Could the Jazz be like the 1999 New York Knicks?

[Matthew Thomas Castleton]

If we all don't remember, the 1999 NBA season was also shortened because of a lockout. That year, the New York Knicks made it to the Eastern Conference Playoffs as the #8 seed. New York also barely made it to the playoffs that year (they didn't secure the final spot until the last week of the season). They upset the #1 seeded Miami Heat in the first round, the #4 seeded Atlanta Hawks in the second round, and the #2 seeded Indiana Pacers in the Eastern Conference Finals. They went on to lose to the Tim Duncan/David Robinson-led San Antonio Spurs in the NBA Finals. As a Jazz fan. I really don't think that it is to bold of a statement to say that we could make a similar type of run this year. I really don't fear any of the teams in the Western Conference Playoffs this year. We beat every single one of them during the regular season at least once. The way the Jazz have been playing lately, I think we could make some major noise this year. We are just as talented as virtually every team in this year's playoffs. I know some won't want to hear it, but if we give either OKC or San Antonio a big dose of the Millsap-Favors-Jefferson front court, we just might upset them. The last time we played Oklahoma City we defeated them by seven after leading by as much as 14 points during the game. We also beat San Antonio in our last match up against them by seven points. However, the "Big 3" of Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker didn't play in the game. All it really would take is the Jazz winning one game either in San Antonio (not likely) or in Oklahoma City (much more likely). I don't know if we are good enough to make a 1999-Knicks-type run, but I think that we could seriously do some damage.

 

[sepanol]

no we wont be knick, because we will win it all
come onnnn guyss, lets be realistic
we won most games with energy and hustle play, u cant win 7 game series only with hustle, u need experience and much more

 

[Harambe]

no we wont be knick, because we will win it all
come onnnn guyss, lets be realistic
we won most games with energy and hustle play, u cant win 7 game series only with hustle, u need experience and much more

That's fine... finish it in the 6th game at the latest.

It's not likely. But even if we lose, the harder we play the more our guys really understand what it takes to win deep in the playoffs.

From a fans point of view, we have something to be proud of.

From the Utah Jazz Organization point of view, we made money(Making the playoffs with our payroll pretty much solidifies we haven't lost any)

Don't hate... appreciate.

 

[LifeOnaPlate]

Instead of facing the Spurs in the finals we're facing them in round one, and based on this year's previous games it does not look good. But we haven't seen how the big lineup might make an impact. But the Spurs are a good defensive team, I expect their zone to give us total fits. Of the current West playoff teams I would rather play anyone than the Spurs.

That said, I'm still glad Utah made it to the playoffs this year.

 

[sahlensguy]

The Jazz have a chance to be like the 2010 Green Bay Packers and the 2011 New York Giants, two champions who snuck into the postseason with great momentum and at least one dominant unit. The Jazz are peaking at the right time and their big lineup can dominate (at times).

Could happen...

 

[Qman]

Well those Knick got ridiculously hot from the 3 pt line. Something our team is very unlikely to do.

 

[candrew]

They can be exactly like the 1999 Knicks - lose to The Spurs in 5 games.

The 99 Knicks were a veteran team - all of their important pieces had extensive playoff experience.

 

[write4u]

Those Knicks also benefited by acquiring Latrell Sprewell, who was at the top of his game, after he had sat out because of the long suspension following the choking incident. He was the real catalyst behind that run.

 

[bordelais7]

Well those Knick got ridiculously hot from the 3 pt line. Something our team is very unlikely to do.

They shot 28% from 3 for the playoffs. I think even the Jazz can do that.

They did hold their opponents to an average of 84ppg, however.

 

[vslice02]

NO. That NY team was an 8th seed because of injuries and massive roster turnover - not because of talent. On paper they were a 50-win team (which is what they were the following season with essentially the same roster).

A better comparison is the 98-99 Sacramento Kings - in which you had a very young and energetic team with a strong frontcourt and great home-court advantage that basically snuck into the playoffs by getting hot in the final 2 weeks of the season and then faced an aging and veteran favorite. Both teams' were rejuvanated and able to get younger by trading an established all-star and both teams' best lineup involved playing a natural PF at SF, extremely strong bench play, a couple of exciting rookies w/loads of potential who saw regular playing time, a backup guard who was out of the league the previous season, and a starting bigman who had alot of invididual success in the league but had yet to win at a high-level.

Sacramento came as close as any team can come to winning their 1st-round series with the Jazz, but their run and experience was the foundation for an underrated Kings team that should've been NBA Champions in 2001-02. Each year they took a little step further, made a couple roster moves, and after getting their PG situation squared away in 2001 they were ready to outplay the defending Champions in the conference finals.

That's what I hope for from this Jazz team - that this is just the first chapter in the journeyto build a contender, and that someday we look back and talk about the experience Hayward, Favors, Burks and hopefully Kanter gained playing against Parker-Ginobili-Duncan and the Spurs.

They did hold their opponents to an average of 84ppg, however.

Impressive, but keep in mind the NBA in '99 was a completely different game in terms of pace, physicality and freedom of movement. If you reached the low-80's you still had a very good chance at winning.