Reply With Quote
Last years team had 4 players who were poor defensively
This years team has 3 who are poor defensively
HUGE difference huh
And most of their starters.
Last years team had 4 players who were poor defensively
This years team has 3 who are poor defensively
HUGE difference huh
Lamar Odom vs Manu Ginobili??? I'd take Ginobili. Granted, Odom is an important piece of the Lakers team, but Ginobili is a better player overall.
I'd take Odom because he has been healthy for two straight years and it is becoming clear that Ginobili cannot be relied upon to be healthy for an entire season.
But healthy Ginobili is probably better
Fixed
Which Spurs team? The Spurs team where Ginobili was playing on a broken ankle that had Finley and Udoka playing the center spot over Oberto? That same Spurs team that had Jacque Vaughn playing back up point guard?
Or the Spurs team that has totally transformed with the new additions?
Which one?
2009/ 2010 Spurs will be completely different than those recently injury plagued old slow teams of the Spurs from the past 2 years.
I thought you would be smarter than that.
Your just a blind and ignorant Laker fan. It's like arguing that the sky is blue and the grass is green.
The Spurs' make-up has changed completey. No sense in denying it.
Coming from the guy starting threads like this talking saying his team who was first round fodder will beat the defending champions because they added a 35 year old role player. Hypocrisy much?
^ lol
Yeah since they just added Antonio McDyess and kept everyone else?
Wow your clueless as well.
That's like you saying a Celtic fan is stupid for thinking their team has a leginament shot at the le next year. Since they just added a 35 year old role player.
Totally disregarding KG's injury ( Like you are with Manu Ginobili and the addition of Richard Jefferson)
Hopefully the Spur and Laker fans will have a great rivalry again. We sucked this past year.
People treat Duncan and Ginobili like they are the same players they were in '05/'07. The reality is they aren't, and it's because of this that the Spurs have not made it back to the Finals since.
They need their Big 3 to be dominant to go all the way. What the Spurs have now is good enough to make it to the WCF maybe, but not good enough to truly compete with the big boys. For that they would need some help from Father Time.
Last year gooden was the "savior.'' this year its McDyess??
Celtics have a shot because they have the basically same team as their 08 championship team. The Spurs defense is not even close to as good as 07
Actually Ginobili had his best year in 2008. Then he got hurt in the playoffs against the Suns.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/player...s?playerId=272
Tim Duncan has been the same player since 2005. As a matter of fact he was having his best year since 2003 before he got a severe case of knee tendonosis.
To prove my point after his injury, he only avg. 16.5 points a game in March on .46 percent shooting, the whole year before that he was putting up his best numbers in years.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/player...g?playerId=215
Spurs haven't won since 2007 because of injuries at bad times. It happens. It's not because the Big Three suck now.
I will admit even with our big 3 healthy this past year, we wouldn't have gotten by the lakers.
With the additions the Spurs have made and if Spurs as fortunate as the Lakers were last year in regard of injuries. Spurs will be the biggest threat.
Again your points are horrible Dr. House.
i agree, but the OP is being a dumb ...and i like to argue
You don't make any sense. Spurs have better defensive players now than they did in 2007 ( outside of Bruce).
Spurs have had the same team since 2007, they were just hurt the past two seasons. Now the Spurs have kept their best defensive players IQ wise and talent wise( outside of bowen). And have replaced the players outside of Manu Tim and Tony with players able to be versatile defenders.
The spurs put themselves in the best position to compete with the likes of the Lakers. There is no doubt about that.
They've gotten better. But I wouldn't crown them yet.
I believe this is a little bit of premature ejaculation.
I don't know why people are saying the Spurs have the best starting 5 or assuming Manu won't resume his role off the bench.
Manu (when healthy) > Lamar (when he shows up)
That was the whole point of the thread. I never said Spurs leap frogged the Lakers. Yet Laker fans in denial refuse to admit the Spurs improved significantly.
For that I thank you for being one of the only rational Laker fans on this board.
And best of luck next year.
the Spurs and the Lakers too. You dumb s think your teams can hold us off, but you're sadly mistaken. It's ALL about the Blazers from now until the next 10 years!
I don't think you'll be laughing so much as soon as we play you next season.
Please. You always get up for us. Then as soon as we leave Portland you assume your Chinese firedrill approach to NBA Basketball. Yer Charlotte East, I mean West.
Christ, if you ever endeavored the other 80 games like you do those few in Oregon against us you could possibly amount to something. But, like every other team who has a hard on for the Lakers, but, no self respect, yer hopeless.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
