Toughest Road to NBA Finals Ever

[HabitualChiller]

93 Bulls definitely deserve a mention here for fighting through the 60 win Knicks and 62 win Suns to 3 peat

So do the 98 Bulls, who disposed of the 51 win Hornets, 58 win Pacers, and 62 win Jazz for 3 peat #2

But I think people forget just how tough the 2010 Lakers road to their repeat was. Their first round opponent, the #8 seed, was the upstart 50 win Thunder in one of the most stacked conferences we've ever seen. The series was tied 2-2 before a blowout in Game 5 and a game winning putback by Gasol on his only 2 points of the game closed out the series. Then they faced the 53 win Jazz, who they actually swept but the series was closer than that (only 1 win was by more than 8 points and 2 wins were by less than 5 points). But this was the easiest it would get for LA. They took on the 54 win Suns in the WCF led by Nash and Amare and were stuck in a 2-2 tie before Ron artests game winning putback with no time left gave them the lead in the series and Kobe scored 37 in the closeout game 6. And even though the Celtics were only 50-32, they quickly recaptured their 07-08 form once the playoffs started and turned into the most dangerous team in the league. That 7 game Finals was one of the most grueling championship series in NBA history. And the Lakers fought back from a 13 point 2nd half deficit in Game 7 in spite of Kobe going 6/24 from the field to claim the title again

You're joking right?

 

[Lootpack]

OKC 2012

:maninblack:

@GilSho You really trying to downplay an (at the time) up-and-coming Thunder squad who made it to the Finals the following season?!

As flabby as that 2011 Lakers team looked, Dallas still defeated the defending champions and drained 22 3s in a game while in the process. Appreciate greatness.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You're joking right?

He picked the 2010 Lakers next even though they didn't face a single team with more than 54 wins and their most threatening opponent had a starter get knocked out with 2 games left.

 

[Point Blank]

2011 MAVS Easily

Swept the defending Champs

Fixed

 

[Mentch15]

You're joking right?

Not really. 98 Bulls definitely had a tougher road than the previous 2 Bulls teams that skated into the Finals. The 58 win Pacers took them to 7 games in the ECF which was only the 2nd time that had happened to them in a year they won it all, and they only won Game 7 by 6 points. Not like they blew out the Hornets either in the round before. And taking down the Jazz for the 2nd year in a row was obviously tougher than it was the year before

He picked the 2010 Lakers next even though they didn't face a single team with more than 54 wins and their most threatening opponent had a starter get knocked out with 2 games left.

You're looking at this out of context. The 50 win Thunder were about as tough of an 8 seed as it gets. Someone pointed out earlier that the 01 Lakers didn't face a single team with less than 50 wins, so why are we going to ignore that exact same situation all of a sudden?

The Celtics weren't a joke dawg. Perkins impact on that team was pretty damn minimal compared to the rest of the starters. They were closer to the 62 win team from the year before than they were to the 50 wins they had that year. They beat a 61 win team and a 59 win team themselves in the playoffs, and you're just gonna ignore that shyt? Once they got to the playoffs, they became dangerous again. And the Lakers had to beat them with their backs against the wall. You're delusional if you think anything about the 2010 Lakers road to the Finals was easy

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You're looking at this out of context. The 50 win Thunder were about as tough of an 8 seed as it gets. Someone pointed out earlier that the 01 Lakers didn't face a single team with less than 50 wins, so why are we going to ignore that exact same situation all of a sudden?

The Celtics weren't a joke dawg. Perkins impact on that team was pretty damn minimal compared to the rest of the starters. They were closer to the 62 win team from the year before than they were to the 50 wins they had that year. They beat a 61 win team and a 59 win team themselves in the playoffs, and you're just gonna ignore that shyt? Once they got to the playoffs, they became dangerous again. And the Lakers had to beat them with their backs against the wall. You're delusional if you think anything about the 2010 Lakers road to the Finals was easy

I don't give a crap who the 8-seed is.

Sure, the #8 Thunder were a good 8-seed, but they were still just an 8-seed, and they weren't a contender. They had been 23-59 the year before, hadn't added any experienced vets, and were making the playoffs for the first time ever. They weren't ready yet, so I don't really care about them at all.

The 53-win Jazz, led by Deron and Boozer with Mehmut Okur as the #3 scorer, were NOT scary either, and the Lakers swept them.

The 54-win Suns were 35-year-old Nash, 37-year-old Hill, Channing Frye, J-Rich, and a declining Amare. That team never made the Finals at their peak, and we're supposed to be scared of them as a contender when they're ?

And then the 50-win Celtics in the playoffs. Yeah, when healthy they were better than 50-wins, but the Lakers DIDN'T beat them healthy. The same thing happened in the Finals that happened all season - when all five starters were on court and engaged the Celtics were world beaters, whenever just one guy got hurt they were vulnerable and exposed. You say that Perkins didn't matter but the Lakers only won because they outrebounded the Celtics 105-79 in the last two games and out FT-ed them 56-27, and still just barely won. Rebounds and FT's were nearly even the first five games, take out the big guy in the middle and suddenly the Lakers are doubling up the Celts there?


The teams the Mavs beat the next year were FAR better. They had to beat a decent Portland team, a more experienced version of that Thunder team, a Miami team that handled the Celtics healthy....and those same Lakers. How is that not objectively far more difficult a path than what the Lakers faced?