Reply With Quote
no justifying anything.
Too much is being made of Spurs' #1 seed.
Since January 1:
Spurs' record: 34-19
MEM's record: 35-20
They've played virtually even beginning this year. Spurs just had a very hot start while MEM took a while to get it together with all the new players added to their roster. Everyone (even the Spurs themselves) didn't expect their record so it's not any major upset and it's a bad matchup for the Spurs - Mem's strength (interior) is Spurs' weakness.
Mavs in 2007 was an even bigger fail. Dallas was 67-15 and lost in five games. Spurs, 61-21 and lost in six.
San Antonio lost this series in the last regular season game of the year when Manu got hurt.
He probably needed a month to get better. He was out playing in a week.
Duncan was flat worn out.
The Mavies were healthy and not ready to play.
The Spurs tried to get it done, but did not have the playmakers to do it.
the mavs also lost in six.
Memphis was the better team. They were better in 5 out of 6 games, and yes i'm counting the game 5 SA fluke win. I don't see how this is debatable. Just Neal with it.
Mavs was embarrasing - this one we kinda saw it coming...
yeah, no one saw the only team the 05-06 mavs hadn't beaten all year upsetting them
No, it's not. You can't on the one hand say (as so many did) that this team was flawed, wasn't a true contender and had an inflated record, then on the other say this was the single biggest upset/choke in NBA playoff history. You can't have it both ways. If they were the former, then this can't be the latter.
I still put the '07 Mavs first, for three reasons. 1) Their entire core was in their prime. 2) They won 67 games (even if they did overachieve, which they did, that is still rarefied air.) 3) That Warriors team, for all their talent and athleticism, was truly flawed. This Grizzlies team is built for playoff basketball. The Mavs aren't chokers on the basis of that one series, they're chokers because of their series of chokes.
You can point out the Grizzlies missing one of their two best players, but he's been gone for months. They learned to play without him (in some ways, it made them better), as evidenced by this stat: Since January 1st, their was a one game difference in the standings between the Spurs and the Grizzlies. The seeds may have said 1-8, but by the time the playoffs arrived, this might as well have been a 3-6 or 4-5 match-up.
That doesn't absolve the Spurs of blame. They still should have won this series and deserve their share of criticism. Just don't make it more than it is, when this team wasn't considered much all season by many.
well, one team had only one star.
the other team had three.
Stars didn't come to perform.
i gotta say, richard jefferson has to be a bigger disappointment than the loss.
1. grizzlies are not an eight seed, they tanked the last few games so they would have probably been a 5-6th seed had they not tanked.
2. there were analysts who predicted the spurs to miss the playoffs this year.
3. in contrast, the 2007 mavs were fresh off a finals appearance and the unanimous choice to win the west that year.
4. 2007 mavs had the season MVP dirk
5. 4>0 rings
It's about time to accept the Spurs were just not that good.
Not a championship roster.
Their roster had major flaws on the frontline and Memphis exposed them.
Rudy Gay missed the entire series, manu missed one game and looked fine the rest. Give up on that excuse.
you bet. get a good nights rest.
wasn't talking to you, rascal.
good post
The Mavericks didn't take the Warriors seriously and rested their best player for a late regular season game that helped GS make the playoffs.
The Spurs didn't take the Grizzlies seriously and rested their best player for game one of the playoffs, which they lost on a late three pointer and cost them the series.
Bigger choke award goes to the Spurs.
IMO this is third behind Dallas/GS and Seattle/Denver.
Both Dallas and Seattle were favored to win it all. Spurs weren't even favored to win their own division.
Memphis wasn't a real 8 seed, and the Spurs weren't a real 1 seed.
Edit: Best of seven....disregard the Seattle/Denver series.
bump
z0sa
historic [hɪˈstɒrɪk]
adj
1. famous or likely to become famous in history; significant
you are seriously ing stupid.
Looking back, the guy said Gay was their best player. Soo.....how's Memphis doing with Gay and without Randolph?
they're #7 seed
I think Zbo is their best player for one and there are not too many teams in the league that can handle the Grizz's physicality. Second, Manu didn't play in the first game which put us at a disadvantage. Third, despite being an 8th seed, they took OKC to 7 games. Clearly, they are a solid team. Fourth, Pop's stubborness to play the turd towers against their bigs was a bad strategy especially with Splitter on the bench. Lastly, the Spurs didn't choke but it was definitely an upset being an 8 beating a 1. It's not even in my top 25 upsets given the talent on the Grizz's squad.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
