FWIW, the Heat had a lot of bad calls against them in the first game. So many so that I was actually surprised.

Point being, the predictability of the NBA. That nucleus, to me, was the only group that could've maybe matured and challenged Miami in the present NBA.

Spurs look good right now but it's still the Heat's to lose. Insta-title again. Just add water. Blech.

I think the Spurs will take the Heat in the finals.

this ignores the way that things actually happened in favor of a narrative that you desperately want to believe. it's no different than the "no one plays defense/the NBA is all thugs" or "Rap music peaked with Nelly's first album" crowds.

you deserve better than yourself, derris.

Which narrative am I desperately wanting to believe? That the Thunder may have dissolved a future contender, hence taking away a challenger to the Heat? It's not like I'm saying the Bobcats are going to win the title next year or something.

The NBA's history is littered with teams that faced obstacles in their way to greatness (ie- Jordan losing to the Pistons 3 straight times before beating them, etc). Of course this is all speculation now and yes, nothing would guarantee they would beat the Heat.

For the Simmons fanboys, he seemed to agree back in October:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/857 ... n-disaster

I would like very much to believe you are right.

If you aren't happy that 3 of the Final Four teams are Indy, Memphis and San Antonio and that all four teams are essentially built around a stifling defense, then there's really not much I can do for you, Derris.

FWIW, I think the Pacers could be a legit contender for a few years; shit, what if they had Danny Granger right now even coming off the bench?

They're definitely making a series out of it. Some crazy stats here about their dominance on the boards and how well Hibbert and West (Xavier!) are playing in this series.

This is going to sound ridiculous, but I think I might actually fear the Pacers more than I fear the Heat.

They can haz teh hungerz.

Hey, Derris and Bloor, has BUDENHOLZER MANIA taken Hotlanta by storm?

rp74 tweeted me asking if they'd hired Mike Faildozer as coach.

I guess it's a good hire, dude has definitely been around some winning. I heard a brief clip from his presser and he said something to the effect of "winning comes from great ownership, great management and a great roster" Someone should have pointed out to him that the Hawks have terrible ownership and only three players on their roster.

I have my issues with the NBA but I AM a Hawks fan first and foremost.

I like the hire much more than the re-treads they were throwing around. He at the very least comes from a great organization and with a solid pedigree under a great coach. Danny Ferry is certainly following the "Spurs Way" game plan so far.

But, like Bloor said, the mistrust of the ownership here runs deep.

Shit show Game 7. Once the Heat win the title, or the Spurs, it'll be official, 8 teams in 30 years will have won it all. By far the lowest in professional sports.

Just from a business stand point, does anyone not think the NBA has an issue there?

I'm not sure. The NBA seems to identify itself with (or define itself by) its dynasties (Russell's Celtics, Showtime Lakers, Jordan's Bulls) more than any other league, so whether there's a real problem, I don't see them speaking to it apart from the usual cap/luxury tax stuff. The smaller rosters might have an impact, but then the NHL doesn't suffer from this.

Also, is it me, or is the press talking about Indiana this year like they did OKC last year?

Not sure what the outcome will be - I'm hopeful but realistic. Expect it to go 7.

I don't really think so. 6 teams have won it all in the last ten years. Even a small market team like OKC can be a legitimate contender. A perenial dog like the Clippers is now a team on the rise. Half the teams make the playoffs and ANY team is a good draft and one or two strong role player signs from making the playoffs.

I don't think any NBA fan has to suffer like the fans of say the Astros or the Lions.

no, because the best team won pretty much every time. The system works!

Do you think there's a problem because an SEC won "college" football 9 of the past 15 or so years?

9 teams actually.

Truth. If anything, the NBA rewards having a successful front office more than any other.

It's an interesting question but I think that's an apples to pine bark comparison. College football has it's own issues, starting with it's antiquated post-season but they've taken steps to fix it. The only reason I've ever "pulled for conference" was because of the BCS. When a conference is dominant it gives that conference's 1 loss team the benefit of the doubt vs another conference's 1 loss team who may be perceived as lesser. But, staying with the question, I'd argue that 5 different teams from the SEC won the title in that period. Until last year, that's almost half the conference. It could be equated to say, 7 different teams from the Western Conference (NBA) winning in 15 years? NBA isn't even close to that kind of parity.

I'm not arguing the best team won. I'm pro-playoff format in all sports. I'm saying they have a parity issue that is hurting their business in my opinion. I would even argue that they recognize this due to the new terms of the latest collective bargaining agreement (harder cap, steeper penalties (luxury tax)). Once that kicks in, it will almost certainly put an end to things like what Lebron and Co. did (unless they take way less money)

I don't disagree with this but I also think that making the playoffs, especially in the East is no great accomplishment. Pretty sure the 8th spot and sometime the 7th spot, teams have been under .500, and have ZERO shot at winning anything.

Funny you mention the front office Bloor. Was listening to Cowherd the other day and he was saying the NFL rewards it the most. His point was that the NFL is structured for every team to go 8-8. If your front offices sucks, you get 5-11, if it's good, you're 11-5 and a contender.

I think a front office is hugely important in the NBA but there are also blind luck factors. I mean, even their draft is a "lottery". Case in point, Cleveland. They were horrendous and were lucky enough to have the #1 pick when a once a generation player came along. Boom, 3?, 4? years later you're in the Eastern Conference finals. See also, Chicago.

Oh, and for the record, I thoroughly enjoyed that 4th quarter last night.

Have always really hated San Antonio... and have also really hated the Heat. Very odd last night, watched the game with no real anticipation of feeling anything for either team; but by halftime I was totally rooting for San Antonio, and actually hoping Duncan (the player that has annoyed my most of any NBA alltime all star... big bambi eyes blink-blinking, whining about calls) would go out as series MVP. Mysterious: I really want to see the Heat lose in 4 or 5.

See, I love Duncan. He's the anti-superstar. A modern day Bill Russell.

Then again, he's never been in a position to beat my team in the playoffs (because the Hawks have never sniffed the Finals).