Reply With Quote
are you?
LOL stretch pretending that he has ever typed anything worth a
are you?
LOL you need a VCR for that !
Still full of I see. Should we take this at face value like your other comments regarding Tony Parker, the 03 conference finals and the 07 semis?
LMAO. to whom am i speaking? Dirk is a top 5 player and the Mavs are 10X champions! LMFAO
no but feel free to fabricate as many issues and comments as you like. it is your only contribution to this thread, and your only apparent skill.
dirk is the least in the league and his post season performances prove it. that's it.
I'm not the one who said I was done with you, mofo.
You seem to be trolling along just fine, fake BillyHayes.
Don't forget, Tony Parker sucks too.
again, fabrication being your only contribution
A Steak Taco is gooooooood!!!
weren't you "done" with this conversation like 10 posts ago?
excellent work troll.
Then give us your scouting report on Tony Parker then, Mr. X's and O's. After all, you're not a troll.
After a while you start to feel sorry for him. It's like picking on Corky from Life Goes On.
that was two pages ago.
looks like you're the one enjoying your own personal circle jerk.
what about a "cheese" taco?A Steak Taco is gooooooood!!!
lol, owned for the 192nd time this thread.
I'll tell you why.
When a Spurs fan says it, it means "The Spurs are the best team and they had an easy road to the championship because they are just too good for anyone to beat"
Stackhouse's comment meant "The Spurs wouldn't have won it if such and such played them on the way to the championship". He's saying we won it because we didn't have tough compe ion, not because we're good.
Last edited by SpursDynasty; 10-19-2007 at 04:20 PM.
That may be so, but if Amare and Diaw had stayed on the bench, the effect of Horry's cheap shot would have been a suspension for Horry and a detriment solely to the Spurs.
Do you really think that Horry -- in that split-second -- made a calculation that if he laid a cheap shot on Nash, he'd be able to draw two key Suns off the bench and get suspensions out of his foolishness? If so, I think we can end the conversation here, because I'm not sure how attributing such omniscient wherewithal to a player in that cir stance is at all reasonable.
So the Spurs 3 other wins in the series were mere flukes while the Suns' failure to win 3 games is somehow indicative of their superiority?
Funny you should say that -- the league did try to revisit it this summer, but not one owner offered a proposal to change the rule:
"We recently brought the subject up for discussion at our compe ion committee meetings," Stern said before Game 1 of the finals between the Spurs and Cleveland Cavaliers.
"There was no proposal to change it. Our teams are satisfied with the enforcement and generally felt that any other enforcement would have been quite questionable given the past enforcement."
Perhaps you should buy an NBA team to bring your singularly-informed view of the rule to the table.
Yet the truth remains that had the league chosen NOT to suspend Amare and Diaw, it would have been making an unprecedented exception for them. I'd be interested in hearing how an argument to do that is somehow anything other than a plea for special treatment.
I'd be surprised if such a verdict could ever withstand the rigors of an appeal, absent the possibility that defense counsel in the trial court had acted in pure incompetence. That a jury might reach that conclusion wouldn't surprise me; that any state court would ignore rules of law that largely prohibit recovery by trespassers for injuries sustained while trespassing would surprise me greatly. And, in this case, because there are rules of law that would prohibit such a recovery by your hypothesized thief, your example is wholly inapt. If there was a rule in the NBA rulebook that permitted players to come off the bench to respond to cheap shots, you'd have a point -- but there isn't such a rule.
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 10-19-2007 at 04:34 PM.
Wrong. Both teams were punished.
I mean, Horry was suspended too right? That's punishing the Spurs. Hasn't he made some of the biggest championship-determining shots in NBA history? Without him the Lakers don't win the championship in 2002 (Game 4 vs. Kings) and without him we don't have our 2005 championship (Game 5 vs. Pistons). He has been more underappreciated since he left the Lakers. His biggest shot this year? Putting away the Nuggets and stopping them from tying the series at 2-2 in the first round, which could have put us in jeopardy. His three put us up by four with under a minute to go in Game 4.
And as far as I saw, there were 5 other games with no suspension, and the Spurs won three of them, and face it, Game 4 was HANDED to Phoenix at the end....It was a defensive collapse on the part of the Spurs.
Rules are rules. That just goes to show that no team gets special treatment, and just because you got 61 wins from beating all the East teams doesn't make you good.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
