Team Spurs fans are most afraid of playing

Like you said, Time will tell. Though I think most of us here think you're overhyping the rockets and underrating the mavs. But in the end, only the spurs will be standing so who cares.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursGO

T-Mac has never choked, obviously his team is garbage.

When the Rockets lost to the Mavs, him and Yao combined for the Rockets 60 points of 76.

The series was the Jazz wasnt also choking, the team just was completely horrible, the Rockets coach used a 7 man rotation, they already had 2 guys in the lineup who were offensive liabilities, Rafer and Hayes, and their benchies Head and Howard were inconsistent, since your a Mavs fan, I hope you look forward to Juwan's inconsistency, and disappearence act in the playoffs.

---

T-Mac has had a number of series (3 I think) where his team has had a 2 game lead and blown it. That's a choke...whether you look at it upside down, inside out or however. One of those series was against the Mavs where they got their ass handed to them in game 7 by 40.

And who gives 2 shits about Juwan Howard? It's not like he's gonna crack the rotation often anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ludda

Like you said, Time will tell. Though I think most of us here think you're overhyping the rockets and underrating the mavs. But in the end, only the spurs will be standing so who cares.

---

I see what I see. I just beileve the Rockets can be a contender this year.

But you know what?

Go Spurs!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dirk4mvp

T-Mac has had a number of series (3 I think) where his team has had a 2 game lead and blown it. That's a choke...whether you look at it upside down, inside out or however. One of those series was against the Mavs where they got their ass handed to them in game 7 by 40.

And who gives 2 shits about Juwan Howard? It's not like he's gonna crack the rotation often anyways.

---

Its a choke, but I wouldnt call Tracy McGrady a choker now because of them. Kobe gave up a 3-1 lead vs the Suns, doesn't mean hes a choker, hes hit tons of game winners to back that up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursGO

Celtics have a chance too I might add, they simply are good inside and outside, KG could cause some problems for Timmy, Ray Allen could easily be handled if he has a shooting dud, and Bruce Bowen could probably contain Paul Pierce, but as far as that goes, the Spurs bench still beats theirs.

The Rockets do have depth at PG, they have Mike James, the guy is averaging 15 ppg and is providing a huge spark for them, I am pretty sure he is one of the main reasons the Rockets won, and he is exactly what the Rockets needed against the Jazz. Dont forget they also have Scola, the same guy that we traded for to save money.

---

In H2H matchups Duncan owns a 26-15 advantage. Their stats are almost identical, with KG outscoring Duncan by about one point and Duncan out-rebounding him by about half a board. By the way, in the playoffs Duncan owns a 6-2 advantage.

So, I don't see much there in terms of KG giving Duncan issues. Allen, however has always had difficulties with Bowen. In the last three games they played Bowen held him to a combined 18 of 53. Throw in Udoka or Pierce, or switch them off, and effectively there is enough defense to cause the Celtics more issues than vice versa. How will the Celtics matchup against the Spurs? It comes down to that and that is a product of coaching. No matter what they are still being run by Doc Rivers.

Scola? Point out to me where Scola will help them outside of the offensive side of the ball. And that still remains to be seen. In his career James has been primarily a scorer with some aptitude for running a team, but not much. That team still has big question marks at the PG and PF position, how those are answered will determine their competitiveness. That and whether Mcgrady and Yao can make it through the season healthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursGO

Its a choke, but I wouldnt call Tracy McGrady a choker now because of them. Kobe gave up a 3-1 lead vs the Suns, doesn't mean hes a choker, hes hit tons of game winners to back that up.

---

The Suns were better than Kobe's Lakers by a pretty big amount. The 2 Rocket teams T-Mac has had with a 2 game lead were pretty evenly matched against the Mavs and Jazz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L.I.T

In H2H matchups Duncan owns a 26-15 advantage. Their stats are almost identical, with KG outscoring Duncan by about one point and Duncan out-rebounding him by about half a board. By the way, in the playoffs Duncan owns a 6-2 advantage.

