Reply With Quote
I agree wholeheartedly.
Who were the analysts who said this?
ESPN first take analyzed picked Spurs to win all over lakers just now. and there r going to debate more little later. Lakers with all the off the court drama they dont think lakers will repeat
Go Spurs
I agree wholeheartedly.
Who were the analysts who said this?
sorry i didnt catch his name, but keep watching if u can, because skip going to talk about it
It was Chris Mannix of S.I. I believe.
SKip "M****F**N" Bayless!!!
Western Conference preview
Britt Robson
SI.com
San Antonio Spurs (second-best record in West)
First Take: The savvy get savvier. The best front office in the game executed the best trade and best draft value of the offseason, acquiring 29-year-old swingman Richard Jefferson, a perfect fit for their style and core personnel, for three fossils (average age: 36), then snagging rebounding fiend DeJuan Blair way down in the second round. Added to the league's most battle-tested trio of star teammates -- Tim Duncan, Tony Parker and a (hopefully) healthy Manu Ginobili -- the Spurs are younger, deeper and most likely better than last year's 54-win squad, perhaps the only assemblage in the conference that can compete with the Lakers even the reigning champions are firing on all cylinders.
Concerns: Ginobili's durability. ... Sorting out secondary minutes on a roster that could legitimately go a dozen deep.
Overrated: The vacuum-sealed bulwark of the Spurs' vaunted post defense has sprung leaks the past two years. Blair, free-agent signee Antonio McDyess and even the occasional insertion of shot-blocker Theo Ratliff against the bigger post players should ease the strain on Duncan (now a full-time center), but only partially remedy the problem.
Underrated: The Spurs' unselfishness is so seamless that it's part of the landscape. Suffice to say that four crunch-time studs will switch roles and share the ball without a quibble.
X-Factors: Can Parker reprise his counterpunch to his dribble penetration -- the surprising pull-up jumpers and the runners -- as effectively? ... How much rest does Duncan get before the playoffs begin?
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137681
Writers' predictions for 2009-10
SI.com's Ian Thomsen, Chris Ballard, Chris Mannix, Jack McCallum and Arash Markazi forecast the 2009-10 season.
1. Who will win the conference finals?
Thomsen: East -- Celtics over Cavaliers. West -- Lakers over Spurs.
Ballard: East -- Cavs over Celtics. West -- Lakers over Spurs.
Mannix: East -- Celtics over Cavs. West -- Spurs over Lakers.
McCallum: East -- Cavs over Celtics. West -- Spurs over Lakers.
Markazi: East -- Celtics over Cavs. West -- Lakers over Spurs.
2. Who will win the NBA Finals?
Thomsen: Celtics over Lakers. Their team defense, driven by Kevin Garnett and aided by backup Rasheed Wallace, will be the biggest factor in what will be a classic Finals.
Ballard: Cavs over Lakers. It's the season of LeBron. Shaq will do just enough on the court -- and perhaps just as important, deflect some of the media attention off it -- to put the Cavs over the top, and with Anthony Parker they now have another spot-up shooter to go with Mo Williams. It'll be a fun series: Shaq tweeting insults about L.A., Ron Artest trying to sumo wrestle James on D and Kobe wondering where, oh where Trevor Ariza is.
Mannix: Celtics over Spurs. It won't be easy, as second-seeded Boston will have to go through Orlando in the second round and Cleveland in the conference finals. But a healthy superstar (Garnett), a revamped bench (Wallace, Marquis Daniels) and a renewed hunger will power the Celtics to their second le in three years.
McCallum: Spurs over Cavs. Wait a minute, isn't that San Antonio franchise ancient history? Didn't it fail to get beyond the first round last year, and didn't the Spurs fail to land the one offseason piece (screwy as he might be) they wanted when Rasheed Wallace went to the Celtics? And isn't it just LeBron's time? Well, maybe. But doesn't a rotation of Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili and Roger Mason, along with new acquisitions Richard Jefferson, Antonio McDyess and rookie DeJuan Blair sound pretty solid? It won't be a replay of the 2007 championship series when the not-ready-for-prime-time Cavs were swept by the formidable San Antonio defense. But I see the Spurs in seven.
Markazi: Lakers over Celtics. Kobe told one of the more bizarre Artest stories last year. Bryant said that after the Lakers lost Game 6 of the 2008 NBA Finals in Boston, he was alone in the shower when Artest, who had apparently talked his way into the Lakers' locker room, walked up to him and said, "I want to come help you. If I can, I'm going to find a way to come to L.A. and give you the help you need to win a le." (You can just imagine Kobe saying, "Um, yeah, let me just dry off and we can talk.") Well, it may have taken longer than both would have liked, but Artest is finally a Laker and Bryant finally has his enforcer. The Lakers were exposed as a soft team by the Celtics in their last Finals meeting, but two years later, the Lakers, with the toughness of Artest and a healthy Andrew Bynum, will return the favor.
Wow! I have to agree Mannix.... I thought last year when it was obvious that all of the new contending teams were beating us by virtually showing up and out running us....They never really demonstrated any basketball know how. They beat us by the quanity of their youth and that was it as far as I was concerned....For The Spurs it was only a matter of tweeking...The Spurs will actually be better by virtue of depth and basketball know how...And by the way..this year there will some dunking from all position...Watch out NBA!
Wow, only Markazi picking the Lakers? They're starting out as underdogs again this year.
Lots of Spurs love in the air.
Here's what Laker fans don't realize... by adding Artest, the Lakers got way less athletic. They will sorely miss Ariza's defense on quick guys like Tony Parker. Ariza could defend the 1, the 2, and sometimes the 3 depending on the matchup. That was HUGE. Artest can defend the 3 really well, but that's about it anymore.
Ariza gave Parker problems - in fact, way more problems than most Spurs fans wanted to admit. I for one was ecstatic to hear they were letting Ariza go. I was also shocked. Ariza was enormous for them, because Fisher has no prayer of containing Parker, and neither does Shannon Brown. Farmar is the quickest guard they have, and he still can't contain Parker. Plus, Farmar is an idiot who can't run the offense. Even though he's y beyond belief and a legend in his own mind, Farmar hasn't been able to beat out the slowest point guard in the league, Derek Fisher. Ariza's presence covered the fact that Fisher has no business trying to defend the point in the NBA.
And I'm only talking about the defensive end. Artest is a black hole on offense and everybody knows it.
I think this is specifically the reason some people are not picking the Lakers. On paper they are super-impressive, but the Artest thing is not only volatile, it will probably prove to be less effective on both ends of the floor.
I actually do realize this. Let's face it, the Lakers are paper tigers this year and only hyped because they're the Lakers. How can guys like Vujacic, Farmar, mBenga, Morrison, Brown, Luke be even considered NBA players? The media is trying to shove this "stacked" Lakers team hype down our throats when it's really just Kobe and a bunch of scrubs.
The Lakers gave up a sure thing and versatile player in Trevor Ariza for a 30 year-old volatile forward who's as likely to stop the offense as he is likely to run around a 5 star hotel in his chonies.
I'll say it now, the Lakers were just lucky to win last year.
No Manu, no KG, no Jameer, No Mo, No Yao, No Okur. I do get it.
Last edited by Allanon; 10-27-2009 at 03:13 PM.
I'd take Spurs' hunger over Celtics' hunger if that determined Finals victory, contra Mannix.
Pierce, Allen, Garnett are great players but don't have the same heart as Parker and especially Duncan and Ginobili.
I think Spurs will make it to the Finals this year. I honestly feel the Lakers' chemistry will be affected negatively by Artest and I don't think they'll be as hungry as they were in 2009 (especially after having been spanked by the celtics in 2008). The Spurs are not only hungry again, but I think just about everyone is underestimating the improvements to the roster. Jefferson and McDyess are proven vets who are starter quality on most NBA teams. George Hill is really coming into his own now and will be a great backup PG. And Dejuan Blair? Please. The man is a beast. He's got a chip on his shoulders, and his shoulders are wiiiiiidddde.
Manu is the x-factor. If he's healthy in the playoffs, and I'm not counting on it, this will be the strongest Spurs team in a long time.
I feel confident the Spurs can beat the Cavs and Magic if they meet in the Finals. Not so sure about the Celtics, who are stacked and hungry again. But I give the slight edge to the Spurs for two reasons. One, I think the Spurs bench is stronger. And two, Sheed is a loose cannon.As with Artest on the Lakers, Celtics can't be 100% confident they won't have personality issues. The Spurs, with McDyess and Jefferson, have no such worries.
I'm surprised Orlando doesn't even figure into the conversation anymore.
yep. pretty much.
LOL Orlando haters are funny..
Three out of five guys have the Lakers coming out of the west. Not sure how that defines them as "underdogs" but whatever helps get you through the day.
Well to be fair, if the Lakers don't make it out of the West, Kobe fans will somehow try to convince people that Kobe's team wasn't the favorite..
Teams like the Lakers have far better things to celebrate than just "coming out of the West". Leave the conference banners for the other upcoming teams to hoist.
Would you be content with the Spurs to just "come out of the West"?
i don't hate Orlando. i just think that Hedo was crucial to their success last year...and i think Vince Carter is a proven also-ran.
As a heavy, yes. As a second banana, not so much.
Imagine Hedo having to carry a team.
The only thing I would disagree would be with is "Kobe and bunch of scrubs". No matter how lucky, you still need a good team to win it all. However, most "experts" do forget how this "juggernaut" barely got past the same (almost) Rockets team that is predicted to miss the playoffs this year and faced the best matchup out of the 3 good teams from the East.I actually do realize this. Let's face it, the Lakers are paper tigers this year and only hyped because they're the Lakers. How can guys like Vujacic, Farmar, mBenga, Morrison, Brown, Luke be even considered NBA players? The media is trying to shove this "stacked" Lakers team hype down our throats when it's really just Kobe and a bunch of scrubs.
The Lakers gave up a sure thing and versatile player in Trevor Ariza for a 30 year-old volatile forward who's as likely to stop the offense as he is likely to run around a 5 star hotel in his chonies.
I'll say it now, the Lakers were just lucky to win last year.
No Manu, no KG, no Jameer, No Mo, No Yao, No Okur. I do get it.
Sure, Kobe, Gasol, Artest, Odom and Fisher/Bynum do look very scary and should be considered one of the favorites, but ignoring that past these 6 the rest of the players are hardly playoff rotation and make me wonder how much the champion label is influencing how this team is seen.
Today on PTI Bill Simmons, as well as Kornheiser, and Wilbon all picked the spurs to make the finals.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
