PDA

View Full Version : houston


thewillis12
03-31-2005, 02:02 AM
im dallas fan that moved to houston a couple of months back. i've been watching the rockets for a while now(still a mavs fan) and the rockets worry me alot. after the portland game they are now our first round opponent. i dont know i would rather have sac...anyone else worried??

mavs413
03-31-2005, 02:23 AM
Hahaha!
thats cute.

Dallas would have an easier time with Houston than they would with Sacramento, IMO.
Houston should not be feared. At least not by the Dallas Mavericks.

ocelot_ark
03-31-2005, 03:29 AM
I don't know how anyone in their right might would rather play Houston than Sacramento. I just don't get it...Who is playing better? Who plays better defense? Who has two stars on top of their game, one of which could single handedly keep any team in a game provided he is on his game? I just really like the way Houston's team is put together. They have a great combination of pieces.

Poindexter Einstein
03-31-2005, 04:15 AM
Both Sacramento and Houston would present strong challenges, but there really isnt a cream puff among any of the teams in the WC playoffs. Houston is playing well. Sacramento might get Miller back soon, making them real nasty for the playoffs. Memphis has quietly put up one of the best records in 2005 after an awful start last fall. Denver has been one of the hottest teams in the league since Karl took over (22-5? something like that). The teams I would want to avoid as long as possible are San Antonio (they have been very strong and know how to win) and Phoenix (great record). There is no one that the Mavs cant beat, though.

mavs413
03-31-2005, 04:31 AM
Originally posted by: ocelot_ark
I don't know how anyone in their right might would rather play Houston than Sacramento. I just don't get it...Who is playing better? Who plays better defense? Who has two stars on top of their game, one of which could single handedly keep any team in a game provided he is on his game? I just really like the way Houston's team is put together. They have a great combination of pieces.

Put together better than Sacramento? You joking right?
Kings - Bibby, Mobley, Peja, Miller, B-Jax, Thomas
Rockets- McGrady, Wesley, Yao, Juwan, who else?

"Who has two stars on top of their game, one of which could single handedly keep any team in a game provided he is on his game?"
Tmac/Yao - 23 combined playoff games (1st season together)
Bibby/Stojakovic - 92 combined playoff games (4th season together)

ocelot_ark
03-31-2005, 04:41 AM
B-Jax? YOU'RE kidding, right? LMFAO.

Unfortunately, a collection of talent doesn't equal success, does it? The way they play together, however, does. Houston PLAYS a lot better than Sacramento right now.

rakesh.s
03-31-2005, 08:58 AM
houston is the better matchup for dallas...the mavs can get physical with yao(dampier and bradley)

sacramento with or without their best players ALWAYS gives dallas trouble..When Nellie was around, he had no clue as to how to stop the offense that sac runs..The passing always drove the mavs nuts and still does(see loss a week ago).

Sacramento is probably salivating at the prospect of playing the mavs, and I only hope houston can hang on to that 5th spot.

capitalcity
03-31-2005, 11:03 AM
Van Gundy will figure the mavs out before Adelman - regardless, whether it's hou or sac, f'em.

SaltwaterChaffy
03-31-2005, 11:40 AM
Yeah, that Adelman sure hasn't figured us out. I mean, he's only knocked us out of the playoffs more than we've knocked him out.

capitalcity
03-31-2005, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by: SaltwaterChaffy
Yeah, that Adelman sure hasn't figured us out. I mean, he's only knocked us out of the playoffs more than we've knocked him out.and you would attribute that more to:
A. Adelman's coaching
B. The play of the Kings
C. Nelson's coaching
D. The play of the Mavs

B., C., and D,. are all correct.

Adelman hardly 'figured us out' - the Mavericks gutless play lost that series, the Kings didn't win it. He definitely didn't out-coach Nelson; Nellie gimmicked the mavericks to defeat.

chumdawg
03-31-2005, 01:58 PM
You severely underestimate the greatness of those Sacramento teams, and at the same time overestimate the quality of last year's Dallas bunch.

SRF
03-31-2005, 02:21 PM
I think you guys underestimate the Rockets this year. We BLEW OUT sacramento in arco earlier this year, the Kings don't scare us at all. We've been great since the Wesley trade, and getting Barry and Mike James has improved our bench a TON. I don't think we'll win a championship, but to say we're not to be feared is pretty bold...you better hope it doesn't come back to bite you in the arse. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

capitalcity
03-31-2005, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by: chumdawg
You severely underestimate the greatness of those Sacramento teams, and at the same time overestimate the quality of last year's Dallas bunch. I think the team was a quality assembly of players who didn't develop into a quality team. Sacramento was good last year, especially in the playoffs, but I still think the mavs would've taken them down playing a traditional lineup (i.e. putting Walker'f fat ass on the bench instead of center).

My overall argument is Van Gundy can do more with less than Adelman can- Regardless of the familiarity between opponents. Obviously their philosophies are different too: Adelman will run with you/ Van Gundy will do everything he can to slow the game down.

I don't want to face houston. It's not that I think we wouldn't win the series - but I think there is a realistic chance to sweep the Kings.

chumdawg
03-31-2005, 03:43 PM
My goodness, Sacramento never developed into a quality team? For my money, they were the best team in the NBA in 2002. The Lakers really needed some lucky bounces to beat them that year.

Clearly their window of opportunity began closing quickly after that, as their veterans aged. They were still a scrappy bunch last year, though. I see no need to diminish their accomplishments or relative strength. And I don't imagine that they would have lay down to the Mavs last year if Bradley had been playing center instead. Or whatever else you think we could have thrown at them at the center spot.

At this point, I also see no reason to promote Van Gundy over Adelman, especially on the premise that VG can "do more with less." He's got Yao and McGrady right now. It's not as if he is working with journeymen. And you have to give Adelman credit for keeping the Kings in the thick of things this year, without Vlade and Webber and Jackson and with an injured Miller.

I don't want to face Houston, either. They are a very dangerous team right now. Any team in the league would have their hands full. But trust me: the Kings won't be getting swept by Dallas or anyone else. Did you not watch them handle us recently?

Poindexter Einstein
03-31-2005, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by: chumdawg.....: the Kings won't be getting swept by Dallas or anyone else. Did you not watch them handle us recently?

I saw the game, and I saw the Kings win. But I wasnt anywhere close to impressed. I thought that game was more a case of the Mavs playing poorly (and running out of gas on the back end of a road back-to-back) than anything.

Since then, KVH has emerged and Stack has returned. I think if they played the Kings in the playoffs today, tomorrow, or next week, the Mavs would handle the Kings handily from what I have seen.

cheesestar
03-31-2005, 05:18 PM
imo the kings are more physical with the loss of webber and addition of their new 4's. if we play them i want damp in top shape

capitalcity
03-31-2005, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by: chumdawg
My goodness, Sacramento never developed into a quality team? For my money, they were the best team in the NBA in 2002. The Lakers really needed some lucky bounces to beat them that year.

Clearly their window of opportunity began closing quickly after that, as their veterans aged. They were still a scrappy bunch last year, though. I see no need to diminish their accomplishments or relative strength. And I don't imagine that they would have lay down to the Mavs last year if Bradley had been playing center instead. Or whatever else you think we could have thrown at them at the center spot.

At this point, I also see no reason to promote Van Gundy over Adelman, especially on the premise that VG can "do more with less." He's got Yao and McGrady right now. It's not as if he is working with journeymen. And you have to give Adelman credit for keeping the Kings in the thick of things this year, without Vlade and Webber and Jackson and with an injured Miller.

I don't want to face Houston, either. They are a very dangerous team right now. Any team in the league would have their hands full. But trust me: the Kings won't be getting swept by Dallas or anyone else. Did you not watch them handle us recently?I should have clarified chum - last years mavs team was quality players not a quality team. You're right about the kings - prior to this year, when healthy, they were arguably the best team in the league.

I still don't know if Adelman is the main reason the kings haven't tanked - could it be ridding themselves of Webber did them more help than harm? Maybe a little of both - I don't know.

As far as the debate: I would still rather face Adelman's Kings because I think you know what your gonna get (Fastballs). Van Gundy scares me - he's a question mark and his team is unpredictable too - (changeups & curveballs).

chumdawg
03-31-2005, 06:05 PM
Whoops! Sorry to have misdirected my response. Of course it's very true as it applies to the '04 Mavs.

Honestly, I'm not very comfortable facing either potential opponent. I hope you are right, PE, that the Mavs could handle up on SAC (although I expect they won't get the chance). PE, how do you think the Mavs match up with the Rockets?

thewillis12
03-31-2005, 08:13 PM
mavs match up badly with rockets because of our inabillity to guard mcgrady. he ALWAYS goes off on us and now that they have some spot up shooters they have become more dangerous. i'd rather face sac still.....

Poindexter Einstein
03-31-2005, 11:12 PM
Dallas vs Hou would be an interesting series and a real grind, I think. Probably goes 6 or 7, with the Mavs' depth forcing the Rox starters into huge minutes, and the Mavs get more dominant as the series goes along. The key at first would be who can stop the other's star player, TMac or Dirk. Yao will get SOME numbers but Damp will have him exhausted by the end of 3, and he cant guard KVH. Stack and KVH would likely be the deciding factors - I dont think the Rox have enough depth to have an answer there. I will add that if Juwan Howard isnt 100%, the Rox are sooooooo overmatched at PF that I would change my prediction to "Mavs in 4-5."

Nash13
04-01-2005, 02:13 AM
The more i think about it, i tend to agree with PE about Houston.

If our team plays defense like they do now, the only real problem will be McGrady. Yao is not a dominant center, and i don't think he'll do a good job scoring not only because Damp will bump him every play, but he'll deny position in the post. And if Damp has trouble, we could use Bradley who seems to defend him pretty good. If Howard can contain T-Mac to his season averages, then it would be more easier to win. When i look at Houston, they'll be in trouble if McGrady struggles because no one person can pick up the load. Teams like Dallas, Sac, SAS, PHX, MEM, DEN and SEA all have at least 2 or more people that could pick up slack if the star player struggles. Maybe it's just me, but they look better than they actually are.

With all that said, i'm not saying Dallas is going to breeze through. Dallas hasn't had a SOLID playoff series win since they swept Minnesota in 01-02 season. It was always someone that was a huge player for us that stunk it up in a round. Nash never played the way he normally did, Finley would take some games off, Raef/Bradley had their respectful slumps. And i have a feeling that either Terry or Van Horn may not have good series. Because James is a pretty good defender, and even though Juwan Howard isn't a good post player, he wouldn't be afraid to post KVH.

All in all, if both teams played like they are now, Dallas would win.

razap
04-01-2005, 10:03 AM
Living in Houston I see the Rockets regularly. I have watched only more SPurs games than Rockets games but I have to tell you the Rockets are going to be tough to beat. Now a Rocket - Maverick 1st round series is what I would love to see and as a Spurs fan I, if I had a choice, I would rather face the Mavs than the Rockets however I think the Mavs would win the series in 7 long drawn out games. As long as Houston can stay close in a game Tracy McGrady scares the heck out of me more so than anyone else in the league becasue of his ability to make shots from anywhere on the court. I hope for a nice long physical series between the 2 teams and I do not think either team has 'physical' advantage over the other..

my 2 cents

birdsanctuary
04-01-2005, 10:38 AM
What worries you? The fact that TMAC becomes a magician in the 4th quarter! He frickin disappears!

In 2 years they won't even be saying Yao's name, it'll be Pavel this Pavel that!

On Pavel:
He's going to be signing a contract soon with Apple to do advertisements for the Ipod.

NYCdog
04-01-2005, 10:25 PM
I'm gonna have to agree with razap on this one....if you have watched this team lately, you'll understand why? I have NBA LP, and since they've been hot, i've been tuning them in more lately.

What impresses me with this team has nothing to do with T-Mac or Yao, or its supporting cast, which has done a great job.

Its the fact that Van Gundy, much like he did with the overachieveing 8th seeded Finals Knicks of 99', is getting the absolute most out of his players on this current Rocket team.

Players whose names you dont hear often, like Scott Padgett, are making plays, hitting three's, and just plain hustling there ass off out there. Van Gundy always preaches doing the "little things" to win games. This team has obviously bought into that....and that's why they've been so hot lately.

Sometimes, its not about talent, but who executes there strategy better. That's what basketball games come down to....x's and o's.

Want an example.....Detroit versus LA, Last year's NBA Finals. Back then, everyone (dont lie, you know you did too) picked LA to win in a cake walk due to there superior talent level, "4 future hall of famers" etc....Hell, they were practically handed the championship after the San Antonio series, which wasnt even the damn WCF. We all know what happened in the end.

capitalcity
04-01-2005, 11:23 PM
NO 76
HOU 73

Well nevermind all that afraid of houston talk - really, who can figure the rockets out? Maybe pulling them instead of Sac won't be a big deal.

NYCdog
04-01-2005, 11:25 PM
You forgot to mention they didnt have Yao tonight......

grndmstr_c
04-01-2005, 11:26 PM
Actually, no Yao tonight. Still, not afraid. I respect them as a good team that you can't sleep on, but if both teams brought their A-games (which the Mavs seem to be doing more consistently lately) I don't think Houston lasts longer than 6. Mavs have the best player, Mavs have the better supporting cast. Mavs win the series.

NYCdog
04-01-2005, 11:48 PM
Well this is where my opinion will repectfully differ from yours GMC

I think the Rockets can and will pull an upset.....the question is on who...Seattle or Dallas?

I guess we'll find out come playoff time.

grndmstr_c
04-02-2005, 12:15 AM
I think the Rockets can and will pull an upset.....the question is on who...Seattle or Dallas?It takes two to make an upset, and lately the Mavs have not at all looked like a team that's going to be eager to cooperate with the aspirations of a lower seed.

NYCdog
04-02-2005, 12:23 AM
It takes two to make an upset, and lately the Mavs have not at all looked like a team that's going to be eager to cooperate with the aspirations of a lower seed.

I'm sure SA wasnt meaing to cooperate on Fisher's ".4" last year.

And i'm sure LA wasnt trying to cooperate with Detroit so the Stones could steel the championship.

Cooperation, smoshporation.....fahgedabodit!

grndmstr_c
04-02-2005, 12:50 AM
Nonetheless, I notice you didn't argue with my basic point, which is that the Mavs are playing like a team that has business beyond the 1st round. Sure the Rockets are dangerous. Nobody that I'm aware of is attempting to argue otherwise, but before they can get to the upset that they're apparently preordained to achieve regardless of their opponent, there's still the matter of needing to beat a more talented team with a significantly better record on the road in the playoffs. Is it possible? Yes. Is it a smart bet? Unless the Mavs suffer some more injuries before the playoffs start or start bumblef'ing their way through the end of the season I just don't see how it could be.

NYCdog
04-02-2005, 02:12 AM
Nonetheless, I notice you didn't argue with my basic point, which is that the Mavs are playing like a team that has business beyond the 1st round.

I'll argue it out.....but there is nothing to argue about the Mavs play of late. The Mavs are playing exceptionally well. So what's your point?

Everyone else is playing just as well...even Denver (OK.. except Sacto and SA sans Duncan). So according to your logic, this should make every playoff team a contender this year......or shall I say....."have business beyond the 1st round?" i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

I think this logic of yours is a mistake. Want Proof?

In 1994, the Seattle Soncis (63-19) were playing like a team that had bussiness in the NBA Finals......that is, until they met the 8th seeded Denver Nuggets in the first round. So much for that, huh....

This proves that it doesnt matter how you play now.......its how you play then, in the playoffs that is.

So again, I guess we'll see come playoff time whose right and whose wrong.

grndmstr_c
04-02-2005, 02:40 AM
Everyone else is playing just as well...even Denver (OK.. except Sacto and SA sans Duncan). So according to your logic, this should make every playoff team a contender this year......or shall I say....."have business beyond the 1st round?"No, not really. It makes SA, Phoenix, Dallas, and maybe Seattle (can't argue with their record, or their success against the top teams around the league, but I just don't know how I feel about them) contenders in the West, with a couple other teams (Denver, Houston, maybe Sac) looking like spoilers if their opponents sleep on them (or if they draw Seattle, who, again, I just don't know what to think about).

And you can point out examples of higher seeded teams getting upset all you want, it doesn't change the fact that such occurrences are the exception rather than the norm.

dirno2000
04-02-2005, 02:46 AM
Everyone else is playing just as well...even Denver (OK.. except Sacto and SA sans Duncan).

Houston didn't represent themselves very well tonight...even without Yao, you should be able to hold of N.O. with an 18 point 3rd quarter lead at home...and maybe score 80 points.

...so Houston's last four games include a loss at SA (minus Tim) in which they scored 70 points and a home loss to NO in which they scored 73...I don't think you can say they're playing well right now.

NYCdog
04-02-2005, 02:47 AM
And you can point out examples of higher seeded teams getting upset all you want, it doesn't change the fact that such occurrences are the exception rather than the norm.

But again, it proves that it does not matter how you play now.....it only matters how you play come playoff time....hence the example I gave you.

And you can't argue that so just drop it.

grndmstr_c
04-02-2005, 03:20 AM
But again, it proves that it does not matter how you play now.....it only matters how you play come playoff time....hence the example I gave you.

And you can't argue that so just drop it.Actually, I don't think I will. You seem to be trying to argue both sides of this debate within a debate about how accurate a predictor regular season performance is of playoff success. On the one hand you seem to be saying that because the Rockets have supposedly been playing so well that they're going to upset whoever they play in the first round. On the other hand, when I point out that the Mavs are playing just as well if not better, and overall have been the more talented, and better team throughout the regular season, you want to say that nothing in the regular season matters and that's why the Rockets are going to get the upset. And you're telling me what I can and can't argue?

chumdawg
04-02-2005, 11:23 AM
Way to deconstruct his circular argument, GMC. But you know, you really can't blame him for seeing monsters in the closet...I mean, after what happened to his Yankees and all.

DubOverdose
04-02-2005, 01:23 PM
We're gonna F'EM UP! No matter who it is!

Don_Didi
04-02-2005, 04:05 PM
The only real bunny that's ready to be shot in the playoffs is Seattle. They ahve injury woes that have knocked out Rashard Lewis and Vladimir Radmanovic, two of their key players. Fortson hasn't played much lately either, so they're going to have it tough, whoever the play. You can argue about Houston having two stars as much as you like, they're not both on top of their game. If Yao is on top of his game on a consistent basis, I for one am thoroughly disappointed in him. He can be good to great one night, and then utterly crap the next, you simply don't know. I don't see enough Rockets games to argue this point, but I'm guessing Houston still has a tendency to go around Yao rather than to pass him the ball often. That said, he still gets into foul trouble waaay too often for him to be effective. T-Mac, well, he can make hilarious plays, but at the end of the day, he's not a great shooter. The same kind of Kobe logic can apply to T-Mac, although McGrady has done slightly better offensively than Bryant, if you don't look at the PPG category this season. And yes, Houston does have James and Barry coming off the bench, and Sura who isn't all that bad in the starting lineup... but James is rather streaky, and except for him and Barry, and Mutombo now and then, there's not much depth there. The Mavs are a lot deeper than Houston is, and right now you can't say that Houston is so much better defensively than Dallas can be. All I'm saying is, an upset is always possible, but as much as people seem to like fearing Houston, it's not as likely to happen to us than the Kings demolishing Seattle's battered roster.

NYCdog
04-02-2005, 07:20 PM
Actually, I don't think I will. You seem to be trying to argue both sides of this debate within a debate about how accurate a predictor regular season performance is of playoff success. On the one hand you seem to be saying that because the Rockets have supposedly been playing so well that they're going to upset whoever they play in the first round. On the other hand, when I point out that the Mavs are playing just as well if not better, and overall have been the more talented, and better team throughout the regular season, you want to say that nothing in the regular season matters and that's why the Rockets are going to get the upset. And you're telling me what I can and can't argue?

Might I remind yout that it was indeed you who brought up this whole thing.

You wanted me to argue the point that the "Mavs are playing like they have business beyond the second round" ....that's what started this whole thing. I gave you credible a example to back up my end. But you've given me nothing but opinions....you know, there are editorials and blogs for this type of garbage.

True I did say the Rockets will upset someone, BUT it wasnt becuse of there play of late, like the garbage excuse you dropped.

Again, I thought that there players are buying into Van Gundy's system and doing all the little things he preaches, like hustling, which is creating plays for them. They've actually been fast breakin lately because of this. These little things are what make teams what they are. They made Detroit a champion last year. That's my reason....and it can be proven....

However, all you have to say is "they have business beyond the second round" and the reason why apparently is becuase they are more talented, in your eyes......That's an opinion, you have brought nothing to the table to bak that smack up.

Furthermore, I pointed out the fact that sometimes, it DOES NOT matter who has the better talent. I gave you an example (LA vs DET)......once again, you've given me nothing. I see a trend building here....

This is what it all boils own to.....I gave brought facts and you've brought opinions to this showdown.

Your not going to win this one with that kind of arguement so that's why I suggested you drop it.


Way to deconstruct his circular argument, GMC. But you know, you really can't blame him for seeing monsters in the closet...I mean, after what happened to his Yankees and all.

Chumdawg-- learn to read...GMC hasnt deconstructed anything....just tried to turn this whole arguement around on me when it was indeed he who wanted me to argue his OPINION.

So I argued it and gave him an examples (facts) to back my words up.

GMC hasnt done anything but provided opinions.

So who has deconstructed who here again......

And as for my Yankees.....might I sense a little jealousy on your part because my city's baseball club has won more championships then all of Dallas's prefessional sports teams COMBINED!

Another fact by yours truly.....waiting for both (GMC, Chum) of your opinions.....

NYCdog
04-02-2005, 07:24 PM
You can argue about Houston having two stars as much as you like, they're not both on top of their game.

Before you too start me up.....READ BEFORE YOU POST... and even try to throw smack at me.

Is that so hard.....

What I said earlier.....


What impresses me with this team has nothing to do with T-Mac or Yao, or its supporting cast, which has done a great job.

Its the fact that Van Gundy, much like he did with the overachieveing 8th seeded Finals Knicks of 99', is getting the absolute most out of his players on this current Rocket team.

Don_Didi
04-02-2005, 07:34 PM
Who's trying to insult who here? I never called you out, it seems to me you're having a bit of an overactive imagination just now.

dirno2000
04-02-2005, 08:07 PM
What impresses me with this team has nothing to do with T-Mac or Yao, or its supporting cast, which has done a great job.Keep in mind that those supporting player don't exist in a vacuum...without McGrady and Yao playing well, they're all ordinary at best. McGradyís ability to draw the double team is crucial otherwise you guard Wesley, Barry and James one on one and dare them to beat you (they wonít).

