Reply With Quote
Manu wanted to play... it wasn't his decision not to...
/thread
Pop underestimating MEM cost us the series. He should have played Manu and used Splitter from the first game. But Parker also underestimated MEM too. When he heard Barkley pick MEM, he said, "Really, he picked MEM. I got to talk to Charles." What a waste - looks like Mavs are going to take down LA.
Manu wanted to play... it wasn't his decision not to...
/thread
Pop takes care of his players plus like u said it was notManu's call and the injuries were different Manu' was a sprain Rondo's was a dislocated elbow,sit was nasty but all they had to do was put it back in place, their was some discomfort but he was good to go. What the celts did was put Rondo's career in jeopardy, maybe they win this game but they also risk losing Rondo for the rest of the series.
It is all water under the bridge. There is nothing that can't be done now. It is also an assumption that the Spurs could have won the first game with Manu. If Manu would have played and they would have lost, Memphis could have probably swept the Spurs. for they did lose 3 and won 2 with Manu playing... No reason to cry over spill milk. It is done and past. We need to move on.
A big difference is that Rondo's injury happened in the heat of an important game, and he stayed in. Manu's injury happened in a meaningless game, and he was pulled out. His coach sat him for the game. See what Rondo goes in game 4 without the luxury of adrenaline.
So you think Manu would have played even if Pop said no.
Manu would just run out on the court and override what Pop said.
What nobody is bringing up is what a crap coach Spoelstra is. I would've fouled Rondo on purpose every time down the floor and made him shoot free throws one handed until Rivers had no choice but to take him out.
No the spurs would not have won the series. The spurs could not beat Memphis in the other games that manu did play going 2-3 and needing a last second miracle shot and overtime in one of those games that they trailed for most of the game.
Memphis was the better team.
Memphis is going to also beat OKC.
Exactly. I said the same thing in the game thread last night. Rondo was clearly favoring his bad arm and dribbling around with one hand. The Heat for some reason didn't jump on him and pressure the guy and make him use his bad arm. They also know Rondo is a horrendous free throw shooter (with two good arms) but no one put him on his ass when he came down the lane for free layups. Shame on Spo for not employing the "sweep the leg" mentality. I doubt Memphis would have let Ginobili get away with that without a hard foul of some kind if they knew he was injured.
Pop should've played Manu game 1. Manu wanted to play. Shane Battier said so himself, that Game 1 win gave the Grizzlies belief in themselves. It was the most important game of the series. We win that first game, it's a completely different series.
Heck, we win the first two, we're up 2-0 and even if Memphis IS the better team 1-12, not too many teams recover from 2-0 down in a best of 7. The psychology would've been way different.
I blame it on Pop's arrogance that the team can just win without their best player.
You can say that you can play all you want, but with Pop he always decides.
Pop understimated Memphis and thought that Manu coming back would be enough to win game 2 and steal one in Memphis, he was wrong, end of story.
This.
I think even the team expected him to play, and was a little deflated when he didn't. I remember some of them making comments about it after the loss, talking about how it wasn't what they had expected, but they just had to go out and play.
Gambles very often don't pay off, otherwise it wouldn't be a gamble.
Good point. Pop thinks he's so friggin' cute with his little shenanigans he pulls and doesn't stop to realize what affect they are having on the team. Like last season when he thought he'd be cute and bench Tim Duncan against the raptors when the team had finally rounded the corner and was getting on a roll (all with Duncan playing limited minutes). Well, most of us know how that one turned out (backfired in a big way).
one is 33 and the other one is 25. you do the math
One is also relatively fragile and the other isn't.
apples and oranges, people. if manu got hurt in a game 3, down 2-0, he would have played, just like Rondo. but game 1, before the series even starts, is a different scenario.
Pop, like many fans here, thought his team could handle Memphis for one game without Manu.
hindsight is 20/20, but don't act like y'all knew it would end this way, cuz y'all didn't.
And btw, get it over it and move on.
Full of fail
Fail is strong on this one.
Manu played - few more people showed up
this guy is probably a remnant of the now defunct Church of Tony.
SinBAD, you must think all people are the same as all the bottles of coke in a box of 24.
Also, Manu doesn't dictate who plays or who doesn't after an injury. You may as well have asked, "Jason Terry hit 9 out of 10 3-pointers. Why can't Manu?" (Were you also going "Wah, Wah, Wah" like a lot of the Spurs fans there in S.A.). That would be your speed of thinking.
Eight. It's eight years.
speak for yourself. Grizz were a team the Spurs should've taken very seriouusly. Manu should've been dressed at least so that if the Spurs were struggling they could put him in. i know that i and others on here felt that way.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
