Printable View
So, the Bulls just finished losing to an eighth seed. Obviously their injuries played a major role in their downfall.
My questions:
Does this Bulls loss help erase the memory of what happened last year?
History will remember Rose's injury but will history remember Ginobili's injury?
Should history remember Ginobili's injury or did the Spurs simply lose to a better team?
Lost to a better team. No excuses.
Agreed, and a :lobt2: is the best cure for the bad memory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Namundy
The 2011 Spurs finished the regular season weak and it carried over to the playoffs. Ginobili's injury didn't help, but no excuses.
However, the Sixers got gifted and are probably the worst #8 to win. I'd even rank them below the Denver team that beat Seattle.
This doesn't erase bad memories. Media will remember Rose's injury not Manu's. We lost to a better team, they didn't.
No.
No.
History should remember Ginobili's injury but even if he was healthy, that series still could have gone either way imo.
Yeah, last year was SCAM instead of SPAM. Spurs Collapse After March.
There are always a ton of variables in life, otherwise it wouldn't be any fun. I think a number of them led to the spurs demise last season.
Manus injury was one significant reason.
The spurs' record being inflated was another.
And it's common knowledge the grizzlies tanked to the eight seed so that is another.
In response to the post. It does feel kinda good to see another 1 seed go down to an 8 but in reality, the bulls' injuries were insane and not comparable to the spurs' last year.
In the end though, both teams lost when they had higher aspirations, and that's all that needs to be said.
i allready forgot last season :lol thanks for bringing it up :depressed
No
No
we lost against a better team
other big difference chicago also lost noah during the serie, rose played one game, manu missed one game.
If Manu would have played game one I could understand the Manu injury not playing a role, given how things played out I think it must definitely be remembered.
I enjoy classy Spurfan's sportsmanship.
But with a healthy Manu, the Spurs beat the Grizzlies in 7.
if Duncan had gone down (g-d forbid!), people would say because of injuries. I don't think anyone else on this team going down would have mattered to people.
We weren't at full strength or playing to our full capacity. Manu's injury did matter. He could have been the difference in the series. We wouldn't have lost game 1 and wouldn't have given a Memphis team hope and energy.
That being said, it still could have gone the way it did. Randolph and everyone else on that team were just clicking. They could have played anyone and beat anyone.
Bulls had that game.
Duuuuuuuuumb move by CJ watson to force the issue with a 1 point lead, and the ball with 7 seconds left to go in the game.
He should have tried to run the clock out and held it himself 81% ft shooter, than dumping it to Asik to get fouled, and who is a poor shooter.
He missed them both gah
Such a great game too. I feel bad for the Bulls.
As everyone has already said, last year was no excuse. Yeah, the Bulls just lost to an 8th seed, but the 76ers are a much worse team than the Grizzlies were last year. Spurs ran into a buzz saw last season. 76ers were merely gift wrapped an injured Bulls team.
The past is the past. What matters now is accomplishing a championship this season.
Beating the grizzlies this year will help erase last years memory
Paul and Blake both got banged up in game 5... might not play in game 6 or in a diminished state.
eeeshk.
We should be glad the Bulls got put out of their misery.
Hopefully the same happens to Atlanta tonight. What a dumb team. And why don't we just give Boston a bye to the ECF, because nobody wants to see the excrement of a Celtics-Sixers series.
Nothing will erase the memory of last year other than a championship.
It's nice to act "honorable" and say the MEM/SA series was won with no strings attatched... but if Phili doesn't get full credit for this year's 8 due to Rose and Noah being out, then why does Memphis get credit with Manu having a broken arm and Duncan having a bum ankle? The point of taking credit away from the 76ers was because the Bulls weren't at full strength. The Spurs were not at full strength.
No Gay, and the two best players on that specific 2011 Spurs team were substantially injured. It makes no sense to not address these facts when talking about the series.
All we can say is the 8th seeded Memphis Grizzlies without Rudy Gay def. the 1st seeded San Antonio Spurs with Manu Ginobili battling through a broken arm and Tim Duncan battling through an injured ankle. No more, no less.
Rose's injury >>> Manu's Injury
Healthy Manu and the Spurs still lose that series in 6. Memphis was definitely the better team. The Spurs #1 seed was mostly a function of a ridiculous first two months of the season.
Me too. Luckily it seemed so long agoQuote:
Originally Posted by slick'81
Rose + Noah > Manu + Timmy
Analysts and fans will remember the Roseless Bulls lost because of injuries but not the Spurs who missed Manu for only one game. People already forgot about Timmy's sprained ankle.
People make excuses for when the Spurs win so it would be crazy to expect anyone to remember key injuries during our losses.
To me, losing to the 8 seed is only fodder for the smack talk from fans of other teams. Losing to a hot 8 seed doesn't hurt any worse than losing to a 4 or 5 seed in the second round. The 1 seed is supposed to at least make it to the Conference Finals, but it doesn't always work out that way.
I think the Bulls would have won with a healthy Rose, just like I think the Spurs would have won with a healthy Manu. It's tough to overcome the loss of your leading scorer. I don't really care if the Bulls get credit, when the Spurs really didn't. Getting that kind of credit is like being on top of the Power Rankings during the regular season - it counts for nothing. We lost, Memphis won, congratulations.
Memphis played like an old school playoffs team. Spurs played like a jumpshooting Suns/Magic team
The lowlight of that series was seeing McDyess lose his cool and yell at the passive Spurs to play tougher. Highlight was Neal with it
But here are excuses, in addition to Manu's injury :
But history might show that Rudy Gay's injury was a blessing in disguise last season for the Grizz, FWIW.
- Parker had divorce distractions
- Duncan got injured towards the end of the season and in the playoffs, Duncan looked spry and had vintage highlights early in the series
- McDyess limped off the court towards the end of the season and had the shoulder stinger in the playoffs, IIRC
- Splitter injured throughout the season and never got enough mins
- God damn Richard Jefferson
That might have been the most painful part of the loss. Most of us could see it coming over the last month of the season.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cane
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
The Grizzlies weren't really an eighth seed. IIRC they could've been as high as sixth because they specifically wanted to play us and loved the match-up with us, and that was before Manu got hurt. I'm a huge Manu homer, but I don't think you can compare the two things. He still played in five of the six games and played pretty well, like at least 75% of what he is. If the Bulls had 75% of Rose, they'd easily beat Philly. Hell, if they had 75% of Noah they easily beat Philly.
A healthy Bulls team is a lock for ECF, minimum. Even if Spurs get past Grizzlies in six or seven, I doubt they'd have gotten past much further. No one to guard Durant outside of RJ (LOL). Duncan was dragging badly. He couldn't move. Not much of a bench to counteract what Harden gives them. We would've needed to score a ton to beat them (as will be the case this year). Bonner would've had to have a monster series.
(And I'll just let that sentence hang on its own.)
Anyway, to answer your questions:
1. No. What happened last year, mainly, was that Tim and Tony sucked. They were the main two culprits. Everything else was far less important. The Bulls have a legit excuse for feeling chagrined.
2. If by "history" you mean "ESPN-addled American sports fans," then no, but they don't remember anything Spurs related anyway, so it doesn't matter. I'm a Spurs fan, I remember the good and the bad, and there are enough people (like you) to discuss those memories with, so that's fine. I don't need to have conversations with millions. As far as I'm concerned, us select few got to enjoy a special treat the rest of the country were too dumb to discover, no different than "Arrested Development," really (but thankfully on the air many more years) so we're lucky.
3. The Thunder weren't better, but if we were better, it was by very little. It was a 4-5 match-up hidden as a 1-8. I don't think it had much influence on last year's Finals outcome. Our bigs were shitty, we peaked way too early, that's it. Spurs fans should know better than anyone, being the best team in December is meaningless.
Indeed. I'd be willing to say the ECF as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoogarBear
We lose that series anyways. Memphis was a better team, was in our heads, had our number.
People blame the 2006 loss to the Mavs on Manu's foul, when the truth is it should never have come down to that.
As shitty as the Spurs played, having a healthy Manu for the entire series would indeed have probably been the difference, so it's disappointing, but the truth is they don't have any excuse for losing that series because of all the other things that were in their control that they didn't do.
Also, I can't think of anyone on the Grizzlies roster that didn't play great, so they deserve a ton of credit for taking advantage of their opportunity.
They also lost Noah. With a healthy Noah they probably still win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
I wish more people would say that more often. It's a 48 minute game. For every play like Manu's foul, there are a dozen more that people conveniently forget about. Like, for instance, Bruce, Finley, Barry, and Horry being a combined 4-15 from the 3P line.
There should be an emote for "hat's off". You nailed it.
Being one of five #1 teams in history to lose to a #8 instead of one of four teams certainly helps take some of the sting out. But I don't feel like the Manu injury was a good enough excuse for it. We were way underprepared for that series.
lol RJ
:depressed
Losing Noah was probably the dealbreaker here, as losing only Rose probbaly wasn't enough.
However I don't think there's ever an excuse for a 1st seed to lose to an 8th seed, no matter what. Let's not forget that the 76ers absolutely suck, to the point that even without the big 3 the Spurs would still have beaten them in 6 games. The 76ers had a great start to the season but collapsed really badly at the end and almost missed the playoffs.
The main issue is not Chicago losing Rosein the 1st round, but for the rest of the playoffs. That alone can really take the air out of any team. Losing Noah on top of it really shows the team's not going anywhere in the post-season this year.
That's still not an excuse to lose to a team that would have a (badly) losing record in the West.
With all due respect, ^this. :toastQuote:
Originally Posted by GSH
bulls losing without rose, but they were rolling leading up to the playoffs without rose...
Ah, yes... the ancient small-ball gag reflex. Sorry, I didn't read between the lines. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Whatever the reason, games aren't lost on one play. A lot of people could improve their overall outlook on life if they could grasp that fact.
No way Memphis beat the Spurs with Rudy Gay playing.
He's the only reason the Clippers are still playing.
Casual fans might not remember Manu's injury, but a lot of people will. Just because ESPN pretends like the Spurs were fully healthy last year doesn't mean that it's true.
I don't think there's any difference between last year's Spurs and this year's Bulls. Manu was our best player last year and Rose was their best player this year. Losing them both to significant injuries were huge blows. Then let's not forget that Duncan will still trying to recover from a sprained ankle in the series too. Much like Noah. There's a lot of similarities.
manu played 5 of the 6 games
With one arm.Quote:
Originally Posted by siraulo23
The problem with the Spurs is that the media considers them as a team, a unit package who works as one.
Then we the fans should remember Manu's injury's as a major problem of 11' season, but I doubt the rest of the league does.
So for them Manu's injurie is nonsense in the 11' failure.
Personnally, Even though 11'Spurs were 10 time less stronger than the 12'version, I'm pretty sure a healthy Spurs team should've win these Memphis series take it to 7 or not.
Besides this year I don't see any team better than the spurs.
Exactly, a healthy Manu doesn't stop Randolph/Gasol dominating the Spurs frontline. Or Parker playing like ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
We'll get payback this year on our way to :lobt2: #5. :hat
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
No. Rose > Manu, plus Manu still played with his injury. Rose couldn't.
Outside of the fans of a team remembering injuries to their team's players, I don't think history remembers anyone's injuries. They're part of the game, there are teams every year who can claim an injury hurt their chances at winning a title. It's simply too common of an occurance for any one specific injury to be anything more than an afterthought to everyone except the fans of the specific team.
Does this Bulls loss help erase the memory of what happened last year?
No.
History will remember Rose's injury but will history remember Ginobili's injury?
It's funny that when Bayless brings this up about last year's team, the rest of the people at ESPN just laugh and dismiss it. However, if someone like D-Wade broke his elbow, forcing him to miss game 1 then be physically compromised the rest of a series, and the Heat lost, I'll bet all of ESPN would say "Yeah, the Heat lost, BUT ... " Sadly, there is no such acknowledgment for the Spurs, which is BS.
Should history remember Ginobili's injury or did the Spurs simply lose to a better team?
Yes, Ginobili's injury was a factor. Memphis had a significant advantage down low. Although, the Spurs could have minimized the impact of that advantage due to their own significant advantage on the perimeter, but Ginobili's injury (along with Parker's poor play) compromised that advantage.
Did they lose to a better team? I'll say they lost to a team that was playing better at the time. The quality of Memphis' play in the first round last year was reminiscent of how Golden State played against Dallas in '07. They were on fire basically the entire series, and every BS shot went in for them. I laughed so friggin' hard when the Mavs became the first #1 to lose to a #8 in a best of 7 series ... I guess karma really is a bitch.
Last year's Grizzlies were a better team than the current Sixers, and not a true 8-seed. They picked their poison, and survived it like Wesley going up against the Sicilian with death on the line.
I also agree that the loss of Rose was more of a blow to Chicago than losing Manu was to the Spurs...but I wouldn't say by much. Last year's team was very Manu-centric....he was the best player in the regular season, and Parker hadn't quite taken the reigns yet. I think losing Manu affected the Spurs psyche in a very similar way that losing Rose struck the Bulls. With Manu, the Spurs very likely don't lose Game 1, and the whole complexion of that series is changed. Was it as damning....probably not. But it was very close, and likely still a game-changer, but you still can't take anything away from the Grizzlies for taking care of business and seizing the opportunity.
Either way, the Bulls losing to the Sixers may not take away the sting of 8 for Spurs fans, but I think it does help to mitigate the overall stigma that comes with losing to an 8-seed. Considering this has now happened three times in the past six postseasons, it's gotta become more normalized just due to regularity. Parity in the league is pretty high these days, and it illustrates just how easy fate can change for a team with one twist of a knee or snap of an elbow.
The irony is that when the league switched to the 7-game first round, they made the argument that it would ensure less upsets, and it's done the exact opposite. We've now seen three first-round upsets in that 10-year span (30%), as opposed to the two times it happened in the 56 years preceding it (3.5%).
Ginobili missed one game and after that, Memphis just outplayed us. The Bulls just couldn't put it together because Rose & Noah were their offense and everything. The Bulls tried but in the end, the Sixers were just too much. Now Spurs have home court throughout
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
The Spurs were not the number 1 seed the last 3 weeks of the season, they were playing horrible bball. The Manu injury just made them even worse. Any of the 7 other teams in the playoffs last year could have beaten the Spurs in 7 games.
Timvp, as much as I love my Spurs and deflect any argument that comes my way with Gino's injury, Duncan hobbling, I gotta say we lost to a better team. No excuses. :toast
they were a better team than us - last year we couldn't have beaten OKC, LA, or Dallas.
Either way, the Mavericks were the only healthy team to lose a 7-game series in the first round to an 8-seed. :stirpot:
:lol the only difference was that memphis took the glove and slapped the spurs across the face, telling the spurs before game 1 how they were gonna abuse them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dex
and abuse them they did!!!!
Worst possible matchup for us last year much like Dallas against Warriors.
Can't really argue that... they wanted us, got us, and bent us over.Quote:
Originally Posted by clambake
I realize maybe history doesn't always remember the details but this and last year is nothing like denver beating seattle or the mavs losing to golden state. It makes a difference a hugh difference if your best player does not play and it's not an excuse it's a fact! No way the bulls lose this series with rose. And no way we lose last year. I would bet my life we win game 1 last year if Manu plays, and if he was healthy no doubt we win the series. If we end up with memphis you will all see.
Horseshit and theres no way we wouldn't have beat dallas also.Quote:
Originally Posted by sehui
:lol not only that, at lunch period the grizz told the spurs they'd be waiting for them after school.......just to give'm a couple more hours to shit their pants!!
GS did the same to Dallas. They celebrated publicly when they got Dallas.
:cry:cry:cry but we were injured!
Spurs were a fluke team last year. Were not going anywhere with a healthy manu or not.
on the other hand, Bulls with a healthy Rose are my favorites to come out of the east.
I think this is why these 2 1-8 losses will be treated completely different.
Aside: were the 2011 Grizzlies the best 8 seed ever? If not, who's ahead of them? Probably the 1999 Knicks, but I can't think of any others.
Memphis was easily a 6th seed but tanked to get us. And they were a better team than philly. Still is.
iirc the 94 nuggets took a pretty good Jazz team to 7 games after their first round win over the Sonics, much like the Grizz did to OKC in the second round last year. Granted if that 94 first round had been a best of 7 instead of 5 Seattle probably wins the series but that Nuggets team was pretty damn good though. They had Dan Issel as a head coach, Dikembe in his prime and pretty good supporting cast espeically Abudul-Rauf at point, tourettes syndrome and all that year he was a hell of a 3 point shooter and near perfect from the line. They had Stith, Rodney Rogers fat ass and LaPhonso Ellis from what I remember too, not too shabby for an 8th seed.
yeah and that sonics team came in as favorites of west winning 60+ I think
I just remember it was funny because I didn't care much for the sonics, and watching dikembe's obnoxious ass holding up the game ball while rolling around on the ground like they just won the championship was entertaining as well. I don't remember too much of that year but I'm sure the infamous rigged Jazz refs of the 90's probably helped them best that nuggets team. I'm all with Timvp celebrating another year where the Jazz don't win shit, God I hated that team so much growning up watching the spurs :lol
FixedQuote:
Originally Posted by spursfan1000
This. History will not be cruel to the Bulls this season just it hasn't been cruel the Spurs for last year. Everyone knows Mem, given more time, would've not been an 8th seed. Also, with G-Nob's injury.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dex
History knows that Dallas' collapse was a thorough choke job. Nellie v. Cuban along with dominate regular season the mavericks had.
This. All you have to do is take one look at how much better the current Spurs team is with our roster shakeup and Tony's major improvement to realize how basically broken last year's team was. It was great that we won a ton of regular season games, but even completely healthy, that team was way, way weaker than any of our title teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheguevara
No, because even though the scenario is the same, it still has nothing to do with the Spurs.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Of course not. It didn't even remember Duncan's missing the '00 playoffs and he was only one of the two best players in the world at the time and the best player on the defending champions. Even Simmons, who seemingly fancies himself a league historian, failed to mention this in a recent article centered around this sort of thing. So if something that gargantuan is mostly forgotten, then what chance does Ginobili's injury have at being remembered (particularly when you remember that he actually played)? Sure they do now, because it's still relatively fresh, but give it a few years.Quote:
History will remember Rose's injury but will history remember Ginobili's injury?
They absolutely should. Despite the fact that he played very well all things considered, he was still a top fifteen player in the league and the consensus best player on his team, playing with what essentially amounted to a broken arm.Quote:
Should history remember Ginobili's injury or did the Spurs simply lose to a better team?
Given that, Duncan's ankle not being 100% (Gay being out is different, because it wasn't sprung on them literally just before the playoffs; they had plenty of time to mentally come to terms with him being out for the season and to adapt accordingly) and the way the two teams were trending going into it, they lost to a better team at that time. But as you've said and I agree with, the Spurs were vulnerable to damn near every playoff team at that time. In the grand scheme of things, the Spurs were the better team though.