How did the media come to the consensus that the Rockets are better than the Spurs?

[Uriel]

Back in July, after the Spurs landed LaMarcus Aldridge, there was a lot of hype surrounding the team. Several pundits proclaimed the Spurs the team to beat, and at one point, Vegas odds even had the Spurs as the overall favorites to win the NBA championship.

Fast forward several months, and expectations have understandably tempered. Most experts now rank the Warriors and Cavaliers ahead of the Spurs, and understandably so, because these two teams after all made the Finals last season. But the Rockets?!

It started in August, when Ethan Strauss and Amin Elhassan ranked their top 5 teams in the NBA, and both of them picked Houston against San Antonio. Justifiably, this sentiment was widely ridiculed across SpursTalk (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251665), and we all thought that would be the end of it.

But rather than going away quietly, this idea that the Rockets are better than the Spurs seems to have caught on among the national media. First, Zach Lowe came out with an article proclaiming Houston as the biggest threat to Golden State in the West (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/35-crazy-predictions-for-the-2015-16-nba-season/). Next, Rob Mahoney went out and ranked the Rockets ahead of the Spurs in his Southwest Division preview for Sports Illustrated (http://www.si.com/nba/2015/10/21/spurs-rockets-grizzlies-anthony-davis-james-harden-southwest-division-preview).

This is not to say the Rockets won't be a good team next season. They have an additional year of playing experience under their belt, and they just added Ty Lawson to a team that already made the WCF last season. No doubt they will be one of the top contenders in the West.

But better than the Spurs? People forget, the Spurs were the best team in the NBA last season post-all star break, running roughshod through the NBA and emerging as the most credible threat to the Warriors in the West. And that team just added LaMarcus Aldridge and David West.

I'm not saying the Rockets won't be good. They definitely will be. But to say they're better than the Spurs? That is just ridiculous.

[cd021]

Back in July, after the Spurs landed LaMarcus Aldridge, there was a lot of hype surrounding the team. Several pundits proclaimed the Spurs the team to beat, and at one point, Vegas odds even had the Spurs as the overall favorites to win the NBA championship.

Fast forward several months, and expectations have understandably tempered. Most experts now rank the Warriors and Cavaliers ahead of the Spurs, and understandably so, because these two teams after all made the Finals last season. But the Rockets?!

It started in August, when Ethan Strauss and Amin Elhassan ranked their top 5 teams in the NBA, and both of them picked Houston against San Antonio. Justifiably, this sentiment was widely ridiculed across SpursTalk (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251665), and we all thought that would be the end of it.

But rather than going away quietly, this idea that the Rockets are better than the Spurs seems to have caught on among the national media. First, Zach Lowe came out with an article proclaiming Houston as the biggest threat to Golden State in the West (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/35-crazy-predictions-for-the-2015-16-nba-season/). Next, Rob Mahoney went out and ranked the Rockets ahead of the Spurs in his Southwest Division preview for Sports Illustrated (http://www.si.com/nba/2015/10/21/spurs-rockets-grizzlies-anthony-davis-james-harden-southwest-division-preview).

This is not to say the Rockets won't be a good team next season. They have an additional year of playing experience under their belt, and they just added Ty Lawson to a team that already made the WCF last season. No doubt they will be one of the top contenders in the West.

But better than the Spurs? People forget, the Spurs were the best team in the NBA last season post-all star break, running roughshod through the NBA and emerging as the most credible threat to the Warriors in the West. And that team just added LaMarcus Aldridge and David West.

I'm not saying the Rockets won't be good. They definitely will be. But to say they're better than the Spurs? That is just ridiculous.

I don't agree with it but I get it. I think the Rockets are the 3rd best team behind GSW and us.

They're really deep and athletic. They were one of the best defensive and offensive teams last year and adding Lawson, should help Harden and a full season from Howard & Capella should help their defense.

[cd98]

Rockets are a good team, but I think the hype has to do with Morey's way of assembling a team. To people that like analytics, this is a team that will excite you.

[DeRozan m8]

They got further than us last year and knocked off the team that beat us - in a series?
They also have an 'MVP'...even if his game is ugly AF.

I don't agree with it tho...Rockets are just a reg season team

[Othyus Lalanne]

I don't agree with it but I get it. I think the Rockets are the 3rd best team behind GSW and us.

They're really deep and athletic. They were one of the best defensive and offensive teams last year and adding Lawson, should help Harden and a full season from Howard & Capella should help their defense.

It's just so fucking hard to take any team with Dwight Howard on it seriously.

[kobyz]

Back in July, after the Spurs landed LaMarcus Aldridge, there was a lot of hype surrounding the team. Several pundits proclaimed the Spurs the team to beat, and at one point, Vegas odds even had the Spurs as the overall favorites to win the NBA championship.

Fast forward several months, and expectations have understandably tempered. Most experts now rank the Warriors and Cavaliers ahead of the Spurs, and understandably so, because these two teams after all made the Finals last season. But the Rockets?!

It started in August, when Ethan Strauss and Amin Elhassan ranked their top 5 teams in the NBA, and both of them picked Houston against San Antonio. Justifiably, this sentiment was widely ridiculed across SpursTalk (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251665), and we all thought that would be the end of it.

But rather than going away quietly, this idea that the Rockets are better than the Spurs seems to have caught on among the national media. First, Zach Lowe came out with an article proclaiming Houston as the biggest threat to Golden State in the West (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/35-crazy-predictions-for-the-2015-16-nba-season/). Next, Rob Mahoney went out and ranked the Rockets ahead of the Spurs in his Southwest Division preview for Sports Illustrated (http://www.si.com/nba/2015/10/21/spurs-rockets-grizzlies-anthony-davis-james-harden-southwest-division-preview).

This is not to say the Rockets won't be a good team next season. They have an additional year of playing experience under their belt, and they just added Ty Lawson to a team that already made the WCF last season. No doubt they will be one of the top contenders in the West.

But better than the Spurs? People forget, the Spurs were the best team in the NBA last season post-all star break, running roughshod through the NBA and emerging as the most credible threat to the Warriors in the West. And that team just added LaMarcus Aldridge and David West.

I'm not saying the Rockets won't be good. They definitely will be. But to say they're better than the Spurs? That is just ridiculous.

Stop with this cockiness already you pathetic blind...

[elbamba]

Houston looked better than SA last year towards the end of the season until SA beat their asses in back-to-back games. Unfortunately, it landed SA the Clippers in Round 1.

[urunobili]

The clips could be better than the Spurs as well. We oughta be careful with too much expectsti no until April/March when we'll have a bigger body of work if the new team to examine...

[Kawhi 5-0]

I think it has something to do with Houston being the fifth biggest metro market in the U.S. and San Antonio being 25th.

[spursistan]

It's just so fucking hard to take any team with Dwight Howard on it seriously.

[Brian Windhorst]

-The Rockets got to the WCF last year with one playmaker. Then they got a top ~15 PG for free.

-People in the media love to single out lower tier players that are going to "surprise people". It makes them look sagely, even if they turn out to be wrong. Kosta Koufos, Ed Davis, CJ MCCollum, etc. In this vein, they are ALL OVER D-Mo and that center that was a foul machine against us. It wouldn't surprise me if an edgelord like Strauss thinks the difference between LMA/West and DMO/Jones is insignificant.

-Like it or not, Harden has routinely cucked the Spurs mercilessly for as long as he's been in the league. A H2H matchup would be a nightmare.

-Like it or not, Ariza is a really good positional defender, and is one of those players against whom Kawhi is always quiet. Green is a better Harden defender IMO, so against Houston our DPOY is basically relegated to standing in the corner guarding a 3pt shooter

-Last year was the year no one in the media wanted to talk about Parker. This year it is the 'hot take' and everyone in the media wants to overstate how much he's slowed down

-It's too early for anyone to have seen that Houston's 2nd unit is likely a disaster. Corey Brewer is their scoring punch off the bench.

