I'm thinking Spurs and Pacers. Duncan gets his last title and retires.

Paul George has a man's first name & a man's last name.

Hopefully the West injury isn't serious. The Pacers hate the Heat and play them tough. Their bigs will cause a lot of problems for the Heat. If Paul George has truly arrived they will win in 6.

50% of Bill Hall's name is the letter L.

I hope this doesn't make me a bad NBA fan, but I just couldn't watch the Pacers in the Finals.

I didn't watch either of the Nets Finals appearances until I YouTubed them years later. Some teams I just have to draw the line with.

I hope this doesn't make me a bad NBA fan, but I just couldn't watch the Pacers in the Finals.

Half way there. Spurs better pray Indiana wins because the Heat will destroy them. I'm willing to make a few friendly wagers if that match up happens.

Listen to an interesting fact on around the horn....since 1999 either the Spurs, Lakers ,or Heat have been in the Finals....This means something , what I don't know

Outside of the Spurs, the ability to attract top talent via free agency or trades is what probably connects Miami and LA. NY should belong in that group as well in terms of attracting talent, but they've suffered from some really poor management.

In recent years, Knicks' management has wasted millions on bad contracts. Right now, the Amare Stoudemire contract doesn't look so smart.

It will never look smart. He made his name on jaw-dropping athleticism. Doesn't look like he worked on his skills enough to survive impending father time. He's dead weight.

[Hard to believe, a former Chicagoan actually helped screw up the Knicks' as BOTH a head coach and a front office executive. You may have heard of him...Isiah Thomas.

Too bad Chicago doesn't have NY's drawing power. A in-his-prime Marbury and Carmelo Anthony forced trades to NY, and many UFAs are always intrigued by NY when the team has cap space. That lack of drawing power already screwed the Bulls over in 2000 and 2010, and probably will do so again the in the near future. The biggest loser will probably be Derrick Rose.

Too bad Chicago doesn't have NY's drawing power. A in-his-prime Marbury and Carmelo Anthony forced trades to NY, and many UFAs are always intrigued by NY when the team has cap space. That lack of drawing power already screwed the Bulls over in 2000 and 2010, and probably will do so again the in the near future. The biggest loser will probably be Derrick Rose.

It's funny picturing about 27 of the 30 fanbases in the league reading this and rolling their eyes. I'm sure teams like Indiana and Detroit feel really bad for us Bulls fans. It's also funny because the Knicks have been a hot mess this entire past decade plus. Their "drawing power" obviously was not very beneficial.

I get tired of hearing about this overhyped argument that the Bulls can't attract anybody. When is the last big time FA that Boston attracted? Vin Baker?

The Bulls have an excellent coach and management team in place, and a very good core to build around. They will be title contenders for the foreseeable future, while NY will be stuck in the same spot, with their ceiling being about what it was this year.

I'm somewhat confused here. I did acknowledge that the Knicks have sucked for the better part of last decade, despite their considerable drawing power (as evidenced by objective indicators like revenue and franchise worth, and subjective indicators like the city's rep. as the cultural capital of the country, and NYC subculture)

I totally agree about the Bulls having a good coach, but not sold yet on management. Do you really think they're title contenders as currently constituted?

The Bulls have a star, a star coach, and some nice young pieces. My whole argument about "drawing power" revolved around the Bulls need, with which I think you'd agree, for a second "star." Teams like NY, despite shoddy performance and management, seem to attract the stars we're talking about, which is why I think the lack of drawing power for Chicago will force them to find other ways to obtain the type of player they need to take on the Heat, Spurs, and Thunder.

And if you're tired about the argument that the Bulls can't attract anyone, how did you feel in 2000 and 2010 when the Bulls failed to sign Duncan, McGrady, Wade, James, Hill, and/or Bosh, despite creating cap space to sign those specific players?

I'm somewhat confused here. I did acknowledge that the Knicks have sucked for the better part of last decade, despite their considerable drawing power (as evidenced by objective indicators like revenue and franchise worth, and subjective indicators like the city's rep. as the cultural capital of the country, and NYC subculture)

I totally agree about the Bulls having a good coach, but not sold yet on management. Do you really think they're title contenders as currently constituted?

The Bulls have a star, a star coach, and some nice young pieces. My whole argument about "drawing power" revolved around the Bulls need, with which I think you'd agree, for a second "star." Teams like NY, despite shoddy performance and management, seem to attract the stars we're talking about, which is why I think the lack of drawing power for Chicago will force them to find other ways to obtain the type of player they need to take on the Heat, Spurs, and Thunder.

And if you're tired about the argument that the Bulls can't attract anyone, how did you feel in 2000 and 2010 when the Bulls failed to sign Duncan, McGrady, Wade, James, Hill, and/or Bosh, despite creating cap space to sign those specific players?