PDA

View Full Version : SI Predicts the suns will win the Finals over the heat


fluid.forty.one
10-18-2006, 06:25 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/specials/preview/2006/scouting.reports/


pfff I think they got it all wrong.

dallas over the bulls in the finals

alby
10-18-2006, 06:44 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/specials/preview/2006/scouting.reports/


pfff I think they got it all wrong.

dallas over the bulls in the finals

bulls?

Underdog
10-18-2006, 06:51 PM
HAHAHAHA!!! I needed a good laugh...

Steve Nash might have 2 MVPs but he'll NEVER get a ring...

EricaLubarsky
10-18-2006, 06:55 PM
Bulls?

And Nash will get a ring in 2020 with the Las Vegas Bookies in their third year as an expansion team. Unfortunately Nash will not play, but wil enjoy a great seat on the floor courtside

MavsX
10-18-2006, 07:46 PM
yeah no way the suns win it...idiots!

Dirkenstien
10-18-2006, 08:15 PM
I tihnk if the Suns had gotten past us in the Conference Finals they would have had a great chance at beating the Heat. Their running style would have been lethal against Shaq and Zo who were both pretty effective in our series.

With that said, the Suns definitely have a chance at getting to the Finals depending on how Amare comes around. Still, no team is a given and it could go many ways with how competitive the West is.

We're in for an entertaining and hopefully rewarding season.

Five-ofan
10-18-2006, 08:38 PM
The Avs series for the Finals. It shows that M is better than C. Mavs over the Cavs in the finals.

dirno2000
10-18-2006, 09:07 PM
If Steve Nash wins a championship before the Mavs I'll have two options

1) Stop visiting this board
2) Hunt down and kill Chum (and probably darth ape too) as a preemptive strike :)

EricaLubarsky
10-18-2006, 09:29 PM
a policy of preemption may not be a bad one

Tokey41
10-18-2006, 10:21 PM
Simply ridiculous, they must be assuming Amare is 100%.

I dont think the Bulls in the finals is as much of a stretch as many are making it out to be. In that weak east its anyone game. But i'd have to say like 5-0 said the Cavs will be seeing the Mavs in the finals.

Dirkadirkastan
10-18-2006, 11:13 PM
Why are the Suns getting so much credit? They haven't proven themselves (especially Amare) AT ALL yet. If you're gonna make a pick, make an educated one based on actual information.

Same argument goes for the Bulls.

So I'm just sticking with the Mavs over the Heat.

If it's Mavs/Cavs I would be worried. The refs would have the exact same incentive to put Lebron on next year's Wheaties box that they did for Wade this year.

AxdemxO
10-18-2006, 11:14 PM
The Cavs are not goin to the finals, they will once again have an up and down season and make it to the second round.

I have to say that the east is a lot more balanced going into this season and that it will be betwen Miami and Chicago, i personally like the Bulls.

Bulls vs Mavs= great series and mavs championship

Five-ofan
10-18-2006, 11:15 PM
The Cavs are not goin to the finals, they will once again have an up and down season and make it to the second round.

I have to say that the east is a lot more balanced going into this season and that it will be betwen Miami and Chicago, i personally like the Bulls.

Bulls vs Mavs= great series and mavs championship
The bulls wont win more than 48 games. They made no signifigant upgrades and yes i know they got ben wallace. Just wait.

nashtymavsfan13
10-18-2006, 11:44 PM
I think it will be the Mavs, but if they somehow lose it could very easily be the Suns or Spurs. I don't see any East teams coming even close, but I think the Cavs or Heat will make it to the Finals.

Tokey41
10-18-2006, 11:45 PM
I'd like to know, what holes do you see in that team exactly that makes you think they wont surpass 48? Their young core being together another year? That damn depth problem? Balance of offensive and defensive players?

They will win more games than the hornets, who 'significantly' upgraded. The Bulls didnt even need to upgrade all that much as far as I see it. They are in the top 4 or 5 teams in the East no matter how you cut it, im thinking they will probably be #3 by seasons end.

Five-ofan
10-19-2006, 12:13 AM
I'd like to know, what holes do you see in that team exactly that makes you think they wont surpass 48? Their young core being together another year? That damn depth problem? Balance of offensive and defensive players?

They will win more games than the hornets, who 'significantly' upgraded. The Bulls didnt even need to upgrade all that much as far as I see it. They are in the top 4 or 5 teams in the East no matter how you cut it, im thinking they will probably be #3 by seasons end.
They were already great defensively and horrible offensively. They were also 42-40 last year and the 7th seed. I dont see how you see them as top 4-5 in the east so clearly. The Heat, Cavs, Nets, pistons and Wiz are all a good bit better imo.

chumdawg
10-19-2006, 12:14 AM
If Steve Nash wins a championship before the Mavs I'll have two options

1) Stop visiting this board
2) Hunt down and kill Chum (and probably darth ape too) as a preemptive strike :)You will never find me.

