We can't beat Dallas 4 straight games? No kidding.

[peskypesky]

Look, it was a bad game. No doubt about it. Aside from the Parker-led run at the end of the second quarter, it was a debacle. Garbage. From just about everyone.

But let's be serious, people. To expect the Spurs to beat the Mavs in 4 straight games, a 7 seed beating a 2 seed 4 straight, is really being unrealistic, even for Spurs fans.

I'm not saying the Spurs shouldn't have tried harder or played better, but 4 straight? When our go-to guy has a freshly-broken nose?

The facts are that the Mavs are a great team. You don't get the 2nd seed in the West being anything less. They're stacked with talent. They'd lost 3 straight. And they were playing at home. So they kicked our butts. I really don't think it's a big deal or anything to get worried about.


:lobt::lobt::flag::lobt::lobt:

[SpurOutofTownFan]

Man I think I agree with your post 100%

[picc84]

Yep. This game had Mavs blowout written all over it. I mentioned before the game for Spurs fans not to expect a win last night, SA may be better than Dallas but not by enough to win 4 straight games. You didnt have a chance in that one.

Just have to take care of biz at home.

[peskypesky]

it's not like we're Mike Tyson and Dallas is Carl Williams, and one combination is going to knock them out. it's more like we're Ali, and Dallas is Joe Frazier. they ARE going to punch back. they have. but we are the Greatest!

[Fabbs]

well said op.

Only legit concerns i have are GNobs noze and Popazits strategy fails ie 4 Dumb and affair with BonBon.

[KuntryDude]

I respectfully disagree. I think we do have what it takes to have won 4 consecutive games. IMO, we should have won Gm1 which would've entailed a sweep. Although home court matters in the West, i don't think that seeding does. Any one of the remaining WC teams could beat you on any given night. Not to mention, we are not your typical 7th seed...ask Mavs.

[DarrinS]

Yep. And I was pissed at Pop (at the time) for giving up, but in hindsight, it probably made a lot of sense.

[in2deep]

good post. Anybody who thought this series was going less than 6 games either way was delusional.

[duhoh]

i honestly was expecting DAL in 6.

the games were close enough to where it could've gone either way.

except last night.

[Chomag]

Only thing that concerns me is that our vets look dead tired. Hopefully they can all find their second wind but their energy level is looking lower and lower.

Them being able to sustain at a high level will be key.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

There's been series before where the vets look completely out of it. Games 3 and 4 of the Pistons series in 2005 where Duncan received a ton of criticism, Ginobili used to be terrible on the road against Sacramento a couple years ago.

They go through bumps and lags, but I'm sure they'll do much better at home. If anything, Blair and Hill should continue to have strong games.

Hill and Parker are still able to get anything they want, it's just up to TD to put the Mavs bigs in foul trouble, and for Ginobili to attack the rim.

[cd98]

At some point the Spurs have to start hitting their threes. Maybe it will be Thursday.

[Cane]

When was the last time a 7th seed beat a 2nd seed in 5 games anyhow?

[crc21209]

There's been series before where the vets look completely out of it. Games 3 and 4 of the Pistons series in 2005 where Duncan received a ton of criticism, Ginobili used to be terrible on the road against Sacramento a couple years ago.

They go through bumps and lags, but I'm sure they'll do much better at home. If anything, Blair and Hill should continue to have strong games.

Hill and Parker are still able to get anything they want, it's just up to TD to put the Mavs bigs in foul trouble, and for Ginobili to attack the rim.

+1. Pop, TD, Manu, & TP have a history of letting their guard down and playing a terrible game for at least once in a series. Of course the 05' Finals is the most famous one when they got blown out in Games 3 & 4 at Detroit...

[nkdlunch]

+1. Pop, TD, Manu, & TP have a history of letting their guard down and playing a terrible game for at least once in a series. Of course the 05' Finals is the most famous one when they got blown out in Games 3 & 4 at Detroit...

IMO game 6 vs detroit was the letdown

[Budkin]

look, it was a bad game. No doubt about it. Aside from the parker-led run at the end of the second quarter, it was a debacle. Garbage. From just about everyone.

But let's be serious, people. To expect the spurs to beat the mavs in 4 straight games, a 7 seed beating a 2 seed 4 straight, is really being unrealistic, even for spurs fans.

I'm not saying the spurs shouldn't have tried harder or played better, but 4 straight? When our go-to guy has a freshly-broken nose?

The facts are that the mavs are a great team. You don't get the 2nd seed in the west being anything less. They're stacked with talent. They'd lost 3 straight. And they were playing at home. So they kicked our butts. I really don't think it's a big deal or anything to get worried about.


:lobt::lobt::flag::lobt::lobt:

+1,000,000

[spursfan1000]

good post. Anybody who thought this series was going less than 6 games either way was delusional.

Its not delusional to think that Spurs were going to win last night looking at how Spurs played the last 3 games, including in Dallas. :flag:

[slick'81]

hell yeah its tough to beat any team 4 straight let alone dallas a let down was possible but the overall effort was fckn sad

[m33p0]

they could have, except they weren't interested.

[DesignatedT]

Its not delusional to think that Spurs were going to win last night looking at how Spurs played the last 3 games, including in Dallas. :flag:

yes it was.

[Whisky Dog]

When you trot out Mason/Bonner/Bogans to play minutes early you're not trying to win. Spurs knew the level the mavs would be playing at and knew trying to match it by going all out with TD and Manu would be pointless. Now they're reasonably rested and at home where the role players play mich better and the other team's usually worse.

