Has this been the easiest road to the finals for the Spurs?

the 1999 championship, the 2003 championship, the 2005 championship, and quite possibly the 2007 championship..so has this been the easiest road for the Spurs to the finals?

They beat Denver in five games..

They got the benefit in the Suns series for something they started, and of course took advantage of Amare and Diaw not playing in Game 5, and won the series.

They beat the Utah Jazz, in game 4 Deron Williams plays with the flu..in game 5 Deron Williams plays with a sprained ankle, and Derek Fisher shows up to the game late.

Seems like this hasn't been a hard path to the finals..so what do you think?

suns were not easy

99 was easier. Brooms up the butts of both the Fakers and Jailblazers, and a 15-2 overall run, which tied one of the Bad Boy teams for least losses, at the time.

I don't think it's been the easiest. Just the most bitter for Laker fan......................

1999 was the easiest. we only lost once to minnesota, swept the lakers, swept the blazers, and won in 5 against the knicks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gameFACE

I don't think it's been the easiest. Just the most bitter for Laker fan......................

---

It wasn't bitter at all. When the postseason started I had already predicted the Suns beat the Lakers in five..there was nothing bitter about something most Lakers fans already knew.

It hasn't been an easy road. Now some team like the Cavs who played a dead team in round 1 and a sub-.500 team in round two ... now that's an easy road. Compared to 2005, this has been a much tougher road to this point.

2007 Nuggets >>>>>>>> 2005 Nuggets
2007 Suns >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2005 Suns
2007 Jazz >>> 2005 Sonics

2003 had the Lakers and a Mav team with two future MVP's leading the way, so that was a tough road. 1999 was pretty tough, but that team was so good they made it look easy.

I think this road to the Finals was closer to the toughest road the Spurs have had than the easiest.

We only lost two games in 99, so no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Infamous

It wasn't bitter at all. When the postseason started I had already predicted the Suns beat the Lakers in five..there was nothing bitter about something most Lakers fans already knew.

---

Yes. And your first post wasn't bitter either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

It hasn't been an easy road. Now some team like the Cavs who played a dead team in round 1 and a sub-.500 team in round two ... now that's an easy road. Compared to 2005, this has been a much tougher road to this point.

2007 Nuggets >>>>>>>> 2005 Nuggets
2007 Suns >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2005 Suns
2007 Jazz >>> 2005 Sonics

2003 had the Lakers and a Mav team with two future MVP's leading the way, so that was a tough road. 1999 was pretty tough, but that team was so good they made it look easy.

I think this road to the Finals was closer to the toughest road the Spurs have had than the easiest.

---

i think you're overrating the Nuggets brah

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cant_Be_Faded

i think you're overrating the Nuggets brah

---

Which one?

The Spurs have made it look easy by dispatching of opponents when they get the chance. No letting teams steal games like in 2003, nor letting them hang around like Seattle in '05. The Suns and Jazz were two of the top 5 teams in the league this year, and the Nuggets were one of the top 5 after the all star break. That's not an easy road by any means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cant_Be_Faded

i think you're overrating the Nuggets brah

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerIsGood!

the Nuggets were one of the top 5 after the all star break.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

It hasn't been an easy road. Now some team like the Cavs who played a dead team in round 1 and a sub-.500 team in round two ... now that's an easy road. Compared to 2005, this has been a much tougher road to this point.

2007 Nuggets >>>>>>>> 2005 Nuggets
2007 Suns >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2005 Suns
2007 Jazz >>> 2005 Sonics

2003 had the Lakers and a Mav team with two future MVP's leading the way, so that was a tough road. 1999 was pretty tough, but that team was so good they made it look easy.

I think this road to the Finals was closer to the toughest road the Spurs have had than the easiest.

---

2005 Sonics>2007 Jazz..there was nearly a game seven in the Seattle series had Tim Duncan not made the game winning lay-up, thats how close the series was.

And 2005 Suns>2007 Suns. A huge reason why the Suns lost to the Spurs in five, one of their best players Joe Johnson was injured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Infamous

2005 Sonics>2007 Jazz..there was nearly a game seven in the Seattle series had Tim Duncan not made the game winning lay-up, thats how close the series was.

---

Those Sonics weren't very good. The Spurs just played like crap in some of those games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Infamous

And 2005 Suns>2007 Suns. A huge reason why the Suns lost to the Spurs in five, one of their best players Joe Johnson was injured.

---

Then how does that make them better than the 2007 Suns? :huh

I think it's a little of column A, a little of column B. The road was tougher in '05 because we had to go OT to win one of the road Denver games and Seattle wound up being pretty tough, but a big reason why the '07 road was easier was because I believe our team is better than the '05 team.

'07 Tony >> '05 Tony
'07 Tim >> '05 Tim
'07 Fin >> '05 Barry
'07 Oberto >>>> '05 Nazr

The '05 Spurs NEEDED Manu to be a stud to win like half their playoff games. The '07 Spurs need him to be Superman maybe once or twice a series.

Is "cheatiest" a word?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

2007 Jazz >>> 2005 Sonics

.

---

I don't see that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whottt

I don't see that...

---

Neither do I. There wasn't much worries for me, like the other two series. The potential to drop the ball or fall asleep on the Nugs or Suns, was a little more nerve-wracking.

Jazz can thank the Warriors for their WCF appearance.
That said, this road is comparable to 05'.
In terms of competitiveness

Suns 07 >>> Suns 05
Nugs 07 >>> Seattle 05
and
Utah 07 = Nugs 05

Against Suns were not an easy serie, avoiding Dallas was great ...

we've had the hardest path out of the 16 playoff teams. WE played the Nuggets, Suns and Jazz, the strongest teams in playoffs.

I will say that this was the hardest road to the Finals from game 1 of the NBA season. It took longer for this team to gel than any team in their championship seasons. The Spurs were having to fight an up hill battle all year and had Dallas not been upset in rd 1, the Spurs would have had to win w/o HCA in their last 2 series. In every championship run previously, they had HCA in every series but one.

If and I say if the Spurs win this year, I seriously think that the players and Pop will get their most satisfaction from this championship than any of the other championships.

Do you agree?

1999 was the easiest, but this year is a close second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SsKSpurs21

1999 was the easiest. we only lost once to minnesota, swept the lakers, swept the blazers, and won in 5 against the knicks.

---

Yes, but that must speak to our dominance at that point. The T-Pups, Lakers, and Blazers were very VERY good and almost dominant teams at that point. Good thread. I'm gonna say yes...

All i can say is that the Nuggets would have been in the WCF if they hadn't played the Spurs in the 1st or 2nd rd :smokin :lol

The Spurs are still the best out West and i truly believe (with my homer glasses on of course) that the Nuggets played them the toughest (in terms of every game). It seems that all 3 teams (Nuggets, Suns and Jazz) just gave up when facing elimination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NuGGeTs-FaN

All i can say is that the Nuggets would have been in the WCF if they hadn't played the Spurs in the 1st or 2nd rd :smokin :lol

The Spurs are still the best out West and i truly believe (with my homer glasses on of course) that the Nuggets played them the toughest (in terms of every game). It seems that all 3 teams (Nuggets, Suns and Jazz) just gave up when facing elimination.

---

I think the Nuggets played them pretty hard, equal to the Suns in my estimation. Not your typical 1st rounder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NuGGeTs-FaN

All i can say is that the Nuggets would have been in the WCF if they hadn't played the Spurs in the 1st or 2nd rd :smokin :lol

The Spurs are still the best out West and i truly believe (with my homer glasses on of course) that the Nuggets played them the toughest (in terms of every game). It seems that all 3 teams (Nuggets, Suns and Jazz) just gave up when facing elimination.

---

As odd as it is, I don't think the Spurs would be playing as well right now if they hadn't faced the Nuggets in the first round. That match-up forced them almost immediately to play at their peak.

I honestly don't think this was a easy road at all...in fact I think we had the roughest road out of any team in the west....well except for Dallas hehehehe. We faced a tough 6th seed in the first round that was only a 6th seed because that trade with AI was done in the middle of the season. They could have easily been a 4th or 5th seed. That matchup was tough, yes we took it in 5 but it was in no way easy, we just made it look that way. Then there was the SUNS.......one of 2 teams that was supposed to take over the league. They had the best offense in the league, but time and time again we have seen that better defense will always outlast a good offense. Yes it was in 6 but everyone saw it as "THE MATCHUP". Well to be honest.....the Jazz were lucky to be there in the first place. Yes they are a good team....but they are young and are missing a few pieces of the puzzle to be champions. They beat the Rockets after they collapsed, then went on to beat the Warriors that were tailor made to beat 1 team in the Finals....THE MAVS. Yeah we haven't had a 7 game series.....does that mean its been easy..no but we sure made it look that way :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NuGGeTs-FaN

All i can say is that the Nuggets would have been in the WCF if they hadn't played the Spurs in the 1st or 2nd rd :smokin :lol

The Spurs are still the best out West and i truly believe (with my homer glasses on of course) that the Nuggets played them the toughest (in terms of every game). It seems that all 3 teams (Nuggets, Suns and Jazz) just gave up when facing elimination.

---

The Suns didn't give up and they or Dallas would have beat the Nuggets....although it would have been a good series.

despite four victory on five games against the nuggets i think it was a very difficult first round

the suns were a hard matchup and utah don't play bad

so i don't think it was the easiest road to the finals

No, I don't think it has been. This Spurs team is surprisingly a very damn good team.
I think the 2007 Jazz=2005 Supersonics. We did play like shit in that series; we should have won Game 3 in Seattle. 2007 Nuggets>>>2005 Nuggets, 2007 Suns>>>>>>>>2005 Suns. The difference has been a healthy Tim Duncan, IMO. He's been so consistent for us and he's made very tough shots when we need him too. He wasn't able to do that in the 2005 playoffs because of his ankles. Also, I think our defense has been better than it was in 2005.

In other words, this trip to the Finals is well deserved. We played tough teams and played very well.

2003 and 2005 had to be the toughest road to the Finals...

those were brutal series. I remember being in the hospital (my wife was under observation), and watching the Sonics just beat the crap out of Duncan in 2005. We still won, but damn, that was a tough series.

2003 we had to eliminate the Lakers. That was NOT easy.

There were very few close games this year. Most games were either blow out wins, or blow out losses. Games 3 and 4 versus the Suns were obviously the hardest, but we owned the Nuggets and Jazz.

So, in order of easiest to hardest:

1999
2007
2005
2003

Now, a lot of that also shows just how good this Spurs team is. This is the best Spurs team I've seen ever, and the fact we're winning has less to do with the quality of out opponents (they were all very good opponents!), and more to do with the quality of the Spurs.

I think the hardest postseason is a toss up between 2003 and 2007. 1999, the spurs were just that good, a dominating team in a league during transition between the jordan years and the eventual lakers dynasty and spurs dynasty. The lakers were unproven, the blazers were unproven with both of those teams really having their first good years in 1999, so they had no experience, whereas the 1999 spurs were a slightly modified (and older) core from their mid 1990's teams with AJ, Robinson and Elliot with the addition of Tim Duncan, which is what got them over the hump. And the Knicks were a fluke, in looking back, was the beginning of poor play in the eastern conference. Evident by the fact they did nothing after that point.
The 2005 run was not easy, but the nuggets had no business beating the spurs, the sonics overachieved and still only took it to 6 (someone made a good point before, the spurs should have won game 3) and then played an all offense team in the suns, and pretty much swept them. The 2007 were so much harder then the 2005 ones. If the Spurs dont make clutch shots down the stretch of game 5, and bowen doesnt hit that corner three, I dont think I am writing this right now. Bell and Thomas were huge upgrades over Q and Steven Hunter. Now the finals was tough, the pistons were nasty that year, and had Big Ben who I think they will miss in 2007.
Looking at Therefore, I say its a toss up between the 2003 and 2007 season, with it depending on what pistons team shows up. If its the one of the past two playoffs, barely beating the cavs, lossing to a better team in the heat last year, I would say go with 2003. If the pistons truely can "turn it on" and do show up in 2007 finals, then I would go with the 2007 season.
In 2003, the suns were a tough first round opponent, but if they dont get those two bank shots, the series ends alot sooner then 6, they def. caught a break in the first game. But the lakers series was monumental, Phil Jackson had won like 25 straight series, they were kobe and shaq, and that was the toughest series the spurs ever had. The mavs series was also very underrated in terms of toughness, they had finley, dirk and nash all in their primes. I would put those two series as very difficult and even the nets came to play, people forget the series was tied 2-2 with game 5 at their place, similiar to the pistons in 2005. So in 2003, you have two high level series and two very good ones. In 2007, you have one tough series vs. PHX, one very good one vs. the nuggets and one very easy one in the jazz. So unless the pistons bring it in the finals, or the cavs, I see the 2003 set of series being alittle bit more difficult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Which one?

---

2007

Maybe one > but not seven or eight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

2007 Jazz >>> 2005 Sonics

.

---

You can always tell when TimVP regrets an opinion...

EG...you'll likely see Kori Ellis, timvp and SpurTalk stickied in a SR discussion thread before you'll see TimVP in another thread with the words Javie and Vendetta.


This is another one of those times...

2007 Jazz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2005 Sonics

Just because the Spurs beat the Jazz easier than they beat the Sonics, doesn't make the Sonics a better team. The great logic being used when judging the "hardest" and "toughest" teams/series/roads is that the Spurs played exactly the same level of basketball in each series since '99 to '07.

The fact is those Sonics weren't even that good. It was basically Ray Allen and Antonio Daniels versus the Spurs by the end of the series. The only reason that series lasted as long as it did is because the Spurs were playing horrible. On top of that, Duncan was injured. That was the most hobbled he was in the 2005 playoffs and that was also the series in which Brent Barry played worse than any Spur in franchise history.

Then again, whottt stopped posting on the forum and started watching him Mavs more around that time so we can't expect him to know much about those Sonics.

If the 2007 Jazz played the 2005 Sonics, the Jazz would sweep.

The Sonics had half of an all star.

The damn Jazz had 3.

Okur, Boozer, and Williams.

The Jazz are a better defensive team, better rebounding team, and a better offensive team.

The Spurs had way more trouble on the defensive end against Utah than Seattle.