The 2013 NBA Finals Thread (Spurs vs Heat)

[Jack Brickman]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>I don't see Spurs losing two in a row. Not even Manu can choke this away. Spurs in 7. Guaranteed. Screenshot if you'd like. It's happening.</p>— Sam The Bullshit Whisperer (@SamAmicoFSO) <a href="https://twitter.com/SamAmicoFSO/statuses/347206378550603776">June 19, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Confirmed: The Bullshit Whisperer literally wrong about everything.

 

[Frank Reynolds]

Man, now that this series is over, I popped in NBA 2k13 and matched up Cavaliers vs Spurs. I was the Cavaliers and beat the Spurs handily.

Really made me wish this series wasn't over yet. I hate Miami, but damn was that an entertaining series. I could have done without game 7 and Shane fucking Battier going off again.

Great series, going to miss getting excited at work to watch these two teams go at one another. Summer baseball just can't hold a candle to the action packed competition that is NBA playoff basketball. Will never forget how the Spurs had that shit locked up, signed and delivered.

I feel really bad for Tim Duncan, one of his all time greatest performances was erased because Manu Ginobili has to leave his feet before he passes the ball. I also feel bad for him because this series is going to haunt him forever, along with his divorce in pending..... Poor Tim.

 

[KilgoreTrout]

The worst thing about the Spurs blowing that series is that it validates the wrong way of building a team.

If the Heat loses, the entire discussion is about how the Heat needs to get broken up, how the experiment failed.

Instead - because of the inability to grab one fucking rebound, the inability to make one fucking foul shot - the discussion is about how great LeBron is, about how this is one of the greatest teams ever.

One play, or the lack thereof changed the entire discussion. And I'm disgusted.

 

[th1]

The worst thing about the Spurs blowing that series is that it validates the wrong way of building a team.

If the Heat loses, the entire discussion is about how the Heat needs to get broken up, how the experiment failed.

Instead - because of the inability to grab one fucking rebound, the inability to make one fucking foul shot - the discussion is about how great LeBron is, about how this is one of the greatest teams ever.

One play, or the lack thereof changed the entire discussion. And I'm disgusted.

They won back to back championships. How can that be wrong ?

 

[brownindian]

They won back to back championships. How can that be wrong ?

depends - if you look at it from the spirit of competition then these sort of acts make the whole thing lop sided. Imagine if all the star players concentrate their efforts into colluding and form super teams - It will be fun if u are a fan of one of those super teams but other wise it sucks because it will be either a good fight or a slaughter fest. And considering how not so many super stars are there it is perhaps a wiser idea to shrink the NBA to only have meaningful games. Also it takes the fun of building a team.

 

[KilgoreTrout]

They won back to back championships. How can that be wrong ?

It's bad for competitive balance, because only two or three teams can do it - the ones in the sun/media centers.

It creates a disincentive for other teams to build the hard way. What's the fucking point of sabermetrics, if Miami or LA or NY can just go BUY a couple of superstars.

Competitive balance is what makes the NFL and NBA INTERESTING, compared to MLB and European Club soccer, where the same teams dominate year after year after year.

 

[Spencer Hawes]

They won back to back championships. How can that be wrong ?

So you 3 out of 5 starters making the max on one team. That's 60% of the starting lineup. If you apply that to the NFL, will any team have a chance? You have 11 starters on offense and defense in football. What if 6 out of every starter on an NFL team makes the max. How about we just put the top 11 offensive or defensive players at every position on one NFL team? That's basically what the Heat is doing. Granted you still have to play the game but what they did was stack the deck to improve their odds.

Now if you stack the odds like that, it takes away from opportunity of other teams to add talent. Say the queen didn't team up with bosh and wade. Now you have a Miami team that is perhaps, a 1 or 2 seed and the queen on another team that is likely a 1 or 2 seed. So the competitive balance is spread out.

The NFL is more popular because of parity. Fans know that their team can compete and win a super bowl in any given year. The NBA does not have that opportunity at the moment. That's the sad thing about it. I think if competitive balance ever comes to the NBA, it's going to overtake the NFL bar none.

 

[6.19.2016]

It's bad for competitive balance, because only two or three teams can do it - the ones in the sun/media centers.

It creates a disincentive for other teams to build the hard way. What's the fucking point of sabermetrics, if Miami or LA or NY can just go BUY a couple of superstars.

Competitive balance is what makes the NFL and NBA INTERESTING, compared to MLB and European Club soccer, where the same teams dominate year after year after year.

Excellent points in general, but if you want to use it as the main metric, the MLB has MORE unique champions over the past 30 years than the NFL. Of course the NBA lags the other two by far.