[Whisky Dog]

This shit ain't checkers, it's chess.

[DesignatedT]

When you trot out Mason/Bonner/Bogans to play minutes early you're not trying to win. Spurs knew the level the mavs would be playing at and knew trying to match it by going all out with TD and Manu would be pointless. Now they're reasonably rested and at home where the role players play mich better and the other team's usually worse.

exactly. pop could tell where this game was heading after the first quarter.

[picc84]

The Spurs aren't 4 straight games to 0 better than Dallas and thats all there is to it. No one in the west is that much better than anyone else in the west. Game last night was very predictable. I know spurs fans were hoping for a win but we all know thats not how basketball works. A team at home with its back against the wall after losing 3 straight to a lower seed is going to blow them out every time.

Tomorrow night should be insane. I predict lots of technicals, a few flagrants, and plenty of Eduardo Najera, JET, and JJ Burrito in the middle of it all.

[elbamba]

Look, it was a bad game. No doubt about it. Aside from the Parker-led run at the end of the second quarter, it was a debacle. Garbage. From just about everyone.

But let's be serious, people. To expect the Spurs to beat the Mavs in 4 straight games, a 7 seed beating a 2 seed 4 straight, is really being unrealistic, even for Spurs fans.

I'm not saying the Spurs shouldn't have tried harder or played better, but 4 straight? When our go-to guy has a freshly-broken nose?

The facts are that the Mavs are a great team. You don't get the 2nd seed in the West being anything less. They're stacked with talent. They'd lost 3 straight. And they were playing at home. So they kicked our butts. I really don't think it's a big deal or anything to get worried about.


:lobt::lobt::flag::lobt::lobt:

I think Bones made a pretty good point after game 5 in that Dallas did not work on anything that failed them in games 2-4. Pop pulled his players to make sure og that. It will be interesting to see how they respond to the presure that will certainly be there in game 6.

[DubMcDub]

Flawed reasoning. "Four straight" after you've already won the first three is just one straight. When someone says "it's difficult to win four in a row," that's only true before the first game has been played. Once you've already won three in a row, winning four in a row is only as difficult as winning one game.

[Sisk]

Flawed reasoning. "Four straight" after you've already won the first three is just one straight. When someone says "it's difficult to win four in a row," that's only true before the first game has been played. Once you've already won three in a row, winning four in a row is only as difficult as winning one game.

Wow. And he has flawed reasoning?
:bang

[DubMcDub]

Wow. And he has flawed reasoning?
:bang

Yes.

Any other questions? I can break it down for you in more detail if you like, but I'm not too confident you'd get it.

[Sisk]

"Four straight" after you've already won the first three is just one straight.

By this point, four straight doesn't exist. So by this logic it's inherently impossible to win four straight games, as it's three straight and the one stand alone game?

Am I missing something here, Plato?

[Sisk]

Oh, forgot to mention, before you come at me with this bullshit "every game is a stand alone game", well no shit. But in basketball, you can make these things called ADJUSTMENTS which just so happened to take rick three games to figure it out. Thus, making winning four in a row increasingly more difficult with each win. Get it yet?

[DubMcDub]

By this point, four straight doesn't exist. So by this logic it's inherently impossible to win four straight games, as it's three straight and the one stand alone game?

Am I missing something here, Plato?

Nice straw man. Of course "four straight" exists. But that's not the point.

The reason winning four in a row is hard is because, if you assume that each team has around a 50% chance to win each game--we'll say it averages to that even though home court obviously swings each individual game either direction--then by pure probability there is only a 6.25% chance that one team wins all four games. But once one team has won the first three games, the odds of winning that fourth game, and thus four in a row, are back to about 50-50.

Now of course it's not really 50-50, as there's some adjusting to be since the Mavs were at home and were more desperate. But clearly the implication of the OP was that the odds of winning the 4th game were somehow drastically lower than the previous three individually. That's certainly not the case.

Frankly, all these cliches people throw out about "The closeout game is the toughest" and "Winning X in a row is so hard" are a bunch of nonsense. People are reminded of those cliches when those situations occur, but then they conveniently forget them in the litany of instances where a team easily wins a closeout game, easily wins their 3rd/4th game in a row, etc. Think about how many easy closeout game victories you've seen watching the playoffs over the last 5 or so years, even against evenly matched teams.

[Sisk]

Now of course it's not really 50-50, as there's some adjusting to be since the Mavs were at home and were more desperate. But clearly the implication of the OP was that the odds of winning the 4th game were somehow drastically lower than the previous three individually. That's certainly not the case.

Frankly, all these cliches people throw out about "The closeout game is the toughest" and "Winning X in a row is so hard" are a bunch of nonsense. People are reminded of those cliches when those situations occur, but then they conveniently forget them in the litany of instances where a team easily wins a closeout game, easily wins their 3rd/4th game in a row, etc. Think about how many easy closeout game victories you've seen watching the playoffs over the last 5 or so years, even against evenly matched teams.

Touche

and Touche
:toast

[Spursmania]

Flawed reasoning. "Four straight" after you've already won the first three is just one straight. When someone says "it's difficult to win four in a row," that's only true before the first game has been played. Once you've already won three in a row, winning four in a row is only as difficult as winning one game.

http://rob.nu/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/facepalm.gif (http://rob.nu/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/facepalm.gif)