2011-2012 OKC Thunder vs. 2001-2002 Sacramento Kings

FACTS

- Despite the game 6, the Kings ended up still shooting more free throws in the entire series than the Lakers
- The Lakers have Shaquille O'Neal, the most dominant player (then) and who led the league in free throws.
- The Kings shot 65% from free throw line that series. Lakers 73%. The Kings shot EVEN WORSE at home at that game 7. 53% from the free throw line. 2/20 from 3 point range. It was a CHOKE of epic proportions by the Kings. What makes you think if they had the same amount of free throws as the Lakers they'd still make it, when the entire series they got more free throws and still didn't shoot as good of a % as the Lakers despite the Lakers having one of the worst free throw shooters in Shaq on their side.

-Lakers have Kobe Bryant, one of the best slashers in the league back then
Kings had a bunch of soft jumpshooters

- What about game 2 when the script was flipped with the Kings having 39 free throws while the Lakers had only 25 (Which was the difference in Game 6 that you're whining about


At the end of the day it has always been the home team gets the benefit of the 50/50 close calls. KNOWING THIS, shouldn't the Kings have closed out when they had a chance? They had an opportunity in Game 7. How do you justify that???

 

Kings

/thread

 

I vote the Thunder for 3 reasons:

1) OKC has an elite closer than can just take over whenever and SAC didn't. A guy like that means a lot.

2) OKC dealt with adversity better. Yeah, the refs screwed them over. They did the same to OKC in Game 3 of the LA/OKC series. They just came out and won the next game. SA was getting tons of ref love this series. OKC just stayed the course and battled through it. They were down 18 last night. Didn't matter.

3) They can make their FT's. SAC still had G7 in their building, and went 16-30 at the FT line. When you miss 14 FT's in a 6 point OT game then you don't deserve to win.

 

Thunder. They have the refs on their side.

 

Four guys on the court could close. Vladi, Webber, Peja, Bibby. I remember bibby being clutch.

 

You've either forgotten how good the Kings were or you didn't watch basketball back then if you say Thunder.

Ask yourselves, would this Thunder team beat that Lakers team and I bet you'll say no.

 

Each teams lacks what the other one has...the Thunder don't really have any dead eye shooters, like Peja, Turkoglu, or Bibby (though Durant is pretty good), while the Kings never had a dynamo to wreck havoc on the wing, create, and get to the basket (Westbrook, Harden and Durant). Again, Turkoglu and Bobby Jax could show some magic on the wing at times.

Peja often had his troubles with Rick Fox of the Lakers for some reason. Fox was in his head. Turkoglu was a much better fit in that series than the injured Peja who probably should not have been rushed back.


OKC doesn't have offensive studs in the paint, like Sacramento. Divac was a magical passer and had a nice little jump shot that was too far behind that started to fade a little bit. Chris Webber was the jack of all trades -- a good rebounder, nice range on his shots, could create offense one on one from perimeter, good post player, good shooter, and arguably the greatest passing power forward in history. Biggest problem, they both lacked Perkins and Ibaka defensive intensity and prowess.


I'd say the closest thing to Webber, these days would be LaMarcus Aldridge or Chris Bosh. Neither one is quite as good or well-rounded as Webber when it comes rebounding, the passing skills and even post moves, though Bosh is probably a better defender. While, both might could match or even best him in a shooting contest.

With that being said Webber is in the discussion with those other all time great power forwards -- Duncan, McHale, Barkley, KG, Pettit, Hayes, Lucas, and Nowtizki. Easily. He's quite better than the next group of power forwards.

 

I have the Kings also. That was a championship team that got screwed royally.

 

1) OKC doesn't really have the same volume of great outside shooters, like Bibby, Turkoglu, Peja, or Bobby Jackson. Their post players are inferior to Divac and Webber, except on defense, maybe.

OKC doesn't have the Kings overall depth.

2) OKC dealt with adversity better in this series or playoffs. It depends on how you look at it. The Spurs got calls, but couldn't capitalize on them. I figured, because they aren't quite as good as they used to be. You cannot just pull that one series out and make that the main determination.

Sidenote: They didn't have to play Shaq and Kobe version of the Lakers. Slowing down Tim Duncan in his mid 30s is one thing. Slow down Shaq who was still in his prime, something completely different. OKC beats some really good teams, this year in the Lakers and Spurs. The Kings did as well, and they were on the cusp of knocking off the 2x defending champion.

 

I'm sorry, but this is just sick. You are approaching Straw Man status for your argument, essentially saying "well, your argument for game 6 is invalid becuase [insert series-long statistical category that has nothing to do with what we've been saying]."

The question isn't about volume of free throws, or even free throw percentages. Again, you're misdirecting the argument, which is solely about the calls in (particularly) game 6. Should the Kings have won on home court? Yes. Did they botch it up? Absolutely. That doesn't at all invalidate what occurred during Game 6.

If you're so set on Game 2 being decided by the refs in Sacramento's favor - by all means, show me a video or something. In fact, I'll go back and watch it - I downloaded the whole series some time ago, have it stored somewhere.

Again, volume of free throws isn't the only thing we look at. The types of calls given, calls clearly missed and then not made up at the other end, fouls specific to certain players (i.e. Pollard and Divac, Sacramento's 2 options for guarding Shaq) at certain times is what we're talking about.

Continue to live in fantasy-land, by all means. No one is trying to take away from the greatness or sheer dominance of that Laker team. What the rest of the basketball world is saying, rather, is that the Kings got gipped that year.

 

Correct me if im wrong, but im pretty sure Tim Donaghy admitted to game 6 being in the lakers favor.

 

So a rogue referee "admitted" to cheating. So what makes him credible?

 

Answer the damn question. You had your chance to close out Game7, WHY DIDNT YOU DO IT??? You had the free throw chances and your team freakin choked on national TV

your team had more free throws earlier in the series just like Game 6 and nobody complained. You just mad the Lakers have owned your team every single time it matter. EVER SINGLE TIME

 

Great teams over come bad reffing, the Thunder are the favorites to win the title this year now. Durant would be the best player in the series, the Webber, followed by Westbrook and Harden. I say Thunder.

 

Bibby guarding Westbrook


Thabo could do a nice job on Hedo, and Peja

Ibaka might get torched by C-Webb


But will Bobby Jackson outplay James Harden