People saying the East was bad the last 6 years are using revisionist history...

[Dray n Klay]

Remember back in 2011 the Bulls had 62 wins and were the 1st seed in the East.


They won the season series against the Heat, and EVERYONE was picking the Bulls to beat the Heat.


After the Bulls won Game 1, people thought the series was over, it required a HUGE clutch performance by LeBron to beat them





2012

The Pacers were up 2-1 against the Heat in the Semi Finals, and with Bosh injured, EVERYONE counted the Heat out. The Heat had freaking Joel Anthony an Haslem as their only big men.


It required Wade/Bron to play HUGE just to beat the Pacers in 6




2013

Wade/Bosh were playing like garbage, the Pacers took the Heat to 7 games in the ECF.




2014


The Pacers were the 1st seed and won 56 games. Roy Hibbert was playing like a DPOY. Paul George was playing like an MVP candidate. REMEMBER, the Pacers won Game 1 and were close to winning game 2 and being up 2-0. Th Heat miraculously won the series





2015

Remember the Hawks bandwagon during the season? People were calling them favorites to win the championship and the 'Spurs of the East".

The Hawks won 62 games and were slight favorites over the Cavs in the ECF.



Remember, Kevin Love was also injured, so the Hawks were overall more talented than the Cavs. Nooone thought the Cavs would win.










So the argument that the 'East was weak' the last 6 years is flawed.



Saying the East was weak just because LeBron made the Finals 6 straight times is false, since LeBron was the underdog at least once every postseason in the East




If you look back over the last 6 years you'll remember people counting out LeBron every year, and hyping another Eastern team, however LeBron was stil able to win even though his teams were less talented

[avonbarksdale]

okay

[Lebronxrings]

the only ones saying the east was bad are Lebron Haters.

[HylianNightmare]

Care

[LostCause]

No one counted the Heat out against the Pacers during any season, and if they did it was certainly not the majority

The Bulls were bigger threats but it was evident from the earlier series that outside of Rose, the rest of the team was struggling mightily offensively and would have problems. Not only that but disappearing acts were common for some of their main players

Hawks of 2015 were overachievers, nothing more needs to be said about that

The best teams Lebron has faced in the Eastern Conference leading up to the playoffs were the Celtics teams prior to them declining/losing Perkins/Thibs. I'm unsure if Lebron played a Detroit team with Larry Brown and Ben Wallace, but if he did then certainly they're legitimate too

Those are the only ones that anyone truly took seriously as title contenders.

[Dray n Klay]

No one counted the Heat out against the Pacers during any season, and if they did it was certainly not the majority

The Bulls were bigger threats but it was evident from the earlier series that outside of Rose, the rest of the team was struggling mightily offensively and would have problems. Not only that but disappearing acts were common for some of their main players

Hawks of 2015 were overachievers, nothing more needs to be said about that

The best teams Lebron has faced in the Eastern Conference leading up to the playoffs were the Celtics teams prior to them declining/losing Perkins/Thibs. I'm unsure if Lebron played a Detroit team with Larry Brown and Ben Wallace, but if he did then certainly they're legitimate too

Those are the only ones that anyone truly took seriously as title contenders.

Perfect example of revisionist history, thanks for the response




Everything you said could only be proven after LeBron beat them hence it is 'revisionist history'





Nothing you said could be proven if you said it during that time period


ie saying "Hawks are overachievers during the 2015 season" or "Bulls were Rose + role players in 2011" Noone would agree with you.

[GrapeApe]

The east was strong in 2011. The Heat, Celtics, and Bulls were all title contenders. That east that season tends gets overlooked. From 2012 on, there's really only been one legit contender per season. Rose was injured, the Celtics' big 3 were old, and the Pacers, Hawks, Raptors, and Heat were never really considered legit contenders, despite being high seeds and/or having good regular seasons.

The only reason the Heat struggled against the Celtics and Pacers was due to injuries (and of course the infamous "verticality"). With a healthy Bosh in 2012, the Heat would've probably beat them both in 5 games tops. Same is true with a healthy Wade in the 2013 ECF.

The west has been more talented top to bottom than the east, and few if anyone would disagree.

