Reigning Black - Tale of the Tape

[Spursfanfromafar]

by Radoslav Komljenovic

Extract -

So, who do the Spurs match-up best with? It's close enough that a case could be made for all three. I'd rank them as follows . . .

1) Heat: Despite the fact that they have arguably the two best players in the league, outside of that, they don't have quality size to give the Spurs problems and they're weak at the point. Perhaps more importantly than any match-up, though, is the fact that they've played the least time together out of any of the contenders (in fact, their projected top eight haven't played a single game together yet). As such, they don't have a stable rotation, nor the chemistry that championship teams typically feature.

Because of their high end talent, they can't be entirely dismissed. But my sense is they're a season away from putting it all together.

2) Lakers: The consensus is probably that they're the toughest match-up for the Spurs, but it probably shouldn't be at this point. Their size advantage over the Spurs is legit, but the advantage that it nets them is overblown. In reality, the Spurs have held their own rebounding wise with them and played them well defensively going back to when Gasol was acquired. It's still an advantage for them, though. But outside of it, they don't really have an advantage over the Spurs.

Whether it's not being as hungry, the wear and tear of three straight Finals appearances, a decline, or a combination of all of the above, they're seemingly in denial about where they're at.

3) Celtics: They're the one out of the three who seemingly have an answer for everything the Spurs can throw at them. Lightning quick point guard to defend Parker and make him work at the other end? Check. Quality shooting guard to somewhat offset Ginobili, while tiring him out at the other end as he's forced to chase him through a maze of screens? Check. Championship proven closer? Check. Lock down defense to combat the Spurs' explosive offense? Check. Size? Check. Depth? Check.

Click here (http://reigningblack.blogspot.com/2011/02/tale-of-tape.html)to read more

[awktalk]

by Radoslav Komljenovic

3) Celtics: They're the one out of the three who seemingly have an answer for everything the Spurs can throw at them. Lightning quick point guard to defend Parker and make him work at the other end? Check. Quality shooting guard to somewhat offset Ginobili, while tiring him out at the other end as he's forced to chase him through a maze of screens? Check. Championship proven closer? Check. Lock down defense to combat the Spurs' explosive offense? Check. Size? Check. Depth? Check.


LOL this is so stupid. The Celts are not even competitive right now. They are at 100% health-wise and still can't perform at a decent level, constantly challenged on their home floor, and with some really horrible losses to the fuggin Wizards??, Suns, and tonight the Bobcats. This team has major problems at the offensive end which they better find answers to after the AS break or they won't be in the finals.

[Spursfanfromafar]

LOL this is so stupid. The Celts are not even competitive right now. They are at 100% health-wise and still can't perform at a decent level, constantly challenged on their home floor, and with some really horrible losses to the fuggin Wizards??, Suns, and tonight the Bobcats. This team has major problems at the offensive end which they better find answers to after the AS break or they won't be in the finals.

Most Celtics losses have come off back-to-backs and they have played well against elite teams home or away. Besides, Kendrick Perkins has just about returned from a long layoff. Shaq is again yo-yo with his injuries and Jermaine O'Neal is expectedly out with injury. Delonte West is also yet to get back to the rotation while Marquis Daniels has been injured and is out. So essentially, they are not fully healthy.

I hate the Celtics' current trash-talking, badly behaving squad and would root for it to lose, but one must admit that they provide the biggest challenge to the Spurs with their depth, their defensive prowess and team effort. Yeah, even bigger than the Lakers, as of now.

[awktalk]

Most Celtics losses have come off back-to-backs and they have played well against elite teams home or away. Besides, Kendrick Perkins has just about returned from a long layoff. Shaq is again yo-yo with his injuries and Jermaine O'Neal is expectedly out with injury. Delonte West is also yet to get back to the rotation while Marquis Daniels has been injured and is out. So essentially, they are not fully healthy.

I hate the Celtics' current trash-talking, badly behaving squad and would root for it to lose, but one must admit that they provide the biggest challenge to the Spurs with their depth, their defensive prowess and team effort. Yeah, even bigger than the Lakers, as of now.

Ok, they aren't healthy. But I doubt anyone in the FO thought that Shaq or O'Neal were not going to be hurt for 1/2 the season: that's what they do, every year. You can bank on it. West shouldn't even be on an NBA roster, the dude is a nutcase. And Daniels just got hurt in the last game.

I guess if you structure your bench in such an idiotic way that you are depending on these injury-laden players, then you don't deserve to go very far in the playoffs. I mean, c'mon, you're going to ride these has-beens to a ring? The Celts big boys are healthy, including Baby and Perkins, and they continue to play like shit at home and on the road, with humiliating losses from east to west. Spurs would rip them in 5 if they were to face off today.

[Spursfanfromafar]

Ok, they aren't healthy. But I doubt anyone in the FO thought that Shaq or O'Neal were not going to be hurt for 1/2 the season: that's what they do, every year. You can bank on it. West shouldn't even be on an NBA roster, the dude is a nutcase. And Daniels just got hurt in the last game.

