Otto Greule Jr / Getty Images
San Antonio players, including (from left)Tony Parker, Nazr Mohammed, Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili should not have let the Sonics back in the series, writes columnist Mike Celizic.
COMMENTARY
By Mike Celizic
NBCSports.com contributor
Updated: 12:50 a.m. ET May 16, 2005
I’ve just one question for the San Antonio Spurs, and when they answer it, they’re free to go back to sleep: Where’s the passion?
I know I’m not the only person who can’t understand how the Spurs could come out with so little energy against Seattle after Jerome James, whose name will never be mentioned with Tim Duncan when the discussion turns to the game’s great big men, called them out after Game 3. Ray Allen had already thoroughly dissed Bruce Bowen when James delivered his un-humble opinions of the Spurs.
San Antonio had won the first two games of the series, then lost the third in Seattle. The Sonics barely escaped with the win when Duncan missed what would have been the game-winner at the buzzer.
It was then that James felt the need to light a fire under the team from Texas. "I don't give them no respect, none,” he said, managing to get off a triple-negative in a seven-word sentence, which may be a record.
Right then, the fans back home along the River Walk must have been drooling in anticipation of what their Spurs would do to James and the Sonics in Game 4. It wasn’t a question of whether the Spurs would stomp the Sonics for their temerity. It was more a question of whether Seattle would need a spatula, a fire hose or both to remove the remains of its team from the court when the game was done.
In Seattle, Sonics fans had to be cringing at every replay of James’ words, certain that he had just provided the Spurs with more motivation than they needed to sweep the next two games and the series.
Instead, with the exception of Duncan, who scored 35, the Spurs didn’t bother to show up. They were down by two after one, six at the half, and 16 after three. Bowen contributed three points. Spurs guards Tony Parker and Brent Barry were outscored by Allen and Luke Ridnour 52-14.
San Antonio committed 20 turnovers and allowed the Sonics to shoot 50 percent from the field.
In short, the Spurs rolled over, fetched up a deep yawn, and took the night off.
The Spurs have been one of the top franchises in the game, and the citizens of San Antonio, who don’t have a lot else going in the way of major league sports, treat them as well as any fans treat any team in the game. They’ve won their two les, in 1999 over the Knicks and in 2003 over the Nets. No one can say they are failures.
But if they haven’t failed, they have disappointed, and they have at various times played in ways that raise questions about their level of desire, about their pride.
Just last year, they beat the Lakers in the first two games of the Western Conference semifinals, then lost four straight to a team that would lose the NBA Finals to Detroit.
They beat New Jersey in six games in 2003, but the year before that, they were steamrolled by the Lakers in five games. And that was an improvement over the 2001 Western Conference Finals, when they went down in four straight to L.A.
In 1999, they won their first le, beating a Knicks team that was playing without Patrick Ewing, but in 2000, they went down in five in the first round to then-lowly Phoenix.
Okay, no one wins every year, not even the Yankees. But San Antonio has been one of the elite teams in the league for a decade, and it has had more disappointing playoffs in that time than it has triumphant ones.
Too often, the Spurs have done what they did Sunday in Seattle — failed to play with the ferocity and passion and desire that marks great teams.
Some of that has to come from the coach, and it’s true that Gregg Popovich is a pretty good and very likeable guy. And some has to be the result of being very big heroes in a town that has no one else to idolize. No matter what they do, as long as they put up good records and put legitimate role models like David Robinson and Tim Duncan on the court, they’ve done all that’s asked of them.
You expect them to win this series, but last year you expected them to beat the Lakers, who, as Detroit proved, weren’t nearly as good as everybody — including the Lakers themselves — thought they were.
They’re better than Seattle. It’s as simple as that.
But they’re not that much better, as the Sonics showed in their two wins.
The Spurs seemed utterly unconcerned. They didn’t, after all, lose home-court advantage. They’d just lost a game and were going home for another. Ho-hum.
And if they’d played with determination to show these upstarts what happens when you talk smack about the Spurs, you could almost forgive a loss and write it off to the Sonics playing on home-court adrenaline. But — again with the exception of Duncan — the Spurs brought nothing to the court. They let Jerome James diss them and, while they didn’t let him score, they didn’t shut him up.
