View Full Version : Spurs: Ibaka will not change the outcome of the series
ambchang
05-22-2014, 08:55 AM
I am sick and tired of hearing how big of a deal missing Ibaka is.
Note that I am not saying:
1) He will not make a difference
2) The Spurs will win this series
What I am saying is, given what has transpired so far, Ibaka would not have made a 20+ point difference in either of the first two games, and here is why ....
1) Ibaka is a fantastic defensive player, and he would likely have been a primary defender on Duncan. If he played in Game 1, in which Duncan was dominant, he would have forced Duncan out of the low block, but that would allow the Spurs to penetrate into the paint even more so. The issue about the Spurs scoring so many points in the paint in Game 1 wasn't just them missing Ibaka, it's also because their perimeter defense sucked. They allowed Parker, Ginobili and Kawhi to waltz into the paint unimpeded, if Ibaka came over to help, the Spurs would have just passed it out for a perimeter shot or for a dunk/layup inside. To top it off, the Spurs had 16 fastbreak points, and scored 21 points off TO, Ibaka isn't going to do much about those.
2) People point to 2012 and 2014 RS as some sort of "proof" that the Thunder would be a lot better vs. the Spurs if Ibaka was available, but you are comparing apples to oranges. The Spurs had no problems scoring in 2012 playoffs vs. OKC (they had 99+ points in 5 of the 6 games), they had trouble stopping them on offense. Sure Ibaka was hitting everything in that series, but the real difference on offense that year was Harden.
As for the 2014 RS, RS and playoffs are two different animals, especially when it comes to coaching. RS games were more based on individual talent, in which teams didn't have as much time to prepare for each other and can just "wing" it. Playoffs on the other hand, requires a lot of preparation to exploit your opposition's weakness as well as magnify your strengths. Brooks is not even in the same league as Pop as a coach. The only reason OKC won in 2012 was because of the massive talent difference. With Harden out of the picture, and the improvement of Green and Kawhi, the talent level has narrowed. Ibaka is not going to make up for that by himself.
Koolaid_Man
05-22-2014, 09:05 AM
^ geez.... learn to show some gotdam humility when your team has been gifted 2 straight finals appearances due to KEY injuries of OKC's top players, especially when it's clear a healthy OKC team completely owns you guys.... This type of grandstanding will only result in an even greater humiliation than last year's 6...
get a clue guy...look at me..I'm languishing in misery right now because I didn't show humility when my team was on top and now the BBall gods are repaying me in full....with the same finals scenario that made me puke last year....learn from Kool's mistakes otherwise 6 will be shoved up your ass times 2....
You SOB you...
ambchang
05-22-2014, 09:12 AM
Note that I am not saying:
1) He will not make a difference
2) The Spurs will win this series
^ geez.... learn to show some gotdam humility when your team has been gifted 2 straight finals appearances due to KEY injuries of OKC's top players, especially when it's clear a healthy OKC team completely owns you guys.... This type of grandstanding will only result in an even greater humiliation than last year's 6...
get a clue guy...look at me..I'm languishing in misery right now because I didn't show humility when my team was on top and now the BBall gods are repaying me in full....with the same finals scenario that made me puke last year....learn from Kool's mistakes otherwise 6 will be shoved up your ass times 2....
You SOB you...
Learn to read.
Koolaid_Man
05-22-2014, 09:15 AM
Learn to read.
You said what you said and you meant what you said.....no need in backtracking now....I've put the bball gods on notice.....you should start practicing with KY and a 6" no make that 12" dildo.... since it's 6 x 2 :lol
TDMVPDPOY
05-22-2014, 10:24 AM
spurs will continue to give ibaka those midrange shots, dare him to take those fluke shots that his been hittin
as for him on the other end with perkins can give our frontline some headache when u need inside scoring....
but i dont think both can stop splitter this season who has been playing beyond god mode
SanDiegoSpursFan
05-22-2014, 10:33 AM
I disagree but it really doesn't matter until the Spurs play the Thunder next year.
Capt Bringdown
05-22-2014, 10:37 AM
Ibaka may not have been THE difference this year, but the Spurs were flat out intimidated and dominated by him previously.
lefty
05-22-2014, 10:44 AM
Backdoor sweep IMO
ambchang
05-22-2014, 11:28 AM
You said what you said and you meant what you said.....no need in backtracking now....I've put the bball gods on notice.....you should start practicing with KY and a 6" no make that 12" dildo.... since it's 6 x 2 :lol
Quoting exact words from my original post is backtracking now? Care to explain your logic?
mudyez
05-22-2014, 12:24 PM
^ geez.... learn to show some gotdam humility when your team has been gifted 2 straight finals appearances due to KEY injuries
True, Lakers would have stomped us, if Kobe had healthy.
urunobili
05-22-2014, 02:11 PM
I'm not sure the Spurs would have gotten backdoor swept if it wasn't for Harden. Though Ibaka won a game for them on that 11-11 night No Harden = them not winning that series.
hater
05-22-2014, 02:13 PM
Ibaka in, Spurs in 6 or 7
Ibaka out, beatdown
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 02:22 PM
I think it would be a different series. Ibaka is the only player on their team that deters points in the paint, and that's where we've been murdering them. They'd still be having their struggles offensively unless Ibaka was going Dirkbaka on us with 8-10 shooting nights. Much of our offensive strategy would be disrupted though. I don't think we get in the paint nearly as successfully, and knowing they have Ibaka there, the perimeter guys wouldn't collapse as hard giving up the outside shots. Ibaka is also a problem on the offensive glass from time to time. Not that i'm saying he single handedly would have changed the end result of games 1 or 2, but his absence has turned a competitive series into a (thus far) uncompetitive one
tlongII
05-22-2014, 02:25 PM
He's not coming back is he? Strange thread title...
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 02:27 PM
Ok, lemme know how you would feel going into a crucial series without a key player
N0 LyF3 ScRuB
05-22-2014, 02:30 PM
Ok, lemme know how you would feel going into a crucial series without a key player
We played OKC four times this year, three times we didn't have a healthy squad. So quit bitching. Parker and Manu were injured in the finals also. Did anyone mention that? Nah.
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 02:32 PM
We played OKC four times this year, three times we didn't have a healthy squad. So quit bitching. Parker and Manu were injured in the finals also. Did anyone mention that? Nah.
I said a series you cum guzzling cat collector not regular season games
N0 LyF3 ScRuB
05-22-2014, 02:39 PM
I said a series you cum guzzling cat collector not regular season games
Are you too retarded to read the second half of the post?
ElNono
05-22-2014, 03:01 PM
We'll never know now, but I was certainly one preaching throughout the season that OKC didn't scare me. You can look up TD21's knee jerk thread upstairs after we lost a couple games to OKC during the regular season.
This series isn't over, but matchup-wise, you're seeing what I been saying on that thread: Reggie Jackson and Ostrich-face (© HH), even with Ibaka out there, have been largely underwhelming throughout these playoffs. Reggie has one solid game out of every five. Ostrich-face only plays garbage minutes. They were supposedly the newly-born Spurs killers, but the playoffs are a completely different beast.
tbh, if not for Fisher hitting everything in Game 1, that was another 35pt blowout, IMO. We'll see what we look like in OKC, and the Spurs are due for a poor shooting night, but there are no easy answers for Scotty right now.
ambchang
05-22-2014, 03:08 PM
Ok, lemme know how you would feel going into a crucial series without a key player
If the spurs lost Parker or Duncan id be concerned, but not anyone else. Reason being nobody else will turn wins into loses or vice versa.
On the okc roster, only Durant and maybe Westbrook has that impact.
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 03:25 PM
Are you too retarded to read the second half of the post?
Listen Garfield, you were mentioning that you guys lost to OKC 4 times this year due to injuries. Its just embarrassing that you would mention that when they were regular season games. I'm happy for the Spurs as I want them to beat the Heat, but lets not act like you wouldn't be having a nervous catdown if you heard going into the Miami series that one of the key players would be missing. That's almost always synonymous in NBA history with a loss.
Also, Spurs weren't going to win these first two games by 20-35 points if not for that so stop your day dreaming :lol We'll see what excuses you muster up when Miami sharts on Spur fan dream again this year.
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 03:30 PM
:lol We'll see what excuses you muster up when Miami sharts on Spur fan dream again this year.
Ara pls :cry
N0 LyF3 ScRuB
05-22-2014, 03:41 PM
:lol We'll see what excuses you muster up when Miami sharts on Spur fan dream again this year.
Wanna make a ele bet on that?
Didn't think so quit talking out your ass
mavsfan1000
05-22-2014, 04:11 PM
Ibaka in, Spurs in 6 or 7
Ibaka out, beatdown
This.
SpursBills
05-22-2014, 04:25 PM
think there's a good chance that the spurs would probably be down 0-2 if they were playing the full strength thunder without kawhi, who's basically the equivalent of losing ibaka for the spurs (emerging but not a primary scorer, key defensive piece), so yeah losing ibaka could definitely change the outcome of the series
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 05:43 PM
Wanna make a ele bet on that?
Didn't think so quit talking out your ass
Miami V Spurs ELE bet? Im for it. Let's do it cat man, or r u gonna be a welching faggot?
StrengthAndHonor
05-22-2014, 06:13 PM
It would change a lot of things. Ibaka is their 3rd scoring option and their best defender. His 14 ppg, 10 rpg, 4bpg against the Spurs is severely missed.
Serge did a great job containing Griffin in the Clippers-Thunder series, holding him down to 42% in their 1on1 match-ups.
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 06:16 PM
Miami V Spurs ELE bet? Im for it. Let's do it cat man, or r u gonna be a welching faggot?
Not worth it. IIRC he welched in an nfl forum bet
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 06:20 PM
Not worth it. IIRC he welched in an nfl forum bet
Oh yeah that is him isnt it. LOL that makes me laugh right meow
ambchang
05-22-2014, 06:28 PM
He's not coming back is he? Strange thread title...
True, should've been "would not have made ..."
That said, I fully expect to see Ibaka play in at least one game this series.
Also, I expect okc to win game 3.
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 07:30 PM
Wanna make a ele bet on that?
Didn't think so quit talking out your ass
What's it gonna be cat man? I dont need your stupid ELE bet that you'll welch from anyway. Lets make it realistic, if I win I pick an avatar and sig of my choice that you have to use on your n0 lyfe scrub account. I know you're idea of a good saturday night is posting here so theres no chance of you following through with an ELE bet anyway :lol
N0 LyF3 ScRuB
05-22-2014, 07:37 PM
What's it gonna be cat man? I dont need your stupid ELE bet that you'll welch from anyway. Lets make it realistic, if I win I pick an avatar and sig of my choice that you have to use on your n0 lyfe scrub account. I know you're idea of a good saturday night is posting here so theres no chance of you following through with an ELE bet anyway :lol
deal and vice versa
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 07:44 PM
deal and vice versa
Ok its a deal. If Miami wins then I win, if Spurs win then I lose. Sound good? You have to have the AV and Sig on till the regular season starts again, since I know you wont do it any other way. Dont welch out boy
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 07:52 PM
Ok its a deal. If Miami wins then I win, if Spurs win then I lose. Sound good? You have to have the AV and Sig on till the regular season starts again, since I know you wont do it any other way. Dont welch out boy
man, i woulda done a sig/avy bet with you. make you rock the armenian flag and shit :lol
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 07:59 PM
man, i woulda done a sig/avy bet with you. make you rock the armenian flag and shit :lol
I wouldnt mind doing that :lol, I couldnt make you put a bad sig and av on though
http://i0.wp.com/apublicdefender.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/dr-evil-crying1.gif
rogues
05-22-2014, 08:04 PM
I wouldnt mind doing that :lol, I couldnt make you put a bad sig and av on though
http://i0.wp.com/apublicdefender.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/dr-evil-crying1.gif
:lol Don't make a bet with Frizzell..he's a known welcher, tbh..
LkrFan
05-22-2014, 08:07 PM
I am sick and tired of hearing how big of a deal missing Ibaka is.
Note that I am not saying:
1) He will not make a difference
2) The Spurs will win this series
What I am saying is, given what has transpired so far, Ibaka would not have made a 20+ point difference in either of the first two games, and here is why ....
1) Ibaka is a fantastic defensive player, and he would likely have been a primary defender on Duncan. If he played in Game 1, in which Duncan was dominant, he would have forced Duncan out of the low block, but that would allow the Spurs to penetrate into the paint even more so. The issue about the Spurs scoring so many points in the paint in Game 1 wasn't just them missing Ibaka, it's also because their perimeter defense sucked. They allowed Parker, Ginobili and Kawhi to waltz into the paint unimpeded, if Ibaka came over to help, the Spurs would have just passed it out for a perimeter shot or for a dunk/layup inside. To top it off, the Spurs had 16 fastbreak points, and scored 21 points off TO, Ibaka isn't going to do much about those.
2) People point to 2012 and 2014 RS as some sort of "proof" that the Thunder would be a lot better vs. the Spurs if Ibaka was available, but you are comparing apples to oranges. The Spurs had no problems scoring in 2012 playoffs vs. OKC (they had 99+ points in 5 of the 6 games), they had trouble stopping them on offense. Sure Ibaka was hitting everything in that series, but the real difference on offense that year was Harden.
As for the 2014 RS, RS and playoffs are two different animals, especially when it comes to coaching. RS games were more based on individual talent, in which teams didn't have as much time to prepare for each other and can just "wing" it. Playoffs on the other hand, requires a lot of preparation to exploit your opposition's weakness as well as magnify your strengths. Brooks is not even in the same league as Pop as a coach. The only reason OKC won in 2012 was because of the massive talent difference. With Harden out of the picture, and the improvement of Green and Kawhi, the talent level has narrowed. Ibaka is not going to make up for that by himself.
2013-2014 WCF winner gets a big fat *PERI:lolD
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 08:07 PM
:lol Don't make a bet with Frizzell..he's a known welcher, tbh..
Man, Im one of few people that would actually go through with the bet. What a cat loving faggot, you can already tell he has one foot out the door. The funny part is he was telling me I dont have the balls to do it :lol
chunticakes
05-22-2014, 08:39 PM
Man, Im one of few people that would actually go through with the bet. What a cat loving faggot, you can already tell he has one foot out the door. The funny part is he was telling me I dont have the balls to do it :lol
Yeah that faggot welched on a bet when his god Cum Newton got his shit pushed in by New Orleans last year. He was supposed to take a two week hiatus or whatever but he didn't last 2 days without posting his retarded Cum Newton >>> Joe Montana takes.
ambchang
05-22-2014, 09:11 PM
2013-2014 WCF winner gets a big fat *PERI:lolD
Why?
