View Full Version : Want a fresh face in the NBA Finals?
This thread isn't crying for the media to love the spurs :cry. They don't, no biggie. It's more about national radio host that get paid to have opinions about sports when they obviously don't watch games.
Half the guys on this board have more basketball knowledge than what goes down on "national" shows. I'm looking at you Antonio Davis.
Was listening to Fox Sports radio yesterday, and some dude was saying how he is tired of the Spurs always being there, and wants the Grizz because he wants a fresh face in the NBA Finals. Yet these are the same damn people that want Kobe and the Lakers in the Finals every single year and bitch and moan when they don't make it. Lebron has been the poster child for the NBA and plastered all over everything for the last 10 years (especially the last 3), but they still want the Heat in the Finals. This is a "professional" take?
This same dude went on to say that the Spurs love to play slow, half court, pound it inside basketball on offense...and this was after game one!!! Did this guy even watch the game? Has he even watched the Spurs that last 3 years? These guys get paid for these opinions?
I know, I know...I don't have to listen. But I'm a sports fan, and want to listen to sports discussions.
/rant
Obstructed_View
05-20-2013, 11:06 AM
Yeah, I don't mind if someone doesn't like the Spurs, but there are a lot of people that make it pretty clear that they aren't even bothering to watch the games. That's frustrating.
Spurs and Mavs fan
05-20-2013, 11:14 AM
Was listening to Fox Sports radio yesterday, and some dude was saying how he is tired of the Spurs always being there, and wants the Grizz because he wants a fresh face in the NBA Finals. Yet these are the same damn people that want Kobe and the Lakers in the Finals every single year and bitch and moan when they don't make it.
/rant
To be fair, you don't know if he would like the Lakers to be in the Finals or not.
FromWayDowntown
05-20-2013, 11:18 AM
To be fair, you don't know if he would like the Lakers to be in the Finals or not.
It is what it is. It's somehow the norm to give only begrudging respect to the Spurs -- I heard someone say this morning (as if a sudden revelation) that the Spurs had been really good for a really long time -- and to wish them away. If that's how the talking heads feel, getting bent out of shape about it is just a ticket to frustration; enjoy rooting for the dark side.
With that said, I don't think there's much doubt that people would claim to be tired of the Heat or the Celtics or the Lakers or the Knicks or the Bulls if they made historically long runs like this. I also think that if the Spurs were located in New York or in Los Angeles or in some other major market, the adulation for them would be unending.
T Park
05-20-2013, 11:19 AM
Yeah, I don't mind if someone doesn't like the Spurs, but there are a lot of people that make it pretty clear that they aren't even bothering to watch the games. That's frustrating.
Agreed.
Should've heard the analysis driving home from Fox Sports Radio on the adjustments. "The grizzlies want run, the grizzlies will want to push the pace because the Spurs slow the game down, and hate to run."
I just hate hate lazy analysis. I hate people that comment on things KNOWING they are uneducated on it, yet still go on acting like they know about it.
Obstructed_View
05-20-2013, 11:26 AM
It is what it is. It's somehow the norm to give only begrudging respect to the Spurs -- I heard someone say this morning (as if a sudden revelation) that the Spurs had been really good for a really long time -- and to wish them away. If that's how the talking heads feel, getting bent out of shape about it is just a ticket to frustration; enjoy rooting for the dark side.
With that said, I don't think there's much doubt that people would claim to be tired of the Heat or the Celtics or the Lakers or the Knicks or the Bulls if they made historically long runs like this. I also think that if the Spurs were located in New York or in Los Angeles or in some other major market, the adulation for them would be unending.
Just imagine if Mort said on ESPN that he was sick of the Patriots. It's sort of like that.
T Park
05-20-2013, 11:29 AM
Just imagine if Mort said on ESPN that he was sick of the Patriots. It's sort of like that.
I think Colin Cowherd would've killed him with a trident on the spot if he said such a thing.
FromWayDowntown
05-20-2013, 11:38 AM
Just imagine if Mort said on ESPN that he was sick of the Patriots. It's sort of like that.
No doubt. And it's remarkable how this sort of fatigue doesn't really impact any other team in any other sport.
Few try to wish away the Detroit Red Wings because they've been too good for too long.
rascal
05-20-2013, 11:44 AM
Agreed.
