11' spurs vs 12' jazz

[spursfan1000]

The question is how would last years spurs team had faired against this years jazz team? My guess would be spurs in 5?

[GSH]

Okay, that deserves a response.


The playoff version of the '11 Spurs had an injured Manu Ginobili. (Serious injury, not just the usual bumps and bruises.) It had no Kawhi Leonard or Danny Green, or Stephen Jackson, or Boris Diaw. And, maybe most importantly of all, it featured Richard Jefferson in the freakin' starting lineup. It's hard to over-weight any one of those factors, but the semi-absence of Manu was enormous - he was the team's leading scorer, and had by far the most trips to the FT line.

That version of the Grizzlies was firing on all cylinders, and they were peaking at just the right time. I think they were playing better than the Jazz team that the Spurs just swept. But the Jazz' front court would still have done their share of damage to Blair and McDyess (even though McD was playing great for his age.)

Maybe that Spurs team, as it existed, could have gotten past thise year's Jazz. Mostly because the Jazz shot so poorly from outside. But some of that was the fact that the Spurs were able to close out on them better, because they didn't have to help inside as much. I'd still say that series would have gone 7 games - maybe 6, with some luck.

Ask yourself how this Jazz team would have fared against last year's Memphis team. That series still probably goes to 6 games. I don't think the '11 Spurs would have gotten it done in 5 games. This team is so much better than least year's, there is no comparison.

i think the jazz would stretch it to 7 games if they had a 1 foot advantage

Heh... I made a conscious effort not to do that. But, yeah, a team of 12-footers is pretty intimidating.

[Mugen]

This year’s Jazz were one of the worst 8seed teams to come around in a while. Both the ’11 Spurs and ’11 Grizzlies would take them out in 5 games, IMO.

Last year’s version of ZBo/Gasol is significantly better than Misap/Jefferson and Darrell Arthur was pretty much the equal of Favors this year.



Conley/Allen/Mayo/Battier are also all significantly better than any of the perimeter players the Jazz had.



Even with an injured Manu, I think that Spurs team gets out of the first round against the Jazz relatively easily.

[romain.star]

Interesting...

Despite RJ, i'd pick the 11' Spurs in 6

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

Spurs in 5, maybe 6. Just as it was this year the Jazz would have zero hope to slow Tony Parker. The final scores would be much closer, but a Tim/Tony pick and roll down the stretch would be enough to get the job done.

[Venti Quattro]

Spurs in 4 or 5.

[romain.star]

Spurs in 5, maybe 6. Just as it was this year the Jazz would have zero hope to slow Tony Parker. The final scores would be much closer, but a Tim/Tony pick and roll down the stretch would be enough to get the job done.

correct, though 11' Parker << 12' Parker

[GSH]

This year’s Jazz were one of the worst 8seed teams to come around in a while. Both the ’11 Spurs and ’11 Grizzlies would take them out in 5 games, IMO.

Even with an injured Manu, I think that Spurs team gets out of the first round against the Jazz relatively easily.

That's funny. I think you could make a case that last year's Spurs were one of the worst 1 seed teams to come around in a while. IMO, you have to look at who they were at playoff time, not how they played earlier in the regular season. They were playing their worst ball of the season, by a long shot, going into the post-season.

They finished the season 12-11. (Okay, so one of those games they rested the Big 3. Call it 12-10.) Just before the playoffs, they had a 6-game losing streak. And 7 of those 12 wins were against crappy teams with sub-.500 records. In other words, if they hadn't hit a soft spot in the schedule at the end, they probably would have been below .500 themselves in the last 20+ games.

And THEN they lost their leading scorer in the last game of the season.

So, yeah, forget how well the '11 Spurs played early in the season, because the team that opened the playoffs was in trouble. If you want to play the "What If" game, you can talk about how it would have been if they were playing with a healthy Manu, or if they were playing like the first 60 games. But they weren't.

I still say that the Spurs team that entered the playoffs last year, as it really existed, would have needed at least 6 games to put away this year's Jazz.

[DMC]

About the same.

I think people are getting way ahead of themselves on this "new look Spurs" thing. Next series could be the tell tale. The Jazz were a joke.

[GSH]

I think people are getting way ahead of themselves on this "new look Spurs" thing. Next series could be the tell tale. The Jazz were a joke.

Like I said - Last year's team finished 12-11. This year's team finished 21-2. THAT is who the two teams are/were at playoff time.

Whether you think this team is good enough to win it all or not, they absolutely are much better than last year's team at this time.


Edit: BTW - I think it's fair to compare the end-of season records of the two. Last year the Spurs rested their starters in 1 of the last 2 games, and got their asses kicked. This year they rested the starters in both of their last 2 games, and won both with the starters sitting. Sorry, but that's not the same team.

[dunkman]

As a team that has won 4 'ships the bar has to be set higher. Its a torture to remember the 11' Spurs.

The Grizzlies were better than 8th seed, they tanked some games to play the Spurs. The Spurs were #1 seed only on paper, they had only 50 wins. They hit low point at the end of the season as injuries to the best players stroked, also many close RS games went Spurs way by luck. There was almost no difference from the 1st to 8th seed, only the Mavs were a great team.

The 12' Jazz is neither something to write home about.

[100%duncan]

Spurs in 4.

[therealtruth]

As a team that has won 4 'ships the bar has to be set higher. Its a torture to remember the 11' Spurs.

The Grizzlies were better than 8th seed, they tanked some games to play the Spurs. The Spurs were #1 seed only on paper, they had only 50 wins. They hit low point at the end of the season as injuries to the best players stroked, also many close RS games went Spurs way by luck. There was almost no difference from the 1st to 8th seed, only the Mavs were a great team.

The 12' Jazz is neither something to write home about.

The Grizzlies tanked their last two games the same way the Spurs left the big 3 out the last two games. What would be the point of playing the last two games if their guys got injured?

[sananspursfan21]

This Jazz team was so overrated by so many of you guys on here '11 spurs still would have done em in 5, losing only game 3 cuz utah was fired up

[ginobili fan]

12' Jazz are a really really bad team probably the worst 8th seed of the decade

I'm waiting for the Memphis in the 2nd round

[dunkman]

The Grizzlies tanked their last two games the same way the Spurs left the big 3 out the last two games. What would be the point of playing the last two games if their guys got injured?

To avoid playing the better team. Manu's a special case, he's always injured. Pop should have played the big 3 vs the Lakers, send a message, and rest them for the last game.

[King]

i think the jazz would stretch it to 7 games if they had a 1 foot advantage

I don't think this post is getting enough credit.