What do you really think?

The biggest reason didn't even make the poll. As some have noted above, the WCF scheduling, combined with the extremely short turnaround after the semis, which was further abbreviated by the plane fiasco, is what did the Spurs in.

Of course, you gotta play the schedule you're given, and the Spurs could have improved their chances, despite the non-sensical WCF scheduling, by taking care of the Hornets in 5 or 6.

That said, is there any doubt the Spurs hold on to win game 1 of the WCF with a rested squad? And if they'd had an extra day or two off during the WCF, surely they would have been able to win at least one of the other games they led. IMO the Spurs win the WCF in 6 with a more "normal" schedule. Could they beat the Celts even without a healthy Manu? I don't know, but they'd have put up much more of a fight than the Lakers did.

manu was injured then our offense struggled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lakers_55

I think it was several reasons. Mainly, the west was a dogfight. Had the Spurs survived that, I believe they would have beaten the Celtics. That's my opinion, for what it's worth.

---

I think the spurs would have lost to the celtics, pistons, and maybe even the grizzlies. we're lucky gino's ankle held up long enough to get us through the hornets series.

he was our scorer this past season. i can't put him above duncan as far as being our best player, but he's our instant offense (like kobe or pierce).

i think our defense was pretty stout for most of the LA series too. offense was clearly the issue, and that stemmed from not having the big 3 at full strength when it mattered.

without any one of the big three firing on all cylinders, the spurs are not a championship calibre team.

Because of the league wide conspiracy that makes the Spurs lose but doesn't make the Spurs win. It's so obvious.

No rest between series