Should've heard the analysis driving home from Fox Sports Radio on the adjustments. "The grizzlies want run, the grizzlies will want to push the pace because the Spurs slow the game down, and hate to run."
I just hate hate lazy analysis. I hate people that comment on things KNOWING they are uneducated on it, yet still go on acting like they know about it.
Spurs don't run. they win with ball movement and passing, getting it ti the open man and dumping it down low to Duncan and parker occasionally taking it to the basket, they are very structured. When they try to run they turn it over or just stop and wait to set up the offense, boring as hell for most fans.
T Park
05-20-2013, 11:51 AM
Spurs don't run. they win with ball movement and passing, getting it ti the open man and dumping it down low to Duncan and parker occasionally taking it to the basket, they are very structured. When they try to run they turn it over or just stop and wait to set up the offense, boring as hell for most fans.
Point 1 of someone who doesn't watch the team.
Mel_13
05-20-2013, 11:56 AM
His takes have always been bad, but now he's stopped watching the games.
romain.star
05-20-2013, 12:01 PM
It is what it is. It's somehow the norm to give only begrudging respect to the Spurs -- I heard someone say this morning (as if a sudden revelation) that the Spurs had been really good for a really long time -- and to wish them away. If that's how the talking heads feel, getting bent out of shape about it is just a ticket to frustration; enjoy rooting for the dark side.
With that said, I don't think there's much doubt that people would claim to be tired of the Heat or the Celtics or the Lakers or the Knicks or the Bulls if they made historically long runs like this. I also think that if the Spurs were located in New York or in Los Angeles or in some other major market, the adulation for them would be unending.
If the Spurs were located in one of those big markets, there is no doubt in my mind that they could not be the Spurs as we know them.
T Park
05-20-2013, 12:10 PM
If anyone wanted Spurs fandom on ESPN, its going on now on the SVP Rusillo show.
Talking about how they would root for the Spurs if they got to the Finals. Also dropping "Game 1, was an outlier, but, they presented some problems that are evident for Memphis"
Also Danny Green will be on with them later this hour.
timtonymanu
05-20-2013, 12:41 PM
Spurs haven't been in the Finals since 2007. Technically, they will be a fresh face.
silverblk mystix
05-20-2013, 12:43 PM
So they want Indiana vs. Memphis?
Mel_13
05-20-2013, 12:49 PM
The national media types have been writing the Spurs' obituary since 2006, maybe earlier. They'd really appreciate it if the Spurs would kindly die already. Especially those that reversed course and jumped on the bandwagon during the 20 game winning streak last season. Those guys really want the Spurs to just go away.
Obstructed_View
05-20-2013, 01:10 PM
Spurs don't run. they win with ball movement and passing, getting it ti the open man and dumping it down low to Duncan and parker occasionally taking it to the basket, they are very structured. When they try to run they turn it over or just stop and wait to set up the offense, boring as hell for most fans.
You are literally too stupid to insult.
So they want Indiana vs. Memphis?
this is exactly what I was thinking, but no, he wanted Memphis Miami which is why I mentioned the stuff about lebron in the op.
crc21209
05-20-2013, 03:51 PM
Spurs haven't been in the Finals since 2007. Technically, they will be a fresh face.
This. While the Spurs have made deep playoff runs in the past couple years, they havent been to the Finals in 6 years.
ffadicted
05-20-2013, 06:57 PM
Didn't Magic Johnson say at halftime that the Grizzlies needed to play a more uptempo game/pace (exactly what the spurs want to do) instead of a halfcourt game inside (what they're best at) because playing slow meant that tony parker wouldn't get tired? Fucking dude gettin payed million to spit this shit, I lol'ed hard at that one :lol
100%duncan
05-20-2013, 07:17 PM
:lmao That's funny
atoyotagaspedal
05-20-2013, 08:20 PM
This one was the best
Shelburne: No. I'm one of those who thinks it's always better when the Knicks, Lakers and Celtics play deep into the playoffs. No way the Lakers were getting past the Spurs in their weakened condition, but either the Knicks or Celtics could have gone further. So, no, these aren't the most sizzling matchups, but they should be good series, nonetheless.
ESPN is missing their ratings.
hater
05-20-2013, 08:26 PM
tbh the 4 best and most complete basketball teams are in the final 4. This is clear. (except for OKC which had a very bad break)
knicks were exposed. and the rest of the teams have horrible flaws: Celtics(:lol), clippers, bulls, warriors, nuggets, etc.
the best teams are still standing IMO. the rest are pretty crappy.
