So you guys still think we are on the Lakers level???

[Don Quixote]

I give you the Lakers and the Celtics beating the Spurs in a series..but not the Hornets or the Jazz or even the Rockets.

But...I'm not giving up on their chances especially after one game in late Jan.

No, I'm not saying the Hornets, Jazz, or Rockets would beat us. I'm reasonably sure that we'd beat all 3. Maybe not New Orleans .. well that's 50-50.

I said the Lakers will beat any West challenges quite easily. The East will be another animal.

[MarHill]

The defense could definitely play better and more importantly smarter (way too many unnecessary fouls) but the Spurs problem against the Lakers was, and still is, their offense. Bad offense tends to enbolden/ignite the opposition mentally and physically.

The Lakers didn't run over the Spurs playing great basketball. They slowly pulled away as the Spurs were unable to keep in striking-distance with their collective offensive inep ude. That's a fact. To put in D. Green's words, "They (Lakers) are who we they thought they were."

The Spurs need Mason and Bonner to play aggressively, what they got was Bonner rushing his shot and Mason trying to play over his head offensively. Mason as an aggressive role player, good. Mason using aggression to play like a "star," not so good. If the role players don't consistently fill their role and play within theirselves, the Spurs have no chance against the elite.

Just about the only player to play solid or decent (when the game was there to be had) was Duncan, but as the OP suggests, they failed to utilize him effectively. Without playing through Tim, they fail to space the floor effectively for shooters, collapse the defense and force help, (drawing fouls, physically taxing the opposition), and maintain the floor-balance that helps with transition D and overall play.

This team, as constructed, needs to play a lower possession game against a team like the Lakers, so the offense has to be run inside out. Opportunistic transition and easy baskets need to be taken advantage of, but you've got to avoid neglecting the big fella.(Stick with the run-game, so to speak)

You've got to be able to hit open shots against a Phil Jackson defense, take care of the ball, not get killed at the free-throw line, and have good ball/player movement to give yourself a shot.

The Spurs today?

I'd say they went 0-4.

Thank you! Thank you!! Thank you!!!

I've been posting that on this forum since the end of the game.

The Spurs took too many jumpers and didn't play the game from the inside-out.

[MarHill]

No, I'm not saying the Hornets, Jazz, or Rockets would beat us. I'm reasonably sure that we'd beat all 3. Maybe not New Orleans .. well that's 50-50.

I said the Lakers will beat any West challenges quite easily. The East will be another animal.

Read Blackjack 21's post...he is spot-on about today's game!

[Don Quixote]

Well ... I'm done here. Hope I'm wrong ...

See you all come playoff time!

[Spur-Addict]

The defense could definitely play better and more importantly smarter (way too many unnecessary fouls) but the Spurs problem against the Lakers was, and still is, their offense. Bad offense tends to enbolden/ignite the opposition mentally and physically.

The Lakers didn't run over the Spurs playing great basketball. They slowly pulled away as the Spurs were unable to keep in striking-distance with their collective offensive inep ude. That's a fact. To put in D. Green's words, "They (Lakers) are who we they thought they were."

The Spurs need Mason and Bonner to play aggressively, what they got was Bonner rushing his shot and Mason trying to play over his head offensively. Mason as an aggressive role player, good. Mason using aggression to play like a "star," not so good. If the role players don't consistently fill their role and play within theirselves, the Spurs have no chance against the elite.

Just about the only player to play solid or decent (when the game was there to be had) was Duncan, but as the OP suggests, they failed to utilize him effectively. Without playing through Tim, they fail to space the floor effectively for shooters, collapse the defense and force help, (drawing fouls, physically taxing the opposition), and maintain the floor-balance that helps with transition D and overall play.

This team, as constructed, needs to play a lower possession game against a team like the Lakers, so the offense has to be run inside out. Opportunistic transition and easy baskets need to be taken advantage of, but you've got to avoid neglecting the big fella.(Stick with the run-game, so to speak)

You've got to be able to hit open shots against a Phil Jackson defense, take care of the ball, not get killed at the free-throw line, and have good ball/player movement to give yourself a shot.

The Spurs today?

I'd say they went 0-4.

Bonner/Thomas/Oberto will not be able to make teams pay for doubling Timmy consistenly when it matters most. Or, when Manu/Tony/Others drive, they stay with Tim and make Bonner/Thomas/Oberto beat them. And guess what, they won't be able to do that consistently either.

Our perimeter players will be just fine. That I can count on.

[Big P]

the only team who could possibly beat us in 7, or even take us to 7 for that matter, are the cavs and celtics.

We got through your spurs rather easily last year and it didn't even take seven. This laker team is looking better than last years because of the addition of Drew and Trevor, both of whom should still get better yet as the year goes on. Not to sound y about or arrogant but I don't see any way the spur beat us in a seven game series-and I would sadly conceed the same if I were a Spurs fan!!

Your talking like you won it all last year. You got smoked..same as we did.

[Rogue]

We are over their level now that we have beaten them twice in a row.

[Blackjack]

We are over their level now that we have beaten them twice in a row.

I'm sure there's somewhere on this earth, or someone, that understands the gibberish you spew, but....

Hopefully, I never find that place or meet that person.

[mrspurs]

When both teams are healthy the Spurs are just too small and too slow for LA.

Yup

[crc21209]

The Spurs aren't going to win many games when Manu, Bonner and Mason combine for 2-for-15 (or whatever) from 3.

Kori's right, if our guys are gonna miss open shots, were gonna lose. The D wasnt so bad, its not like Pau or Kobe or anyone went off, we just missed shots. The Spurs will be fine.

[SenorSpur]

Even with the new additions this year, the Spurs are simply not as good defenisvely as in years past. Even Pop has declared they don't stand a chance if they can't hold teams to within the 80's. Also watching Duncan go against the opposition's entire frontline, on both ends of the court, is a rerun of a movie that I grew tired of last year. TD simply is saddled with too much responsibility and does not have enough help. At this stage of career, that shouldn't be.

[Ditty]

its just one damn game its not like we got outplayed since the opening tip-off just some dumb plays in the second half of course were a big man away from murdering these lakers but its probably not going to happen with a cheap owner like ours

all i got to say is we need 3 players to get there heads out of there asses during big road games to try to prove something to the legue and we know who those 3 guys are

[Ghazi]

I don't buy the argument that the Spurs will "turn it on" in the second half of the season. Through 43 games what you see is probably what you'll get. The Spurs are mediocre offensively, good defensively but not as good in recent years.

Some people, don't take margin of victory stats seriously but I do, as it measures how often you score and how often you disallow teams from scoring

Margin stats in Duncan era:

97-98: +4.0
98-99: +8.1
99-00: +6.0
00-01: +7.8
01-02: +6.2
02-03: +5.4
03-04: +7.2
04-05: +7.8
05-06: +6.8
06-07: +8.4
07-08: +4.8
08-09: +2.9

I think it can legitimately be said this is the worst Spurs team of the Tim Duncan era.

[anakha]

we beat LA on their second game of back to back without walton, famar and sasha by 1 point...and somehow you guys think we are on their level.

back to reality

Whatever you say, Laker fan.

[Rapper]

of course

I still think we are on the Lakers level

[bavarianworks]

Not even close. I think last year's 4-1 defeat in the playoffs, and this year's (thus far) Laer dominance pretty much seal the deal.

I am aware that the Silver & Black somehow beat them last month. Not sure how that happened ... they tried their best to give it to the Lakers. It came down to a lucky ref's call.

And there's simply too much talent on that Lakers squad. They are better, deeper, younger, stronger, and more talented at every position than we are (except PF, and it's close).

How many Spurs would play significant minutes on the Lakers? 3 -- Duncan would start, and Tony and Gino would come off the bench. The rest would ride the bench, if they were on the roster at all.

How many Lakers would start for the Spurs. All of em, and I mean all. Even Radmonovich.

It's not even close. Lakers are #1 in the West. The Spurs, maybe a distant second. Truth hurts.

Damn you're an idiot, tony and manu would start:
Tony
Manu
Kobe
Duncan
Bynum

[melo061]

The spurs are simply not on the Laker's levels both offensively and defensively at the moment. There is no proof of such claim, rather all the evidence points to the Laker's being on a different pedestal.

The Spur's MO for years was defense. That's why they were champs, why they were better than the Lakers. They can't even claim that today.

[romain.star]

Not even close. I think last year's 4-1 defeat in the playoffs, and this year's (thus far) Laer dominance pretty much seal the deal.

I am aware that the Silver & Black somehow beat them last month. Not sure how that happened ... they tried their best to give it to the Lakers. It came down to a lucky ref's call.

And there's simply too much talent on that Lakers squad. They are better, deeper, younger, stronger, and more talented at every position than we are (except PF, and it's close).

How many Spurs would play significant minutes on the Lakers? 3 -- Duncan would start, and Tony and Gino would come off the bench. The rest would ride the bench, if they were on the roster at all.

How many Lakers would start for the Spurs. All of em, and I mean all. Even Radmonovich.

It's not even close. Lakers are #1 in the West. The Spurs, maybe a distant second. Truth hurts.

So,

Fisher > Tony?

Duncan more or less = to Gasol?

Plus ALL of the lakers starters for the Spurs?

[galvatron3000]

Spurs missing shots and Lakers getting to the line killed it

[lefty]

We didn't show up, which is what we do on Sunday afternoon games.

Horrible D, poor decision making on offense.


We played like .

We'll beat the Lakers in the playoffs.

[DrHouse]

Popovich really said it all in the post game comments. The margin of error for the Spurs is so slim that they really can't afford to make any serious blunders defensively or offensively.

The two back to back 3's in the 3rd opened the game up for LAL and they never looked back from there. I'm not saying the Spurs can't beat the Lakers in the playoffs, but they will need to play near perfect basketball to do it. Without significant roster changes I just can't see the Spurs going all the way to the Finals and winning it all again. They are very close though, just need a solid C alongside Duncan (Splitter, Scola, etc. would all have been nice to have).

[lefty]

Popovich really said it all in the post game comments. The margin of error for the Spurs is so slim that they really can't afford to make any serious blunders defensively or offensively.

The two back to back 3's in the 3rd opened the game up for LAL and they never looked back from there. I'm not saying the Spurs can't beat the Lakers in the playoffs, but they will need to play near perfect basketball to do it. Without significant roster changes I just can't see the Spurs going all the way to the Finals and winning it all again. They are very close though, just need a solid C alongside Duncan (Splitter, Scola, etc. would all have been nice to have).

True

That's really stressfull for a Spurs fan

[DPG21920]

That is the first thing that House said that is true. The Spurs can beat the Lakers as currently constructed, but the margin for error is clearly slim. In the playoffs that hurts. The more Manu starts to turn the corner, the better those odds get. But even if Manu regains last years form consistently, the Spurs still have to hit most of their open shots, play great defense and hope the Lakers miss a couple.

The Lakers do not have to play their best to beat the Spurs. They can have an off night and still win. The Spurs will need to step it up and pull off what would be an upset as things currently stand. Spurs have a better shot than anyone to do this. As in every year the Spurs have won it all, it takes a combo of great team defense, open looks going in and some luck. This is no different.

[DrHouse]

It boggles my mind why the Spur's FO would think Matt Bonner is the solution for the Spurs frontcourt depth.

[DPG21920]

It boggles my mind why the Spur's FO would think Matt Bonner is the solution for the Spurs frontcourt depth.

They do not. That is false. They are handcuffed as many here have pointed out. The Spurs are open to making moves, they just do not have a lot of tradeable assets outside of the big 3. Unless a homerun deal comes through (which is highly unlikely) there is only so much you can do. You have to work with what you have.

It is funny how good the Spurs are/have been. Even when they are second int the West, with Matt Bonner, people are jumping off of cliffs. Many teams would love to have that problem.