Reply With Quote
remember how deep the spurs were.
we don't need no stinkin superstars!!!!
oops
Defense still wins championships tbh. I guess the Celtics would also won the Thunder, perhaps not 4:1, but they have proved many times they can win road games. The Celtics are as old as the Spurs and still play defense. Pop should check how, he was known as the best defensive coach in the NBA. The Spurs are the NBA best offensive team, it was a good run this season, but . . . that's not the way to it all. Pop had to re-focus on defense.
Good coaching by Spo, the Heat were the best team this season. LeBron is an Magic / MJ type of talent tbh.
remember how deep the spurs were.
we don't need no stinkin superstars!!!!
oops
it looks like to be a good defensive team in the new nba you need a big who can switch on pick and rolls and defend the perimeter
when duncan is your best defender it just wont work
splitter is pretty mobile but hes to soft defensively at times
he just stands hands up and doesnt try to block or really make the shot difficult
Ya know the entire playoffs never were consistent.
Things went one way, then they went another changing literally game to game.
The Spurs went from an unstoppable force of great offense and frankly decent to good defense in critical junctures to a team that looked like the one that frizzed against Memphis.
Boston went from dead, to having a pulse, to one game from the finals then falling apart.
Philadelphia went from overmatch to scraping by to one win from the eastern finals
It was one of the more interesting and confounding playoffs I've honestly ever seen. Its the first playoffs that I can honestly say almost had a mind of its own it changed on a dime so many times.
Not to Mention Indiana went from damn the Magic might beat them to, their gonna cruise by Miami.
Winning in the NBA finals is tied to two things, IMO: peaking as a team, and playing tenacious defense.
Peaking being the most important IMO...
when was the spurs peak?
probably first round against Utah. End of second round vs Clippers.
Game 4 against the Clippers some flags went up.
And then boom! They collapsed. On their last legs winning both games in WCF and then THE PEAK moved to Oklahoma City Thunder.
No way.
Spurs were dominant for too long to say they had a peak vs Jazz or Clipps.
Game 1 was a gift from Brooks and game 2 was an anomaly that will happen in every playoffs.
The schedule in the WCF didn't help either, another cap tip to TIMVP on calling that when the schedule first came out that that would be a problem. It ended up being one.
Yep, agreed.
What the schedule has to do with peaking?
Nothing
And you saying games one and two were coincidences?
The spurs played really good ball in those two games and they won because they were better.
Brooks might something up, but it's a game in which anybody can some things up. That how it goes.
At the end of a day the spurs had more ed ups and that's why they lost.
The peaking has nothing to do with Bonner and Green not being in the series and Splitter later as well. Some players when put in a uncomfortable situation cannot handle them and that what happened.
Miami had ups and downs in the playoffs but I haven't seen them peaking in the Finals. Better D and more powerful play got the win. Thunder played soft. They could do whatever they wanted against the spurs cause the spurs are not tough enough.
Peaking is key, I agree. OKC peaked in the series against us. Frankly I think they treated that last series as "their finals," as if their was a passing of the guard which ensured the inevitability of them beating the winner of the East. It reminds me of the Heat last year in some ways. But they are young and will learn.
Not to mention, OKC just ran into a tough match up for them. Durant actually had to play D, and on Lebron no less! Westbrook had to check Wade. There was really no need for Perkins, and Ibaka was tied up with Bosh. Oh and it didn't help that Harden went Danny Green/Matt Bonner in the finals.
3rd quarter, Game 2 WCF.
This.
In regular season watching Miami, I could have bet my legs that they cannot reach the NBA finals.
2 months later they're champs.
OKC and Miami are simply the two best NBA teams potentially.
Spurs are the best as an system and execution team, but potentially and individually far behind them.
IMO peaking is more of an illusion. The team peaks when the opponent lets you play. When plays defense, everything becomes difficult, the confidence soon disappears and on the other end builds up.
From the game 2 to the games 3, 4 and 5 (in game 6 both teams were near equal, it was decided by the refs), the momentum wasn't going to change because of some cycling stuff, but because of the adjustments the Thunder made, which rendered both the Thunder offense and defense better.
Pop was late with the adjustments. He should had some answers for the game 5, after losing two times in OKC. If the Thunder was an superior team, the Spurs should have concentrated their efforts for the game 5, and then in the hypothetical game 7. In some games Parker played well, in others it was Manu, and so. But not in the same game, which was necessary to advance to the finals.
However, the Heat would have won the 'ship regardless, so the Spurs need more talent and improvements, particularly on defense.
The Spurs played some of their best defense against the Jazz and Clippers. The defense dropped remarkably against the Thunder.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