ESPN's comments are extremely biased and moronic. NO way to spin that
This season is a classic case of whore the Lakers, Knicks, Miami, and ignore everyone else.
Oh...Memphis SA Indiana are in the conference finals? Our ratings are gonna suck because no one knows these teams! Thanks a lot guys! :cry
Captivus
05-20-2013, 10:00 PM
The problem is that most fans don't like basketball, they like superstar players. ESPN has to support the majority.
Although the Spurs have 3 HOFs that's not enough, because they have achieve that status winning and not dunking and making faces like Curry.
Most people are not prepared for meritocracy.
Ive heard this a million times: What could an organization like the Spurs do if they the Lakers budget?
At the end, I think the NBA players, coaches and FOs really appreciate what the Spurs do, fans on the other hand, don't.
Would I like the Spurs if I wasn't a Spurs fan? Hell yeah! I would be asking my team to do the same thing.
Obstructed_View
05-20-2013, 10:20 PM
ESPN loves great teams that play smart, even teams that don't score a lot of points, regardless of their market size...as long as they're in the NFL or MLB.
Obstructed_View
05-20-2013, 10:21 PM
Didn't Magic Johnson say at halftime that the Grizzlies needed to play a more uptempo game/pace (exactly what the spurs want to do) instead of a halfcourt game inside (what they're best at) because playing slow meant that tony parker wouldn't get tired? Fucking dude gettin payed million to spit this shit, I lol'ed hard at that one :lol
Yes he did. He had some good takes recently, and pretty much wiped them away with that lame take.
Man In Black
05-21-2013, 12:22 AM
It is what it is. It's somehow the norm to give only begrudging respect to the Spurs -- I heard someone say this morning (as if a sudden revelation) that the Spurs had been really good for a really long time -- and to wish them away. If that's how the talking heads feel, getting bent out of shape about it is just a ticket to frustration; enjoy rooting for the dark side.
With that said, I don't think there's much doubt that people would claim to be tired of the Heat or the Celtics or the Lakers or the Knicks or the Bulls if they made historically long runs like this. I also think that if the Spurs were located in New York or in Los Angeles or in some other major market, the adulation for them would be unending.
http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2010/10/tim-duncan-we-dont-get-that-respect/
“Where do you think the three of you should be regarded among the great trios in NBA history?
TP: ‘Yeah, that’s a GREAT question, because I’m watching the game last night (Miami’s Big Three had played its preseason opener the night before) and it shows all the best Big Threes — Chicago, Boston, the Lakers. After that, there’s a hole and it goes straight to Miami. I don’t know why they never put us on that list. It’s not like it’s gonna bother me, because I have the rings and I’ll sleep well at night. But they just don’t want to put us up there.’
TD: ‘That’s how it always is. Even in the midst of us winning championships every other year, every year we started we’d be like the No. 5 team on the list to win it. That’s the way it is in San Antonio, for whatever reason. We don’t get that respect.’
TP: ‘I always say if we did what we did in New York, we’d be gods right now.’
TD: ‘It would be crazy.’
TP: ‘I think the fact that me and Manu are international players, I don’t think we get the same respect. Because we’re not from America, I think that’s why we’re not considered up there with the Bostons, or the Lakers or Chicago.’
TD: ‘It’s a conspiracy theory.’”
Kidd K
05-21-2013, 12:43 AM
Agreed.
Should've heard the analysis driving home from Fox Sports Radio on the adjustments. "The grizzlies want run, the grizzlies will want to push the pace because the Spurs slow the game down, and hate to run."
I just hate hate lazy analysis. I hate people that comment on things KNOWING they are uneducated on it, yet still go on acting like they know about it.
Bolded words are practically an oxymoron tbh. Fox isn't known for intelligence or accuracy.
Spurs don't run. they win with ball movement and passing, getting it ti the open man and dumping it down low to Duncan and parker occasionally taking it to the basket, they are very structured. When they try to run they turn it over or just stop and wait to set up the offense, boring as hell for most fans.
Right, and the Grizzlies run so much themselves. Lol
Obstructed_View
05-21-2013, 12:54 AM
Bolded words are practically an oxymoron tbh. Fox isn't known for intelligence or accuracy.
