Reply With Quote
So we lost. Do we tank the postseason now? Being that this game was key and all...
He looked a little tired in the first game, but that's to be expected. But he's able to make good cuts, getting good lift on his shots, and not shooting off of one foot. It looks like he believes the ankle is sound, which is the best sign of all.
I'm glad he stayed out as long as he did. I wouldn't want to see him playing 35 minutes, but I feel good about the chances of him being solid through the playoffs. I'm more optimistic than I have been this whole season.
So we lost. Do we tank the postseason now? Being that this game was key and all...
Spurs have missed too many opportunities this season. especially in March. We still don't know what kind of team we'll have in the playoffs, perhaps figuring that out should be our main goal in what little time we have left.
Pop seems to be more concerned about making a statement about his coaching skills than anything else at this point. It's a strange sight to see our team concept meltdown after all these years. Is it Duncan's team, Parker's team, Manu etc?; Pop appears to want to tell the world that it's his team, and that his micro-management revolving roster mania is what will bring us success.
Talk about a jinx thread...
Why are you such a ? Look at the standings and tiebreakers now vs. what it would have looked like. Winning would have made the remainder of the regular season easier. That's all. But it could also make a difference in the playoffs. (Notice how the thread le said "could be"?
I'm guessing that you flunked math in school, and you take out your feelings of failure on the people around you. Get some therapy... get a math tutor. But get over it. You don't score any extra points in life by being a .
[Edit: And before you try and tell us that you have a PhD in Math, maybe it was reading you flunked. Either way, you're obviously feeling a little... inadequate.]
Last edited by GSH; 03-29-2009 at 10:28 PM.
i didnt know a 45-27 record with 2 starters being out a total of over 35+ games meant you were "melting down." we just beat the spurs without chandler, peja, and posey on natl television. id consider that a nice confidence boost. people say we're not what we were last year but we've been devastated by injuries. even more so than the spurs, who have a good record despite some injuries. dont look at stats, peja and chandler are important pieces of our team. they give better spacing to west and cp3 and chandler does the intangibles. so come on, i like intelligent fans that post intelligent things, not stupid like the hornets are awful.
Your takes just suck. You deal with it. We lost, we're still second in the West, and even if we go in with the 3rd or 4th or 7th seed, I know the Spurs can win on the road. I'll take Pop's word that seeding position is not that important, or HCA for that matter before any weak sauce rant from a hack like you.
Now, go start a thread about how key to the postseason is the next game...
Listen, you're just melting down right now. Ofcourse were not going to play like this in the playoffs. At least not for 7 games in a row. You think Pop will close the 3rd quarter with the lineup he put out there? Or that Manu is not going to drive more when he actually gets into somewhat decent shape? How many terrible games like this is Kurt Thomas going to have? How many more calls are the Hornets going to get? Yet we were still right there.
Chill out. We need to get to the playoffs and go from there.
I just don't see any team in the West that we can go out there, execute our game, and be unable to beat them in their house.
Hey, El Dip . Check the Western Conference standings today.
http://www.nba.com/standings/team_re...w_Std_Cnf.html
Notice anything odd? Of course you don't, but I bet most people do. That's right - Houston is a half game behind us, but they have clinched a playoff berth, and we haven't. I know that's going to strain your already overloaded brain, but it's because of tie-breakers. Can you say tie-breaker? I knew you could.
Don't start flaming yet, El Dip . Nobody is saying that the Spurs won't make the playoffs. It just means that Houston clinched earlier than us, even with a worse record. But the same thing that allowed that to happen could give Houston the Southwest Division le, and a higher playoff seed. It could cost us home court advantage against Houston, Denver, or even New Orleans if we meet them in the playoffs. And a win in New Orleans last night could have prevented it. If we wind up tied with any of those teams, you may finally understand.
No matter how mean you talk, you know jack about the game. Yes - having Tim and Manu healthy is the most important thing. But if you actually believe that HCA is a non-factor in the playoffs, you are either a newcomer to the sport, or just plain stupid. And if you think that Pop was saying that HCA is a non-factor, someone needs to step in before you are allowed to breed. We don't need you making any more stupid little people to annoy the next generation.
[Edit: Here's a few fun little facts about HCA in the playoffs. There are a lot more, but I kept it short.]
During the 2007-2008 playoffs, home teams won 60 of the 80 contested games. Game 1 victors went on to win 16 of the 17 series waged last year. Having Game 1 at home also guarantees that Game 7 (if necessary) will be contested in the same home arena of the team with the best regular-season record. How important is playing Game 7 at home? In the 100 Game 7s recorded in league history, the home team has won 80.
We already clinched. You don't see it because you're stupid.
Straight from Pop:
"It doesn't matter then if you have home or away. The best team is gonna win. Every time we won a championship, we won on the road. We won one or two games in every series on the road, because we were a better team. I think that proves out for every champion. If we're good enough, we'll find a way."
/thread
First of all, head, if the NBA site doesn't have a little x next to the Spurs name, it means that there is a mathematical chance that they still could miss the playoffs, however small. If you want to argue with someone, argue with them.
The problem is that you don't understand multi-way tiebreakers. (The real problem is that you are a ing neanderthal with a big mouth, but that's a different subject.) In a multi way tie between non-division winners, the first tie-breaker is best winning percentage between all tied teams. Pinheads like you always want to compare head-to-head for each team, but it doesn't work that way. We may be 3-1 against the Suns, but they are 2-1 against Denver, while we are 1-2. They could be 1-2 against New Orleans, while we could be 1-3. The tie-breaker is who has the best winning percentage among all tied teams.
I don't have a computer simulation set up, but you can bet your ass that the NBA does. I don't know the exact scenario(s), but you can bet your ass the NBA does. And that's why there isn't a little x next to the Spurs for having clinched. But that really doesn't matter. What does matter is that the same tie-breaker problems could easily move the Spurs as low as 6th seed.
You shot off your mouth and embarassed yourself. And you keep trying to make up for it by being even more abusive with your posts. But the bottom line is you don't have a clue how the tie-breakers work, or why that game with N.O. was so important. Just remember - stupid is hereditary, but ignorance is voluntary. You should take a little time to educate yourself before trying to talk.
You were also too ing lazy to get the whole quote from Pop. He didn't say HCA was meaningless or unimportant:
"One would never turn down a higher seed," he said. "Any coach that tells you that is lying," he said. "It can be important. But we've done both. We won the seventh game in New Orleans last year and if you'd have asked me before the game, I would have said, 'Gee, I'd rather play this at home.' ..."But the best team really does win. In seven games, I can't think of a time when the best team did not win the series."
So answer this El head. Do you think Pop would rather win the first 2 rounds in 5 games each, or 7 games each? If the Spurs have to face the Lakers in the WCF, they sure as would rather finish the second round early. Without HCA, 7 games is a lot more likely. That might make the difference in who is the better team.
Don't you just hate looking stupid and less in front of all these nice Spurs fans?
Last edited by GSH; 03-31-2009 at 04:48 AM.
I have better things to do than to project the Spurs going 0-9 the rest of the way, especially against the opposition we're facing. You go ahead and believe we're going 0-9 the rest if the way. Do you wanna put your money where your mouth is and bet we're not going to clinch within the next 2 games?... I didn't think so.
And what's the problem with that? If you're the better team, seeding is irrelevant. Even more so considering the season we had injury wise. That's what a 4 time NBA champion coach said.
Somehow I think he has more authority on the subject than a hack like you.
Your posts are embarrasing. Give us a break and STFU already.
I quoted Pop properly in the context of this discussion. There's no doubt he'll take a higher seed if given to him, but he won't overplay his players to do so. Case in point, we handed Denver the tiebreaker. If you haven't noticed how this ball club operates by now, you need to catch up and quickly before you keep on posting more garbage.
Last edited by ElNono; 03-31-2009 at 01:32 PM.
Hey El Zero... did you see all the articles about how the Spurs finally clinched a playoff berth LAST NIGHT? Not the game before, dip . Last night.
You must be the only person on the planet who didn't get the memo. You're now officially a bigger dumb than Sequ. How embarassing.
EL NONO - "I have better things to do... than to know what I'm talking about."
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121306
Stop embarrassing yourself in front of everybody...
Here's a follow-up for all of those who insisted that "a loss is a loss, and all games are of equal importance". The Spurs wound up losing to New Orleans, and then beat the Pacers a few nights later. Suppose it had gone the other way - beating the Hornets and losing to Indiana. The Spurs would still be 53-28, and tied with Houston and Portland. But look what a difference it would have made:
If all 3 teams win their last games, and wind up tied at 54-28, the Spurs would have won the Southwest Division, due to a better record within the division. Winning the division guarantees one of the top 4 seeds in the playoffs. And since the Rockets own the tiebreaker over Portland, that would have given the Spurs the 3 seed, the Rockets 4, and Portland 5. We could even have HCA in the Western Conference Finals, if Portland managed to beat the Lakers in the second round.
Same 3 teams, same number of wins and losses. But winning that game in NO, rather than Indiana would have made the difference between the 3 and the 5 seed. At the beginning of the season, that game in New Orleans was no more important than any other. But at the time we played it, it was MUCH more important, because of the tiebreaker considerations. It's playing out just like I was afraid it might. We could still get the 3 seed, but now we need help from other teams.
So... could being the 3 seed vs. being the 5 seed turn out to be the key to post-season success? You don't have to know much about basketball history to know the answer to that one. Sure we could buck the odds. But I'd like our chances of doing that a lot better if we were healthy and playing our best ball at the end of the season. As it stands, I'd feel a lot better with the 3 seed and HCA for as long as possible.
A loss is not a loss. Not all games are created equal. And that game in New Orleans could, indeed, have been the key to the post-season.
And we can do what, exactly, about that now? Or are you just trying desperately to prove that you were right?
Meh... we could have just beat Houston last time around, and have the tie breaker to win the division too without needing Houston to lose. We could have ended up with the #2 seed too if we gave a crap and actually didn't play scrubs against Denver. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. In that scenario though, we would play against NO, which IMO is a worst matchup for us than playing Dallas.
You're still stuck with the whole 'seeding really matters' theory. Tim Duncan knees have more saying on the playoffs than HCA or seeding. The only goal of the regular season is to make the playoff. We accomplished that task. The rest is pretty much rubbish.
You rode the short bus to school, didn't you?
Easier to attack me than defend your own argument? I thought so.
a loss to a division opponent always matters more than other losses. however, NEXT game against NO is most important.
Dang, this had me loling all over the place...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
