The word "rivalry" is being thrown around a lot. Oddly enough, it always gets mentioned whenever the Knicks are playing a good team. Tonight, they happened to have just beat Miami the day after Amare boldly said "Nobody's afraid of the Heat." Then came the clips from the famously games in Heat-Knicks history, defined by several heated incidents during each of their playoff series from 1997 to 2000 (PJ Brown flipping Charlie Ward into the stands in 97, Alonzo Mourning and Larry Johnson causing a huge brawl with Jeff Van Gundy hilariously hanging on to Mourning's leg in 98, and Allan Houston's one-handed runner to lift the Knicks in 99). In that timeframe, the two teams faced each other all 4 of those years and each series went the distance. This NEVER happened between any two teams in the league. Back then, this WAS a legitimate rivalry.
Here's my criteria for legitimate rivalries. All 4 rules apply when it comes to judging whether two teams have current, legitimate rivalries:
1. The teams should have played head to head in more than one playoff series.
2. The head-to-head matchup should not be completely one-sided.
3. At least one or two noteworthy fights or heated exchanges must take place to define the rivarly.
4. The two teams must have faced each other at least once within the past 5 years.
5. The teams have to be good (i.e. playoff teams).
Rule 1 is kind of implied by Rule 2 - it's not a rivalry if the teams have only met only once OR if one team has won every matchup. Remember the so-called Cavs-Wizards "rivalry" a few years ago? They had one good playoff series in 2006, but since then? Cavs swept the Wizards in 07 and ousted them in 6 games (fairly lopsided despite going this many games) in 08. The famous Kings-Lakers series in 2002 was one of the most competitive (and controversial) playoff series of all time. But the Kings never beat the Lakers before or after that series.
Rule 3 is almost kind of a byproduct of what happens when Rules 1&2 are satisfied. When teams face each other so many times, heated exchanges are almost inevitable. They're virtually a guarantee when you have to go up against guys like Kevin Garnett for just one game, much less for multiple playoff series. Controversy off the court counts as well, such as verbal jabs at press conferences between coaches and players.
Rule 4 eliminates pairs of teams that USED to be rivals, but one team or the other started sucking since. The aforementioned Heat-Knicks rivalry is one of them. As for Rule 5 - well, nobody cares about crappy teams that have a rivalry with one another. Otherwise, we might as well put high school team rivals on the list.
That said, here's my list of current legitimate rivalries:
1. Lakers/Celtics
2. Spurs/Mavericks
3. Suns/Spurs
Lakers-Celtics
Head-to-head: Celtics 9-3
Recent Matchups: 2008 Finals, 2010 Finals
This is undoubtedly the league's juiciest rivalry, with a storied history between the NBA's two winningest franchises. With the most star power and no shortage of trash talkers (KG, Pierce, Sheed, Kobe, Artest), these two teams could very well face each other again for at least a couple more years and add to their rivalry. This is the NBA's premier rivalry with tons of history and promising battles to come.
Spurs-Mavericks
Head-to-head: Spurs 3-2
Recent Matchups: 2006 Conf. Finals, 2009 First Rd., 2010 First Rd.
The 2006 matchup was by far the best series between the two teams, ending in a Game 7 OT in favor of the Mavericks. If Ginobili did not commit the worst foul of the century on Nowitzki, the Spurs would arguably have gone on to win the championship (yes, they would not have had an epic collapse against D-Wade's Heat the way Dallas did).
Suns-Spurs
Head-to-head: Spurs 6-4
Recent Matchups: 2005 Conf. Finals, 2007 Conf. Semi-finals, 2008 First Rd, 2010 Conf. Semi-finals
If it weren't for the Suns 4-0 sweep of the Spurs last year, this would not be a rivalry per Rivalry Rule #2. Before that series, the Spurs appeared to have Phoenix's number, despite a number of grueling playoff series. There was plenty of drama between the two teams, with Phoenix seemingly never getting any breaks. In 2005, Joe Johnson fractured his left orbital bone on his face. In 2007, Steve Nash's nose couldn't stop bleeding in Game 1, and as a result he was unable to stay on the court consistently in crunch time. In Game 4, Robert Horry decked Steve Nash into the scorer's table in Game 4 of the series, leading to suspensions of Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw (forever changing Horry's nickname to 'Cheap Shot Bob' in my mind). In 2008, the Suns were a popular pick to beat the Spurs as they shook up their roster, bringing Shaq in as their center. Despite signs that the trade made the Suns match up against the Spurs better, San Antonio quickly dismissed them in 5 games.
By then, it appeared that Steve Nash would never be able to get through the Spurs. But the most unexpected turn of events happened after Phoenix won their first two home games to go up 2-0: Goran freakin' Dragic scored 23 of his 26 points in the 4th quarter of Game 3 to give the Suns a 3-0 lead. Freak things like this tend to happen to in back-and-forth rivalries.
Runner-ups but not quite rivalries yet: Celtics-Magic, Celtics-Bulls
Rivalries in the last 10 years that aren't really rivalries anymore: Spurs-Lakers, Cavs-Pistons and Cavs-Celtics (obviously because of LBJ's departure), Suns-Mavs
The Eastern Conference is in need of some rivals, but there is hope for them. Among the top four teams in the East (Celtics, Heat, Bulls, Magic), rivalries promise to form in the near future.