Fox Sports on TV has enough local people and local coverage that they usually don't overlook teams, but their radio broadcasts are syndicated nationwide, which is when analysis suffers. Could be worse: ESPN starts with an E for a reason and NBA.com hired Van Earl Wright. :lol
Spurs haven't been in the Finals since 2007. Technically, they will be a fresh face.
And it's worth noting that the only guys left from the 2007 squad are the Big 3 and the Red Mamba.
This one was the best
ESPN is missing their ratings.
At least she's being honest about it
TheyCallMePro
05-21-2013, 02:00 AM
Well there's no way I see it happening, but I know the media would be just furious if it ended up Spurs/Pacers or even worse, Grizz/Pacers in the finals.
Frankly I wouldn't care much about a Grizz/Pacers finals. I mean I'd watch but... damn it would be boring. And the Spurs would slaughter the Pacers...so I could understand others being turned off by the match up. It kind of reminds me of when the Lakers would always match up with the Pacers in the Finals during the early 2000's. Those series would NEVER go beyond 5 games. The Lakers would just dominate.
But ESPN and company don't have to worry. I would consider this Pacers team beating this Heat team in a best of 7 series the greatest upset in sports history. I just CAN'T see it happening. I have the Heat in 4 myself...The pacers are offensively challenged...and they have a ton of match up problems with Miami across the board.
Well there's no way I see it happening, but I know the media would be just furious if it ended up Spurs/Pacers or even worse, Grizz/Pacers in the finals.
Frankly I wouldn't care much about a Grizz/Pacers finals. I mean I'd watch but... damn it would be boring. And the Spurs would slaughter the Pacers...so I could understand others being turned off by the match up. It kind of reminds me of when the Lakers would always match up with the Pacers in the Finals during the early 2000's. Those series would NEVER go beyond 5 games. The Lakers would just dominate.
But ESPN and company don't have to worry. I would consider this Pacers team beating this Heat team in a best of 7 series the greatest upset in sports history. I just CAN'T see it happening. I have the Heat in 4 myself...The pacers are offensively challenged...and they have a ton of match up problems with Miami across the board.
Indiana is 6-0 at home and 2-4 on the road. Paul George is the third best SF in the league when he plays at home, but he's worse than Leonard when he's on the road.
Darkwaters
05-21-2013, 03:13 AM
tbh the 4 best and most complete basketball teams are in the final 4. This is clear. (except for OKC which had a very bad break)
knicks were exposed. and the rest of the teams have horrible flaws: Celtics(:lol), clippers, bulls, warriors, nuggets, etc.
the best teams are still standing IMO. the rest are pretty crappy.
ESPN's comments are extremely biased and moronic. NO way to spin that
I agree for the most part with that comment. The four teams I would have personally picked would be the Thunder (pre-injury), Spurs, Grizzlies and Heat. Of course, 3 of those teams are Western Conference, so that could never happen. But those 4 would be my pick. Having to take a second Eastern team, and having to adjust for OKC's injuries, I would then agree with your assessment.
Darkwaters
05-21-2013, 05:16 AM
But ESPN and company don't have to worry. I would consider this Pacers team beating this Heat team in a best of 7 series the greatest upset in sports history. I just CAN'T see it happening. I have the Heat in 4 myself...The pacers are offensively challenged...and they have a ton of match up problems with Miami across the board.
Pacers did take them to 6 last year.
I don't think the Pacers win, but I do think it won't be nearly as easy for Miami as you might suggest.
rascal
05-21-2013, 05:02 PM
And it's worth noting that the only guys left from the 2007 squad are the Big 3 and the Red Mamba.
That is the main top players so it is not a fresh face.
FromWayDowntown
05-21-2013, 05:56 PM
It kind of reminds me of when the Lakers would always match up with the Pacers in the Finals during the early 2000's. Those series would NEVER go beyond 5 games. The Lakers would just dominate.
For what it's worth, the Lakers and Pacers only met once in the Finals (in 2000) and the Lakers won in 6, winning games by 17, 7, 2 (in OT), and 5 and losing games by 9 and 33.
TheyCallMePro
05-21-2013, 06:43 PM
For what it's worth, the Lakers and Pacers only met once in the Finals (in 2000) and the Lakers won in 6, winning games by 17, 7, 2 (in OT), and 5 and losing games by 9 and 33.
Oh. Well I was mainly referring to whichever Eastern Conference team they played. Shouldn't have mentioned the Pacers specifically.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.