Grantland Article: The Spurs and Mortality

[stéphane]

Tiago ain't overachieving...
He's a gifted pick'n roll post player with soft hands and solid footwork (always has been) and it's enough to be good in the NBA due to the so so level of frontcourt players nowadays.

[z0sa]

How many #1 seeds have played #8 seeds in history? hunreds

How many of those #1s have lost?

It is historic

More than #1 seeds have lost to #8 seeds. See the 1999 playoffs.

Like I said, things stop becoming "historic!1111" when they start happening multiple times. You lose and are a hater.

[cheguevara]

let me give you a hint, NBA.com ranks Spurs failure as #3 upset in NBA history
http://allball.blogs.nba.com/2011/04...ayoff-history/

[z0sa]

let me give you a hint, NBA.com ranks Spurs failure as #3 upset in NBA history
http://allball.blogs.nba.com/2011/04...ayoff-history/

you can say whatever you want, you haven't argued any of my points and have only pointed to #1 over #8. When you decide to study the facts and present an argument contrary to mine, I'll be waiting.

EDIT: btw you are a huge liar. That article does NOT rank the Spurs failure as #3 upset all time. It simply ranks the 8 over 1 upsets.

lol lying to save face

[cheguevara]

^ read the article. You can count similar failures with one hand.

not historic

[z0sa]

^ read the article. You can count similar failures with one hand.

not historic

you are a huge liar. That article does NOT rank the Spurs failure as #3 upset all time. It simply ranks the 8 over 1 upsets.

lol lying to save face

[cheguevara]

Sounds like the recipe for a first-round sweep, doesn’t it? Except as we all know, that’s not what happened, as the Grizzlies dropped the Spurs in six games and became just the fourth 8-seed to topple a 1 since the playoffs expanded to 16 teams in 1984.

z0sa

not historic

[z0sa]

LOL at any dumbass who thought the Spurs would sweep the Grizzlies.

Nice job trying to lie and avoid answering my arguments through this thread, though.

[ElNono]

That article makes some good points and a lot of really bad ones.

this

[z0sa]

NBA.com ranks Spurs failure as #3 upset in NBA history

I'm done derailing this thread, please continue with the discussion of the OP friends and neighbors.

[GSH]

Well, that guy certainly wrote alot of words.

Grantland is Bill Simmons' creation, and Simmons has always shown great respect for the Spurs. Rather disappointing that he's associated with this rambling, incoherent pile of excrement.

No, there are some really intense basketball articles there. Really. I left out some of the other gems by the same author, like:

Does Sasha Vujacic "Deserve" Maria Sharapova?
Buzzworthy NBA Names, and
The Self-Aware NBA

And then there's Chuck Klosterman who weaves together articles like:
What Ever Happened to the Triangle Offense? (Okay)
So What If Mountain Dew Can Melt Mice?
The Incredibly, Insanely, Undeniably Awesome Return of Van Halen, and
Frankenstein's Monster - A second-by-second analysis of Edgar Winter's finest nine minutes.

I guess all the good Internet niches were taken, so Simmons decided to go with what's left.

[cheguevara]

I know you don't, since multiple teams have lost to 8th seeds before the Spurs did. It's not historic anymore the 2nd, 3rd or 20th or 100th time something happens. Notable? Sure. But not at a level to be considered 'historic.'

it only happened 4 times genius

[cheguevara]

I'm done derailing this thread, please continue with the discussion of the OP friends and neighbors.

what bigger upset is there?

even Spurstalk agreed:
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=178605&page=2

[manufan10]

it only happened 4 times genius

You forgot to bold the 2nd or 3rd times too.

[TJastal]

Geez, ppl are still overrating last year's grizzlies team? They couldn't even get to the WCF (both Dallas & OKC were better) and we're all supposed to believe they were some great ass team?

I guess if it makes you all feel better about losing in the 1st round and the fact a team purposely went out and lost games in order to secure a seed to play us.

[cheguevara]

Geez, ppl are still overrating last year's grizzlies team? They couldn't even get to the WCF (both Dallas & OKC were better) and we're all supposed to believe they were some great ass team?

I guess if it makes you all feel better about losing in the 1st round and the fact a team purposely went out and lost games in order to secure a seed to play us.

[spurs10]

what bigger upset is there?

even Spurstalk agreed:
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=178605&page=2

The Spurs being the most winning team of all team sports for a decade or more is quite a bit bigger an upset than us losing any round of the playoffs with a one armed Manu and 1 1/2 legged Tim. Baseball, Football, Soccer....yep....the Spurs in little San Antonio...... How many times in history have the defending champs been swept and curbstomped for...I can't remember the exact figure...but it was truly historical...as in 'hasn't happened multiple times.' The Grizzlies were a pretty good team..took OKC to 7..?? We flamed out in the last game of the regular season...a real drag, but not that surprising. Without Manu, we probably don't go far this year either...though TP has been off the chart...