Everyone here knows, whether they are man enough to admit it or not, that Steve Nash is a generational player. If his team has talent around him, they are always a threat to take it the distance. Witness the 2005 season, when they put the Mavericks to rest and gave the Spurs all they wanted to handle.

Extraordinary talents beget extraordinary outcomes, which is why the Suns are always a threat. You dismiss them at your peril. Just as a Kobe or a LeBron or a Wade may raise up and win a series singlehandedly, so too may Nash. But if Nash has a healthy Stoudemire and Marion and Barbosa beside him, he may not need to do so much himself.

Danger lurks in the desert. Don't kid yourself.

sike
10-19-2006, 12:35 AM
If Steve Nash wins a championship before the Mavs I'll have two options

1) Stop visiting this board
2) Hunt down and kill Chum (and probably darth ape too) as a preemptive strike :)
Now that's 100% pure unpolluted merkin.

AxdemxO
10-19-2006, 01:14 AM
LeBron mite be a "great player' but the Cavs will not make it to the finals anytime soon. But asnythin is possible.

Chicago is got sooo many pieces and with Ben Wallace as their leader (just his presence) they will be better.

and anything is piossible soo dont be ignorant and just put the Mavs and heat in the finals because if the Mavs lose to any1, you will just end up looking stupid. For all we know it could be the Boston vs Denver

nashtymavsfan13
10-19-2006, 01:24 AM
For all we know it could be the Boston vs Denver

No, it couldn't. I'll go out on a limb and say that that isn't going to happen in the near future.

AxdemxO
10-19-2006, 01:46 AM
It probably wont happen, but it is a fact that it is a possibility

nashtymavsfan13
10-19-2006, 01:51 AM
It probably wont happen, but it is a fact that it is a possibility

Yes, but your point was to not just say it would be the Mavs against Heat again just because that's who made it last year. I agree with that, but it is actually a strong possibility, cuz their aren't that many good teams in the East.

AxdemxO
10-19-2006, 02:04 AM
Tru but there are improved teams and its more balanced, and the Heat could end up havin a bad run.

But there are good team in the West, and it wont be a walk in the park ths for sure.

Dirkadirkastan
10-19-2006, 03:00 AM
LeBron mite be a "great player' but the Cavs will not make it to the finals anytime soon. But asnythin is possible.

Chicago is got sooo many pieces and with Ben Wallace as their leader (just his presence) they will be better.

and anything is piossible soo dont be ignorant and just put the Mavs and heat in the finals because if the Mavs lose to any1, you will just end up looking stupid. For all we know it could be the Boston vs Denver

I'm so relieved to know that asnythin is piossible.

But seriously, you're not really making much of an argument here. Everyone already knows the Finals matchup is not guaranteed; the so-called "experts" all thought last year would be a Pistons-Spurs rematch. But if I had to pick two teams for next year, they would certainly not be Boston and Denver. My best guess is Dallas and Miami.

I don't see how this could make anyone "look stupid". Those teams have both proven themselves (unlike Boston, Denver, Phoenix, and Chicago, among others). But no one is speaking in certainty as it is, so I really don't see your point.

alby
10-19-2006, 08:40 AM
lebron won't make it to the finals, stern will not let it happen.. maybe on his 7th year? with a threepeat?

Underdog
10-19-2006, 09:24 AM
So, what happens if Amare comes back as good as he was before his injury, but Dirk comes back better than he was last year? Or if Howard, Terry, & Harris get better/more consistent, Diop & Mbenga come into their own, and the rest of the team role plays consistently?

Don't get me wrong - the Suns have a great starting 5, but even with Amare 100% they're going to have to beat a 12-man rotation with an excellent starting 5 of their own in a 7 game series... Even if Phoenix DOES manage to beat the Mavs, they still have to get past the Spurs - I just don't see them beating the Mavs/Spurs back-to-back...

mary
10-19-2006, 10:10 AM
Two things here:

If we could all pretend that Amare is going to come back even 90% and still have the same explosive athletic ability as he did two years ago, then there's no reason to believe the Suns can't be a credible contender. However, the article posted in the other thread claimed that Amare still suffers from pain, swelling, and chronic arthritis in his good knee. I just keep remembering how Sacremento collapsed after they tried to force Webber back into the line-up. It completely screwed the on-court chemistry the team had developed in his absence.

Secondly, lets not forget that the Suns were a) a miracle Tim Thomas three from not even making out of the first round, and b) the beneficiaries of a playoff format that no longer exists.

Five-ofan
10-19-2006, 11:57 AM
BTW whoever said the the bulls were a nice balance of offensive and defensive players is just flat out wrong. They have 3 above average offensive players and none of them are great offensively. I just dont see them having the guy who can say give me the ball and I will score when its at the end of the game and they need that.

As for lebron "might" be a great player, he is AT WORST a top 3 or maybe 4 player in the nba and most likely the BEST player in the nba. Yeah I would say its safe to go ahead and get rid of that might.

bigdaddy
10-19-2006, 12:38 PM
considering the suns who had they not lost raja bell last year for a few games in the conference finals could of beaten the mavs even without amare and thomas...there's no reason to think they shouldn't win it all with amare and thomas back

some of you people who think it is impossible for the suns to win it all are completely clueless obviously.

Five-ofan
10-19-2006, 01:47 PM
considering the suns who had they not lost raja bell last year for a few games in the conference finals could of beaten the mavs even without amare and thomas...there's no reason to think they shouldn't win it all with amare and thomas back

some of you people who think it is impossible for the suns to win it all are completely clueless obviously.
I dont think they would have beaten the mavs with raja and I think kurt hurts them against the mavs BUT i think its fairly obvious that any team that has been to the conference finals in consecutive years(even if one of them was from a flaw in the seeding system) is clearly a "threat".

jthig32
10-19-2006, 02:03 PM
considering the suns who had they not lost raja bell last year for a few games in the conference finals could of beaten the mavs even without amare and thomas...there's no reason to think they shouldn't win it all with amare and thomas back

some of you people who think it is impossible for the suns to win it all are completely clueless obviously.

Thomas was healthy and in uniform for the Mavs series. They simply chose not to play him.

Tokey41
10-19-2006, 02:05 PM
I dont think the Bulls are horrible offensively at all, they didnt have a go to scorer last year and you could argue that they still dont. But i'm going out on a limb and saying Gordon will be their go to guy when it counts and have a pretty good ppg this year. Put simply, they are just balanced. They dont have that one guy who can explode and put up 20-25 a game but not relying on one superstar isint as bad as your making it out to be, especially if one or two of those 10ppg guys is just hot on any given night. It's pointless to argue that its their strong suit because thats obviously their D but they are decent enough on offense.

As for them being in the top 4-5... the only teams I see in contention (real contention) are the Heat, Cavs, Bulls, Pistons... then the Nets, and Pacers. Im predicting the Bulls ahead of the Pistons, Nets, and Pacers. But we'll see. And yes I know I left out the Wizards but they just aren't a factor to me.

Five-ofan
10-19-2006, 02:25 PM
I dont think the Bulls are horrible offensively at all, they didnt have a go to scorer last year and you could argue that they still dont. But i'm going out on a limb and saying Gordon will be their go to guy when it counts and have a pretty good ppg this year. Put simply, they are just balanced. They dont have that one guy who can explode and put up 20-25 a game but not relying on one superstar isint as bad as your making it out to be, especially if one or two of those 10ppg guys is just hot on any given night. It's pointless to argue that its their strong suit because thats obviously their D but they are decent enough on offense.

As for them being in the top 4-5... the only teams I see in contention (real contention) are the Heat, Cavs, Bulls, Pistons... then the Nets, and Pacers. Im predicting the Bulls ahead of the Pistons, Nets, and Pacers. But we'll see. And yes I know I left out the Wizards but they just aren't a factor to me.
So you think ben wallace makes them THAT much better? I think people forget that they werent very good last year. As to their offense, they have Kirk, Gordon, Nocioni and everyone else SUCKS at offense. None of those guys are great. And yes they sucked at offense last year. They were 42-40 last year. I think they may have improved to 45-48 wins but i just dont see this massive improvement everyone seems to think they made.

Yes the hornets are better than they are btw.

Jerry Stackhouse
10-19-2006, 06:27 PM
Orlando is going to be a top 4 seed and 50-win team at the very minimum. Slightly off-topic, but I just wanted to get that prediction out before the season starts.

Five-ofan
10-19-2006, 06:37 PM
I love Orlando, was the first on the Dwight Howard bandwagon on this board. I dont see them being a top 4 seed though. Wait one more year.

Tokey41
10-19-2006, 07:20 PM
Having a young playmaker like Hinrich and a bomber like Gordon in the backcourt doesnt make them good offensively? Yes theres Nocioni, but lets not forget Deng and Thomas (he showed he can do more than dunk with his buzzer beater in the pre-season). They will be fine on offense dont worry about them (still think they should have kept J.R Smith though)... but as a Mavs fan you should know that defense wins championships, offense is just more fun. And im not saying Wallace makes them insanely better but considering they have him and their division rivals don't? That helps a lot.

