Reply With Quote
Nash has played in 10 Suns losses.
How could they have been 46-8?
The playoffs are a whole other beast all together. It doesnt matter who collapses in the regular season. All that matter is what you do in the playoffs. However for use in this topic head to head record is relevant.
It would also be nice too see a breakdown of playoff records per player/per starting 5.
Nash has played in 10 Suns losses.
How could they have been 46-8?
Nash got hurt in the IND game, played 11 minutes, Suns lost without Nash over half the game.
Then the Suns lost the next 3 games, 4 straight, with Nash out.
I figure those 4 losses without Nash would be 4 wins, or 3-1. ie, had Nash played, the Suns would be 45-9 or 44-10.
( Nash comes back for Spurs@PHX, and lose their 5th straight.)
And the Spurs would be 53-0 if Timmy had been 100% all season.
Whatever. The numbers are what they are, no if ands or buts.
Not sure what to expect with the suns they started off hot but are 10-9 in last 19. I don't care if they are 10-3 with nash back but its just horrible sometimes to watch the lackluster D they play, I mean I really like the turnaround but I think they are starting to buy into their own hype. Yeah we beat the teams we are suppose to, but we're not doing to good against teams at the top. 0-2 vs spurs, 1-1 v mavs 1-1 against the kings and 1-1 1-0 against the rockets and 1-1 agaisnt the sonics thats 5-5 and not getting it done. The good thing we do having going for us is that we are young, Im not sure I am buying into D'antoni as a coach, sometimes he just makes bad bad decisions. But, I wasn't expecting them to do this well, so i guess i shouldn't be too greedy. We just got to take baby steps and start playing good at both ends of the court....
It's still a great team. I fully expect a Spurs-Suns matchup in the WCF finals.
I just don't like some that downplay the Spurs record while simultaneously hyping other team's records.
I really like the Suns, but I hate the Nash MVP talk. How long has he been in the league and never been in the top 3 for consideration?
If we're talking Spurs' weaknesses, how about these?
1. Stamina -- there have been a few occasions where the team appears worn down after a particularly hectic part of the schedule, such as back-to-backs, three games in four nights, or near the end of a long road trip. This has led to losses @POR, @WAS, @MIA, and some lackluster performances for a significant portion of the game, such as @NJN. The 2003 team appeared to persevere better through physical trials, and that team was older than this one overall. That's just my impression. The postseason does not feature the rapid-fire schedule of the regular season, but nevertheless is uniquely taxing on mind and body. On paper, this team appears dominant, but will a lack of stamina allow a better-conditioned or tougher team to pull an upset?
2. Small forward -- If a team has an athletic small forward, 6'9" or taller, athletic, with good scoring ability, he will give the Spurs fits unless they can just focus on stopping him alone. See Grant Hill, Shawn Marion, Rashard Lewis, Darius Miles, Tracy McGrady. All have figured prominently either in Spurs losses, or in near-misses. Either they go off, or the Spurs have to pay some much attention to them that another perimeter player (Ray Allen, Steve Francis) can dominate. Three such players loom in potential playoff series. Is this the Achilles heel like perimeter shooting was last year?
3. Wilting -- last year, it looked like Tony Parker had turned the corner. He played terrific over the final third of the season, and continued to excel for six playoff games. Then his game fell out from under him. There's no way of knowing whether that will happen again until he is placed into that situation again.
4. Free-throw shooting -- turns close wins into close losses.
5. Defending Tim Duncan -- Karl Malone showed it can be done. Tim is not as dominant as in years past due to wear and tear from Athens. Karl's not around anymore, but talented defensive big men like Rasheed Wallace and Danny Fortson can watch tape and learn the tactics. If a team can contain Tim without extensive double-teaming, we may see a reprisal of the clang-fest from Games 3-6 in last year's LA series.
6. Brent Barry -- we all thought Hedo eventually would come around. Even Steve Smith saw his 3pt% go UP, not down, when he joined Tim Duncan's team. There's no reason to think Barry suddenly will turn it on in the postseason. What we see is what we'll get.
These are concerns, but I think other teams have much bigger concerns. Seattle is one of the worst teams in the league in pts allowed per 100 possessions. How will they get stops in close playoff games? Phoenix still has a short bench and a pronounced tendency to wear down late against good teams. On those teams, only Steve Nash is a starter with much experience in the later playoff rounds. Dallas and Houston have even bigger question marks. Sacramento is hardly worth discussing.
I think even the 2003 championship team had bigger concerns than this one. That team couldn't hold onto a lead to save its life, and was a turnover machine. You never knew what you would get from SJax. This year's offense is a clinic compared to that one.
I think boutons has some points. As good as this team has been, they have had an opportunity to be up there with the greatest of the Bulls and Lakers teams, and have squandered some opportunities (statistically, they ought to be on pace for 68-70 wins, but they're not). They are not as consistent as some other elite teams, like Miami, though they are stronger overall. And all the apparent dominance in the world can evaporate in a flash when a proven championship team flips the switch on defense (*ahem,* Detroit).
He just doesn't know how to back up his gut feeling with facts.
"Defending Tim Duncan -- Karl Malone showed it can be done. Tim is not as dominant as in years past due to wear and tear from Athens. Karl's not around anymore, but talented defensive big men like Rasheed Wallace and Danny Fortson can watch tape and learn the tactics. If a team can contain Tim without extensive double-teaming, we may see a reprisal of the clang-fest from Games 3-6 in last year's LA series."
This is revisionary BS, the only reason Malone played half way decent on Duncan was:
1) Shaq was backing him up and there were many double and sometimes triple teams and Turk and others chocked and clanged from midrange and afar.
2) Tim not assertive enough, that blame is on him but he could have drawn more fouls.
3) Tim was mugged through out
Duncan has owned Malone in his career period, the last 4 games of last year were an abberation.
While Duncan owned Malone in Utah, his tactics last year were effective enough that Pop was concerned about facing him if he had signed with Miami or Minnesota.This is revisionary BS, the only reason Malone played half way decent on Duncan was:
1) Shaq was backing him up and there were many double and sometimes triple teams and Turk and others chocked and clanged from midrange and afar.
2) Tim not assertive enough, that blame is on him but he could have drawn more fouls.
3) Tim was mugged through out
Duncan has owned Malone in his career period, the last 4 games of last year were an abberation.
Even if Tim was mugged, if the refs now consider those tactics "legit" because Mailman got away with them for an entire series, then other physical defenders likewise might get away with them. It is, after all, the postseason, where obvious fouls don't get called on the road.
I think this, along with Tony's ability to find ways to be productive even if teams clog the lane and limit his drives, are imperitive issues for the postseason.
It's not revisionist BS to say that Malone slowed Tim. He did. And his success in employing those tactics will encourage others, who lack any other answer, to try the same methods. Tim is going to be pushed and shoved and hacked on the block. Others might not be as strong as Mailman (for example, I don't think that Amare Stoudemire or Juwan Howard is physically strong enough to push Tim out; but guys like Dampier or Jerome James/Danny Fortson might be) but the contact will be there and Tim has to find ways to make teams pay for employing those strategies. He can do it by attacking the rack and drawing some calls or by becoming more effective with his face-up game, among other options, but he can't just passively accept the tactic.
I don't lament the Spurs inconsistencies. To me, many of the issues that lead to any semblance of inconsistency this season (things like back-to-backs, threes-in-four, and lack of preparation time for an opponent) don't really exist at playoff time. I do, however, think the Spurs need to find ways to attack on the offensive end, rather than just comfortably settling for three after three. If they can use the three as a complementary piece, rather than an offensive focus, they'll be very hard to beat.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