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 09:16 PM
Yeah that faggot welched on a bet when his god Cum Newton got his shit pushed in by New Orleans last year. He was supposed to take a two week hiatus or whatever but he didn't last 2 days without posting his retarded Cum Newton >>> Joe Montana takes.
I can already tell he's welching. Welchers have a way of not wanting to confirm on the stipulations of the bet and just kind of hope their team wins. I root for Spurs or anyone to beat the heat but there's no chance in hell anyone will this year.
Splits
05-22-2014, 09:30 PM
I root for Spurs or anyone to beat the heat but there's no chance in hell anyone will this year.
You're talking out yo ass if you really believe that and have watched these playoffs. If the Spurs continue playing at the same level they have since Mavs G7, Heat don't stand a chance. I'd put my entire GIF collection on the Spurs over Heat, not that you have anything comparable to offer.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7II3dJcYbfg/UMMTGWIKslI/AAAAAAAADvc/Um69JqRY-Yg/s1600/dr-evil-laughing.gif
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 09:39 PM
You're talking out yo ass if you really believe that and have watched these playoffs. If the Spurs continue playing at the same level they have since Mavs G7, Heat don't stand a chance. I'd put my entire GIF collection on the Spurs over Heat, not that you have anything comparable to offer.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7II3dJcYbfg/UMMTGWIKslI/AAAAAAAADvc/Um69JqRY-Yg/s1600/dr-evil-laughing.gif
You do realize I believe the league is rigged for the most part right? I think in a non rigged league I would take the Spurs. However, what the NBA wants is ALWAYS what they get. I think time and time again its been proven that whatever story line benefits the NBA is the one that coincidentally prevails. Heat win, book it
Splits
05-22-2014, 09:44 PM
You do realize I believe the league is rigged for the most part right? I think in a non rigged league I would take the Spurs. However, what the NBA wants is ALWAYS what they get. I think time and time again its been proven that whatever story line benefits the NBA is the one that coincidentally prevails. Heat win, book it
I would be onboard if last year's Finals had been rigged. It wasn't, it was a fairly officiated series, Heat won fair and square.
I do think the league rigs who gets there, or at a minimum provides influence, but once the Finals are on they can only do so much, the viewership is 10 X from the conference finals and the last thing they want to do is lose the casual fan and the associated revenue.
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 09:45 PM
You do realize I believe the league is rigged for the most part right? I think in a non rigged league I would take the Spurs. However, what the NBA wants is ALWAYS what they get. I think time and time again its been proven that whatever story line benefits the NBA is the one that coincidentally prevails. Heat win, book it
if the league always got what it wanted, the spurs wouldn't have been to 5 finals
Clipper Nation
05-22-2014, 09:49 PM
You do realize I believe the league is rigged for the most part right? I think in a non rigged league I would take the Spurs. However, what the NBA wants is ALWAYS what they get. I think time and time again its been proven that whatever story line benefits the NBA is the one that coincidentally prevails. Heat win, book it
Sure looked like the league wanted the Spurs to win last year, seeing as how the Heat shot a record low amount of free throws in a 7-game series and all, but Miami won anyway....
Unlike Dad Killer, Kirby, and Durbeta, Kang has had to win in spite of the refs....
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 09:57 PM
Sure looked like the league wanted the Spurs to win last year, seeing as how the Heat shot a record low amount of free throws in a 7-game series and all, but Miami won anyway....
Unlike Dad Killer, Kirby, and Durbeta, Kang has had to win in spite of the refs....
:lol manu got hacked in 6, and Green got hammered on that last 3
Thebesteva
05-22-2014, 10:01 PM
I would be onboard if last year's Finals had been rigged. It wasn't, it was a fairly officiated series, Heat won fair and square.
I do think the league rigs who gets there, or at a minimum provides influence, but once the Finals are on they can only do so much, the viewership is 10 X from the conference finals and the last thing they want to do is lose the casual fan and the associated revenue.
Heat did win fair and square in that series. However, the league WILL NOT ALLOW certain storylines to not go through. Its been proven over and over. When it was Lakers V Celtics, I bet $1k on the Lakers to win and I had no doubt as I knew the NBA would not allow the rivalry to die off with the Celtics winning two times and in LA at that in 2010 to pretty much settle the debate. It was obvious the league was gonna give those certain calls at the end to LA, in which it did, and ultimately LA won. Same reason why I knew Celtics were going to win in 08.
Sure looked like the league wanted the Spurs to win last year, seeing as how the Heat shot a record low amount of free throws in a 7-game series and all, but Miami won anyway....
Unlike Dad Killer, Kirby, and Durbeta, Kang has had to win in spite of the refs....
I know you're a Korean and like to only look at numbers, however, you have to watch the games without biased which is hard for you to do. When you watch, its not about the amount of free throws ,in fact it has nothing to do with free throws. It has to do with who they call fouls on, when they call fouls, and in whose favor. Its about the timing of the calls and calling fouls on specific key players at the right moment.
Just because you check that Heat got only 10 free throws in a game doesnt mean they didnt have a game officiated in their favor. If you didnt believe this, then you heat fans wouldnt make threads last year about how the heat barely get free throws and people still think its rigged. :lol
I am sick and tired of hearing how big of a deal missing Ibaka is.
Note that I am not saying:
1) He will not make a difference
2) The Spurs will win this series
What I am saying is, given what has transpired so far, Ibaka would not have made a 20+ point difference in either of the first two games, and here is why ....
1) Ibaka is a fantastic defensive player, and he would likely have been a primary defender on Duncan. If he played in Game 1, in which Duncan was dominant, he would have forced Duncan out of the low block, but that would allow the Spurs to penetrate into the paint even more so. The issue about the Spurs scoring so many points in the paint in Game 1 wasn't just them missing Ibaka, it's also because their perimeter defense sucked. They allowed Parker, Ginobili and Kawhi to waltz into the paint unimpeded, if Ibaka came over to help, the Spurs would have just passed it out for a perimeter shot or for a dunk/layup inside. To top it off, the Spurs had 16 fastbreak points, and scored 21 points off TO, Ibaka isn't going to do much about those.
2) People point to 2012 and 2014 RS as some sort of "proof" that the Thunder would be a lot better vs. the Spurs if Ibaka was available, but you are comparing apples to oranges. The Spurs had no problems scoring in 2012 playoffs vs. OKC (they had 99+ points in 5 of the 6 games), they had trouble stopping them on offense. Sure Ibaka was hitting everything in that series, but the real difference on offense that year was Harden.
As for the 2014 RS, RS and playoffs are two different animals, especially when it comes to coaching. RS games were more based on individual talent, in which teams didn't have as much time to prepare for each other and can just "wing" it. Playoffs on the other hand, requires a lot of preparation to exploit your opposition's weakness as well as magnify your strengths. Brooks is not even in the same league as Pop as a coach. The only reason OKC won in 2012 was because of the massive talent difference. With Harden out of the picture, and the improvement of Green and Kawhi, the talent level has narrowed. Ibaka is not going to make up for that by himself.
It doesn't exactly work like you're saying.
If Ibaka is in the paint, the Spurs aren't in the paint as much. That puts them further out, and that puts KD and RW where they are accustomed to being. With Serge out, someone has to try to fill that gap and there's no one there who can defend the paint and score from both inside and outside. he could very well make a 20+ ppg difference if he is locking down the paint and being another person that the Spurs have to defend against both inside and out.
Serge's absence is the difference in this series. I am convinced of that.
The perimeter defense sucked because they had to watch the paint as well. It all goes hand in hand.
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 10:36 PM
i'm more in line with what DMC is saying. the entire dynamic of the spurs offense changed once it was learned ibaka was out. the paint area which had always appeared inaccessible to the spurs against OKC is suddenly a gold mine, and the only way OKC can prevent layups is by giving up wide open threes.
if the league always got what it wanted, the spurs wouldn't have been to 5 finals
It's not black or white. The league could very well influence the officiating for any particular series. That doesn't mean the league can instantly pick the winner, but they can skew the odds one way or another by something as simple as early to mid game out of bounds change of possession calls. Those are never reviewed and you almost never seen anyone question them after the game. It's those calls in the critical points of the game that get scrutinized, and the league knows this, so they know they have a way to ensure one team gets more possessions than they otherwise would.
Fans are basically stupid to the first half of the game, wiping it away from their memories except for dunks and other highlights. Change of possession calls are questionable at best, and downright wrong at worst. I thought the Thunder got every 50/50 call in the 1st half, but when the Spurs pulled away, the calls started going more the Spurs way or being more obviously correct. That's because there was no more need to skew the outcome, it wasn't helping.
Just watch the out of bounds calls and how they seem to go against the same team over and over for at least a half. Watch how charges are called when it's clearly a blocking foul. Then watch how that stops in the 2nd half the other team is still gaining ground.
You cannot tell me that it's a coincidence. It's intentional. What corporation doesn't try to maximize it's profits?
spurraider21
05-22-2014, 10:56 PM
It's not black or white. The league could very well influence the officiating for any particular series. That doesn't mean the league can instantly pick the winner, but they can skew the odds one way or another by something as simple as early to mid game out of bounds change of possession calls. Those are never reviewed and you almost never seen anyone question them after the game. It's those calls in the critical points of the game that get scrutinized, and the league knows this, so they know they have a way to ensure one team gets more possessions than they otherwise would.
Fans are basically stupid to the first half of the game, wiping it away from their memories except for dunks and other highlights. Change of possession calls are questionable at best, and downright wrong at worst. I thought the Thunder got every 50/50 call in the 1st half, but when the Spurs pulled away, the calls started going more the Spurs way or being more obviously correct. That's because there was no more need to skew the outcome, it wasn't helping.
Just watch the out of bounds calls and how they seem to go against the same team over and over for at least a half. Watch how charges are called when it's clearly a blocking foul. Then watch how that stops in the 2nd half the other team is still gaining ground.
You cannot tell me that it's a coincidence. It's intentional. What corporation doesn't try to maximize it's profits?
I do think the officials play favorites. Anybody who has watched the Thunder routinely would notice this. I was responding to the "NBA is rigged" comment, which implied winners are basically pre-determined WWF style
Calispursfan11
05-23-2014, 04:22 AM
https://i.imgflip.com/9117p.jpg
LkrFan
05-23-2014, 05:37 AM
Why?
Stop trolling son. He shoots a high percentage against your bigs. Decent rebounder. He's an elite swatter. Without him, the lane is wide the fuck open for TP and whoever else wants an easy layup. His absence changes the whole complexity of this series and you know this maaaan.
-15 points for this thread
* standsPERIOD
LkrFan
05-23-2014, 05:42 AM
It doesn't exactly work like you're saying.
If Ibaka is in the paint, the Spurs aren't in the paint as much. That puts them further out, and that puts KD and RW where they are accustomed to being. With Serge out, someone has to try to fill that gap and there's no one there who can defend the paint and score from both inside and outside. he could very well make a 20+ ppg difference if he is locking down the paint and being another person that the Spurs have to defend against both inside and out.
Serge's absence is the difference in this series. I am convinced of that.
The perimeter defense sucked because they had to watch the paint as well. It all goes hand in hand.
^ Truth.
Thebesteva
05-23-2014, 05:50 AM
N0 LyF3 ScRuB already welching in this thread tbh
spurraider21
05-23-2014, 06:04 AM
Stop trolling son. He shoots a high percentage against your bigs. Decent rebounder. He's an elite swatter. Without him, the lane is wide the fuck open for TP and whoever else wants an easy layup. His absence changes the whole complexity of this series and you know this maaaan.
-15 points for this thread
* standsPERIOD
ibaka changes the series. but there's no asterisk. do the lakers get an asterisk for their 09 ring because ginobili was out, and the mavs bounced the spurs in the first? what about in the second round when yao got hurt and the lakers still barely won in 7 against fucking hayes/landry/aaron brooks? what about the fact that KG was out so the celtics got bounced instead of repeating?
injuries happen. the spurs have had them in the past too
N0 LyF3 ScRuB
05-23-2014, 06:24 AM
N0 LyF3 ScRuB (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=43681) already welching in this thread tbh
Maybe you're too busy jerking off Big Faggot, IDK, regardless I already told you I'd make the bet
ambchang
05-23-2014, 06:24 AM
You do realize I believe the league is rigged for the most part right? I think in a non rigged league I would take the Spurs. However, what the NBA wants is ALWAYS what they get. I think time and time again its been proven that whatever story line benefits the NBA is the one that coincidentally prevails. Heat win, book it
I am not sure the league cares more about who wins as to who plays. What I mean is as long as they have the two teams they want in the finals in a competitive series, they will get the ratings. That said, spurs vs heat is really not the ideal matchup, they'd much rather have okc vs heat.
We'll see if okc will come back to win the series.
ambchang
05-23-2014, 06:29 AM
It doesn't exactly work like you're saying.
If Ibaka is in the paint, the Spurs aren't in the paint as much. That puts them further out, and that puts KD and RW where they are accustomed to being. With Serge out, someone has to try to fill that gap and there's no one there who can defend the paint and score from both inside and outside. he could very well make a 20+ ppg difference if he is locking down the paint and being another person that the Spurs have to defend against both inside and out.
Serge's absence is the difference in this series. I am convinced of that.
The perimeter defense sucked because they had to watch the paint as well. It all goes hand in hand.
I am willing to say serge makes a difference in a game to game basis, but he's not a big enough difference to change the outcome of a series.
Serge in the paint will still not stop the spurs from going past the perimeter defense of okc, which has so far stunk.
ambchang
05-23-2014, 06:32 AM
Stop trolling son. He shoots a high percentage against your bigs. Decent rebounder. He's an elite swatter. Without him, the lane is wide the fuck open for TP and whoever else wants an easy layup. His absence changes the whole complexity of this series and you know this maaaan.
-15 points for this thread
* standsPERIOD
Remind me why 99 was an * again?
100%duncan
05-23-2014, 08:29 AM
Ibaka in, Spurs in 6 or 7
Ibaka out, beatdown
Pretty much this
Ibaka in, Spurs in 6 or 7
I was thinking this in the RS, but after seeing the Thunder in the posteseason , even with Ibaka, this series would have been over in 5 or 6. After I heard about Ibaka this became a clean sweep/gentlemen's sweep
think there's a good chance that the spurs would probably be down 0-2 if they were playing the full strength thunder without kawhi, who's basically the equivalent of losing ibaka for the spurs (emerging but not a primary scorer, key defensive piece), so yeah losing ibaka could definitely change the outcome of the seriesWithout Kawhi we don't have a SF, so not really the same. I'm not sure who Ibaka is equivalent to on our roster but it's not Kawhi. Splitter? Diaw? Danny?
urunobili
05-23-2014, 11:44 AM
You'll get answers to this. He's coming back as per Woj's twitter tbh
RsxPiimp
05-23-2014, 11:49 AM
It doesn't exactly work like you're saying.
If Ibaka is in the paint, the Spurs aren't in the paint as much. That puts them further out, and that puts KD and RW where they are accustomed to being. With Serge out, someone has to try to fill that gap and there's no one there who can defend the paint and score from both inside and outside. he could very well make a 20+ ppg difference if he is locking down the paint and being another person that the Spurs have to defend against both inside and out.
Serge's absence is the difference in this series. I am convinced of that.
The perimeter defense sucked because they had to watch the paint as well. It all goes hand in hand.
It would change a lot of things. Ibaka is their 3rd scoring option and their best defender. His 14 ppg, 10 rpg, 4bpg against the Spurs is severely missed.
Serge did a great job containing Griffin in the Clippers-Thunder series, holding him down to 42% in their 1on1 match-ups.
exactly, to dismiss ibaka's presence as if he doesn't play one of the most important defensive role is pure comedy :lol
RsxPiimp
05-23-2014, 11:52 AM
I am willing to say serge makes a difference in a game to game basis, but he's not a big enough difference to change the outcome of a series.
Serge in the paint will still not stop the spurs from going past the perimeter defense of okc, which has so far stunk.
:lmao
ambchang
05-23-2014, 03:28 PM
:lmao
So you think serge will make a 25 difference in the last two games? I doubt it.
He may help the thunder win a game or two, but he's not changing the outcome of the series.
KaiRMD1
05-23-2014, 03:41 PM
I think the biggest difference makers in 2012 was the switch to Thabo on Parker. When you stop Parker, you stop the offense and Thabo has no been effective. Does the presence of Serge make a difference in the paint, I'm sure it does but with the way the Spurs play, it may not. Danny Green ain't missing wide open threes anymore which helped keep a lot of Thunder defenders in the paint. Serge may be too dumb to realize the long term affects that playing through the pain can do to him in the long term but I'm hopeful he will play. I only wish I didn't have to listen to the combined efforts of Kerr & Miller on sunday but we can't have it all.
I am willing to say serge makes a difference in a game to game basis, but he's not a big enough difference to change the outcome of a series.
Yes he is. A series is just a game to game basis until one team wins 4 games. Serge being out is more damaging to OKC than Westbrook being out, and they were defeated in the 2nd round last year when Westbrook was out so yeah, it makes a difference. In fact, any time a starting center is out, it makes a huge difference. Even a small difference however can swing a series. It doesn't need to be a 35 point swing. Spurs don't score 120 if Serge is playing, the game slows down, it's a FT shooting contest. A 10 pt swing would make all the difference in the world.
Serge in the paint will still not stop the spurs from going past the perimeter defense of okc, which has so far stunk.
Perimeter defense is designed to funnel the ball handler to the help. Serge is the help. They don't have to stop them, that would lead to silly perimeter fouls. Let the action happen at the rim.
Stop trolling son. He shoots a high percentage against your bigs. Decent rebounder. He's an elite swatter. Without him, the lane is wide the fuck open for TP and whoever else wants an easy layup. His absence changes the whole complexity of this series and you know this maaaan.
-15 points for this thread
* standsPERIOD
Pussies and assholes.
Spurs9
05-23-2014, 05:11 PM
I think the biggest difference makers in 2012 was the switch to Thabo on Parker. When you stop Parker, you stop the offense and Thabo has no been effective. Does the presence of Serge make a difference in the paint, I'm sure it does but with the way the Spurs play, it may not. Danny Green ain't missing wide open threes anymore which helped keep a lot of Thunder defenders in the paint. Serge may be too dumb to realize the long term affects that playing through the pain can do to him in the long term but I'm hopeful he will play. I only wish I didn't have to listen to the combined efforts of Kerr & Miller on sunday but we can't have it all.
The difference maker in the 2012 series was Harden. Splitter also was a dog turd, Leonard was a rookie, Danny Green wasn't hot. We are a much better team all around even compared to last year and OKC is simply not as good even with a healthy team. When you have a guy like Westbrook always getting so emotional over every play and playing hero ball they aren't going to win. Westbrook has been playing the same way for years, hes definatley got going to change now. Even after that 35point loss he said we don't need to change anything, we just need to keep playing the way we always play :lmao
Green and Leonard can actually defend them so they don't get smoking hot like they do against most teams in the league. Its too easy to get into Westbrooks head as the spurs for him to get in the right mental mindset to pull it out. Brooks obviously tried to make adjustments in game 2 and got whooped even more. The entire thunder fanbase is clinging to 2012 and a half healthy guy. :lol
KaiRMD1
05-23-2014, 05:24 PM
The entire thunder fanbase is clinging to 2012 and a half healthy guy. :lol
Your entire post can be summed up by this sentence ol' sport, truth in that sentence alone.:toast
Calispursfan11
05-23-2014, 05:31 PM
Yes he is. A series is just a game to game basis until one team wins 4 games. Serge being out is more damaging to OKC than Westbrook being out, and they were defeated in the 2nd round last year when Westbrook was out so yeah, it makes a difference. In fact, any time a starting center is out, it makes a huge difference. Even a small difference however can swing a series. It doesn't need to be a 35 point swing. Spurs don't score 120 if Serge is playing, the game slows down, it's a FT shooting contest. A 10 pt swing would make all the difference in the world.
Perimeter defense is designed to funnel the ball handler to the help. Serge is the help. They don't have to stop them, that would lead to silly perimeter fouls. Let the action happen at the rim.
Semi intelligent analysis.
mavsfan1000
05-24-2014, 01:35 AM
What Durant is for the offense, Ibaka is for the defense. He is OKC's only rim protecter. Defensive players don't quite get as much hype as the offensive players. But OKC is like a layup line without Ibaka. And it's not like Ibaka was poor on offense. He got 15 points a game.
Leetonidas
05-24-2014, 01:37 AM
Y'all really need to quit premature ejaculating
Franklin
05-24-2014, 02:16 AM
Its not even confirmed yet if nigga* will come back or will not, but methheads are already hyping up the rumors because that's their last hope. They're apparently drowning and that nigga* Ibaka is like their last straw.
ambchang
05-24-2014, 07:21 PM
Well, seems more and more likely serge will be back. Let the games begin.
All the talk about playing through pain is code for "pay me". They were careful with Russ' injury because KD and Reggie carried the team, however Serge is a bigger deal for OKC than is Westbrook and it's not like they'll never get back here again. If I'm the GM, I tell Serge he's not playing until he can walk and run relatively pain free. No early returns.
OKC has a better chance to beat the Spurs without having a question mark in the paint. At least they know what Adams and Perk can give them, and if they chose a wounded Ibaka over a fully healthy backup, that's not a good message to the team. It's also telling Serge they don't care if he's healthy during the summer or to begin next season.
spurraider21
05-25-2014, 12:04 AM
From what I've heard he still hasn't done anything beyond stationary shooting. I can't imagine him being a factor in a game tomorrow
I have as much confidence in our Spurs as anyone here but I have no idea why some think it's as simple as 'abaka doesn't make the thunder 35 pts better.'
1. The gap between our beloved Spurs and the Thunder (without abaka) isn't actually anywhere near 35 pts. Game 1 was tied late in the 3rd quarter for one.
2. The above is especially true when playing @ OKC.
If Abaka is effective (big if) I would be surprised if the series doesn't come back tied 2-2. Shit I wouldn't be entirely shocked if it came back tied up even if Abaka is just being used as a morale boost. Those methheads are rowdy and it's damn hard to win there IMO.
dg7md
05-25-2014, 04:41 AM
:lol at People thinking this Thunder team is as deadly as the 2012 unit without Harden. They lost almost 20 PPG without him and have no replacement. Ibaka is not horrible on offense but they just don't have the same scoring barrage as they did with Harden on the team.
Even if Ibaka plays tomorrow (would be dumb seeing as he says he's still in pain), then I don't see how a hobbled Ibaka would make up for how they've played so far. He's not Hakeem.
Is this the real ambchang? First time he's EVER posted without either Kobe's cock tickling his prostate or his lips firmly wrapped around Robinson's shaft.
Still a shitty take though, par for the course since he's been here.
Uppity fuckin gooks, what can you do with em...
Malik Hairston
05-25-2014, 11:49 AM
Is this the real ambchang? First time he's EVER posted without either Kobe's cock tickling his prostate or his lips firmly wrapped around Robinson's shaft.
Still a shitty take though, par for the course since he's been here.
Uppity fuckin gooks, what can you do with em...
:lmao..
SpursDynasty
05-25-2014, 01:18 PM
This is exactly why some teams/players don't last for long in the league. Some players don't know when to give it a rest if you're hurt. OKC will learn its lesson once Ibaka's injury is even worse after this series.
rascal
05-25-2014, 01:19 PM
mistake
:lol at People thinking this Thunder team is as deadly as the 2012 unit without Harden. They lost almost 20 PPG without him and have no replacement. Ibaka is not horrible on offense but they just don't have the same scoring barrage as they did with Harden on the team.
Even if Ibaka plays tomorrow (would be dumb seeing as he says he's still in pain), then I don't see how a hobbled Ibaka would make up for how they've played so far. He's not Hakeem.
If he plays, he probably wouldn't start and even then he'd have limited minutes. I think he would be a liability for both morale and for the future of the Thunder. This is assuming they aren't exaggerating the severity of the injury. Even if he's 100% though, first game back after an injury and the team has to adapt again, but since they are at home at least the crowd can get whipped into a frenzy and the meth can flow freely.
So what drugs would he be on today besides crystal meth?
spurraider21
05-25-2014, 06:25 PM
If he plays, he probably wouldn't start and even then he'd have limited minutes. I think he would be a liability for both morale and for the future of the Thunder. This is assuming they aren't exaggerating the severity of the injury. Even if he's 100% though, first game back after an injury and the team has to adapt again, but since they are at home at least the crowd can get whipped into a frenzy and the meth can flow freely.
So what drugs would he be on today besides crystal meth?
Brooks said he will start game 3 and won't have a minutes restriction. then again brooks said "he's not coming back" so i guess anything goes :lol
Ibaka changed the outcome of at least one game.
Seefourdc
05-26-2014, 01:50 AM
Look how many fools got exposed in this thread. What was that a 30 point swing from one game to the next? Could have easily been 40. Not getting free layups made the spurs look old and washed up hella fast.
Looks like it's back to the rice paddies for OP...
oh crap
05-26-2014, 02:59 AM
OP.....nigga, you trippin.
I have as much confidence in our Spurs as anyone here but I have no idea why some think it's as simple as 'abaka doesn't make the thunder 35 pts better.'
1. The gap between our beloved Spurs and the Thunder (without abaka) isn't actually anywhere near 35 pts. Game 1 was tied late in the 3rd quarter for one.
2. The above is especially true when playing @ OKC.
If Abaka is effective (big if) I would be surprised if the series doesn't come back tied 2-2. Shit I wouldn't be entirely shocked if it came back tied up even if Abaka is just being used as a morale boost. Those methheads are rowdy and it's damn hard to win there IMO.
I hate being right 99% of the time, especially when its something negative about my Spurs tbh. :depressed
When was the last time we even won at OKC tbh? 2011-2012 regular season if Im not mistaken.
Koolaid_Man
05-26-2014, 07:26 AM
Looks like it's back to the rice paddies for OP...
:lmao:lol:lmao
baseline bum
05-26-2014, 08:28 AM
Spurs better win Game 4. Otherwise, I can't see them winning two out of three against a team they'd be 0-6 against. But winning one out of three with two at home is pretty doable if they can steal Game 4.
ambchang
05-26-2014, 08:36 AM
OP.....nigga, you trippin.
:lol stretching dude. I am not saying Ibaka in the lineup will NOT let the Thunder win. In fact, I explicitly said I fully expect the Thunder to win Game 3. I also said having Ibaka means a 7 game spurs win, and without him will be a 5 game Spurs win.
What I am saying is, Ibaka will NOT change the outcome of the series, which is a Spurs win.
ambchang
05-26-2014, 08:42 AM
I hate being right 99% of the time, especially when its something negative about my Spurs tbh. :depressed
Is that why Ibaka had a +/- of +11 in the game? Reggie Jackson, Westbrook and Durant all had higher +/-. In fact, the only Thunder who played more than 20 minutes and had a negative +/- was Butler. You put Perkins there, and they still would have won Game 3 (I predicted as such). The energy of the crowd, desperation, and some home cooking (31 to 16 FTA) will do that for you.
Look how many fools got exposed in this thread. What was that a 30 point swing from one game to the next? Could have easily been 40. Not getting free layups made the spurs look old and washed up hella fast.
Game was in OKC vs. SA, serious desperation game, I mean, you expect the Spurs to win Game 3? I didn't. Check the post history.
Looks like it's back to the rice paddies for OP...
:lol People need to go back to Grade 3 and learn some comprehension. Did Ibaka change the outcome of the series? Have the OKC won yet?
But then, I never expect much intelligence from Kobe fans.
When was the last time we even won at OKC tbh? 2011-2012 regular season if Im not mistaken.
Not to worry, it will come this week.
^You basically just covered your turd with paper, instead of admitting a stupid take and flushing it.
The Batman
05-26-2014, 09:21 AM
:lol What a horrible thread
RsxPiimp
05-26-2014, 09:44 AM
ambchang
ambchang
05-26-2014, 10:31 AM
^You basically just covered your turd with paper, instead of admitting a stupid take and flushing it.
:lol What a horrible thread
ambchang
:lol, bunch of neanderthal level intelligence homo-sapiens.
The outcome of the series is the Spurs will win. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the results of a single game, and in particular game 3, which btw, as mentioned already and something you seem to miss over and over and over again, I have already predicted the Spurs to lose, with or without Ibaka. OKC is too good a team to be swept, and we already knew it, but then again, two of the quoted are noted Kobe lovers so I am expecting very little out of you.
yes, yes...everybody's an idiot and you're the smart one. That's clearly how a casual passerby would assess this thread.
