Reply With Quote
the combination of mental and physical toughness is what makes you an elite team and a championship contender. you have to impose your will and kill your opppenents spirit.
I think thats what people usually mean when they use the term soft. They're talking about a lack of mental for ude not so much a willingness to put another player on the ground or physically intimidate them.
However, the Bad Boys of the early 90s had both types of toughness. I wish the spurs were a little tiny bit more like them.
the combination of mental and physical toughness is what makes you an elite team and a championship contender. you have to impose your will and kill your opppenents spirit.
As much as I HATED to hear during the pre-1999 years that the Spurs were soft they were.. This is the first time since those days that I see the Spurs being challenged and not responding
I am confident that they can respond...it almost seems like they don't want to respond. Like they are saving themselves for the playoffs.As much as I HATED to hear during the pre-1999 years that the Spurs were soft they were.. This is the first time since those days that I see the Spurs being challenged and not responding
Yes it SEEMS. Just like like year.
The Sacto series was suppose to be a wakeup call. It didn't woke them up for real.
I hope your right.. . I just don't get that vibe from this spurs team.. let's face it our marigin for error is at a 'Tim Duncan era' low at this point..
then the spurs run the risk of falling into the trap where they believe they can turn "it" on and off at will. it is far better to instill fear in the opposing team rather than have them believe that they will catch you on an off day. you want teams dreading when the have to play the spurs.
with all the home losses that we have, what team is afraid to come in our house? after charolette beat us, that fear of the ATT center went up in smokes.
The Bulls were plenty physical on defense, especially after they picked up Worm. The Lakers always had enforcers, both in the 80s and in the 00s. Houston was physical.
You say that the Bad Boys and 04 Pistons were physical, but those three teams might have been the most finesse-style offenses ever to win the NBA championship.
Of course, I don't define softness entirely as lacking mental toughness and perseverence, as many others seem to be.
agreed. I don't think the big three should be playing 45min a game but they have to assert themselves at one point on a consistent basis.then the spurs run the risk of falling into the trap where they believe they can turn "it" on and off at will.
Excactly
"we can turn it on" and we have a great record. That fooled them last year.
Is this year the same?
In taht case we have all psychical teams in NBA.
The Spurs-thank God- don't fall in this category.
But to me, it is softer than soft and weaker than weak to lose from a lazy absense of effort.
There is nothing more stupid than giving up games in your ability to win.
Great point.But to me, it is softer than soft and weaker than weak to lose from a lazy absense of effort.
There is nothing more stupid than giving up games in your ability to win.
Losing is bad enough but losing because you are not trying is disgusting.
Stereotypes SUCK but the SPURS will always be labeled as SOFT. Even after the KING of SOFTNESS (Duncan) retires.
tim has been playing rather soft lately...but he's not the king of softness
One symptom of softness is a sense of en lement that manifests itself into players flopping or flailing after any contact, or whining incessantly after every foul call or non-call. Soft teams expect points to be given to them.
When the Spurs are so focused on calls and non-calls, as they often have been this year, they don't look hungry. They look like a frustrated mess. It's as though they feel en led to have the game called a certain way... and if it's not, then they're above playing at their best level.
The incessant ing has to stop.
ok...but why are they soft? Someone wants to call them that fine but at least have the balls to have a reason...don't just suc b to blind hate.Stereotypes SUCK but the SPURS will always be labeled as SOFT. Even after the KING of SOFTNESS (Duncan) retires.
Last edited by samikeyp; 12-27-2006 at 02:57 PM.
No ....sadly though....there are a whole lot of players who do this...mainly superstars.One symptom of softness is a sense of en lement that manifests itself into players flopping or flailing after any contact, or whining incessantly after every foul call or non-call. Soft teams expect points to be given to them.
When the Spurs are so focused on calls and non-calls, as they often have been this year, they don't look hungry. They look like a frustrated mess. It's as though they feel en led to have the game called a certain way... and if it's not, then they're above playing at their best level.
The incessant ing has to stop.
exactly...and it all starts with timmy playing through the contact until he hears the whistle. if no whistle, hustle your ass back on d and keep playing. if the whistle doesn't blow, it's not a foul. tim has to set that tone.
Ok I'm glad someone else said it Tim needs to stop looking for calls and start imposing his will whether he gets a call or not..
It's been a long time, but the 79 Sonics were considered soft compared to the physical Bullets. Also, the showtime Laker teams of the 80's were not a physical team except for Rambis.
Hardly. Last year, for instance, I wouldn't call the Spurs, Mavs, Grizzlies, Clippers, Suns, Kings, Warriors, Timberwolves, Pistons, Bucks, Cavaliers, Knicks, Nets, Raptors, Sixers, Wizards, Bobcats, Hawks, or Magic physical.
Last year's champion Heat weren't tremendously physical, but neither were they soft; Shaquille O'Neal has always been one to try to injure opposing slashers rather than play position defense, Alonzo Mourning is a tough bas , and Payton, Posey, and Haslem are willing to do the dirty work while Wade showboats.
The 79 Sonics and 80s Lakers - among others - were not the most physical teams of their day, but any sportscaster today would be shocked and appalled by their dirty, evil, society-wrecking thuggishness.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