New Orleans IS a better team, but they wont be within 5 wins of the Bulls like we have discussed. Unfortunately for them they are in the wrong conference AND in the wrong division. They will likely finish fourth in the southwest and need luck to make the playoffs.

nashtymavsfan13
10-19-2006, 07:45 PM
At least they have the Mavs getting first seed, they are probably assuming Amare will be a 100% for them to beat the Mavs in the playoffs.

kg_veteran
10-19-2006, 08:51 PM
Two things here:

If we could all pretend that Amare is going to come back even 90% and still have the same explosive athletic ability as he did two years ago, then there's no reason to believe the Suns can't be a credible contender. However, the article posted in the other thread claimed that Amare still suffers from pain, swelling, and chronic arthritis in his good knee. I just keep remembering how Sacremento collapsed after they tried to force Webber back into the line-up. It completely screwed the on-court chemistry the team had developed in his absence.

Secondly, lets not forget that the Suns were a) a miracle Tim Thomas three from not even making out of the first round, and b) the beneficiaries of a playoff format that no longer exists.

Excellent post.

As you said, if Amare is even pretty close to what he used to be, then the Suns are a viable contender. I just don't see that happening. I suppose I could be wrong, but all evidence so far points to the contrary.

As for the playoff format, it will be interesting to see what happens when the Suns have to face the Spurs or Mavs just to get to the Conference Finals and the Spurs AND Mavs to win the West. Frankly, even if they could get by one, I see no way they can get by both.

kg_veteran
10-19-2006, 08:53 PM
Everyone here knows, whether they are man enough to admit it or not, that Steve Nash is a generational player.

You are always entertaining, even when you take silly jabs at the manhood of anyone who dares to disagree with one of your dubious claims.

Big Shot Rob
10-22-2006, 11:09 PM
That article is crazy.

Any intelligent writer would know the WCF will be between Dallas and the Spurs this year and the winner will win the NBA Title against anyone who comes out of the East.

The winner IMHO will be the Spurs after a ball-busting series against the Mavs.

chumdawg
10-22-2006, 11:51 PM
You are always entertaining, even when you take silly jabs at the manhood of anyone who dares to disagree with one of your dubious claims.That's just not fair, KG. To call Morlon Wiley generational would be dubious. To call Jim Spanarkel generational would be dubious. Even to call the great Donald Hodge generational (though I think many of us would believe that he was) might be called dubious.

But to call a two-time NBA MVP generational, dubious? C'mon. I think we would go a long time--a generation even--before we saw another point guard of his ilk win the NBA's highest honor two years running.

You just sound bitter.

AxdemxO
10-23-2006, 12:35 AM
That's just not fair, KG. To call Morlon Wiley generational would be dubious. To call Jim Spanarkel generational would be dubious. Even to call the great Donald Hodge generational (though I think many of us would believe that he was) might be called dubious.

But to call a two-time NBA MVP generational, dubious? C'mon. I think we would go a long time--a generation even--before we saw another point guard of his ilk win the NBA's highest honor two years running.

You just sound bitter.

I agree with you on the Nash stuff...but idk if it will be that long before anothe pg does it cuz remmebr that Chris Paul is in the league and the kid is super talanted.

chumdawg
10-23-2006, 12:38 AM
Well, if he does it, I hope the Mavs wouldn't have had a chance to sign him at his current contract.

Because that would just add insult to injury.

mqywaaah
10-23-2006, 12:38 AM
This just in: A more dependable source (Mqywaaah) has just predicted that it will be the Mavs over the Heat in the 07 Finals. Redemption!!! haha

FINtastic
10-23-2006, 06:14 PM
C'mon. I think we would go a long time--a generation even--before we saw another point guard of his ilk win the NBA's highest honor two years running.

Yeah, but that line means two different things to two different people. I would agree that yes, I don't think I will see a more spare point guard win it two times in a row in a generation (or my lifetime even). But of course, I'm sure that's not what you had in mind when you said this.

Five-ofan
10-23-2006, 06:51 PM
Yeah, but that line means two different things to two different people. I would agree that yes, I don't think I will see a more spare point guard win it two times in a row in a generation (or my lifetime even). But of course, I'm sure that's not what you had in mind when you said this.
Hey, I was as big a proponent of nash not having any business winning the mvps as anyone but hes not a spare. Hes a top 10-15 player in the nba so he is most definitely not a spare.

FINtastic
10-25-2006, 08:48 AM
I didn't say he was a spare. Just the most spare point guard (or probably player) to ever win an MVP.