The Spurs were called out and they didn’t answer the call.
Where’s the passion?
Mike Celizic is a frequent contributor to NBCSports.com and a free-lance writer based in New York.
Exactly.
Win or lose, play the game with intensity, hustle, committment, and, in a word, "character", which the Spurs org says is their foundation.
The Spurs were out-hustled and out-executed on both ends of the floor, and it really looked liked the Spurs didn't give .
How often does a game come where they get smoked and it isn't a result of lack of passion/hustle? I mean are there tons of games where the Spurs play their hearts out and still get blown out? Or does it just seem that the passion isn't there because they simply are playing bad basketball?
It seemed to me like the Spurs are playing like they are expecting to win and with a thought that Seattle is just going to roll over and give them the series. That is the way ti seemed like they were playing. Now I hope they have woken up and really start playing becuase if they don't start playing they will not see the WCF. And for a team like the Spurs anything less than the Finals is a disapointing season.
Too many ups and downs in this year's Spurs! Certainly they're able to blow out good teams as early as in the 1st quarter, and maintained the momentum throughout the game, as they often did in the first half of season, when the Spurs're threatening to break the NBA record for point differentials. However, the same team can also lose poor teams often.
This series is just the small version of what happened throughout the season. Let's see if they can react properly, now that the season is in jeopardy. In Game 5 they can prove if they can play as fiercely as if they should in the 4th quarter of Game 7.
I don't "believe", I KNOW the Spurs are very good, right at the top of NBA, just like last season. The NBA le is theirs, IF they have the fight for it.
They don't get blown out, or even lose, when they play with intensity and focus, and, dammit, with some flexible smarts, aka intelligence, making adjustments.
My perfect example is the loss @POR. Spurs turned in a very solid game, a solid stat box, but Blazers shots over 50% FGs and 3Gs for the entire game, their "game of the season", perhaps their "game of the last 5 years". Damon and esp Darius got other-worldly, unstoppably hot in the 4th qtr. happens. A good Spurs loss, with honor. And the Spur still lost by less than 10 pts. Absolutely didn't bother me.
"are there tons of games where the Spurs play their hearts out and still get blown out?"
I can't think of a single one this season.
The Spurs are so good that they beat themselves much more often with bad play than they play well but get beat by superior play by the opponent.
The Spurs were the better team vs 04 (edit) Lakers, so the historic collapse is on the Spurs.
The Spurs are better than the Soncis, and if they lose this series, the collapse will be on the Spurs again.
Last edited by boutons; 05-16-2005 at 12:55 PM.
? Wrong year, boutons?
I don't like the examples he uses in this article. Spurs losing in 2000 to PHX? o, no Tim.
Spurs being swept by Lakers? Well, that was embarassing, but I think David was hurting that year.
Now, 2002 we have no excuse, leads all throughout series, blown-up by Kobe every frickin' time.
2004, we did NOT lose to the same Laker team that lost to the Pisons. Karl Malone played great against the Spurs, and was out against the Pistons. Maybe it wouldn't have made a difference, but we'll never know.
In any case, I can't be disappointed with the Spurs. Frustrated and angry at times, yes. But disappointed, no. Winning two Championships in 6 years is not bad. Maybe it could be better. It sure as could be worse.
Considering that the only team to beat a Healthy Spurs team during that time was Jackson's Lakers, you can be very proud of the Spurs.
And you can trust they'll come back and win this series.
And I think that is exactly the mentality this team and organization has and in professional sports that wont cut it. You have to want it and crave it every year. You can never just settle for "oh well, we won two in the last 6".
OK, first of all MY mentality has little to do with the Spurs mentality.
I'm sure Tim, Manu and Tony aren't satisfied with the one Championship they've won.
I'm just saying as a fan, I'm not disappointed. I can see how other fans would be, but other than 2001 and 2002 was there a series we just "gave up" on? (I'm really not sure if we even gave up in 2002).
The Spurs have fought hard every year, and as a fan, there's really not much you can about. 0.4 seconds? Tim or David being injured? Bad breaks, sure, but not something that leaves me hating the Spurs over.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
