Was Memphis really this bad, or are the Spurs really this good?

Memphis came into the series much hyped, even by some of ST's most vaunted posters, not to mention much of the brain trust at ESPN. And yet the Spurs dispatched them in 4 honestly not so tough games. So what are we to make of this unexpected by most outcome?

There's another much hyped team that will most likely make it out of the East to face us. So did the Spurs just beat a team that was much worse than most people thought, or are the Spurs hugely better than most people were capable of predicting? And depending on where you stand on that question, what does that mean for how you think the most likely Finals match up will play out?

Discuss...

Memphis had weak links. On offense it was Prince and Allen. On defense it was Randolph.

Memphis played us neck and neck most of the series. There were point swings but 2 games went to OT. Tonight was a close win.

I said the series would be decided in the 1st quarter of the 1st game and it was as the Spurs jumped out early and didn't look back.

Memphis just doesn't have the outside shooting to force SA to respect their perimeter play which means everyone can collapse on the bigs, and that's all Memphis really has. They had 16 offensive boards, if the Spurs had that it would have been a 25 point blowout.

How did the Grizzlies win 56 games?

A little bit of both imo. It's no secret that Memphis' offense struggles at times. Their role players, outside of Pondexter, just didn't really give them much offensively. And neither Z-Bo or Gasol had a very good series. But a lot of that goes to the credit of the Spurs, too. Duncan and Splitter both played GREAT D this series. Splitter's D on Z-Bo was huge. What's crazy is the Spurs could've played a lot better this series...

Meh....most people kept citing 2011 as the reason why the Spurs might get beaten. Not really based on solid analysis imo.

lulz @ Bill Simmons.

I was telling my friends before the series and they didn't believe me, but I thought this series would go to 5 max. The spurs match up so well with Memphis at this point its ridiculous. Their starting lineup has no shooting besides conley who isn't even that great of a threat, which means the spurs wings can constantly help out and double/reach for steals. The spurs have the length and fundamentals to seriously bother randolph, with Duncan, Splitter, and Bonner (great fundamentals defensively tbh) to bother him. The one point I kept trying to stress was that Zbo simply couldn't dominate or even play to his regular standards against us, he just can't get comfortable. All in all, our defense proved to be great in this series and we should feel good about ourselves

Pop coached the perfect series, exploited the Memphis weaknesses on offence and defence.

Let's see if he can do the same in the Finals. Fingers crossesd

Spurs struggle with teams that can fill it up from distance. Fakers and LeMizzerables don't have shooters, hence sweeps. Gameplanning for perimeter oriented teams is mighty difficult, which is why the Spirs are a nightmare matchup for anyone. But if the cHeat shoot like they did last night, we'll never stop them.

It'll go 7, with a playmaker at the end making the difference. Hopefully it is Manu or Green instead of Battier or Allen.

4 honestly not so tough games? I beg to disagree.

I'd argue this might have been one of the most competitive sweeps ever.

Tbh, this series depended on the health of Tony Parker. If he was hobbled, Grizzlies probably win. If he was typical TP, Spurs win a tough series. If he plays his best series ever, Spurs sweep.

I think the Spurs are better than most realize. They only talk about the execution and poise of the Spurs. They forget about the physical standpoint of what the Spurs do. There is so much motion all over the court that a defense has trouble keeping up with the conditioning of the Spurs players. Even the bigs use tons of motion. It is confusing to defenses and forces all sorts of mistakes. I call the Spurs offense more opportunistic than a pick and roll offense. When the Spurs have so many players that can move without the ball and are threats to score at the slightest mistake, it is difficult for the basketball purist to not understand what exactly is happening to a defense facing the Spurs system. The Grizzlies were flat out tired. They couldn't keep up with the Spurs CONSTANT motion, and at the same time have the energy to compete against a solid Spur defensive gameplan. A team cannot take a break against the Spurs on either end of the court. This is why I believe that the Spurs are in fact a damn good team and have a chance to prove that they ARE the best TEAM in the NBA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Splitman4evah

Spurs struggle with teams that can fill it up from distance. Fakers and LeMizzerables don't have shooters, hence sweeps. Gameplanning for perimeter oriented teams is mighty difficult, which is why the Spirs are a nightmare matchup for anyone. But if the cHeat shoot like they did last night, we'll never stop them.

It'll go 7, with a playmaker at the end making the difference. Hopefully it is Manu or Green instead of Battier or Allen.

---

If we lose a series to Haslem jumpshots and Bosh 3s, I can live with that. You can't take away everything, so if we give them those shots and they hit them then so be it.

I feel the same about Lebrons mid range shots, if he hits them then you just gotta shake his hand and say well played. If he gets in to the lane he'll score or dish for dunks and open 3s, gotta give him the mid range and hope he misses.

The Spurs made the Grizzles look bad

It's just that the Spurs are such a bad match-up for the Grizzlies this year, exactly like they were our worst match-up. Their strength is the two big men, and the Spurs have the best interior defense (when healthy) against traditional low-post players. Tim and Tiago may not be able to stop LeBron's penetration, but ZBo's post-up plays right to their hands.

The Spurs defense was the difference, IMO... as I said on my prediction thread, we already knew the Grizz had trouble scoring, and since Game 3 of the Warriors series, the Spurs took it to another level defensively. I don't think Memphis was overrated. It was clear they would've had a much harder time getting past OKC if Westbrook was there, but they're a solid bunch of guys. The Spurs just had a great gameplan.

Grizz were exposed by Pop tbh

Memphis is a below average perimeter offensive team which hurt them in all facets. Spurs are playing terrific right now, especially TP but TD and Khawi were special too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Tbh, this series depended on the health of Tony Parker. If he was hobbled, Grizzlies probably win. If he was typical TP, Spurs win a tough series. If he plays his best series ever, Spurs sweep.

---

Tony was fine from the get go...

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214458

You Tpark'd this year LJ.... Own it.

I think Memphis was just that bad.

Randolph is literally like 6'7. If he's guarded by a true 7 footer who wont give him ground, then he's practically useless. Gasol is finesse as hell, and he got away with shooting jump-shots throughout the post-season for way too long.

And otherwise Memphis just plain out didn't have any scorers. Seriously. I don't think I've ever seen a team in the Western Conference Finals so offensively challenged. I mean we basically left Tony Allen (a 6'4 guard mind you) WIDE OPEN at the 3 point line and he wouldn't even shoot because he knows he's such a bad shooter. That's how bad it was for Memphis. Even their guards didn't have any confidence of making a shot.

And defensively I think Memphis was overrated. No one on their team could keep up with Parker, and Duncan was a mismatch because of Randolph and Gasol's lack of hustle on the defensive end (hence Duncan beating them down the floor multiple times throughout the series). And besides Tony Allen,, Memphis didn't really have anyone on defense that stood out. Marc Gasol winning defensive player of the year was an absolute joke IMO. Duncan had a better year defensively. Not to mention Lebron for God's sake!

I said before the series started that I felt we were the MUCH better team and that we were going to win the series easily. I mean we really dominated in all 4 games except for the 4th quarter of game 2 and the 1st quarter of game 3. I was surprised at all the hype Memphis got despite only beating a Clippers team we swept last year and a Thunder team without Russel Westbrook or James Harden.

Both.
A play that sticks in my mind is the missed breakaway layup at a key juncture. I think it was the Grizzlys Arthur.
Laid an egg and set it just in front of the rim for the miss. :lol

The Spurs are extremely well balanced.

From playing against a team that were almost completely outside Jump shooters (Warriors)...to a team that is almost completely inside game (Memphis,) we were able to compete and beat both styles. Our defense can play against both types of threats, and win. So can our offense.

Memphis and the Warriors are not bad teams. They both are very good.

But, the Spurs are just that much better.

And to put it bluntly, we out-coached both of these teams. Pop put together a team that is extremely versatile...and he used that versatility to beat 2 different types of teams.

Personally, I don't care who we play in Finals.

Grizz were undermanned. They really missed Rudy Gay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phxspurfan

Grizz were undermanned. They really missed Rudy Gay.

---

They beat us without Rudy Gay in 2011.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phyzik

Tony was fine from the get go...

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214458

You Tpark'd this year LJ.... Own it.

---

Grizzlies in 9, tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phxspurfan

Grizz were undermanned. They really missed Rudy Gay.

---

I honestly don't think they would have been any better with Gay. They would likely have been worse. Tayshaun Prince is no joke on defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Grizzlies in 9, tbh.

---

We all lay eggs, whatever. Keep bringing us those grades.:flag:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Grizzlies in 9, tbh.

---

:toast:lol

What really hurt Grizzlies is Allen can't shoot threes and brings nothing to the offense really, even Bowen made teams pay for doubling Duncan by hitting the three

Spurs that good, tbh. In all honesty, if Manu doesn't break his arm and Tim doesn't sprain his ankle in 2011, we handle Memphis and have a legit chance at a title. Last year, if we don't start getting straight up fucked by the refs, and Harden doesn't go MJ on us, we have another legit chance at a title. This year, the odds just even'd out. Ask any Heat fan last year, and they were far more scared of playing the Spurs. We're their nightmare, and shit just got real for them. Look for them to step up and try to finish the Pacers as quickly as possible.

Combination of both. The Grizzlies were a good team, but contrary to ESPN talking heads' beliefs, they didn't actually match up with us as good as they claimed.

Conley was never going to play Parker even, because the media underrates Parker (until tonight, obviously they didn't).

Duncan's defensive ability has been massively underrated this season. He led the NBA in defensive rating and carried the Spurs up to the 3rd best team defensive rating in the NBA despite our team being filled with role players and guys with bad defensive ability like Bonner, Blair, and Neal.

ZBo was not actually as good as he was against us 2 years ago. He peaked while Duncan was having his worst season and playing at like 65%.

I don't think it was a matter of the Grizzlies being really overrated neccessarily (except in the areas I mentioned), it was mostly a matter of the Spurs being WAY underrated because they closed the season weakly.

The Grizzlies were a great team. . .2nd in the NBA in defense. What they didn't tell you is that the Spurs were 3rd. They also didn't tell you that the Spurs have been among the elite in offense for 3 straight seasons, while the Grizzlies were noticably below average.

I think those are the main points to be made. The Grizzlies were a good team and I don't want to take anything away from their season or their players. But anyone who thought Conley was going to play Parker even, that ZBo was going to go off on the REAL DPOY Tim Duncan, and that ther Grizzlies' defense (which was barely better than ours) was going to hold down our elite offense that much while their weak offense was going to score better against our nearly as good defense. . .you were kidding yourself.

Spurs are dope right now. Parker is 100%. Duncan is clicking. Green is good. Even fucking Matt BONER is playing his best playoff basketball ever. All we're missing is Manu Ginobili getting his shit together and Leonard's knee getting 100%. Knock on wood with the health thing obviously.

2011 Spurs team was half as strong as the 2013. Everyone healthy, experienced and hungry makes Grizzlies like the Bobcats.

No idea how you could say these were 4, not so tough games... the Grizz made big runs in every game, and there were 2 OTs. Parker playing out of his mind does not make the series easy, exactly ...

That said, it's basically impossible to predict how the Spurs will play in the Finals.

Why do we have to downplay the Spurs' accomplishment by acting as if Memphis wasn't/isn't a good team?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anakha

4 honestly not so tough games? I beg to disagree.

I'd argue this might have been one of the most competitive sweeps ever.

---

I think there'd be some people that my take the opposing side of that argument. Sure, the middle two games went to overtime, but we pulled away quite definitively in both overtime periods; eventually what appears like competitiveness becomes a pattern of superiority if one teams comes out on top repeatedly. Personally I was surprised (though admittedly not as much as the Simmonites on this forum) by how deftly we were able to keep the Grizz at arm length this series. After all, I thought the Grizz had 2 win in them. So while I saw tons of holes in the Grizz and didn't think they were nowhere near as good as some people *cough* timvp *cough* stated they were, I'm at a loss to really say what or if that means anything to how good the Spurs are. My gut reaction is that while the Grizz were definitely overrated by a lot of people, that implies that the Spurs were also underrated. And at the end of the day they still managed the first WCF sweep in 10 years.

If I hadn't chucked my homer glasses in at least '08, and we didn't have 10 days until the finals, I wouldn't be agonizing over this subtle distinction, but I starting to feel that it just might be possible to assert that the Spurs have another gear in them this post season, similar to in '05 when the ran with the Suns and pounded it out with the Sonics and Pistons, an extra gear they can turn it on in just the ways they need it to beat the particular team they're playing, and if this is true, there's good reason to believe that they just might beat the Heat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by z0sa

No idea how you could say these were 4, not so tough games... the Grizz made big runs in every game, and there were 2 OTs. Parker playing out of his mind does not make the series easy, exactly ...

---

Imagine a heavy weight boxer, who's 20-0. 25% of his boughts ended in KO, 50% TKO, and 25% by judges decision. That roughly maps onto the Spurs blowing out the Grizz in Game 1, going over time in games 2 and 3, and beating them in regulation in game 4. Now, are you telling me that this boxing we're imagining wouldn't be view as having a dominant record? Sure, it wasn't all knock outs in the first round, but he was the one still standing every match. I think you're overvaluing the sample size; I think the Spurs would have won 10 out of 10 games following ruffly that 25-50-25% pattern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

The Spurs defense was the difference, IMO... as I said on my prediction thread, we already knew the Grizz had trouble scoring, and since Game 3 of the Warriors series, the Spurs took it to another level defensively. I don't think Memphis was overrated. It was clear they would've had a much harder time getting past OKC if Westbrook was there, but they're a solid bunch of guys. The Spurs just had a great gameplan.

---

I think it would have been a closer series with a healthy Westbrook just like in '11. They really needed another scoring option to keep the defense honest.

The Spurs definitely played the better series, but two games went into OT and a third wasn't decided until the final minute. A few made outside shots from Bayless and Pondexter and a few misses from Green and Leonard, and we're looking at a whole different ballgame. The main difference was Pop, IMO. He forced Hollins to make the adjustments instead of playing from behind. Monster performances from Parker and TD certainly helped.

if the grizz had a couple of shooters, the spurs would have struggled more

every game was close except game 1 and i thought spurs played handicap in game 4 with pop playing bonner so much in the 4th

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ViceCity84

How did the Grizzlies win 56 games?

---

You forgot, they played Eastern Conference teams 30 times. Gotta love the opportunity to beat up on the junior varsity.

The Grizz did have shooters but they had to come off the bench first. If that's what you want to blame, then blame Hollins.

The Grizzlies are an awful team by conference-finals standards. I know people tried to hype them up as a legitimate contender, but they really weren't. They. Just. Can't. Score. That's the whole point right there. They can't put up points, and their defense is only good until a team figures out their obvious weaknesses. They can hit a groove for sure, but they wouldn't've beaten a healthy Thunder or Warriors. I honestly think they should blow it up next year by trading Randolph and finding a new coach. They're ceiling in a normal year is a second-round exit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Tbh, this series depended on the health of Tony Parker. If he was hobbled, Grizzlies probably win. If he was typical TP, Spurs win a tough series. If he plays his best series ever, Spurs sweep.

---

+1

We forget, but heading into this series Tony just didn't look right. That and there were concerns (still are) around Kawhi's knee and Duncan looked a bit worn as well. After these four games though, those concerns are largely a thing of the past. We look healthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

The Grizzlies are an awful team by conference-finals standards. I know people tried to hype them up as a legitimate contender, but they really weren't. They. Just. Can't. Score. That's the whole point right there. They can't put up points, and their defense is only good until a team figures out their obvious weaknesses. They can hit a groove for sure, but they wouldn't've beaten a healthy Thunder or Warriors. I honestly think they should blow it up next year by trading Randolph and finding a new coach. They're ceiling in a normal year is a second-round exit.

---

You called this one pretty early...and you called it right. I remember you saying five games or, if we get hot, a sweep.

Props on the good call. :toast

First, I thought the Grizz were not quite as good as advertised. Watching the OKC series I thought Scott Brooks showed he was not ready for prime time. He could not make any adjustments to compensate for the loss of Westbrook. His offense turned into Durant bringing the ball up the court, going one-on-five and shooting. Even with that 2 games were on Durant's hand for the win, but did not go down. That is an offense that a really good defense can rake over the coals. No doubt in my mind that with a healthy Westbrook that OKC wins that series.
Having said that one of the things that most people miss about the Spurs is that they have such a talented squad that the Spurs can play the OTHER team's style and beat them at it. They outran the Warriors and outslugged the Grizz. Heck, even the Warriors series only goes 5 if not for a 36 hour turn around between games 3 and 4. How does this fare going forward? Against the Pacers I think it is similar to the Grizz, but the Spurs drop a couple of games. Against the Heat, if Parker plays like he did in the Grizz series I don't think the Spurs can be beat. I think they have to put James on him to defend and that would take a lot out of his own offense. This is the year Duncan's legacy becomes so great that there is no doubt that he is in fact the most dominant player of his generation.

Spur's had one dominant win, won two coin toss overtime games, and rode Parker to win the last game. Though it was a sweep, it wasn't a blow-out - a couple of different makes/misses and we are still playing. The Grizz are one player short of matching the Spurs - they need another perimeter scorer and a wider variety of offensive sets.

Just read that this was the second home game Grizzley's owner attended this year?

Grizz hit a couple more FTs (and they missed a LOT) and this series is knotted 2-2. Give Spurs credit for the clutch gene but this was not your typical 4-0 whitewash (see Fakers, Los Angeles).

Memphis is a very solid team, but 3 out of 4 of the wins vs Thunder were really toss-ups, which OKC would have had with a normal Durant in crunch time, even without Westbrook.
Spurs controlled pretty much all games except the beginning of G3.

GSW was very different beast, as they controlled the first two games and it took a miracle comeback (and a lot of inexperience from the Warriors) to win G1.
I have seen some 2005ish defense from the Spurs, since G3 of the GSW series. Yet the Warriors managed to win one more.

All in all, the real WCF was the Golden State series.

A close win is still a win.

Spurs in 6 over Miami.

Spurs in 5 over Indiana.

Spurs played better but pur 3-0 lead coulda been 1-2 if the shots didnt fall in a 5 minute OT.

Overall they were inferior and we were winning no matter what imo.

The Spurs have more options, deeper team. In my case I wasnt sure that players besides the Big 3 would show up, so my confidence wasnt high. Most of us would agree that we would have been more confident knowing that these players would step up.

The Spurs are pretty good, but Memphis got way overhyped because they beat an OKC team that quit and a LAC team that saw Griffin get hurt. I fear that the Spurs, if they aren't careful, are going to think that they're better than they are when the finals start. The Spurs are an order of magnitude better than Memphis, and the Heat are an order of magnitude better than the Spurs. The Spurs have played three or four really good quarters in the series against Memphis, which was good enough to beat them. They'll have to play three or four really good quarters per game to have a chance against Miami.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

The Spurs are pretty good, but Memphis got way overhyped because they beat an OKC team that quit and a LAC team that saw Griffin get hurt. I fear that the Spurs, if they aren't careful, are going to think that they're better than they are when the finals start. The Spurs are an order of magnitude better than Memphis, and the Heat are an order of magnitude better than the Spurs. The Spurs have played three or four really good quarters in the series against Memphis, which was good enough to beat them. They'll have to play three or four really good quarters per game to have a chance against Miami.

---

This. If OKC lost Westbrook at the beginning of the season like Bulls with Rose, they would probably still beat Grizzlies with their talent. However, losing Westbrook in the first round gives them no mental preparation. They just felt, "Oh-oh, there goes our season."

The Spurs are a pretty balanced team. Memphis only goes as far as their bigs take them, and the Spurs frustrated the hell out of Zach Randolph in this series. Much as I hate to admit it, if Matt Bonner had played like he did a couple of years ago, we would be heading back to San Antonio tied 2-2 ... at best. I'm not saying that Bonner did it by himself; obviously he didn't. But he gave the Spurs enough depth there to keep Randolph from taking over for stretches of games.

Are the Spurs "that good"? They are now. Memphis finished the season 9-3, including a victory over the Spurs. The Spurs finished the season 5-8, and caught a break by meeting a crippled Lakers team in the first round. By the end of that series, they were healed up and confident. But the real galvanizing moment may have been that monumental come-from-behind win in Game 1 against Golden State.

Are you asking if the Spurs are good enough to beat Miami? I don't think there's any doubt about that. In Game 3 against the Pacers, Miami was in the zone and even their bench was shooting lights-out; and the Pacers were having one of those games where the ball just won't go in. When that happens, any team in the league is unbeatable. But when both teams are playing their normal games, the Spurs are playing good enough ball to win a 7 game series against them. And don't forget that the Spurs have those in-the-zone nights, too.

Bill Simmons cooks up a crock pot of shit most of the time. I'm pretty sure before Game 4 started (not completely sure), he said that Spurs and Grizzlies would go to a Game 7.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidd K

Combination of both. The Grizzlies were a good team, but contrary to ESPN talking heads' beliefs, they didn't actually match up with us as good as they claimed.

Conley was never going to play Parker even, because the media underrates Parker (until tonight, obviously they didn't).

Duncan's defensive ability has been massively underrated this season. He led the NBA in defensive rating and carried the Spurs up to the 3rd best team defensive rating in the NBA despite our team being filled with role players and guys with bad defensive ability like Bonner, Blair, and Neal.

ZBo was not actually as good as he was against us 2 years ago. He peaked while Duncan was having his worst season and playing at like 65%.

I don't think it was a matter of the Grizzlies being really overrated neccessarily (except in the areas I mentioned), it was mostly a matter of the Spurs being WAY underrated because they closed the season weakly.

The Grizzlies were a great team. . .2nd in the NBA in defense. What they didn't tell you is that the Spurs were 3rd. They also didn't tell you that the Spurs have been among the elite in offense for 3 straight seasons, while the Grizzlies were noticably below average.

I think those are the main points to be made. The Grizzlies were a good team and I don't want to take anything away from their season or their players. But anyone who thought Conley was going to play Parker even, that ZBo was going to go off on the REAL DPOY Tim Duncan, and that ther Grizzlies' defense (which was barely better than ours) was going to hold down our elite offense that much while their weak offense was going to score better against our nearly as good defense. . .you were kidding yourself.

Spurs are dope right now. Parker is 100%. Duncan is clicking. Green is good. Even fucking Matt BONER is playing his best playoff basketball ever. All we're missing is Manu Ginobili getting his shit together and Leonard's knee getting 100%. Knock on wood with the health thing obviously.

---

There's nothing left to say!

2 games were for the taking for the grizzlies, could have easily been 4-1, 4-2 spurs.

Grizzlies just didn't have enough offense. Credit the Duncan Defense, but Zbo shot horribly. When you are strictly relying on Pondex and Bayless to get the offense going, that is recipe for disaster imo...

1. Parker was a beast.
2. Tiago stepped up. He was all over Gasol and Randolph defensively, and offensively he was Horryesque. Lots of little plays, tipped balls, setting great screens. About all that was missing was a dagger three, but he threw down a couple of sneaky hoops in game 3 OT that helped propel us to that win.
3. Memphis didn't have enough offense to keep up.

the game should have been out of hand early. spurs were dominating the entire time but kept missing easy 3s....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Tbh, this series depended on the health of Tony Parker. If he was hobbled, Grizzlies probably win. If he was typical TP, Spurs win a tough series. If he plays his best series ever, Spurs sweep.

---

And Duncan's resurgence. Tim was playing on one leg and getting owned by their bigs 2 years ago..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capek

Memphis came into the series much hyped, even by some of ST's most vaunted posters, not to mention much of the brain trust at ESPN. And yet the Spurs dispatched them in 4 honestly not so tough games. So what are we to make of this unexpected by most outcome?

There's another much hyped team that will most likely make it out of the East to face us. So did the Spurs just beat a team that was much worse than most people thought, or are the Spurs hugely better than most people were capable of predicting? And depending on where you stand on that question, what does that mean for how you think the most likely Finals match up will play out?

Discuss...

---

The bolded is incorrect. We had two overtimes in the series. PFFFFT not so tough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkwaters

You forgot, they played Eastern Conference teams 30 times. Gotta love the opportunity to beat up on the junior varsity.

---

Grizz RS record vs WC teams: 34-18
Spurs RS record vs WC teams: 33-19



And to answer the OP: We'll know in about a month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

The Grizzlies are an awful team by conference-finals standards. I know people tried to hype them up as a legitimate contender, but they really weren't. They. Just. Can't. Score. That's the whole point right there. They can't put up points, and their defense is only good until a team figures out their obvious weaknesses. They can hit a groove for sure, but they wouldn't've beaten a healthy Thunder or Warriors. I honestly think they should blow it up next year by trading Randolph and finding a new coach. They're ceiling in a normal year is a second-round exit.

---

Agreed. The only players that should for sure be brought back are Gasol, Conley, Davis and Pondexter.

We'll see how things shake out over the summer and as usual, health come playoff time will factor heavily into it as well, but making a few reasonable projections, this team is probably eliminated in the 1st round next season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richie

Pop coached the perfect series, exploited the Memphis weaknesses on offence and defence.

Let's see if he can do the same in the Finals. Fingers crossesd

---

This x5. Go BRO!

I'm not really sure. I will say two things:

1) This is the second best team the Spurs have swept (based on winning percentage) in the Duncan era. The only statistically better team was Portland in '99 (35-15), so if you want to go by win total, this is the best team the Spurs have swept in the Duncan era.

2) Memphis was giving everything they had in Game 4. They were playing hard. The Spurs took the punches and punched back even harder every single time. It's been a while since the Spurs have done that against a team with this high of a win total in the playoffs.

You can't go any further with defense and no offense than you can with offense and no defense.

I actually LOLd when I saw the Grizz inbound the ball in the first quarter, and Connolly let it roll all the way to center court. I was thinking "You really don't want there to be MORE possessions in a game, you want less, because then the difference in our offensive efficiency and yours is somewhat blunted."

Spurs just did this to Memphis:

http://i.imgur.com/FG3OSvY.gif