So if this upset is going to happen, itís all about McGrady and Yao playing at a high level.

grndmstr_c
04-02-2005, 08:32 PM
You wanted me to argue the point that the "Mavs are playing like they have business beyond the second round" ....that's what started this whole thing.
Oh man, my mom's going to be so mad at me when she finds out that I started the whole thing.

I gave you credible a example to back up my end. But you've given me nothing but opinions....you know, there are editorials and blogs for this type of garbage.Actually, I'm pretty sure I responded in kind to your "credible example" by pointing out that your example was of a relatively rare sort, and not representative of what usually happens in the playoffs: that being higher seeded teams winning.

True I did say the Rockets will upset someone, BUT it wasnt becuse of there play of late, like the garbage excuse you dropped.Tsk, tsk, perhaps I touched a nerve. But, if it's not because of the way they're playing that you think they'll score the upset then what could it possibly be? Perhaps, this:

Again, I thought that there players are buying into Van Gundy's system and doing all the little things he preaches, like hustling, which is creating plays for them. They've actually been fast breakin lately because of this. These little things are what make teams what they are. They made Detroit a champion last year. That's my reason....and it can be proven....
But, but, but...I thought you said you weren't using that garbagy, "play of late" reasoning? Honestly, man. Are your posts written by two different people who don't actually communicate while they're writing or forming opinions? You just got through getting pissy because I called you for riding the carousel of morphing logic, and then you turn around and do it again in the very same post.

However, all you have to say is "they have business beyond the second round" and the reason why apparently is becuase they are more talented, in your eyes......That's an opinion, you have brought nothing to the table to bak that smack up.Up to this point you haven't even disagreed with me. Why should I bother to justify an opinion that you haven't specifically taken issue with when you're keeping me busy trying to pick up the pieces of your tattered use of logic?

Furthermore, I pointed out the fact that sometimes, it DOES NOT matter who has the better talent. I gave you an example (LA vs DET)......once again, you've given me nothing. I see a trend building here....Oh, I was just waiting for you to point out all those less talented teams that kept Magic's Lakers from winning 5 championships, or Jordan's Bulls from winning 6. Sorry, but a couple counterexamples to the claim (that I never even made) that the more talented team ALWAYS wins, only buys you the following: that talent is not the only thing that matters. That's a very different thing from proving that talent "does not matter".

This is what it all boils own to.....I gave brought facts and you've brought opinions to this showdown.What facts? Again, you've done nothing but champion the exception to the rule that higher seeded teams usually win. Pardon me if I don't feel I've been beaten into submission by your "Pete Sampras didn't go undefeated in his career" argument.

Your not going to win this one with that kind of arguement so that's why I suggested you drop it.As I'm sure you can see, not going to happen.

Now, you questioned my opinion that the Mavs are the more talented squad, so the least I can do is offer my own personal breakdown of how I think the rosters compare.

First off, I do think the Rockets have the advantage at point guard, primarily because their depth at the position is more proven than the Mavs' depth. James was a good pickup for them, and it's an open question just how ready Devin will be to handle the challenge of the playoffs. He has been improving rapidly of late, however, and if we're talking strictly talent, out of all the players on both teams he's almost certainly behind only Dirk and TMac in terms of raw ability.

At SG/SF, the Rockets obviously have the advantage at the top with McGrady. However, especially with KVH on board available to play minutes at the 3, the Mavs have a clear advantage in depth on the wings, and when it comes to executing in the fourth quarter the fresh legs on the Mavs side should, IMO, probably be worth enough to at least tighten things up at the only position(s) where the Rockets have a clear advantage.

PF's a no-brainer. The Mavs come at you with 48 minutes of hell at the PF position, and unlike the Spurs and Suns the Rockets' roster really isn't well constructed to deal with what the Mavs can throw at them here.

The Mavs, on the other hand, are pretty well suited to match up with the Rockets at the center position. Yao's really not much of a defensive presence at all, and between Damp and Shawn the Mavs have the defenders to keep him from getting comfortable offensively. Mutombo's actually been more effective by the +/- this year because he's lightyears better defensively, but he's not going to dominate offensively so he won't put much strain on Damp or Shawn when they have to defend him except perhaps on the glass, and as good as he is patrolling the lane I don't know that the Rockets will be able to keep him on the court when the Mavs throw out the Dirk/KVH frontcourt, which has been very, very effective thus far.

bernardos70
04-04-2005, 03:53 PM
You make it look easy, GMC.

NYCdog
04-07-2005, 01:46 AM
Tell me you people didnít think I was NOT going to reply....


You make it look easy, GMC.

I donít reply immediately and crap like this shows up from some punk kid trying brown-nose people on a forum to become "cool."

I guess this tells the difference in the worlds we hail from. You see, here in NYC, there is so much to do then spend my life on the computer. I will join cyberspace, as time permits.

But I see riding horses and watching reruns of "Who shot JR" can only kill so much time for some folks' down here in these neck of the woods before they get bored and decide to spend the rest of there pathetic existence trying to become "cool" in cyberspace.

So Bernardos....pardon me if I didnít meet up to your "cool" standards and reply GMC's lil shot in the allocated time of 24 seconds you gave me to be cool. I had other things to do.

And as you will see....it will NOT be so EASY for GMC.


Oh, I was just waiting for you to point out all those less talented teams that kept Magic's Lakers from winning 5 championships, or Jordan's Bulls from winning 6.

GMC,

I had to start with this quote....it just further proves my whole point about upsets happening at any given moment.

It also raises questions about your basketball I.Q.

True, the Showtime Lakers won 5 titles.

But they could have had more (7 to be exact) if they didnít get upset by "lesser talented teams." In 1981, the defending champion Lakers were upset by the Houston Rockets, just as Showtime was beginning to hit its stride. In 1986, the defending champion Lakers were upset again by the Houston Rockets, as Showtime was in its prime.

As for Jordan, he did indeed win 6 titles. But Shaq and the Orlando Magic prevented him from winning 7 titles as they took out the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs.

I guess I can expect an "I'm quite aware of that" response any moment now *looks at watch* from you even though we all know the truth now....


But, but, but...I thought you said you weren't using that garbagy, "play of late" reasoning?.

Umm...remind me again......who said I did. Was it because I used that word "lately" perhaps. Honestly now, do you think I am trying to suggest that because they fast break "lately," they will win?

This was not meant as regarding there play of late.....it was meant to provide an example of just how JVG's philosophy is being instilled in this team and its effects. You would know that instantly if you watched the NBA more closely. I can never remember a JVG team actually fast breaking, especially these Rockets. This team used to go whole game stretches without scoring a single fast break point. Now to say the fast break....its almost funny. Why is this happening? Cause they play hard at the defensive end, a staple of JVG philosophy. They have bought into his preachingís and its quite evident now, it has changed them

But honestly, after seeing Olando play, I think I might be partially wrong about this too. Maybe all it took for this Rocket team to turn a corner was getting rid of Francis and his "me-attitude" since it appears to be holding back Orlando now. Whatever it is, JVG's message of playing hard is getting though as he is getting the most out of his players. That has been my whole reason why I believe this team will pull an upset. Its also the same reason why I believe Denver can pull an upset as well as they too have bought into Karl's game, which has finally gotten them on the right track.


Up to this point you haven't even disagreed with me. Why should I bother to justify an opinion that you haven't specifically taken issue with when you're keeping me busy trying to pick up the pieces of your tattered use of logic?

Hmm...this is interesting.

In an earlier post, you brought up the fact that I didnít "argue your basic point"....it was almost like a challenge to me. I donít back down so I responded and backed it up with facts.

Now, when I challenge you to backup your theory of the Mavs being more talented, you fail to deliver the goods and instead give me your two cents worth.