Seefourdc
05-26-2014, 10:52 AM
Is that why Ibaka had a +/- of +11 in the game? Reggie Jackson, Westbrook and Durant all had higher +/-. In fact, the only Thunder who played more than 20 minutes and had a negative +/- was Butler. You put Perkins there, and they still would have won Game 3 (I predicted as such). The energy of the crowd, desperation, and some home cooking (31 to 16 FTA) will do that for you.
Game was in OKC vs. SA, serious desperation game, I mean, you expect the Spurs to win Game 3? I didn't. Check the post history.
:lol People need to go back to Grade 3 and learn some comprehension. Did Ibaka change the outcome of the series? Have the OKC won yet?
But then, I never expect much intelligence from Kobe fans.
Not to worry, it will come this week.
Just fucking admit you shit the bed and move on. It was a 30 point turnaround and could have been worse. The Spurs look old and busted against OKC with Ibaka in because they are old and busted.
Clipper Nation
05-26-2014, 10:55 AM
:lol, bunch of neanderthal level intelligence homo-sapiens.
The outcome of the series is the Spurs will win. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the results of a single game, and in particular game 3, which btw, as mentioned already and something you seem to miss over and over and over again, I have already predicted the Spurs to lose, with or without Ibaka. OKC is too good a team to be swept, and we already knew it, but then again, two of the quoted are noted Kobe lovers so I am expecting very little out of you.
Stick to dropping truthbombs about Kirby and MVPau, because this was a shit take....
Here's the good that can come out of this thread...if the Spurs do indeed end up winning the series (gutsy proclamation by OP with a 2-0 lead and HCA, btw), it's still a shitty take--he'll just hang on for dear of life to this disclaimer, despite the fact that a one-legged Ibaka clearly changed how effective the Spurs were...so you can imagine what a healthy Serge would do.
If the Spurs somehow manage to lose, this stupid slant-eyed slope will likely be gone for a long, long time--or at least until Kobe's in the news again. This would be Hedo fortifying Nash times pantalones de blanco times calf tats level of fail. When you look at it like that, how can you not root for the Thunder? Spurs lose, but the board ultimately wins.
rogues
05-26-2014, 11:10 AM
:lmao Asians and their basketball takes
Malik Hairston
05-26-2014, 11:12 AM
:lmao Asians and their basketball takes
:lol..
The Thunder have played nearly an identical amount of minutes against the Spurs with Serge Ibaka on and off the court if you combine the regular season and postseason. With Ibaka on the court -- OKC is outscoring the Spurs by 29 points and allowing just 93.0 points per 100 possessions. With Ibaka off the court -- the Thunder have been outscored by 44 points and they are giving up 122.6 points per 100.
IrisHockey
05-26-2014, 11:49 AM
IBAKA has changed this from a frontdoor sweep by the Spurs to a potential backdoor sweep for the Thunder.. He makes all the difference, literally nothing less..
The Thunder have played nearly an identical amount of minutes against the Spurs with Serge Ibaka on and off the court if you combine the regular season and postseason. With Ibaka on the court -- OKC is outscoring the Spurs by 29 points and allowing just 93.0 points per 100 possessions. With Ibaka off the court -- the Thunder have been outscored by 44 points and they are giving up 122.6 points per 100.
When DMC drops truthbombs, there are no survivors.
Last time Pop won CotY, Spurs were backdoor swept by the Thunder in the WCF. We could see a repeat of both this season.
TDfan2007
05-26-2014, 01:17 PM
Ibaka may not change the outcome of the series, but he sure makes it more interesting.
When Ibaka is on the court every Spurs player outside of Leonard instantly loses his manhood.
spurraider21
05-26-2014, 01:44 PM
Was a bad omen when Manu was hitting all those threes and we were still down at the half. Was like game 2 of the finals when green hit 5 threes (I think all in the first half) just to keep us floating. Both Miami and okc proceeded to blow us out late. Ibaka clearly makes a difference. Like I said in this thread out entire offensive scheme gets altered. No more easy shots at the rim, thus less collapsing into the paint. Still, didn't help that Diaw didn't make a single open jumper, and green was missing all sorta of shots he makes any other game.
When you're on the road against an elite team, you aren't going to win anything if you can't hit open jumpers
RsxPiimp
05-26-2014, 02:06 PM
Here's the good that can come out of this thread...if the Spurs do indeed end up winning the series (gutsy proclamation by OP with a 2-0 lead and HCA, btw), it's still a shitty take--he'll just hang on for dear of life to this disclaimer, despite the fact that a one-legged Ibaka clearly changed how effective the Spurs were...so you can imagine what a healthy Serge would do.
If the Spurs somehow manage to lose, this stupid slant-eyed slope will likely be gone for a long, long time--or at least until Kobe's in the news again. This would be Hedo fortifying Nash times pantalones de blanco times calf tats level of fail. When you look at it like that, how can you not root for the Thunder? Spurs lose, but the board ultimately wins.
Venti Quattro
05-27-2014, 09:43 PM
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
Kool Bob Love
05-27-2014, 09:47 PM
It's 2-2. Chill out.
Spurs take a punch they whimper like pussies and fold. Kahward Leonard was looking for a corner to crawl off into. The Spurs submitted in the 1st quarter tbh.
Franklin
05-27-2014, 10:55 PM
I think maybe we should try some hack-a-Ibaka next game. Nigga plays with pain and he can't make no shot outside dunks with such intense pain in his leg. Dude got all his points tonight near the rim, except one acquired from
1-4 free throw shooting.
lol ambchang you stupid, stupid gook.
oh crap
05-27-2014, 11:09 PM
:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao at this thread and OP
timtonymanu
05-27-2014, 11:09 PM
:wow
The OP has hedged his bets. He's making a hypothetical and that can never be proven true or false, because it's about an event that's already occurred. Now Ibaka is in the series, and it's possible the Spurs will lose. Since he didn't say they would win, what's he actually saying? He's saying Ibaka wouldn't have changed the outcome of the 1st two games. Why then did he use the words "will not" and "series"?
If the Spurs win, he'll say "see, I told you". If the Spurs lose, he'll say "yeah, but they would have lost even if Ibaka wasn't playing".
So basically he's being a chickenshit by not committing to a stance, and basically he's saying one team will win and one will lose no matter who's playing.
Franklin
05-27-2014, 11:35 PM
I think the "outcome" of the series means the eventual result of it (who wins and who loses), imho.
ambchang
05-28-2014, 11:08 AM
Just fucking admit you shit the bed and move on. It was a 30 point turnaround and could have been worse. The Spurs look old and busted against OKC with Ibaka in because they are old and busted.
Stick to dropping truthbombs about Kirby and MVPau, because this was a shit take....
No offense, but it wasn't Ibaka that had the 30 point turnaround, there were a series of changes that were made:
- Reggie Jackson with more minutes
- Jeremy Lamb stepping up
- Home crowd
- Huge FT disparity, especially early in the game
Did Ibaka make a difference? Sure, but he didn't change the outcome of either games. The Thunder would have won regardless. To think that OKC would have lost by 25 the last two games without Ibaka is laughable.
KobeOwnsDuncan
05-28-2014, 11:10 AM
No offense, but it wasn't Ibaka that had the 30 point turnaround, there were a series of changes that were made:
- Reggie Jackson with more minutes
- Jeremy Lamb stepping up
- Home crowd
- Huge FT disparity, especially early in the game
Did Ibaka make a difference? Sure, but he didn't change the outcome of either games. The Thunder would have won regardless. To think that OKC would have lost by 25 the last two games without Ibaka is laughable.
:lmao Bullshit. Ibaka singlehandedly turned the Spurs into pussies. It's easy to drive in the lane with no Ibaka.
ambchang
05-28-2014, 11:12 AM
Just fucking admit you shit the bed and move on. It was a 30 point turnaround and could have been worse. The Spurs look old and busted against OKC with Ibaka in because they are old and busted.
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
lol ambchang you stupid, stupid gook.
:lol, two more amoeba brains who think that Ibaka made all the difference.
Is it Ibaka when the Thunder made that huge run in the first quarter? Oh wait, he was sitting on the bench while Westbrook was stealing the ball while stepping out of bounds!
Was it because of Ibaka that Perkins had a goal-tend "block" on Parker?
I mean, did you guys even watch the game? The Spurs would have lost the game with or without Ibaka, there was no question about it. I will admit that I made a mistake predicting a Game 4 Spurs win, but it had nothing to do with Ibaka. Without Ibaka, the Spurs would have lost anyways.
ambchang
05-28-2014, 11:15 AM
:lmao Bullshit. Ibaka singlehandedly turned the Spurs into pussies. It's easy to drive in the lane with no Ibaka.
Is that why the Thunder made their runs when Ibaka was on the bench? Was it why Ibaka had the same +/- as Jeremy Lamb while Westbook and Durant both had a higher +/- than both of them? How is it possible that Ibaka SINGLEHANDEDLY affect the Spurs when OKC had two players who had a +/- that is HIGHER than Ibaka while playing more minutes? What happened in those minutes when Ibaka was NOT on the floor and OKC was still increasing the lead?
KobeOwnsDuncan
05-28-2014, 11:19 AM
Is that why the Thunder made their runs when Ibaka was on the bench? Was it why Ibaka had the same +/- as Jeremy Lamb while Westbook and Durant both had a higher +/- than both of them? How is it possible that Ibaka SINGLEHANDEDLY affect the Spurs when OKC had two players who had a +/- that is HIGHER than Ibaka while playing more minutes? What happened in those minutes when Ibaka was NOT on the floor and OKC was still increasing the lead?
What happened when Parker, and Duncan tried to go to the rim with Ibaka on the floor? Why did the Spurs still miss easy layups? The fear of Big Dick Ibaka. Why did Leonard look like he wanted to crawl into a hole? The fear of Big Dick Ibaka. Why didn't the Spurs blow out OKC like in games 1 and 2?
Clipper Nation
05-28-2014, 11:21 AM
Is that why the Thunder made their runs when Ibaka was on the bench? Was it why Ibaka had the same +/- as Jeremy Lamb while Westbook and Durant both had a higher +/- than both of them? How is it possible that Ibaka SINGLEHANDEDLY affect the Spurs when OKC had two players who had a +/- that is HIGHER than Ibaka while playing more minutes? What happened in those minutes when Ibaka was NOT on the floor and OKC was still increasing the lead?
Sorry son, but the Spurs turned into complete pussies once Ibaka came back....
Katherine Robinson
05-28-2014, 12:10 PM
From a 4-5 game series to a 6-7.
Ibaka's presence is clear.
RsxPiimp
05-28-2014, 01:32 PM
ambchang is such a retard:lol
ambchang
05-28-2014, 03:17 PM
ambchang is such a retard:lol
So you are saying OKC would have lost in the last two games without Ibaka? Pray tell.
Also enlighten me on how Ibaka was the sole reason for the OKC games when OKC was building on leads when he was sitting on the bench.
ambchang
05-28-2014, 03:20 PM
What happened when Parker, and Duncan tried to go to the rim with Ibaka on the floor? Why did the Spurs still miss easy layups? The fear of Big Dick Ibaka. Why did Leonard look like he wanted to crawl into a hole? The fear of Big Dick Ibaka. Why didn't the Spurs blow out OKC like in games 1 and 2?
They were missing layups when he was OUT of the lineup as well. What, they were afraid of him blocking them from the bench?
Sorry son, but the Spurs turned into complete pussies once Ibaka came back....
The Spurs sure did shrivel, I am not convinced it was because of Ibaka though. The hustling perimeter defense had more to do with all of that.
From a 4-5 game series to a 6-7.
Ibaka's presence is clear.
Oh, no question, see my posts before game 3, I explicitly said Ibaka would win them a few games, he just won't change the outcome of the series.
Also, before the series started, I stated that Spurs would win in 7 games, after OKC Ibaka would be out for the remainder of the playoffs, I said Spurs in 5. So clearly, I knew Ibaka would make a difference, just not the outcome of the series, which is a Spurs win.
Katherine Robinson
05-28-2014, 03:41 PM
They were missing layups when he was OUT of the lineup as well. What, they were afraid of him blocking them from the bench?
The Spurs sure did shrivel, I am not convinced it was because of Ibaka though. The hustling perimeter defense had more to do with all of that.
Oh, no question, see my posts before game 3, I explicitly said Ibaka would win them a few games, he just won't change the outcome of the series.
Also, before the series started, I stated that Spurs would win in 7 games, after OKC Ibaka would be out for the remainder of the playoffs, I said Spurs in 5. So clearly, I knew Ibaka would make a difference, just not the outcome of the series, which is a Spurs win.
You seem confident, Amb.
ShowtimeFan
05-28-2014, 03:51 PM
You seem confident, Amb.
If someone were to do a Bill Simmons "Irrational Confidence Guy" list for spurstalk, this thread would put Amb right up near the top.
RsxPiimp
05-28-2014, 04:24 PM
So you are saying OKC would have lost in the last two games without Ibaka? Pray tell.
Also enlighten me on how Ibaka was the sole reason for the OKC games when OKC was building on leads when he was sitting on the bench.
Whose to say OKC won't lose the same lead if Ibaka never played? Basketball is always a game of runs and what we all know is the Thunder never lost in two games were Serge was present.
Just admit you had a shitty take, no one in this thread has supported you.
LkrFan
05-28-2014, 04:57 PM
No offense, but it wasn't Ibaka that had the 30 point turnaround, there were a series of changes that were made:
- Reggie Jackson with more minutes
- Jeremy Lamb stepping up
- Home crowd
- Huge FT disparity, especially early in the game
Did Ibaka make a difference? Sure, but he didn't change the outcome of either games. The Thunder would have won regardless. To think that OKC would have lost by 25 the last two games without Ibaka is laughable.
Ignoring the rest of your bullshit, I can't let the bolded slide. Can the crowd:
1) Rebound?
2) Block a shot?
3) Make a freebie?
4) Make an assist?
5) etc etc?
You see where I'm going here? A crowd shouldn't have shit to do with the outcome of a game or series. Those that depend on HCA are weakminded. Players shouldn't give a fuck where they play. Boots to asses - no matter where they're playing. SMDH
Katherine Robinson
05-28-2014, 04:59 PM
Ambach should take a vacation if Thunder close this series out.
Leetonidas
05-28-2014, 05:22 PM
Ignoring the rest of your bullshit, I can't let the bolded slide. Can the crowd:
1) Rebound?
2) Block a shot?
3) Make a freebie?
4) Make an assist?
5) etc etc?
You see where I'm going here? A crowd shouldn't have shit to do with the outcome of a game or series. Those that depend on HCA are weakminded. Players shouldn't give a fuck where they play. Boots to asses - no matter where they're playing. SMDH
I agree with you in a sense but tbh it's pretty obvious OKC plays better at home. For big time players like KD/Westbrook it doesn't matter but for the role players imo playing at home is a big deal. OKC's role players were lifeless and non-existent in the first two games but torched us in the last two. Or for a player like Danny Green for instance who tends to go apeshit on three pointers at home and shit the bed on the road (not all the time obviously)
Homecourt shouldn't matter but it does play a factor. Even the refs seem like they're afraid of OKC's crowd :lol
Venti Quattro
05-28-2014, 06:13 PM
:lmao Dumbchang
Strange Love
05-28-2014, 06:16 PM
:lmao Dumbchang
He's the lkrfan of the spurs. you add those 2 together and they make for quite a shitty pair as far as thread backfires go.
HemisfairArena
05-28-2014, 06:19 PM
Gotta give the OP props,,,he's gonna go down with the ship win, lose, or draw.
op is and has always been dumber than the gorilla in his avatar imho
Venti Quattro
05-28-2014, 06:22 PM
Ignoring the rest of your bullshit, I can't let the bolded slide. Can the crowd:
1) Rebound?
2) Block a shot?
3) Make a freebie?
4) Make an assist?
5) etc etc?
You see where I'm going here? A crowd shouldn't have shit to do with the outcome of a game or series. Those that depend on HCA are weakminded. Players shouldn't give a fuck where they play. Boots to asses - no matter where they're playing. SMDH
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=258RK2F1N_I
ambchang
05-29-2014, 08:06 AM
You seem confident, Amb.
I won't use the word confident, but I did call the Spurs winning in 7 at the beginning of the series, and I am sticking by it. Whether Ibaka playing or not is immaterial. Him not playing will allow the series to close quicker, but the outcome will still remain the same: Spurs win.
Whose to say OKC won't lose the same lead if Ibaka never played? Basketball is always a game of runs and what we all know is the Thunder never lost in two games were Serge was present.
Just admit you had a shitty take, no one in this thread has supported you.
We DO know that the Thunder were building on the lead WITHOUT Ibaka. We do know the first big run OKC made in game 4 was done WITHOUT Ibaka. We do know Ibaka didn't have the highest +/- in either of the games. We do know the perimeter offense of OKC became MUCH more aggressive at home because of the added confidence, and Ibaka really doesn't do much on the perimeter offense front.
Ignoring the rest of your bullshit, I can't let the bolded slide. Can the crowd:
1) Rebound?
2) Block a shot?
3) Make a freebie?
4) Make an assist?
5) etc etc?
You see where I'm going here? A crowd shouldn't have shit to do with the outcome of a game or series. Those that depend on HCA are weakminded. Players shouldn't give a fuck where they play. Boots to asses - no matter where they're playing. SMDH
Really? Is that why we have never seen a winning team go through an entire season of basketball with a better road record than a home record, ever in the history of the NBA?
Home crowd does provide energy, and that is extremely important for a team, especially a young team like OKC.
Over the season, OKC scores 3.1 ppg more at home vs. on the road, has a +0.6 higher point differential, grabs 2.7 more rebounds, have 0.49 more assists, have 1.04 more steals, have 0.3 more blocks, have 1.3 less turnovers. The only thing they have more is fouls, which could be attributed to increased aggressiveness.
Should a crowd have an effect? No. But it does have an effect, and decades of statistics show that.
ambchang
05-29-2014, 08:07 AM
Ambach should take a vacation if Thunder close this series out.
It would be for my incorrect prediction of Spurs in 7 (or 5 without Ibaka).
ambchang
05-29-2014, 08:08 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=258RK2F1N_I
Is that Shaq playing at home?
You get the sense that OP knows this is going to end badly and is holding onto these last few days of false bravado.
ambchang
05-29-2014, 09:10 AM
You get the sense that OP knows this is going to end badly and is holding onto these last few days of false bravado.
:lol still can't read
:lol Ibaka making all the difference when statistics clearly showing that OKC was beating the Spurs without him on the floor the last two games
:lol Home crowds make no difference
:lol Ignoring the play of Reggie Jackson/Jeremy Lamb
:lol Ignoring the much more increased aggressiveness of Russell Westbrook and Durant
:lol Ignoring the HUGE jump in FTA for OKC in the two home games while the FTA for the Spurs stayed the same and Ibaka only shooting 4 FTA a game
:lol Ignoring runs by OKC when Ibaka was on the bench
The Batman
05-29-2014, 09:11 AM
Amb is really asshurt. Really.
:lol still can't read
:lol Ibaka making all the difference when statistics clearly showing that OKC was beating the Spurs without him on the floor the last two games
:lol Home crowds make no difference
:lol Ignoring the play of Reggie Jackson/Jeremy Lamb
:lol Ignoring the much more increased aggressiveness of Russell Westbrook and Durant
:lol Ignoring the HUGE jump in FTA for OKC in the two home games while the FTA for the Spurs stayed the same and Ibaka only shooting 4 FTA a game
:lol Ignoring runs by OKC when Ibaka was on the bench
:lolYup, it's clearly a 2-2 series without Ibaka.
:lolStay gold, ponygook
ambchang
05-29-2014, 10:02 AM
:lolYup, it's clearly a 2-2 series without Ibaka.
:lolStay gold, ponygook
Of course it is. Without Ibaka, OKC would still have won the last two games. Maybe not by as big a margin, but they would have won nonetheless.
But that's not the point, the point is, Ibaka will not change the outcome of the series (which is another case of you not understanding how to read as I have iterated this point about 10 times by now), which is a Spurs win.
RsxPiimp
05-29-2014, 10:49 AM
I am sick and tired of hearing how big of a deal missing Ibaka is.
Note that I am not saying:
1) He will not make a difference
2) The Spurs will win this series
Also, before the series started, I stated that Spurs would win in 7 games, after OKC Ibaka would be out for the remainder of the playoffs.
:lol
RsxPiimp
05-29-2014, 10:50 AM
Of course it is. Without Ibaka, OKC would still have won the last two games. Maybe not by as big a margin, but they would have won nonetheless.
It does not support your theory. OKC is 0-2 this season against the Spurs without Ibaka :lol
ambchang
05-29-2014, 11:30 AM
:lol
Idiot, do you understand the point of separate threads? The point of this thread ISN'T saying that the Spurs will win the series, it's saying that Ibaka will not make a difference one way or another.
On a separate thread, I predicted a 7-game Spurs win in the series.
These are two separate subjects.
ambchang
05-29-2014, 11:31 AM
It does not support your theory. OKC is 0-2 this season against the Spurs without Ibaka :lol
Yes, so ....? Was he the only variable in those games?
It's like saying whenever broad ties are in vogue, the economy is good, therefore everybody should always wear broad ties to keep the economy up.
There's correlation and causation. Those are two different things.
ambchang
05-30-2014, 09:44 AM
:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao at this thread and OP
:lmao Bullshit. Ibaka singlehandedly turned the Spurs into pussies. It's easy to drive in the lane with no Ibaka.
What happened when Parker, and Duncan tried to go to the rim with Ibaka on the floor? Why did the Spurs still miss easy layups? The fear of Big Dick Ibaka. Why did Leonard look like he wanted to crawl into a hole? The fear of Big Dick Ibaka. Why didn't the Spurs blow out OKC like in games 1 and 2?
ambchang is such a retard:lol
If someone were to do a Bill Simmons "Irrational Confidence Guy" list for spurstalk, this thread would put Amb right up near the top.
Ignoring the rest of your bullshit, I can't let the bolded slide. Can the crowd:
1) Rebound?
2) Block a shot?
3) Make a freebie?
4) Make an assist?
5) etc etc?
You see where I'm going here? A crowd shouldn't have shit to do with the outcome of a game or series. Those that depend on HCA are weakminded. Players shouldn't give a fuck where they play. Boots to asses - no matter where they're playing. SMDH
:lmao Dumbchang
He's the lkrfan of the spurs. you add those 2 together and they make for quite a shitty pair as far as thread backfires go.
op is and has always been dumber than the gorilla in his avatar imho
You get the sense that OP knows this is going to end badly and is holding onto these last few days of false bravado.
Where are you guys at now?
What happened to Ibaka? Was he mauled by a hyena and missed the game?
Why did OKC lose by pretty much the same (well, slightly larger) margin with pretty much the exact same game flow as Games 1 and 2 when Ibaka is playing?
Why is it that the only differences between games in SA and OKC are FTA for OKC, and the results are so drastically different when you claim HC makes no difference?
Why am I not getting quoted 6 times this morning after the game?
Where you roaches hiding?
Come back and post like a man, you cowardly little maggots.
ambchang
05-30-2014, 09:46 AM
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro Venti Quattro
KobeOwnsDuncan
05-30-2014, 09:46 AM
Where are you guys at now?
What happened to Ibaka? Was he mauled by a hyena and missed the game?
Why did OKC lose by pretty much the same (well, slightly larger) margin with pretty much the exact same game flow as Games 1 and 2 when Ibaka is playing?
Why is it that the only differences between games in SA and OKC are FTA for OKC, and the results are so drastically different when you claim HC makes no difference?
Why am I not getting quoted 6 times this morning after the game?
Where you roaches hiding?
Come back and post like a man, you cowardly little maggots.
2-1 with Ibaka in the lineup, or are you mathematically retarded? I'd consider the possibility of suicide as a viable option before posting again if I were you.
ambchang
05-30-2014, 09:48 AM
2-1 with Ibaka in the lineup, or are you mathematically retarded? I'd consider the possibility of suicide as a viable option before posting again if I were you.
Ibaka wasn't the only difference between Games 1 and 2 vs. Games 3 and 4.
The ONLY difference between Games 3 and 4 vs. Game 5 wasn't the presence of Ibaka, it was the location of the games.
Did you finally get that through your thick skull now?
lefty
05-30-2014, 09:48 AM
Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094) Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094)
Kool Bob Love
05-30-2014, 10:01 AM
You get the sense that OP knows this is going to end badly and is holding onto these last few days of false bravado.
You describe yourself perfectly grandama killer.
Kool Bob Love
05-30-2014, 10:02 AM
Looks like it's back to the rice paddies for OP...
Looks like it's back to hiding with Osama for you.
Kool Bob Love
05-30-2014, 10:03 AM
^You basically just covered your turd with paper, instead of admitting a stupid take and flushing it.
The bills DD
Kool Bob Love
05-30-2014, 10:04 AM
yes, yes...everybody's an idiot and you're the smart one. That's clearly how a casual passerby would assess this thread.
All them white genes and only one decent take itt. :lol
Actually, Ibaka changed the entire complexion of the series, otherwise, we wouldn't have seen Matt Bonner in the starting lineup. Good thing it worked well for the Spurs, but I'm pretty sure OKC will come back strong to force a Game 7.
weebo
05-30-2014, 11:10 AM
Actually, Ibaka changed the entire complexion of the series, otherwise, we wouldn't have seen Matt Bonner in the starting lineup. Good thing it worked well for the Spurs, but I'm pretty sure OKC will come back strong to force a Game 7.
Also, Ibaka allowed OKC to pack the paint with more effectiveness because he is athletic enough to get back and help when perimeter guys get beat.
ambchang
05-30-2014, 11:34 AM
Actually, Ibaka changed the entire complexion of the series, otherwise, we wouldn't have seen Matt Bonner in the starting lineup. Good thing it worked well for the Spurs, but I'm pretty sure OKC will come back strong to force a Game 7.
Also, Ibaka allowed OKC to pack the paint with more effectiveness because he is athletic enough to get back and help when perimeter guys get beat.
Didn't say he wouldn't, just that he wouldn't change the outcome of the series.
The focus of subject within this thread seems to be on what Oklahoma City is doing right and not about what the Spurs are doing wrong.
The Spurs missed and passed up a number of open shots to allow the Thunder there victories. The presence of Serge Ibaka shouldn't have hindered the Spurs from withering away their offensive efficiency insufficient percentages in other areas of the court accept the rim. Playing with fear implies playing without confidence. The Spurs were apprehensive and second-guessing an offense that has assured their success.
The Spurs returned to their form spanning three games. Its a matter of maintaining confidence is always a dependent.
The Thunder still aren't really that great (opinion) which is for obvious reasons that I've seen in the previous rounds prior to this. While others may be in pathological denial of what was witnessed during Thunder games, the matter of Thunder's mental weakness relevant to anyone placing gambling tokens on them.
However the case, the Thunder cluttered the paint extremely well which made Duncan rather ineffective as well as limiting the relevance of Splitter. Ibaka creates a somewhat video game bonus to guard defense for the Thunder. In effect this gives the confidence on defense that they'll stop their opponent the train of effect wets the offense.
The Thunder are young, vigorous, and robust. Their offense however...is...out of control in various variations of instances. When the dual focal points within that offense is failing, they're done. Until these dual focal points, Durant and Westbrook, become more independent on their sheer talent rather then holding the hands of their parent, I'll respect them again.
midnightpulp
05-30-2014, 05:57 PM
Amb is right until proven otherwise. No one knows what would've happened if Ibaka played games 1 and 2 or missed games 3 and 4. But we did get a 1 game sample size for the first question, and the results were pretty much the same.
As is it stands, Chesapeake is the bigger X-factor for the Thunder than the Spearchucker.
spurraider21
05-31-2014, 11:01 PM
ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang ambchang
lefty
05-31-2014, 11:02 PM
OP with the goods
spurraider21
05-31-2014, 11:03 PM
Looks like it's back to the rice paddies for OP...
^You basically just covered your turd with paper, instead of admitting a stupid take and flushing it.
Here's the good that can come out of this thread...if the Spurs do indeed end up winning the series (gutsy proclamation by OP with a 2-0 lead and HCA, btw), it's still a shitty take--he'll just hang on for dear of life to this disclaimer, despite the fact that a one-legged Ibaka clearly changed how effective the Spurs were...so you can imagine what a healthy Serge would do.
If the Spurs somehow manage to lose, this stupid slant-eyed slope will likely be gone for a long, long time--or at least until Kobe's in the news again. This would be Hedo fortifying Nash times pantalones de blanco times calf tats level of fail. When you look at it like that, how can you not root for the Thunder? Spurs lose, but the board ultimately wins.
lol ambchang (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=986) you stupid, stupid gook.
You get the sense that OP knows this is going to end badly and is holding onto these last few days of false bravado.
excellent contributions to this thread, old friend :tu
ElNono
05-31-2014, 11:03 PM
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....