-Aldridge and especially West have looked pretty meh in the preseason

-It's easy to see why someone would predict the Rockets finishing above the Spurs in the standings. Pop regularly punts away games, for better or worse, and that cost us like 4 spots last season easy

-It is easy for a sportswriter to see how the Rockets offense works on paper. Harden or Lowry with the ball, Ariza and Jones spacing the floor, Dwight in the middle. No one knows how the Spurs are going to generate shots other than 'passing a bunch'. Is TP going to handle the ball? Run through LMA in the post? Put Kawhi in the PnR? Or just keep giving it to Danny Green at the top of the key like in the preseason /s



I'd say Spurs in 6 without breaking too much of a sweat, for various reasons, but I would also comfortably bet on Houston finishing higher in the standings, assuming Dwight is healthy. If Pop is going to start Boban Marjanovic and Matt Bonner on B2B's, we're going to finish with a worse record than a slightly lesser team that plays an MVP, a top 5 center, and an allstar PG 30+ minutes a night for all 82 games.

Overall, though, most sportswriters pride themselves on having edgy opinions. Bill Simmons basically paved the way for this.

[Stevie Johnson]

-The Rockets got to the WCF last year with one playmaker. Then they got a top ~15 PG for free.

-People in the media love to single out lower tier players that are going to "surprise people". It makes them look sagely, even if they turn out to be wrong. Kosta Koufos, Ed Davis, CJ MCCollum, etc. In this vein, they are ALL OVER D-Mo and that center that was a foul machine against us. It wouldn't surprise me if an edgelord like Strauss thinks the difference between LMA/West and DMO/Jones is insignificant.

-Like it or not, Harden has routinely cucked the Spurs mercilessly for as long as he's been in the league. A H2H matchup would be a nightmare.

-Like it or not, Ariza is a really good positional defender, and is one of those players against whom Kawhi is always quiet. Green is a better Harden defender IMO, so against Houston our DPOY is basically relegated to standing in the corner guarding a 3pt shooter

-Last year was the year no one in the media wanted to talk about Parker. This year it is the 'hot take' and everyone in the media wants to overstate how much he's slowed down

-It's too early for anyone to have seen that Houston's 2nd unit is likely a disaster. Corey Brewer is their scoring punch off the bench.

-Aldridge and especially West have looked pretty meh in the preseason

-It's easy to see why someone would predict the Rockets finishing above the Spurs in the standings. Pop regularly punts away games, for better or worse, and that cost us like 4 spots last season easy

-It is easy for a sportswriter to see how the Rockets offense works on paper. Harden or Lowry with the ball, Ariza and Jones spacing the floor, Dwight in the middle. No one knows how the Spurs are going to generate shots other than 'passing a bunch'. Is TP going to handle the ball? Run through LMA in the post? Put Kawhi in the PnR? Or just keep giving it to Danny Green at the top of the key like in the preseason /s



I'd say Spurs in 6 without breaking too much of a sweat, for various reasons, but I would also comfortably bet on Houston finishing higher in the standings, assuming Dwight is healthy. If Pop is going to start Boban Marjanovic and Matt Bonner on B2B's, we're going to finish with a worse record than a slightly lesser team that plays an MVP, a top 5 center, and an allstar PG 30+ minutes a night for all 82 games.

Overall, though, most sportswriters pride themselves on having edgy opinions. Bill Simmons basically paved the way for this.
Brian you sound so intelligent.

[FromWayDowntown]

This all matters because the teams making the NBA playoffs and their seeding are determined by polls and media votes.

[SpursFan86]

It's really not that ridiculous of a take :lol It could go either way. Rockets won 56 games last year with Dwight missing half the season, and then made the WCF without Beverley/Motiejunas + Dwight on a minutes restriction. Their biggest weakness was having no secondary playmaker when Harden went to the bench (ORTG with Harden = 110.6, ORTG without Harden = 96.6) - they solved that problem by going out and getting Ty Lawson for practically nothing.

You can do the same for the Spurs. We won 55 games with Kawhi missing 20 games, and Splitter/Mills missing 30 games. We added Aldridge and West. That being said, people here scoff at the "Spurs are old" argument, but it is a valid concern with this team whether you want to admit it or not. I've learned not to doubt Duncan, but it's perfectly reasonable if someone wants to predict a decline from him or question whether he'll hold up for the entire season + playoffs. Same goes for Manu. Then there's the question of how well Aldridge will fit, or how long it'll take for him to really get comfortable.

I'm predicting the Spurs to be better than the Rockets. I'd definitely take us in a playoff series over them assuming both teams are healthy. But I can see the arguments for the other side and I'm not going to act like it's some absurd opinion to think Houston will finish ahead of us.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Houston looked better than SA last year towards the end of the season until SA beat their asses in back-to-back games. Unfortunately, it landed SA the Clippers in Round 1.
no, losing to the fucking Pelicans landed SA the Clippers in Round 1

the Spurs needed to win out to avoid the 6th seed and they almost.... almost... almost did it.

[Chinook]

Terrance Jones being healthy again is huge for the match-up. The Spurs have had no answer for him. However, with LMA, it's a mutual issue. I would imagine Howard is going to guard LMA and Jones will check Duncan. So Tim will have to take advantage. As far as the wings go, Green has the ability to draw Ariza's attention, but he's probably going to have to earn it with a couple of games where he shoots lights out. Kawhi will not be relegated to the corner, though. The Spurs are going to make him a big part of the offense, for better or worse.

Lawson vs. Parker is the only wildcard. Tony has to be able to guard someone. If Ty draws Danny or Kawhi, the resulting mismatch could swing multiple possessions.

[Fireball]

I also was high on Jones in the past, but in the preseason game against us he sucked big time ...

[hater]

Rockets are shit. Dwight is a pussy and can't even be considers a full time Center.

LOLckets are a fucking joke. Fuck them and their fans

[widowmaker]

James Harden

[Ice009]

Houston looked better than SA last year towards the end of the season until SA beat their asses in back-to-back games. Unfortunately, it landed SA the Clippers in Round 1.

It didn't land us the Clippers in round 1. It gave us the chance to finish second if we were to beat NO in the last game of the season. Losing to New Orleans is what landed us the Clippers in round 1.

[FromWayDowntown]

It didn't land us the Clippers in round 1. It gave us the chance to finish second if we were to beat NO in the last game of the season. Losing to New Orleans is what landed us the Clippers in round 1.

So did losing to the Knicks -- and giving away the Cleveland game at home with missed free throws in the last 10 seconds.

[Ice009]

So did losing to the Knicks -- and giving away the Cleveland game at home with missed free throws in the last 10 seconds.

Elbamba was talking about the Rockets games which were at the end of the season, so we're strictly talking about end of season games here. He stated that those two games got us the Clippers and that is not entirely correct. By winning those two games it enabled the Spurs with the chance to finish 2nd if they were to beat NO in the last game of the season. Sure, those other games you mentioned cost the Spurs, but by winning those two Rockets games, the Spurs still had a chance to finish second. We all know those other games earlier in the season cost us, but the point is that they still had a chance to write all those wrongs with the last game of the season and unfortunately they didn't get it done. It never should have come down to that though. They threw away too many games.

[TheDoctor]

I don't agree with that bullshit but I get why they would pick the Rockets. With a healthy Ty Lawson setting up Harden and Dwight plus adding 15pts a night, they can be an interesting team. In the end they're trash only for having Jason Terry, so, fuck'em.

[Hoops Czar]

So did losing to the Knicks -- and giving away the Cleveland game at home with missed free throws in the last 10 seconds.

So did blowing a 17 point lead at home to Detroit; losing to Toronto, Losing to the Lakers at home on a Swaggy three in OT, losing b2b triple OT games vs Portland and Memphis because they couldn't hit a single free throw, etc. Those "meaningless regular season games" though :lol.

[elbamba]

It didn't land us the Clippers in round 1. It gave us the chance to finish second if we were to beat NO in the last game of the season. Losing to New Orleans is what landed us the Clippers in round 1.

The season landed us the Clippers. My point is that the Spurs kicked the crap out of Houston at the end of the season when it mattered the most.

[SAGirl]

Back in July, after the Spurs landed LaMarcus Aldridge, there was a lot of hype surrounding the team. Several pundits proclaimed the Spurs the team to beat, and at one point, Vegas odds even had the Spurs as the overall favorites to win the NBA championship.

Fast forward several months, and expectations have understandably tempered. Most experts now rank the Warriors and Cavaliers ahead of the Spurs, and understandably so, because these two teams after all made the Finals last season. But the Rockets?!

It started in August, when Ethan Strauss and Amin Elhassan ranked their top 5 teams in the NBA, and both of them picked Houston against San Antonio. Justifiably, this sentiment was widely ridiculed across SpursTalk (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251665), and we all thought that would be the end of it.

But rather than going away quietly, this idea that the Rockets are better than the Spurs seems to have caught on among the national media. First, Zach Lowe came out with an article proclaiming Houston as the biggest threat to Golden State in the West (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/35-crazy-predictions-for-the-2015-16-nba-season/). Next, Rob Mahoney went out and ranked the Rockets ahead of the Spurs in his Southwest Division preview for Sports Illustrated (http://www.si.com/nba/2015/10/21/spurs-rockets-grizzlies-anthony-davis-james-harden-southwest-division-preview).

This is not to say the Rockets won't be a good team next season. They have an additional year of playing experience under their belt, and they just added Ty Lawson to a team that already made the WCF last season. No doubt they will be one of the top contenders in the West.

But better than the Spurs? People forget, the Spurs were the best team in the NBA last season post-all star break, running roughshod through the NBA and emerging as the most credible threat to the Warriors in the West. And that team just added LaMarcus Aldridge and David West.

I'm not saying the Rockets won't be good. They definitely will be. But to say they're better than the Spurs? That is just ridiculous.
I haven't followed up on what the media is saying on the odds bc it doesn't mean anything, but I imagine there are variants of:
1. chemistry and fit issues will be problem
2. old guys, injury risk, someone's wheels finally falling off a cliff
3. Tony Parker's questionable Euroleague play, and poor play, and the Spurs still needing him to stay healthy to handle the bball and set others up. Some points from him and several assists are required per night.
4. Unproven bench: Kyle Anderson, Boban, who?? Manu/old/minutes restrictions/injury risk, etc. Behind him, Simmons? really? Rasual Butler? Ok but he's no Manu.

Etc. If you dissect the Spurs you would think they are fool's gold. As always with the spurs, the sum of the whole is better than all individual parts. Because they have their chemistry issues, and Pop was in full experiment mode in preseason, they didn't look formidable. But when this team gets it going they will be awesome quite frankly.

[kobyz]

What a joke thread! Does op is Harlem alt?

[Gladney to see you]

It's all transition D these days.

[Sean Cagney]

It's just so fucking hard to take any team with Dwight Howard on it seriously.

I am not a fan of that guy at all.

[Budkin]

Because people only remember the Western Conference Finals.

[Kawhitstorm]

B/c the Rockets added Lawson & will be getting D-Mo back after reaching the WCF w/ Jason Terry/Josh Smith/Prigioni playing major minutes & Howard playing on one leg. If Howard is relatively healthy then they will be a complete team esp. w/ Capela being a viable backup for Howard.

If Tony wasn't on a steep decline then you could argue otherwise.

[dbreiden83080]

Dwight Howard is the GOAT!!

[kobyz]

Because Kawhi got bitch slap by Matt Barnes...

[Cowboys_Wear_Spurs]

We all know how Clyde feels about this topic.

[NameLess Scrub]

In before Tony vs Kawhi part 13,457.

[el contusione]

It's just so fucking hard to take any team with Dwight Howard on it seriously.
This.. dwight is the biggest baby alive.

[TD 21]

It's really not that ridiculous of a take :lol It could go either way. Rockets won 56 games last year with Dwight missing half the season, and then made the WCF without Beverley/Motiejunas + Dwight on a minutes restriction. Their biggest weakness was having no secondary playmaker when Harden went to the bench (ORTG with Harden = 110.6, ORTG without Harden = 96.6) - they solved that problem by going out and getting Ty Lawson for practically nothing.

You can do the same for the Spurs. We won 55 games with Kawhi missing 20 games, and Splitter/Mills missing 30 games. We added Aldridge and West. That being said, people here scoff at the "Spurs are old" argument, but it is a valid concern with this team whether you want to admit it or not. I've learned not to doubt Duncan, but it's perfectly reasonable if someone wants to predict a decline from him or question whether he'll hold up for the entire season + playoffs. Same goes for Manu. Then there's the question of how well Aldridge will fit, or how long it'll take for him to really get comfortable.

I'm predicting the Spurs to be better than the Rockets. I'd definitely take us in a playoff series over them assuming both teams are healthy. But I can see the arguments for the other side and I'm not going to act like it's some absurd opinion to think Houston will finish ahead of us.

No, it's not. What is, is pretending the Spurs are clearly behind them or anyone, which is what the consensus has become.

Never have I seen a team drop so much in the eyes of the public without playing a game. The Spurs went from something like co-favorites to win the championship to either fifth or sixth. Suddenly, they're filled with vulnerabilities, while the Warriors are the greatest team ever and the Thunder and Rockets aren't far behind.

[Hoops Czar]

No, it's not. What is, is pretending the Spurs are clearly behind them or anyone, which is what the consensus has become.

Never have I seen a team drop so much in the eyes of the public without playing a game. The Spurs went from something like co-favorites to win the championship to either fifth or sixth. Suddenly, they're filled with vulnerabilities, while the Warriors are the greatest team ever and the Thunder and Rockets aren't far behind.

So the spurs went from co-favorites to win a championship "without playing a game" to fifth or sixth "without playing a game". Interesting.

[Roxsfan]

Rockets are shit. Dwight is a pussy and can't even be considers a full time Center.

LOLckets are a fucking joke. Fuck them and their fans

Village idiot


Lots of good takes here minus pendejo up there^


Fuck sports writers - they don't know shit. That's why the games are played.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

Rockets are shit. Dwight is a pussy and can't even be considers a full time Center.

LOLckets are a fucking joke. Fuck them and their fans

Exactly, Rockets are a first round exit to the clippers if we take care of business versus the pelicans. Good grief, Rockets have no shot at the title, they will be lucky to make the second round in this WC.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

Village idiot


Lots of good takes here minus pendejo up there^


Fuck sports writers - they don't know shit. That's why the games are played.

lol, yalls season was a total fluke last year, it depended on so many things going wrong for so many teams, yall have zero fucking shot at the WCF this year

[SpursFan86]

ESPN's "expert" picks: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13947198/nba-espn-experts-predictions-2015-16-western-conference-champions

Out of 25 picks:

Warriors - 9
Thunder - 7
Spurs - 5
Rockets - 2
Clippers - 2

[Obstructed_View]

I am not a fan of that guy at all.

I think he's great.

[Sean Cagney]

Elbamba was talking about the Rockets games which were at the end of the season, so we're strictly talking about end of season games here. He stated that those two games got us the Clippers and that is not entirely correct. By winning those two games it enabled the Spurs with the chance to finish 2nd if they were to beat NO in the last game of the season. Sure, those other games you mentioned cost the Spurs, but by winning those two Rockets games, the Spurs still had a chance to finish second. We all know those other games earlier in the season cost us, but the point is that they still had a chance to write all those wrongs with the last game of the season and unfortunately they didn't get it done. It never should have come down to that though. They threw away too many games.

They threw away way too many games IMO, the Portland game in which they had won a few times on end was one of them but they lost in triple OT. That Memphis loss as well they let slip away. Those were heart breaking losses looking back. It's all over now but you are right they threw away way too many games. The last game of the season should have been a rest all and wait for the playoffs to start.
I think he's great.

Thats your opinion man.
ESPN's "expert" picks: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13947198/nba-espn-experts-predictions-2015-16-western-conference-champions

Out of 25 picks:

Warriors - 9
Thunder - 7
Spurs - 5
Rockets - 2
Clippers - 2

They always seem very high on the Thunder every year.

[quentin_compson]

Regarding last season: Are some guys here really thinking that the Spurs are the only team who lost a couple of close games or did not win every game against the bottom clubs of the league? It is what it is, and it happens to pretty much every team over the course of a season.

As for the Rockets, I definitely could imagine them finishing above the Spurs in the RS. Health is going to be a factor obviously, especially with Howard, judging his last couple of years, but well, the Spurs have some potential health issues of their own.

[Obstructed_View]

Thats your opinion man.

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/28909467.jpg

[Sean Cagney]

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/28909467.jpg

Mine was a joke too from the movie big lebowski. I should have posted the vid or caption...

[Roxsfan]

lol, yalls season was a total fluke last year, it depended on so many things going wrong for so many teams, yall have zero fucking shot at the WCF this year

Had we had DMO, pat bev and a fully healthy Dwight- we would have gone all the way tbh.



*yes they shit the bed something awful tonite but still sans D12 and DMO and chemistry issues with new player.

McHale's rotations still suck.

[Spurs 4 The Win]

Had we had DMO, pat bev and a fully healthy Dwight- we would have gone all the way tbh.



*yes they shit the bed something awful tonite but still sans D12 and DMO and chemistry issues with new player.

McHale's rotations still suck.

I was talking about the team you had last year which included your injuries, yall way overachieved. This year, with them back, I can see yall pushing a second round matchup to 6 or 7 games before losing. You are going nowhere with McFail though.

[Russ]

Nuggets 105 -- Rockets 85.

Tonight (in Houston).

[Uriel]

:lmao Rockets
:lmao 5-10
:lmao "Better than the Spurs"
:lmao National media

[kaji157]

Back in July, after the Spurs landed LaMarcus Aldridge, there was a lot of hype surrounding the team. Several pundits proclaimed the Spurs the team to beat, and at one point, Vegas odds even had the Spurs as the overall favorites to win the NBA championship.

Fast forward several months, and expectations have understandably tempered. Most experts now rank the Warriors and Cavaliers ahead of the Spurs, and understandably so, because these two teams after all made the Finals last season. But the Rockets?!

It started in August, when Ethan Strauss and Amin Elhassan ranked their top 5 teams in the NBA, and both of them picked Houston against San Antonio. Justifiably, this sentiment was widely ridiculed across SpursTalk (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251665), and we all thought that would be the end of it.

But rather than going away quietly, this idea that the Rockets are better than the Spurs seems to have caught on among the national media. First, Zach Lowe came out with an article proclaiming Houston as the biggest threat to Golden State in the West (http://grantland.com/the-triangle/35-crazy-predictions-for-the-2015-16-nba-season/). Next, Rob Mahoney went out and ranked the Rockets ahead of the Spurs in his Southwest Division preview for Sports Illustrated (http://www.si.com/nba/2015/10/21/spurs-rockets-grizzlies-anthony-davis-james-harden-southwest-division-preview).

This is not to say the Rockets won't be a good team next season. They have an additional year of playing experience under their belt, and they just added Ty Lawson to a team that already made the WCF last season. No doubt they will be one of the top contenders in the West.

But better than the Spurs? People forget, the Spurs were the best team in the NBA last season post-all star break, running roughshod through the NBA and emerging as the most credible threat to the Warriors in the West. And that team just added LaMarcus Aldridge and David West.

I'm not saying the Rockets won't be good. They definitely will be. But to say they're better than the Spurs? That is just ridiculous.

Because media members get money in different ways.

Good reporting

Advertising

Telling lies

NBA Teams...