Will the NBA ever have another Blue Collar Champion like DET?

[bottom74bottom]

And another thing, BOS is only "sorta like" DET. BOS started 4 future HOF in their title run... that's waaaaaaaaay different. I feel like DET MADE Tay, Rip, and Ben... but I'd put none of them in the Hall. Ben might deserve it for the defense, but that's a stretch too. DET truly was a blue collar get'er done ++! team.

 

[doublejs07]

Who are the 4 future HOF'ers that Boston started? I'm lost after Allen, Pierce, and KG....

Who REALLY considered Billups tops back THEN tho.. it was only later that he solidified that notion...right?


How does this make any sense? Do you think people who watch basketball look in retrospect and say.."oh yeah, it's only now I realize that Billups was a top-5 PG in 2004...) No, if you follow the game you know how good Billups was in 2004, and even in the years before. Ask yourself this...if you had to choose a PG out of everyone in the NBA back in 2004, what guys would you want RUNNING your team?

 

[doublejs07]

Who are the 4 future HOF'ers that Boston started? I'm lost after Allen, Pierce, and KG....

Who REALLY considered Billups tops back THEN tho.. it was only later that he solidified that notion...right?


How does this make any sense? Do you think people who watch basketball look in retrospect and say.."oh yeah, it's only now I realize that Billups was a top-5 PG in 2004...) No, if you follow the game you know how good Billups was in 2004, and even in the years before. Ask yourself this...if you had to choose a PG out of everyone in the NBA back in 2004, what guys would you want RUNNING your team?

 

[acidicality]

Originally Posted by Wisconsin 4 Life

This Bucks team will be considered a Blue Collar Champion when they win it this year or next.  Bogut, Jennings, Salmons, Illyasova Mbah a Moute, Delfino, Gooden, CDR, Sanders, Maggette... 

have fun with maggette

 

[acidicality]

Originally Posted by Wisconsin 4 Life

This Bucks team will be considered a Blue Collar Champion when they win it this year or next.  Bogut, Jennings, Salmons, Illyasova Mbah a Moute, Delfino, Gooden, CDR, Sanders, Maggette... 

have fun with maggette

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by BOTTOM74BOTTOM

I never felt LA was "beaten"... by DET or BOS... they just lost. I feel they did themselves in both times.

I guess that's how most Kings fans feel about what happened in 2002.

Nah. The Lakers beat the Kings in 2002 and the Pistons and Celtics did the same to the Lakers. No air balling excuses.

On topic tho, the Spurs vs Pistons Finals was gritty. 

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by BOTTOM74BOTTOM

I never felt LA was "beaten"... by DET or BOS... they just lost. I feel they did themselves in both times.

I guess that's how most Kings fans feel about what happened in 2002.

Nah. The Lakers beat the Kings in 2002 and the Pistons and Celtics did the same to the Lakers. No air balling excuses.

On topic tho, the Spurs vs Pistons Finals was gritty. 

 

[proshares]

I think most people were in agreement that Chauncey was a top flight PG in 04.

When I've heard the term blue collar tossed out there about this team I've always heard the city being a very hard working, diligent and blue collar city being one of the factors as to why that word was used.

A team like Houston would remind me of that Detroit team a bit if they happened to win it all.

 

[proshares]

I think most people were in agreement that Chauncey was a top flight PG in 04.

When I've heard the term blue collar tossed out there about this team I've always heard the city being a very hard working, diligent and blue collar city being one of the factors as to why that word was used.

A team like Houston would remind me of that Detroit team a bit if they happened to win it all.

 

[edweeno]

On topic tho, the Spurs vs Pistons Finals was gritty.

Gritty BUT sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo boring. yea they went 7 games but jeez why is it that the spurs are connected to the word "boring"?

got respect for timmy and company though.

 

[edweeno]

On topic tho, the Spurs vs Pistons Finals was gritty.

Gritty BUT sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo boring. yea they went 7 games but jeez why is it that the spurs are connected to the word "boring"?

got respect for timmy and company though.

 

[kvsm23vs24]

Man that Spurs and Pistons series was a thing of beauty.

That is top notch defense vs. top notch defense.

I don't think the Spurs are boring at all. Parker on the fastbreak

, Manu with driving to the lane, and Tim working the boys down the paint

 

[kvsm23vs24]

Man that Spurs and Pistons series was a thing of beauty.

That is top notch defense vs. top notch defense.

I don't think the Spurs are boring at all. Parker on the fastbreak

, Manu with driving to the lane, and Tim working the boys down the paint

 

[westcoastsfinest]

f detroit

yes im still salty!

BOTTOM74BOTTOM wrote:

---

I never felt LA was "beaten"... by DET or BOS... they just lost. I feel they did themselves in both times.
  youre right we didnt get beat...we got demolished and owned by boston and detroit

 

[westcoastsfinest]

f detroit

yes im still salty!

BOTTOM74BOTTOM wrote:

---

I never felt LA was "beaten"... by DET or BOS... they just lost. I feel they did themselves in both times.
  youre right we didnt get beat...we got demolished and owned by boston and detroit

 

[steve cash]

Originally Posted by Im Not You

It's cool and all...but I still maintain that they won that series because of the turmoil within the Lakers.

You could just see that there were problems that went beyond basketball throughout that entire series.

 

[steve cash]

Originally Posted by Im Not You

It's cool and all...but I still maintain that they won that series because of the turmoil within the Lakers.

You could just see that there were problems that went beyond basketball throughout that entire series.

 

[bottom74bottom]

Originally Posted by DoubleJs07

Who are the 4 future HOF'ers that Boston started? I'm lost after Allen, Pierce, and KG....

Who REALLY considered Billups tops back THEN tho.. it was only later that he solidified that notion...right?

How does this make any sense? Do you think people who watch basketball look in retrospect and say.."oh yeah, it's only now I realize that Billups was a top-5 PG in 2004...) No, if you follow the game you know how good Billups was in 2004, and even in the years before. Ask yourself this...if you had to choose a PG out of everyone in the NBA back in 2004, what guys would you want RUNNING your team?

Ya know, some of you S&T regulars are sooooooooo saddity. I can handle being "wrong" in an opinin based debate, but some f ya'll come off as holier than thine and I'm not having it. Since you asked, in most areas of art and entertainment, it's only after things have run their course that you can ACCURATELY assess them. If that wasn't the case, Lebron would be considered the best basketball player of alll time just off his accomplishments at such a young age. I've already asked myself that question you posed... and I'd take Nash. Then AND now. Not to slight Chauncey, but it's only after he left DET that his value could truly be felt for what it was because he proved that at that point in his career, he was better than the All-Era player he was traded for. Before that, he was the east's answer to Derek Fisher. What?

 

[bottom74bottom]

Originally Posted by DoubleJs07

Who are the 4 future HOF'ers that Boston started? I'm lost after Allen, Pierce, and KG....

Who REALLY considered Billups tops back THEN tho.. it was only later that he solidified that notion...right?

How does this make any sense? Do you think people who watch basketball look in retrospect and say.."oh yeah, it's only now I realize that Billups was a top-5 PG in 2004...) No, if you follow the game you know how good Billups was in 2004, and even in the years before. Ask yourself this...if you had to choose a PG out of everyone in the NBA back in 2004, what guys would you want RUNNING your team?

Ya know, some of you S&T regulars are sooooooooo saddity. I can handle being "wrong" in an opinin based debate, but some f ya'll come off as holier than thine and I'm not having it. Since you asked, in most areas of art and entertainment, it's only after things have run their course that you can ACCURATELY assess them. If that wasn't the case, Lebron would be considered the best basketball player of alll time just off his accomplishments at such a young age. I've already asked myself that question you posed... and I'd take Nash. Then AND now. Not to slight Chauncey, but it's only after he left DET that his value could truly be felt for what it was because he proved that at that point in his career, he was better than the All-Era player he was traded for. Before that, he was the east's answer to Derek Fisher. What?

