I can give you an answer.

The Spurs just edge out the '99 edition as the best of the four San Antonio champions, ranking ninth among the (now) 62 teams. Every team ahead of them won 61 games while they only won 58, but that mirrors what I've been saying about the Spurs all year -- their victory margin was that of a vastly superior team, and that's what we should have been paying attention to all along. San Antonio could have ranked higher if it had maintained such a strong margin in the playoffs, but it didn't.

Still, with 275.3 points, the Spurs are just a hair behind the eighth-ranked 1992 Chicago Bulls -- that's some pretty lofty company. And consider this -- the Spurs now own the two best-rated post-merger team that didn't feature Michael Jordan, Larry Bird or Magic Johnson, and two of the five best that didn't have Jordan. There's some more fuel for Tim Duncan's all-time great resume.

As for the Cavs, it may surprise some to learn that they're not the worst finalist ever, as some have claimed. In fact, they're not terribly close. Cleveland's 146.3 points would rate them 56th, or seventh from the bottom, but nowhere near the 100.1 put up by the 1982 Rockets.

But some other recent Eastern Conference champions have been worse --including the 2001 76ers, the 2002 Nets and the 1999 Knicks. It wasn't a good team for a finalist, mind you, but the Finals have seen worse. This blowout was as much a result of their unusually strong opponent as it was the Cavs' unusually weak conference champion resume.

-- John Hollinger in Cleveland

That's Hollinger reporting FROM Cleveland, but he doesn't work for any Cavalier or Cleveland media.






Yes I take pride in being better than the worst.

Yes these Spurs are better than the 99 Spurs. No these Cavs aren't the worst NBA final team ever.

Yes I win.

Yes you shut up.

Thanks.

[G-Rob da great]

We would wreck those Nets, Knicks and Sixers teams. You said Kenyon Martin could wreck with our bigs? Please... we held Tim Duncan (who you agree with me is the greatest PF the game has ever seen) to 24 pts, 23, 14, and 12 points last night. What in the flying fuck would K-Mart do against our front?

Hollinger agrees...

Cavs> Nets, Sixers and most importantly... KNICKS.

[Purple Haze]

lol, if Patrick Ewing wasn't injured.. the knicks would have took it to game 6 or 7; and possibly would have won.


He was our centerpiece. That's like the cavs playing without LBJ as much as he sucked in this series.. he couldn't even grab the ball in the final minutes without fumbling it.

[Iceodu921]

Originally Posted by G-Rob da great

Shut up dude.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailyd...ilydime-070615



That's Hollinger reporting FROM Cleveland, but he doesn't work for any Cavalier or Cleveland media.






Yes I take pride in being better than the worst.

Yes these Spurs are better than the 99 Spurs. No these Cavs aren't the worst NBA final team ever.

Yes I win.

Yes you shut up.

Thanks.

So than you agree Wades better than Lebron cause Hollinger said that two?

[G-Rob da great]

Later on in that season he then went back and said LeBron was more deserving of MVP than Wade, I remember posting the article on here last year.

[Iceodu921]

Either point is John Hollinger doesnt know shit..

His knowledge is about equivalent to Gorilla Nasty.

[G-Rob da great]

It wasn't a Hollinger quote or editorial, it was a statistical based article. This years Spurs had one of the highest point differentials in NBA history. Hollinger's opinion isn't involved there, it's just fact.

[Iceodu921]

Noone said the spurs werent great..

Doesnt change the fact the cavs are the worst finals team proably all time.

[G-Rob da great]

Probably not.

But some other recent Eastern Conference champions have been worse --including the 2001 76ers, the 2002 Nets and the 1999 Knicks. It wasn't a good team for a finalist, mind you, but the Finals have seen worse. This blowout was as much a result of their unusually strong opponent as it was the Cavs' unusually weak conference champion resume.

[toker]

Originally Posted by Iceodu921

Noone said the spurs werent great..

Doesnt change the fact the cavs are the worst finals team proably all time.

u can probably make a strong case for the eastern conference being the worst conference in any sport during any period since jordan bounced..

[G-Rob da great]

AFC lost 13 straight superbowls.

East lost 4 consecutive Finals since Jordan retired, 6 total.

Baseball doesn't have conferences.

[the Prince]

american league, national league