Obviously this must have been a stall tactic on your part to buy you more time to squeeze as much knowledge out of that tree sloth you call your brain. And it must have worked as later onin your reply, you miraculously found the words to put together an actual analysis to finally provide some backup to your baseless theories.

The reason why I havenít disagreed with you is because you have given me nothing (no analysis until this post) to disagree upon, just your belief that the Mavs are a better team. I can disagree with your opinion all I want but it makes no sense in me doing so if I donít know your reasons as to why you believe they are a better team.

Now that you have finally decided to be a man and actully post your analysis on the matchups, now I can disagree and tell you why.


Now, you questioned my opinion that the Mavs are the more talented squad, so the least I can do is offer my own personal breakdown of how I think the rosters compare.

This I got a laugh out of because you said earlier in your same reply that I DIDNT disagree with you on this, thus you chickened out by not offering a response and instead tried to bash my "tattered logic."

And you say I'm pulling Dr. Jackal/Mr. Hyde in my posts. I guess you too are not on the same page with your 3rd Grade English tutor or whoever writes your blogs nowadays....


At SG/SF, the Rockets obviously have the advantage at the top with McGrady. However, especially with KVH on board available to play minutes at the 3, the Mavs have a clear advantage in depth on the wings, and when it comes to executing in the fourth quarter the fresh legs on the Mavs side should, IMO, probably be worth enough to at least tighten things up at the only position(s) where the Rockets have a clear advantage.

T-Mac averages amongst the top in minutes played the past few seasons. You would think if he could not have handled it, he would not have been averaging so many minutes as his coaches would have rested him earlier in the game to save his "legs" for the fourth quarter. But yet still, even after playing as many minutes as he does, T-Mac like many superstars do, makes his money in the 4th quarter and no one can deny that. The only way this is not a clear cut advantage for McGrady is if he is off of his game the entire series. I donít see that happening as he will use the playoff stage to fire one last shot back at Orlando GM John Weisbrod. He has something to prove....I think he will come up big come playoff time as this will fire him up.


The Mavs, on the other hand, are pretty well suited to match up with the Rockets at the center position. Yao's really not much of a defensive presence at all, and between Damp and Shawn the Mavs have the defenders to keep him from getting comfortable offensively. Mutombo's actually been more effective by the +/- this year because he's lightyears better defensively, but he's not going to dominate offensively so he won't put much strain on Damp or Shawn when they have to defend him except perhaps on the glass, and as good as he is patrolling the lane I don't know that the Rockets will be able to keep him on the court when the Mavs throw out the Dirk/KVH frontcourt, which has been very, very effective thus far.

Yao's not much of a defensive presence at all?

Yao is 7'6" and averages more blocks then Damp. The simple fact the he is this tall makes him a defensive presence. This is also why Shawn Bradley still has a job in the NBA as well. Yao might not be Shaq but to say he is not a defensive presence is incorrect. As for getting comfortable offensively, Yao might have his troubles with Damp. But Damp could also have his troubles as well.....foul troubles that is. If Damp can stay on the floor, he will be effective and indeed prevent Yao getting comfortable offensively. If not, its up to Shawn Bradley. He's given Yao fits before but this season Yao has actually faired better against Bradley. I give the Rockets the advantage on this one because we know Yao will show up, but will Damp be able to stay out of foul trouble and can Bradley give Yao fits for an entire series? Scary thing is, I havenít even hit on how big Mutombo has been for this team this year, not to mention how big of a role he could play in this series. He's a big defensive presence who creates scoring opportunities for the Rockets when comes up big on the defensive end.

In the end.....for the third and final time, we will see whose right and whose wrong come playoff timeÖÖ

Thespiralgoeson
04-07-2005, 02:15 AM
Houston's a very good team. I can't help but laugh a little when people say that Denver is the team that they don't want to face. Denver was overrated last year, and they're overrated this year. True, they've played great under Karl, but they've also had a cream-puff schedule. Sacramento? I'm not even going to go there. I think Houston can end up being very dangerous. So many people babble on and on about how "T-Mac can't win in the playoffs" and other nonsense about Yao, but here's the bottom line: Houston has Tracy McGrady and Yao Ming. Plus they've got a team of veterans that can defend, and shoot the ball well. Still, I have to say that I'd expect the Mavs to win this series in 6. They've got nobody that can defend Dirk, and almost no inside presense, the exception being Mutumbo. I know someone's going to talk about Yao being Shaq-like, but the guy's really a jumpshooting-center. Also, I can't say I'd be surprised their age catch up with them in a seven game series. Don't overestimate Houston, but don't underestimate them either.

chumdawg
04-07-2005, 03:04 AM
Bernie, you were right: GMC really does make it look easy. Yet, while I'm certain GMC could handle a bigger challenge with the same nimble facility, I will borrow something he said in this thread and say that "it takes two" to make it look easy. Or rather, to make it look THIS easy.

Dog, it's really neither here nor there, as your anti-Dallas tirade was probably too juvenile to require a response, but just so you know, I'm pretty sure that neither GMC nor Bernardos lives anywhere near Dallas. I do, though, so I'll try to finish this up pretty quick so's I can get me back to the TV and watch some more of them there "Dallas" reruns. Plus I have to get up early to milk the cows. (What is it, incidentally, that keeps you sophisticated metroplitan folks so busy all the time?)

Dog, of course upsets do happen. They happen a pretty fair percentage of the time. By my count, since the '83-'84 season, when the league went to the 16-team format, the underdog has won 73 of the 315 series. And of course, it's far more common for a five seed to knock off a four seed than it is for the eight to knock off the one. So could Houston beat Dallas? Sure they could. But that in no way makes it likely. Just because it can happen doesn't mean that it will.

I do have some empathy for you, though. I'm sure that these days you are, as I said earlier, seeing monsters in the closet and starting to feel that even things that supposedly CAN'T happen probably will. I mean, who ever loses a 3-0 lead in a baseball series? That happens, like, next to never. Yes, I know that it's embarrassing to be the team that did. Especially the way it happened, in that Game Four. I mean, it's FAR more embarrassing than Denver's debacle against the Nuggets that year. It's like, exponentially more embarrassing, especially considering that it wasn't just any old opponent who owned you so badly. But at least your embarrassment can be tempered by the fact that you have proven--beyond any shadow of a doubt, beyond even the strongest and most objective argument to the contrary--that the most incredible playoffs collapse that even the cruelest mind could imagine is indeed possible.

Oh, by the way, how is Rivera doing so far this season? I haven't been following...

grndmstr_c
04-07-2005, 12:10 PM
I'll make this simple for you, NYC. Do you contend that upsets are more likely to happen than the higher seeded team with the significantly better record winning? In spite of all these confused attempts you keep making to prove me wrong I'm guessing you don't. So really, what's your point? I'm serious. I just don't have any clue why you're continuing this. Are you just bitter for having had the gemini logic behind your Houston-will-win-in-the-first-round proclamation exposed? Are you too blind to see that nobody is even disagreeing with you that upsets happen? Are you having personal problems? I'm just trying to figure out why you would think you're on to something that has any value for your argument by arguing that those Lakers and Bulls teams that won 11 titles between them also suffered, gasp, 3 upsets? Come on, man. At least make some effort to comprehend what my position is. Or, perhaps I should just thank you for making my point for me: that upsets are the exception, not the rule.

Now, let me try to pick out the substantive parts from the insults you've been using to hide your shame at having been outed as a hack.

TMac - he'll undoubtedly have a couple games where he goes nuts. The odds are pretty well against him doing it the whole time, though. Overall his efficiency is fairly average as far as elite offensive players with questionable defensive worth are concerned: 52.3% true shooting (to put that in perspective Finley's at 52.1%, Stack's at 52.5%, Josh Howard is at 53.5%). Plus, the stats suggest he's not quite so clutch as you seem to think he is. 82games' clutch play data on TMac show the Rockets getting outscored in the clutch with TMac on the floor 20 times this season and outscoring their opponents under the same circumstances only 15 times. Additionally, TMac's efg% drops from 47.1% overall to 42.4% in the clutch, and his free throw percentage dips from 77% to 69.2%.

