Does the NETS have a chance? wats ur opinion???

[cyman3]

Looks like its gonna be NETS vs SPURS. How does the matchup go for that series? Do u think its another 1-sided FINALS series?

theres 3 things i like about the SUPERBOWL.

1)commercials

2)hype- its only 1 game

3)Both teams have 50% chance of winning. Theres no clear winner (ask New England... Titans were 1 yard away...).

THE BIG QUESTION- ANSWER THIS QUESTION....

-when was the last time the NBA FINALS was like that? in other words, when was the last time there was a VERY GOOD MATCH between 2 equally talented teams?

and

- suppose Nets/Spurs is the result... wanna go ahead and predict?

[Diesel]

The nets and the Spurs mirror each other. The nets like to turn up the tempo but they also play very good defense. I think that the true matchup questions will come when Kidd plays parker. Parker has no business being on the floor with Kidd right now. I think Kidd will defend Parker better than Nash and NVE has. I also think NJ will place the ball into Duncan's hand and make him play against a double team. Somebody will have to step up for San Antonio. My guess is that guy will be Jackson.

However, the question is....

Will Smith and Deke get a chance to play?

I think if S.A. forces this series into a halfcourt game where Duncan faces a double... Deke will be brought in to man the C position.

'

However, if S.A. cannot stop the madness of the NJ fast break, Deke nor Smitty will play.

However either way... ONE former Hawk will win a championship this year!!

But I think that S.A. will encounter the same problems they had with Phoenix. A bad matchup because of the PG position.

[chillzatl]

I think they have a great shot. I don't think they will win. But it should be close games and should easily go six games, maybe seven.

Last well matched finals series: Bulls / Jazz.

[Guest]

I've been saying this since the Spurs and Nets were lighting up their respective second round series ~ if it comes down to the Nets/Spurs in the Finals, the East could very well eek out a win. It's probably the only scenario (these two teams) where the East could win, but consider the matchups (I'm going to play Dr. Jack here for a sec).

PG - Parker vs. Kidd. Edge - Kidd. Kidd's everything that Parker could hope to become: a fast breaking pg with excellent court vision, ability to take clutch shots, lead his team, and get everyone involved.

SG - Jackson/Manu vs Kittles/Harris. Edge - Spurs. Manu's been playing great all postseason while both Nets' guards have struggled to find their games and touch. This position could well determine the series.

SF - Jefferson vs. Bowen - push. Bowen's a better defender but should be kept busy with Jefferson's offense.

PF - Duncan vs. Martin - edge - Spurs. MVP speaks for himself and has been backing up the controversial second MVP game in and game out throughout the playoffs, esp. the past two series. However, Martin is the best block defender that he's faced in the postseason. Martin's lateral mobility, quickness, and strength will allow him (and the Nets) to play Timmy man to man rather than always worrying about rotating for the double team. Martin's the best foil to guarding Duncan that I can think of.

C- Rose/Robinson vs. Collins, Williams, and? Deke? Edge - Spurs, by a hair. It's an odd position for both teams, with future HOF's getting less time than their smaller counterpart bu's.

Bench - push. Neither team is incredibly deep, but possess the poise and consistency to go 8 or possibly 9 deep when matchups warrant.

Simply put, the Nets match up almost perfectly with the Spurs. You have to give the nod to the Spurs, but temper it greatly with knowledge that the Nets have experience as well (finals last year vs. Spurs *championship run). Both teams have established go-to guys and are willing to play as a team, within a system. It may come down to how well the Spurs can force the Nets into a half-court game, a style where they'll have the edge. If it gets up tempo, look for Kidd's poise and supreme complimentary cast (perfect for him) to take over.

[PoppaFritz]

I'm happy to see that everyone believes that the Nets have a chance, but what has changed since the playoffs started? I was starting to think that the analysts were just saying that the Nets had a chance to build interest in a potentially lopsided series. But now I'm seeing it from delusional fans. All the Nets have been doing is beating up on overmatched teams. They are the only team that is even remotely close to a complete team in the Eastern conference, which explains their dominance.

Still, if they were in the Western Conference they might not have made it out of the 1st round. The teams in the Western Conference can play any tempo and at times it looks like they are struggling because they are just playing against better competition. The match-ups may work on paper but the truth is I don't see the Nets winning more than one game. It's just a different level of talent that the Spurs have been competing against. The Eastern Conference teams are lucky to score over 80 points a game, the Spurs can win scoring 60 points or 120 points. There wasn't any reason to think the Eastern Conference could win before the playoffs started and to me there still isn't any reason.

I hope I eat my words on this because I would love to see a good series and I love JKidd but it's not going to happen.

[Guest]

I started thinking last round that the only way the Nets, or the East, had a chance was against SA and then only if it was the Nets. You're right. The Mavs (probably even now), Kings (sans Webb), LA...take your pick, would all more than likely beat the Nets or any East representative.

However, with the experience that the core gained last year in the finals, and the matchups on paper, yes, the Nets have a legit shot IMO. I'm not saying that they'll win, but I bet it's a good series for the most part. I'll go so far as to say that the Nets will win at least two. The Nets are showing maturity, poise, and confidence in each other that they lacked last year. That's not to say that they've played the same caliber teams as SA, but that's not really the point is it? The road doesn't matter so much as the end result, and that's going to be SA NJ. Two teams that match up nearly perfectly with each other.

It's not like SA isn't without their flaws and weaknesses, they've just been able to raise the other aspects of their games to another level that masks their deficiencies.

[Diesel]

Simply put... It's a game of Tempo. Nothing else really matters.

If San Antonio can force it's tempo on the Nets, San Antonio will win.

However, if the Nets make this a run and gun affair, the nets are the best in the biz at it.

The problem. The Spurs are 1-1 vs. the Nets. The Spurs had a hard time with the Suns all year long. And the Nets learned the lesson last year about allowing a team to dictate their tempo on them.

I think now that KVH is gone and Jefferson and Martin are full timers then they may be able to find space to run. However, in order to run, they got to get the rebound. This means somebody will have to put a body on old 20/20 MVP out there.

So what you want to watch is rebounds and Turnovers.

I believe that NJ will hit the boards HARD. I believe that Kidd will out rebound Parker and Cause Parker to turn the ball over... And vice versa. However, in the end, if Tim Duncan/Rose/Robinson pulls down the boards and San Antonio dictates the pace, it will be Spurs in 5.

However, if San Antonio try to play NJs game and don't play Drob and Rose as much... and they don't have a significant advantage on the boards, NJ just might take it to 7.

[Diesel]

I don't know...

I think the Nets would easily beat the Mavs.

Mavs don't have enough defense. Nets and Mavs would put up a lot of numbers, but the Mavs are not a great rebounding team either. I think the Nets would have their way with the Mavs.

The Spurs offer a lot of problems. Namely, they can rebound and pound the ball inside.

Same with Lakers and Kings.

The point is that for two long, people have talked about the conference being stronger or that conference being stronger...

The truth is Matchup.

Matchups determine who wins or loses...

A few years ago, the Lakers were the only team in the West that could have beaten Philly.

A year before, Utah would have creamed LAL had they met.

PTL should've beaten LAL that year but REFs.

It's all about matchups.

This year, I think Detroit matched up well against the West... They would have beaten the Lakers... and played a healthy Kings team well. And even the Spurs would have been given a good game. But the Nets dispensed of them in a sweep. Reason being, it was a bad matchup for Detroit. They have post defense and perimeter defense but their transition defense is weak. Kidd and Company were able to neutralize Wallace on the boards by keeping him away from the boards and letting everybody run Curls. It was very good coaching by Scott. Scott gets no credit for his coaching, but he made the Nets into the Showtime lakers in that series.