[DirkNowitzki41]

Only reason why the East 'sucks' is because LeBron. He is so damn great that he makes the rest of the conference irrelevant.

[LostCause]

Perfect example of revisionist history, thanks for the response

Everything you said could only be proven after LeBron beat them hence it is 'revisionist history'

False

Looking at the respective teams own accomplishments at the time shows it to be true. The Celtics were title contenders with Perkins/Thibs and they actually won a title with Perkins/Thibs. Same with the Brown/Wallace Pistons

Those are the only 2 teams Lebron has faced that have proven they could win a championship, because they have done it

Nothing you said could be proven if you said it during that time period

Did the respective Pistons and Celtics teams I mentioned win championships "during that time period" or not?

ie saying "Hawks are overachievers during the 2015 season" or "Bulls were Rose + role players in 2011" Noone would agree with you.

They wouldn't?

Hawks

A quick google search
http://nyulocal.com/city/2015/02/06/...ight-showdown/ (2nd and 5th paragraphs, specifically)

http://fansided.com/2015/02/05/steve...ba-coach-year/ (2nd to last paragraph)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ith-the-hawks/ (5th Paragraph)

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...nchise-history (2nd to last paragraph)

http://hawkshoop.com/category/3-on-3/ (Scroll down to the "Ceiling for this team" section)

There are plenty more that a quick google search can find and highlight for you of people questioning whether they Hawks are "For real", saying they've been overachieving, that they're fools gold etc. All of these are dated before the playoffs began, before Lebron beat them in the playoffs. So it's not even taking into account how the Hawks weren't exactly tearing it up in the first or second round of the playoffs and even more doubts began to surface

It's even easier finding this information for the Bulls but why bother? You know it's there, and you know the disappearing acts were starting before the Miami series even began. Also I never said the Bulls were bad, but there's absolutely no doubt the other main players were coming up short throughout the playoffs and it was cause for concern. Lebron didn't have to beat them for people to realize this. You saw it in the series before

[Paul George 24]

THEY HV NO COMPETITION AGAINST WEST

[Spurs m8]

I mean, you could write a novel with a bunch of info skewed to fit your agenda....or just use your head and stop being a f*cking idiot tbh

[warriorfan]

