View Full Version : 2004-05 NBA thread
Ian McCracken
31 Mar 2005, 06:14 PM
may i present (with 11 games to play), you 2005 pacific division champions
http://www.millerhouseofsports.com/PhoenixSuns/images/Phoenix%20Suns%20BE516.JPG
May I present your 2004 Pacific Division Champions:
http://millerhouseofsports.com/LALakers/images/3208506459.jpg
Now, may I present your 2004 NBA Champions:
http://millerhouseofsports.com/DetroitPistons/images/3208512872.jpg
Moral of the Story: Don't Get Too Cocky
Garcia
31 Mar 2005, 10:48 PM
Did I read this correctly, the Cavs won two games in a row for the first time since November 2004? Can't be.
BorrachoNJ
31 Mar 2005, 10:51 PM
that game ain't over yet vs bulls
man, what a comeback...but they're down now by three with a little over two seconds left...
BorrachoNJ
31 Mar 2005, 10:55 PM
king lebron just bombed one in as time expired to bring it to OT...unbelievable arch!
Garcia
01 Apr 2005, 09:41 AM
Then the Bulls just happened to score the first 11 points in the OT. :eek:
Man, they are headed for the 4th spot and some home cooking in the East playoffs.
skipshady
01 Apr 2005, 10:07 AM
May I present your 2004 Pacific Division Champions:
http://millerhouseofsports.com/LALakers/images/3208506459.jpg
Now, may I present your 2004 NBA Champions:
http://millerhouseofsports.com/DetroitPistons/images/3208512872.jpg
Moral of the Story: Don't Get Too Cocky
Eh, I don't think he was being particularly cocky. I think winning the Pacific, even post-alignment, is a pretty big accomplishment for a team that missed the playoffs last year.
Plus, no one really thought much of the Lakers last year either. They didn't run away with the division way the Suns have done this year, and everyone thought the Wolves and the Spurs were the teams to beat, not the Lakers.
BorrachoNJ
01 Apr 2005, 10:33 PM
nets just squeezing past knicks 93-91...
still hope for playoffs!
BorrachoNJ
01 Apr 2005, 10:34 PM
paterson, NJ native tim thomas missing game-winning 3 !!
whew! we both suck a$$...
chad
04 Apr 2005, 09:23 AM
Backdoor Bryant couldn't take his team to the playoffs. Hilarious.
The next Jordan....pffffftt....
United Forever
04 Apr 2005, 01:04 PM
I am just waiting for Kings to win two games straight :rolleyes: I back them unlike those Lakers who will not make the playoffs this year.
dark knight
05 Apr 2005, 01:58 PM
It's pretty clear what the Knicks need to do to get back to the playoffs:
Suns' success makes it three straight teams to win at least 50 games in their first full season after Steph leaves (along with Wolves and Nets).
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/powerranking?season=2005&week=22
Metros Striker10
05 Apr 2005, 07:59 PM
It's pretty clear what the Knicks need to do to get back to the playoffs:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/powerranking?season=2005&week=22
Have you not understood that the problem this season was that in January, a good portion of the team was missing games? And also the fact that they had a coach who should have retired permantly five years ago? Seriously...how many times must I say this? Phx., NJ, and Minn., had no one their team when Marbury was running the point. Geez.
Metros Striker10
05 Apr 2005, 08:10 PM
I also find it comical how the media once again doesn't tell the full story when bashing the Knicks. Two seasons before that 50 win season, they went 45-37, only five games short of the "big" season without Marbury. They were 25-25 in the lockout season (first time without Marbury), therefore the likelyness of them winning 50 games, or achieving what Marbury did in his last season there, was VERY small. In the 96-97 season, it was the very first time in seven years that they won more than 29 games...they finished with 40. Marbury, the selfish player that he is, averaged 15.8 ppg and 7.8 apg.
skipshady
05 Apr 2005, 08:53 PM
Have you not understood that the problem this season was that in January, a good portion of the team was missing games? And also the fact that they had a coach who should have retired permantly five years ago? Seriously...how many times must I say this? Phx., NJ, and Minn., had no one their team when Marbury was running the point. Geez.
Um..... you do realize Steiny was pointing out a statistical quirk, and I'm pretty sure DK's post was tongue in cheek.
But about your point about how Phx, NJ and Minn had "no one":
Phoenix had Stoudemire, Marion and Joe Johnson
NJ had Kenyon Martin and Van Horn
Minnesota had Garnett and Gugliotta
Look, I'm not going to argue that trading away Marbury is the key to success, but each team upgraded its point guard and saw immediate results.
Metros Striker10
05 Apr 2005, 10:28 PM
Okay. But you can't say that those guys were all that good when Marbury played with them...especially Garnett and Kenyon Martin.
BorrachoNJ
05 Apr 2005, 10:38 PM
so when do we stop talking knicks, since their chances of an 8th spot diminishes day-by-day...the latest loss by one reggie miller and co.
skipshady
06 Apr 2005, 12:09 AM
so when do we stop talking knicks, since their chances of an 8th spot diminishes day-by-day...the latest loss by one reggie miller and co.
Speaking of 8th, I can't believe Cleveland's 2 games up from that spot. It seems like just a couple of weeks ago that they were fighting for home court vs Washington.
And what about the late surge by Indiana and Chicago? Chicago owns the home court advantage in the 4 vs 5 game and Indian is only .5 games behind Boston in the 3 vs 6 matchup.
FC Carolina
06 Apr 2005, 12:57 AM
Stephen A. Smith is reporting that Jim Paxson is as good as fired.
I know, I know, it's Stephen A., but two things make me think it's the truth. Number one, the Cavs have new ownership, and we all know how new owners = housecleaning. Number two, check out this statement from the new owner:
I don't think it makes sense for us to comment on the truth or the inaccuracy of rumors related to key positions in our organization.
That's not even remotely close to a vote of confidence.
ibreak4coffee
06 Apr 2005, 10:27 AM
Have you not understood that the problem this season was that in January, a good portion of the team was missing games? And also the fact that they had a coach who should have retired permantly five years ago? Seriously...how many times must I say this? Phx., NJ, and Minn., had no one their team when Marbury was running the point. Geez.
This statement smacks of a lot of denial... do you think the Knicks are the only team that's had injury problems? What about Indiana, San Antonio, or even Orlando? Can you imagine where this edition of the Knicks would be if they lost all their best players. Actually, that might not be a bad thing. Step and Crawford will never run a successful team... up front you gave up your most consistent front court man for Malik Rose, who won't bring anything to the Knicks that you dont already have... and all this was overseen until recently by a coach who should have never been hired by Toronto in 1999, let alone the Knicks in 2003. Where's the young talent too that will take over from the overpaid old men? Ariza and Sweeney may be NBA worthy, but they arent going to take a team deep in the playoffs...
United Forever
06 Apr 2005, 10:49 AM
Knicks aint cutting it no more. Well my team Kings wins again. Will probably lose the next one.:rolleyes: That is how it is since Webber left