View Full Version : Poll: biggest playoff choker
04-22-2002, 06:40 PM
garnett or webber
04-22-2002, 07:06 PM
04-22-2002, 07:07 PM
Starks didn't even make the playoff roster. What a spare.
04-22-2002, 07:09 PM
Starks is the all time playoff choker. The Knicks would have a ring right now if starks could have hit one 3 pointer a few years ago. He was like 0 for 16. Dont quote me on that but Im fairly close.
04-22-2002, 07:20 PM
<< Starks didn't even make the playoff roster. What a spare >>
I´m speaking about the 94 finals against Houston. Game 6.
Gotta agree with Fidel and dallmav here..Starks really blew it for Ewing and the Knicks.
04-22-2002, 07:33 PM
Out of Murph's choices, I vote Webber.
Garnett hasn't had a lot of support and he has never had home court advantage. With that said, Garnett is nothing more than a bigger version of Scottie Pippen.
Webber has had a lot of support and still can't win squat.
04-22-2002, 07:38 PM
Nick Anderson comes to mind.
04-22-2002, 07:41 PM
Was Starks really bad in Game 7? I was a huge Rockets fan during that series, and I remember Starks was KILLING us with his deadly 3 point shooting...but, since you guys labeled him a choker from that series, he must have had a bad game 7.
04-22-2002, 07:41 PM
and murph, i don't think you can call webber or garnett a playoff choker, especially KG...so i cant vote until you modify the poll.
04-22-2002, 07:44 PM
It was game 6. If starks would have hit one 3 pointer in that game, there would not have been a seventh game. The knicks would have been champions.
04-22-2002, 07:45 PM
gotcha...thanks for the info...that series seems soooooo long ago i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif
04-22-2002, 07:48 PM
<< and murph, i don't think you can call webber or garnett a playoff choker, especially KG... >>
Well... 19 points... 12 rebounds.. 5 assists. Pretty good numbers.
But aren't you supposed to elevate your game in the postseason. If you believe you are... then he is **choking**... if you believe you can maintain your same numbers... then yeah he **isn't** choking.
04-22-2002, 07:49 PM
game 6. He wasn´t 0-something. But he missed numerous chances to win it at the end (wasn´t that an OT game?).
04-22-2002, 08:25 PM
has either player elevated their game in the post season in the past?
however, i would agree about kg... he hasn't had as realistic of a chance to excel in the playoffs as webber.
plus..kg's game isn't as conducive to putting up huge numbers consistantly in the playoffs to begin with.. yes, very, very solid numbers..but i believe he'll always be only a "good" scorer when it comes to the playoffs
Perception is a funny thing. Wallace puts up similar numbers in the Detriot game and he is called DOMINANT at both ends of the court. KG is a choker. Weird...
04-22-2002, 08:44 PM
MFFL.... Wallace went 8-11 from the field.... Garnett went 6-18.
That in itself is a big difference.
04-22-2002, 08:51 PM
<< Nick Anderson comes to mind. >>
OHH DUDE! I totally forgot about that one. If that loser hits those free throws, there's a slight possibility that Dallas doesn't have to deal with Shaq until the finals this year, because he might still be in the East!
That began the undoing of the Magic. That's also what they get for beating out Chicago that year, in Jordan's return, and robbing us of a Jordan vs. Dream Finals. I don't know if Chicago would have won a finals series against that team. It would have been interesting to see.
04-22-2002, 09:48 PM
Garnett hasn't really elevated his numbers but he has maintined them. Webber's numbers actually go down. Also KG is not a 'scorer' in the regular season. Its unrealistic to expect him to become so in the post-season, his strength has always and will always be his all-around game.
Weber on the other hand is a scorer but he can't score when it counts.
04-22-2002, 10:12 PM
kg has a good all around offensive game..but part of his problem is that he really doesn't excel with anything offensively...just average to good to solid in pretty much every different offensive aspect
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.