51-12 tells you all you need to know.
Full article: http://www.projectspurs.com/2011-art...o-contend.htmlOn Thursday, it will have been two weeks since the NBA trade deadline passed. The San Antonio Spurs still stand a top the league with the best record at 51-12. After witnessing the Los Angeles Lakers and Andrew Bynum take full advantage of the Spurs in the paint Sunday afternoon, keeping in mind the team made no moves at the trade deadline, one has to wonder if the questions about the Spurs lacking size in the frontline will hurt them down the stretch and in the playoffs?
I’m hear to ask the question: How does the Spurs' frontline compare with the other playoff teams?
51-12 tells you all you need to know.
Tell that to the many failed mavs teams of the past decade.
The Mavs are chokers. The Spurs are not.
The Spurs have also never had a 6-7center starting next to Duncan or a toilet paper soft 3pt shooting (big man?)getting minutes behind him.
99' Duncan/Robinson/Rose
03' Duncan/Robinson/Rose
05' Duncan/Mohammed/Horry/Nesterovic
07' Duncan/Oberto/Horry/Elson
09' Duncan/BONNER/Thomas - FAILED
10' Duncan/Mcdyess/BONNER - FAILED
11' Duncan/Blair/BONNER/Mcdyess - FAILED
Uh, 2011 ain't over yet, bud...![]()
We've already been eliminated from the 2011 playoffs? How disheartening.
If they had only traded Parker for Bargnani, one of the worst rebounding 7 footers in NBA history.
I'd love to agree, but fading great teams can put together great regular season records.
Look at the mid-'00s Pistons, the 2001 Spurs (pre-Tony and Manu), even the never-were Cavs in LeBron's last two years.
I remain hopeful this will be the Spurs' year, but the gaudy record isn't the main reason.
Hopefully, there is still time to work Splitter in (and Anderson). Also, Neal should be on the court in big situations -- he has "the clutch gene" as Skip Bayless would say.
like injuries didn't play a part in 09' and 10' either. 11' isn't over brah.
Right, Listen I watch the guy way more than you and can tell you all his weaknesses. He has skills that would fit the spurs, its his sorry at ude that would never work here. I like him, he is an ok player. Put in a suggestion instead of bringing him up.
This^
that was kinda my point in my first post.
I would start, if we play against the lakers, with parker and manu, bonner as a SF, duncan as PF and McDyess as C, rotating with tiago and blair
Yeah, he lacks the very same skills that you're whining that the Spurs lack. I'll keep bringing him up every time you trot out your "expertise" on the Spurs roster.
We dont play the Lakers every night
Sounds funny but it might work considering artest is slow. However what happens when theirs a switch. Like say he ends up guarding Kobe? FYI i like Novak at the 3 better than bonner. actually I like Novak better than bonner period.
we dont play the cavs every night either.
Speaks volumes.
Im not an expert, just a fan with opinions, your the same. Bonner is a good shooter, and not a good rebounder. can you find some kinda of evidence that refutes that.
Duncan just can't carry this team on his back anymore. IMO, people are in for a rude awakening come playoff time when they expect Duncan to kick it in to another gear. The Spurs couldn't improve at the deadline because they had no money to spend. Its sink or swim with Bonner, Dice and Blair.
Maybe they shouldnt have signed bonner to 4yr 15million dollar contract then they wouldve had something significant left to spend. Whats the difference between him and novak? Oh yeah novak makes under a million and shoots ALMOST as well.
I wouldn't try to. Bonner is a good shooter and he's not a good rebounder. He does possess better career shooting and rebounding numbers than Bargnani at a fraction of the price and without giving up Parker.
All you're doing is whining that the Spurs have a weaker frontline than the Lakers. Whining that is compounded by the fact that you have repeatedly advocated for the acquisition of player who would not address the shortcomings that are the subject of this thread.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)