 

[remi23]

Originally Posted by Im Not You

It's cool and all...but I still maintain that they won that series because of the turmoil within the Lakers.

You could just see that there were problems that went beyond basketball throughout that entire series.

Excuses 

 

[remi23]

Originally Posted by Im Not You

It's cool and all...but I still maintain that they won that series because of the turmoil within the Lakers.

You could just see that there were problems that went beyond basketball throughout that entire series.

Excuses 

 

[koolbarbone]

One of the main reasons people call them a blue collar team is because they were from Detroit. Change that roster to the Sonics, the Blazers, Golden State, etc. and it's just a good, all-around team.

 

[koolbarbone]

One of the main reasons people call them a blue collar team is because they were from Detroit. Change that roster to the Sonics, the Blazers, Golden State, etc. and it's just a good, all-around team.

 

[ASE]

Originally Posted by BOTTOM74BOTTOM

Originally Posted by DoubleJs07

Who are the 4 future HOF'ers that Boston started? I'm lost after Allen, Pierce, and KG....

Who REALLY considered Billups tops back THEN tho.. it was only later that he solidified that notion...right?

How does this make any sense? Do you think people who watch basketball look in retrospect and say.."oh yeah, it's only now I realize that Billups was a top-5 PG in 2004...) No, if you follow the game you know how good Billups was in 2004, and even in the years before. Ask yourself this...if you had to choose a PG out of everyone in the NBA back in 2004, what guys would you want RUNNING your team?

Ya know, some of you S&T regulars are sooooooooo saddity. I can handle being "wrong" in an opinin based debate, but some f ya'll come off as holier than thine and I'm not having it. Since you asked, in most areas of art and entertainment, it's only after things have run their course that you can ACCURATELY assess them. If that wasn't the case, Lebron would be considered the best basketball player of alll time just off his accomplishments at such a young age. I've already asked myself that question you posed... and I'd take Nash. Then AND now. Not to slight Chauncey, but it's only after he left DET that his value could truly be felt for what it was because he proved that at that point in his career, he was better than the All-Era player he was traded for. Before that, he was the east's answer to Derek Fisher. What?

Nothing you've said is wrong they just don't really support each other or your argument in general. So instead of being 'saddity' and telling you you're wrong, could you retell me how Billups, not only wasn't considered a top 5 pg in 04', but wasn't actually one either?

 

[ASE]

Originally Posted by BOTTOM74BOTTOM

Originally Posted by DoubleJs07

Who are the 4 future HOF'ers that Boston started? I'm lost after Allen, Pierce, and KG....

Who REALLY considered Billups tops back THEN tho.. it was only later that he solidified that notion...right?

How does this make any sense? Do you think people who watch basketball look in retrospect and say.."oh yeah, it's only now I realize that Billups was a top-5 PG in 2004...) No, if you follow the game you know how good Billups was in 2004, and even in the years before. Ask yourself this...if you had to choose a PG out of everyone in the NBA back in 2004, what guys would you want RUNNING your team?

Ya know, some of you S&T regulars are sooooooooo saddity. I can handle being "wrong" in an opinin based debate, but some f ya'll come off as holier than thine and I'm not having it. Since you asked, in most areas of art and entertainment, it's only after things have run their course that you can ACCURATELY assess them. If that wasn't the case, Lebron would be considered the best basketball player of alll time just off his accomplishments at such a young age. I've already asked myself that question you posed... and I'd take Nash. Then AND now. Not to slight Chauncey, but it's only after he left DET that his value could truly be felt for what it was because he proved that at that point in his career, he was better than the All-Era player he was traded for. Before that, he was the east's answer to Derek Fisher. What?

Nothing you've said is wrong they just don't really support each other or your argument in general. So instead of being 'saddity' and telling you you're wrong, could you retell me how Billups, not only wasn't considered a top 5 pg in 04', but wasn't actually one either?