Farewell Everyone

[Rummpd]

Bye, adios, Auf wiedersen (or something like that), hasta la vista, chao.

[travis2]

2centsworth wouldn't be another incarnation of MB, would he?

[boutons]

"How on Earth is @GST a "tough" game?"

In exactly the same way I ask "How on Earth is @POR a "lost" game for the Spurs?", but with a key difference between Suns and Spurs. The Suns hung tough and got the W.

PHX put together a typical, solid stats game, their avg (offensive) numbers, but GS was having a very good game, 4 players in double figures, 2 with dbl-dbl, plus Adonal with 20 RB. GS was shooting poorly, but they stayed in the game by killing PHX on the boards.

"The Suns made it tough"

Not at all. GS played a great game for GS. In no way did Suns play way below their average and to give it away the way the Spurs have done so 9 or 10 losses this season.

Crunch time was really crunch time, and PHX played it tough, came back, and tied it. PHX had a cold spell in the 4th, and with 3 minutes left, were -7.

(3:14) [GOS] Foyle Rebound (Off:11 Def:7)
(3:13) [GOS 92-85] Foyle Layup Shot: Made (6 PTS)
(3:06) [PHX 87-92] Marion Slam Dunk Shot: Made (15 PTS) Assist: Stoudemire (1 A
(2:46) [GOS] Dunleavy Jump Shot: Missed
(2:44) [PHX] Marion Rebound (Off:3 Def:12)
(2:26) [GOS] Foyle Foul: Shooting (5 PF)
(2:26) [PHX 88-92] Stoudemire Free Throw 1 of 2 (7 PTS)
(2:26) [PHX] Stoudemire Free Throw 2 of 2 missed
(2:25) [GOS] Foyle Rebound (Off:11 Def:8)
(2:04) [GOS] J. Richardson Turnaround Jump: Missed
(2:02) [PHX] Stoudemire Rebound (Off:3 Def:5)
(1:49) [PHX 90-92] Marion Jump Shot: Made (17 PTS) Assist: Jackson (4 AST)
(1:32) [GOS 94-90] Claxton Jump Shot: Made (12 PTS)
(1:18) [PHX 92-94] Nash Driving Layup: Made (20 PTS)
(0:59) [GOS] Claxton Turnover: Bad Pass (2 TO) Steal: Marion (1 ST)
(0:55) [PHX 94-94] Marion Slam Dunk Shot: Made (19 PTS) Assist: Jackson (5 AST)
(0:47) [GOS] Team Timeout: Regular
(0:39) [GOS] J. Richardson Reverse Layup: Missed
(0:38) [GOS] Team Rebound
(0:34) [GOS] J. Richardson Jump Shot: Missed
(0:30) [PHX] Stoudemire Rebound (Off:3 Def:6)
(0:07) [PHX] Nash Jump Shot: Missed
(0:05) [GOS] Foyle Rebound (Off:11 Def:9)
(0:05) [GOS] Team Timeout: Regular
(0:05) [GOS] Foyle Subs ution replaced by Cheaney
(0:05) [PHX] Team Timeout: Short
(0:01) [GOS] Claxton Turnover: Bad Pass (3 TO)
(0:01) [PHX] Team Timeout: Regular
(0:01) [PHX] Johnson Subs ution replaced by Q. Richardson
(0:01) [GOS] Cheaney Subs ution replaced by Foyle
(0:01) [PHX] Team Timeout: Regular
(0:00) [PHX] Nash Jump Shot: Missed
(0:00) [GOS] Fisher Rebound (Off:1 Def:5)
(0:00) End Period

PHX goes on to prevail in OT. PHX was supposed to beat GS, and they did.

The Spurs make it tough on themselves by playing really crappy against inferior teams, put up below average numbers, but DON'T find a way to salvage a win the way PHX does. The Spurs were supposed to beat Wiz and Heat, and they didn't, and got a gift from Carter to beat the Nets.

I was really hoping the RRT would show the Spurs developing some toughness, and before last week, there was some very encouraging play, but the last 3 Spurs games were really weak, and could have easily been 0-3. People blame it ALL on Tim being hurt, but I'm not buying it.

(Wiz lost @Hornets last night. If Tim doesn't play Wed night, the recently improving Hornets, even without Baron, have a good chance to take the game as the Spurs can be expected to play down to them. If the Spurs reputed depth is worth anything, they ought to be able to beat the Hornets (and Wiz and Nets) without Tim).

While the Spurs overall record is trotted in defense of whatever ty game the Spurs give away ("Spurs are 40 -12 so STFU"), the Spurs 40 -12 would look weak against a PHX uncatchable record of probably 45 - 7 if Nash/Barbosa hadn't been hurt for the extraordinary, understandable 5 Suns losses just before the Spurs@Suns game.

You think 45 - 7 is an impossible number? I don't, not at all. In fact, I am convinced these Spurs are so good that they equally capable of 45 -7, but they just don't have, yet!! (yes, I'm optimistic about SPAM), the consistency and close-game/come-from-behind toughness, so they are down at 40-12. But Suns are truly having a 45 - 7 season, minus the 5 Nash-less losses.