Even below the championship level, it requires so much good luck, and almost requires a decent market location, just to make it from bad to decent (look at how many years SacTown, Toronto, and Minnesota have been bad.) As I keep saying, we could easily see the Heat NEVER have to do a full-fledged rebuild, a la the Lakers, if everyone continues to want to play for them and the rules continue to allow them to never have to fully rebuild.*

*You want a solution? There should have been a salary floor on individual players, as a % of their prior salary, to prevent "championship discounts" to allow the best teams to stay on top. That way, Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis would have played for someone else this season (if Lewis didn't just retire,)

 

[Birdy89]

I think if competitive balance ever comes to the NBA

When there is only 5 guys on the floor, a super star like Jordan/Kobe/Lebron can have a far more outsized impact on the game which is what makes parity nearly impossible.

If it were 11 on 11 like in the NFL, Lebron/Kobe/Michael aren't nearly as dominant or able to control a game.

It is just the nature of the sports, and there is nothing you can really do about that as long as only 5 guys are allowed on the court and the best player can have the ball in his hands all the time.

There are things that can be done to minimize creating super teams and such, but the team with the transcendent star in the NBA will always have a leg up on the teams that don't.

 

[Futuredome]

NFL popularity is fading a bit, though it has a big cushion. The NBA has as much as I hate to say it, a "talent" gap problem. The league needs more talent. The NHL has the same problem.

The Heat weren't even that good this year. When the best you can throw against them is a aging Spurs team.........that should have won the title, you got a problem as a league.

 

[6.19.2016]

When there is only 5 guys on the floor, a super star like Jordan/Kobe/Lebron can have a far more outsized impact on the game which is what makes parity nearly impossible.

If it were 11 on 11 like in the NFL, Lebron/Kobe/Michael aren't nearly as dominant or able to control a game.

It is just the nature of the sports, and there is nothing you can really do about that as long as only 5 guys are allowed on the court and the best player can have the ball in his hands all the time.

There are things that can be done to minimize creating super teams and such, but the team with the transcendent star in the NBA will always have a leg up on the teams that don't.

A top-notch QB (or on rare occasions some other positions, like Ray Lewis in his prime) is arguably of comparable value to an elite NBA starter, and yet the NFL still has more suspense. Tom Brady has not been able to win a Super Bowl since my last year of undergrad, for instance, and Peyton Manning has only been able to do it once in his many years, despite his absence almost single-handedly making the difference between a 10-6 team and a 2-14 team, and then between an 8-8 team and a 13-3 team.

I guess that "suspense" also comes from the single-elimination aspect of the NFL. I'd be in favor of going back to best-of-fives in the NBA playoffs' first rounds, and possibly adding it to the second rounds.

There should also be two-and-through in the NBA draft going forward, to reduce the risk for teams that basically have to build through the draft (and make those players more able to help those teams win right away) while still forcing them to pay attention to college prospects closely enough to not just pick "sure things," as they would be able to if they saw a prospect for 3-4 years on the college level.

 

[wildfan]

Haven't read all 261 pages so maybe this was discussed.

In game six with I think a little over 1 second left and SA needed a 3 and was SA side out . The final play had Green taking the shot. My question is why did Pop take Parker out of the game. Even if Green was the plan, I would think you would want Parker as a decoy. He would have drawn 1(LBJ) and likely 2 defenders away from the play.

Not trying to be critical of Pop in any way. I just wondering the logic of removing Parker with 1+ seconds left.

 

[Stark]

I know why the Spurs didn't win...

 

[GreasySpread36]

It's bad for competitive balance, because only two or three teams can do it - the ones in the sun/media centers.

There hasn't been competitive balance in the NBA since Jimmy Carter was President.

Back in the day the Celtics and Lakers would con bankrupt and incompetent franchises out of premium players and draft picks. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar bolted a cold-weather small market for L.A. almost four decades ago. I don't see how the Miami Superfriends are really breaking new ground here. The rich (big markets w/appealing weather) get richer, the poor (small markets w/lousy weather) get poorer. This is nothing new whatsoever.

Setting aside questions of collusion there is no morally right or morally wrong way to build a championship roster. There is only the successful and unsuccessful way.

 

[Dr. Claw]

They won back to back championships. How can that be wrong ?

"Wrong" is the wrong word for it. It's not wrong, it's just corny. The same old crap we've seen forever, but with a twist. Why even be a fan? For that shred of hope you end up being the next "Spurs", "Mavs", or "Pistons"? (Or technically, the Bulls?)

I dunno.

With The "Heat" model being the latest way to a basketball oligarchy, I don't see how the rest of the league doesn't eventually end up imploding.