Tim Duncan - 05/31/14
ambchang
06-01-2014, 10:18 AM
Where those little front running nimwits at?
I will bump this thread again.
jeebus
06-01-2014, 10:24 AM
Igoaltenda became a non issue the past two games. After Corey cucked him and his entire family history in game 4, that was the end of Spear Chucker. Simmons was probably jizzing non stop last night while writing another article about the Harden trade.
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 12:56 PM
i never understood the "they chose ibaka over harden" narrative when they could have just amnestied Pork and kept both
ambchang
06-01-2014, 04:09 PM
oh crap
KobeOwnsDuncan
Clipper Nation
RsxPiimp
ShowtimeFan
LkrFan
Venti Quattro
Strange Love
m>s
DD
FkLA
Malik Hairston
rascal
Seefourdc
DMC
This thread proved two things:
1) A bunch of you half-wits can't read. Ibaka not changing the outcome of a series and Ibaka not having an impact on any given game are two different things. I said the former, not the later. I also said the Spurs will win in 5 if Ibaka didn't play, and win in 7 if Ibaka did. Ibaka played part of the series, and the Spurs won in 6. That said, I would venture to say that even if Ibaka were to miss the entire series, the Spurs would have only won in 6 instead of 5 because Brooks could have put Leonardo DiCaprio out there, and the Thunder would have won Games 3 and 4. The only difference would be that the Spurs would have won in Game 6 in MUCH more convincing fashion.
2) With the exception of KobeOwnsDuncan, every one in the above mention list are just a bunch of front running, media regurgitating, basketball not-knowing brain dead hicks. None of you came back to eat your crow, not after Game 5, and certainly not after Game 6. To top it off, none of you even had the guts to come and chime in BEFORE Game 3. Here's a tip for you, go to a local super market and get yourself a back bone.
Now that we are through this, let me educate you for free as to why I was so convinced Ibaka would not have changed the outcome of the series, again. It's not like I never mentioned this before, but given point 1) above, I would like to take this opportunity to teach you again.
People kept referring to 2012 as some sort of proof, and yet ignored the two major components. We all knew Harden was the difference. In fact, Harden destroyed the Spurs in Game 5, while Serge had a -3 for the game. It's obvious, we all knew it, but for some reason, people like to ignore that. Reggie Jackson can cause Spurs damage, but his playmaking is far from Harden level. He can be a homeless man's 2012 Westbrook some games, but his game is too different from Harden's to do a similar level of damage. As an extension of this, 2014 OKC' bench is not anywhere close to as effective as 2012 OKC.
Second, both Kawhi and Green improved immensely since then. Especially Green. Green missed wide open shots in 2012 during the 4 losses, he's not doing that again.
There are a few other factors that I didn't notice prior, Thabo didn't suck as badly back then as he did now. He did a very good job in 2012 on Parker, but he is totally worthless this year. Diaw stepped up big time and was the ultimate Ibaka buster in the series.
So learn young padawans, acknowledge your absolute crap takes, take it like a man, and learn from it. Some day, you guys may be able to have a decent basketball take for a change.
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 04:11 PM
i dont think HH and DMC are media regurgitating posters at all, tbh
Clipper Nation
06-01-2014, 04:21 PM
:lol How am I a media-regurgitating frontrunner? Frontrunners don't root for the Clippers, and I usually call bullshit on Media's narratives :lol
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 04:23 PM
:lol How am I a media-regurgitating frontrunner? Frontrunners don't root for the Clippers, and I usually call bullshit on Media's narratives :lol
yeah ur off the hook too, missed det one
Venti Quattro
06-01-2014, 04:26 PM
So learn young padawans, acknowledge your absolute crap takes, take it like a man, and learn from it. Some day, you guys may be able to have a decent basketball take for a change.
Congrats for lucking yourself into one basketball prediction after years of being dominated by DD in this forum.
You win or you learn
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 04:27 PM
Congrats for lucking yourself into one basketball prediction.
Sometimes I get it right, sometimes I learn
so if his prediction didn't come through and OKC won, would his prediction have been "bad luck" or would you all be calling him retarded?
Venti Quattro
06-01-2014, 04:29 PM
so if his prediction didn't come through and OKC won, would his prediction have been "bad luck" or would you all be calling him retarded?
He's already a retarded gook. These things go without saying. He'd just be doing things he's capable of
But that doesn't change the fact that I did not get this prediction right, and ergo I must own up to my miscalculation.
I was never a part of the crowd that thought we were doomed and getting backdoor swept.
Malik Hairston
06-01-2014, 05:12 PM
Why was I mentioned by OP? I didn't even have a take in this thread:lol..
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 05:29 PM
Why was I mentioned by OP? I didn't even have a take in this thread:lol..
he's probably mad because you gave emoticon support to people laughing at him :lol
rascal
06-01-2014, 05:32 PM
oh crap
KobeOwnsDuncan
Clipper Nation
RsxPiimp
ShowtimeFan
LkrFan
Venti Quattro
Strange Love
m>s
DD
FkLA
Malik Hairston
rascal
Seefourdc
DMC
This thread proved two things:
1) A bunch of you half-wits can't read. Ibaka not changing the outcome of a series and Ibaka not having an impact on any given game are two different things. I said the former, not the later. I also said the Spurs will win in 5 if Ibaka didn't play, and win in 7 if Ibaka did. Ibaka played part of the series, and the Spurs won in 6. That said, I would venture to say that even if Ibaka were to miss the entire series, the Spurs would have only won in 6 instead of 5 because Brooks could have put Leonardo DiCaprio out there, and the Thunder would have won Games 3 and 4. The only difference would be that the Spurs would have won in Game 6 in MUCH more convincing fashion.
2) With the exception of KobeOwnsDuncan, every one in the above mention list are just a bunch of front running, media regurgitating, basketball not-knowing brain dead hicks. None of you came back to eat your crow, not after Game 5, and certainly not after Game 6. To top it off, none of you even had the guts to come and chime in BEFORE Game 3. Here's a tip for you, go to a local super market and get yourself a back bone.
Now that we are through this, let me educate you for free as to why I was so convinced Ibaka would not have changed the outcome of the series, again. It's not like I never mentioned this before, but given point 1) above, I would like to take this opportunity to teach you again.
People kept referring to 2012 as some sort of proof, and yet ignored the two major components. We all knew Harden was the difference. In fact, Harden destroyed the Spurs in Game 5, while Serge had a -3 for the game. It's obvious, we all knew it, but for some reason, people like to ignore that. Reggie Jackson can cause Spurs damage, but his playmaking is far from Harden level. He can be a homeless man's 2012 Westbrook some games, but his game is too different from Harden's to do a similar level of damage. As an extension of this, 2014 OKC' bench is not anywhere close to as effective as 2012 OKC.
Second, both Kawhi and Green improved immensely since then. Especially Green. Green missed wide open shots in 2012 during the 4 losses, he's not doing that again.
There are a few other factors that I didn't notice prior, Thabo didn't suck as badly back then as he did now. He did a very good job in 2012 on Parker, but he is totally worthless this year. Diaw stepped up big time and was the ultimate Ibaka buster in the series.
So learn young padawans, acknowledge your absolute crap takes, take it like a man, and learn from it. Some day, you guys may be able to have a decent basketball take for a change.
Shut the hell up. The Spurs were lucky to barely escape game 6(if Manu doesn't get a lucky bounce rebound sitting on his ass) or this thing goes 7 and in a one game series anything can happen.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 05:32 PM
Congrats for lucking yourself into one basketball prediction after years of being dominated by DD in this forum.
You win or you learn
Huh? I've never even heard of dd before this thread, and I now remember him/her because of how bad his/her take was.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 05:33 PM
He's already a retarded gook. These things go without saying. He'd just be doing things he's capable of
But that doesn't change the fact that I did not get this prediction right, and ergo I must own up to my miscalculation.
But you did not until you got called out because you are one spineless front runner.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 05:35 PM
Shut the hell up. The Spurs were lucky to barely escape game 6(if Manu doesn't get a lucky bounce rebound sitting on his ass) or this thing goes 7 and in a one game series anything can happen.
After the game 5 domination? It was clear that home court was the difference. Not Ibaka. I knew the spurs would win at least one game at okc, I just thoughtless gonna be game 4.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 05:42 PM
:lol How am I a media-regurgitating frontrunner? Frontrunners don't root for the Clippers, and I usually call bullshit on Media's narratives :lol
You are a Lebron fan. I respect you for your view on the Kobe issue, but media lovers love Lebron.
Clipper Nation
06-01-2014, 05:47 PM
You are a Lebron fan. I respect you for your view on the Kobe issue, but media lovers love Lebron.
Media hates LeBron and gives him more scrutiny and criticism than any other superstar ever, so I'm not seeing it, tbh....
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 05:48 PM
You are a Lebron fan. I respect you for your view on the Kobe issue, but media lovers love Lebron.
to be fair lebron deserves a lot of love, he truly is one of the greatest of all time. though CN does guzzle his cum quite a bit
Malik Hairston
06-01-2014, 05:48 PM
:lmao Dad Killer fan accusing others of being media sheep..
Clipper Nation
06-01-2014, 05:50 PM
:lmao Dad Killer fan accusing others of being media sheep..
Dad Killer's unquestioned GOAT status is the most obvious example of Media-sheep groupthink in basketball history :lol
rascal
06-01-2014, 05:53 PM
After the game 5 domination? It was clear that home court was the difference. Not Ibaka. I knew the spurs would win at least one game at okc, I just thoughtless gonna be game 4.
Spurs were spotted the first two games without Ibaka and it proved too much for OK City to overcome. Had Duncan sat out the first two games and the spurs went down 0-2 they wouldn't of won the series.
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 05:53 PM
Dad Killer's unquestioned GOAT status is the most obvious example of Media-sheep groupthink in basketball history :lol
MJ being the GOAT can actually be backed up. i think the biggest media-sheep groupthink goes to the Kobe is the most clutch player/best player since jordan/jordan 2.0 stuff
The OP has hedged his bets. He's making a hypothetical and that can never be proven true or false, because it's about an event that's already occurred. Now Ibaka is in the series, and it's possible the Spurs will lose. Since he didn't say they would win, what's he actually saying? He's saying Ibaka wouldn't have changed the outcome of the 1st two games. Why then did he use the words "will not" and "series"?
If the Spurs win, he'll say "see, I told you". If the Spurs lose, he'll say "yeah, but they would have lost even if Ibaka wasn't playing".
So basically he's being a chickenshit by not committing to a stance, and basically he's saying one team will win and one will lose no matter who's playing.
oh crap (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=5851)
KobeOwnsDuncan (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=26523)
Clipper Nation (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=28500)
RsxPiimp (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=12644)
ShowtimeFan (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=36398)
LkrFan (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=18824)
Venti Quattro (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17094)
Strange Love (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17278)
m>s (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=27774)
DD (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=12607)
FkLA (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17213)
Malik Hairston (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=18403)
rascal (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=914)
Seefourdc (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=45474)
DMC (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20665)
This thread proved two things:
1) A bunch of you half-wits can't read. Ibaka not changing the outcome of a series and Ibaka not having an impact on any given game are two different things. I said the former, not the later. I also said the Spurs will win in 5 if Ibaka didn't play, and win in 7 if Ibaka did. Ibaka played part of the series, and the Spurs won in 6. That said, I would venture to say that even if Ibaka were to miss the entire series, the Spurs would have only won in 6 instead of 5 because Brooks could have put Leonardo DiCaprio out there, and the Thunder would have won Games 3 and 4. The only difference would be that the Spurs would have won in Game 6 in MUCH more convincing fashion.
2) With the exception of KobeOwnsDuncan, every one in the above mention list are just a bunch of front running, media regurgitating, basketball not-knowing brain dead hicks. None of you came back to eat your crow, not after Game 5, and certainly not after Game 6. To top it off, none of you even had the guts to come and chime in BEFORE Game 3. Here's a tip for you, go to a local super market and get yourself a back bone.
Now that we are through this, let me educate you for free as to why I was so convinced Ibaka would not have changed the outcome of the series, again. It's not like I never mentioned this before, but given point 1) above, I would like to take this opportunity to teach you again.
People kept referring to 2012 as some sort of proof, and yet ignored the two major components. We all knew Harden was the difference. In fact, Harden destroyed the Spurs in Game 5, while Serge had a -3 for the game. It's obvious, we all knew it, but for some reason, people like to ignore that. Reggie Jackson can cause Spurs damage, but his playmaking is far from Harden level. He can be a homeless man's 2012 Westbrook some games, but his game is too different from Harden's to do a similar level of damage. As an extension of this, 2014 OKC' bench is not anywhere close to as effective as 2012 OKC.
Second, both Kawhi and Green improved immensely since then. Especially Green. Green missed wide open shots in 2012 during the 4 losses, he's not doing that again.
There are a few other factors that I didn't notice prior, Thabo didn't suck as badly back then as he did now. He did a very good job in 2012 on Parker, but he is totally worthless this year. Diaw stepped up big time and was the ultimate Ibaka buster in the series.
So learn young padawans, acknowledge your absolute crap takes, take it like a man, and learn from it. Some day, you guys may be able to have a decent basketball take for a change.
Obviously you can't fucking read. I already nailed you down on this after you went AWOL after the 1st two Spurs losses when Ibaka returned.
Venti Quattro
06-01-2014, 06:51 PM
But you did not until you got called out because you are one spineless front runner.
:cry he disagrees with my thread
:cry front running faggot
:cry mommy they disagree with me
No offense, but it wasn't Ibaka that had the 30 point turnaround, there were a series of changes that were made:
- Reggie Jackson with more minutes
- Jeremy Lamb stepping up
- Home crowd
- Huge FT disparity, especially early in the game
Did Ibaka make a difference? Sure, but he didn't change the outcome of either games. The Thunder would have won regardless. To think that OKC would have lost by 25 the last two games without Ibaka is laughable.
This shit, for example, is just gibberish. There's no way in hell you could possibly know that Ibaka didn't make a difference in the outcome. Interestingly enough all of the pundits (people who know the game) said Ibaka made all the difference in those two games, but somehow your crystal ball to a parallel universe tells you differently and someone here is supposed to give your hypothetical credence.
Idiot.
