Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 32 of 32

Thread: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

  1. #26
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Either '97 or '99 for me. I think the '99 team lost because they assumed they had it won.
    I'll take '99 over '97 every time.

  2. #27
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

    For the record I think the '99 team lost because they had a game literally stolen by the refs, and that is a HUGE deal. That's the difference between winning and losing a series.

    Edit - ANd not that is important, I do think the 97-98 team was better than the 99 team. Defense matters, and the 98 team was great defensively. The 99 team wasn't..
    Last edited by mattie; 11-08-2013 at 03:33 PM.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  3. #28
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,485

    Default Re: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

    97 equals up on the Bulls with 5 mins left ECF game 7 and Smits loses a jump ball to Pippin. Utah would have fell in the Finals to the Pacers. 99/00 was Pacers losing to Shaq and Kobe in 6, where Shaq fouls out and McKey leaves Kobe open in OT for the shot that won the game 3? of the Finals. If you beat the Bulls in '97, you beat Utah. If you win game 3 in 2000 you're up 2-1 and beat the Lakers, I'm convinced. Tough either way. Both of those teams were on the verge of change and at the maximum of their games, THIS team is yet to get there. Pretty exciting. I hope in 7 or 19 months this isn't even a consideration, the banners will tell the tale.

  4. #29
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For the record I think the '99 team lost because they had a game literally stolen by the refs, and that is a HUGE deal. That's the difference between winning and losing a series.

    Edit - ANd not that is important, I do think the 97-98 team was better than the 99 team. Defense matters, and the 98 team was great defensively. The 99 team wasn't..
    I used to feel that way, but the truth is they blew two home games in that series, too.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  6. #30
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,517

    Default Re: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I used to feel that way, but the truth is they blew two home games in that series, too.
    Yep, that's true as well. They still could have won the series.

    Don't you feel like that game just sucked the life out of them tho?
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  7. #31

    Default Re: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

    though the 2000 squad made the finals, the 98 squad remains the standard in my book. we still had A.D plus, rik was able to score much better because his feet hadn't gone to crap yet. those 2 factors alone elevate the 98 bunch over the finals team.
    now the 98 team against this year's squad?
    well, i hate to sound indecisive but, i haven't yet seen enough of a sample size to give much of an evaluation. in fact, i won't have enough of one until i see the entire reg. & postseason play out in order to be fair as possible. we still have no idea how granger will do this year which could make an already deep team even deeper.
    i suppose i might give the 98 team the edge but this team has the potential to pass them i believe.
    Last edited by clownskull; 11-08-2013 at 03:55 PM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to clownskull For This Useful Post:


  9. #32
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: 2013 Pacers vs. 2000 Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by mattie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yep, that's true as well. They still could have won the series.

    Don't you feel like that game just sucked the life out of them tho?
    It sucked the life out of me, I know that.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •