This game was SUCH a blowout that...

[exstatic]

Iverson brought a note from his mom to go home early.
:fro

[ducks]

and I am watching james get his but kicked by suns

[Phenomanul]

I enjoyed the fact that Gino and TD were given a chance to rest... and that the bench can be this productive....

If the bench can keep this level of consistency on overall chemistry then the Spurs will be well rested and prepared for the playoffs....

[baseline bum]

64-18 isn't looking like such a wild prediction now, is it?

[Jimcs50]

64-18 isn't looking like such a wild prediction now, is it?


that is improbable. If SA starts out 16-4 like I predicted, then in order for them to win just 63 games, they must duplicate last year's great finish of 47-15....that is asking a hell of a lot.

[whottt]

<<<Predicted 65+wins with health. Where is the fucking thread I predicted it in at?

It was the one asking for this years outrageous predictions...someone needed to archive it. But anyway...

It will happen. When teams hit the plateau the Spurs are playing at now they seldom slow down...it'd be one thing if they were a fluke, an inexperienced team, or a team that plays a gimmicky style of ball...but the Spurs are rock solid and experienced at the right positions..and Pop looked like we just got eliminated from the playoffs in his post game....they will only get better as time goes by...and I'm expecting them to have an even stronger second half than usual.

You gotta realize..it wasn't that long ago that Utah and Seattle were winning 64 games in a season...and the Spurs are better than those teams were.

I figure they are a lock to set the team record...I won't be surprised if they hit 67 wins and perhaps they might even surprise all of us and pull off 70...

Who is going to stop them?

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

<<<Predicted 65+wins with health. Where is the fucking thread I predicted it in at?

That's why you sig it yourself.

[Nikos]

I figure they are a lock to set the team record...I won't be surprised if they hit 67 wins and perhaps they might even surprise all of us and pull off 70...

Who is going to stop them?

Do you realize how difficult it is to win 65 games, let alone 70? The Spurs always have their hot streaks and solid defense that wins them 52-55 games even if the offensive is erratic.

What makes you think they have a chance at 70 games? In order to even come close to that mark they would need to basically be the BEST offensive team in the league.

Can you honestly see that happening? The Best offense? Be realistic.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

The Spurs will hit a slump at some point, but the way they've played the last five games about the only team that I could even see slowing them down is Phoenix, and I still like our chances.

The scary thing is Brent Barry isn't even hitting his shots yet.

[T Park]

well, he isnt consisntent should be the term.

Whats great??

Is they can improve.

[whottt]

Nikos...did you read WTF I said? First of all 20 year old, I am aware of how hard it is to do...especially for a team like the Spurs...I did get to see first hand the only team to do so. If you notice...I said maybe they will surprise us all...

I don't expect 70 wins...you don't expect 70 wins...no one expects 70 wins...do I believe it is in the realm of possiblity? It's in the upper stratosphere of possiblity for this team to pull it off

The things that I think it takes...


1.Consistency - One of the Spurs strongest traits.

2.Defense - Of course.

3.Veteran experience. Guys with lots of playoff experience who are used to being challenged. Even the young guys on the Spurs have this experience. Parker has already been through the wars. Spurs got it...they've got the young legs to do it, yet there is essentially no situation these guys haven't faced yet.

4.Depth - to win that many games you have to be able to put out your best performance night in and night out...you have to have team that gets lots of rest and doesn't get worn down. This is deepest Spur team in history...we've got actual guys that could be playing on our team right now sitting on the DL...in fact I think all of them could be getting minutes on a less deeper team. Spurs have it.


5. Multiple Superstars. Like two franchise players and some complementary stars. A superstar in his prime and a supporting cast that knows him. Got it. IMO Gino serves as a second franchise player on this team..if Duncan is having an off night Manu can carry this team.

6.Luck...this includes catching teams on off days, in slumps, winning some games you should lose on last second shots... and staying healthy, I mean the entire team staying healthy...cross your fingers because I can't gurantee this one. But I do think we have the personnel to help us with our luck.

And in addition...


...it would take quite a few win streaks of around 18 or 19 games to pull it off...like right now we'd need to have one...in order to pull it off....and then we'd need to follow that up with a 10 game streak or so....and then we'd need a strong second half like we had in 02-03 or last year...where we only drop 6 or 7 games in the second half...that part we have done before Nikos.

Are the Spurs capable of winning 18 or 19 games in a row multiple times in a season? Yes, the second half Spurs always are capable of pulling off very long win streaks...this is even with very stong teams like the Lakers and Kings floating around...Well those teams are not what they used to be and the Spurs are better than the past Spurs teams that have flirted with those types of streaks in the past...This team is right at their usual second half form already.


You have to realize this team won 57 games last year and had we not been one of the worst FT shooting teams in NBA history, not just in the league last season, in NBA history, we would have easily broken 60 wins...and that's with a shitty, even by our usual standards, start....Duncan being injured multiple times, and Parker and Manu missing games as well.

