Why the Lakers won't be able to beat the Spurs in the playoffs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeNeedLength

Can someone make a "Why the Lakers won't be able to beat the Spurs in the playoffs" thread?

---

Not that I truly believe that San Antonio will have a decisive edge over LAL, but this is a good idea just to debunk myths.




1) Home-field advantage. The Spurs have it; the Lakers don't and won't.



2) Chances are (and I mean chances), the Lakers will have emerged from a more prolonged, tiring, WCSF with Dallas that will stretch to 6 or maybe even 7 games, while the Spurs may dispatch of their own WCSF opponent slightly more quickly.

In fact, if the Spurs play OKC and the Lakers play Dallas, that's a tiny bit less travel and distance for the Spurs than the Lakers, who would also have to fly back to San Antonio after closing out their series against Dallas at Staples Center (if things unfolded that way).



3) If one is going to trump up the Lakers' recent beating of the Spurs for maximum value, then it's only statistically fair to take into consideration the immediate preceding history of the Spurs' victories over LA as well. Yes, the Lakers won 99-83. The Spurs won 97-82 too, didn't they? The Spurs won 89-88 too, didn't they? Hasn't San Antonio won 3 out of the last 4 in this rivalry?


If the Celtics beat the Magic 3 times in a row, and then the Magic finally came back and had a very good game at the green garden at TD Banknorth, would we declare that the previous 3 Celtics wins over ORL were suddenly moot?




4) If "size is everything," they why hasn't LAL been 4-0 against SAS in the last four meetings instead of 1-3?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs and Mavs fan

4) If "size is everything," they why hasn't LAL been 4-0 against SAS in the last four meetings instead of 1-3?

---

We've only played them 3 times

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajballer4

We've only played them 3 times

---

The spurs manhandled the lakers at staples last season in march or april...

so the last four meetings are 3-1 spurs.

It's over guys...stop prolongong your anguish

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverblk mystix

The spurs manhandled the lakers at staples last season in march or april...

so the last four meetings are 3-1 spurs.

---

And just remind me again what last year has to do with this year?

oh...and good luck having this thread be as successful as mine

John, I trust your abs more than I trust you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calispursfan11

John, I trust your abs more than I trust you.

---

These abs never lie

The question is, how old is John Basedow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Basedow

oh...and good luck having this thread be as successful as mine

---

Need approval much?
:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Man In Black

Need approval much?
:lmao

---

Needs to juice up that turkey neck of his.

Tiago Splitter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Holden_Caulfield

Tiago Splitter.

---

:lol Splitter's gonna need to attend Popavich boot camp over the summer. He's nowhere near ready to step into Dice's shoes next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHo 37

:lol Splitter's gonna need to attend Popavich boot camp over the summer. He's nowhere near ready to step into Dice's shoes next year.

---

Why does he need to step into Dice's shoes when Dice isn't going anywhere?
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...mcdyess-plans/

I agree he needs to play the post with more sheer physicality, but it's not like he's Chuck Nevitt or Travis Knight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Man In Black

Why does he need to step into Dice's shoes when Dice isn't going anywhere?
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...mcdyess-plans/

---

It came up after the Pistons game that maybe Dice is done after this year. Haven't seen anything else about it since.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pistons < Spurs

What's the deal?

Dice was just interviewed by Pistons media guy after the game, asked him what made him change his mind and decide he is going to play next year, and Dice flat out said that it was a misprint, and not what he said. He said this is definitely his last year.

---

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172848

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Man In Black

Why does he need to step into Dice's shoes when Dice isn't going anywhere?
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...mcdyess-plans/

I agree he needs to play the post with more sheer physicality, but it's not like he's Chuck Nevitt or Travis Knight.

---

Duncan228 beat me to it. It seems like he is planning to retire at seasons end. Wishful thinking hopes he stays but not likely. IMO, Splitters not ready to take on the starters minutes yet. Maybe in due time. I guess Blair would go back to starter for the time being unless the Spurs make a move in the offseason which is also pretty unlikely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoops Czar

And just remind me again what last year has to do with this year?

---

Last year's Lakers team is the same as this year's Lakers team, and they got handled by a Spurs team that had to work to win 50 games.

The fallacy is your comparing regular season games to playoff games. Its an entirly different scenario when the playoffs start with teams playing at the top level of their intensity, no catching teams playing uninspired or coming off back to back games.

Why did the lakers lose their last two times? Why did the Spurs get spanked so soundly last game? It looks like the last game the lakers lenght and size was a big problem for the spurs. And it looks like Pop also believes this by the benching of Blair. He knows Blair is a poor matchup against LA and Dyess needs to get used to playing more minutes.

You have to look at the rosters and matchups and see how one team can overcome deficiencies and maximise their strenghts as compared to the other team.

lololololololololol Spuds fans in denial

right now the way LA is playing they're unstoppable. These guys are a machine, Cleveland may have done a very bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurs and Mavs fan

Not that I truly believe that San Antonio will have a decisive edge over LAL, but this is a good idea just to debunk myths.




1) Home-field advantage. The Spurs have it; the Lakers don't and won't.



2) Chances are (and I mean chances), the Lakers will have emerged from a more prolonged, tiring, WCSF with Dallas that will stretch to 6 or maybe even 7 games, while the Spurs may dispatch of their own WCSF opponent slightly more quickly.

In fact, if the Spurs play OKC and the Lakers play Dallas, that's a tiny bit less travel and distance for the Spurs than the Lakers, who would also have to fly back to San Antonio after closing out their series against Dallas at Staples Center (if things unfolded that way).



3) If one is going to trump up the Lakers' recent beating of the Spurs for maximum value, then it's only statistically fair to take into consideration the immediate preceding history of the Spurs' victories over LA as well. Yes, the Lakers won 99-83. The Spurs won 97-82 too, didn't they? The Spurs won 89-88 too, didn't they? Hasn't San Antonio won 3 out of the last 4 in this rivalry?


If the Celtics beat the Magic 3 times in a row, and then the Magic finally came back and had a very good game at the green garden at TD Banknorth, would we declare that the previous 3 Celtics wins over ORL were suddenly moot?




4) If "size is everything," they why hasn't LAL been 4-0 against SAS in the last four meetings instead of 1-3?

---

Because the Spurs won't be in the WCF ...

All kidding aside, Spurs and their fans should be confident you have HCA. you have been consistently good all year. Why shouldnt you have faith in your team?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Killakobe81

Why shouldnt you have faith in your team?

---

2 things we worry about (other than injuries of course):

- Laker's frontline (if Bynum stays healthy)
- Popovich turning into a mental midget vs Jackson in the playoffs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

The fallacy is your comparing regular season games to playoff games. Its an entirly different scenario when the playoffs start with teams playing at the top level of their intensity, no catching teams playing uninspired or coming off back to back games.

Why did the lakers lose their last two times? Why did the Spurs get spanked so soundly last game? It looks like the last game the lakers lenght and size was a big problem for the spurs. And it looks like Pop also believes this by the benching of Blair. He knows Blair is a poor matchup against LA and Dyess needs to get used to playing more minutes.

You have to look at the rosters and matchups and see how one team can overcome deficiencies and maximise their strenghts as compared to the other team.

---

:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoops Czar

And just remind me again what last year has to do with this year?

---

Was late in season and essentially the same key personnel on both teams. Has quite a lot to do, actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

The fallacy is your comparing regular season games to playoff games. Its an entirly different scenario when the playoffs start with teams playing at the top level of their intensity, no catching teams playing uninspired or coming off back to back games.

---

I agree, at the same time I expect much better focus from the Spurs part, including more minutes for guys like TD and Manu.

The reality is that the last game was an aberration as far as what the Spurs normally shot, and what the Lakeshow normally shot.

If you talk about matchups and fret only about size inside, you're overlooking the fact that on perimeter and bench play the Spurs have been much superior and consistent than the Lakers counterpart, something that wasn't necessarily the case in years past (the Spurs always had problems with depth on the bench, forcing Manu to be moved there).

Ultimately you also need a bit of luck too. The luck we had for Dice to be on the right place at the right time for the tip-in win, and the luck the Lakeshow had to make everything in the 1st quarter of last game while the Spurs couldn't hit the side of a barn.

I think any Spurs vs Lakeshow series will be competitive. I think the Spurs have a much better shot than seasons past, from a personnel standpoint. I also think this Lakeshow team is not what it was on seasons past.
I just won't bother fretting about the potential matchup since they both have to make it there first.

All teams being healthy, the Lakers take this in 6. Too much length...and not just situational length, all 3 bigs can play both sides of the court effectively.

Spurs will need to:

- Control the transition game..Spurs have been in the top 5-10 all season long, Lakers are one of the worst in the league..Spurs have to get out and run, Lakers are just an average team at defending in transition..if LA controls the tempo, Spurs are in trouble..

- Duncan will need to play at a borderline All-Star level..he doesn't have to be a star player for the Spurs to win, but he has to put up around 15-10 for the Spurs to beat LA..

- Dominate the perimeter game..this is the most important key, obviously..in the last game, the Lakers' perimeter players made the majority of their outside shots, and they completely outplayed the Spurs' perimeter players..if this happens, Lakers would win the series in 5..it's their weak link, it should always be exploited..Jefferson in particular would need to step up, since Kobe doesn't play D very often..

- Spurs bench needs to outplay LA's bench..Spurs' bench has more talent, they have to play like it, especially from long range..


I was away for a few days after the last LA-SA game..I checked out some of the reactions here, I was surprised by most of the hyperbole..Lakers controlled the boards at around the same rate as the 2nd game between these 2 teams(the McDyess tip-in game), so that wasn't the main issue for the Spurs loss..

It was pretty obvious that LA was treating it as a must-win, while the Spurs played with no energy, but that also wasn't the primary reason for the loss..

The 1st half was the only meaningful portion of this game, for obvious reasons..during the 1st half, the Lakers shot 45% from 15 feet or longer..the Lakers usually shoot 37% on 36 shots per game, from 15 feet or longer, including 3s..in this game, the Lakers were so hot that they took 34 shots from this range, in the 1st half alone, 1 off from their usual average for an entire game..

If LA is making outside jump shots, there isn't a team that will beat them..more often than not, they won't be making their outside jump shots at such a high rate..Spurs probably would have lost either way, based on the energy level of both teams, but the score was an aberration..

Send help against LA's bigs, play with a lot of energy, make them kick it out and force their perimeter players to win the game..if they do, you live with it, because nobody is stopping their bigs(other than Kobe not passing them the ball)..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadlyDynasty

All teams being healthy, the Lakers take this in 6. Too much length...and not just situational length, all 3 bigs can play both sides of the court effectively.

---

Actually the Laker bigs are still soft, not sure the Spurs can take advantage of this but it is obvious they are not physical and can be muscled.

I expect to see Duncan Manu and Dice play extended minutes in a Lakers series, but I'm not completely sold that it will be the Lakers the Spurs face in WCF. Dallas can beat them, Dirk will put a lot of the Lakers front court in foul trouble. Of all the teams in the WC Dallas poses the biggest matchup problem for the Lakers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vito Corleone

Actually the Laker bigs are still soft, not sure the Spurs can take advantage of this but it is obvious they are not physical and can be muscled.

---

lets be real, if the Lakers bigs are soft what does that make the spurs bigs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

Spurs will need to:

- Control the transition game..Spurs have been in the top 5-10 all season long, Lakers are one of the worst in the league..Spurs have to get out and run, Lakers are just an average team at defending in transition..if LA controls the tempo, Spurs are in trouble..

- Duncan will need to play at a borderline All-Star level..he doesn't have to be a star player for the Spurs to win, but he has to put up around 15-10 for the Spurs to beat LA..

- Dominate the perimeter game..this is the most important key, obviously..in the last game, the Lakers' perimeter players made the majority of their outside shots, and they completely outplayed the Spurs' perimeter players..if this happens, Lakers would win the series in 5..it's their weak link, it should always be exploited..Jefferson in particular would need to step up, since Kobe doesn't play D very often..

- Spurs bench needs to outplay LA's bench..Spurs' bench has more talent, they have to play like it, especially from long range..


I was away for a few days after the last LA-SA game..I checked out some of the reactions here, I was surprised by most of the hyperbole..Lakers controlled the boards at around the same rate as the 2nd game between these 2 teams(the McDyess tip-in game), so that wasn't the main issue for the Spurs loss..

It was pretty obvious that LA was treating it as a must-win, while the Spurs played with no energy, but that also wasn't the primary reason for the loss..

The 1st half was the only meaningful portion of this game, for obvious reasons..during the 1st half, the Lakers shot 45% from 15 feet or longer..the Lakers usually shoot 37% on 36 shots per game, from 15 feet or longer, including 3s..in this game, the Lakers were so hot that they took 34 shots from this range, in the 1st half alone, 1 off from their usual average for an entire game..

If LA is making outside jump shots, there isn't a team that will beat them..more often than not, they won't be making their outside jump shots at such a high rate..Spurs probably would have lost either way, based on the energy level of both teams, but the score was an aberration..

Send help against LA's bigs, play with a lot of energy, make them kick it out and force their perimeter players to win the game..if they do, you live with it, because nobody is stopping their bigs(other than Kobe not passing them the ball)..

---

Good analysis.

It was a law of averages game. The Spurs had won 3 straight against the Lakers, 22 straight at home and just came off a game where they played out of their minds offensively against an elite team. The Lakers, meanwhile, were playing their best ball of the season and clearly wanted the game more.

You shouldn't have been surprised about the hyperbole around here, nor amongst the media. It was predictable. The majority are convinced the Spurs can't beat the Lakers in a series and that there's some massive gulf between the two teams. So for all of them to finally see the Lakers not only beat the Spurs, but beat them convincingly, they felt like it justified their sentiments.

Spurs fans have less confidence in their team than any other elite team's fans I've ever seen. They can all pretend it's because of the defense or the rebounding or the lack of size or the age of some of the top players, etc., the reality is they were no different from 03-08.

Playoffs aren't about law of averages, they are about matchups.

Lots of outside factors play into regular season games that aren't a factor come playoff time.