NBA 2016 | Playoffs | The Best Team Since 1947 Warriors

Contract the first round

That bleacher report commercial just had gift of gab doing alphabetaerobics? Sick

jj reddick doing everything possible to avoid eye contact

Everyone predicted Thunder/Mavs being the only tied first round series in the West, right?

i actually had them beating okc

By DY_nasty Go To Posti actually had them beating okc

Half of the Mavs' team should be in the hospital right now.

By Branduil Go To PostHalf of the Mavs' team should be in the hospital right now.

and half of okc's roster should be in china

and pop's true rival is carlisle

By DY_nasty Go To Posti actually had them beating okc

I mean. If I had to pick an upset in the West.... it would be this.

In the east it would be Pacers over Raptors.

By DY_nasty Go To Posti actually had them beating okc

and in dirk's dying breath he whispered to pop "hold this l, you old bih"

By DY_nasty Go To Postand half of okc's roster should be in china

and pop's true rival is carlisle

I love me some Carlisle, but no. Pop is in the Phil/Riley tier. He has no rivals unless Phil and Riley came back to coach OKC and Cleveland.

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostI love me some Carlisle, but no. Pop is in the Phil/Riley tier. He has no rivals unless Phil and Riley came back to coach OKC and Cleveland.

during #beautifulbasketball carlisle fucked pop up with trash. if i get one upset pick, its dallas

So apparently LeBron is fed up with Detroit being "overly physical" with him and had some choice words for Marcus Morris and choice actions for Stanley Johnson. LeBron was visibly trash-talking Johnson after a few shots in the 2nd and 4rd quarters, which led Johnson to say this after the game:

“I’m definitely in his head,” said Johnson. “He jabbers. I wish he would just talk when the game is 0-0, not when he’s up 16. He moves his mouth sometimes. Their whole team does, kind of like their little cheerleaders on the bench.”

Oh my... I mean I know you're 19 and your confidence is off the charts for a rook, but damn.

By DY_nasty Go To Postduring #beautifulbasketball carlisle fucked pop up with trash. if i get one upset pick, its dallas

Eh. Hollins beat him as an 8th seed and Gentry swept him. Pop's been wrekt by mediocre coaches, it happens. Carlisle isn't mediocre or anything, he's amazing, but I feel like he's in the Doc tier.

The Clippers situation is shitty because a couple years ago their offense was so one dimensional. It was just high pnr after high pnr after high pnr. Now they run such a sweet offense. Floppy sets for Reddick. Chris Paul off ball coming off screens. Blake being a really solid Point Forward.

This is the best their offense has looked since Doc got there. Their defense is really good too. They're just gonna go up against all time great shit right now. But I think this Clippers team makes the Finals and wins a chip in 2013 if their offense and Blake were this developed.

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostEh. Hollins beat him as an 8th seed and Gentry swept him. Pop's been wrekt by mediocre coaches, it happens. Carlisle isn't mediocre or anything, he's amazing, but I feel like he's in the Doc tier.

Really? Because I think Doc is the very definition of mediocrity at coach and underachieving with actually gifted rosters. He hasn't done shit without 3 legit hall of famers - and his best showing as a coach was with a Thibs designed defense

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostThe Clippers situation is shitty because a couple years ago their offense was so one dimensional. It was just high pnr after high pnr after high pnr. Now they run such a sweet offense. Floppy sets for Reddick. Chris Paul off ball coming off screens. Blake being a really solid Point Forward.

This is the best their offense has looked since Doc got there. Their defense is really good too. They're just gonna go up against all time great shit right now. But I think this Clippers team makes the Finals and wins a chip in 2013 if their offense and Blake were this developed.

That's all well and good but Doc's adjustments are trash and he's good for choking twice every year.

By DY_nasty Go To PostReally? Because I think Doc is the very definition of mediocrity at coach and underachieving with actually gifted rosters. He hasn't done shit without 3 legit hall of famers - and his best showing as a coach was with a Thibs designed defense

Yea I know I'm in the minority here, but I think he's a damn good coach. I don't see how he under-achieved in Boston. Won a chip, KG got injured so he got to the 2nd round. Then made the finals again and lost in game 7. Then another 2nd and CF exit once the Lebron superteam was formed. That's about as well as can be expected given an aging superstar core that dealt with injuries and the forming of a better team and going up against Phil/Kobe in the finals twice.

