2011 NBA Playoffs

[TrueYankee26]

NBA: Where 2 teams win 82% of the titles since 1998 and 4 teams win 89% since 1990 happens!

I really don't see how that matters. Would you rather that a random team won every year, and that there were no dynasties? How would that be more entertaining?

It's better than seeing the same teams win (unless that's my teams that's hogging up the titles! )

Since Y2k, only 2 teams have won multiple titles (Yankees & Red Sox). And 5 appeared in multiple World Series (Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals, Phillies, Giants) For MLB.

[loogodude90]

NBA: Where 2 teams win 82% of the titles since 1998 and 4 teams win 89% since 1990 happens!

I really don't see how that matters. Would you rather that a random team won every year, and that there were no dynasties? How would that be more entertaining?

It's better than seeing the same teams win (unless that's my teams that's hogging up the titles! )

Since Y2k, only 2 teams have won multiple titles (Yankees & Red Sox). And 5 appeared in multiple World Series (Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals, Phillies, Giants) For MLB.

And again, that's where we disagree. If 10 different teams win a title over a span of 10 years, I don't find that the slightest bit more entertaining than if one team had won every title during those 10 years. Dynasties create drama and rivalries.

[PurpleRush]

Dear officials:

Thank you for making sure the Lakers won their last regular season game to get the #2 seed.

Signed,

Chris Paul.

[DustDevil61]

All I can say is congrats to the Hornets and Grizzlies. I never would have thought that Memphis remained winless once mid-April had passed in franchise history.

I don't think that New Orleans will beat the Lakers, but that was a great game by the Hornets. There are few things that would bring a bigger smile to my face than to see the Lakers (at least this group) get knocked out in the first round (if the Hornets manage to topple the Lakers).

[cameroncrazie07]

Pacers giving the Bulls another great game but it appears D-Rose will be too much once again.

[knnhrvy16]

And the Bulls escape with another win. Boy, Indiana sure doesn't play like an 8-seed. That team hustles like crazy, and has given Chicago a whole lot of trouble. Who knows how they could do at home in Indy? I'll definetely be keeping an eye on this series, and personally, hope to see the Pacers' hard work and hustle pay off for some wins. I'm not at all implying that I think they will, but I hope to see Indiana get some wins and make things interesting.

[loogodude90]

And the Bulls escape with another win. Boy, Indiana sure doesn't play like an 8-seed. That team hustles like crazy, and has given Chicago a whole lot of trouble. Who knows how they could do at home in Indy? I'll definetely be keeping an eye on this series, and personally, hope to see the Pacers' hard work and hustle pay off for some wins. I'm not at all implying that I think they will, but I hope to see Indiana get some wins and make things interesting.

Not that anyone will really remember this, but this series REALLY reminds me of the 1997 first round series between the (1)Bulls and (8)Bullets, especially with Chris Webber doing the commentary. That was the series that made Michael Jordan proclaim the Bullets as the "Team of the future." That didn't work out so well, though.

[knnhrvy16]

And the Bulls escape with another win. Boy, Indiana sure doesn't play like an 8-seed. That team hustles like crazy, and has given Chicago a whole lot of trouble. Who knows how they could do at home in Indy? I'll definetely be keeping an eye on this series, and personally, hope to see the Pacers' hard work and hustle pay off for some wins. I'm not at all implying that I think they will, but I hope to see Indiana get some wins and make things interesting.

Not that anyone will really remember this, but this series REALLY reminds me of the 1997 first round series between the (1)Bulls and (8)Bullets, especially with Chris Webber doing the commentary. That was the series that made Michael Jordan proclaim the Bullets as the "Team of the future." That didn't work out so well, though.

I never did think of that, that's an interesting comparison. I was five then and only paid attention to the Jazz games at the time, but weren't each of the games in the series decided by like, four points or less? I've never seen any footage or anything, but I've certainly heard that that series was closer than most would have expected it to be. Especially knowing how everything would eventually turn out in the Finals, I kinda wish Washington was able to pull if off back then

[ESTONES6]

NBA: Where the Playoffs last longer than the Season

NBA: Where 2 teams win 82% of the titles since 1998 and 4 teams win 89% since 1990 happens!

NBA: Where competitive balance happens. Or did you mean Where the inmates run the asylum?

It is funny coming from a Yankee fan though. No offense, cause I love Yankee history... but... funny none-the-less.

[CubsFanBudMan]

And the Bulls escape with another win. Boy, Indiana sure doesn't play like an 8-seed. That team hustles like crazy, and has given Chicago a whole lot of trouble. Who knows how they could do at home in Indy? I'll definetely be keeping an eye on this series, and personally, hope to see the Pacers' hard work and hustle pay off for some wins. I'm not at all implying that I think they will, but I hope to see Indiana get some wins and make things interesting.

Not that anyone will really remember this, but this series REALLY reminds me of the 1997 first round series between the (1)Bulls and (8)Bullets, especially with Chris Webber doing the commentary. That was the series that made Michael Jordan proclaim the Bullets as the "Team of the future." That didn't work out so well, though.

Oh, some of us remember. Some of us were sitting in the stands blowing their disposable income on Bulls-Bullets, Bulls-Heat and Bulls-Jazz playoff tickets after dropping the year before's on the Bulls-Sonics Finals.

Interesting comparison, though. Have head a few, but not that one.

Hearing a little bit too much panic from the bandwagon Bulls fans. Although they have played particularly poorly these first two games, they won their share of close ones -- and almost all of their games were close, even ones that shouldn't have been.

For whatever reason, people expected them to destroy the Pacers as if they were the 1995-96 Bulls. This team is not like that at all. Even Dick Stockton said "these Bulls fans must be stunned" when the Bulls are up 1-0 in the series and up by 4 with 2 minutes left in Game 2. I don't get it. A win is a win.

[pmoehrin]

NBA: Where the Playoffs last longer than the Season

NBA: Where 2 teams win 82% of the titles since 1998 and 4 teams win 89% since 1990 happens!

NBA: Where competitive balance happens. Or did you mean Where the inmates run the asylum?

It is funny coming from a Yankee fan though. No offense, cause I love Yankee history... but... funny none-the-less.

I don't know how much competitive balance the NBA can really have, just because of how the game is designed. A last place team can add one player and become a 50 win team. There's no other sport like that. Baseball certainly isn't like that. You may get it to some degree in football with the QB position but that's about it, and I would say anyone short of a Wayne Gretzky wouldn't get you that in hockey.

To me the idea of competitive balance refers to how fluid the standings are. Not just at the top but the bottom as well. Every sport is going to have their dominant teams. There's no getting around it. But when you have the same teams being bad year in and year out, to me that's when you get competitive balance issues. I don't know if there's a team like that in the NBA. Over the last five years with any team I can point to at least one season where they were at least decent.

I just think that once a team gets Kobe Bryant on their roster, they are always going to be at the top of the standings no matter what.

What I don't like about the NBA is how they promote the one-one Michael Jordan style of play, and try to ignore any team that goes against it, mainly teams built around big men and those who spread the ball around on offense. If the Boston Celtics of the 60's played today, the things people say about the Spurs would be being said about them. There's alot to be learned and appreciated with a team like the Spurs and instead of that they just get called a boring team. If they are being called boring that means the person saying that either doesen't understand the game, or hasn't been taught it. I tend to agree with the latter and I blame the NBA for it. I had to go work for an NCAA Basketball team for two+ years in order to gain an understanding of the game, which I never would have gotten while watching TV, and I watched alot of NBA basketball. Its the only sport where the strategy of the game isn't well known amogst the fans of it and I don't think the NBA wants people to understand it. I think the NBA is quite happy with everyone thinking that a superstar gurad oriented team is the only way to play, and every other way is stupid.

[cameroncrazie07]

Basically this game has turned into Carmelo Anthony Vs. The Celtics and the refs. I am fully convinced that the NBA is fixed.

[Lights Out]

I think the NBA is quite happy with everyone thinking that a superstar gurad oriented team is the only way to play, and every other way is stupid.

Well, first of all, teams don't generally win titles without talented big men. That's a must if you actually plan on winning in the regular season, let alone the playoffs. So the guards aren't the most important position on the team no matter what the league promotes.

Secondly, the NBA has moved past the one-superstar team. Now every team is expected to have three superstars, a ridiculous idea in a league without any parity to speak of.

[Rockstar Matt]

I'm no Knicks fan by any stretch of the imagination, but the refs are seemingly "inventing" fouls to be called on New York or deliberately not calling fouls that should be called against Boston.

[cameroncrazie07]

I'm no Knicks fan by any stretch of the imagination, but the refs are seemingly "inventing" fouls to be called on New York or deliberately not calling fouls the should be called against Boston.

Thank You.

[Lights Out]

I'm no Knicks fan by any stretch of the imagination, but the refs are seemingly "inventing" fouls to be called on New York or deliberately not calling fouls the should be called against Boston.

Is it giving you flashbacks to a certain playoff series in '02?

[Rockstar Matt]

I'm no Knicks fan by any stretch of the imagination, but the refs are seemingly "inventing" fouls to be called on New York or deliberately not calling fouls that should be called against Boston.

Is it giving you flashbacks to a certain playoff series in '02?

My memory is bit a fuzzy from way back then

[Rockstar Matt]

I'm no Knicks fan by any stretch of the imagination, but the refs are seemingly "inventing" fouls to be called on New York or deliberately not calling fouls the should be called against Boston.

Thank You.

Then again, that last "foul" on Pierce wasn't a foul.

[cameroncrazie07]

I'm no Knicks fan by any stretch of the imagination, but the refs are seemingly "inventing" fouls to be called on New York or deliberately not calling fouls the should be called against Boston.

Thank You.

Then again, that last "foul" on Pierce wasn't a foul.

Yeah, but it still doesn't make up for the 10 "fouls" that have gone against the Knicks.

[cameroncrazie07]

If they somehow win this game I will legit flip out.