| year_id | east_w | east_l | east_wpct | west_w | west_l | west_wpct | e_vs_w | w_vs_e | e_h2h | w_h2h |
+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-------+-------+
| 2014 | 118 | 155 | 43.2% | 157 | 120 | 56.7% | 26 | 63 | 29.2% | 70.8% |
| 2013 | 577 | 651 | 47.0% | 652 | 578 | 53.0% | 188 | 262 | 41.8% | 58.2% |
| 2012 | 474 | 516 | 47.9% | 516 | 474 | 52.1% | 114 | 156 | 42.2% | 57.8% |
| 2011 | 579 | 651 | 47.1% | 651 | 579 | 52.9% | 189 | 261 | 42.0% | 58.0% |
| 2010 | 594 | 636 | 48.3% | 636 | 594 | 51.7% | 204 | 246 | 45.3% | 54.7% |
| 2009 | 621 | 609 | 50.5% | 609 | 621 | 49.5% | 231 | 219 | 51.3% | 48.7% |
| 2008 | 582 | 648 | 47.3% | 648 | 582 | 52.7% | 192 | 258 | 42.7% | 57.3% |
| 2007 | 583 | 647 | 47.4% | 647 | 583 | 52.6% | 193 | 257 | 42.9% | 57.1% |
| 2006 | 588 | 642 | 47.8% | 642 | 588 | 52.2% | 198 | 252 | 44.0% | 56.0% |
| 2005 | 584 | 646 | 47.5% | 646 | 584 | 52.5% | 194 | 256 | 43.1% | 56.9% |
| 2004 | 559 | 671 | 45.4% | 630 | 518 | 54.9% | 154 | 266 | 36.7% | 63.3% |
| 2003 | 575 | 655 | 46.7% | 614 | 534 | 53.5% | 170 | 250 | 40.5% | 59.5% |
| 2002 | 593 | 637 | 48.2% | 596 | 552 | 51.9% | 188 | 232 | 44.8% | 55.2% |
| 2001 | 566 | 664 | 46.0% | 623 | 525 | 54.3% | 161 | 259 | 38.3% | 61.7% |
| 2000 | 598 | 632 | 48.6% | 591 | 557 | 51.5% | 193 | 227 | 46.0% | 54.0% |
| 1999 | 379 | 371 | 50.5% | 346 | 354 | 49.4% | 46 | 38 | 54.8% | 45.2% |
| 1998 | 648 | 582 | 52.7% | 541 | 607 | 47.1% | 243 | 177 | 57.9% | 42.1% |
| 1997 | 647 | 583 | 52.6% | 542 | 606 | 47.2% | 242 | 178 | 57.6% | 42.4% |
| 1996 | 619 | 611 | 50.3% | 570 | 578 | 49.7% | 214 | 206 | 51.0% | 49.0% |
| 1995 | 550 | 598 | 47.9% | 557 | 509 | 52.3% | 158 | 206 | 43.4% | 56.6% |
+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-------+-------+
| year_id | east_w | east_l | east_wpct | west_w | west_l | west_wpct | e_vs_w | w_vs_e | e_h2h | w_h2h |
+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-------+-------+
| 1994 | 562 | 586 | 49.0% | 545 | 521 | 51.1% | 170 | 194 | 46.7% | 53.3% |
| 1993 | 583 | 565 | 50.8% | 524 | 542 | 49.2% | 191 | 173 | 52.5% | 47.5% |
| 1992 | 573 | 575 | 49.9% | 534 | 532 | 50.1% | 181 | 183 | 49.7% | 50.3% |
| 1991 | 521 | 545 | 48.9% | 586 | 562 | 51.0% | 170 | 194 | 46.7% | 53.3% |
| 1990 | 517 | 549 | 48.5% | 590 | 558 | 51.4% | 166 | 198 | 45.6% | 54.4% |
| 1989 | 522 | 462 | 53.0% | 503 | 563 | 47.2% | 186 | 126 | 59.6% | 40.4% |
| 1988 | 464 | 438 | 51.4% | 479 | 505 | 48.7% | 145 | 119 | 54.9% | 45.1% |
| 1987 | 465 | 437 | 51.6% | 478 | 506 | 48.6% | 146 | 118 | 55.3% | 44.7% |
| 1986 | 460 | 442 | 51.0% | 483 | 501 | 49.1% | 141 | 123 | 53.4% | 46.6% |
| 1985 | 462 | 440 | 51.2% | 481 | 503 | 48.9% | 143 | 121 | 54.2% | 45.8% |
| 1984 | 461 | 441 | 51.1% | 482 | 502 | 49.0% | 142 | 122 | 53.8% | 46.2% |
| 1983 | 458 | 444 | 50.8% | 485 | 499 | 49.3% | 139 | 125 | 52.7% | 47.3% |
| 1982 | 461 | 441 | 51.1% | 482 | 502 | 49.0% | 142 | 122 | 53.8% | 46.2% |
| 1981 | 466 | 436 | 51.7% | 477 | 507 | 48.5% | 147 | 117 | 55.7% | 44.3% |
| 1980 | 454 | 448 | 50.3% | 448 | 454 | 49.7% | 124 | 118 | 51.2% | 48.8% |
| 1979 | 425 | 477 | 47.1% | 477 | 425 | 52.9% | 205 | 257 | 44.4% | 55.6% |
