ESPN experts pick Spurs (12/18) to win the Finals against the Heat

[Roundball_Rock]

They were significant underdogs in 1998. They barely beat the Pacers in the ECF while the Jazz swept the Lakers and had HCA. The Bulls-Jazz played a close series in 97' and all indicators suggested the Bulls had declined since the previous year while the Jazz were at the same level.

[tomtucker]

2008

[red1]

The Heat were favored by most "experts" last year.

nope

[Mr Feeny]

91 Bulls were a Sam Perkins 3pter away (game1) from sweeping the Lakers. Seeing as how the Lakers had the 3rd best record behind Portland and Chicago, calling the Bulls underdogs in that series is about as stupid an assessment as has ever been made on these boards.

93 Suns were hardly "stacked". They almost lost to the 8th seed Lakers in the first round, going down 0-2 (best of 5 series) before coming back. Needed 6 games against SA. Needed 7 against Seattle. A "stacked" team doesn't struggle nearly as hard as they had to in order to reach the finals. Nonetheless, I'd say that this was the only "real" competition Jordan had in the finals where you could call his opponent the favorite (only very slightly).

98 Jazz were a classic case of overachievers in the regular season who made it top priority to secure HCA in order to knock off the battle weary champs. This narrative sound familiar? Was anyone honestly stupid enough to believe that a team featuring Stockton/Malone/Hornacek/Ostertag/BryonRussell was going to beat a far more talented core of Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc?

Jordan's team was only a "real" underdog in 1 out of his 6 title runs (93 Suns); and even then only by a tiny margin.

No, Swish is pretty much spot on. If you were old enough to have watched the 1991 finals then you wouldnt be embarassing yourself right now. The fact that the Bulls dominated LA has nothing to do wiyh whether they were favored or not. EVERYONE predicted a Lakers title. Riley, their ex coach, was quite abnoxious about it and expected LA to dispatch Chicago with contemptuous ease.

Similarly, the fact that the 04 pistons destroyed the lakers doesnt mean that they were favored. The Lakers were overwhelming favorites in 2004; the pistons just happened to outplay them. If you need a history lesson, let Swish or I know, and we'll be glad to give you one.

[Mr Feeny]

They were significant underdogs in 1998. They barely beat the Pacers in the ECF while the Jazz swept the Lakers and had HCA. The Bulls-Jazz played a close series in 97' and all indicators suggested the Bulls had declined since the previous year while the Jazz were at the same level.

That's pretty much exactly right. The Jazz players themselves had a diff demeanor before the finals. They EXPECTED to beat Chicago by 98. The Bulls were anything but favored.

[Paul George 24]

Heat Is Overrated

[rhowen4]

ooooh michael wallace picked the spurs. it's over.

[stalkerforlife]

Underdogs/favorites/blah blah blah.

This Heat team SHOULD win this series, but picking against them is merely saying they are stacked, but overrated. They are the most stacked team in the history of the NBA relative to each era, but they are also highly overrated because they are obviously a lot more beta and cowardly than you are led to believe.

If the Heat lose, it will be a MASSIVE FAILURE.

[Xoush]

I dont know how anyone can take ESPN "experts" seriously...

[no pun intended]

lmao

[StephHamann]

MIA against the world

#lebronfamily is all we have left

Morris be like

[bingoa]

Opinions by Haberstrob and Gutierrez should be ignored as they have made careers out of covering the Heat