Satisfied...

[jeffdrums22]

I think the Spurs have re-established themselves to the position they were in before January 1 when they were 23-8: Top team and contender for the NBA championship.

From January 1-February 11, they had a 10-10 stretch, now they are starting off a 5-0 stretch. I personally never lost confidence in the Spurs, and right now, they are just beating teams they are supposed to beat, no huge accomplishment. I know I'm just stating a bunch of numbers, and the Spurs 5 straight victories featured 3 really easy teams, but it was the Spurs' careless losses to really easy teams that had people talking about the Spurs being on the decline and on the verge of a first-round elimination in the playoffs. They are now 3-0 after the All-Star break this year, and will continue their run as the best NBA winning percentage after the All-Star break in the Duncan era.

The team you saw tonight is very capable of beating Dallas. Dallas should hope that the current team in the past 5 games, doesn't show up in the playoffs.

So, who now here is satisfied with the Spurs for now at least? Five straight is a lot for the Spurs if they were as bad as some people were saying...

[samikeyp]

I will be satisfied when Duncan is holding up another O'Brien trophy....until then nothing else matters.

[jeffdrums22]

I will be satisfied when Duncan is holding up another O'Brien trophy....until then nothing else matters.

We are very much on the way to that. The Spurs made a big statement opening night in Dallas, regardless what has happened since then.

[fitzgerald]

Play someone that will make the playoffs. Then you will see what they can do. Props for beating the teams you should beat. It is hard to judge progress if you play someone bad. That goes for any team.

[samikeyp]

We are very much on the way to that. The Spurs made a big statement opening night in Dallas, regardless what has happened since then.

so the Mavericks two victories against "us" do not matter?

[Mr. Body]

Very good teams look excellent against crappy teams. Suddenly they don't look so excellent against truly excellent teams.

Dallas = excellent. San Antonio = very good.

[ManuTim_best of Fwiendz]

I think we should wait til the Houston game to affirm San Antonio gaining some steam.

[samikeyp]

If the Spurs can get from here through the Rockets game unscathed....I would be a lot closer to being convinced.

[stretch]

i think its too early. a lot of shitty teams go on nice winning streaks from time to time, like the nets the past 2 years. not saying that San Antonio is shitty, but its too early to suddenly say that they are the top team. while i think they are still the second best team in the league, they dont appear to have enough firepower, rebounding, or defense to beat Dallas. i see the two teams meeting in the WCF, with Dallas winning in 5 (not dominating, but winning in 5 VERY hard-fought, physical games, 3 of which come down to the final 30 seconds or so). i think Dallas just has too many weapons for the Spurs to handle. Dirk and Duncan always get their points, although lately Dirk has definitely been the better player when the teams meet. Harris and Parker pretty much cancel each other out, as do Ginobili and Howard. then that leaves Terry and Stackhouse, whom no one else is capable of guarding, because if you put Bowen on one of them, then its going to take a lot of heat off of either Dirk or Howard (although they both seem to be able to get the best of him nowadays).

i honestly cant see San Antonio beating Dallas. Dallas has clearly gotten better last year in just about every phase of basketball, while San Antonio has not gotten any better, but has actually declined considerably. also, San Antonio doesnt have the mental edge that they used to have on Dallas, which makes a huge difference. and there can be no excuses this year, saying that Duncan or Ginobili got hurt, because both have been healthy this year, and the team hasnt improved at all. of course, we will see when the playoffs come, but i dont expect the Spurs to win more than 1 game against Dallas in a playoff series.

[ponky]

well, i'll give the spurs some credit, they are definitely playing better ball, i don't care who their opponents are, they look like they have a bit more energy and fire in their game...this has no bearing on the mavericks, so i don't see why the mavs should *hope* they don't meet these spurs in the playoffs...so, celebrate your success and we'll continue to celebrate ours, we don't fear teams anymore, it's more about just staying focused and staying healthy as we continue to rack up wins

[mavsfan1000]

I still think the mavs biggest threat are the suns. The mavs match up well with the spurs along with the spurs getting older definitely helps the mavs. The spurs match up well to the suns though so anything can happen.

[jeffdrums22]

so the Mavericks two victories against "us" do not matter?

They matter, but for the SPURS (not "us" if you want to be politically correct) to go to Dallas opening night and win on their floor, makes a big statement.

[jeffdrums22]

Very good teams look excellent against crappy teams. Suddenly they don't look so excellent against truly excellent teams.