[FromWayDowntown]

Don't you see that the Spurs depth, which you lament in losses, is what it is only because these players have Tim Duncan around to make them specialized role players. Yes, the Spurs have great depth, but only if you factor in Tim. It's not some zero sum game of "well they're deep no matter what and they should be the best team in the league, even if you take away a piece." Tim is the alpha and the omega for the Spurs. Everything else is just bonus. If you take Tim out of the equation, nobody would consider the Spurs to be anything better than a marginal playoff team. Yes, Manu is nice and Tony has been playing well, and both are legitimate all-star caliber players, but if you take Tim away, the Spurs start to look a whole lot like the Washington Wizards or the Los Angeles Lakers. You've already informed us of your opinion that neither of those teams is particularly good. Thus, you seem to argue that a marginal playoff team should be able to roll top-half playoff teams in road games; but marginal playoff teams don't often win those games -- that's why they're marginal playoff teams.

I also don't get this -- Phoenix barely gets over in Golden State, but it's a good, tough win. The Spurs get the same kinds of wins on the road (perhaps in a slightly different fashion), and you call them soft and unfocused, or whatever the adjective de jour is. How is that consistent? It's absolutely not. By your logic, there's no way that Golden State, which is a crappy team even at home, should be able to hang with Phoenix. But, since Phoenix puts up its regular offensive numbers, the issue isn't any concerns with the Suns play, but an enhancement in the Warriors play, which makes the Suns win a "good, tough" one. But, given the empirical data available, there's no reason that Golden State should have even been close. Your explanation for such anomalies for the Spurs is that they play down to their compe ion. Why isn't the same true, on the defensive end at least, for Phoenix? Didn't Phoenix, in failing to achieve its average margin of victory, play down to Golden State? Or are the Spurs the only elite team that "plays down to its compe ion?"

One last thing -- if you're so enamored of Phoenix's reputed toughness (which I thought was pretty evident as they choked away a 17 point 4th Quarter lead against San Antonio in Phoenix) why you don't just jump on their bandwagon? If that's what you want, the Suns, in your mind at least, seem to be the ticket to NBA nirvana.

[boutons]

"which you lament in losses"

oh . I can tell your post is gonna be pure BS, because I don't lament the Spurs depth, nor do lament the Spurs "talent", lack of a "second star" nor their Front Court weakness, nor "shooters", nor Rasho, not this season, and not last May, either.

I lament that while the Spurs have all it takes to go all the way, last year and this year (I'm a real fan and a believer), but they don't have the toughness or self-confidece or leadership or killet insinct or whatever's missing. They blew it last May after an irreproachable, damn near perfect SPAM. I'm rooting for them yet to find toughness this season.

"you seem to argue that a marginal playoff team should be able to roll top-half playoff teams in road games"

Be specific. Are you referring to Tim-less Spurs losing to the Hughes-less Wiz? The Wiz are ing 8 GB in the ing EC. They are "top-half playoff" only because the EC stinks.

If Tim really is without-which-the-Spurs-are-mediocre, then yes, the one loss without Tim (@WAS) was not so lamentable. So all the claims here about how deep and talented the Spurs are hollow without Tim? ok, I accept that qualification, with qualification.

But last season when the Spurs started running small ball while Tim as hurt, and Tim "was just another option" when he came back through the 17 game SPAM winning streak, and then again this season where Tim has been playing fewer minutes, leads me to believe the non-Tim Spurs are much better than you make them out to be, esp since the Tim-less Spurs should be able to play a much-better-than-NBA-avg defense without Tim.

"The Spurs get the same kinds of wins on the road"

BS. List them.

And while your at it, list all the Spurs road losses where they played down and actually lost to the Golden-State's of the NBA.

"By your logic..."

Absolute BS. Crappy teams can have good, even season-great, games. I made that point clearly. Suns were in a bad way (for whatever reason, against whomever) @GS, fought back in the last 3 minutes, tied it, and won.

"Didn't Phoenix, in failing to achieve its average margin of victory, play down to Golden State?"

That's admissable, but the only Suns stat that was really horrible was the RB diff. But as we always like to say: "A W's a W". They played their offensive game as consistently as ever (not played down to sub-40% shooting like the Spurs do) And you ignore the key difference I'm making:

If/when the Suns play down (and they simply don't play down nearly as much as Spurs do), the Suns stilll get the W, while the Spurs have 5 - 10 losses where they played down and couldn't get the W.

And the Spurs losses have often been playing down to a team that isn't playing much better (eg, loss @SAC, etc). ie, the Spurs give away games, whereas the Suns give away nothing. If you want to beat PHX, you have to bring it. If you want to beat the Spurs, you migh catch the Spurs when they are giving the game away to whatever team is suited up (inlcudes the 11 losses that Tim played). The only 2 Spurs losses where the Spurs played pretty well and lost to teams playing solid were @POR (out of their minds) and @MIA.

"why you don't just jump on their bandwagon? "

I'll do that, right after you go yourself. Let me know when you're done, ok?

@PHX, the Suns were beating the out of Spurs for 3 quarters, Spurs -17. You want to call it a choke job for PHX lose that game, but you damn well know that PHX ONLY lost because the Spurs played an absolutely incredible, legendary 4th quarter to tie it, and get the W. Full credit to the Spurs, absolutely no discredit for the Suns. In no way did PHX play a bad game or choke or give away the game. The Spurs were just gonna take that 4th quarter no matter what.

Our loss @POR game was very similar, but in the other direction. Spurs played a pretty solid game statistically (no shame), but POR, lottery bound, shot an incredible 55+% FGs and 3Gs all game, and Darius, 13 PPG, went nutz for 17 points in the 4th quarter, Spurs lose by a handful of points. I'm convinced that NOBODY could have beaten POR/Miles that night. The @POR-type losses just happen, and no discredit to the Spurs. In other words, the ONLY way POR was going to beat the Spurs, playing the Spurs solid game, was to bring an incredible game.