And even with that - if Lebron doesn't play perhaps his best postseason game ever in 2012 game 6, Boston makes the Finals and wrecks the Thunder that year.

The Clippers haven't over-achieved, but other than that Houston loss last year (where they didn't have HC and Chris Paul for 2 games), they've never lost a series they were favored in or under-achieved either.

What really tells me that he's a good coach is that when dudes like Rondo, KG, Blake, CP3 get injured, his teams just keep winning. Now, they're not going to win chips with those dudes injured obviously, but in the regular season and the first/second round, they hold their own and guys come in and play really well.

The thing with Pop is, and he's god-tier, but the dude loses an awful lot of series when he's favored and has HC.
-Multiple times to the Lakers in the early 2000's,
-Losing to Dallas in game 7 at home in 2006.
-Losing to Memphis as a 1 seed in the first round.
-Losing to OKC the next year despite being up 2-0 and then losing 4 in a row even when they had HC)

In like 20 years Phil's lost twice with HC. 2004 Detroit and 2011 Mavs. That's it. Both were the eventual champions.

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostEh. Hollins beat him as an 8th seed and Gentry swept him. Pop's been wrekt by mediocre coaches, it happens. Carlisle isn't mediocre or anything, he's amazing, but I feel like he's in the Doc tier.

you're fucking nuts

Carlisle is like 9 tiers above Doc

By The Frankman Go To PostSo apparently LeBron is fed up with Detroit being "overly physical" with him and had some choice words for Marcus Morris and choice actions for Stanley Johnson. LeBron was visibly trash-talking Johnson after a few shots in the 2nd and 4rd quarters, which led Johnson to say this after the game:
Oh my… I mean I know you're 19 and your confidence is off the charts for a rook, but damn.

Gotta love Bron crying about any little contact. A dude that uses the truck stick on a basketball court complaining about physicality.

If portland loses then shit the Dubs gotta play with two fuckboy goon teams in a row.

Rockets, then Clippers. What other hated team we gotta play next.

By Rob Go To Postyou're fucking nuts

Carlisle is like 9 tiers above Doc

Sorry 3SP, but Carlisle is better than Doc Rivers.

Doc Rivers is like Larry Brown tier.

By shun Go To PostIf portland loses then shit the Dubs gotta play with two fuckboy goon teams in a row.

Rockets, then Clippers. What other hated team we gotta play next.

Sorry 3SP, but Carlisle is better than Doc Rivers.

Doc Rivers is like Larry Brown tier.

hall of fame coaching, tried and tested

i hate doc. i always will.

Carlisle has one year where the Mavericks were amazing. One year. Every other season he's had a 1st or 2nd round flameout. You can't talk about Doc "under-achieving" and then say Carlisle is much higher than Doc. That doesn't make sense to me.

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostCarlisle has one year where the Mavericks were amazing. One year. Every other season he's had a 1st or 2nd round flameout. You can't talk about Doc "under-achieving" and then say Carlisle is much higher than Doc. That doesn't make sense to me.

Doc is working with some of the best players in the league for almost his entire career lol

Carlisle is almost constantly overachieving

By DY_nasty Go To PostDoc is working with some of the best players in the league for almost his entire career lol

Carlisle is almost constantly overachieving

Prime Dirk is as good, if not better than anyone Doc has ever coached. They've made the CF one time in like 8 years that he's been coaching in Dallas. He's amazing. But to put him far above Doc? I don't see a reason other than personal taste.

By DY_nasty Go To Posthall of fame coaching, tried and tested

i hate doc. i always will.

Hey, I get it. I hate D'Antoni.

*shrug* fair enough

Not to make this about Phil, but just doing the research. Outside of the 2 years he coached LAL when they had no business being any good and the 2 years with Michael gone (They made the playoffs all 4 years) he basically spent two decades either A) winning a chip or B) Losing to the Champion.

His only losses when he had a contending team were all to the eventual champions:

Detroit 90
SA 03
Detroit 04
Boston 08
Mavs 11


He either beat everyone. Or he lost to the guys that beat everyone. There was no in-between. Fuck. That's nuts.

By DY_nasty Go To PostDoc is working with some of the best players in the league for almost his entire career lol

Carlisle is almost constantly overachieving

I mean Rick has worked with HoF players on every team himself..

The Det team he had won the finals after Larry Brown took it off his hands..

He over achieved once in Indy, winning 61 games..but fell to earth the next years leading to him getting fired.

Then took over one of the deepest teams in the NBA ...

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostNot to make this about Phil

cause that's the last thing you'd want

By Omzz Go To Postcause that's the last thing you'd want

Lol ok fair enough. Just thought I'd do the research while I was researching Pop and Doc and Carlisle. I just find that information absurd. How do you make the Playoffs 20 out of 20 seasons and then when you have a contender never lose to anyone but the eventual champion. EVERYBODY has some losses to scrub teams in the playoffs when they coach that long.

I mean, even in the two MJ Baseball seasons (well he came back for some of the second one) they still ended up losing to the eventual Finalist from the East.

i liked it better when we used anime gifs to describe sporting events


like you don't even need to guess to know that its lebron getting wrecked again

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostNot to make this about Phil, but just doing the research. Outside of the 2 years he coached LAL when they had no business being any good and the 2 years with Michael gone (They made the playoffs all 4 years) he basically spent two decades either A) winning a chip or B) Losing to the Champion.

His only losses when he had a contending team were all to the eventual champions:

Detroit 90
SA 03
Detroit 04
Boston 08
Mavs 11


He either beat everyone. Or he lost to the guys that beat everyone. There was no in-between. Fuck. That's nuts.

all but the years you decided to remove?

i was gonna let it go but hey

By DY_nasty Go To Posti was gonna let it go but hey

Dirk won a Championship or lost to the champion in his whole career everytime he made it to the finals!

By blackace Go To Postall but the years you decided to remove?

The years where objectively the team wasn't a contender? I mean you can make a case for the first non-Mj season where the team won 55 games, but I think most people view that as that team over-achieving. To Lose Michael and only have a 2 game dropoff wasn't really an indicator that the team was a contender in the playoffs as much as they were just really well coached.

But sure, let's say that for 16 of the 20 seasons Phil either won a chip or lost to the eventual champion if that makes you feel better. I just don't think I'm arbitrarily removing them if the general consensus is that those 4 teams had no business competing for a championship.

Put another way. If someone tells you about the 16 out of 20 seasons thing and you go "ok, so what happened the other 4 years". "Well, 2 of those were the Michael Baseball sabbatical and two where the Lakers rebuilding years before Pau"

I think the general observation would be "well, that makes sense".

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostThe years where objectively the team wasn't a contender? I mean you can make a case for the first non-Mj season where the team won 55 games, but I think most people view that as that team over-achieving. To Lose Michael and only have a 2 game dropoff wasn't really an indicator that the team was a contender in the playoffs as much as they were just really well coached.

But sure, let's say that for 16 of the 20 seasons Phil either won a chip or lost to the eventual champion if that makes you feel better. I just don't think I'm arbitrarily removing them if the general consensus is that those 4 teams had no business competing for a championship.

Put another way. If someone tells you about the 16 out of 20 seasons thing and you go "ok, so what happened the other 4 years". "Well, 2 of those were the Michael Baseball sabbatical and two where the Lakers rebuilding years before Pau"

I think the general observation would be "well, that makes sense".

removing 20% of his career was more of a making you feel better move.......

By blackace Go To Postremoving 20% of his career was more of a making you feel better move…….

Yea ok the dude has 11 chips and 20 seasons in the playoffs out of 20. I don't need that so let's not resort to personal petty comments.

I mentioned Pop losing against Memphis, Dallas, OKC, and the Lakers in 04 and 2001 despite being a #1 seed in the West all of those years. Noticed that many of those teams didn't actually end up chipping, so I researched Phil and saw the pattern of what happens when he had a contending team. Thought it was kind of crazy.

I didn't even use a strict "Must have the 1 seed" to determine that. Just used the more commonly accepted definition of a 50 win team with the exception of that non-MJ season because, well, no MJ.