Now as for your thing about offense being necessary.....I don't think you have to have the best offense in the NBA...but it does take a good offense and I do think the Spurs have one..in fact...It's a very versatile offense. IMO they've got the best guard rotation in the NBA..and I thought this before Beno started emerging like this, Barry + a more experienced Manu and Parker made me think that....I wasn't even counting on Beno. I think we also have the best bigman rotation in the NBA, and I think we have the best bench in the NBA. I think we're the best team in the NBA and I don't even think another team is close to us. That doesn't mean we're invincible...you never know when some team, like say Phoenix, will have your number...but to me this team is a powerhouse that has no weakness and I think the team stats are already starting to show this.

Do I expect them to win 70? Hell no. Is it in the realm of possibility for them to do it? Yeah...essentially they need to have a first half like they usually have in the second half.

[Nikos]

Nikos...did you read WTF I said? First of all 20 year old, I am aware of how hard it is to do...especially for a team like the Spurs...I did get to see first hand the only team to do so. If you notice...I said maybe they will surprise us all...

First off, I am 22 years old and I know enough basketball, so please spare me with your age talk. If thats the best you can do, than that is weak.



I don't expect 70 wins...you don't expect 70 wins...no one expects 70 wins...do I believe it is in the realm of possiblity? It's in the upper stratosphere of possiblity for this team to pull it off

No, it isn't possible.




1.Consistency - One of the Spurs strongest traits.

2.Defense - Of course.

Sure, they have that EVERY year as long as Duncan has been on the team with Bowen and another shot blocker next to him. They would be elite on defense with Duncan, Rasho, Bowen and any other combo of players, or at least Top 5.


3.Veteran experience. Guys with lots of playoff experience who are used to being challenged. Even the young guys on the Spurs have this experience. Parker has already been through the wars. Spurs got it...they've got the young legs to do it, yet there is essentially no situation these guys haven't faced yet.

They have experience to win a title and a substancial amount of games. That doesn't mean they have a chance at 70.


4.Depth - to win that many games you have to be able to put out your best performance night in and night out...you have to have team that gets lots of rest and doesn't get worn down. This is deepest Spur team in history...we've got actual guys that could be playing on our team right now sitting on the DL...in fact I think all of them could be getting minutes on a less deeper team. Spurs have it.

Thats nice, but depth alone does not mean a team can win 70. You better have a great offense and defense, and someone other than Duncan has to be extremely consistent on the offensive side. We are still waiting on Parker for this. There are plenty of nights where the offense just goes stale. It is been solid so far thus season but has a lot of room for improvement.



5. Multiple Superstars. Like two franchise players and some complementary stars. A superstar in his prime and a supporting cast that knows him. Got it. IMO Gino serves as a second franchise player on this team..if Duncan is having an off night Manu can carry this team.

Where is the other franchise player besides Duncan? I do not see see one? Can Parker become it in a year or so? Gino is a very good support player, but he himself even admits his stats will 'normalize' and TP should become the second scorer. I guess he is not confident yet in his ability to be a consistent scorer, or a guy who can take more shots and assume more scoring resposbility. He has done well so far, but you know at some point he is going to start defering more when he is not starting games ON FIRE, and TP wants to regain his scoring touch from 2002-03.


6.Luck...this includes catching teams on off days, in slumps, winning some games you should lose on last second shots... and staying healthy, I mean the entire team staying healthy...cross your fingers because I can't gurantee this one. But I do think we have the personnel to help us with our luck.

I hope it does stay healthy. Even if it does, I still cannot see 65 wins. That might not be completely impossible, but 70 sure as hell is.



...it would take quite a few win streaks of around 18 or 19 games to pull it off...like right now we'd need to have one...in order to pull it off....and then we'd need to follow that up with a 10 game streak or so....and then we'd need a strong second half like we had in 02-03 or last year...where we only drop 6 or 7 games in the second half...that part we have done before Nikos.

They did it before after starting slow or going on a mini-slumps. Duncan is no Jordan, and the Spurs aren't as good offensively as they are on defense. To win 65+ games you have to be GREAT on both ends at the same time.


Are the Spurs capable of winning 18 or 19 games in a row multiple times in a season? Yes, the second half Spurs always are capable of pulling off very long win streaks...this is even with very stong teams like the Lakers and Kings floating around...Well those teams are not what they used to be and the Spurs are better than the past Spurs teams that have flirted with those types of streaks in the past...This team is right at their usual second half form already.

Doen't mean they will stay hot this early. And even if they do have a nice second half as always, they still would need to dominate up until February as well. Not an easy thing to do.


You have to realize this team won 57 games last year and had we not been one of the worst FT shooting teams in NBA history, not just in the league last season, in NBA history, we would have easily broken 60 wins...and that's with a shitty, even by our usual standards, start....Duncan being injured multiple times, and Parker and Manu missing games as well.

I am aware of what they have done in the past. I was the one saying how TP and Duncans FT shooting hurt. So far TP still is struggling AND not getting to the line tht much. That has to change, or he will have to shoot 50% from the field from here on out to make up for it. Parker and Manu missed games, sure but a lot of teams have minor injuries and semi-critical ones. Spurs are not the only team. They still did not win the title, so its not like it matters what they COULD have won last season. They had a historically GREAT defense that couldn't hold up in the playoffs because their offense went stale at the wrong times. Sure they lost by a miracle, but I rather they would have won Game 4 against LA and crushed their hopes right there.


Now as for your thing about offense being necessary.....I don't think you have to have the best offense in the NBA...but it does take a good offense and I do think the Spurs have one..in fact...It's a very versatile offense. IMO they've got the best guard rotation in the NBA..and I thought this before Beno started emerging like this.

Do I expect them to win 70? Hell no. Is it in the realm of possibility for them to do it? Yeah...essentially they need to have a first half like they usually have in the second half.

They cannot win 65+ if their offense isn't at least Top 5 in the league. 70 games is not possible, not even slightly. I would be SHOCKED if they came close to that. But I beleive you are wrong, for the Spurs to win significantly more games than previous seasons, the offense has to get better. Namely guys like Parker and Ginobili have to be solid and efficient.

[Drachen]

I tell you guys, they are at the beginning of a 34 game win streak, on their way to a 73-9 record. (break two records with one season...)

I am kidding, but oh the glory should that happen.

[whottt]

*makes note that calling Nikos a 20 year old pisses him off* :)

Ok now where were we?

First of all, I am not going to get into a heated debate with you on the Spurs chances of winning 70 games, since as I said, I don't think it'll happen. So you might as well calm down and put on Zorba the Greek. I do disgree that it is impossible to happen...in fact it's impossible for it to be impossible to happen. So suck on that.


I have a few problems with your reasons of why you say the Spurs won't do it...

First of all...would you care to explain to me why you say it is absolutely essential for a team to be a "top 5 offensive team" to be able to win 70 games? And what exactly do you mean by "top 5 offensive team"? Top 5 in PPG? In efficiency? In FG%?

The Spurs were one of the top offensive teams just two years ago in every category but PPG. They were #3 in efficiency and FG% and they were number 1 in point differential, assist differential and a bunch of stuff like that.

So what exactly drew you to that conclusion, since the only team to win 70 games was #1 in both PPG on offense and defense.

I see absolute no reason for you being hung up on the top 5 offense thing over the top 5 defense thing, unless you think it takes both and are counting on the Spurs being a top defensive team....that makes sense, but I'll say that won't be much of a factor...#1.I expect the Spurs to be a top offensive team. #2.There is no trend favoring offense or defense for teams that have won 65+ games, and if there is it favors defense, but really it favors just being very good at one.


Secondly...The only common elements I see in eras where teams experienced a huge upsurge in W-L...is that they expansion eras..kinda like baseball...The Bulls, Jazz and Sonics mid 90's huge W-L totals coincided with the addition of the Grizz and Raps. The early 80's upsurge coincided with the addition of the ABA teams...and the early 70 upswing coincided with another expansion era.

Guess what? We have an expansion team this season...and we have another team in our division that is playing like one. I think the general rule is that when there is one team that is very bad and 1 team that is very good...you see big win seasons.

You actually made some good points on guards I just don't agee with them...

I think Manu is a franchise 2 guard, I have been saying this for 2 years now. If you beat team of All Stars, that features two champion NBA coaches, with a team of nobodies, you can claim you are a fucking franchise buddy...now you may not see Manu play that was...but that's because Manu isn't asked to play that way...he's admitted he's adapted his game to the Spurs...so don't fucking diss Manu...I have never lost an argument yet when I was arguing something in favor of Manu..back the fuck off or suffer the same humiliation that Segu, Chump, N Cali and Taruky suffered when they doubted him.

And I disagree that we won't have consistent guard play...I think we will have it...I was the guy bitching about our guard rotation all of last season remember? But, Parker's play in the post season, Manu's confidence gained in the Olympics, and the addition of Brent Barry give me confidence to christen this the best guard roation in the NBA. We've got 3 guards that can score 20 points at the drop of a hat...that can all pass and score...Don't compare them to guard oriented teams and say they suck just because they go 1-7....I've seen Kobe and AI start 1-7 in a game about 200 times in their careers, they go on to get 20 more shots and so their numbers improve. We've got the best guard rotation in the NBA. Offensively and defensively...and Beno makes me feel even more confident in saying this.

And lastly...confidence...these guys know they can be the best team in the NBA, they have been the best team in the NBA before, they know they can beat any team in the NBA, and most importantly, they can beat any team in the NBA without playing their best. If not for the Lakers this team might have been looking at 2 or 3 additional championships...I won't say the Lakers owned them mentally...but they did rent them in a couple of seasons...that's gone. The only team that has stopped the Spurs is gone. Winning is a funny thing...once you hit a certain threshold of confidence it becomees surreal and you just start playing at a different level...I do not think the Spurs will all of a sudden stop believing they are the best team in the NBA this season...I think they will believe it...and I think they are going to have supercharged w-l record because of it. I don't think they'll win 70...but I do think they'll win at least 65 if they stay healthy.

[Athenea]

67. That's the number.

PS: Great posts Whottttttt :elephant :elephant :elephant

[travis2]

Kori has the thread somewhere.

I know I was the first to say 65 this season.

[Rummpd]

LakerFan did not predict they would come back!

MadDoc

[Nikos]

First of all, I am not going to get into a heated debate with you on the Spurs chances of winning 70 games, since as I said, I don't think it'll happen. So you might as well calm down and put on Zorba the Greek. I do disgree that it is impossible to happen...in fact it's impossible for it to be impossible to happen. So suck on that. :rolleyes



First of all...would you care to explain to me why you say it is absolutely essential for a team to be a "top 5 offensive team" to be able to win 70 games? And what exactly do you mean by "top 5 offensive team"? Top 5 in PPG? In efficiency? In FG%?

The Spurs were one of the top offensive teams just two years ago in every category but PPG. They were #3 in efficiency and FG% and they were number 1 in point differential, assist differential and a bunch of stuff like that.

So what exactly drew you to that conclusion, since the only team to win 70 games was #1 in both PPG on offense and defense.

I am talking about offensive efficiency, as in POINTS PER POSSESSION not FG%.

http://www.basketballreference.com/leagues/leagueyear.htm?lg=n&yr=2003 (2003-04 NBA efficiencies) -- #1 Defense, average on offense -- of course the defense was historically the best of all time, and if you combine their O and D ratings they were projected to win 65. But FT shooting squashed any chances of that.

http://www.basketballreference.com/leagues/leagueyear.htm?lg=n&yr=2002
(2002-03) Efficiencies, Spurs #3 on defense, #6 on offense. Very balanced, but they were not the BEST in any area. They will need to have Great D and offensive as good, or better than the offense in 2002-03 to be a 65 win team this season.

http://www.basketballreference.com/leagues/leagueyear.htm?lg=n&yr=1995
Check out the Bulls efficiencies when they won 72 in 1995-96. Statistically the numbers have to hold up to be a GREAT team. Its nice the Spurs have a great system and Tim Duncan -- but they need to become better on offense and keep similiar defense to be a GREAT NBA team of all time as far as regular seasons go.


I see absolute no reason for you being hung up on the top 5 offense thing over the top 5 defense thing, unless you think it takes both and are counting on the Spurs being a top defensive team....that makes sense, but I'll say that won't be much of a factor...#1.I expect the Spurs to be a top offensive team. #2.There is no trend favoring offense or defense for teams that have won 65+ games, and if there is it favors defense, but really it favors just being very good at one.

It favors BALANCE. The Old Bulls teams had elite offensive teams efficiency wise and elite defensive teams (although not as good as the Spurs of this era). Spurs have had elite defense and good offense depending on the year. In 2001-02 when they had Drob and DA and a bunch of efficient shooters they were #3 on offense and #1 on defense. They also should have won 65 if you combined their O and D ratings. But they collapsed playoff time to the better and more healthy Laker team.



Secondly...The only common elements I see in eras where teams experienced a huge upsurge in W-L...is that they expansion eras..kinda like baseball...The Bulls, Jazz and Sonics mid 90's huge W-L totals coincided with the addition of the Grizz and Raps. The early 80's upsurge coincided with the addition of the ABA teams...and the early 70 upswing coincided with another expansion era.

I don't like comparing the Spurs of now to teams of the 80s. I think we can compare teams today to teams like the Bulls, Jazz and Sonics of the 90s. I don't think teams are much weaker today, just a different set of talent at different positions. Less centers now, but much of the talent at the PF and SG/Swingman spots I don't think teams were any better in the 90s than the elite of the NBA in the late 90s and early 00's.


Guess what? We have an expansion team this season...and we have another team in our division that is playing like one. I think the general rule is that when there is one team that is very bad and 1 team that is very good...you see big win seasons.

Still tough to win 65, expansion teams or not. Those Bulls teams could have won 67-68 even if they were placed in the early 90s as well. The 91-92 Bulls actually did win 67, and I don't think that team was better than the 95-96 Bulls.


You actually made some good points on guards I just don't agee with them...

I think Manu is a franchise 2 guard, I have been saying this for 2 years now. If you beat team of All Stars, that features two champion NBA coaches, with a team of nobodies, you can claim you are a fucking franchise buddy...now you may not see Manu play that was...but that's because Manu isn't asked to play that way...he's admitted he's adapted his game to the Spurs...so don't fucking diss Manu...I have never lost an argument yet when I was arguing something in favor of Manu..back the fuck off or suffer the same humiliation that Segu, Chump, N Cali and Taruky suffered when they doubted him.

We don't know how good Manu is. We can go by what we see him doing in the NBA, on the Spurs. If he is going to make comments like "my stats should normalize and TP is better suited to be the second scorer" then that shows he probably doesn't have confidence to be a 16-17ppg scorer on this team. He still has his nights where he barely takes 7 shots, and he still has nights where he is a non-factor on offense. Yes his all around game is there, but the team needs his scoring down the road. Unless they want to platoon 7-8 players around Duncan and have them all playing 25mpg except Tony Parker.


And I disagree that we won't have consistent guard play...I think we will have it...I was the guy bitching about our guard rotation all of last season remember? But, Parker's play in the post season, Manu's confidence gained in the Olympics, and the addition of Brent Barry give me confidence to christen this the best guard roation in the NBA. We've got 3 guards that can score 20 points at the drop of a hat...that can all pass and score...Don't compare them to guard oriented teams and say they suck just because they go 1-7....I've seen Kobe and AI start 1-7 in a game about 200 times in their careers, they go on to get 20 more shots and so their numbers improve. We've got the best guard rotation in the NBA. Offensively and defensively...and Beno makes me feel even more confident in saying this.

I hope your right. But Parker needs to start scoring better from here on out. He needs to be more efficient. And Manu needs to stop taking 5-6 shot attempts a game if he is going to become a better player and more assertive than last season. Otherwise in the playoffs he is going to settle in a role where scoring 12ppg is OK. Last season in the playoffs he had very good numbers against LA, but no one noticed. No one would even think that Manu had a good series against LA, the only one who is mentioned in that series was Devin Brown. When the playoffs come around Parker and Manu need to step up as scorers and all around players. Just merely filling a role where they play hard defense and get hot once in a while is probably not going to cut it. More assertiveness and offensive consistency is needed.


And lastly...confidence...these guys know they can be the best team in the NBA, they have been the best team in the NBA before, they know they can beat any team in the NBA, and most importantly, they can beat any team in the NBA without playing their best. If not for the Lakers this team might have been looking at 2 or 3 additional championships...I won't say the Lakers owned them mentally...but they did rent them in a couple of seasons...that's gone. The only team that has stopped the Spurs is gone. Winning is a funny thing...once you hit a certain threshold of confidence it becomees surreal and you just start playing at a different level...I do not think the Spurs will all of a sudden stop believing they are the best team in the NBA this season...I think they will believe it...and I think they are going to have supercharged w-l record because of it. I don't think they'll win 70...but I do think they'll win at least 65 if they stay healthy.

Sure they are confident. But at the end of the season they need to have the same confidence that they can score AND play an all around game. Defense and Duncan are not going to get the title alone. Offensive consistency around Duncan could easily bring the team a title. I am pretty sure the defense can hold its own when it has to, but none of it will matter if Parker has one of those cold streaks, and Manu is still taking his normal 7 or 8 shots because its the only ROLE he knows on this team.

[Marcus Bryant]

Holy shit, whottt v Nikos. I hope there's enough bandwith.

[Nikos]

Holy shit, whottt v Nikos. I hope there's enough bandwith.

Your the one who posts 1000 times a week, and under different handles nontheless.

Why bother to post in this thread Marcus if you are not even going to read the takes?

[Marcus Bryant]

Settle down can't you take a joke? Geez.

[whottt]

Nikos...you just don't think the guards are as good as I think they are. That's the major difference, and I also think that you aren't paying enough attention to the fact that our traditional rivals...Minny, Dallas, Sac, and LA...are all going through transition periods or feeling the effects of age....that because our D is so ahead of schedule our offense will be equally ahead of schedule. I think you have a statistical rigidness to your analysis that doesn't fit the game of basketball as well as you think it does...and your analysis also seems to be totally oblivious to the external factors at play in this season...as well as the human factor of the game.

I know our guards are as good as I think they are...I am a hardass on guard evaluations in case you haven't noticed. With the rotation we have I don't think we need a guard who averages 20 PPG...We have 3 that can do it on any given night...and who can average up 10- 15 a night.

And I totally disagree with your valuation of Manu...I guess you and I define "franchise" player in slightly different terms...I don't feel Manu has to be the second best scorer on the team to qualify for that label...Manu knows how to win games and make others better...that's my definition of a franchise player...and there is absolutely no reason to downplay what he did in international ball...because the game he kicked ass was against American players, including one of his own teamates, and a coach who knows his game. Besides, who says that just because Parker should be the second scorer(which I agree with)...that Manu can't score? Manu's point totals are not that low for the amount of minutes he plays and the amount of shots he takes.... it's not like he's going to play the same game every night...

Our oldest and toughest rivals are all having issues...our guard rotation has not played as well as it is going to...and we are still 12-3, we are not as good as we are going to be...yet our 12 wins aren't the fluke...2 of our 3 losses are. And you totally miss the boat on the point I made with expansion teams....it's a fact...and it wasn't intended to be a cross era comparison...more like a universal basketball rule...

I don't think the team is going to win 70...but nothing is impossible for this team in this season Nikos...and that's what you aren't able to see through your strict adherence to statistical groupings with no awareness of the external factors at play in this season. Do you really think that if the Spurs are # 6 in efficiency instead of #5, that some cosmic force is going to come down and tell them they are not allowed to enter the promised land of 65- 70 wins? It just doesn't work that way. And again, our offense is going to get a lot better.

[MannyIsGod]

I honestly don't see any reason whatsoever to prevent this team from winning 65 games. This team is definetly better than any Spurs team at this point in the season, and there is still an incredible amount of improvement that can be made.

I'm too lazy to write papers like Whottt and Nikos, but I side with Whottt on this one.

[Nikos]

I don't think the team is going to win 70...but nothing is impossible for this team in this season Nikos...and that's what you aren't able to see through your strict adherence to statistical groupings with no awareness of the external factors at play in this season. Do you really think that if the Spurs are # 6 in efficiency instead of #5, that some cosmic force is going to come down and tell them they are not allowed to enter the promised land of 65- 70 wins? It just doesn't work that way. And again, our offense is going to get a lot better.

More like its impossible to win 70 for this team.

I knew you were going to respond with that #5 or #6 efficiency comment. And I could have bet my life that you were going to respond with the comment "cosmic force...." above.

The bottom line is Manu and Tp are not consistent offensive threats. And if they don't become that by seasons end they won't be a good offensive team in this league. Maybe if the competetion completely sucks they can get by on pure defense and Duncan and some role players getting hot once in a while.

But the entire point is, to win 65+ you need to have a domianant offense AND defense like the old Bulls teams. That is the entire point.

The stats are just the icing on the cake and represent a good snapshot on how efficient the players really were. It is not the END ALL BE ALL, but it sure shows you who was doing well and who was underacheiving. So far TP is underacheiving. Manu is doing well on average and doing what he has always been doing for this team. Fine. But by seasons end, they BOTH better be consistent scorers, or the same inconsistincies will resurface as long as they face good competetion in the playoffs.

Being #5 or #6 is not the point. The point is being an elite offense team or damn close to it is what the Spurs need to accomplish to be a GREAT REGULAR season team.

You are the one who seems to point out all the positives about the team, the magic of Manu, the talent of Parker, the greatness of Horry, and so forth.....

All I am pointing out right now is the teams weaknesses that I think need to be addressed for them to be a great regular season team and championship material.

I watch the game and listen plenty. I know the intangibles that are involved in the game, but I also like pulling on statistics to reassure how good the players have really been. Its not everything, but it sure means something to me.

[Nikos]

I'm too lazy to write papers like Whottt and Nikos, but I side with Whottt on this one.

So you think the Spurs can win 65+ a title without Parker and Manu being consistent scorers. Is that what you are saying? Or are you so happy with the Spurs start you assume they will win 65+ cause of Duncan and the fact he has great role players?

Do you think the team has any flaws?

[Marcus Bryant]

This team has flaws, namely a lack of physicality at the center position, free throw shooting, and skittish little bitch fans.

Relax.

[Nikos]

If that comment was aimed at me Marcus then that is pathetic.

The initial argument was whether the team could win 65+. And I said no. It has too many flaws and inconsistencies to EVER consider 70 wins.

I never said they could not win the title.

[Marcus Bryant]

All of your posts are filled with some kind of strange pessimistic anxiety. What is it with Connecticut based Spurs fans? Ghost, rascal, and yourself need to lighten up.

[Nikos]

All of your posts are filled with some kind of strange pessimistic anxiety. What is it with Connecticut based Spurs fans? Ghost, rascal, and yourself need to lighten up.

All your posts are filled with are scolding of other posters who defy your takes or say anything negative about the team.

The difference between me Ghost and rascal is that I actual argue about basketball and get descriptive about my takes, I don't scold posters to make my point. I would rather talk basketball than get into arguing matches, you on the other hand have more posts that are more focused on denigrating another poster than actual basketball talk.

For instance, why is it you never argue descriptively about basketball with posters you disagree with, but yet you have countless number of one sentence posts that simply serve the purpose of insulting that same poster?

[MannyIsGod]

So you think the Spurs can win 65+ a title without Parker and Manu being consistent scorers. Is that what you are saying? Or are you so happy with the Spurs start you assume they will win 65+ cause of Duncan and the fact he has great role players?

Do you think the team has any flaws?

It's a mix of both. I think you can consistently count on scoring coming from the bench on this team. And that aliviates the lack of a HUGE 2nd scorer. With Brown, Udrih, Rose, and Barry coming off the bench you have leway from which you don't need 20+ from a 2nd scorer.

I also don't think you're giving Manu nearly enough credit as far as his scoring goes.

Do I think this team can win 4 out of every 5 games? Yeah, I do. And I think they will.

[Nikos]

I also don't think you're giving Manu nearly enough credit as far as his scoring goes.

I am giving him plenty of credit. He has scored ridiculously efficiently thus far this season. It's more his consistency I am concerned with. For instance he has been off lately, and with Parker's inevitable improvement on the offense end looming, its possible Manu may defer too much to his own detriment.

He has the ability score productively and I hope he continues it as Parker regains his touch.

[Marcus Bryant]

One does not have to write a 10,000 word essay every time they post in order to discuss basketball. I like to practice brevity. Try it sometime.

I only give posters what they deserve. If they post thoughtful, concise, and well reasoned posts then they have my respect.

If they post consistent nonsense like Ghost, Sequ, and TPark, then they end up on my scorn and ignore lists.

[whottt]

.


I'm confused, you seem to be split between saying we can't do it...and telling me what needs to happen for us to be able to do it...

Well...you keep bringing up Parker's scoring...do you think he's going to continue to score 12ppg...and shoot 135% from 3?

I don't...I see nothing to indicate that trend will continue...and Manu's numbers are good...he's not Kobe...he's not that type of 2 guard, that doesn't mean he's a weak player.

And I think the Spurs do have a dominant offense...it's name is Tim Duncan and he is always going to be a dominant offensive force...he's been the #1 or #1a dominant offensive force for about 5 years now.

Did you read the quotes from Phil Jackson's book?

Last season he didn't think it was likely to beat the Spurs...he thought it was impossible to beat them 4 times in a row...but he had a team that had a certain comfort level against the Spurs, and a champions confidence that was independent of statistics...and that enabled them to do things they probably shouldn't have been able to do against us.

You bring up the 2001 team...that was very balanced team, it was an awesome statistical team...but what the stats didn't show was the age of our perimeter players and the effects of Sean Elliott's kidney on his ability to defend Kobe Bryant. They also didn't show AJ's total lack of any perimeter game but that's another story entirely....


I have to admit, some of the biggest disappointments in Spurs history have come from teams that on paper were the most balanced teams...you have to look beyond the stats and look at the versatility of this team...In doing so I see differences between this team and the past teams that were so balanced and still got buttwhuppings in big games....On this team, every guard on the team has a perimeter game...So, you just have to look at all the factors beyond stats...like age, rivals..experience, depth...etc.

MB for instance makes an attempt at doing so...

He makes a legitimate point on FT shooting...

but like yourself, he fails to weigh in all the factors, all the aspects at play here...before he makes his negative judgement...

Notice how MB makes yet another asslike comment about Rasho...On the surface it seems intelligent...but when analyzed more close you see he judges without ever considering that only 1 player makes Rasho look soft...and his name is Shaq...he considers Rasho a liability against Shaq...but...what he doesn't realize, the doors he is unable to unlock within his brain...his inability to grasp the 3rd T if you will..... is that Shaq no longer plays for LA...he no longer plays in the WC, which means we will see him 2 times this season, not 4, and we have already beaten him once...and that he is also on the decline and he no longer has a 9 time champion coach.


This is not a typical NBA season, and this is not a typical Spurs team...the Spurs have a very good base from which to push themselves to an all time high in regular season performance.

[MannyIsGod]

Nikos,

When you're done giving yourself a hardon over your basketball knowledge, answer this.

Are the Spurs currently winning at a pace that would give them 65 wins?

[Nikos]

One does not have to write a 10,000 word essay every time they post in order to discuss basketball. I like to practice brevity. Try it sometime.

:lol

I knew you were going to use that "10,000 word essay" comment too.

To lump me with rascal and Ghost who I have argued plenty with is a slap to my face.

I thought I posted about basketball a lot, but I guess all my posts are just essays filled with drivel?

[Nikos]

When you're done giving yourself a hardon over your basketball knowledge, answer this.

A hardon? All I said was I like talking about basketball more than making jokes and scolding other posters. What the fuck is wrong with that?

[Nikos]

but like yourself, he fails to weigh in all the factors, all the aspects at play here...before he makes his negative judgement...

I mentioned FT woes plenty of times last season. I guess you were not paying attention. Just because I factor in stats does not mean I have not been saying the same things that others are saying.

If my posts have become that pathetic and annoying to others that they stop reading them because I mention stats, then I can stop posting statistics or my opinions if you'd like.

[MannyIsGod]

ok ok, but answer the question.

As of right now, the spurs are on pace to win how many games?

[Nikos]

I'm confused, you seem to be split between saying we can't do it...and telling me what needs to happen for us to be able to do it...

We are simply not arguing about the same thing. I said I do not think the team can win 65+, I never said they cannot win a title.

They might be able to win it without Parker or Manu playing much better than last season. But they will not be a 65+ win team if Parker and Manu do not become more consistent.

[whottt]

You want stats Nikos....

Here's one that fits right in line with my two franchise player theory...and it clearly shows how you under-rate Manu...how long till you join fools row?

From 82 games.com...the top player pairs in the NBA:


Current player pair leaders in 2004-05 (as of 11/29) # Team Player1 Player2 +/- Off/g Def/g Net
1 SA Ginobili Duncan +148 103.2 80.7 +22.5
2 SEA Allen Radmanovic +146 109.1 87.0 +22.1
3 CLE Gooden Ilgauskas +145 100.5 80.3 +20.2


Now how Stoudamire and Nash aren't in that grouping I don't really know...but as you can see...the Spurs do have the 1-2 punch to pull off a big win season, as I surmised earlier.

[Nikos]

As of right now, the spurs are on pace to win how many games?

What does that have to do with the argument? Its early in the season and their are still teams like the Sonics and the Suns who are inferior but still are on pace to win 60+.

[whottt]

What does that have to do with the argument? Its early in the season and their are still teams like the Sonics and the Suns who are inferior but still are on pace to win 60+.


Mistake #1...Classifying the Spurs as the same type of team as the Suns and Sonics.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not too sure about how inferiror the Suns are, but the point being that we haven't seen what this Spurs team can do and they are ALREADY on a pace to win 66 games.

The real reason we havne't seen many 60+ win totals for the spurs over the past few years is because of their slow starts. We always expect a blistering finish and if they keep going the way they are, that won't be nessecary.

It's not a lock by any means, but to say that it's beyond the realm of possibility is foolish.

[Nikos]

Here's one that fits right in line with my two franchise player theory...and it clearly shows how you under-rate Manu...how long till you join fools row?

Manu has been very good thus far this season. Stats wise, intagible wise, and BASKETBALL wise etc..

But I notice he is slipping a bit in his scoring consistency lately. And with Parker getting off to a slow start its not unreasonable to assume Parker will score more, and Manu will defer and score less down the line.

Again, it means nothing now. The Spurs are winning. All I am saying is it would take a noticable improvement from the backcourt THIS season to warrant 65+ wins.

I understand the Spurs were very good last season. I read parts of Phil's book (about the Spurs). I realize the Lakers got a little lucky last season. But the argument is not if the Spurs are good enough to win the title. The argument was 65+ wins THIS season.

And Whott I lumped the Spurs with the Sonics and Suns for the sake of Manny trying to make some sort of point -- not sure what it was?

I know the Sonics are not as good as the Spurs. Regardless of how hot they are right now. I actually still would not be suprised if the Sonics missed the playoffs.

[MannyIsGod]

Mistake #1...Classifying the Spurs as the same type of team as the Suns and Sonics.

The point he was trying to make was that those teams are not in the Spurs class yet have a simmilar projected wins according to their win percentages at this point in the season.

The Sonics are there only because of shooting, will is hard to keep up over the course of the season.

The Suns have a very solid team.

The Spurs are there because of their defense however, and that is eactly why they will win 65 games.

[ducks]

Ilike nikos post
if you do not then do not read them

atleast he brings a decnt take
not one line

[samikeyp]

impossible to win 70? no. improbable? yes. (Sorry ducks..I know its just one line :) )

[Marcus Bryant]

Yes Nikos, you are the most optimistic and knowledgeable Connecticut based Spurs fan.

[whottt]

The point he was trying to make was that those teams are not in the Spurs class yet have a simmilar projected wins according to their win percentages at this point in the season.

The Sonics are there only because of shooting, will is hard to keep up over the course of the season.

The Suns have a very solid team.

The Spurs are there because of their defense however, and that is eactly why they will win 65 games.

Yeah but he's saying the record of those teams isn't indicative of where they are likely to finish the season, that they are unlikely to maintain that pace...I have to think that the major reason he thinks that about those teams is their past performance...and he's right...he's using them as an example of why the Spurs are unlikely to maintain their current pace as well...there is nothing to indicate they won't maintain the this current pace...traditionally the Spurs do maintain their pace once their D and confidence are established.

The Spurs are also the one with the recent ring and the one that won 57 games last season. This winning isn't new to the Spurs...only doing it in the first half....

[MannyIsGod]

there is nothing to indicate they won't maintain the this current pace...traditionally the Spurs do maintain their pace once their D and confidence are established.

The Spurs are also the one with the recent ring and the one that won 57 games last season. This winning isn't new to the Spurs...only doing it in the first half....

exactly

[whottt]

exactly

Well that's no fun. :(

And Nikos...far be it from me to tell you to cut down on your word count...I don't mind stats...I just think there are a lot of other factors that need to be considered, beyond stats...see:95 WCF, 01 WCF, 04 Semis...and I'm not really talking about championships there...just that statistically we had a certain superiority that didn't play out on the court because of things the stats didn't show...Age, our confidence, an opponent with a champions confidence, lack of versatility and true perimter performanc...This season, I think what the stats don't show are the reasons we will have a big Win season...Age, our confidence, lack of equivalent rivals...and true perimeter performance...

[Nikos]

I'm well aware of that 00-01 team. I thought they flat out folded like a cheap suit when things got tough. Da being injured didn't help. That team was still VERY good though. Just not built for the playoffs, and not built to match up with the Lakers, especially with DA not 100%. Not to mention the refs calling Drob for a foul every 10 seconds. Impossible to win like that. They had a nice system as well, efficient and dominant on both ends. But did not capitlize when it counted.

Of course there are tons of factors that determine many things. But I just would love to see this team being offensively consistent for an entire season while still keeping that GREAT defense. Did you know last season they had the best defense of all time statistically, better than the Knicks of the early 90s? Of course you can make arguments they were not perfect on defense, but I still think they were as good as you can be basically. Sure Rasho was not tough, but the team won games last season with their GREAT defense, Duncan, and some help from the role players on offense when needed.

If the Spurs can become a great offensive team this season that would be awesome. They have the tools to be excellent on both ends, I just hope they capitlize on it.

[Rummpd]

Spurs will not win 65 for a simple reason = Pop will lock up Duncan and Ginobli to save them for the real season s/p #1 seed lock up.

The Sage predicted 63 (a great accomplishment) and I will stick with it - but it will be an "easy 63". No more having to win 30/35 to get to high 50s or 60 wins. Spurs will stay above 750 most of year, dropping below one time, and then will surge and coast to 63 wins.

Mark it down.

MadDoc