predictable. now lakerfan will say "It's not an injury if you don't have surgery"
Typical dumbass Spurs fan. I'm just curious on the type of injury he was claiming to have? Being tired and worn out is not an excuse to play the injury card. Everybody is tired and worn out! Deal with it!predictable. now lakerfan will say "It's not an injury if you don't have surgery"
What I recall is that it was being called a "bone jam" in his ankle. Apparantly that's different than a sprain, there's no injections for it. It limited his movement. The articles were all posted here, I'm sure a search will turn them up.
He also tore a fingernail completely off on his shooting hand. They couldn't repair it, he was wearing an acrylic piece on it during the series. That has to hurt and I assume it affected his ball handling.
The Spurs never used Ginobili's injuries as any kind of excuse. The information came out from the media, not the team. It was only after the series was over that Ginobili said something about not being 100%.
I know, Manu himself would not use that as an excuse. I have no doubt that he was banged up, but what team/player isn't this time of year? You suck it up and give it the best you have. Why some spurs fans try to use it as an excuse is insulting to Manu, the Spurs and the Lakers.
Manu's injuries were clearly not significant enough to stop him from playing. Plenty of players have had to deal with the same and played through it, managing to find ways to be effective. Don't tell me the ankle had anything to do with Manu taking ill-advised 3pt shots, throwing the ball away, and making other careless turnovers. He flat out played like for all but one game. He could not find a way to be an effective player with a limited ankle, which is the sign that maybe he isn't as great a player as you think he is.
For an organization that is so no-nonsense you'd think it'd rub off on the fanbase. All I hear from you guys is whining about the flu, ankle injuries, etc. Every team has to deal with the same and the true winners are the ones that find ways to win in spite of these setbacks. The Spurs just weren't good enough this year, and they haven't played consistently well at all during the regular season. The signs were there, you just chose to ignore them.
I'm only in this thread trying to answer questions.
If you're interested, here are a couple of articles that cover Manu's injuries better than I did.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/b...i.40517d1.html
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/c....41c72e64.html
What about Kobe's torn ligament on his shooting hand? What about Fisher's torn tendon in his foot? What about Gasol still being limited by his ankle injury? What about Bynum being out for the playoffs when he was projected to make it back for the 1st round?
Every team can play this ing game. This is the playoffs, you either put up or shutup. If health is THIS big an issue for the Spurs how do you expect things to get any better next season when everyone other than Parker is yet another year on the wrong side of 30?
Why are you here?
This thread and some of the posts from Spurs fans disappoint me.
Of course a healthy Manu would have given the Spurs a better chance to win and would have allowed Manu to put up better numbers against Sasha.
But, it doesn't even matter. Manu was not healthy. And, the Spurs lost.
Should just let it go. Sasha's a and can't stop a healthy Manu. Who cares what Laker fans want to believe anyway?
Don't forget Bynum's injury affected LA as well. It's not as they were full force anyway.
Ssshhhhhh get out of here with that common sense.
The Machine!!! is locking down Ray Allen tonight!!!
It had nothing to do with age. Manu was our leading scorer and basically was hobbled on 1 wheel. The fact that he found a way to contribute at all was admirable. In the long run, I think the injury will be a key reason that he develops into a better 3 pt shooter. Next year I expect his game to be off the charts. He'll blow by everyone who tries to step out on him at the arc.
Ya I woudln't count Manu out. He'll probably improve his jumper even more now.
Duncan. 4 Rings.
Kobe. 3 Rings.
Thanks.
I've been looking for articles that explain how the Spurs could have won three more games against the Lakers playing bad defense, going cold and taking fifteen minutes off every other quarter.I'm only in this thread trying to answer questions.
If you're interested, here are a couple of articles that cover Manu's injuries better than I did.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/b...i.40517d1.html
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/c....41c72e64.html
Seriously, I'm shocked there's not someone in this thread yet who's said that the Spurs would have beaten the Lakers if they hadn't traded Scola. That 's just as unprovable as Manu's supposed injury and it's certainly as easy for the lazy to have come up with.
Watching the celebration last night, I thought of a good example of what I'm talking about. Ray Allen played like at the beginning of the playoffs. When he was going through his shooting slump, the Celtics could have been eliminated as early as the first round. If that had happened, some of their fans would have said, "The Celtics would've won the le if not for Ray's slump". What gave him time to recover was the play of his teammates and their commitment to defense, something the Spurs really needed when Manu wasn't at 100 percent. The difference is that the both teams knew what they'd been all year, which was ultimately good for Boston and ultimately bad for San Antonio.
No, what really gave him time is they were playing ty teams the first two rounds.
I said before, if the Celtics had played the first round against Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, or possibly even Denver, they would have been this years' Mavericks.
That's a good point, Shoog; better compe ion might have doomed them, but the fact remains that Celtics did have a lot of people stepping it up. It would have been nice for someone on the Spurs to consistently elevate their game for the playoffs instead of just hoping for a guy on one leg to have to do it.
I agree the Spurs didn't have the offensive depth they needed, and when Manu went down, they were doomed.
On the other hand, if the Spurs could have played Manu 25 minutes a game in series against the Hawks and Cavs, chances are he would have been in very good shape the rest of the way.
The best team won, but definitely this was a year in which the West beat themselves up, and the team that was hurt the most by that was, not surprisingly, the oldest.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