By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostYea ok the dude has 11 chips and 20 seasons in the playoffs out of 20. I don't need that so let's not resort to personal petty comments.

I mentioned Pop losing against Memphis, Dallas, OKC, and the Lakers in 04 and 2001 despite being a #1 seed in the West all of those years. Noticed that many of those teams didn't actually end up chipping, so I researched Phil and saw the pattern of what happens when he had a contending team. Thought it was kind of crazy.

I didn't even use a strict "Must have the 1 seed" to determine that. Just used the more commonly accepted definition of a 50 win team with the exception of that non-MJ season because, well, no MJ.

Now let's pump your brakes for a second here... You were the one who implied I needed to feel better by stating a fact that removing 20% of his career makes those stats look way better.. SO don't play the boo-hoo card when shit blows back on you..

One of the greatest coaches of all time he doesn't need anyone padding his stats... Now if you did for his shitty PoBO career I am sure he would appreciate it

By blackace Go To PostNow let's pump your brakes for a second here… You were the one who implied I needed to feel better by stating a fact that removing 20% of his career makes those stats look way better.. SO don't play the boo-hoo card when shit blows back on you..

One of the greatest coaches of all time he doesn't need anyone padding his stats… Now if you did for his shitty PoBO career I am sure he would appreciate it

I brought up those parameters when discussing what Pop did despite having HC or 1st seeds. I even lowered the bar to "50 win team" even though there's like 10 of those a year some years where not everyone is a contender.

The Spurs won 50 games or more when they lost to the Suns. When they lost to the Clippers last year. When they lost to the Lakers in 2010. They had like 5 MORE years of being the 1st seed and losing in their own conference before even making the Finals.

Phil doesn't NEED stat padding in this comparison. I was simply trying to point out an interesting factoid that I stumbled upon when researching this stuff during the debate we were having, found it remarkable and posted it here. It was not an attempt to "pad his stats".

Me saying "If it makes you feel better" wasn't meant to be condescending, it was "ok if you'd like we'll change the parameters". You absolutely said it as if I had some personal emotional attachment to a factoid I found interesting.

I literally said the same thing to you but you acted like it was a personal insult on your honor... so it's one or the other..

Speaking of factoids, Pop has never finished under 50 game in any full season he has coached.. to me that is amazing..

even in 2 locks out he finished at 50 games in one of them

By blackace Go To PostI literally said the same thing to you but you acted like it was a personal insult on your honor… so it's one or the other..

Speaking of factoids, Pop has never finished under 50 game in any full season he has coached.. to me that is amazing..

even in 2 locks out he finished at 50 games in one of them

Alright fine.

That is ridiculous, but it's well known. And there's some stat padding there too because even if he would have coached a full season in 96-97 they wouldn't have won 50 games. They won like 17 out of 64. during his tenure. So saying "full season he coached" is semantics as far as that season goes. But it was a tank year so you can't even hold it against him even if it was a full season. Wouldn't affect the Timmy era.


Winning 50 in the lockout year was patently absurd. Honestly, until "beautiful basketball" I think he was kind of struggling to find a winning formula that worked in the playoffs post 07. Once Lakers got Pau he couldn't defend his 07 title, then he just started losing to shit like the Suns and Dallas and Memphis and OKC during years where those guys really weren't close to chipping (other than OKC that year). Then he developed beautiful basketball, found Kawhi and got back to being elite.

Don't really know the stat padding... it's not removing years I didn't like... But the fact that the first year of his tenure wasn't a full year...

But they wouldn't have won 50... so he has won 50 + for 17 years in a row...minus the lock out year...

Don't think there is a coach that can claim that... Phil close but had a few 40+ win seasons...

first round got us all ded

By Dark PhaZe Go To Postfirst round got us all ded

nic, zeller, and marvin losing all the moneys

free agency about to be real cold

teams are going to have so much cap space it doesnt even matter

nic didn't lose any money, just got an early start to his offseason

Clippers can won warriors thunder can won spurs too who agree playoff have been the worst evar durant need to move

From game winning shots in Washington to DNP's

Pierce pls

By Dark PhaZe Go To PostFrom game winning shots in Washington to DNP's

Pierce pls

Fuck him for taking part in that bullshit.