So, I don't see much there in terms of KG giving Duncan issues. Allen, however has always had difficulties with Bowen. In the last three games they played Bowen held him to a combined 18 of 53. Throw in Udoka or Pierce, or switch them off, and effectively there is enough defense to cause the Celtics more issues than vice versa. How will the Celtics matchup against the Spurs? It comes down to that and that is a product of coaching. No matter what they are still being run by Doc Rivers.

Scola? Point out to me where Scola will help them outside of the offensive side of the ball. And that still remains to be seen. In his career James has been primarily a scorer with some aptitude for running a team, but not much. That team still has big question marks at the PG and PF position, how those are answered will determine their competitiveness. That and whether Mcgrady and Yao can make it through the season healthy.

---

Pop wont place Bowen on Ray Ray, instead Paul Pierce who poses to be a bigger threat to us than Ray who is primarily a jumpshooter. Scola will defenitely help the Rockets on more places than offense, he is quite a weak defender, but can get charges, the ocassional steal, and some other minor stuff, but his job is to score and backup Chuck Hayes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dirk4mvp

The Suns were better than Kobe's Lakers by a pretty big amount. The 2 Rocket teams T-Mac has had with a 2 game lead were pretty evenly matched against the Mavs and Jazz.

---

I could understand the Mavs statement, they were pretty equal with the Rockets that one series.

But the Jazz are a whole completely different story, they caused major matchup problems, the main one being the Okur/Boozer combo. the Rockets had to place Yao on Boozer, who was a lot faster and gave him trouble, Hayes defended Okur well, but Boozer is a bigger problem, another thing is the Rockets horrible bench during the playoffs, the Rockets bench consisted of 2 inconsistent players named Luther Head, who couldnt hit anything in the playoffs and Juwan Howard, who according to you, wouldnt even crack the Mavs rotation.

Who am I afraid of playing? The answer is pure and simple, I fear nobody. Not only are the Spurs the reigning champs, but we're undefeated so far as well. Now, I realize this streak will not last and some other teams will rise. But at this point in time none of the "big" teams have shown me anything unstoppable or worthy of fear. With time my concerns will surely grow, but I refuse to be worried over hype and some pundit's analysis. When a team shows me consistent effort and production then I will change my tune.

Looking at all the teams in the league there seem to be several different types and different tiers of concerning teams.

The first group is just one team: Milwaukee. The Spurs are 8-10 against them in the Duncan era and have a knack for losing random games against the Bucks. Fortunately, we seem to be the only team in the league that ever has consistent problems with them...and they're a long-shot to get into the playoffs anytime soon....even in the east.

The second group are the rising stars. Houston, Chicago and Boston appear to be the most improved teams from a talent standpoint this season across the entire league. Many are picking them to win their divisions, conferences as well as a variety of other personal awards. However, they are all largely unproven. These teams are likely to have problems with team chemistry at some point and do not have the innate knowledge of each other's games. Boston has the added problem of having virtually no depth while Houston is a perenial first round exit (a trend they will have to break). Chicago is very young, and there are concerns surrounding their general lack of experience. Although their chemistry is significantly better than the other two. All of these teams could be serious problems for the Spurs, but until I see the development of team chemistry and the formation of consistency then I'm not too worried.

The final group are the falling stars. Dallas, Phoenix and Detroit are all members of this group because I feel their rosters have not progressed this year but rather regressed. The loss of Ben Wallace last season showed obvious symptoms of problems all season for the Pistons last year. But the Pistons were still a force to be reckoned with. Still, Nazr Mohammed just can't bring the same intensity that Ben did, and I haven't seen enough improvement to think things will change too much. Of course, when Rodney Stuckey is healthy again he could be a nice piece very quickly. Phoenix took a serious step back this year by trading away Kurt Thomas (the only Duncan "stopper"). With questions about Stoudemire's knee apparent already as well as the impending injuries to Grant Hill (it's only a matter of time) I just can't see this team being a legitimate problem to the Spurs. I could be wrong, but the Suns must prove me wrong first. Lastly is Dallas. While Dallas has not regressed, per se, as many of the others teams have, it appears the Spurs have identified ways to match up better with them. Elson and Udoka offer a variety of new solutions to Dirk and Howard. Plus the Vaughn/Washington combo is already superior to Van Exel/Udrih. And I do recognize the fact that Dallas was able to oust the Spurs last time they matched up in the playoffs. However, that was with an injured Duncan, dismal backup PG role and range-less Parker to manage that in a game 7 overtime. It was hardly a resounding sweep or even sturdy defeat. Sometimes we forget just how close Dallas was to packing their bags that night. However, the most important development in the decline of Dallas is the mental hits. Dirk has proven that he is anything but clutch (unless Manu fouls him late though) in recent postseason ventures and nobody on the team is willing to pick up the mantle once Dirk drops it. Frankly, I fear Dallas by default because of the loss, not out of common sense. They haven't given me a reason to truly fear them yet (albeit, they haven't had very long to do so either). I know that will change quickly, but until I see how we match up with them I think it is too quick to speak.

