Reply With Quote
LOL, yeah, we got lucky twice. It wasn't a strategy. Our best player that year was a washed up Dominique Wilkins.
The Spurs are the 2nd worst team on the road in the Western Conference (following the tanking Golden State Warriors).
Coming soon...
But someone just had to make this thread...
I was hoping the Spurs schedule included the Mad Ants, the Blue Coats, and the Springfield High School JV, but heck, it's all NBA teams.
LOL, yeah, we got lucky twice. It wasn't a strategy. Our best player that year was a washed up Dominique Wilkins.
Yes,that was exactly the point i was trying to make.
We're playing some NBA teams over the next 3-4 months.
It wasn't that we have a top5 tough remaining schedule.
It wasn't that we may have an even worse RRT than last year.
It wasn't that we may soon be-not just out of the playoff picture-but bottom 3 in the Conference....
It was that we're playing NBA teams ...
Cheers. Well done. Hahaha
Uh-oh. You tossed in a fact. That's going to get avoided like the plague.
The Spurs are the 2nd worst team on the road in the Western Conference (following the tanking Golden State Warriors).
Coming soon...
But someone just had to make this thread...
Those 5 AM games are going to be brutal. ing Silver.
One reason we may never see the Spurs actually tank is that they are a small market team and they need to fill seats and get those extra playoff game revenues to continue to compete financially in the league.
Teams in larger markets can tank and absorb some of those lost revenues more easily.
For that reason alone I expect the Spurs to always be a team that tries to "win now," even when they don't look like a le contender.
It is worth remembering that while we are not a legit le contender this year, we do have NBA history to chase.
If we get to the playoffs for a 23rd year in a row that will set a new NBA record.
Why not add that to this storied franchise's list of accomplishments?
Go Spurs Go!
If you go all the way back to Nov. 22, the Spurs have played above .500 ball. (They were 9-8 in that stretch.) Above .500 is a 42-win season. That should get them into the playoffs, but it should also result in some big trades.
The Spurs have the 18th highest team salary this year, which is about how they're playing I guess. But they also have the 11th most committed for next season, and two or three of the ones with more committed are so close that it doesn't matter. Basically in a 4-way tie for 8th most committed salary next season. What are they going to do with that that is going to move the needle? (And I know as I type this that about 98% of the people will totally miss the point.)
You want facts:Uh-oh. You tossed in a fact. That's going to get avoided like the plague.
1. that was 20 years ago in the 19th century and an era where a couple of stars + a bunch of role players was enough, and you were siging them for their whole career or at least prime years.
NBA has "slightly" changed ever since and the construction of a contender is way more compicated and subject to a lot of variables like players who can leave and up your whole master plan because of their Uncle or whatever... Players have taken over power in the NBA, teams had it 20 years ago.
2. How many other cases can you name? Cos I can give you a giant list of tanking and failing teams. Or maybe you think that one example 20 years ago, for an all time great, generational player we might never see again, will prove your point occulting all the counter-examples ever since?
Fact is there's absolutely no guarantee you'll succeed faster tanking (=playing to lose) than doing it the right way. The only guarantee you'll got is you'll suck big time (and maybe for a long time if your pick is a bust or get injured..)..
Even LA, that sucked many years, piling up bad "top" picks don't owe their return to grace to tanking but to Lebron choosing Hollywood for his business to finish his career. If he picks NY or whatever, they're ed and AD probably don't even accept to go there.
And anyway, who the does want to watch and wish his team to lose? I don't and don't care if it worked once in the 20th century...
3. Last but not least, and precisely (and ironically) because of that Duncan guy and a couple other dudes, spurs have built a certain history and culture of excellence and success you might wanna laugh at but that represent something for (some) of their fans, that PO streak symbolizing it.
Look how people are disconcerted and sarcastic because spurs are fighting for a 8th spot while fans from other teams will celebrate it and call it an achievement... We're are demanding and used to excellence and it should stay like that.
We are the freaking spurs. Good day, bad days keep pounding the rock and doing your best.
Last edited by JPB; 01-02-2020 at 12:27 PM.
All day, every day.
Oh... you're a philosopher. Sorry, I did't recognize it right at first. Here's a little news flash, Plato. WE are not the freaking Spurs, and you aren't pounding that ing rock. You're one of those who somehow think the "virtue" of your favorite team applies to you personally. The rock is a mataphor (Google it) for constant incremental improvement. The Spurs were able to do that for almost two decades because their rock had a foundation of the great Timothy Theodore Duncan - who, not coincidentally, they got exactly the way we're talking about. And the Spurs have been in a state of constant incremental decline since he retired. Something has to change, or nothing is going to change.
You may be happy with a perpetual .500 record, and sneaking into the playoffs just because some other fans woudl be happy with that. But the grownups are talking about how the Spurs can be more than that, in the shortest amount of time.
Now... go away and think, then come back and sputter something deep and philosophical at me. All the best philosophers were Greek, and they got their best material from me.
I did a “Start from today” NBA 2K20 simulation where the Spurs finished 4th seed lol. I mean, it coooouuuld happen
Spurs play down to the compe ion, but somehow rises to better teams, i.e. Clippers, Rockets. I think they are capable of playing well if properly motivated.
Umm it worked for us how do you think we got David Robinson and Tim Duncan?
We didn't use tanking as a strategy in 97. Robinson suffered the injury that hampered him the rest of his career and our best player was a Dominique Wilkins...and it still came down to luck. Stinking it up for a lottery ticket isn't a sound strategy and the teams who have literally been utilizing it for long strides of time haven't been successful and/or lucky. Too many variables to consider it a sound strategy.
I'd still like for this team to upgrade either the starting SG or starting PF. They have to make a trade, even if they want to keep DeRozan. You just can't survive with Trey Lyles and Bryn Forbes in the starting line up
Especially now that the weighting has changed so much, even from before.
People say that all of the time, but it’s just not true. SA set a then record for player games missed with like 278. David started the season out with issues caused by playing in the olympics, and then broke his foot after only a few games, and was out for the year. Sean missed half the season. Those were the two All Star caliber players. Avery missed like 3/4 of the season, and then almost ed things up when he returned by winning some games, and leaving us with only the 6th worst record.
Forget about the fact that THERE ARE NO TIM DUNCANS OUT THERE, AND NEVER WILL BE AGAIN.
And now they're 4 1/2 games out of 7th place, and 4 games out of 14th. They're closer to the 7th pick than the 7th seed.
Given the next 8 or so, this was a must win. And it was until Pop inexplicably played Forbes while he was getting it pushed in from SG-A.
And I'm not trying to jump on you about the thread... I swear I'm not. It's just frustrating as to see Bryn getting this many minutes, and I don't think we can get excited when they win a game against the Pisstons, and have to go to O/T to beat GSW. There just aren't enough of those to get into the playoffs.
I get that. I tried to make it clear that the post was more so about the pace of change and how quickly we went from being out to fairly solidly in the 8th place, yet it's clearly NOT a concrete status.
There's a great chance the Spurs go 1-5 in their next six games:
@ Mil, Mil, @ Boston, @ Memphis @ Toronto @ Miami,
That would put the Spurs at 15-24
There's a great chance the Spurs go 1-5 in their next six games:
@ Mil, Mil, @ Boston, @ Memphis @ Toronto @ Miami,
That would put the Spurs at 15-24
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