| 1978 | 428 | 474 | 47.5% | 474 | 428 | 52.5% | 208 | 254 | 45.0% | 55.0% |
| 1977 | 436 | 466 | 48.3% | 466 | 436 | 51.7% | 216 | 246 | 46.8% | 53.2% |
| 1976 | 388 | 350 | 52.6% | 350 | 388 | 47.4% | 181 | 143 | 55.9% | 44.1% |
| 1975 | 378 | 360 | 51.2% | 360 | 378 | 48.8% | 171 | 153 | 52.8% | 47.2% |
+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-------+-------+
| year_id | east_w | east_l | east_wpct | west_w | west_l | west_wpct | e_vs_w | w_vs_e | e_h2h | w_h2h |
+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-------+-------+
| 1974 | 315 | 341 | 48.0% | 382 | 356 | 51.8% | 131 | 157 | 45.5% | 54.5% |
| 1973 | 318 | 338 | 48.5% | 379 | 359 | 51.4% | 134 | 154 | 46.5% | 53.5% |
| 1972 | 283 | 373 | 43.1% | 414 | 324 | 56.1% | 125 | 215 | 36.8% | 63.2% |
| 1971 | 291 | 365 | 44.4% | 406 | 332 | 55.0% | 139 | 213 | 39.5% | 60.5% |
| 1970 | 309 | 265 | 53.8% | 265 | 309 | 46.2% | 169 | 125 | 57.5% | 42.5% |
| 1969 | 314 | 260 | 54.7% | 260 | 314 | 45.3% | 176 | 122 | 59.1% | 40.9% |
| 1968 | 274 | 218 | 55.7% | 218 | 274 | 44.3% | 154 | 98 | 61.1% | 38.9% |
| 1967 | 223 | 182 | 55.1% | 182 | 223 | 44.9% | 133 | 92 | 59.1% | 40.9% |
| 1966 | 184 | 136 | 57.5% | 176 | 224 | 44.0% | 124 | 76 | 62.0% | 38.0% |
| 1965 | 181 | 139 | 56.6% | 179 | 221 | 44.8% | 121 | 79 | 60.5% | 39.5% |
| 1964 | 170 | 150 | 53.1% | 190 | 210 | 47.5% | 98 | 78 | 55.7% | 44.3% |
| 1963 | 169 | 151 | 52.8% | 191 | 209 | 47.8% | 97 | 79 | 55.1% | 44.9% |
| 1962 | 179 | 141 | 55.9% | 181 | 219 | 45.3% | 107 | 69 | 60.8% | 39.2% |
| 1961 | 162 | 154 | 51.3% | 154 | 162 | 48.7% | 84 | 76 | 52.5% | 47.5% |
| 1960 | 180 | 120 | 60.0% | 120 | 180 | 40.0% | 102 | 42 | 70.8% | 29.2% |
| 1959 | 159 | 129 | 55.2% | 129 | 159 | 44.8% | 87 | 57 | 60.4% | 39.6% |
| 1958 | 162 | 126 | 56.3% | 126 | 162 | 43.8% | 90 | 54 | 62.5% | 37.5% |
| 1957 | 155 | 133 | 53.8% | 133 | 155 | 46.2% | 83 | 61 | 57.6% | 42.4% |
| 1956 | 154 | 134 | 53.5% | 134 | 154 | 46.5% | 82 | 62 | 56.9% | 43.1% |
| 1955 | 150 | 138 | 52.1% | 138 | 150 | 47.9% | 78 | 66 | 54.2% | 45.8% |

[warriorfan]

+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-------+-------+
| year_id | east_w | east_l | east_wpct | west_w | west_l | west_wpct | e_vs_w | w_vs_e | e_h2h | w_h2h |
+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-------+-------+
| 1954 | 173 | 187 | 48.1% | 151 | 137 | 52.4% | 73 | 87 | 45.6% | 54.4% |
| 1953 | 168 | 183 | 47.9% | 183 | 168 | 52.1% | 67 | 82 | 45.0% | 55.0% |
| 1952 | 169 | 161 | 51.2% | 161 | 169 | 48.8% | 79 | 71 | 52.7% | 47.3% |
| 1951 | 181 | 187 | 49.2% | 173 | 167 | 50.9% | 80 | 86 | 48.2% | 51.8% |
+---------+--------+--------+-----------+--------+--------+-----------+--------





Therefore the Eastern Conference has been historically weaker than the Western

[Duncan21formvp]

It was weak. You put them out west and they lose in round 1. They wouldn't even have HCA in round 1.

[Monta Ellis MVP]

Big time Pacers fan and also a fan of the Cavaliers as well checking in here. I have followed the Eastern Conference for my entire life. I am a fan but I can still stay non-biased and admit that the Western Conference has been stronger for about 95% of the time over the past 20 years.