Yao - is, in fact a forgettable defensive presence. The Rockets go from giving up 98.9 points per 100 posessions with Yao on the bench to giving up 104.8 with him on the floor. Additionally, their efg% allowed goes from 43.7% to 47.4%.

capitalcity
04-17-2005, 12:27 AM
HOU vs DEN recap (http://www.nba.com/games/20050416/DENHOU/recap.html)
James did some pretty good shooting of his own for Houston (49-31), scoring 23 points while connecting on 9-for-12 attempts from the field. So what's up with this Mike James cat? Is he a 1, a 2, or a tweener? Is he somebody we should be worried about if we get the Rox in Round 1?

dirno2000
04-17-2005, 12:50 AM
He's a nice player to have coming off the bench. A one and a half who can give them some minutes at either backcourt spot. Streaky shooter, but when he had it going it really opens up the court for T-Mac and Yao. He's also a pretty good defender. I wouldn't be worried about him alone, but if the trio of Wesley, Barry and James is knocking down open shots the Rockets are dangerous.

EricaLubarsky
04-17-2005, 12:51 AM
He's one of the 3 tweeners (they call them combo guards) on Houston's roster. We have to defend him, but he's not particularly scary at 6'2". Terry/Harris/Armstrong should be able to take care of him.

RocketFan11
04-17-2005, 01:59 AM
Anything can happen in the playoffs. If the Rockets and Mavs are matched up, the Mavs will be heavily favored, and rightly so. That said, the Rockets are a good road team, and have shown the capability to beat any team on any given night. Losing Juwan hurts us, but we weren't exactly depending on him as much as some people seem to believe. We miss his misrange J, but in all honesty, Spoon isn't much worse defensively, and when Padgett's hitting his 3s he's just as productive as Howard.

We'd rather be facing the Sonics, but most of us think that the Rockets could certainly take the Mavs to 7, and at least 6. If our shooters get (and stay) hot, we could give you guys a legitimate scare.

dirno2000
04-17-2005, 02:18 AM
If our shooters get (and stay) hot, we could give you guys a legitimate scare.My concern is that on a good day McGrady is un-guardable...plus he's a better passer than a lot of people give him credit for so he can create a lot of open shots for those guys...if they can knock them down it could be a long series.

EricaLubarsky
04-17-2005, 02:21 AM
the three combo guards are a questionmark too. Howard is on TMac. How we guard Sura and Wesley may well impact if we win or not.

Thespiralgoeson
04-17-2005, 06:04 PM
I love Houston. I've always liked Yao Ming, but although I always respected T-Mac as a player, I was never really a fan. But after watching the Rockets play this season, epecially T-Mac's shoot-out with Dirk, this team has really grown on me. I really enjoy watching them play fudamentally sound, defensively solid,half-court game. I find myself hoping that they'll get the no. 6 seed, not because I don't think the Mavs can beat them, but merely because I like them and want to see them get out of the first round. (Seeing a Dirk/T-Mac duel would be entertaining as hell though!) Houston is a very good team right now even without Juwan, however, they have got to adapt in the offseason or they are in trouble. The team obviously doesn't have a real point guard on the court. Their best passer/playmaker is T-Mac. Wesley, Sura, and James, are all really 2 guards, and are all in their 30's. Whoever they play at 1 will get torn up by Terry and Harris. So they obviously need a younger backcourt. Most importantly though, they desperately need a real low-post player at 4 to play next to Yao. Juwan is a good player, but he has no low post game and gets eaten alive by Dirk, and other bigger, more atheletic 4's. They really need someone who can do for them what Kelvin Cato did for them last year, and have Juwan as another solid backup.

Lysdexic
04-19-2005, 09:04 AM
Hello. I'm a member of the rockets board on clutchfans.net and was directed to this site. Among some of the Mavs fan that post on that Rockets board, this site was considered to be one of the better boards. As a fan I'm sure we're all homers for our team and share some bias on who will win. That said as a Rockets fan I think we have a good shot at winning.

Our offense has improved a lot beyond what most people think. We hit the open J, have a go to guy in T-Mac to help create shots, and atleast IMO the best center combination in the league. Yao while he's not putting up Shaq numbers, puts up numbers that warrants him being the 2nd best center in the league. He's been a lot more physical lately, and appears to have upped his game in April. He's averaging almost 3 blocks a game this month, and and has had a few string of games getting 27, 10, and 3 blocks. He's not putting up these kind of stats every game, but gets pretty close, mostly missing out on double doubles due to his rebounding skills. The man clogs the paint well but doesn't have Rodman/Ben Wallace knack of knowing where a ball is going to land and fighting for the boards. Basically if it lands in his area he'll grab it. But really the biggest reason I think the Rockets have the best center combination in the game has been Mutombo. Together with Yao, in the Denver game the center dombo averaged 25 points, 22 boards, and 8 blocks. Yao still isn't putting up great minutes in the 37+ range, but having a backup like Deke and him appearing like he has a new found youth has helped a ton. Generally in games you'll see Yao playing anywhere from 31 to 33 minutes tops. Maybe his minutes will go up in the playoffs, but as it stands that's pretty much what you can expect. 19, 9, 2 in 31 minutes. Pretty good numbers, where only the thing that really stops him from putting up consistent double double numbers is his stamina. Truth be told you'll find the paint clogged pretty well with these two. Though I must admit Dampier has put a damper on Yao in previous games. I can only hope Yao's recent physical play will help him overcome that hump.

T-Mac has been a consistent threat through the regular season atleast since the team started gelling after picking up Sura, Mike James, and David Wesley. Against the Mavs this season T-Mac is averaging 31.3 points on 51.6% shooting, 7 assists and 6.5 boards. Pretty damn good numbers. Since acquiring Sura, Wesley, and James the Rockets have upped their scoring to 95 PPG. We're not the same grind it out team that'll try to keep a team in the low 80s in hopes of grinding out a win. We can, but that hasn't been our style of play lately. We do hold the opponents to the second lowest FG % among NBA teams. This team is actually fun to watch unlike last season where I loathed JVG and Steve Francis' selfish play. There's actually good passing, decent fast breaking, and good shooters to compliment T-Mac and Yao who typically force mis match problems on any given team. Basically we got shooters who will make you pay if you double team our two go to guys. Our defense is still there. We basically force a team to beat us from the outside and clog the paint as much as possible. You can expect a lot of man to man defense and hustle play from us. Though we don't have the bigger names that come off the bench like your team does, we do have a bench that'll throw you off if you're not ready. Mike James if you haven't seen him play much, runs full speed on pretty much every offensive possession. He forces a pushing offensive tempo, and has a decent outside jumper to compliment the open looks he gets. Jon Barry much likes his younger brother is a very good outside shooter, and a very creative passer. He's also a very emotional player and I really like that out of him. Dikembe has pretty much been Mr. Consistent all year long. He'll get you a couple of blocks every night, and a lot of contested shots along the way. He's had quite a few games where he's grabbed over 15 boards while getting double figures in points. Basically when Yao's not feeling it that night, Dikembe steps in and does an impressive job. You really would think you're watching the Dikembe Mutombo in his prime, and not the ancient player you typically hear about from the media.

