why are spurs the only good team in this era to suck at backtobacks?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I mean really. Why is it a given we will always lose at least one of our back to backs. I never notice any primetime teams doing this. Lakers just stole two on the road back to back overtime wins.

[DPG21920]

Spurs back to back record is not as bad as it seems. Someone did an analysis of this; they looked at the Spurs b2b records vs the rest of the league and it was pretty close IIRC.

Thing is, the Spurs usually get blown out when they lose and they look terrible, so it stands out more.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Uh yeah
we suck at them
that's what I'm saying
It's a given that we're not even going to compete in one of the 2 games. That's yet another reason the nba fixed that mysterious 3 day layover between games 6 and 7 of the hornets series in 2008. They knew it would be an automatic loss in game 1 against the lakers if we won.

[DPG21920]

Not true. We don't suck any worse (in terms of W/L) than other teams. It just so happens our losses look worse.

[Mel_13]

Last season:

54-28 .659

Second games of B2B

12-6 .667

[HarlemHeat37]

^^adding to that..

2007-2008: 13-5
2006-2007: 12-4
2005-2006: 5-9
2004-2005: 10-9
2003-2004: 13-6
2002-2003: 13-5

the only bad years we've had were 2005-2006 and 2004-2005..not a coincidence that those were the 2 years that our franchise player was battling serious injuries..

[DPG21920]

Knowledge.

[manustarting2gd]

How many back to backs do we have this year?

[DPG21920]

16

[timvp]

Yeah, Spurs have been pretty damn good in back-to-backs in the last few years. The supposed struggles has become a talking point for the national media to harp on that some fans eat up without looking at reality.

[Blackjack]

It became a talking point during the '05-'06 season because of Tim's plantar fasciitis but, as has been pointed out, it's been largely overblown.

That '04-'05 season was basically the same type of scenario -- Tim battling through the ankle sprains -- which would explain the second worst record over that span.

The blowouts have helped to create a perception, with Pop choosing to pick his battles with an aging supporting cast and more recently Tim and Manu, but, as the numbers bear, it's only a perception.

[will_spurs]

It's a myth created by CIA Pop. Seriously.

[easy7]

The media also has tied to correlate the back to back loses to old age. This is something they have been trying do for the past few years.

[Rebounds]

IMO this year the blowouts will only be temporary; as the 2nd unit jells and asserts itself more, it's learning curve will rise side by side with success of B2B's to the point where they will improve to the rest of the league's B2B differential averages.

[xellos88330]

B2B games aren't an issue for the Spurs as the media makes it out to be. Don't let them work their mind tricks on you.

[TDMVPDPOY]

B2B games aren't an issue for the Spurs as the media makes it out to be. Don't let them work their mind tricks on you.

spurs to buzy focusing on the stronger team they face in b2b games then the loser teams cause theres no braggin rights and it doesnt hurt us as much in the team records....

the bucks beat us all the time, doesnt mean they are champs

[K-State Spur]

Yeah, I don't see that Bulls loss as having anything to do with a back-to-back. It was because not a single player other than TD had even a remotely decent game.

The Spurs will lose 20-25 games this year, but I don't think they'll ever have an across-the-board effort that bad again.

[Galileo]

It's a myth created by CIA Pop. Seriously.

bump!

:lmao

[kace]

i remember a stat saying that the spurs have been the best team in second game of b2b during the 2003-2007 period i think.

don't know after that but even then, the spurs had a false reputation of being awful in those games whereas we were simply the best in the league. rather deceptive.

[UnWantedTheory]

Deception is the better part of valor? Or something....

[LOL@MavsFan]

Uh yeah
we suck at them
that's what I'm saying
It's a given that we're not even going to compete in one of the 2 games. That's yet another reason the nba fixed that mysterious 3 day layover between games 6 and 7 of the hornets series in 2008. They knew it would be an automatic loss in game 1 against the lakers if we won.

There's no back to back in the playoffs so IMO this doesn't matter. Thank you, have a nice day and go VINCE go!

[Höfner]

Funny that the national media distorts the Spurs non-issues as if it was common journalism.

Oh yeah, it is!

Keep on distorting and lying there, no one shall notice and those who do won't care.

[Fpoonsie]

Lakers just stole two on the road back to back overtime wins.

We did 'em one better...


With a 125-124 double overtime win at the Los Angeles Clippers on 4/9 and a 136-134 double overtime win at the Golden State Warriors the following night the Spurs made NBA history becoming the first team in history to win back-to-back double overtime games (only two other teams have played back-to-back double-overtime games: the Minneapolis Lakers during the 1951-52 season and the Vancouver Grizzlies during the 1998-99 campaign) … the Spurs back-to-back double overtime wins are even more impressive due to the fact that the Spurs were without Tim Duncan and Devin Brown for the Clippers game and then had to play without Duncan, Brown, Manu Ginobili and Rasho Nesterovic against the Warriors (the four players who missed the Golden State game averaged a combined 49.6 points per game during the 2004-05 season) … the combined 261 points over the two games was the Spurs highest two-game total since the 1990-91 campaign (when they scored 271 points - on 11/3 and 11/7 - in two games to open the season).

link (http://hoopedia.nba.com/index.php?title=San_Antonio_Spurs_Franchise_Histor y)

:hat

[Cant_Be_Faded]

There's no back to back in the playoffs so IMO this doesn't matter. Thank you, have a nice day and go VINCE go!

Uh, yes we played game 7 of hornets series and the next day had to play the lakers for game 1 dumbass



Also, yeah. I was wrong. This is a total myth.