Dallas = excellent. San Antonio = very good.

When two excellent teams meet in the playoffs, you get a 7 game series (with 2 overtimes in the series too), obviously one of them will be the winner.

Dallas is just playing with something to prove (hence the 45-9 record) after a Finals whooping at the hands of Miami, while the Spurs are still capable of beating anybody, but haven't really came out with the same hunger. Now they are doing what they did before: beat the teams they are supposed to beat. No suprises.

[ponky]

They matter, but for the SPURS (not "us" if you want to be politically correct) to go to Dallas opening night and win on their floor, makes a big statement.

meh, it would've made a bigger statement had we not dropped our first four games, like you guys would've been the only team to have beaten us in those first two weeks...but the mavs weren't ready for shit the opening week, they should've been but they weren't, they didn't play the pre-season that the spurs had...anyway, if the spurs had a made a big statement in the first game then they wouldn't have gone on to lose the next two in a row, they would've really impressed upon the mavs that they were better with that *big* statement...but that wasn't the case.

[ponky]

When two excellent teams meet in the playoffs, you get a 7 game series (with 2 overtimes in the series too), obviously one of them will be the winner.

Dallas is just playing with something to prove (hence the 45-9 record) after a Finals whooping at the hands of Miami, while the Spurs are still capable of beating anybody, but haven't really came out with the same hunger. Now they are doing what they did before: beat the teams they are supposed to beat. No suprises.

i wonder if spurs fans are embarrassed by your blind homerism...oh wait...

[jeffdrums22]

I still think the mavs biggest threat are the suns. The mavs match up well with the spurs along with the spurs getting older definitely helps the mavs. The spurs match up well to the suns though so anything can happen.

I'm tired of all this "Spurs are getting older" talk. If you look at key players:

Erick Dampier is 31. Jerry Stackhouse is 32. Jason Terry is 29, Dirk is 28. Josh Howard and Devin Harris are young, but we've already seen what Howard's youth does last year, which is not much. He can start by calling a timeout when he's supposed to.

Tim Duncan is 30. Elson is 30. Ginobili is 29. Tony Parker is 24. Bonner I figure will play a key role somehow in the Spurs' success in the playoffs, he's only 26. Now if you look at the Spurs bench, they're old, but the bench doesn't equal the championship.

Other than the bench of Horry (won't log very many minutes in the playoffs), Barry, and Finley - What else makes the Spurs old and unathletic?

[leemajors]

i think its too early. a lot of shitty teams go on nice winning streaks from time to time, like the nets the past 2 years. not saying that San Antonio is shitty, but its too early to suddenly say that they are the top team. while i think they are still the second best team in the league, they dont appear to have enough firepower, rebounding, or defense to beat Dallas. i see the two teams meeting in the WCF, with Dallas winning in 5 (not dominating, but winning in 5 VERY hard-fought, physical games, 3 of which come down to the final 30 seconds or so). i think Dallas just has too many weapons for the Spurs to handle. Dirk and Duncan always get their points, although lately Dirk has definitely been the better player when the teams meet. Harris and Parker pretty much cancel each other out, as do Ginobili and Howard. then that leaves Terry and Stackhouse, whom no one else is capable of guarding, because if you put Bowen on one of them, then its going to take a lot of heat off of either Dirk or Howard (although they both seem to be able to get the best of him nowadays).

i honestly cant see San Antonio beating Dallas. Dallas has clearly gotten better last year in just about every phase of basketball, while San Antonio has not gotten any better, but has actually declined considerably. also, San Antonio doesnt have the mental edge that they used to have on Dallas, which makes a huge difference. and there can be no excuses this year, saying that Duncan or Ginobili got hurt, because both have been healthy this year, and the team hasnt improved at all. of course, we will see when the playoffs come, but i dont expect the Spurs to win more than 1 game against Dallas in a playoff series.

dallas may be peaking way too early, but that remains to be seen. i would rather my team build momentum as the playoffs approach as opposed to trying to maintain it. i do like to see mav fan casually dismissing the spurs though, should be an interesting postseason to say the least.

[Pablo Escobar]

I'll be satisfied when the spurs are beating everybody by at least 20 maybe 25 untill then they haven't showed me shit

[aaronstampler]

so the Mavericks two victories against "us" do not matter?

We hid Elson in the first Dallas game in SA and had Manu injured halfway through and didn't have him available for the second. I'm excited about the Elson-Dirk matchup.

[Cry Havoc]

i wonder if spurs fans are embarrassed by your blind homerism...oh wait...

What do you count "We'll beat the Spurs in no more than 5 games" as? Cautiously optimistic? :wakeup

[jaespur21]

i was very glad 2 get home tonight and see the highlights and the stat line. I hope we keep getting better.

[SoCalSpursFan]

I'll be satisfied when the spurs are beating everybody by at least 20 maybe 25 untill then they haven't showed me shit

:lol

[lefty]

:ttiwwp:

[FromWayDowntown]

but we've already seen what Howard's youth does last year, which is not much.

This is very much akin to regarding Dwight Howard as a "fluke player." Josh Howard is legitimately an all-star player. The guy dropped 16 ppg and, probably more importantly, 7 rpg in the Spurs/Mavs 2006 series. It's not as if he's a poor player or he's some unheard of guy who has just suddenly appeared. Josh Howard's youth was a vital factor in the Mavericks reaching the 2006 Finals.

I don't disagree with the point that the Spurs are playing better -- albeit against very much weaker competition -- but it's asinine to me to suggest that Josh Howard is a liability for the Mavericks.

[TDMVPDPOY]

enjoy the run, regular season doesnt mean shit if its not carried into the playoffs, well 2nd round exit to the hands of the suns or showponies

[4001 STEREO SPUR]

I agree with samikeyp.
I think Duncan and the rest of the team would too.

We'll be satisfied when we're holding that trophy

It's nice to be back on a win streak, but we haven't proven anything yet!

[texas84]

I'm tired of all this "Spurs are getting older" talk. If you look at key players:

Erick Dampier is 31. Jerry Stackhouse is 32. Jason Terry is 29, Dirk is 28. Josh Howard and Devin Harris are young, but we've already seen what Howard's youth does last year, which is not much. He can start by calling a timeout when he's supposed to.

Tim Duncan is 30. Elson is 30. Ginobili is 29. Tony Parker is 24. Bonner I figure will play a key role somehow in the Spurs' success in the playoffs, he's only 26. Now if you look at the Spurs bench, they're old, but the bench doesn't equal the championship.

Other than the bench of Horry (won't log very many minutes in the playoffs), Barry, and Finley - What else makes the Spurs old and unathletic?

Horry won't get many minutes in the playoffs... HA! Don't know what dream world your living in, but Horry is your best big man after Duncan. He'll will be playing a lot come playoff time.

Finley's getting old, Barry's getting old, Vaughn is getting old, Bowen is getting old. The Spurs (my friend) are an older team.



They matter, but for the SPURS (not "us" if you want to be politically correct) to go to Dallas opening night and win on their floor, makes a big statement.

If you really consider the first game of the year a statement game... i don't know what to say.

[GrandeDavid]

I think the Spurs have re-established themselves to the position they were in before January 1 when they were 23-8: Top team and contender for the NBA championship.

From January 1-February 11, they had a 10-10 stretch, now they are starting off a 5-0 stretch. I personally never lost confidence in the Spurs, and right now, they are just beating teams they are supposed to beat, no huge accomplishment. I know I'm just stating a bunch of numbers, and the Spurs 5 straight victories featured 3 really easy teams, but it was the Spurs' careless losses to really easy teams that had people talking about the Spurs being on the decline and on the verge of a first-round elimination in the playoffs. They are now 3-0 after the All-Star break this year, and will continue their run as the best NBA winning percentage after the All-Star break in the Duncan era.

The team you saw tonight is very capable of beating Dallas. Dallas should hope that the current team in the past 5 games, doesn't show up in the playoffs.

So, who now here is satisfied with the Spurs for now at least? Five straight is a lot for the Spurs if they were as bad as some people were saying...

Nothing short of a championship will satisfy me.

[td4mvp21]

We beat two tough teams in Detroit and Denver. Denver always gives us trouble because they are bruisers in the paint and Anthony is a tough matchup for anyone, not to mention that they have A.I now. We struggled to beat Denver when we played them back in December and then now we kicked their asses bad. The other teams have been bad, but we wooped them. I like how we are playing. We need to keep this up because we have tough teams in Toronto, Orlando, and Houston coming up. If we can keep the win streak going then I'll be pretty impressed. I still don't know if we can beat Dallas though, it's going to take nearly perfect consistency and team effort.

[td4mvp21]

meh, it would've made a bigger statement had we not dropped our first four games, like you guys would've been the only team to have beaten us in those first two weeks...but the mavs weren't ready for shit the opening week, they should've been but they weren't, they didn't play the pre-season that the spurs had...anyway, if the spurs had a made a big statement in the first game then they wouldn't have gone on to lose the next two in a row, they would've really impressed upon the mavs that they were better with that *big* statement...but that wasn't the case.

I think it was more of a statement for us rather than to the Mavs...regardless of how they were playing, everyone is rusty opening night. The Mavs were actually up most of the game, if I remember right. It wasn't a huge statement but it definitely counts as a win agains the Mavs.

[jack0fspeed]

I'm tired of all this "Spurs are getting older" talk. If you look at key players:

Erick Dampier is 31. Jerry Stackhouse is 32. Jason Terry is 29, Dirk is 28. Josh Howard and Devin Harris are young, but we've already seen what Howard's youth does last year, which is not much. He can start by calling a timeout when he's supposed to.

Tim Duncan is 30. Elson is 30. Ginobili is 29. Tony Parker is 24. Bonner I figure will play a key role somehow in the Spurs' success in the playoffs, he's only 26. Now if you look at the Spurs bench, they're old, but the bench doesn't equal the championship.

Other than the bench of Horry (won't log very many minutes in the playoffs), Barry, and Finley - What else makes the Spurs old and unathletic

I don't think it's the age so much as the athleticism. The league trend is towards athletic tweeners that can run the floor. The new rules tilt the game in the favor of the perimeter player.

The Spurs have basically stuck with what has worked for them. They have a tough time forcing the tempo with the current personnel. Teams that are athletic and can rebound or create turnovers will give them trouble. The Mavs were contructed the way they were for a reason ... to beat the Spurs.

edit: And by the way, the Spurs should beat Houston. Without Yao the Rockets are a one man team.

[stretch]

The Mavs were contructed the way they were for a reason ... to beat the Spurs.
and to hopefully win a championship. doesnt mean a damn thing to simply beat the Spurs, as we all learned the hard way last season...

[stretch]

I think it was more of a statement for us rather than to the Mavs...regardless of how they were playing, everyone is rusty opening night. The Mavs were actually up most of the game, if I remember right. It wasn't a huge statement but it definitely counts as a win agains the Mavs.
that is the stupidest thing ive ever heard. that game meant NOTHING.

[DubMcDub]

We are very much on the way to that. The Spurs made a big statement opening night in Dallas, regardless what has happened since then.

What the hell does this even mean?

[td4mvp21]

that is the stupidest thing ive ever heard. that game meant NOTHING.

What is stupid is saying a win doesn't count because the team wasn't playing together. It was a statement for us, to beat the Mavs on the road opening night. That is a tough game.

[jack0fspeed]

either way, a regular season win doesn't mean much.

[td4mvp21]

either way, a regular season win doesn't mean much.

:lmao!!! MOTHER FUCKER, that is so hypocritical.

[GrandeDavid]

either way, a regular season win doesn't mean much.

That's what the Heat said. :lmao

[jack0fspeed]

that is so hypocritical

I guess you don't get what I'm saying. Getting the #1 seed is important this year because there are 3 top teams. You can avoid playing one of the other 2 teams if you get #1. Otherwise you have to beat both in a playoff series.

But as far as individual regular season games go, they don't mean much. Just 1/82 of getting that #1 seed. I'd sooner lose all 4 regular season games against the Spurs and get that #1 seed than win them all and get the #2 seed.

[jeffdrums22]

This is very much akin to regarding Dwight Howard as a "fluke player." Josh Howard is legitimately an all-star player. The guy dropped 16 ppg and, probably more importantly, 7 rpg in the Spurs/Mavs 2006 series. It's not as if he's a poor player or he's some unheard of guy who has just suddenly appeared. Josh Howard's youth was a vital factor in the Mavericks reaching the 2006 Finals.

I don't disagree with the point that the Spurs are playing better -- albeit against very much weaker competition -- but it's asinine to me to suggest that Josh Howard is a liability for the Mavericks.

Josh Howard was not chosen originally as an All-Star reserve, he only made it in because of injuries to other real All-Stars and was picked by David Stern, enough said. I never said he was a bad player, but most of us outside of Dallas didn't know who he was before the Spurs series. Howard's youth was a factor in reaching the Finals, but also in losing the Finals.

Everybody knows at the end of Game 5, if the Mavs had their timeout called at the right time, and advanced it past half court, Dirk or some other Mavs player would have jacked up some wild shot with 2 seconds left that would have gone in and won the game, with Mavs leading the series 3-2, then taking the next on in Dallas. There's no denying it even from a Spurs fan. Fortunately for Spurs fans, we got to see Dallas fail. It was beautiful.

[jeffdrums22]

I don't disagree with the point that the Spurs are playing better -- albeit against very much weaker competition -- but it's asinine to me to suggest that Josh Howard is a liability for the Mavericks.

Yeah, playing better against weaker competition - But wasn't it the Spurs' losing to weak teams what got everyone talking about them struggling, etc. etc. etc. in the first place??? So now they're back to beating who they're supposed to beat, and still as good as they were prior to January 1.

[jeffdrums22]

What the hell does this even mean?

It means, we opened the 2006-2007 season beating Dallas, what better way to open the season? We will end the season the same way.

Regardless of our bumpy stretch of going 10-10.

But I guess with you from Dallas, anything that doesn't say "Dallas is the best and got robbed in the Finals", you are not capable of reading.

[FromWayDowntown]

Yeah, playing better against weaker competition - But wasn't it the Spurs' losing to weak teams what got everyone talking about them struggling, etc. etc. etc. in the first place??? So now they're back to beating who they're supposed to beat, and still as good as they were prior to January 1.

Actually, I think most of the concern about the Spurs season -- and their playoff prospects -- has less to do with losing to bad teams than it does with the following numbers:

1-2
1-1
1-2
1-2
1-2

Those are, of course, the Spurs records against Dallas, Phoenix, Utah, Houston, and the Lakers. Complaints about losing to bad teams are one thing; complaints and concerns arising from the fact that the Spurs are 5-9 against the other top 6 teams in the West (Spurs excluded, of course) is far more substantial. I don't know that beating bad teams will end up turning those far more important numbers around.

I'd be far more "satisifed" to use your word, if the 5 game winning streak had come against Dallas, Phoenix, Utah, Houston and the Lakers.

[jack0fspeed]

Everybody knows at the end of Game 5, if the Mavs had their timeout called at the right time ...

The Mavs shot themselves in the foot a number of times in last years playoffs. Howard's timeout, Terry's punch to the groin, Stackhouse flagrant foul on Shaq, DJ Benga doing whatever he did, Mark Cuban making an ass of himself every 5 minutes ...

Hopefully this year they'll handle themselves a little better. The coach can call his own timeouts now too (aka the "Josh Howard Rule"). So that will help.

[FromWayDowntown]

Josh Howard was not chosen originally as an All-Star reserve, he only made it in because of injuries to other real All-Stars and was picked by David Stern, enough said. I never said he was a bad player, but most of us outside of Dallas didn't know who he was before the Spurs series. Howard's youth was a factor in reaching the Finals, but also in losing the Finals.

Sure, but Howard's snub was widely decried by those who actually watch the games as a glaring omission on the part of the Western coaches. And I'm convinced that the West coaches, on the whole, would have put Josh Howard in the top 12 among West players at the break. You can try to put him down as a replacement All-Star, but the fact is that he was an All-Star, and he's played like an All-Star. You'd have to be completely oblivious to what's going on in the NBA to think that Josh Howard was anything other than a deserving All-Star this season.

I also have no idea what you mean when you say that "most of us outside of Dallas didn't know who he was before the Spurs series." You might not have known who he was, but I'd be willing to guarantee you that "most of us" who've posted around here for the last few years have known all about Josh Howard since the days before he entered the NBA. "Most of us" have understood that he's got the game to be a difference maker (read: All-Star) on teams that have legitimate title chances.

That you're myopic when it comes to player evaluation doesn't make your view that of the majority. You've made it quite evident around here that watching games -- particularly games that don't involve the Spurs -- is not a priority to you when it comes to assessments of players. I wouldn't think that such an approach would be shared by the majority of basketball fans.


Everybody knows at the end of Game 5, if the Mavs had their timeout called at the right time, and advanced it past half court, Dirk or some other Mavs player would have jacked up some wild shot with 2 seconds left that would have gone in and won the game, with Mavs leading the series 3-2, then taking the next on in Dallas. There's no denying it even from a Spurs fan. Fortunately for Spurs fans, we got to see Dallas fail. It was beautiful.

So Josh Howard made a terrible mistake in an important moment of a key game and you're convinced that he'll never be anything more than that? In that case, I'd hate to hear what you think of Manu Ginobili.

[Dirk Nowitzki]

I think the Spurs have re-established themselves to the position they were in before January 1 when they were 23-8: Top team and contender for the NBA championship.

From January 1-February 11, they had a 10-10 stretch, now they are starting off a 5-0 stretch. I personally never lost confidence in the Spurs, and right now, they are just beating teams they are supposed to beat, no huge accomplishment. I know I'm just stating a bunch of numbers, and the Spurs 5 straight victories featured 3 really easy teams, but it was the Spurs' careless losses to really easy teams that had people talking about the Spurs being on the decline and on the verge of a first-round elimination in the playoffs. They are now 3-0 after the All-Star break this year, and will continue their run as the best NBA winning percentage after the All-Star break in the Duncan era.

The team you saw tonight is very capable of beating Dallas. Dallas should hope that the current team in the past 5 games, doesn't show up in the playoffs.

So, who now here is satisfied with the Spurs for now at least? Five straight is a lot for the Spurs if they were as bad as some people were saying...

You are really setting yourself up for a HUGE dissapointment. Go ahead and have false hope that you can beat us or the Suns for that matter. The fact remains it will be Mavs/Suns 2007 WCF. The west comes down to those 2. No one else!

[samikeyp]

Fortunately for Spurs fans, we got to see Dallas fail. It was beautiful.

Watching Dallas fail did me no good seeing as how they Spurs failed two weeks before that. Saying "yeah well Dallas didn't win the title" after they dispatched the Spurs is almost as bad as those Mavs fans (not all but some) who said "yeah but we beat the Spurs" after losing in the finals. Myopic and stupid.

[GrandeDavid]

You are really setting yourself up for a HUGE dissapointment. Go ahead and have false hope that you can beat us or the Suns for that matter. The fact remains it will be Mavs/Suns 2007 WCF. The west comes down to those 2. No one else!

Cut the biased bullshit, will you? Have you even bothered to check San Antonio's record against Phoenix the past few years? Do you even recall that that same running and gunning and YOUNGER Phoenix team got worked over in what should've been a clean sweep, instead in five, during the 2005 WCF?

Wait until...or IF... your team wins one championship at this team's expense before bringing such weak takes to this house. Last year was a great chance, but it was blown. Now your team will face San Antonio again, and they'll be ready. Three and counting.

[Cry Havoc]

You are really setting yourself up for a HUGE dissapointment. Go ahead and have false hope that you can beat us or the Suns for that matter. The fact remains it will be Mavs/Suns 2007 WCF. The west comes down to those 2. No one else!

What did you say? I couldn't see your post, the glint of 3 rings was blinding me. You've won NOTHING, so until you have done something that people will remember past 2007, stop talking like you're the big kid on the block. Your overcompensatory arrogance shows how scared you are of the Spurs.

[DubMcDub]

It means, we opened the 2006-2007 season beating Dallas, what better way to open the season? We will end the season the same way.

Regardless of our bumpy stretch of going 10-10.

But I guess with you from Dallas, anything that doesn't say "Dallas is the best and got robbed in the Finals", you are not capable of reading.

No it means how in the hell is it "making a statement" to beat a team months ago and then lose to them twice at home since then? Using your own diversion of topic, I could similarly say that the Mavs sure "made a statement" to the Heat in Games 1 and 2 of the Finals.

[jeffdrums22]

Actually, I think most of the concern about the Spurs season -- and their playoff prospects -- has less to do with losing to bad teams than it does with the following numbers:

1-2
1-1
1-2
1-2
1-2

Those are, of course, the Spurs records against Dallas, Phoenix, Utah, Houston, and the Lakers. Complaints about losing to bad teams are one thing; complaints and concerns arising from the fact that the Spurs are 5-9 against the other top 6 teams in the West (Spurs excluded, of course) is far more substantial. I don't know that beating bad teams will end up turning those far more important numbers around.

I'd be far more "satisifed" to use your word, if the 5 game winning streak had come against Dallas, Phoenix, Utah, Houston and the Lakers.

If that is true, how come the Phoenix Suns aren't considered to be a struggling team? They are 1-7 vs Dallas, San Antonio, Lakers, and Utah. Houston is not a factor in that record, because they are not good enough, I don't know why people keep throwing them in the top teams category.

[jeffdrums22]

Sure, but Howard's snub was widely decried by those who actually watch the games as a glaring omission on the part of the Western coaches. And I'm convinced that the West coaches, on the whole, would have put Josh Howard in the top 12 among West players at the break. You can try to put him down as a replacement All-Star, but the fact is that he was an All-Star, and he's played like an All-Star. You'd have to be completely oblivious to what's going on in the NBA to think that Josh Howard was anything other than a deserving All-Star this season.

I also have no idea what you mean when you say that "most of us outside of Dallas didn't know who he was before the Spurs series." You might not have known who he was, but I'd be willing to guarantee you that "most of us" who've posted around here for the last few years have known all about Josh Howard since the days before he entered the NBA. "Most of us" have understood that he's got the game to be a difference maker (read: All-Star) on teams that have legitimate title chances.

That you're myopic when it comes to player evaluation doesn't make your view that of the majority. You've made it quite evident around here that watching games -- particularly games that don't involve the Spurs -- is not a priority to you when it comes to assessments of players. I wouldn't think that such an approach would be shared by the majority of basketball fans.



So Josh Howard made a terrible mistake in an important moment of a key game and you're convinced that he'll never be anything more than that? In that case, I'd hate to hear what you think of Manu Ginobili.

The reason it's not the same with Manu is different: The Spurs wouldn't have been up by 3 in the closing minute if it wasn't for Manu in the first place.

[jeffdrums22]

You are really setting yourself up for a HUGE dissapointment. Go ahead and have false hope that you can beat us or the Suns for that matter. The fact remains it will be Mavs/Suns 2007 WCF. The west comes down to those 2. No one else!

False hope? Is using that phrase your way of trying to pretend that SA has just gone away and Dallas won't have to deal with them in the playoffs? Will our disappointment be more huge than Dallas' disappointment in the Finals last year? There's one difference between SA and Dallas:

SA knows that they have to show up and play, that the league doesn't owe them anything. Dallas thought going into the Finals, that the league owed them the championship, and they stopped playing, and choked, and went back into their playoff softness.

[BUMP]

i think the sleeper team in the playoffs is Utah.

they beat us by 31, waxed San Antonion twice, and are 3-0 against the Suns. they remind of me of us last year. we didnt have the best record, but we flew a little bit under the radar and we were able to beat all the quality teams.

they are physical, they take good shots, if Boozer is able to give them enough inside, i would pick them to emerge out of the West behind Dallas

[stretch]

What is stupid is saying a win doesn't count because the team wasn't playing together. It was a statement for us, to beat the Mavs on the road opening night. That is a tough game.
im not saying a win doesnt count. a win is a win. but that was not a statement at all. the first game of the season is just that... the first game of the season... and nothing more. but it doesnt mean a thing at all at this moment, does it?

[td4mvp21]

im not saying a win doesnt count. a win is a win. but that was not a statement at all. the first game of the season is just that... the first game of the season... and nothing more. but it doesnt mean a thing at all at this moment, does it?

I guess not, I just think it was important that we won that game at the time. Now I guess it doesn't because we lost two in a row to you guys. Oh well.

[stretch]

i think the sleeper team in the playoffs is Utah.

they beat us by 31, waxed San Antonion twice, and are 3-0 against the Suns. they remind of me of us last year. we didnt have the best record, but we flew a little bit under the radar and we were able to beat all the quality teams.

they are physical, they take good shots, if Boozer is able to give them enough inside, i would pick them to emerge out of the West behind Dallas
no way. they have no playoff experience, and sometimes they play stupid as hell. they have a good team, but they are nowhere near the mental level that they need to be at to win in the playoffs. the Mavs, Spurs, Suns, Lakers, and Rockets are all going to finish ahead of the Jazz. i see the Jazz having a very disappointing first round exit against Houston or LA, in 5 games.

[jeffdrums22]

Houston and LA are non-factors in the West playoffs. Period. Everyone knows the West semifinals will be Dallas vs Utah (potential upset here!), Phoenix vs SA.

[stretch]

Houston and LA are non-factors in the West playoffs. Period. Everyone knows the West semifinals will be Dallas vs Utah (potential upset here!), Phoenix vs SA.
I dont think everyone knows that at all. Utah has no idea how to win in the playoffs. typically, no one ever does good on their first trip to the playoffs. especially a team as young as them, and that plays as stupidly as they do at times.

[jeffdrums22]

I dont think everyone knows that at all. Utah has no idea how to win in the playoffs. typically, no one ever does good on their first trip to the playoffs. especially a team as young as them, and that plays as stupidly as they do at times.

Utah beat Dallas 101-79 earlier on.

[jeffdrums22]

There wasn't much to fix in the first place concerning the Spurs' turning the corner. They have improved 4th quarter play. Look at their losses since January 1, when they were a league-best (or 2nd best, not sure, but one of those) record of 23-8. It's amazing to see how seven of their 10 losses during their bumpy 10-10 stretch, were by 5 points or less:

Cleveland: A 4-point loss, 82-78
Minnesota: A 2-point loss, 103-101
Dallas: A 5-point loss, 90-85
Lakers: A 4-point loss, 100-96
Houston: A 5-point loss, 90-85
Utah: A 4-point loss, 97-93
Orlando: A 2-point loss on a fluke dunk, 106-104

The Phoenix (closer than the outcome), Miami and Chicago losses were the only ones where they really got dominated. Everything else was given away in the 4th.

They've fixed their problem for now at least: 4th quarter play.

If you want to break it down into other stuff (age, athleticism), stuff we've heard all season, go ahead, but it comes down to 4th quarter play.

[leemajors]

can we get jeffdrums a column or blog on the site?

[dknights411]

26 points that could mean anything from 45-11 to 38-18.

Yikes!

[stretch]

Utah beat Dallas 101-79 earlier on.
are you just trying to be dumb or what? what part of "PLAYOFFS" do you not understand?

[DubMcDub]

I guess not, I just think it was important that we won that game at the time. Now I guess it doesn't because we lost two in a row to you guys. Oh well.

But that's exactly correct. The most recent trend is the one that sticks out in all the fans' minds. That first game would actually still be important if the Spurs had won the next two, because it would be part of the current trend. But it's a bit odd for that guy to claim a "statement" game that was followed by 2 losses to that particular team.

[DubMcDub]

Houston and LA are non-factors in the West playoffs. Period. Everyone knows the West semifinals will be Dallas vs Utah (potential upset here!), Phoenix vs SA.

Dude, you predicted a Heat upset over the Mavs thursday, among surely at least 20 other absolutely inane predictions within the past month. Nothing you say regarding what will happen in a future game/series has any validity whatsoever. :lol

[FromWayDowntown]

But that's exactly correct. The most recent trend is the one that sticks out in all the fans' minds. That first game would actually still be important if the Spurs had won the next two, because it would be part of the current trend. But it's a bit odd for that guy to claim a "statement" game that was followed by 2 losses to that particular team.

I'm not sure that I buy an argument that the first game of the season was irrelevant, but that the latter two games are demonstrative of any sort of meaningful trend. If one game is irrelevant, I'd think that all of them would be.

To this point, what we know is that the Spurs and the Mavericks have played 3 close games and that the road team has won all 3 games. To me, that says that the teams remain very competitive with each other, despite the disparity in regular season records. If the Spurs can get themselves into a series with the Mavericks, I'd think the close games played between the teams would suggest that it's really anybody's series.

[DubMcDub]

I'm not sure that I buy an argument that the first game of the season was irrelevant, but that the latter two games are demonstrative of any sort of meaningful trend. If one game is irrelevant, I'd think that all of them would be.

To this point, what we know is that the Spurs and the Mavericks have played 3 close games and that the road team has won all 3 games. To me, that says that the teams remain very competitive with each other, despite the disparity in regular season records. If the Spurs can get themselves into a series with the Mavericks, I'd think the close games played between the teams would suggest that it's really anybody's series.

I didn't say irrelevant. I said in the fans' minds, the most recent trend is what's important. Sports fans tend to have extremely short memories.

[FromWayDowntown]

I didn't say irrelevant. I said in the fans' minds, the most recent trend is what's important. Sports fans tend to have extremely short memories.

What difference does it make what fans think?

[jack0fspeed]

It was a disappointment that the coaches didn't vote Howard on to the All-Star team. But the West is pretty stacked at forward.

I've heard it said that the coaches should have voted an extra forward onto the squad instead of 2 backups at Guard (that is, Parker shouldn't have been in versus Howard or Anthony). My recollection is a little fuzzy, but I believe that I heard that from Marc Stein.