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 07:06 PM
actually with ibaka missing games 1-2, had OKC come back to complete the backdoor sweep, it would have completely debunked OP, since they would have had to win in san antonio. amb made his claim that the home court was a bigger variable than ibaka, and the game 5 destruction confirmed it to an extent. i think ibaka played well in OKC, but watching the games i observed the spurs missing a great deal of uncontested looks that had nothing to do with ibaka. every uncharacteristic turnover or missed shot was instantly attributed to "the ibaka effect" even when he had no role in the play at all
ambchang
06-01-2014, 07:21 PM
:lmao Dad Killer fan accusing others of being media sheep..
Wow. You don't even know my background.
I hate Jordan, think he's overrated (to a degree), but he is undoubtedly better than Lebron.
Just calling it like it is.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 07:25 PM
Media hates LeBron and gives him more scrutiny and criticism than any other superstar ever, so I'm not seeing it, tbh....
You gotta be kidding me. Lebron is the most loved for a while now.
to be fair lebron deserves a lot of love, he truly is one of the greatest of all time. though CN does guzzle his cum quite a bit
Yeah he deserved it, greatest prime since early 2000 shaq or even better. But I'm not sure he deserves the almost homosexual level man love CN has for him.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 07:28 PM
Spurs were spotted the first two games without Ibaka and it proved too much for OK City to overcome. Had Duncan sat out the first two games and the spurs went down 0-2 they wouldn't of won the series.
What does that have to do with the subject? If Duncan missed the first two games and the spurs were down 0-2, I would've called a sweep.
Clipper Nation
06-01-2014, 07:29 PM
You gotta be kidding me. Lebron is the most loved for a while now.
:lmao No, Durbeta gets the most Media love by a landslide....
ambchang
06-01-2014, 07:30 PM
Obviously you can't fucking read. I already nailed you down on this after you went AWOL after the 1st two Spurs losses when Ibaka returned.
I don't blame you because that was on another thread, but I already called spurs in 5 without Ibaka and 7 with him BEFORE game 1. I also reiterated that multiple times before game 5, so your crap take still remains a crap take.
Btw, great reading on your end.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 07:31 PM
:cry he disagrees with my thread
:cry front running faggot
:cry mommy they disagree with me
:lol pointless hyperbole when getting nailed.
ambchang
06-01-2014, 07:33 PM
This shit, for example, is just gibberish. There's no way in hell you could possibly know that Ibaka didn't make a difference in the outcome. Interestingly enough all of the pundits (people who know the game) said Ibaka made all the difference in those two games, but somehow your crystal ball to a parallel universe tells you differently and someone here is supposed to give your hypothetical credence.
Idiot.
And game 5 proved me right. Things like watching the game and seeing how the spurs played with vs without Ibaka showed me that the spurs would've lost both games one way or another.
Your reliance on other peoples points further proved my point about you being a media regurgitAting drone.
Thanks.
Pop adjusted. If he had played Tiago-Timmy together, which is what got our Spurs to the WCF and the 2-0 lead, the return of Ibaka could've made the difference tbh.
It did change the series and Pop countered nicely.
monkey boy having a meltdown
Mugen
06-01-2014, 10:36 PM
Been a while since I've ventured downstairs and just now noticed this thread. My thoughts:
1) Thunder probably win with a healthy Ibaka. It took a crazy dunk from their 3rd string PG for the Spurs to realize that Serge isn't Prime Hakeem tbh. They probably would have split the first two games and it would have been a dogfight for 6-7 games.
2) Nobody will care about Serge being out for the first 2 games except for OKC fans and Laker fans still around on Spurstalk. Just like how nobody brings up Manu being out for Game 1 against Memphis except for Spurfan.
I could not care less if Ibaka, KD, LeBron, Wade, etc. were out these playoffs.
The only thing that matters is that Duncan rings.
actually with ibaka missing games 1-2, had OKC come back to complete the backdoor sweep, it would have completely debunked OP, since they would have had to win in san antonio. amb made his claim that the home court was a bigger variable than ibaka, and the game 5 destruction confirmed it to an extent. i think ibaka played well in OKC, but watching the games i observed the spurs missing a great deal of uncontested looks that had nothing to do with ibaka. every uncharacteristic turnover or missed shot was instantly attributed to "the ibaka effect" even when he had no role in the play at all
4 words: Points in the paint
Look at those before and after Serge. That's really all that needs to be said.
I am not convinced that Serge wasn't worse off in games 5 and 6, he wasn't as spry and though he had a couple decent moves, he was still at least a step slow. If the Thunder take one of the 1st two in SA, it's a difference series, and Ibaka being fully healthy really changes things because then no need for all the shuffling of the lineup.
Cause and effect, butterfly effect.. all that. It all changes the outcome. Thinking having your starting center out and/or playing injured in a series doesn't affect the outcome when the affected team swept you in the regular season is just ridiculous. It's the sign of wishful thinking and overrating your team, especially considering both coaches and all the players made the connection.
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 11:13 PM
ibaka looked plenty spry in the 4th and OT of game 6, and thats after extended minutes of play. yeah, the points in the paint dropped off. i dont think anybody, myself or OP thought ibaka would have zero impact on the games. but would he single handedly alter the results? thats a tougher call to make
And game 5 proved me right. Things like watching the game and seeing how the spurs played with vs without Ibaka showed me that the spurs would've lost both games one way or another.
Your reliance on other peoples points further proved my point about you being a media regurgitAting drone.
Thanks.
So you think the players would have done the exact same things, except someone photoshopped out Serge, or that's how your post reads. You cannot watch a game and decide how it would have gone if the starting center for one team was out, or any of the key players tbh. That's why the term "key" is used.
No Ibaka in game 3, Spurs don't need to change anything. They just keep attacking the paint. They don't have to hit outside shots, Tony keeps dominating inside. If the Thunder double Tony with no inside help, they'd get even more destroyed.
It's not about what Serge did. It's about what the Spurs didn't do because Serge was in the game. There's a lot more variables than you're accounting for.
ibaka looked plenty spry in the 4th and OT of game 6, and thats after extended minutes of play. yeah, the points in the paint dropped off. i dont think anybody, myself or OP thought ibaka would have zero impact on the games. but would he single handedly alter the results? thats a tougher call to make
No, why are you using "single handedly"? Did Bonner single handedly change the game? He didn't score a single point. Of course not, but how the team had to cover for him, how they had to consider he was out there and move out to defend him, that made a difference. Small differences can pay big dividends over time.
Last night, the Spurs could have easily lost that game. Tell me that Manu doesn't get that shot to go instead of getting it blocked (goal tending or not). Tell me that the Thunder go on that run down 12 or 14 to tie the game if Serge isn't defending the paint forcing the Spurs to shoot long 3's.
No player changes the game single handedly, not even MJ did that. It's how the other team responds to him and how his team's offense and defense changes that changes the game. One brick removed can bring down a castle.
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 11:22 PM
No, why are you using "single handedly"? Did Bonner single handedly change the game? He didn't score a single point. Of course not, but how the team had to cover for him, how they had to consider he was out there and move out to defend him, that made a difference. Small differences can pay big dividends over time.
Last night, the Spurs could have easily lost that game. Tell me that Manu doesn't get that shot to go instead of getting it blocked (goal tending or not). Tell me that the Thunder go on that run down 12 or 14 to tie the game if Serge isn't defending the paint forcing the Spurs to shoot long 3's.
No player changes the game single handedly, not even MJ did that. It's how the other team responds to him and how his team's offense and defense changes that changes the game. One brick removed can bring down a castle.
i see your point. if somebody sneezes on the bench before being checked in, he might make a marginally different play on the ball then he would have otherwise, etc. but the spurs showed they were plenty capable of winning with ibaka on the floor, even when he was jumping around swatting shots. i think thats the point of the thread, which was in response to "with ibaka OKC would win for sure" sort of talk
i see your point. if somebody sneezes on the bench before being checked in, he might make a marginally different play on the ball then he would have otherwise, etc. but the spurs showed they were plenty capable of winning with ibaka on the floor, even when he was jumping around swatting shots. i think thats the point of the thread, which was in response to "with ibaka OKC would win for sure" sort of talk
Now you're just making a strawman out of a legit argument. The entire dynamic of the game changes when a player like Serge is on the floor vs when he's not. Spurs were capable of winning against any team in the league at any given time. Doing it is something completely different than capability however. They were capable of winning the game without Tim on the floor in game 6 last year. They didn't and everyone points out Tim's absence. Maybe Tim doesn't get the rebound. Maybe the Spurs gave up too many 2nd chance looks, maybe they could have won in overtime. Who knows? They didn't win, but if you want to speculate, you cannot just plug Serge in or take Serge out and not change how the game is played.
spurraider21
06-01-2014, 11:38 PM
on page 1 of this thread, i mentioned that ibaka is a difference maker, and that his absence turned what would have been a competitive series (to that point) into an uncompetitive one. i just think its unfair for people to assume that OKC would have owned us with ibaka present, which is the sort of talk i believe OP was responding to.
on page 1 of this thread, i mentioned that ibaka is a difference maker, and that his absence turned what would have been a competitive series (to that point) into an uncompetitive one. i just think its unfair for people to assume that OKC would have owned us with ibaka present, which is the sort of talk i believe OP was responding to.
You're doing the strawman again. There's a meaningful difference between changing the outcome of a series and total domination. We say Manu's broken arm allowed Memphis to beat us. So we accept Manu's absence changed the outcome of a series when it was the 1 vs the 8, but not when it's the 1 vs the 2 and the starting center?
ambchang
06-02-2014, 06:48 AM
monkey boy having a meltdown
:lol getting called out so the only comeback is saying I'm having a meltdown.
ambchang
06-02-2014, 06:53 AM
So you think the players would have done the exact same things, except someone photoshopped out Serge, or that's how your post reads. You cannot watch a game and decide how it would have gone if the starting center for one team was out, or any of the key players tbh. That's why the term "key" is used.
No Ibaka in game 3, Spurs don't need to change anything. They just keep attacking the paint. They don't have to hit outside shots, Tony keeps dominating inside. If the Thunder double Tony with no inside help, they'd get even more destroyed.
It's not about what Serge did. It's about what the Spurs didn't do because Serge was in the game. There's a lot more variables than you're accounting for.
Of course. Only problem for you is that the sample of OKC playing with and without Ibaka in any given game didn't change much. The home crowd had an enormous effect on the play of both the spurs and the thunder and games 3 through 6 showed it.
Ibaka had an effect on a game, but he did not have such a big impact to change the entire complexion of the series.
Of course. Only problem for you is that the sample of OKC playing with and without Ibaka in any given game didn't change much. The home crowd had an enormous effect on the play of both the spurs and the thunder and games 3 through 6 showed it.
Ibaka had an effect on a game, but he did not have such a big impact to change the entire complexion of the series.
You seem to give random cause vs correlation credit to things like the crowd without justification. The Spurs had the best road record in the league, why would they get blown out on the road in the playoffs just because a crowd is cheering? Do crowds not cheer in the RS? Have the Thunder not won in SA because of the crowd?
ambchang
06-02-2014, 12:44 PM
You seem to give random cause vs correlation credit to things like the crowd without justification. The Spurs had the best road record in the league, why would they get blown out on the road in the playoffs just because a crowd is cheering? Do crowds not cheer in the RS? Have the Thunder not won in SA because of the crowd?
And yet okc have one of the best home records in the league, with the spurs not being able to win there in years until Saturday.
Fact is, Ibaka played in 4 of the 6 games, the spurs still won. Unless you want to argue that Ibaka not playing in games 3 to 6 would have resulted in an OKC series win, or Ibaka would have made a big enough difference in games 1 and 2, knowing full well what happened in game 5, then you don't have much of a leg to stand on
ambchang
06-02-2014, 12:45 PM
Chimping out
Come to think of it, you didn't even have a basketball take in this entire thread.
:lol loser.
ShowtimeFan
06-02-2014, 01:29 PM
Some day, you guys may be able to have a decent basketball take for a change.
Oh the irony! :lol
And with just that thought I've spent more time in this crap thread than it deserved.
ambchang
06-02-2014, 01:50 PM
Oh the irony! :lol
And with just that thought I've spent more time in this crap thread than it deserved.
What is that? Nothing to back up and no arguments again? I guess we just have very different standards of what a basketball take is.
And yet okc have one of the best home records in the league, with the spurs not being able to win there in years until Saturday.
Fact is, Ibaka played in 4 of the 6 games, the spurs still won. Unless you want to argue that Ibaka not playing in games 3 to 6 would have resulted in an OKC series win, or Ibaka would have made a big enough difference in games 1 and 2, knowing full well what happened in game 5, then you don't have much of a leg to stand on
Since you screwed up the quote format I had to steal a different post and trick fuck it.
I could say the Thunder would have keep the Spurs scoreless in 4 consecutive games had Ibaka played uninjured and you couldn't disprove it. Hypothetical scenarios are just the mind's way of creating that which doesn't exist in reality. You made one in the OP and Ibaka came back and suddenly the game changed. So you either have to attibute that 40+ point swing to the lineup or to the crowd. If you think playing at home makes a 40 point difference in the playoffs, I cannot help you any further, however if you think having a key defender in the paint can shut down an offense that's predicated it's last 2 games on points in the paint, then we can continue this discussion.
Indy had the best home record in the league and look how well they did at home against a team with a worse road record.
You've completely dismissed the peripheral effects that a player like Serge can have on the game, and truth be known you went AWOL until the Spurs won again.
If the spurs lost Parker or Duncan id be concerned, but not anyone else. Reason being nobody else will turn wins into loses or vice versa.
On the okc roster, only Durant and maybe Westbrook has that impact.
Turn wins into losses? What the fuck does that mean? A team doesn't have a win until the game ends, but they can have the lead. I guess Manu didn't help the Spurs win game 6, especially with Tony out. I guess the Spurs would have won that game anyhow if Tony was playing all game and Manu wasn't.
You are basketball retarded tbh.
ambchang
06-02-2014, 02:58 PM
Since you screwed up the quote format I had to steal a different post and trick fuck it.
I could say the Thunder would have keep the Spurs scoreless in 4 consecutive games had Ibaka played uninjured and you couldn't disprove it. Hypothetical scenarios are just the mind's way of creating that which doesn't exist in reality. You made one in the OP and Ibaka came back and suddenly the game changed. So you either have to attibute that 40+ point swing to the lineup or to the crowd. If you think playing at home makes a 40 point difference in the playoffs, I cannot help you any further, however if you think having a key defender in the paint can shut down an offense that's predicated it's last 2 games on points in the paint, then we can continue this discussion.
Indy had the best home record in the league and look how well they did at home against a team with a worse road record.
You've completely dismissed the peripheral effects that a player like Serge can have on the game, and truth be known you went AWOL until the Spurs won again.