PS: I know a lot of people will question the lack of Denver on this list. Frankly, at this point, I think they're a moot point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkwaters

Who am I afraid of playing? The answer is pure and simple, I fear nobody. Not only are the Spurs the reigning champs, but we're undefeated so far as well. Now, I realize this streak will not last and some other teams will rise. But at this point in time none of the "big" teams have shown me anything unstoppable or worthy of fear. With time my concerns will surely grow, but I refuse to be worried over hype and some pundit's analysis. When a team shows me consistent effort and production then I will change my tune.

Looking at all the teams in the league there seem to be several different types and different tiers of concerning teams.

The first group is just one team: Milwaukee. The Spurs are 8-10 against them in the Duncan era and have a knack for losing random games against the Bucks. Fortunately, we seem to be the only team in the league that ever has consistent problems with them...and they're a long-shot to get into the playoffs anytime soon....even in the east.

The second group are the rising stars. Houston, Chicago and Boston appear to be the most improved teams from a talent standpoint this season across the entire league. Many are picking them to win their divisions, conferences as well as a variety of other personal awards. However, they are all largely unproven. These teams are likely to have problems with team chemistry at some point and do not have the innate knowledge of each other's games. Boston has the added problem of having virtually no depth while Houston is a perenial first round exit (a trend they will have to break). Chicago is very young, and there are concerns surrounding their general lack of experience. Although their chemistry is significantly better than the other two. All of these teams could be serious problems for the Spurs, but until I see the development of team chemistry and the formation of consistency then I'm not too worried.

The final group are the falling stars. Dallas, Phoenix and Detroit are all members of this group because I feel their rosters have not progressed this year but rather regressed. The loss of Ben Wallace last season showed obvious symptoms of problems all season for the Pistons last year. But the Pistons were still a force to be reckoned with. Still, Nazr Mohammed just can't bring the same intensity that Ben did, and I haven't seen enough improvement to think things will change too much. Of course, when Rodney Stuckey is healthy again he could be a nice piece very quickly. Phoenix took a serious step back this year by trading away Kurt Thomas (the only Duncan "stopper"). With questions about Stoudemire's knee apparent already as well as the impending injuries to Grant Hill (it's only a matter of time) I just can't see this team being a legitimate problem to the Spurs. I could be wrong, but the Suns must prove me wrong first. Lastly is Dallas. While Dallas has not regressed, per se, as many of the others teams have, it appears the Spurs have identified ways to match up better with them. Elson and Udoka offer a variety of new solutions to Dirk and Howard. Plus the Vaughn/Washington combo is already superior to Van Exel/Udrih. And I do recognize the fact that Dallas was able to oust the Spurs last time they matched up in the playoffs. However, that was with an injured Duncan, dismal backup PG role and range-less Parker to manage that in a game 7 overtime. It was hardly a resounding sweep or even sturdy defeat. Sometimes we forget just how close Dallas was to packing their bags that night. However, the most important development in the decline of Dallas is the mental hits. Dirk has proven that he is anything but clutch (unless Manu fouls him late though) in recent postseason ventures and nobody on the team is willing to pick up the mantle once Dirk drops it. Frankly, I fear Dallas by default because of the loss, not out of common sense. They haven't given me a reason to truly fear them yet (albeit, they haven't had very long to do so either). I know that will change quickly, but until I see how we match up with them I think it is too quick to speak.

PS: I know a lot of people will question the lack of Denver on this list. Frankly, at this point, I think they're a moot point.

