Bill Simmons still believes in the Warriors!

[letmk]

Bull , bull , bull . The guy is a disingenuous ing clown. He had a column last year about the 20 most fluke NBA champions and all four of the Spurs les were in the top 20 (2, 10, 13, 14, actually).

He did the exact same thing all last season. He doesn't talk about the Spurs the whole reg season, completely dismisses them, gets on the bandwagon right around the middle of round 2 when it's impossible to ignore them any longer and makes it sound like he knew the whole time they'd be great, pretends to be a fan when it looks for sure they're going to the Finals, and then the second they get knocked down, he writes about how glad somebody else is going to the finals because it's more fun now.

It's been very obvious that he doesn't watch the Spurs at all during the regular season. He didn't even have Kawhi Leonard on his Top-50 trade value column (he outed Jalen Rose, as a Spurs hater for influencing him). He said in his podcasts that Ginobili played terribly the whole playoffs (he was great against the Lakers) and especially in Game 6 against the Warriors (where he had 11 assists). He said Duncan wasn't doing anything in the playoffs (he's averaging 17.5 and 9.3).

He said the Warriors were the better team after Game 4 and that they should've been up 3-1 (not sure how they didn't steal Game 4 any differently than we stole Game 1) and that he still thought they'd win the series. He picked Memphis here because he "loves that match-up for them."

Please. It's so predictable. Once the Spurs get up 2-0 or 3-1, he'll change his tune, pretend like he knew they'd win all along, make some excuses for his ty pick and immediately pick the Heat in 5.

Can't agree more. This is what I've been saying all along. With 4 championships, he has to acknowledge Tim and the Spurs to some extent. But he will use any opportunity to insinuate and downplay the achievements.

And I heard the "Warriors should be up 3-1" comment as well. If you want to use hypos or hindsight, at least you need to use it both ways. You can't just say that Warriors 'give away' game 1, but do not acknowledge that Spurs give away game 4.

Basically he is an 'intelligent' hater. In this sense, I like Hollinger much better. Granted, he relied on his PER-related data too much. But his thinking process is that his data doesn't 'like' a player/team, then he said that player/team is not that great. While BS starts with dislike/hate, then tries to find out reasons to justify the hate. He is quite knowledgeable and eloquent (at least his writing), so if you just read one article of his, it seems to make sense (unlike many incompetent writers).

But if you look at a series of his articles, you can see that he is that kind of judge who makes a verdict before the evidence presents itself. He just uses evidence to justify his foregone conclusion. While the unbiased judge should not have conclusions before hearing all the evidence.

[ohmwrecker]

Still?!

[Obstructed_View]

Oh and at Simmons talking about how Jalen hates on Manu behind the scenes.

Eat Jalen

Nick Van Exel told him it was Manu throwing towels while he was doing his sideline report.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Bill Simmons: After Game 2, I feel both of these teams are equal



http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=9300579

[Johnny RIngo]

OKC was about as good as we were last year, Memphis isn't + no ref help.

I think last year's Spurs/Thunder would mop the floor with this Memphis team. I don't we're as good as we were last year as well. Good enough to beat this overrated Memphis team though.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I've been reading Bill Simmons since 2000, and I think he has made a mistake by going on television with those guys - he is not very good at half-time soundbite media. His takes are generally quite deep and involved and he doesn't have time to get them out when he has 5 seconds to say what he means. He'd actually be much better as a second colour commentator ("special comments guy") during the game - I've heard him do that and he does it quite well.

In complete contrast with his half-time performances, the podcasts that he does through Grantland are fantastic, and his writing on the big picture elements of the NBA is superb.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Can't agree more. This is what I've been saying all along. With 4 championships, he has to acknowledge Tim and the Spurs to some extent. But he will use any opportunity to insinuate and downplay the achievements.

And I heard the "Warriors should be up 3-1" comment as well. If you want to use hypos or hindsight, at least you need to use it both ways. You can't just say that Warriors 'give away' game 1, but do not acknowledge that Spurs give away game 4.

Basically he is an 'intelligent' hater. In this sense, I like Hollinger much better. Granted, he relied on his PER-related data too much. But his thinking process is that his data doesn't 'like' a player/team, then he said that player/team is not that great. While BS starts with dislike/hate, then tries to find out reasons to justify the hate. He is quite knowledgeable and eloquent (at least his writing), so if you just read one article of his, it seems to make sense (unlike many incompetent writers).

But if you look at a series of his articles, you can see that he is that kind of judge who makes a verdict before the evidence presents itself. He just uses evidence to justify his foregone conclusion. While the unbiased judge should not have conclusions before hearing all the evidence.

That's all nice, but Simmons doesn't hate the Spurs. He is often complimentary to our team on his podcasts and in his Grantland articles. I'm not sure why he is coming across as a hater on TV, but he's not.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

I like Simmons a lot, but he's been constantly against the Spurs in these playoffs.

It's weird. He's usually big on the Spurs in years prior.

[RD2191]

Simmons has been sucking some major spurs opponent this post season. Pretty much giving the Spurs no credit and basically saying the other team beat themselves.

[letmk]

That's all nice, but Simmons doesn't hate the Spurs. He is often complimentary to our team on his podcasts and in his Grantland articles. I'm not sure why he is coming across as a hater on TV, but he's not.

I didn't mean he hates the Spurs like KG hates Lebron and the Heat. I mean he has his conclusion first (like the Spurs is old, Dubs or Grizzlies are better, etc.), then finds evidence to support it.

While Hollinger's way is to try to find the conclusion after the data and analysis. I'm not saying Hollinger always got it right than Simmons, or even his PER stuff is that "scientific" or useful. But at least Hollinger does not make up his mind beforehand.

[spurs1990]

Antonio Davis said on TV that the Spurs style is to play a slow-down halfcourt game and that the Grizzlies need to push the pace against them.

If Davis actually vocalized this thought on live air he's officially 10 times dumber than I thought he was.

[Budkin]

He was saying great things about Duncan after the game even though he was still sucking off Memphis.

[Obstructed_View]

Simmons is really trying to force the narrative that the Grizzlies figured something out, and even the rest of ESPN knows the Spurs just got flat in the fourth quarter. I have yet to see anyone give the vaunted Memphis defense credit for the Spurs scoring 9 in the 4th quarter, though that will probably be the spin by tomorrow.

BTW, someone tweet Tim Legler and tell him that Matt Bonner's the reason the Spurs gave up the lead.

[therealtruth]

Jalen Rose sounded like an idiot. Winning a Pulitzer Prize for flopping? I hope he's just playing stupid.

[hater]

he's an unknowledgeable bufoon. that's all there is.

he sucks and he's stupid

[hater]

Jalen Rose sounded like an idiot. Winning a Pulitzer Prize for flopping? I hope he's just playing stupid.

I like that dumb Simmons finally was able to try to correct somebody. He immediate went to correct Jalen that you don't win pulitzers for acting

funny thing is Simmons is the one that needs correction everytime he opens his mouth

[mudyez]

Don't know how to properly embed twitter stuff (help?), but Bill has this to say:

"San Antonio fans are funny - if you don't pick their Spurs to win a series, they honestly believe this means you HATE the Spurs."

"As the chairman of the "Tim Duncan is the best player of his generation" committee, I'm ineligible for any "You hate the Spurs!" theories."

[hater]

why is this thread still being bumped

[Budkin]

he's an unknowledgeable bufoon. that's all there is.

he sucks and he's stupid

His game diaries are pretty hilarious but he doesn't belong on TV.

[T Park]

Simmons is really trying to force the narrative that the Grizzlies figured something out, and even the rest of ESPN knows the Spurs just got flat in the fourth quarter. I have yet to see anyone give the vaunted Memphis defense credit for the Spurs scoring 9 in the 4th quarter, though that will probably be the spin by tomorrow.

BTW, someone tweet Tim Legler and tell him that Matt Bonner's the reason the Spurs gave up the lead.

Around the Horn forcing the narrative by Pablo S Torre and Bomani Jones. Torre "Ya know Memphis was down 2-0 to the Clippers, and these same Spurs were up 2-0 last year."

Bill Plaschke of all people called him out and finally said "Spurs are better than the Clippers and the Grizzlies arent close to the Thunder"

[cd98]

How hard is it to beat the Clippers two in a row when Blake is injured and can barely walk? If Griffin were healthy, the Clippers probably win game 5 and it goes the distance. Heck, the Clippers won two years ago when healthy, probably would have done it this year as well.