You know how sometime teams seem to have a magical and unexpected run?

Here are some interesting stats that may be pointing to the Phoenix Suns as this years team of destiny.

Only twice has the Spurs been swept, 1982 & 2001 and the team that swept them (LA) won the NBA crown both years.

Phoenix has only been to the NBA finals twice in franchise history, 1976 & 1993, exactly 17 years apart. 2010 is their 17 year itch coming again?

Maybe the 3rd time is the charm. Numerologist head to Vegas and put your money on the Sun over LA!


[This message has been edited by Agnzona (edited 5/11/2010 1:41a).]

Nah. They won't be able to mach up against LA or Orlando in the post. Against these elite teams, they will absolutely get killed with rebs and points in the paint. But don't get me wrong. They are playing amazing basketball right now.

Don't forget that Lopez ought to be back for the next series.

Lopez? Against Gasol/Bynum? Against Howard? Ha Ha

The NBA has had what 8 TOTAL franchises that have won titles since the merger. Those teams pretty much all had 1 thing in common.

There really aren't championship teams of destiny in the NBA. Detroit in 04 may have been close, however they still had 3-4 All Star caliber players in their prime & they got to play a disfunctional Lakers team with no chemistry. The Lakers are the defending champs & whoever comes out of the East will be a very good team w/experience and more star power than PHX.

Teams that win titles in the NBA are almost always the one with the most star power and there are 4 teams left right now that have more.

[This message has been edited by Syd_X_Barrett (edited 5/10/2010 7:32p).]

Hmmmm, interesting math you got there....

Not at all saying Lopez will hold Howard, Gasol, or Bynum, but he will give them a some size down low. The disadvantage won't be as bad as it would otherwise be.

quote:

---

Hmmmm, interesting math you got there....

---

He's actually right factually, but he mistyped his post...the Suns went to the Finals in 1976 (not 1966) and 1993.

I don't expect them to beat the Lakers, but stranger things have happened.

The Suns will get murdered down low against the Lakers. But it's not exactly a great matchup for the Lakers on the perimeter. who is going to guard Nash? I think if the Suns shoot 3s like they did against the Spurs it's going to be tough for the Lakers to hang.

FIFM

quote:

---

Teams that win titles in the NBA are almost always the one with the most star power

---

I think this is complete baloney.

quote:

---

The Suns will get murdered down low against the Lakers. But it's not exactly a great matchup for the Lakers on the perimeter. who is going to guard Nash? I think if the Suns shoot 3s like they did against the Spurs it's going to be tough for the Lakers to hang.

---

Like Tim Duncan and the Spurs dominated the Suns down low? Look, this obviously isn't the Suns team of the D'Antoni era. They have a deep bench and are more playoff-ready. They SWEPT the San Antonio Spurs.

put nash, barbosa, dragic,richardson, and amare and watch bynum, gasol, and odom cramp up. Small ball will be the Suns best bet.

besides...the Lakers aren't in the Suns head like the Spurs were.

This might, repeat, might be a tight series.

quote:

---

Like Tim Duncan and the Spurs dominated the Suns down low?

---

Comparing the Spurs front line to the Lakers front line is apples and oranges.

The Laker interior defense is 100% better than the Spurs. Nash/Dragic/Barbosa will not be constantly finishing at the rim the way they were against the Spurs.

It is painful to say, but true.

quote:

---

I think this is complete baloney.

---

Really? So please give me a ****ing example of an NBA champion that didn't have multiple (3-4) All-Star type players, or one of the 2-3 best players in the league.

Please. I'll be waiting.

That's why only 8 franchises have won titles. The teams with the best player on the court, or best collection of players almost always win the title. Only a ****ing idiot would argue that.

Even the 95 Rockets had THE best player in the league at the time.


[This message has been edited by Syd_X_Barrett (edited 5/11/2010 2:34p).]

quote:

---

Really? So please give me a ****ing example of an NBA champion that didn't have multiple (3-4) All-Star type players, or one of the 2-3 best players in the league.

---

2006 - Heat with Wade & Shaq. 2 All Stars and a bunch of role players.

You said "the most star power".

Now you're just saying "a star" or "best collection of players". Make up your mind.

I'm not going to indulge you, because I can't stand people that say things on the internet that they wouldn't dare say to my face. But it can be argued that there are several post-merger examples of teams that won titles with less "star power" than other NBA franchises. It isn't a "****ing" no-brainer that coaching and chemistry come into the mix every once in a while.

Wade was a top 2 or 3 player in the league for Miami. And I would say that to your face. Your wifes face. Your kids whatever. That's funny shat. If you want to say my argument that NBA champions win with star power is baloney i.e. bullshat, then I'll say you'd have to be a bleeping idiot. Again, teams that win the NBA title almost always have something in common. Please point one out that didn't. I'm still waiting.

[This message has been edited by Syd_X_Barrett (edited 5/11/2010 9:10p).]

11 franchises have won since the merger.

8 franchises have won since 1980; 11 since the merger in 1977. Throw out the Heat/Mavs fluke year and it's 7.

The only teams that arguably violate the top 2-3 superstar or 3-4 all-stars rule are the '04 Pistons (1 All-star Ben Wallace, 3 borderline All-stars Chancey/Rip/Sheed), '89 Pistons (1 All-star Isiah, 3 borderline All-stars Aguirre/Dumars/Rodman) and '99 Spurs (was Duncan already a top 3 player, ahead of Malone/Iverson/Shaq/Kidd?)

[This message has been edited by InternetFan02 (edited 5/11/2010 7:58p).]

Only teams left that fit the rule are Cavs and Lakers. Howard is not a top 3 alpha dog, and he is not surrounded by all-stars. But if they win the title then that means that 2 of Carter, Nelson, and Lewis raised their game to an All-star level, or that Howard made the leap to top 3 alpha dog with a monstrous Finals performance. If the Mavs hadn't choked away the title then we would be saying that Dirk>Wade for that season.

Nelson, Lewis, and Carter have all been all-stars.

I agree that the NBA doesn't get the Cinderella teams like other leagues do, but just saying this might be the year.

I guess I was wrong on teams since the merger, I was going by a Simmons article, and it seemed to fit since it's always the same teams winning.

I don't agree on Orlando. Howard is a superstar & they have 2 other guys that are All Star types.

Phoenix fit the bill 2-3 years ago, but Nash past his prime & Stoudamire don't add up to NBA champion.

Puddy's Miami example is about the best counter I can think of, also the 04 Pistons & 95 Rockets, but again, those teams all had a significant player in the paint.

The NBA is the 1 league where teams don't come out of nowhere and win it all. It's too star driven for that. Mavs fans know all about that.

And for clarity, star power means you have 1 of the 2-3 best players in the league, or you have 3+ All Star type players. If you don't have that formula, you don't win titles, plain and simple, and the teams with a superstar usually need another All Star too. 7 teams in the last 25 years & 8 in the last 33, and the ones the broke the mold were Miami (Wade), Portland (Walton), Washington (Unseld) & Seattle (they had 3-4 All Star type guys

[This message has been edited by Syd_X_Barrett (edited 5/11/2010 9:14p).]

So you're NOW saying the Finals winner always has a great player or two on their team?

Just brilliant. I don't know how I could have ever argued with you.

quote:

---

I agree that the NBA doesn't get the Cinderella teams like other leagues do, but just saying this might be the year.

---

There is a big reason for this! In a 7-game series, the best team will always prevail.

This isn't March Madness or the Super Bowl where one game decides it all.

It isn't like any other championship because most games are not decided by a couple of points like baseball, soccer or hockey.

A team needs a talented(defense or offense) big man in order to win a championship. With the most recent exception of Jordan's Bulls. Of the four teams left, only the Lakers (Bynum/Gasol) and the Magic (Howard) have that dominating low post presence which is why Stoudemire doesn't qualify. You don't see Stoudemire posting up and be able to dominate the game that way because their offense is not set up to run a half court game.

quote:

---

Small ball will be the Suns best bet.

---

Bingo. Just look at the Rockets last year.

Amare is all they need in the post. There isn't a single team that can defend their pick and roll.

'03 '05 '07 could have been the years too.