Well, that goes without saying. The point is given what has been observed prior to game 2, and what transpired after Game 2, it is extremely difficult to defend what you just threw out. And yet what happened in Games 5 and 6 gives a lot of support to my argument.
I made the call after game 2, with my take on why that has happened, then Ibaka came back and basically what I said would happen happened. I did not dismiss his effects, I have said multiple times that Serge does have an effect on the game, just not big enough to change the outcome of the series, which was what I predicted to be, and what actually happened, a Spurs win.
ambchang
06-02-2014, 02:59 PM
Turn wins into losses? What the fuck does that mean? A team doesn't have a win until the game ends, but they can have the lead. I guess Manu didn't help the Spurs win game 6, especially with Tony out. I guess the Spurs would have won that game anyhow if Tony was playing all game and Manu wasn't.
You are basketball retarded tbh.
It means that the impact of those players would be so profound that the Game 1 and 2 win would have been a loss without them. Try to follow the conversation instead of pulling stuff out of thin air, will you?
Oh, and please don't let the irony of how your shit take in this thread got pounded into the ground escape you.
Well, that goes without saying. The point is given what has been observed prior to game 2, and what transpired after Game 2, it is extremely difficult to defend what you just threw out. And yet what happened in Games 5 and 6 gives a lot of support to my argument.
No it doesn't. Your OP stated you weren't saying the Spurs would win. How then did two games where the Spurs won support your argument? Your argument is that whether or not Ibaka played the entire series, the series outcome wouldn't be different. Now suddenly winning the series justifies your argument? Why then did you hedge your bet in the OP?
I made the call after game 2, with my take on why that has happened, then Ibaka came back and basically what I said would happen happened. I did not dismiss his effects, I have said multiple times that Serge does have an effect on the game, just not big enough to change the outcome of the series, which was what I predicted to be, and what actually happened, a Spurs win.
Yes, you made your call after two blowouts by San Antonio then the Thunder responded and you didn't say shit. You waited until the Spurs won again before you started yapping again. You're basically doing a Tlong. You didn't predict anything, you made it clear that you were not making a win/loss prediction. You basically said what happens will happen regardless whether Ibaka plays or not. Otherwise you wouldn't have filed that disclaimer just in case the Spurs lost.
Let's not get all stupid and think it's in fashion.
It means that the impact of those players would be so profound that the Game 1 and 2 win would have been a loss without them. Try to follow the conversation instead of pulling stuff out of thin air, will you?
Oh, and please don't let the irony of how your shit take in this thread got pounded into the ground escape you.
Thin air? I quoted you.
So whether or not Tony plays in a game 6 on the road, the Spurs will win anyhow. I can prove that by showing that they did win in a game 6 without Tony for half the game. The Thunder were up while Tony was playing. Therefore your claim that only Tim and Tony being absent will turn a win into a loss has been debunked.
So that makes as much sense in retrospect as your retrospective hyperbole.
ambchang
06-02-2014, 04:12 PM
No it doesn't. Your OP stated you weren't saying the Spurs would win. How then did two games where the Spurs won support your argument? Your argument is that whether or not Ibaka played the entire series, the series outcome wouldn't be different. Now suddenly winning the series justifies your argument? Why then did you hedge your bet in the OP?
My first post is saying the point of the post is not to say the Spurs will win or not, ie, this is not a prediction thread. I have already said that the Spurs will win in 5 without Ibaka and 7 with Ibaka in another thread. If the Spurs were to lose this series, it does not invalidate my stance that Ibaka would not change the outcome of the series, it would only invalidate my earlier prediction the Spurs will win in 5/7 games.
Yes, you made your call after two blowouts by San Antonio then the Thunder responded and you didn't say shit. You waited until the Spurs won again before you started yapping again. You're basically doing a Tlong. You didn't predict anything, you made it clear that you were not making a win/loss prediction. You basically said what happens will happen regardless whether Ibaka plays or not. Otherwise you wouldn't have filed that disclaimer just in case the Spurs lost.
Let's not get all stupid and think it's in fashion.
You went blind or something? I responded to every single response to me after Games 3 and 4. In fact, one of the post you QUOTED was after either Game 3 and 4.
Thin air? I quoted you.
So whether or not Tony plays in a game 6 on the road, the Spurs will win anyhow. I can prove that by showing that they did win in a game 6 without Tony for half the game. The Thunder were up while Tony was playing. Therefore your claim that only Tim and Tony being absent will turn a win into a loss has been debunked.
So that makes as much sense in retrospect as your retrospective hyperbole.
It was a quote I answered to a specific question, you just pulled it out of nowhere and make it sound like I said Tim and Tony would be the only guys to make a difference in any given game, when I was specifically speaking to Games 1 and 2.
drive for five!
dmc u aint jane goodall you can't talk to this guy tbh
My first post is saying the point of the post is not to say the Spurs will win or not, ie, this is not a prediction thread. I have already said that the Spurs will win in 5 without Ibaka and 7 with Ibaka in another thread. If the Spurs were to lose this series, it does not invalidate my stance that Ibaka would not change the outcome of the series, it would only invalidate my earlier prediction the Spurs will win in 5/7 games.
You just ignored the question. You weren't required to disclaim picking a series winner in this thread. You did disclaim it in your OP. Then, in the same thread, you're using a win to say you were right. How can a win prove you to be right when you didn't say what the outcome would be, only that it wouldn't be changed by Ibaka? There would have to be a parallel universe to prove you to be right or wrong since you're making a hypothetical argument and not even choosing an outcome. You've insulated yourself from injury in the OP, you cannot file a claim now.
You went blind or something? I responded to every single response to me after Games 3 and 4. In fact, one of the post you QUOTED was after either Game 3 and 4.
And you didn't say anything to me. You responded to a bunch of shit talking but did not address the fact that I called out your bet hedging early on.
To address what MNP said about you being right until proven otherwise, that's not how it works. When you make a claim you accept the burden of proof. You're wrong until proven otherwise. Since there cannot be two outcomes, you can never be proven right. It would be different if you were countering another claim, however you weren't. You just felt good about the 1st two wins and had to make this thread, and in the process of doing so realized you might look like an idiot if the Spurs lose, so you made that disclaimer about picking a winner. If you felt strongly that the Spurs would win, you could have easily continued that in this thread. The fact you didn't is evidence enough that you were hedging.
It was a quote I answered to a specific question, you just pulled it out of nowhere and make it sound like I said Tim and Tony would be the only guys to make a difference in any given game, when I was specifically speaking to Games 1 and 2.
Actually no...
Ok, lemme know how you would feel going into a crucial series without a key player
If the spurs lost Parker or Duncan id be concerned, but not anyone else. Reason being nobody else will turn wins into loses or vice versa.
On the okc roster, only Durant and maybe Westbrook has that impact.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the 1st two games since they had already occurred before that post.
Thinking that key players don't decide wins and losses is just idiotic, as if anyone can fill those roles and the win would still occur.
drive for five!
dmc u aint jane goodall you can't talk to this guy tbh
Crikeys!
Robz4000
06-02-2014, 05:59 PM
Been a while since I've ventured downstairs and just now noticed this thread. My thoughts:
1) Thunder probably win with a healthy Ibaka. It took a crazy dunk from their 3rd string PG for the Spurs to realize that Serge isn't Prime Hakeem tbh. They probably would have split the first two games and it would have been a dogfight for 6-7 games.
2) Nobody will care about Serge being out for the first 2 games except for OKC fans and Laker fans still around on Spurstalk. Just like how nobody brings up Manu being out for Game 1 against Memphis except for Spurfan.
I could not care less if Ibaka, KD, LeBron, Wade, etc. were out these playoffs.
The only thing that matters is that Duncan rings.
I still think the Spurs win if Abaka was healthy tbh. Had they given up a game at home Pop prolly doessn't throw the white flag as early as he did in Game's 3 and 4. As ElNono has said multiple times, Pop gave up those games too early.
Still, its all moot, as long as Duncan rings...
ambchang
06-03-2014, 06:56 AM
drive for five!
dmc u aint jane goodall you can't talk to this guy tbh
:lol too retarded to even gain an upper hand in an argument vs a chimp
:lol coat tailing a superior poster
:lol zero takes.
You're winning!
drive for five internet argument wins!
ambchang
06-03-2014, 01:54 PM
You just ignored the question. You weren't required to disclaim picking a series winner in this thread. You did disclaim it in your OP. Then, in the same thread, you're using a win to say you were right. How can a win prove you to be right when you didn't say what the outcome would be, only that it wouldn't be changed by Ibaka? There would have to be a parallel universe to prove you to be right or wrong since you're making a hypothetical argument and not even choosing an outcome. You've insulated yourself from injury in the OP, you cannot file a claim now.
I did answer the question, and Game 5 provided the best proof. I gloated after Game 5, with strong evidence that the presence of Ibaka will not change the outcome of the series due to the similarities with Games 1 and 2. Unless you want to claim that without Ibaka in Games 3 thru 6 would have resulted in a Spurs loss, then go ahead. But you will most definitely be the minority.
And you didn't say anything to me. You responded to a bunch of shit talking but did not address the fact that I called out your bet hedging early on.
I went on and talked about predictions of Spurs win.
To address what MNP said about you being right until proven otherwise, that's not how it works. When you make a claim you accept the burden of proof. You're wrong until proven otherwise. Since there cannot be two outcomes, you can never be proven right. It would be different if you were countering another claim, however you weren't. You just felt good about the 1st two wins and had to make this thread, and in the process of doing so realized you might look like an idiot if the Spurs lose, so you made that disclaimer about picking a winner. If you felt strongly that the Spurs would win, you could have easily continued that in this thread. The fact you didn't is evidence enough that you were hedging.
That applies to every single argument on Spurstalk, so your point is moot.
Actually no...
That has absolutely nothing to do with the 1st two games since they had already occurred before that post.
Thinking that key players don't decide wins and losses is just idiotic, as if anyone can fill those roles and the win would still occur.
That has EVERYTHING to do with the first two games BECAUSE those games already occured before the post.
Now that the Spurs have won with Ibaka in the lineup, do you want to claim that the Spurs would have lost without Ibaka in the lineup?
I did answer the question, and Game 5 provided the best proof. I gloated after Game 5, with strong evidence that the presence of Ibaka will not change the outcome of the series due to the similarities with Games 1 and 2. Unless you want to claim that without Ibaka in Games 3 thru 6 would have resulted in a Spurs loss, then go ahead. But you will most definitely be the minority.
Once again ignoring the fact that you refused to pick a winner yet used a win to say you were right.
I went on and talked about predictions of Spurs win.
Not in the OP. You made it abundantly clear that you were not saying the Spurs would win. Parsimony dictates that you did that to hedge your bets, especially since you gloated later when the Spurs won.
That applies to every single argument on Spurstalk, so your point is moot.
Tu quoque doesn't save you here. You aren't right until proven otherwise, therefore you're wrong.
That has EVERYTHING to do with the first two games BECAUSE those games already occured before the post.
"Ibaka will not change the outcome of the series" That's the title of the thread. Since two games had passed, you could not be talking about those two games since your thread title isn't past tense. There was no outcome of the series as of the posting of this thread, so you cannot say whether or not something that did not yet exist could be changed and you couldn't know if it could or could not be changed unless you want to debate free will vs determinism which I gather you don't, and that you'd rather just pretend to know enough about the game to know separate outcomes based on who's playing in a 7 game series.
Now that the Spurs have won with Ibaka in the lineup, do you want to claim that the Spurs would have lost without Ibaka in the lineup?
Ibaka wasn't in the lineup during the 1st two games.
You're trying to play this from both angles and I know enough about that to nail your balls to the floor on it.
"Ibaka would not have made a 20+ point difference in either of the first two games, and here is why".. Half of your argument is saying Ibaka didn't make a difference and half is saying he wouldn't have. You cannot know if he would have made a difference in the 1st two games, so don't pretend you're only talking about the other games and don't pretend Ibaka played the entire series.
In essence what you are saying is that Ibaka would not make a difference in the W/L outcome if he played every single game. You've not clearly stated that, but you've talked around it enough to see the outline.
:lol DMC ambchang
You guys write chapters replying to each other. Get a fucking room already.
:lol DMC ambchang
You guys write chapters replying to each other. Get a fucking room already.
:cry:cry
ambchang
06-04-2014, 09:42 AM
Once again ignoring the fact that you refused to pick a winner yet used a win to say you were right.
I said the Spurs are going to win in another thread, and then said the presence of Ibaka will not change the outcome of the series. The point of this thread is not to predict the outcome of the series, but it goes hand in hand with it. Even in this thread itself, on later posts, I explicitly said Spurs will win, how is that not picking a winner?
Not in the OP. You made it abundantly clear that you were not saying the Spurs would win. Parsimony dictates that you did that to hedge your bets, especially since you gloated later when the Spurs won.
Yes, because that is not the point of the OP. But when inquired, I immediately picked a winner.
Tu quoque doesn't save you here. You aren't right until proven otherwise, therefore you're wrong.
The absence of right is not wrong.
"Ibaka will not change the outcome of the series" That's the title of the thread. Since two games had passed, you could not be talking about those two games since your thread title isn't past tense. There was no outcome of the series as of the posting of this thread, so you cannot say whether or not something that did not yet exist could be changed and you couldn't know if it could or could not be changed unless you want to debate free will vs determinism which I gather you don't, and that you'd rather just pretend to know enough about the game to know separate outcomes based on who's playing in a 7 game series.
Ibaka wasn't in the lineup during the 1st two games.
You're trying to play this from both angles and I know enough about that to nail your balls to the floor on it.
"Ibaka would not have made a 20+ point difference in either of the first two games, and here is why".. Half of your argument is saying Ibaka didn't make a difference and half is saying he wouldn't have. You cannot know if he would have made a difference in the 1st two games, so don't pretend you're only talking about the other games and don't pretend Ibaka played the entire series.
In essence what you are saying is that Ibaka would not make a difference in the W/L outcome if he played every single game. You've not clearly stated that, but you've talked around it enough to see the outline.
Tlong pointed it out in the first page, and I admitted it was a grammatical error on my part.
He's not coming back is he? Strange thread title...
I even responded:
True, should've been "would not have made ..."
That said, I fully expect to see Ibaka play in at least one game this series.
Also, I expect okc to win game 3.
ambchang
06-04-2014, 09:50 AM
oh crap
RsxPiimp
DD
Where you cowards at?
ohmwrecker
06-04-2014, 09:51 AM
Bookmarked for when I need something to read at nap time.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.