[LongtimeSpursFan]

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...-antonio-spurs

Carles in Charge: The Spurs and Mortality
When winning just doesn't feel right


By Carles on February 21, 2012



The Spurs are 23-9, good for the second-best record in the Western Conference. They have wildly overachieved again. But when you watch the Spurs night in and night out, each game feels like a struggle with mortality. For years, they have been tabbed the most boring team in the league, and now it finally seems as if collective boredom might end up killing off its fan base. When deciding to confront the idea of your own imminent death, you never really know if you should celebrate the will of the human spirit that lives to fight for another day, or if you should just tell yourself that you are at peace with the legacy that you left behind.

Watching Tim Duncan makes me feel that way. And even though the team is winning, nobody's really thinking that it's going to add up to much in the playoffs.

While large-market teams can inspire the biggest stories and offer a context to extend the most general metaphors, the most vulnerable fan experiences are constructed in small markets, where the bouncing of Ping-Pong balls and competency of the front office are actually important to the city's economy and iden y.

The funny thing about the Spurs is that they aren't even really dying — at least not when it comes to wins and losses — so the front office can't just put this generation to rest and start over. Sure, there are those sad moments when Tim Duncan gets his shots blocked by marginally talented young guys, but the team is thriving with a solid squadron built around Tony Parker. They've even already undergone the annual potentially catastrophic Manu Ginobili injury.

The Spurs manage to excel in the regular season because they always seem to find a handful of overachievers to supplement their Big Three. In fact, every time a Spurs bench player overachieves, it is tempting to want to celebrate the success of the Spurs as an organization that can turn "moderately skilled, character guys" into legitimate NBA players. Role players like Kawhi Leonard, Danny Green, and Tiago Splitter have all exceeded early season expectations, sort of like how Gary Neal, George Hill, and DeJuan Blair all have in recent years. But these guys have a tendency to no-show in the playoffs, and the emotionally manipulative ride toward the postseason crash begins again next season.

Does anyone really think the Spurs will win a playoff series? They were the no. 1 seed in last year's playoffs. They could be the no. 1 seed this year. This, in itself, is impressive, but when your benchmark is winning championships, what could be worse than a team that plays well in the regular season and then inevitably flames out in the playoffs to a much younger and cooler team?

Perhaps one of the downsides of the Duncan era is that the Spurs haven't branded their team as a hot-spot destination that was only 'a piece away' from winning a le. They cultivate strength in accepting that they are what they are. Acknowledging that they were 'a piece away' would diminish the fans' faith in San Antonio's most important celebrities and heroes. It's hard to tell a city that a franchise formula that served as the foundation of its own iden y has flaws that might prevent the team from ever winning again.

While most cities are driven to acquire and hype big-name stars, San Antonians would consider role players like Bruce Bowen and Avery Johnson to be just as crucial to the team and the city's iden y. San Antonio is the biggest small town in Texas and identifies itself as a working-class city. It isn't as trendy as Austin, as dehumanizing as the Houston sprawl, or as 'everything's bigger in Texas' as Dallas. San Antonio consists of loops of suburbia created by the Texan desire for new money to escape from the antiquated inner city for 'more acreage,' meaning that there is no cultural center in San Antonio. Theoretical cultural ins utions like the River Walk and the Alamo are basically packaged tourist destinations. Since Tim Duncan was drafted, the Spurs have become the cultural center of the city because Duncan was able to add substance to the projected ideals of David Robinson, who largely existed as a ringless figure of morality.

The lack of widespread interest in the Spurs isn't surprising, because fans have the consumer right to use imaginary franchise classism to guide their interest in specific teams. That just means a small-market team has the challenge of convincing its fans that the team 'belongs,' and its fans aren't just an afterthought in the relevant tier of the NBA. After winning four championships and witnessing the greatest power forward of all time play on a nightly basis, the Spurs and their fans have constructed a championship psyche to overshadow any small-market insecurities.

Most small-market NBA teams deploy various marketing gimmicks in order to 'get fans in the seats' and generate organic local interest in the team. Since they don't have a local media that can generate Linsanity levels of buzz to increase the profile of their team, they must offer unlimited crappy food, 'free swag,' and other upper deck promotions to add to the fan-perceived value of the team experience. However, the most important idea to be able to sell their fans on is the idea of 'hope.' Since the Spurs are trending downward, they aren't built on a traditional upward trending construct of NBA hope that teams like Oklahoma City, Minnesota, and even Washington are.

Since the Spurs have already matured into a championship team, their current iteration of hope relies on constructing a narrative around savvy veterans who were able to overcome physical limitations in order to beat younger talent. Every other incubating franchise would love to achieve an imminent mid-round playoff exit where its team 'went down fighting.' When the Spurs go down fighting, it's just depressing and confusing to see those same figures fall after already achieving the pinnacle of basketball achievement.

