Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dalakhani
The spurs have been the most consistently good team in the NBA over the course of the last 15-20 years. The team that lost to the Lakers in 04 should have won the title. In those years the spurs made it to the title round, getting past the western conference final was really the championship. They beat some tough teams those years.
07 was a funky year and the stars aligned. Golden State took care of the topseeded Mavs that year and then there was the controversial fight with Phoenix. I dont think anyone in their right mind would tell you that San Antonio was the best team in the west in 2007. It was a very weak year and in the east it was even weaker which resulted in the worst finals in recent memory...in my opnion.
|
People said the same thing about all of those playoffs
that I mentioned. Everyone of them. When they beat NY
in the shortened season, Phil Jackson said put an * next
to that championship.
The series with Detroit was a disappointment ratings wise
so the teams were both obviously bad. You have to beat
a good LA team or a good Boston team to be considered
legitimate champions.
Conclusion:
The Spurs got lucky every year, one way or another.
Just not flashy enough. That does not work in this NBA.