Admittedly I don't keep up with the Mavs much. Pretty much what I know is your teams defense has improved under Avery Johnson, and you have a very deep team that's riding a 7 game winning streak ATM. You're arguably the hottest team in the league with the Rockets not too far behind who are riding a 6 game win streak against some very quality teams. You're still a heavily offensive oriented team with a very deep bench. And when your team is hitting their perimer shots it puts a damper on our defensive strategy which basically is to force opponents to shoot from the perimeter with hoepfully very little success. You hold the advantage at the PF position heavily with Dirk and KVH. You have good size, good shooters, and present mismatch problems. I definitely think you guys are a contender as much as I think the Rockets are. Basically I just wanted to post here to clear up any misconceptions about the Rockets and how they've been playing as of late. We can gun with you guys, though we would prefer to hold the tempo at half court where it's arguably more favorable for the Rockets.

With all this being said, as a homer and a team that I truly do believe can raise some hell in atleast getting into the WCF, I just gotta pick the Rockets. I do wish your team good luck and hope the best team wins.

dirno2000
04-19-2005, 09:47 AM
Welcome. Perspective from the other side is always appreciated. Just as an FYI, since the brackets are set, we're discussing match up here (http://dallas-mavs.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=2&threadid=22209)Öyou'll probably get more feedback if you copy your post in the main Mavs section.

mary
04-19-2005, 09:52 AM
Thanks for the insight Lysdexi. I always enjoy reading another fan's perspective, and clutchcity is a pretty solid message board IMO.

champ
04-19-2005, 10:55 AM
How to get Category Password of main Mavs section?

u2sarajevo
04-19-2005, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by: champ
How to get Category Password of main Mavs section?It is blank. Just hit continue.... or login.... or whatever the button says....

ocelot_ark
04-19-2005, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by: mary
Thanks for the insight Lysdexi. I always enjoy reading another fan's perspective, and clutchcity is a pretty solid message board IMO.

ClutchFans is a great message board, even if it is populated by Rocket's fans i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

kingrex
04-19-2005, 11:34 AM
A very well-thoughtout, albeit long, post from Lysdexic.

I agree that Houston has a good chance to win the series, however, unlike you I feel the Mavs will prevail in 7 games. The home court being just one of many factors. Afterall, since Avery took over, the Mavs have been undefeated at home. Granted the playoffs are different from the regular season, but slight edge to the Mavs nonetheless.

It is true that McGrady will be a force to be reckoned with for the Mavs, however, I'm confident that in a 7-game series having Howard, Daniels, Stackhouse and Finley to make him work on both ends of the court will wear him down and reduce his effectiveness as the series goes on.

As for the Yao-Mutombo combo, they will present problems, but I'm not convinced that it is a clear advantage to Houston. The Mavs can counter with either matching size for size with Dampier and Bradley or force mismatches with a smaller frontcourt of Nowitzki and/or Van Horn that might expose Yao-Mutombo to foul trouble.

Both benches will contribute, but ultimately may neutralize each other. You have James, but we have Harris. You have Barry, but we have Stackhouse. You have Padgett, but we have Van Horn.

No doubt, a great match-up. Bring on the play-offs!

champ
04-19-2005, 11:35 AM
thx a lot u2sarajevo

FINtastic
04-19-2005, 12:37 PM
As for Jordan, he did indeed win 6 titles. But Shaq and the Orlando Magic prevented him from winning 7 titles as they took out the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs.

I know I am jumping in on an old argument here, but I did want to point out that this was a very horrible point right here. I don't think it can be called an upset considering Orlando was a higher seed and got home court advantage. Not to mention, Jordan was very rusty since he his return wasn't even 2 months old. The Jordan that went up against Orlando in 1995 was maybe half the player that the Jordan from the 1995-1996 season was.

BradleySucks
04-19-2005, 03:15 PM
Hey guys, I am a Rockets fan, and just wanted to check out what you guys had to say. You are a bunch of classy individuals!! See, everything is better in Tx. Burn all Jazz fans though!

www.clutchfans.com

Thespiralgoeson
04-19-2005, 06:49 PM
Welcome to the board Rocket Fans. I don't know what exactly it is about your team, but for some reason I'm really getting Rocket-fever here. Anytime they play, I hope their game is broadcast here so I can witch (I really need NBA TV) Yao and T-Mac have become two of my favorite players. I just love watching them, and would love to see them pick up a good PF in the offseason. If they were playing against any other team in the playoffs, I'd root for them. But unfortunately, looks like they're playing my Mavs, so I hope the Mavs stomp them. Although, I can't help but be excited about the Dirk/T-Mac shoot-out.

SRF
04-19-2005, 06:57 PM
Originally posted by: FINtastic

As for Jordan, he did indeed win 6 titles. But Shaq and the Orlando Magic prevented him from winning 7 titles as they took out the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs.

I know I am jumping in on an old argument here, but I did want to point out that this was a very horrible point right here. I don't think it can be called an upset considering Orlando was a higher seed and got home court advantage. Not to mention, Jordan was very rusty since he his return wasn't even 2 months old. The Jordan that went up against Orlando in 1995 was maybe half the player that the Jordan from the 1995-1996 season was.

Sorry about the double post.

Anyways, I think the fact the bulls didn't have one of the greatest rebounders and defenders in the history of the NBA had a little to do with it...remember Rodman didn't join until the next season and brought 15 rebounds a game with him. I don't think Jordan's 'rust' had anything to do with it, the dude dropped 55 in NY a month or so before the playoffs...that sounds pretty ready to me. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

NYCdog
04-19-2005, 07:32 PM
WOW.....completely forgot about this thread and the disagreement I had with some here.



I'll make this simple for you, NYC. Do you contend that upsets are more likely to happen than the higher seeded team with the significantly better record winning? In spite of all these confused attempts you keep making to prove me wrong I'm guessing you don't. So really, what's your point? I'm serious. I just don't have any clue why you're continuing this. Are you just bitter for having had the gemini logic behind your Houston-will-win-in-the-first-round proclamation exposed? Are you too blind to see that nobody is even disagreeing with you that upsets happen? Are you having personal problems? I'm just trying to figure out why you would think you're on to something that has any value for your argument by arguing that those Lakers and Bulls teams that won 11 titles between them also suffered, gasp, 3 upsets? Come on, man. At least make some effort to comprehend what my position is. Or, perhaps I should just thank you for making my point for me: that upsets are the exception, not the rule.


GMC......

No I'm not having personal problems.....cant believe you'd resort to bringing my personal life into a basketball-related disagreement. More Wal-Mart level cheap shots by you I seeÖ

My whole point was just because the Mavs are a better team on paper doesnít mean they will win, something you seem to be championing yourself. That's why I brought up the upset example's I provided. You yourself asked for them regarding the Lakers and Bulls teams. You left yourself open to the question and I just responded. I guess you didnít like the fact that I had a logical answer.

True, upsets donít happen every time....I never said it did, that's just a foregone conclusion by you. But you cant rule it out either. It could happen here....like I think it will.


I do have some empathy for you, though. I'm sure that these days you are, as I said earlier, seeing monsters in the closet and starting to feel that even things that supposedly CAN'T happen probably will. I mean, who ever loses a 3-0 lead in a baseball series? That happens, like, next to never. Yes, I know that it's embarrassing to be the team that did. Especially the way it happened, in that Game Four. I mean, it's FAR more embarrassing than Denver's debacle against the Nuggets that year. It's like, exponentially more embarrassing, especially considering that it wasn't just any old opponent who owned you so badly. But at least your embarrassment can be tempered by the fact that you have proven--beyond any shadow of a doubt, beyond even the strongest and most objective argument to the contrary--that the most incredible playoffs collapse that even the cruelest mind could imagine is indeed possible.

Chumdawg.....this is just plain sad.

You bring BASEBALL and LAST YEAR as a cheap shot at me. That's it!?!i/expressions/anim_roller.gif Man I'm glad your not from Boston other wise I could you played your lil "Back to the Future" trash talk role and bring up 86 years worth of misery to throw at you as opposed to my supposed one season's worth of misery you meekly threw at me.

But then again, all I need to do is bring up the fact that your a proud fan of the Texas Rangers, and that does it for me. We Yankees brought you playoff misery in the 90's....Remember that? So what's next...gonna bring up your beloved Cowboys history now?

BTW....I think there is a place we can talk baseball and other sports as a way for to meekly try and diss me, and this aint it, last I checked. Guess I'll be seeing you in the "Yankee 2005" thread....

FINtastic
04-19-2005, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by: SRF

Originally posted by: FINtastic

As for Jordan, he did indeed win 6 titles. But Shaq and the Orlando Magic prevented him from winning 7 titles as they took out the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs.

I know I am jumping in on an old argument here, but I did want to point out that this was a very horrible point right here. I don't think it can be called an upset considering Orlando was a higher seed and got home court advantage. Not to mention, Jordan was very rusty since he his return wasn't even 2 months old. The Jordan that went up against Orlando in 1995 was maybe half the player that the Jordan from the 1995-1996 season was.

Sorry about the double post.

Anyways, I think the fact the bulls didn't have one of the greatest rebounders and defenders in the history of the NBA had a little to do with it...remember Rodman didn't join until the next season and brought 15 rebounds a game with him. I don't think Jordan's 'rust' had anything to do with it, the dude dropped 55 in NY a month or so before the playoffs...that sounds pretty ready to me. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Just because he was rusty doesn't mean he didn't do some incredible things still. But he wasn't anywhere near the player that year as he was in other years. His numbers weren't Jordan-like numbers. Not to mention, he had those two crucial turnovers at the end of one of the playoff games against Orlando. He was still good, but he wasn't quite himself. It was that Orlando series that motivated him to work like a madman during the summer to get his game back to the level it was at when he retired.

But like I said, he still did some pretty impressive things during that season, like dropping a double nickel on the Knicks.

SRF
04-20-2005, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by: FINtastic

Originally posted by: SRF

Originally posted by: FINtastic

As for Jordan, he did indeed win 6 titles. But Shaq and the Orlando Magic prevented him from winning 7 titles as they took out the Bulls in the 1995 playoffs.

I know I am jumping in on an old argument here, but I did want to point out that this was a very horrible point right here. I don't think it can be called an upset considering Orlando was a higher seed and got home court advantage. Not to mention, Jordan was very rusty since he his return wasn't even 2 months old. The Jordan that went up against Orlando in 1995 was maybe half the player that the Jordan from the 1995-1996 season was.

Sorry about the double post.

Anyways, I think the fact the bulls didn't have one of the greatest rebounders and defenders in the history of the NBA had a little to do with it...remember Rodman didn't join until the next season and brought 15 rebounds a game with him. I don't think Jordan's 'rust' had anything to do with it, the dude dropped 55 in NY a month or so before the playoffs...that sounds pretty ready to me. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Just because he was rusty doesn't mean he didn't do some incredible things still. But he wasn't anywhere near the player that year as he was in other years. His numbers weren't Jordan-like numbers. Not to mention, he had those two crucial turnovers at the end of one of the playoff games against Orlando. He was still good, but he wasn't quite himself. It was that Orlando series that motivated him to work like a madman during the summer to get his game back to the level it was at when he retired.

But like I said, he still did some pretty impressive things during that season, like dropping a double nickel on the Knicks.
I'll just ask one more question so this thread doesn't go too far off topic...Do you think the Bulls would've 1. 3 peated without Rodman, 2. won ANY championships without Rodman, 3. Won 72 games without Rodman. I wish I could bring up some stats of the bulls with and without him, as I remember this discussion awhile back and the Rodman factor was HUGE.

FINtastic
04-21-2005, 12:48 AM
Don't get me wrong Rodman, was very important. I don't think they would have won three championships without Rodman, probably just 1 or 2. The Bulls would have won it in 1995-1996, even without Rodman. That's how incredibly good they were that year because they had an ultra-hungry Jordan who was motivated from his playoff failures. Not to mention, the competition wasn't really scary that year. With Rodman, they simply became one of the greatest teams of all time. The next couple of championships would have been kind of iffy though without Rodman, especially that last championship since they won it by the skin of their teeth.

I'm not trying to bash Rodman, but the main reason chicago lost to orlando in 95 was cause of the jordan rust factor. Those two turnovers at the end of the one game against Orlando said it all for me - Jordan wasn't quite himself yet. He changed all that over the summer and had returned to his dominant self by the beginning of the next season.

capitalcity
04-26-2005, 06:08 PM
Originally posted by: capitalcity
NO 76
HOU 73

Well nevermind all that afraid of houston talk - really, who can figure the rockets out? Maybe pulling them instead of Sac won't be a big deal. I'm still not AFRAID of houston... I'm afraid of what I'll do to the TV if we lose game 3. F'em.

ocelot_ark
04-27-2005, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by: ocelot_ark
I don't know how anyone in their right might would rather play Houston than Sacramento. I just don't get it...Who is playing better? Who plays better defense? Who has two stars on top of their game, one of which could single handedly keep any team in a game provided he is on his game? I just really like the way Houston's team is put together. They have a great combination of pieces.

Hate to say I told you so...

kingrex
04-27-2005, 11:14 AM
Those who underestimated Houston were foolish, but who could have predicted how badly the Mavs would play in the playoffs?

I give Houston all the credit in the world, but the Mavs have't exactly played up to their level. Houstons' gameplan has something to do with it, but the Mavs have helped in the process.

Let's hope that this will start to look like the competitive and exciting series that we all expected.

MrCheerios
04-27-2005, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by: kingrex

I give Houston all the credit in the world, but the Mavs have't exactly played up to their level. Houstons' gameplan has something to do with it, but the Mavs have helped in the process.


This series reminds me of the Laker-detriot series. Our team had more talent; we were on a roll. Detroit had no superstars and appeared to be weak offensively. When they beat us, we were left scratching our heads thinking "If only the lakers had played to their potential..." They were trying to, only the pistons wouldn't let them. We were hoping Kobe's shots would fall, but only in retrospect did we see that detroit was determining which shots he was taking, which shot every laker was taking. Everyone thinks the lakers collapsed, but it was all detroit. And to this day they still don't get enough credit.

kingrex
04-29-2005, 11:48 AM
I give Houston all the credit in the world. They gameplanned perfectly and took advantage of all the mismatches they had. But, you have to admit that Dallas didn't exploit all their mismatches. They flat out just didn't play up to par.

I think game 3 was closer to how the Mavs have played in the regular season (style I mean, rather than line-up).

Now, Houston didn't play as well as they did in games 1 and 2 either, but as you said the defense had something to do with that too.

I hope that if game 4 can't be a blow out win by the Mavs, then my second wish is for both teams to battle at the level of play that both are capable of doing (ending with a Dallas win of course). i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif

Evilmav2
04-29-2005, 03:19 PM
Houston is a toilet bowl of a team that is situated in a stinking latrine pit of a strip mall city. They deserve some measure of credit for putting Dallas on the ropes in this series, but after last night I think the fun and games have come to a close, and if Dallas is able to successfully even up the series this Saturday, then young Yao 'Rik Smits' Ming and his lazy-eyed sidekick McGrady will be doomed in this series.

dude1394
05-01-2005, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by: Evilmav2
Houston is a toilet bowl of a team that is situated in a stinking latrine pit of a strip mall city. They deserve some measure of credit for putting Dallas on the ropes in this series, but after last night I think the fun and games have come to a close, and if Dallas is able to successfully even up the series this Saturday, then young Yao 'Rik Smits' Ming and his lazy-eyed sidekick McGrady will be doomed in this series.

Is that you 'ape?? i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif