Thanks Obama
Printable View
Thanks Obama
Never had a chance to begin with tbh.
We're tied. We could win out.
Have chance at matching it if Porky is out for the season.
Parker wasn't the reason Monta scrub Ellis went for 26 and he wasn't the reason the Spurs shot 4-28 behind the arc. Oh, and Parker was much better than the combination of Ginobili and Kyle "Magic" Anderson who were a combined 1-10 with 1 assist in 36 minutes of game action.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawhitstorm
Big Dummy, Porky's backup is Patty not Fag Head.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoops Czar
Warriors look very vulnerable again, they arent the same team they were pre all star break
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawhitstorm
Monta Ellis has always had our number. In fact, any flashy, shoot first PG has our number. They run all over us. Darren Collison, Reggie Jackson (not really a shoot first then but now he is), Steve Nash, Goran Dragic, (Oddly we hold Chris Paul down somehow), Steph.. hell they all do. That's because we don't have anyone who can defend against a PG, and we have to hide Tony behind someone like Cousins until he gets the ball at which time we try to rotate. Cory Joseph was one of the better PG defenders we've seen and he wasn't fantastic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoops Czar
I thought stupi.., I mean Danny Green was the pg stopper. He's suppose to be guarding Curry in the WCF's.Quote:
Originally Posted by DMC
Danny's too big to stop the PG. He's a defender who works best improvising in transition. You need a smaller person to guard a smaller person, unless Danny is going to give up the 3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoops Czar
The Spurs sure do hold down Chris Paul when he's HEALTHY like last year's playoff series.:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by DMC
No one on the Spurs can stop Steph Curry. DG sure as hell can't and neither can TP or Kawhi. I believe the Spurs will have to defend everyone else and hope he doesn't go off. They just need to find a way to limit his damage and make him work on the other end of the court. Thank goodness Kevin Martin is coming, they will need his shooting. DG's shooting woes continue. Open shot after open shot continue to clang.
The team has been average post all star break but Curry has been bailing them out. Coach Kerr even mentioned it after the Magic game last night.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurs 4 The Win
Exactly. Problem is Parker cannot be hidden anymore. He will be easy to exploit against OKC and the Warriors. Livingston would just post him up, Barnes would post him up. Waiters looked like an all star last time and Donovan exploited that matchup. We all know what Westbrook would do to Parker. Not to mention the Clippers. It really sucks CoJo isn't on the team anymore. He would've really helped guarding Curry. We can't expect Green and Leonard to guard Curry because it's a risk of them being in foul trouble plus Kerr would run them through endless screens.Quote:
Originally Posted by DMC
If the Warriors break the Bulls 72-10 record as a Bulls/Spurs fan I will be ok with it. The NBA is different now than it was in the 90's, you can't even touch a player today without having a foul called. 72 wins in 1996 was very impressive, the game was tougher, and still will be more impressive even if the Warriors break it. Now they will have to win it all this season to back that up say they do it, because it doesn't mean a thing without the ring. That Warriors team will have more pressure on them if they break the Bulls record, they would be the clear favorites to win it all. They have had many close games this season they pretty much nabbed, the playoffs are entirely different.
The Spurs don't need to worry about catching the Warriors but holding onto the 2nd seed and maintaining a better record than the Cavs, Raps. No matter what the Warriors are the defending NBA champs and until some team dethrones them, it will still be that way. To get the Larry O'Brien back, you will have to beat the Warriors as of now. It's all about Curry, he is hitting so many insane shots this season which is why they have had such a great regular season. The Warriors can play D, but will live and die by the jumper. I don't think they are unbeatable in the playoffs, they are. Let them worry about winning 70 games, the Spurs need to stay healthy and get ready for trying to win championship #6.
yes but Bulls team win 72 games in a watered down league. The NBA added two expansion teams that year. Not only are those 8 easy wins (I think Griz were in east back then but if not, 6 easy wins) but those teams could take the 8th best player on every team leading to an overall watered down league. GSW run will be just as impressive as the Bulls run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chillen
The league (in my memory) has never been worse than it is this year. The worst teams - Lakers and Sixers are as bad or worse than expansion teams. Throw in a bunch of bad middle of the road teams and you get the gaudy Warriors and Spurs records. The 1995 Bulls would have toyed and crushed the Warriors. The comparison is outright comical tbh. They probably would have blasted this Spurs team too.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
66 or 67 wins will be the final tally..
The 1995-96 Bulls were good, but you are fooling yourself if you don't think GSW are on their level. They would easily outshoot Chicago. Spurs would match up well with the Bulls as well. Both GSW and Spurs are deeper than that Bulls team.Quote:
Originally Posted by tmtcsc
1995/96: The NBA and Canada was always a natural match, as James Naismath the famed inventor of the sports was a Canadian. However after the Toronto Huskies folded after the NBA's first season in 1947 it took nearly 50 years for the NBA to return to the Great White North, as the Vancouver Grizzlies were on of two Canadian teams to join the league in 1995. The Grizzlies would get off to a solid start stunning the Portland Trailblazers on the road 92-80 on November 3rd. Two nights later the Grizzlies had a successful home debut at General Motors Place by beating the Minnesota Timberwolves 100-98. However the Grizzlies would lose their next 19 games, as they went on to finish in last place in the Midwestern Division with a NBA worse record of 15-67, as only four Grizzlies averaged ten ppg, with Greg Anthony leading the way with a mediocre 14.0 ppg. In addition the Grizzlies and the NBA's other Canadian expansion team the Toronto Raptors would split two games.Quote:
Originally Posted by tmtcsc
Raptors roster was horrid as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmtcsc
MJ, Pippen, Kukoc, Rodman and John Salley playing small ball? 2015 rules? Good Lord. You're the one fooling yourself. Curry would be lucky to get 10 shots off.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
The league isn't "watered down" now with 30 teams? Nearly 1/3rd of which tanking ever year for draft picks? One conference ALWAYS losing to the other overall (win%) every single year?Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
And no the Grizzlies were not in the east. Vancouver is near Seattle which is about as west as it gets.
HAHAHAHHAQuote:
Originally Posted by tmtcsc
And then he said John Salley LMFAO HAHAHA
That's all it would take. You could start Luc Longley against Bogut but Salley was better at running the floor. Bulls bring Steve Kerr, Ron Harper and Buechler off the bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by Benoit
Are you a teenager or in your 20's? I mean, I get it. If you never saw them play or just saw snippets of them in highlights, I understand why you think the Warriors could hang. You probably just look at the stats and make up your mind. The NBA this season is abysmal and the Spurs and Warriors' records are beneficiaries.
This Warriors team is going to eventually melt down and lose. The Spurs will put them away if it doesn't happen before they meet.
The Sixers and Lakers are the equivalent of what the Griz and Raps were back then. They are the 6 easy wins today. Throw in Nets and Suns and it becomes 12 easy wins if your the Warriors or Spurs.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
There were other bad teams in '95. And not many good teams in the East or West. And teams could only protect their top 7 players, I believe, so many good teams lost quality bench guys making even those teams weaker. Today's NBA is deeper with teams scouting talent all over the world. In 1995, the global market for players had barely been tapped.Quote:
Originally Posted by daslicer
The expansion draft did not weaken the talent of the league. Back then they were only 12 official guys on the roster and you could only protect 8. The 4 players who weren't protected tended to be shitty granted there was at times 1 good role player out of the 4 available. The best player out of that expansion draft was Doug Christie and the rest tended to be guys who were old vets or just scrubs.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_NBA_Expansion_Draft
They were good teams back in '95 and yes the global market hadn't been tapped but at the same time the college players that came out back then were infinitely better back then versus today. Here is how the NBA looked back then records wise http://www.landofbasketball.com/year..._standings.htm
The league is much more athletic today, so I don't know that skill of 90s beats today's athleticism. But take 9th best player off the Spurs and it would impact us.Quote:
Originally Posted by daslicer
Don't buy the athletic argument. David Robinson, Shawn Kemp, Shaq ,Hakeem,Alonzo, Larry Johnson,Ewing,Mutumbo were athletic freaks back then and would have still been today. I have hard time believing Karl Malone wouldn't be effective in today's league. Kevin Johnson,Grant Hill,Scottie Pippen, Penny Hardaway,Clyde Drexler,Dominique Wilkins, Eddie Jones,Sprewell,JR Rider would have still been athletic today. I could name others but you see what I'm saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
Kids now adays dont even know about hoops in the mid/late 90's.
Yes, but I have little doubt that Lillard, LeBron, Curry, Kawhi, etc. would do well in the 90s. But the overall athleticism is better today than it was in the 90s, no question.Quote:
Originally Posted by daslicer
Lillard is an awful chucker under handchecking he would be rendered useless considering he currently shoots a pathetic 41 percent under these perimeter friendly rules. Also whose to say that guys like Tim Hardaway,Gary Payton,Kevin Johnson would not have been even better players in this current era where perimeter players are protected. I think Kawhi would be even a better defender during the 90's because he would be allowed to hand check plus his post game is even more suited for the 90's. Lebron would still be a great player during that era because of his size but I do think it would be harder for him to win since he doesn't like physical play.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
Again I don't buy your argument about the overall athleticism being better. Look at the current Spurs I would say Simmons is the only super athlete on the team. Kawhi and Green have above average athleticism but aren't out of this world. The rest of the team is composed of guys who have great fundamentals and basketball IQ that's why they win a lot of games. On my home team the Hornets the only super athlete is Michael Kidd-Gillchrist. Kemba and Batum have above average athletic abilities but after that the rest team is just average. I'm sure if you break down all the teams in the league they have similar compositions with a few teams out there being the exceptions.
Don't bother arguing with old, bitter NBA fans, bro:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by cd98
There's nothing saltier than a 90s NBA fan, I've never seen anything like it, tbh..
:( we love watching ugly, slow-paced basketball with goons and mid-range jump shots that are only worth 2 points :(
:lol Right and watching guys jack up 3's on every possession along with getting touch fouls is very exciting to watch.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
Probably true, though I am a fan from the 90s. I’m just realistic.If Mark Price could be as great as he was in the 90s, why not Curry and Lillard.There were some flawed teams in the 90s, just like today.For example, the Spurs regularly won 50 games in the 90s, but if you watched at the time, you knew those rosters were pretty much David Robinson and a bunch of average players. Same with the Rockets and Hakeem.There weren’t a lot of power teams.Just a lot of one team superstars.And Chicago was one of the few teams with several good players.So the idea that Chicago, as good a team as they were, are leaps and bounds better than the Spurs and the GSW of today is laughable.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
It was great to see those Knicks/Heat games that were 72 to 68. Please take us back to those days.Quote:
Originally Posted by daslicer
I like older fans(35+) that appreciate every era of basketball and recognize the pros/cons of each individual generation, tbh..Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
Most fans of previous eras don't behave that way, though..
Who's bitter or old? Just stating facts. Do you really think a healthy and young Shaq would be at a disadvantage if he played in today's league? Hell, Tim played in the 90's too. Do you think a young Tim Duncan or Hakeem Olajuwon would have trouble dominating in today's league? That's just ignorant.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
The Houston Rockets dominated the Orlando Magic with an inside out game. Hakeem killed em down low while Cassell, Drexler, Elie and Horry nailed 3's.
The star players of the 90's had athleticism AND skill. Many of today's players have off the chart athleticism but are as dumb as rocks when it comes to playing the game. Young players are coming out of college at a higher rate and they are unprepared to play the game. They lack skill and BB IQ.
It’s funny because when Shaq played for the Suns, he spent all his time running from free throw line to free throw line because he couldn’t keep up with the pace. I do agree that the big man is lost in today’s game, but mostly because if you are not an extraordinary talent, like prime Shaq or Robinson or Hakeem, then you can’t make an NBA roster (say Donaldson or many of the other starting centers in the 90s that weren’t superstars).Yes, there were great players that played in Jordan’s era (though Shaq was in his prime about two years after Jordan retired), but there are equally great players today.I doubt LeBron would have any trouble dominating in the 90s given his size and speed. And some NBA bigs of the 90s would have trouble getting minutes in an era where all 5 players can shoot the three.Quote:
Originally Posted by tmtcsc
Jack Sikma, Arvydas Sabonis, Chris Webber, Shawn Kemp, Rasheed Wallace, Sam Perkins and Bill Laimbeer all shot 3's as part of their game. They just didn't do it as much as bigs in today's game.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
As for Lebron, he could have played in any era but he is a true superstar. I question his will to win at any cost like a Kobe or MJ but he's no doubt one of the best of all time.
When Shaq played with Orlando and LA, he went coast to coast with the ball. You can't compare old Shaq with young Shaq.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b866hh4apUI
Check this out just for fun: Highlights of DRob vs Shaq:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XivZd3mRVw
Anthony Davis, Boogie Cousins....LOL
On a side note, can you imagine a pre back surgery David from this video and a 2003 Tim Duncan starting together?
any player perimeter of "ERA hand-checking" would be easier in today's game, any current perimeter player would have more difficulty in 90s. Talking about the Bulls96 playing today, good luck using screens against Harper, Rodman, Jordan and Pippen. Then trying to stop Jordan without hand-checking (he would probably have 20 free throws per game)
How is doubting previous stars any more ignorant than doubting today's stars? That's as hypocritical as you can get, tbh..Quote:
Originally Posted by tmtcsc
The 90s had plenty of skilled players, but it also had a ton of goons that only made the league because they were 7-foot stiffs in a time where a post game was the standard for the league..
Also, I don't know why older people act like shooting 3-pointers isn't a skill:lol
Hand-checking is not real basketball, tbh..it rewards a lack of athleticism and promotes ugly basketball..Quote:
Originally Posted by r0drig0lac
Damn, I hadn't realized we were that close to not getting it for some reason. I'm sure the Dubs won't get it either for what it's worth.
I can understand why you think that (though I disagree)Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
Don't really miss stiffs like Raef Lafrentz or Shawn Bradley, tbh...
Though Bonner still has a job...
Right and could you imagine if hand checking didn't exist during those games how much more amazing guys like Allan Houston and Sprewell. They go from being tier 2 stars under 90's rules to being superstars in this current era. If only the rules were different back then I could have watched them shoot a bunch of 3's and freethrows.Quote:
Originally Posted by cd98
Surreal post. You do it constantly. :lol You don't know how many times I sat on my Phone laughing at you for ripping into yesterday's athletes telling anybody who'd listen how overrated they were compared to today's athlete. Bowen couldn't play in today's NBA. :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
BTW, Boban is a 7-foot stiff that has the same skill-set as Shawn Bradley yet, Spurs fans are intrigued. :lol
FYI, the NBA is still littered with goons, just not of the 7-foot variety or else the league wouldn't be littered with a bunch of bad to mediocre teams.
My anti-90s shtick began as a counter to all the old posters in the NBA forum:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Hoops Czar
If you check my old posts, I used to discuss old players favorably all the time, tbh..