The Spurs are a unique 'small-market' team that operates as the only major professional franchise in the seventh-largest city in the United States. The cross-pollination of superstars with new and buzz-worthy markets has led to the Spurs' omission from more games than usual on this year's national TV schedule. Do mass-market fans really want to watch a team dying right before their eyes?

When a small-market team is confronting its own franchise mortality, it automatically becomes a sad portrait of impending irrelevancy. The Spurs are somehow sadder than the Charlotte Bobcats because you can't just forget about them altogether. Whether it is the Spurs' recent playoff purgatory, Dwight Howard holding the Magic hostage, or the New Orleans Hornets establishing themselves as the league's premier free agent non-destination, all doomed small-market scenarios make fans wonder if they will ever feel any semblance of glory, pride, or even just marketable hope ever again.

If the Spurs can't be celebrated for fighting against the imminent death of their golden era, can we just watch them and celebrate their legacy? Since Tim Duncan is unlikely to ever have a 'Look at Me, I Need Your Validation' Farewell Tour, the Spurs as we know them will disappear before we even knew we were supposed to appreciate them. We are quietly watching Duncan's Last Stand, and instead of rooting for rising teams to put the final nail in the Spurs' coffin, we should be rooting to see one of the NBA's last relics of historical greatness succeed one last time against artificially created buzz franchises and misguided marquee-player movement.

This last paragraph seems to contradict everything the writer wrote. Does he not suggest that fans should come to appreciate what Duncan and the Spurs have and or will accomplish as opposed to those other high-marquee teams?

[DAF86]

I don't know how this guy can be so sure we will fail in the playoffs.

[jjktkk]

Geez, ppl are still overrating last year's grizzlies team? They couldn't even get to the WCF (both Dallas & OKC were better) and we're all supposed to believe they were some great ass team?

I guess if it makes you all feel better about losing in the 1st round and the fact a team purposely went out and lost games in order to secure a seed to play us.

No, it was a horrible playoff exit. #1 seeds should never get ousted by a 8 seed imo. Having said that, Memphis was not your typical 8th seed. Eliminating a #1 seed, and taking OKC to 7 seven games, is not what an 8th seed normally does. Which, given Memphis's playoff run last year, it was not a shocker that Memphis was a preseason pick this year, to contend in the West.

[itzsoweezee]

Carles is the guy behind Hipster Runoff and is, in general, hilarious.

[TJastal]

No, it was a horrible playoff exit. #1 seeds should never get ousted by a 8 seed imo. Having said that, Memphis was not your typical 8th seed. Eliminating a #1 seed, and taking OKC to 7 seven games, is not what an 8th seed normally does. Which, given Memphis's playoff run last year, it was not a shocker that Memphis was a preseason pick this year, to contend in the West.

Your point might actually have legitimacy if Memphis had gotten past the 2nd round to the WCF. Sure they tanked a few games at the end, so maybe you can argue they were really a 6th seed. That's about as far as it goes. They were a good team, but not great. The loss was more about the spurs than the grizzlies tbh. Specifically, the spurs having no rim protection in the paint. And we all know that story.

[jag]

Well, that guy certainly wrote alot of words.

Grantland is Bill Simmons' creation, and Simmons has always shown great respect for the Spurs. Rather disappointing that he's associated with this rambling, incoherent pile of excrement.

Yep, a lot of words with very little substance.

The writer seems somewhat confused. The last paragraph seems like it was meant for a different article.

[Killakobe81]

This last paragraph seems to contradict everything the writer wrote. Does he not suggest that fans should come to appreciate what Duncan and the Spurs have and or will accomplish as opposed to those other high-marquee teams?

Not really ...Though I did not like the article, he muses on why the Spurs are tragic and why they are not embraced nationally. The last paragraph is a call for fans to appreciate the best PF in NBA history and a team of overachievers. The paragraphs before were an examination on why the team is not getting recognition nationally, including the flameouts in recent playoffs as an example.

I just think it was far too negative. instead of spending more time on WHY they should be embraced he spent most of saying why they are not. I dont think it's contradictory the story just has no balance, since he is saying we SHOULD appreciate the spurs ...

[jjktkk]

Your point might actually have legitimacy if Memphis had gotten past the 2nd round to the WCF. Sure they tanked a few games at the end, so maybe you can argue they were really a 6th seed. That's about as far as it goes. They were a good team, but not great. The loss was more about the spurs than the grizzlies tbh. Specifically, the spurs having no rim protection in the paint. And we all know that story.

My point was Memphis was a good team, better than their 8th seed ranking last year. This by no means excuses the Spur's putrid performance against them in the playoffs, but if the Grizz get Randolph back and get in the playoffs, no one in the West would look forward to matching up with them.