Reply With Quote
Go suck your daddy Manu's .
I'm talking about the Warriors series, he was MIA. He was 8-22 in Game 3 vs the Warriors.
Go suck your daddy Manu's .
People were calling to let go LMA for bums this summer. Amused got.
OK, will do.
Yes, and it was bull . The team didn't need "everybody" in the Rockets series any more than they did against Memphis. Aldridge-ball won the semis, not Capela-ball. You're always going to need others chipping in, from Manu blocking Harden to Tony going off on Conley.Did you read what I wrote?
He was dominant in Game One against them until Kawhi went out and they started triple-teaming him.
I said it was better to keep LMA this year than get rid of him for peanuts.
Always ing right.
I honestly think you could have played 4 Spurstalk posters alongside Kawhi on round 1 and he would have will them past the Grizzlies too. That's how Godly Kawhi was on that series.
And I don't know where this idea that I thought Kawhi won the Rocket series all alone comes from, but I never said such thing. The injury problems started to show on that series and Kawhi slowed down big time.
And I have to disagree with OP. The sum of the year says otherwise. You can twists what ever narrative you want. The Spurs are winning with LMA. And LMA is a big reason why.
Every star player has bad nights and every star loses games. How many more you win says how good of a player you are.
Kawhi being out and LMA been performing great tbh. Are we gonna do without Kawhi? No. No other star in the league would either.
Spurstalk in a nuts : LMA is a third option on a Championship team and everyone else is a ty role player.
3rd in the West.
The Spurs would have been beaten pretty soundly had it been Kawhi and bums. They lost a game where Kawhi got 43 points and in the one before that, he wasn't able to stop his team from being blown out. In Game Five, they absolutely needed Aldridge, Parker and second-leading scorer Patty to win. In the close-out game, Parker had 27 points, LMA double-doubled and the team took a game where they were only leading by one going into the fourth. It's sort of amazing how you can be so stat-oriented but still come up with a narrative like this.
Because you though LMA was just a role-player against the Rockets rather than the fulcrum for the team. They didn't win because of modern, efficient Kawhi-ball (which of course has its one problems fitting into the modern NBA). They won because LMA came in and dominated his match-ups in the post, especially prototype modern big Capela.And I don't know where this idea that I thought Kawhi won the Rocket series all alone comes from, but I never said such thing. The injury problems started to show on that series and Kawhi slowed down big time.
The Rockets series was won on defense, tbh.
You can not win a le if LMA is a top 2 player on your team. And no, Spurs were not beating the Warriors last year even with a healthy Kawhi.
The problem is we don't have a third option you dumb .
Not that LMA is good enough.
Nice try, but points don't score themselves, and last I checked, the team needed to get more than Houston to win. Those points came from somewhere. (And of course, Aldridge's defense was one of the fundamental aspects of how they held the Rockets in check anyway.)
That's a pro-LMA argument tbh.
I think game 4 of that series disproves your point. Kawhi went god mode and the Spurs still lost.
This argument is beyond dumb (no offense). Also, why aren’t you bashing the Wolves like you do SA for losing to ATL?
There's a lot of posters in this forum like Darius Bieber, Amuseddaysleeper, Hoops Czar etc. who will try to find anyway to be miserable while watching basketball for entertainment. Seems really unhealthy, imagine when they're at work.
What’s really funny is claiming CP to be better than LMA and how with no LMA and CP3 SA would be better suited. CP with stacked teams never did much (made it to the WCF one time which you seem to knock LMA for since it’s not a championship).
Besides that, you take Harden off the Rockets like Kawhi is off the Spurs and they get their a** beat in the playoffs despite the fact many here claim HOU’s roster to be far superior.
Aldridge was a bit more passive, but they literally keyed in on him, and I think Kerr said Patty and tried to take them both out of the series. When you lose your best player, it's easier for teams to shut down Option #2. unless your GS.
And they won't bash the Wolves or anyone else for losing to lesser teams. It only happens to us... Or GS for losing to Utah by 30 for that matter.
What were those stacked teams? The teams that immediately turn into sub 500 teams without him?
CP3 on the Spurs would be a perfect fit, tbh. Only concern would be his injury issues.
It’s funny how people here argue different sides of the coin when it suits them.
Mmh, show me what different sides of the coin did I argue over this. CP3 on the Hornets and Clippers was, to a lesser degree, like Lebron on the Heat and Cavs. Teams would lose every time they missed a game and once they left them altogether, they became lottery teams.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions