Reply With Quote
Eh, I think he didn't have the best of games, but I don't think he was as bad as you think he was.
Spot on. A healthy Duncan IMO brings that gap down and if Gooden can get healthy and bring what he did last night then that evens it 100%.
Eh, I think he didn't have the best of games, but I don't think he was as bad as you think he was.
He wasn't bad overall, but he had 2-3 horrible sequences that led to easy Lakers baskets
You could point to probobly every player that did that.
Still don't understand why Udoka is singled out.
We have to have a different scapegoat every 2 games
Because he sucks ass and you can't count on him.
Some of the stuff being said in this thread rings of people not actually having seen the game. The boxscore and final score doesn't tell the story of this one.
Are you kidding me? If you guy have a healthy Manu and with the addition of Gooden, the Spurs definitley have a shot. Do not underestimate your own Spurs they have the heart of a champion. The Lakers better come prepared if we expect to beat you guys.
stats = win; honestly the only stat that matters is the fact that the Spurs came back from an 18 point deficit to make it a game. I don't know how many key regular season games that the Spurs have played in the past 3-4 years that once they were down by a big margin, they pretty much turned it in. The resilience that they showed is very comforting in the cajones department and it made this loss easier to accept than usual. I don't mind if the majority feels the Spurs are incapable of beating the lakers in the playoffs - what matters to me are these signs of hunger that frankly this year's squad has that last year's squad didn't have.
Why act as if the Spurs are the only team with injuries and that if they were just healthy it would all be great! This just may be the most injury-riddled season of the NBA that I can remember. Lots of teams are hurting.
Actually, the only stat that matters is this one:
LA 102
SA 95
The Spurs coming back had more to due with the Lakers being on a b2b and Phil keeping the bench unit in too long than anything else. I wouldn't place too much importance on it.
The more I think of Pop putting Hill on Kobe for such an extended period of time, and giving only 4 minutes to an excited Gooden, the more I think he truly is just poking and prodding; messing around till the playoffs. It's an interesting thing to see Pop just mess around with the lineups.
Going in line with everyone in the world, I know that Manu will completely change the makeup of this current Spurs team. It's a smart move to keep Manu out till there is no inkling of an injury; he's a game changer and the Spurs need him to be 100%. Given his history of injuries and being a skinny white man, resting seems to be the best option until he and Gooden can make their big minute debuts together. That's when we'll see the true Spurs team. Until then, I figure Pop will keep experimenting and seeing what works, rather than truly putting every effort towards winning.
It's truly painful to watch Duncan struggling. When Gooden works his way into the lineup, I feel he should spot in minutes for Duncan, at least for a week or two, so Duncan can get some well-needed rest. The last thing this team needs is for one major injury to a star player to follow another.
Last edited by ILoveOranges; 03-14-2009 at 12:10 AM.
true because the lakers are so old - that's a crap excuse and you know it. The main difference was that the Spurs started playing defense. That started in the 2nd quarter just after the lakers were on fire for the 1st quarter. So, you're telling me that a b2b caused the lakers to go cold in only the 2nd quarter? How many minutes did Kobe, Gasol and Odom have?
Why act as if the Spurs aren't one of the best teams in the NBA this season, every season, and sometimes they are actually the best team evidenced by a few championships. Why act as if the Spurs don't have a 75% win/loss ratio with Ginobili playing. Why act as if everything the Spurs have ever done is wrong.
If you're hurt, don't play. If you play hurt, don't say anything about it nor should you make it an excuse for failure. That's what Duncan is doing. He is not soft. He is all heart. The Lakers have the Spurs' mojo. They know how to play the Spurs. That's just all there is to it.
Disagree.Lakers won the game in the first quarter.TP played really worse than TD in the first quarter so it wasn't only TD's fault.
After 1st quarter down by 18 the game was over.You are facing the Lakers,not the Grizzlies.
About TD take a look
http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119609
We didn't use him in the low post when Lakers was taking the big lead so I can't put the defeat on his shoulders.
And the only reason i can't find is TD was far away to be healthy because he usually was the first option in that kind of situations.
Any team can look back at a game and say they would have won if so and so happened.
It doesn't matter. All that matters is the end result. Stop making excuses and accept the loss. It's still the regular season, the slate gets wiped clean come playoff time.
Duncan's injuries are self inflicted. After winning the 2005 le on two bum ankles, he's going to one up himself by winning the 2009 le on two bum knees. I'm sure that next in line is 2013, which will be known as the "Jordan + 1" le, which will be won by Tim Duncan on two broken legs. This is all assuming the odd numbered year legend holds true and 2011 becomes the "21 = 23" le.
Actually I'd be more than thrilled if Duncan hung it up with six les as long as #6 is "the repeat".
Exactly.
The Spurs have time to implement Gooden into the game plan and see what he can and cannot contribute to the team.
People forget that Manu (when healthy ENOUGH) not only contributes points and energy but helps with regard to ball distribution and floor spacing; both of which are keys to the Spurs style of offense. He is also a difficult guard that will make overly aggressive defenders (like Ariza, Artest) get into foul trouble or play him differently to avoid it. I say all this to again reitirate that Manu changes the dimension and style of play of the Spurs when he is able to give quality minutes.
Everyone starts at 0-0 come playoff time and with good fortune shining down on both teams we'll see each other again in the WCF.
There's been plenty of good, rational points made on behalf of the Spurs and Lakers throughout this thread, so I'm not going to re-hash what's already been said.
Bottom Line... The Spurs can not only compete against the Lakeshow, but they can ultimately defeat them. If the Spurs do have a healthy Manu, a well integrated Gooden, a 85-90% Duncan, and the Parker who's shown flashes recently of taking ownership of the games like a point-guard version of Wade.... Then, Yeah. The Spurs can come out on top.
The problem is, the odds of all that coming to fruition are pretty slim. Not impossible, but slim.
The Lakers superior size, length, and atheticism can be overcome with guile, heart, and championship experience, but the margin for error is hovering somewhere around zero.
I'm not giving up hope for the Spurs, crazier, less probable things have happened, so I'll just reiterate what Pop always makes a point of saying.
You've got to get a couple of breaks, be healthy, and even a little lucky sometimes to win a championship.
The Spurs are probably going to need all of the above.
I don't know why a fan of any team would want to face the Spurs in the post-2003 era, where you either lose to the Spurs, or beat them and then lose in the Finals. Either way, you're still a loser.
That must make you sleep better at night, huh?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions