Reply With Quote
Not surprised. Nothing is guaransheed in the NBA.
Jesus Christ, it's not like they were playing a bunch of scrubs!
The Mavs are a great team. The Spurs made some bone-headed plays, but saying they "played like " is a total ing lie.
"Playing like " is being swept. Players don't "play like " and, as you say, have a great chance to be playing Game 2 in the WCF tonight!
Not surprised. Nothing is guaransheed in the NBA.
"Playing like " is being swept.
... Spurs were "swept" by playing like in the first half of Game7. No matter how tough they played the last 24 minutes, they lost the game in the first half, which the Spurs admit was the worst half they played all season.
How does a Championship-ready team come into a Game7 @home totally unready to play? They don't, and that's why the Spurs aren't Champions this year.
Agreed. That said, they had the game won with 30 seconds left. So, what does that tell you?
Spurs weren't playing like the whole game...
I'm a bit surprise that they didn't win it all.
But the Mavs were better than I thought they were.
I do have to question POP a little.
It seemed we played the Mav's game and not the Spurs' game by only having Tim out there for a legit center.
When we did that we just took and lengthed the Mavs bench by 1 to 2 big men all to defend Tim and block shots.
I know it's all about matchups but come on we did let the MAVs dictate match ups and the game.
Sorry for the Rant I just had to let it out...
"what does that tell you?"
It tells me the Spurs were better than the Mavs, but they didn't have that Championship edge and focus to avoid bonehead plays when up 3 with a few seconds remaining.
If the Spurs had come out ready to play all 48 minutes like they did the last 24 ...
The Spurs' first half was a "what were they thinking" event.
And Pop has been extremely mellow all season.
Timmy rubbing off on him?
3 les have extinguished Pop' fire?
Last edited by boutons_; 05-26-2006 at 12:28 PM.
Reasons for small ball
1. Finley has a better chance to guard Dirk or Howard than Mohammad or Rasho
2. Finley gives the spurs an extra 3 point shooter which makes it hards for the mavs to double team Duncan without getting burned.
3. Dallas is forced to expend more energy on defense chasing down a quicker spurs team than if they went big.
So in conclusion if the spurs went big Duncan would've seen many more double teams and the offense wouldn't have been the same while Dirk goes off on Rasho or Mohammmad from the perimeter.
Did You Know? In 73 NBA playoff games (not including last night's Detroit-Miami game), 14 have been decided by 2 points or less (tying a 1995 record) and 23 have been decided by 5 points or less. Teams are shooting 46.1 percent, the highest mark since 1993. The 2-point field-goal percentage is 49.1, the highest since 1991, according to the Elias Sports Bureau.
Stern's dream come true.
Hey, i've said before and throughout the season that apathy would be the Spurs biggest oppenent. It's something the Spurs have appeared to have since Duncan has come onboard. Maybe it's because he's such a mellow guy and doesn't show too much emotion. It's not meant to be a rip on the Spurs or TD, but they haven't been able to win back-to-back les yet.
Last years team had that killer instinct. This years team, even more talented, appeared to go through the motions at times. They shouldn't have fallen behind Dallas 3-1, but they did. And when they've been put in that postion in the past they've failed to step up. They rallied in gm7, but again should never have been down by 19 on their home court in a gm7.
I really thought it would have been the opposite; that the Spurs would have crushed Dallas in gm7. But in the end (OT) Dallas wanted it more.
TD was a monster and the MVP of that series. He killed Dallas all by himself in just about every game.
Tim Duncan benefitted from the small lineup more than anyone. If he had that lineup all year he would be the MVP.A center clogs the paint on offense as much as defense.
Tim is one of the best power forwards to ever play the game. It doesn't really matter too who he's playing against.Tim Duncan benefitted from the small lineup more than anyone. If he had that lineup all year he would be the MVP.
Tim's game, IMO, is MUCH more impressive that Dirk's because Dirk is a perimeter shooter and doesn't have any difficult defensive assignments.
"Dirk is a perimeter shooter"
Not really, anymore, not primarily.
I was surprised at how few 3Gs he took against us.
His preferred jumpshooting areas are around either elbow.
And his newly found offensive rebounding gives hime plenty of garbage points.
And he had several gutsy, thru-traffic And1 drives to the hole against us, inlcuding the one that sent us fishing.
With the way his jumper was falling, he could have very well settled for a jumper with no criticism on that last play from where he was at 15 ft, but he chose to drive. A Champion's decision, and execution.
He runs like he had rickets as a child,
Dirk is the player this year who deserves to have the critics' sound level meter pegged on the far left.
Last edited by boutons_; 05-26-2006 at 02:09 PM.
When it got to the point where we all knew Pop would not stop playing Small Ball, I was not surprised when we lost, just extremely angry.
How can you be surprised that we lose a series in which we played from behind 6 out of the 7 games, 3 out of every 4 quarters?
How can you be surprised that we lose a series in which we played from behind 6 out of the 7 games, 3 out of every 4 quarters?
It deserves to be said twice because this past series sickens me.
I am still angry, and I still hate Dallas more than ever in my entire life. I also hate small ball.
Grrrr....
Pop wouldn't have played small ball if his bigs did something useful...
So it was just coincidence that he played them for 63 wins?
Or was it coincidence that those 63 wins were all against teams that were incapable of using mobile forwards to make our center useless and incapable fo getting duncan into foul trouble (also said teams had no swift young athletic wings)
All 63 wins weren't against the Mavs, that's for sure.
As timvp says, evolve or die. Pop made the changes he thought necessary, and we went from a blowout Game 2 loss to 5 very close games that could have gone either way.
I don't believe Rasho or Nazr would have won Game 3, 4, or 7, but that's just my opinion, an opinion that happens to be backed up by a Coach who's won 3 NBA Championships.
Most teams don't have bigs at the 4 that can hit 3's and drive well. Any team that has this can exploit San Antonio and force them to go small.
I'm not surprised we didn't win it all - just surprised we didn't at least get to the NBA finals.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions