Do We Really Want to Sweep?

[Budkin]

Every time I see this thread le it becomes even worse a question than it was the time before...

[Legacy]

[DMC]

So what's the odds Pop sends the big 3 and Green home again before the 1st game?

[Obstructed_View]

To be fair to the OP, though, there is a reasonable case to be made that a defeat sandwiched in between several wins could give a team better at ude than a long winning streak. Some would hold the 20-game winning streak from last season as evidence.

That being said, there's obviously no point in losing on purpose, and 99% of the time, sweeping is better.

The only danger the Spurs have of being in a long winning streak at this point would see them stealing at least one game against Miami in the finals. I'm unsure how that's an unfavorable outcome.

[Spur|n|Austin]

yes. More play = higher chance of injury. Yeah, it's a long time off. Yeah, they could look rusty. You can shake off rust and you can do things to prevent rust. But they need rest. They need to heal. They need to watch a of a lot of game footage and have a gameplan.

Do I think they'll sweep? I don't know. But I sure as hope so.

/thread.

[FkLA]

Why do people make such stupid threads?

No, OP lets not sweep. Spurs should strategically tank Games 4 and 5, that way they have the perfect balance of rest and little rust. Seems like the smart move and just makes too much damn sense to not do anything other than that tbh.

[spursince#99]

Yes. The Spurs want to have time to go over every loss by the Heat, break down every play they struggled with, find every weakness of each player so they know exactly who and when to double, who to leave, what plays to run on inbounds, out of timeouts, and at the end of quarters.

And if the Pacers win, then the Spurs can start planning the parade.

[Biggems]

ideally, we close out tonight.....then we sit back and watch Indy and Miami go 7, the last 3 of which are OT games, with game 7 going multiple OTs.