America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by KingoftheCove. 20 replies replies.
GS is kicking the Cavs.....
fishinguitarman Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
Azzzzzzzz!!!!
patrickh44231 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 09-24-2009
Posts: 1,510
SHUUUUT IT!!!

WHATS THAT?

3-1?
frankj1 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
14 pts with 2.5 left in the 3rd
fishinguitarman Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
14 point lead!
frankj1 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
21
gummy jones Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
This series will go 6 or 7
fishinguitarman Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
gummy jones wrote:
This series will go 6 or 7



6
patrickh44231 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 09-24-2009
Posts: 1,510
You can't make a call. You don't even have a laptop to fallow the stats.





GOOO CAVS!
bassman45 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 07-05-2009
Posts: 4,082
No answer for Durant,Warriors in 5
MACS Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,599
Well that escalated quickly...
SteveS Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 01-13-2002
Posts: 8,751
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Hank_The_Tank Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 11-15-2016
Posts: 3,677
As much of a Cavs fan I am, I don't know if this series will even go 5. Pretty sure this GS team may be the best championship team ever...as in they would beat Jordan's bulls. If the Cavs somehow pull off a miracle, it will be awesome, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.
frankj1 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
Jordan's Bulls wouldn't beat most of the 10 Russell Celtics (8 in a row)
MACS Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,599
Last year's championship series, no game was within 10 points except game 7.

Cavs turned it over and missed too many shots. Can't do that and beat GS.
KingoftheCove Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 10-08-2011
Posts: 7,603
frankj1 wrote:
Jordan's Bulls wouldn't beat most of the 10 Russell Celtics (8 in a row)

Frankie...............get serious.
I'm as nostalgic as any other old guy.
But....
Jordan's Bulls, Magic's Lakers, any Spurs team, Kobe's Lakers, the current Warriors, etc...........any of these teams, in fact, any modern NBA team, would simply crush ANY team from the 60s......period.
Even Jerry West (The Logo) has said as much.
frankj1 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
sorry King. Started to answer at work and could not finish...

it's impossible to compare athletes and teams from different eras, so here's what I tend to do for my own amusement.

I think of guys like Russell, Cousey, Sharman, Heinsohn, Sam Jones, KC Jones, Havliceck, et al. They were the most dominant team in all of sports history from the late '50's to the late '60's, so indulge me and accept that they were the greatest of their time...winning more titles than any great teams before or after their incomparable run of greatness.

But what if they were born in 1990, playing with more modern training advantages and looser rules (traveling, palming, etc.). Why would they not also be the most dominant in future decades as well?

Reversing that imaginary scenario, as great as he was, would Iverson have been considered a Hall of Famer had he played in the 60's when he would have been called for carrying on nearly every drive? and on and on...
KingoftheCove Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 10-08-2011
Posts: 7,603
frankj1 wrote:
sorry King. Started to answer at work and could not finish...

it's impossible to compare athletes and teams from different eras, so here's what I tend to do for my own amusement.

I think of guys like Russell, Cousey, Sharman, Heinsohn, Sam Jones, KC Jones, Havliceck, et al. They were the most dominant team in all of sports history from the late '50's to the late '60's, so indulge me and accept that they were the greatest of their time...winning more titles than any great teams before or after their incomparable run of greatness.

But what if they were born in 1990, playing with more modern training advantages and looser rules (traveling, palming, etc.). Why would they not also be the most dominant in future decades as well?

Reversing that imaginary scenario, as great as he was, would Iverson have been considered a Hall of Famer had he played in the 60's when he would have been called for carrying on nearly every drive? and on and on...

I get what you're saying.
The rules have changed for sure.
Heck, in the 40s and even to the mid 50s, there were full on fisticuffs.........often!

But the skill and size of today's players, compared to those players in the 60s.............not even close really.
But it's silly to compare eras.
Still, can you imagine Durant playing in the 60s? He'd have better ball handling skills than almost anyone, at 7 ft!
Who could guard him? Heck, who can guard him now I suppose!
frankj1 Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
KingoftheCove wrote:
I get what you're saying.
The rules have changed for sure.
Heck, in the 40s and even to the mid 50s, there were full on fisticuffs.........often!

But the skill and size of today's players, compared to those players in the 60s.............not even close really.
But it's silly to compare eras.
Still, can you imagine Durant playing in the 60s? He'd have better ball handling skills than almost anyone, at 7 ft!
Who could guard him? Heck, who can guard him now I suppose!

just having discussions like we are now is part of why I love sports so much!

So when I imagine Durant playing in the 60's I also imagine him having been born in the 40's and having been coached and trained and reffed the same way as the greats back then...West, Baylor, Oscar(!), Pettit, and Durant would have been great within the confines of the game back then.

To me, most greats would likely be great in other eras as well, so I can't imagine how much more amazing Baylor, oscar, et al would have been today with the year round opportunities today's stars get...like AAU intensity, privarte prep schools recruiting and tutoring...I know you get the point.

But I can't picture the James Worthy of The Show Time Lakers swooping in on Big Bill Russel for open-lane dunks!

I often hear that it was easier for a team like the Celts of the 60's win so many titles, reason being an 8 team league. I understand that, but consider the concentration of high level stars...the worst teams had massive talents like Walt Bellamy, Nate Thurmond, Dave Bing, the regular season was brutal, often train travel, room mates on the road, adhesive tape for sprains if there even was a trainer.

The Celts then had to beat teams with Chamberlain and Greer and 2 or 3 other big stars, Oscar and Twyman, Lucas and other stars, just to get to the finals and beat West and Baylor and Goodrich and others...and they won 8 in a row, 9 out of 10 (or 10 out of 11?), having lost in Russell's second year when he was out with an injury, or they would possibly have won 10 or 11 in a row,

Many who did not see much of that era assume the C's had the biggest stars, but in fact they never had the leading scorer, many years not even a top 10 scorer, but they had that D, the rebounding desire, the ability to mentally out last opponents, and Red, who basically invented the fast break, and the sixth man concept. And he smoked cigars!

Raise those same guys in modern times, they'd be the same types playing with today's skill set.

To me, over the last decade or two or more, the Spurs remind me most of those Celtic teams, and the Walton/Hollins/Lucas/Steele era Blazers do too.
patrickh44231 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 09-24-2009
Posts: 1,510
We find out tomorrow how much of a **** show this is gonna be!
KingoftheCove Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-08-2011
Posts: 7,603
patrickh44231 wrote:
We find out tomorrow how much of a **** show this is gonna be!

I'm pulling for the Warriors, but hoping the Cavs win at least a game or two.
Last year Curry was hurt, and Clay was gimpy, but both wouldn't admit it.
They are healthy this year (although Clay's shooting lately has been a bit anemic).
If they sweep the Cavs, despite the historical significance........I think it will be bad for the NBA.
Users browsing this topic
Guest