Reply With Quote
That is true but it depends in this hypothetical matchup would both teams be coached by Jackson? Shaq did get mentally stronger with Jackson but he still had his moments where he could be provoked like that fight with Miller and Oakley.
^^Shaq was a much different player from a mental standpoint after being coached by Jackson, though, tbh..
The 2000 and 2001 seasons with a healthy, in shape and motivated Shaq was unfair for the rest of the league..
That is true but it depends in this hypothetical matchup would both teams be coached by Jackson? Shaq did get mentally stronger with Jackson but he still had his moments where he could be provoked like that fight with Miller and Oakley.
Shaq discusses how his free throws never cost a game. To his defense, I never recall hack a Shaq actually working during the Lakers run. This is what worried me about Dwight Howard. For the first time in my life, I saw the hack a center type strategy work beautifully. He cost us games. There's no way this guy takes any team without a Lebron or Durant to a championship.
The guy sucks major on the line.
MJ lost his ass a few years before breaking though.
And still, you begged him to stay, to impregnate your frail white womb with his tainted gorilla seed.
I dont think its common for a team to beat the two best players both having another top 10 and a top 20 player..
I didnt beg him. I wasnt up there helping with the billboards.
One of the best. Top 3-5 ever.
The shadow of Amy & Bats torturing gay boy Duncan is a powerful visual.
Good morning, Arizona!!!
Cmon Seppe, you can't deny how good the 2014 Spurs is compared to the greatest.
The 2014 spurs are getting more and more overated. People seemed to forget that they lost 3 games vs the Mavs and two games against the thunder (both dominating perfomances by the thunder).
The spurs have weaknesses that could be exploited by a certain type of team. Teams that rarely double and sticky to their man on d are those that cause the spurs problems because they can't swing the ball around for open buckets as easily. The spurs only response is to give the ball to Parker for one on ones which is not a championship winning formula.
The 92 bulls would give the spurs serious problems. The 12 thunder would still cause the spurs problems. The old pistons teams under the old rules or the 99 spurs team will cause issues.
The spurs had two dominating series. Let's not pretend they had 4.
Amb, my boy you on fire. Another solid take where you take the opposing view from the consensus of the board. I am enjoying your takes here and the reasoning behind them. This Spurs team was extremely well coached and play with some of the best cohesion on offense I have seen since the 80's ... But let's not get carried away with the praise.
They also dominated OKC in the games they won except game 6 which they won in OKC without TP for the entire second half
The Dallas series was a kick in the ass. From Game 7 on the Spurs were a rapetrain. They set the record for most blowouts in post season history, that's not being overrated dude
So in 6 games, Spurs dominated 3, got dominated in 2, and won a very close game. That is hardly killing OKC. It's almost like the 05 series vs. the Pistons. The Spurs dominated 2, got dominated in 2, won 2 close ones (well, Game 7 opened up in the last quarter), and lost another one that was kinda close. I wouldn't say the Spurs dominated the Pistons in that series. If anything, they were very close.
The Dallas series was a kick in the ass. From Game 7 on the Spurs were a rapetrain. They set the record for most blowouts in post season history, that's not being overrated dude
And I don't buy that "the Dallas series woke up the Spurs" crap. Is the playoffs not enough of a wakeup? A veteran team like the Spurs knows how to play in the playoffs. The Spurs won a blowout game, lost a blowout game, and lost two nail biters in that series. I never thought the Mavs had much of a chance in the series, and I always thought the Spurs would have won, but it drives home the point that the Spurs are not the best of all time material, that they can be challenged by well coached teams who have the discipline to stay at home on defense.
The OKC series shows the weakness of the Spurs, in that teams that have athletes who can double and recover quickly to disrupt passes can beat the Spurs. OKC is just not a disciplined enough team to get it done. OKC with Carlisle as a coach will likely beat the Spurs a majority of the time, and a team like that wouldn't be called best of all time by anyone.
The issue is, it seems like people still do not understand why the Spurs dominated the Heat and to an extent the Blazers. The logic is that the Heat is a two-time defending champion led by one of the best players the league has ever seen in his prime, and they were thoroughly embarrassed by the Spurs, so the Spurs MUST be one of the best teams of all time. The thing is, the Heat is a team that relies heavily on a trapping defense to cover up their weakness in their interior defense. What better way to beat a trap than to whip around passes. The Heat do not have the personnel to handle a penetrating Parker without collapsing their defense, nor they have the ability to handle players like Ginobili, and Duncan one on one. The only person who can handle Kawhi 1-1 is Lebron, but it just so happens Lebron is their main cog in their trapping frentic defense. Having Kawhi go ultra aggressive forced Lebron to stay home, and the entire Heat defense falls apart.
This type of offense works in today's game because teams can no longer have bruisers camped in the paint, as the spreadout game forces defensive big men out of the paint. The Spurs offense will not have as much success under the old rules because defenses do not have to entirely collapse to stop the Spurs' penetration as there is this 7' 250lb waiting in the lane. A team like the 92 Bulls can put a Pippen on Kawhi, BJ Armstrong on Parker, and let Jordan roam the passing lanes (or switch Pippen and Jordan), the Spurs will have to force it into a Duncan vs. Grant matchup, which is more or less a wash at this stage of Duncan's career. Duncan may get his 25 and 12, but he is no longer the force that requires constant double teams with an adequate post defender on him.
Even the 96 Sonics, with Payton on Parker, McMillan on Kawhi, and Kemp guarding the lane, the Spurs will have some trouble having those nice open looks and clean passes.
That's the other thing, people talk about the Spurs passing, but they generally do not talk about how crisp those passes are. What I mean is, the Spurs will pass the ball to exactly the right spot where the receiving player can immediately shoot, make another pass, or dribble. There's no wasted motion, and is really impressive. That said, under the old rules, with a hand constantly at your hip and people tugging on your jersey, those passes will be a lot less effective.
I am not saying the Spurs stunk, I think they are a fantastic team that really doesn't have much compe ion outside of the Thunder at this point. The Spurs are the only team with good talent and coaching on the same team, all the other teams seems to be missing one or the other. What I am saying is, the Spurs are beneficiaries of today's rules, and there are weaknesses that can be exploited. This is not a team where you just don't know what to do with, like the 01 Lakers or the 86 Celtics.
Comparing the 2014 Spurs to any team from the 90s is like comparing a brand new Blu-Ray disc(the pinnacle and end of the line before streaming takes over) to an old VHS with some of the tape in the back sticking out, tbh..
I tried to watch a game from the 90s the other day, I literally almost vomited, I took it off and watched an ISIS beheading instead, tbh..
Don't compare that lightning in a bottle Mavs team to our Spurs brah.
it was very on and off. the spurs at their best would have crushed anybody else at their best, imo.
we struggled vs dallas for the most part, but made portland look like a joke. OKC had 2 easy wins against us, both in OKC. we had 3 comfy wins against OKC and a tough knockout game on their own court.
games 1/2 vs miami were muddy games, but 3-5 were clinics.
90's was pretty ugly. 2014 Spurs closest comparison is the 80's Celts And from what I hear (i am much too young to remember) dem 77 Blazers ...
I tried to watch a game from the 90s the other day, I literally almost vomited, I took it off and watched an ISIS beheading instead, tbh..
Comparing the game that has been around for 100 years to modern technology is just idiotic. The game has evolved many times, and has matured in its form for quite a while. What has changed since are mostly rule changes that forces team to play one way or the other to make the game more aesthetically pleasing for the average fan.
I tried to watch a game from the 90s the other day, I literally almost vomited, I took it off and watched an ISIS beheading instead, tbh..
Sure, 90s ball is full of isos and thug-ball, but that was what the rules favoured back in the day. The new rules favour ball rotation, movement and shooting. The European influence is strong, and the game is similar to what WNBA does as well, albeit being played at a much higher level.
I don't do that compare malarkey, %.
It's my religion.
90's teams would only have a shot with their rules.
1993 Suns
Kevin Johnson un-guardable
Ainge & Marjele draining 3's
Barkley destroying the paint
LOL @ glorifying an ERA where Kevin Durant is the MVP
At the highest level, It would all depend on how the officials call it. The 2014 Spurs were built to have success under today's rules and officiating. The old Pistons bad boys teams with Rodman wouldn't be able to play their defense under today's rules. On the other hand the 2011 Mavs or 2014 a Spurs would probably get man handled and beat down by the Jordan-Rodman Bulls, IF they were plaing under their rules. In the case of the 2001 Lakers, it would depend totally on how the refs handle the Shaq matchup.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