---

First educated post as of yet in this thread :clap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursGO

Pop wont place Bowen on Ray Ray, instead Paul Pierce who poses to be a bigger threat to us than Ray who is primarily a jumpshooter. Scola will defenitely help the Rockets on more places than offense, he is quite a weak defender, but can get charges, the ocassional steal, and some other minor stuff, but his job is to score and backup Chuck Hayes.

---

Bowen has had greater success defending Ray Allen than he has Paul Pierce. The physical nature of Pierce's game can cause problems for Bowen.

Allen may be primarily a jumpshooter, but he's a jump shooter who can single-handedly destroy a team.

Scola's a good offensive player with serious flaws on the defensive end; I still fail to see how this will positively impact the Rockets outside of making them slightly more dangerous on the offensive end. Defensively he's not going to free up Yao by handling the opponents top big man nor is he a game changer on the boards or shot-blocking. The Rockets still revolve around Mcgrady and Yao and so far, nothing in their past history indicates that they are ready to take the next step. Hell, it remains to be seen whether they play over 71 games each this season.

They have the components, but the two players (Francis and Wells) who can really make a difference for them have had such a checkered last one to two years you don't know what they are going to contribute.

Darkwaters said exactly what I was thinking. Several concerns, no real fear at this point in time. The only problem with that is that once a threat is proven, it's generally too late to begin fearing it - but then, that's why the Spurs have scouting reports and rarely underestimate their opponents (at least in a 7 game series).

If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the matchups that concern me most are Dallas, Utah, Houston, and Boston (but only because of the unknown factors there). I think the fact that the Spurs got better while retaining 'institutional knowledge' and the ease of playing together and the good chemistry will help them tremendously this season.

Nice post, Darkwaters. Your posts are generally contain tight analysis, no exception here. :tu

Actually, GoSpurs, it was not the first educated post in this thread - I posted something reasonable back on page 2 but it was ignored by all. I said pretty much exactly what Darkwaters just said about Dallas, and mentioned the same teams he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L.I.T

Bowen has had greater success defending Ray Allen than he has Paul Pierce. The physical nature of Pierce's game can cause problems for Bowen.

Allen may be primarily a jumpshooter, but he's a jump shooter who can single-handedly destroy a team.

Scola's a good offensive player with serious flaws on the defensive end; I still fail to see how this will positively impact the Rockets outside of making them slightly more dangerous on the offensive end. Defensively he's not going to free up Yao by handling the opponents top big man nor is he a game changer on the boards or shot-blocking. The Rockets still revolve around Mcgrady and Yao and so far, nothing in their past history indicates that they are ready to take the next step. Hell, it remains to be seen whether they play over 71 games each this season.

They have the components, but the two players (Francis and Wells) who can really make a difference for them have had such a checkered last one to two years you don't know what they are going to contribute.

---

Scola is the perfect compliment to Yao, as the Rockets broadcaster: Bill Worrell says, he does rebound well, he is not garbage at it, pulls down 6-7 so far, not counting the Laker game of course.

Also another thing Id like to mention is why do people ALWAYS talk about the Rockets being injury prone, the only 2 players that are injured at times are Yao Ming, and T-Mac. T-Mac cant be said about anymore because his back hasnt acted up since he saw that one Doctor, whatever the hell his name is, and Yao missed tons of games because someone fell on his leg, I would say the Rockets can stay healthy unless they have another freak injury.

Bruce Bowen does have trouble against players who can drive in, and shoot well, Paul Pierce, T-Mac, Kobe are perfect examples, but players like Ray Ray and Shawn Marion are a different story.

Uh, the Rockets ARE T-Mac and Yao, or at least have been prior to this season (and are likely to remain so). Having either out for extended stretches, as has happened every season since TMac was acquired, has hurt them terribly.

TMac hasn't gotten any younger, and Yao has yet to play a full season. One hopes that his foot issues are now resolved, but there is some question about whether or not he can make it through a whole season, particularly in an up-tempo style of ball, given his tendency towards slowness and his disappearing act if he plays too many minutes.

Yeah...what Easjer said.

Ok, I was going to put this in my previous treatsie of a post, but I forgot it.

The fourth grouping of teams are the paper tigers. Golden State and Miami seem to fill this role best. Why?

While Golden State might be Dallas' matchup nightmare we just happen to be Golden State's version of Freddy Kruger. We shred them. Now I haven't heard anybody state them as a legitimate concern, but let me put those unvoiced fears to rest here: just because Golden State beat Dallas last year doesn't mean they would be the Spurs. Vice versa actually as we would sweep them out of the building.

Miami is the perfect example of a paper tiger, however. Why? Because they're horrible. Shaq looks like a 20M big stiff, Posey is gone, Wade is hurt and their big offseason acquisitions included Smush Parker. Give me a break. Anybody that seriously thinks Miami will be a contender is simply delirious. In fact, I am having doubts whether or not they will even make the playoffs. I suppose in the East they still be able to slide in, but in the West they wouldn't even sniff it. So why are people afraid of a team that couldn't even make the playoffs in our own conference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RuffnReadyOzStyle

Nice post, Darkwaters. Your posts are generally contain tight analysis, no exception here. :tu

Actually, GoSpurs, it was not the first educated post in this thread - I posted something reasonable back on page 2 but it was ignored by all. I said pretty much exactly what Darkwaters just said about Dallas, and mentioned the same teams he did.

---

I think it's safe to say that everyone contributed some to Dark's summary... :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by easjer

Uh, the Rockets ARE T-Mac and Yao, or at least have been prior to this season (and are likely to remain so). Having either out for extended stretches, as has happened every season since TMac was acquired, has hurt them terribly.

---

You hit the proverbial nail on the head. Saying that it is foolish to call the Rockets team injury prone when just Yao and McGrady are actually that way is on par with saying "it wouldn't be a big deal if the Celtics lost Ray Allen, Paul Pierce or Kevin Garnett". Those two ARE that team and their loss cripples their efforts.

Until Scola, Franchise, Bonzi or anyone else proves they can step it up when one of those two guys is out then you can never discount their lost time on the court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RuffnReadyOzStyle

Nice post, Darkwaters. Your posts are generally contain tight analysis, no exception here. :tu

---

<disguises his voice like TimVP>

Yea, that Darkwaters guy is really all over things around here. Somebody should tell Kori to put a Spur under his name!

:smokin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkwaters

You hit the proverbial nail on the head. Saying that it is foolish to call the Rockets team injury prone when just Yao and McGrady are actually that way is on par with saying "it wouldn't be a big deal if the Celtics lost Ray Allen, Paul Pierce or Kevin Garnett". Those two ARE that team and their loss cripples their efforts.

Until Scola, Franchise, Bonzi or anyone else proves they can step it up when one of those two guys is out then you can never discount their lost time on the court.

---

The Rockets can play well without Yao, they went 20-12 when Yao was out for 32 games, Tracy on the other hand is a different story.

I am also sure, if ANYBODYS Stars got injured they would suck, thats how it is for Heat, Lakers, Rockets, Hornets, etc.

But, Without Tmac, Yao only team beat Spurs last season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpursGO

The Rockets can play well without Yao, they went 20-12 when Yao was out for 32 games, Tracy on the other hand is a different story.

I am also sure, if ANYBODYS Stars got injured they would suck, thats how it is for Heat, Lakers, Rockets, Hornets, etc.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by florige

I think it's safe to say that everyone contributed some to Dark's summary... :lol

---

Yeah. :lol

I just get a little annoyed when I post something reasonable and insightful, it is completely ignored, then two people post the exact same thing an hour later and other people say "gosh, that's smart!"

Happens to me around here all the time. :rolleyes

As for you Darkwaters, them thar spurs are hard to get a hold of! Hell, I've traveled to SA from Oz for the Spurs TWICE and I don't even get a spur in recognition of that! :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RuffnReadyOzStyle

As for you Darkwaters, them thar spurs are hard to get a hold of! Hell, I've traveled to SA from Oz for the Spurs TWICE and I don't even get a spur in recognition of that! :lmao

---

:fishing

Don't mind me, I'm just fishing for a handout.

:downspin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkwaters

:fishing

Don't mind me, I'm just fishing for a handout.

:downspin:

---

Me too! ;) :lmao