Here's my criteria for legitimate rivalries. All 4 rules apply when it comes to judging whether two teams have current, legitimate rivalries:
1. The teams should have played head to head in more than one playoff series.
2. The head-to-head matchup should not be completely one-sided.
3. At least one or two noteworthy fights or heated exchanges must take place to define the rivarly.
4. The two teams must have faced each other at least once within the past 5 years.
5. The teams have to be good (i.e. playoff teams).
Rule 1 is kind of implied by Rule 2 - it's not a rivalry if the teams have only met only once OR if one team has won every matchup. Remember the so-called Cavs-Wizards "rivalry" a few years ago? They had one good playoff series in 2006, but since then? Cavs swept the Wizards in 07 and ousted them in 6 games (fairly lopsided despite going this many games) in 08. The famous Kings-Lakers series in 2002 was one of the most competitive (and controversial) playoff series of all time. But the Kings never beat the Lakers before or after that series.
Rule 3 is almost kind of a byproduct of what happens when Rules 1&2 are satisfied. When teams face each other so many times, heated exchanges are almost inevitable. They're virtually a guarantee when you have to go up against guys like Kevin Garnett for just one game, much less for multiple playoff series. Controversy off the court counts as well, such as verbal jabs at press conferences between coaches and players.
Rule 4 eliminates pairs of teams that USED to be rivals, but one team or the other started sucking since. The aforementioned Heat-Knicks rivalry is one of them. As for Rule 5 - well, nobody cares about crappy teams that have a rivalry with one another. Otherwise, we might as well put high school team rivals on the list.
That said, here's my list of current legitimate rivalries:
1. Lakers/Celtics
2. Spurs/Mavericks
3. Suns/Spurs
Lakers-Celtics
Head-to-head: Celtics 9-3
Recent Matchups: 2008 Finals, 2010 Finals
| One of the many promos for the league's most famous rivalry |
This is undoubtedly the league's juiciest rivalry, with a storied history between the NBA's two winningest franchises. With the most star power and no shortage of trash talkers (KG, Pierce, Sheed, Kobe, Artest), these two teams could very well face each other again for at least a couple more years and add to their rivalry. This is the NBA's premier rivalry with tons of history and promising battles to come.
Spurs-Mavericks
Head-to-head: Spurs 3-2
Recent Matchups: 2006 Conf. Finals, 2009 First Rd., 2010 First Rd.
The 2006 matchup was by far the best series between the two teams, ending in a Game 7 OT in favor of the Mavericks. If Ginobili did not commit the worst foul of the century on Nowitzki, the Spurs would arguably have gone on to win the championship (yes, they would not have had an epic collapse against D-Wade's Heat the way Dallas did).
Suns-Spurs
Head-to-head: Spurs 6-4
Recent Matchups: 2005 Conf. Finals, 2007 Conf. Semi-finals, 2008 First Rd, 2010 Conf. Semi-finals
If it weren't for the Suns 4-0 sweep of the Spurs last year, this would not be a rivalry per Rivalry Rule #2. Before that series, the Spurs appeared to have Phoenix's number, despite a number of grueling playoff series. There was plenty of drama between the two teams, with Phoenix seemingly never getting any breaks. In 2005, Joe Johnson fractured his left orbital bone on his face. In 2007, Steve Nash's nose couldn't stop bleeding in Game 1, and as a result he was unable to stay on the court consistently in crunch time. In Game 4, Robert Horry decked Steve Nash into the scorer's table in Game 4 of the series, leading to suspensions of Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw (forever changing Horry's nickname to 'Cheap Shot Bob' in my mind). In 2008, the Suns were a popular pick to beat the Spurs as they shook up their roster, bringing Shaq in as their center. Despite signs that the trade made the Suns match up against the Spurs better, San Antonio quickly dismissed them in 5 games.
By then, it appeared that Steve Nash would never be able to get through the Spurs. But the most unexpected turn of events happened after Phoenix won their first two home games to go up 2-0: Goran freakin' Dragic scored 23 of his 26 points in the 4th quarter of Game 3 to give the Suns a 3-0 lead. Freak things like this tend to happen to in back-and-forth rivalries.
Runner-ups but not quite rivalries yet: Celtics-Magic, Celtics-Bulls
Rivalries in the last 10 years that aren't really rivalries anymore: Spurs-Lakers, Cavs-Pistons and Cavs-Celtics (obviously because of LBJ's departure), Suns-Mavs
The Eastern Conference is in need of some rivals, but there is hope for them. Among the top four teams in the East (Celtics, Heat, Bulls, Magic), rivalries promise to form in the near future.
2 comments:
Vijay, I can't help but disagree with a couple of points here. I agree with your rules for selecting rivalries. That being said, I don't know think you can call Spurs/Suns one of the current rivalries because the suns are not a good team this year. All they have is Steve Nash. I'm not sure where they were when this post was written, but now they are a sub 500 team that is currently 10th in the western conference. I guess I just don't see the Spurs getting fired up for a game against the suns this year.
I think Celtics-Magic is getting pretty close there..
I also think any rivalries involving Boston have this year and maybe next year to develop. Boston's original Big 3 is just too old to play at a high level beyond next season. I think you're future rivalries are going to be Miami-Chicago-New York - Orlando.
Good point about the Suns - this is undoubtedly a down year for them. But if and when the Suns and Spurs re-load over the next few years, they can still be a rivalry. It's just a down-year for the rivalry, just as that of the Lakers-Celtics was 4 years ago.
I do agree with your future rivalry list, except maybe the Knicks. The jury is still out there as to whether Amare will co-exist with Carmelo to make them true contenders.
Post a Comment