There are varieties of nutcases. West is a nutcase outside the court with his bipolar problem. He has been a serviceable defender and a decent player on court, who was snagged by the Celtics for a song this season. The O'Neals were Perkins-insurance and they have paid off, shown in the Celtics' record at 38-13 despite losing KG for large stretches in the season.




I guess if you structure your bench in such an idiotic way that you are depending on these injury-laden players, then you don't deserve to go very far in the playoffs. I mean, c'mon, you're going to ride these has-beens to a ring? The Celts big boys are healthy, including Baby and Perkins, and they continue to play like shit at home and on the road, with humiliating losses from east to west. Spurs would rip them in 5 if they were to face off today.

The Celts' first team has proven to be a difficult nut to crack East or West, my reading of their record shows. They are second place only to the Spurs and most losses have come in back-to-backs and being a veteran team that is excusable.

No, I don't think it will be an easy ride for the Spurs. My homie opinion is that Spurs will win a tightly fought series, but the objective guy in me tells me that the "tightly fought" label could go either way. I am reminded by how difficult the Spurs found it against the Celtics without Garnett playing in Jan this season. And I also know that their starting 5 matches up with ours quite well and so do their depth. If they all turn up healthy in the playoffs, it is going to be a difficult time for whichever team that is facing them. And if as I expect they face the Spurs in the NBA finals, it is going to be really close one, and far from what you make it out to be - a laugher in favor of the Spurs.

[awktalk]

The O'Neals were Perkins-insurance and they have paid off, shown in the Celtics' record at 38-13 despite losing KG for large stretches in the season.

KG has not missed "large stretches" this season. He missed 9 games, they went 6-3, which isn't horrible.



The Celts' first team has proven to be a difficult nut to crack East or West, my reading of their record shows. They are second place only to the Spurs and most losses have come in back-to-backs and being a veteran team that is excusable.

Rondo played 43 min tonight. Allen 39. The other starters 30-35, Davis 23. That's the same rotation you're going to find in the playoffs. And they lost to the Bobcats.


No, I don't think it will be an easy ride for the Spurs. My homie opinion is that Spurs will win a tightly fought series, but the objective guy in me tells me that the "tightly fought" label could go either way. I am reminded by how difficult the Spurs found it against the Celtics without Garnett playing in Jan this season. And I also know that their starting 5 matches up with ours quite well and so do their depth. If they all turn up healthy in the playoffs, it is going to be a difficult time for whichever team that is facing them. And if as I expect they face the Spurs in the NBA finals, it is going to be really close one, and far from what you make it out to be - a laugher in favor of the Spurs.

I don't disagree with any of that. I just wish the playoffs started today, because under current conditions, the Spurs would rip the Celts in 5. Too bad this isn't June.

[Spursfanfromafar]

KG has not missed "large stretches" this season. He missed 9 games, they went 6-3, which isn't horrible.

Fair enough.. but makes my point that they did well despite their best defender.



Rondo played 43 min tonight. Allen 39. The other starters 30-35, Davis 23. That's the same rotation you're going to find in the playoffs. And they lost to the Bobcats.

Back-to-Back. Case closed. The Spurs lost to the effing Clippers in a back-to-back. You think they don't deserve to win therefore?




I don't disagree with any of that. I just wish the playoffs started today, because under current conditions, the Spurs would rip the Celts in 5. Too bad this isn't June.

It will be a seven match series if it played to form as of today.

[mingus]

A Celtics-Spurs series would definitely be great. It'd go to 7 IMO and HCA team wins.

[awktalk]

It will be a seven match series if it played to form as of today.

Spurs are a far superior team "today" and would slaughter the Kelts. Come June, that might not be the case. But the measuring stick has been lain: Kelts have a lot of work to do if they are going to compete. Prediction: Lakers blow them out on their home floor Thursday.

[mingus]

I like the Spurs versatility though. Celtics are big, but not versatile. Bonner could be a difference maker Ina series vs. Celtics by taking Perk or KG away from the hoop. That's one thing LA could never do. They had to play right into Celtics hands by going big.

[Spurs7794]

I think Boston is the only team that is legitimately better than us right now. Their defense is insane and despite Awktalk thinking they are so much worse than us and terrible at home, they are only 4 games back of us, beat us without KG or Perkins, and have only 4 losses at home (second best home record). They have toughness and defenders at all the positions for our best players.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Celtics over Spurs in 6, and they've had to deal with a lot of injuries that has affected their depth this season.



Excellent write up :tu

[wildbill2u]

Defense wins championships and the Celts have a better defense than the Lakers or the Heat. To an extent they remind me of us. An older veteran team with a still great Big three plus some younger guys who can play.

A seven game series against them would be hard-fought and nerve-wracking.

[TampaDude]

A Celtics-Spurs series would definitely be great. It'd go to 7 IMO and HCA team wins.

^ truth :toast

A Spurs-Celtics Finals would be EPIC...2005 all over again. :hat

[G-Dawgg]

Defense does win championships... but there is something about these spurs, they seem to be able to do whatever it takes to win in different match-ups. They are very adaptable. AND they have gotten many key defensive stops in the 4th qtr of games.. I think the Spurs defense is not where it should be statistically, but I believe they are still a very good defensive team when need be..