Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambchang
Are you not the same guy who argued Robinson over Duncan because team success is not indicative of individual greatness?
Not exactly...I argue that you can't win a championship without a great team. And you can't...in the playoffs a team built around a dominant big and no perimeter support will get bounced pretty easily.
Quote:
Why would Finley not winning a ring be indicative of him being a lesser player on the Spurs when Barry won a ring on totally different teams?
What is so totally different about them....
Better yet...what was so totally different between the 05 Champions and the 06 Chokers?
The answer old foot...is one Michael Finley...and no one else.
Brent won is ring, and he played a major role in doing it...he was the guard off the bench in that title run. He did not a play a major role last year(except in the Kings win)...Finley played the major role last year. And likely again this year...not just Barry's role...but Horry's as well.
Finley was the guy in last years choke(even though he started). What can you say about Finley? He takes a lot of shots...he either makes them, or he doesn't...that's what he contributes on offense.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
BeerIsGoo
:lmao
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambchang
Are you not the same guy who argued Robinson over Duncan because team success is not indicative of individual greatness? Why would Finley not winning a ring be indicative of him being a lesser player on the Spurs when Barry won a ring on totally different teams?
And to tell you the truth...it's not so much that I argue Drob over people...as it is he is sickeningly under-rated.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
The 99 team could score without Duncan...Drob could still score then, in fact he did so.
The 03 Team was the best Spurs Team ever IMO.
'03 was lucky as hell. If Horry's shot in Game 5 went down (miracle it didn't), we would have never beaten the Lakers after '99. That's a scary thought!
All games going to 6, Dirk getting injured, I can't say how you can call '03 the easiest. It was the hardest, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
The 05 Team was lucky to beat the Pistons...it took the clutch performance of Robert Horry's career. Will he even be on the court in this series?
No doubt '05 was the toughest Finals ever. But let's remember: First year without Robinson in the Finals.
You of all people know how important Robinson was.
IMO, this '07 team is the best team we've had without Robinson. I know you hate Finley, but hopefully, with him starting, we won't need a crazy Game from Horry to win the series.
Oh, and back to '06: Tim makes a free throw or Manu doesn't foul, and we're going to the Finals against the Heat. Can't blame that loss on Finley.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
Not exactly...I argue that you can't win a championship without a great team. And you can't...in the playoffs a team built around a dominant big and no perimeter support will get bounced pretty easily.
This is absolutely true, and I agree totally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
What is so totally different about them....
Better yet...what was so totally different between the 05 Champions and the 06 Chokers?
The answer old foot...is one Michael Finley...and no one else.
Brent won is ring, and he played a major role in doing it...he was the guard off the bench in that title run. He did not a play a major role last year(except in the Kings win)...Finley played the major role last year. And likely again this year...not just Barry's role...but Horry's as well.
Finley was the guy in last years choke(even though he started). What can you say about Finley? He takes a lot of shots...he either makes them, or he doesn't...that's what he contributes on offense.
But you just said it's because of Pop's small ball over and over again. Both Barry and Finley are role players, and their contributions should never be as striking as a championship and a 2nd round exit.
In 2005, Barry had an average of 6.9 ppg in 23 games in the playoffs, with about half as a starter, and shot 46/42/81 from the field, 3pt and FT, playing 24 mpg.
In 2006, Barry had an average of 7.8 ppg in 13 games in the playoffs, and shot 56/50/76 from the field, 3pt and FT, playing 23 mpg.
So it is quite apparent that Finley never took the minutes away from Barry, but was in fact complimenting his production.
Finley on the other hand, scored 10.5 ppg in 13 games in the 2006 playoffs, and shot 48/38/90 in 32 mpg. He had better production than Barry did in 2005.
Like you said earlier, it was small ball that finished off the Spurs, putting in Finley was a mistake as far as using him instead of a reliable big man that the Spurs didn't have, but Finley was never used at the expense of Barry.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
And to tell you the truth...it's not so much that I argue Drob over people...as it is he is sickeningly under-rated.
He definitely was underrated. I personally won't put Robinson > Duncan, strictly because of the rings, but I wouldn't put Duncan > Robinson either, because I would never know what would happen if Robinson had a decent FO that would put shooters around him.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by z0sa
But the question remains: if the Cavs are so bad, how did they beat Detroit? Of course theres plenty of opinions and answers, but the mere fact that they are in the Finals says something to me.
The Cavs, like San Antonio, are a much different team in the playoffs. This is one of the youngest teams in the league, so when they turned up the intensity they have the youth to do it to a much higher degree. Cleveland will make this an ugly series for Lebron to take over, which he will. It isn't a fluke that Cavs are 3-1 vs. SA since Mike Brown took over, he knows the Spurs playbook inside and out, Cleveland will win it with tight defense and the leadership of Lebron.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
People comparing Deron Williams to LeBron James make me LOL.
DWill is the shit, and he proved it this year and playoffs.
But hes no LBJ...matter of fact, there isnt a player in the league like him. Kobe, big-fucking MAYBE. But Kobe isnt as strong.
Here's LeBron's consistent stats 20+ppg 8+rebs 8+dimes 1+steal 2+block
Here's LBJ's potential numbers when he is totally locked in
35+ppg 10+rebs 10+dimes 2+steals 4+blocks
And he doesnt even average very many FTs! He is not DWade, DWade couldnt pack his lunch (i would go as far as "he couldnt wear his jockstrap", because he could arguably do that).
LeBron is LeBron. Am I a witness now? Yes, yes I am.
Not because the Cavs beat Detroit. Its because LeBron beat Detroit single-handedly. Sure, these werent the same Pistons from past years, but they certainly werent so terrible that a one-man team could outplay them for 6 straight games.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDog73
'03 was lucky as hell. If Horry's shot in Game 5 went down (miracle it didn't), we would have never beaten the Lakers after '99. That's a scary thought!
All games going to 6, Dirk getting injured, I can't say how you can call '03 the easiest. It was the hardest, IMO.
I have to agree with Whottt on this one. The '03 team could do anything they wanted whenever they decided to. They never played 48 minutes and they just destroyed anyone that got in front of them once they turned it on. They routinely jumped out to huge leads and then gave them up, only to pull away again with huge run after huge run. They closed out on every team they played with near flawless performances on both ends of the floor. If not for their immaturity they could have won every game they played by 40 points. The only reason most of us remember '03 being so difficult is because you never knew if or when they were going to show up, and if they were suddenly going to be unable to just turn it on.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
I have to agree with Whottt on this one. The '03 team could do anything they wanted whenever they decided to. They never played 48 minutes and they just destroyed anyone that got in front of them once they turned it on. They routinely jumped out to huge leads and then gave them up, only to pull away again with huge run after huge run. They closed out on every team they played with near flawless performances on both ends of the floor. If not for their immaturity they could have won every game they played by 40 points. The only reason most of us remember '03 being so difficult is because you never knew if or when they were going to show up, and if they were suddenly going to be unable to just turn it on.
I would suggest that this year's version is closing in similar fashion; every time they have had a chance to close, they have turned in a really nice game; not to mention games following losses.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by 101A
I would suggest that this year's version is closing in similar fashion; every time they have had a chance to close, they have turned in a really nice game; not to mention games following losses.
This team is much more consistent than the '03 team, which was damn near feast or famine. This team is almost as talented and is much more seasoned and mature. They still have a tendency to come out flat or just play gutless basketball. I'm hopeful that team is dead and gone.
The nice thing about this season is that the shitty fans in Phoenix and Utah gave the Spurs extra incentive not to want to go back.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWJACKETS
The Cavs, like San Antonio, are a much different team in the playoffs. This is one of the youngest teams in the league, so when they turned up the intensity they have the youth to do it to a much higher degree. Cleveland will make this an ugly series for Lebron to take over, which he will. It isn't a fluke that Cavs are 3-1 vs. SA since Mike Brown took over, he knows the Spurs playbook inside and out, Cleveland will win it with tight defense and the leadership of Lebron.
but it may be misleading. 2 of the losses came from back2backs. there are no back2backs in the playoffs. in the other two games, lebron was held to mortal numbers (much like he was in the pistons game 5 without the overtimes. 29 points, i think, something manageable to the spurs) of around 20 points. with that non-b2b split, the spurs beat the cavs by 12 or there abouts and lost by 4, if i remember right. and for all their defense, the cavs let a wiz team sans its 2 best players score in the 90s 3 of the 4 games; and never really blew out a hobbled nets team either.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by td4mvp3
but it may be misleading. 2 of the losses came from back2backs. there are no back2backs in the playoffs. in the other two games, lebron was held to mortal numbers (much like he was in the pistons game 5 without the overtimes. 29 points, i think, something manageable to the spurs) of around 20 points. with that non-b2b split, the spurs beat the cavs by 12 or there abouts and lost by 4, if i remember right. and for all their defense, the cavs let a wiz team sans its 2 best players score in the 90s 3 of the 4 games; and never really blew out a hobbled nets team either.
The first game they played last year the Spurs won by 26. They lost on the second night of a B2B at the end of the roadeo trip. I wouldn't be worried if the Bucks made it to the Finals, either...
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
I have to agree with Whottt on this one. The '03 team could do anything they wanted whenever they decided to. They never played 48 minutes and they just destroyed anyone that got in front of them once they turned it on. They routinely jumped out to huge leads and then gave them up, only to pull away again with huge run after huge run. They closed out on every team they played with near flawless performances on both ends of the floor. If not for their immaturity they could have won every game they played by 40 points. The only reason most of us remember '03 being so difficult is because you never knew if or when they were going to show up, and if they were suddenly going to be unable to just turn it on.
:wtf Are your seriously rating the '03 team on what they "could have" accomplished?
Well, allow me to retort. This '07 team could have swept every series so far, if they decided not to take a few games off.
I'm not sure what players you think were so great in '03. Robinson was not putting out amazing numbers. Oberto is doing fine there.
Finley > Jackson. Jackson cost us as many games as he won for us, but I'm sure that you'll just chalk that up to "immaturity."
Then add in Horry as one of the greatest clutch shooters ever...
Spurs fans should be happy as hell he's on our team now, and that his clutch shot in Game 5 in 2003 bounced out, or we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
The first game they played last year the Spurs won by 26. They lost on the second night of a B2B at the end of the roadeo trip. I wouldn't be worried if the Bucks made it to the Finals, either...
even better!
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
detroit and cavs are like mavs and warriors. cavs plays detroit well, but by no means are the pistons on the same level as the SA Spurs. First, we have a man who can at will score against anyone in the league...he is always consistant and its not going to be any different now. if you think gooden, z, sideshow are going to give duncan more trouble than nene, camby, boozer, okur, najera, kg, and all those other suckers TD OWNS basically your a FOOL.
Manu and Tony will complement each other with great games, i expect Tony to play better in game 1,2 as then the defense will close the lane and he takes some time to make adjustmeents. MAnu he is going to play dangerously and do his thing.
Queen James, well he is going to get his and we dont expect anything less of him, Boobs is not going to get 31 against the spurs. z is going to be Zzzzzz off.
lets be real spurs in 6 max.
2007 NBA CHAMPIONS SA SPURS
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by 101A
would you mind posting the whole chat, since it is insider I can not access the page.
thanks.
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWJACKETS
The Cavs, like San Antonio, are a much different team in the playoffs. This is one of the youngest teams in the league, so when they turned up the intensity they have the youth to do it to a much higher degree. Cleveland will make this an ugly series for Lebron to take over, which he will. It isn't a fluke that Cavs are 3-1 vs. SA since Mike Brown took over, he knows the Spurs playbook inside and out, Cleveland will win it with tight defense and the leadership of Lebron.
I was playing against some kindergarten kids the other day, and damn, they were totally different when they decided to turn the game on! Must have been all that youth behind it.
I never say the correlation before, youth and the ability to turn on the game, but there was my proof!
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDog73
:wtf Are your seriously rating the '03 team on what they "could have" accomplished?
First of all, that team won the championship and beat a couple of pretty good teams in the process, rather convincingly at that. Second, just go look at the box score of the close out games. Huge run against Phoenix. Huge run against the Lakers. Huge run against Dallas. Huge run against New Jersey. There's no "could have" to it. They did it time after time. They were so good that they could just whip the top teams as soon as they decided to do it. The only trouble they had during that playoff run was keeping a huge lead because they'd get so far ahead they'd lose focus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDog73
Well, allow me to retort. This '07 team could have swept every series so far, if they decided not to take a few games off.
That's not a retort, that's an assumption. I do happen to agree with it. One problem, though: The '07 team isn't a championship team. If this team wins four more games I'll decide where they belong in comparison to the '03 team. The Spurs have had some rather good teams that didn't win the championship, and they aren't even considered in the discussion. Same goes for the team that plays Thursday until they do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDog73
I'm not sure what players you think were so great in '03. Robinson was not putting out amazing numbers. Oberto is doing fine there.
Please tell me that you didn't type that. Just apologize for it or don't mention it again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDog73
Finley > Jackson. Jackson cost us as many games as he won for us, but I'm sure that you'll just chalk that up to "immaturity."
I can't imagine why I would consider a 34 year old Michael Finley more mature than a 24 year old Stephen Jackson. Maybe because it's valid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDog73
Then add in Horry as one of the greatest clutch shooters ever...
Spurs fans should be happy as hell he's on our team now, and that his clutch shot in Game 5 in 2003 bounced out, or we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
Sounds to me like you are the one making assumptions about what "could have" happened to support your theories. Are we going to get into hypotheticals? The Spurs had a huge lead and Horry missed a shot to win it. The Spurs had two more games at home. .4 was in San Antonio. Big difference. The '99 team and the '05 team had big wins by hitting shots at the end. What's the difference?
Re: Hollinger REALLY disagrees with Whott
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
First of all, that team won the championship and beat a couple of pretty good teams in the process, rather convincingly at that. Second, just go look at the box score of the close out games. Huge run against Phoenix. Huge run against the Lakers. Huge run against Dallas. Huge run against New Jersey. There's no "could have" to it. They did it time after time. They were so good that they could just whip the top teams as soon as they decided to do it. The only trouble they had during that playoff run was keeping a huge lead because they'd get so far ahead they'd lose focus.
Sounds kinda like the '07 Spurs...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
That's not a retort, that's an assumption. I do happen to agree with it. One problem, though: The '07 team isn't a championship team. If this team wins four more games I'll decide where they belong in comparison to the '03 team. The Spurs have had some rather good teams that didn't win the championship, and they aren't even considered in the discussion. Same goes for the team that plays Thursday until they do it.
Fair enough. I never assumed the '03 team would win a series, not even gainst Dallas. Maybe it was losing for 2 straight years with Duncan healthy, but I remember the '03 Championship being the hardest to win, with the caveat of the Finals.
Quote:
Please tell me that you didn't type that. Just apologize for it or don't mention it again.
Robinson's '03 numbers: http://www.nba.com/playerfile/david_robinson/
7.86 pts in Playoffs, 8.35 rebounds. Oberto so far has 5.9 pts, 5 rebounds.
Yes, Robinson >>>>> Oberto. But, 2003 vs 2007, it's not as big a difference as you'd think.
Quote:
I can't imagine why I would consider a 34 year old Michael Finley more mature than a 24 year old Stephen Jackson. Maybe because it's valid.
Kinda my point.
Quote:
Sounds to me like you are the one making assumptions about what "could have" happened to support your theories. Are we going to get into hypotheticals? The Spurs had a huge lead and Horry missed a shot to win it. The Spurs had two more games at home. .4 was in San Antonio. Big difference. The '99 team and the '05 team had big wins by hitting shots at the end. What's the difference?
That's my point: Most Championship runs come down to a little luck - but you have to be skilled to capitalize on that luck.
IMO, a big difference between success and failure is Horry's missed shot in 2003 for the Lakers, and .4 in 2004. It's strange, we argue about what team is better, when the reality is, a little luck and the Spurs could have 4 or 5 Championships already - or none.
Strange world.
