Reply With Quote
Side note: Pop became only the 10th coach to reach 70 postseason wins.
This is an awesome article just posted on Foxsports and it's true maybe the Spurs are the team to beat not the pistons because they aren't the reigning champs...
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/5531874
In the event you were out of the country on a mission for the past year and had no idea who the defending NBA champions are, all you had to do was watch Saturday's opening day of the 2006 playoffs.
It would be wise to reconsider the state of the San Antonio Spurs after the way the Spurs emphatically reminded everyone that they are the champs until further notice.
And the extent of the Spurs' domination of the Kings was so apparent, veteran point guard Nick Van Exel entered the game to start the second quarter in place of Parker, and quickly rang up 11 points before the period was halfway over.
Anyone seen Mike Bibby?
For all the noise coming out of Artest's mouth prior to the series how the Kings were not only going to take out the Spurs, but were going to win the NBA le, it was somewhat ironic that Manu Ginobili caught Artest right in the mouth with an elbow on the Spurs' first possession.
So much for the y Artest.
Although it was just one game in this best-of-seven series, it was stunning how omnipotent the Spurs were, particularly when so many analysts have talked about the vulnerability of the Spurs. Allegedly, the time is ripe for them to be knocked off in the West — perhaps by the cross-state rival Dallas Mavericks. True, some of what happened Saturday was the bizarre convergence of a great start and the Kings not being ready for any of it.
Nonetheless, everyone needs to remember the Spurs finished just one game behind the Detroit Pistons for the best record in the entire league. The quality play and experience that veterans like Van Exel, Michael Finley and Brent Barry bring off the bench gives them a stability and level of execution that will make them a tough out all the way to the Finals again.
Maybe the Detroit Pistons remain the team to beat, but nobody sent that message to the Spurs. They've got their own thoughts on the subject, being the road to the NBA Finals still very much travels through the SBC Center in San Antonio.
Nobody will be howling at the Kings to remember the Alamo. But close enough. Suffice to say the Spurs fired a warning shot Saturday that was heard from coast to coast.
Side note: Pop became only the 10th coach to reach 70 postseason wins.
NOTE- pistons were the champs last yr,(so being champs doesn't mean your the one to beat specially when it comes to pistons!spurs had HCA,barely won if not for a prayer by horry in the 5th game.and it took 2 mins in the 7th game with help by the refs favoring the hometeam for the spurs to pull out a win for the le.keep in mind pistons have HCA this yr and revenge on their mind!
the last bit of your post is lame. it's not the ncaa, there was no miracle 4 games that the spurs won. for all the what ifs and almosts, the sure fact is that, in 7 games, the pistons lost four. and just like you point out that being the champ assures nothing, neither does hca. but the key difference that i think gets overlooked is how few, if any, analysts have said the cliche "they're the defending champs, so until someone knocks them off, they're the team to beat." i think that's all this article is about.
Horry must be the second coming because his prayers are answered on a regular basis.
If you're going to trashtalk you should get your fact right. Horry's 3-pointer helped them win Game 5, but that doesn't explain them winning Game 7. You could credit Bowen's D on Billups or the Spurs' ability to grind it out, but you can't give Horry credit for game 7, or for the whole series. In fact, Duncan was named MVP, and Manu came close, so if you want to try and pin the championship on one player, maybe you should start with them.
Face it, your Pistons lost a good series. They weren't good enough last year. Maybe they are this year, maybe they aren't. But they weren't last year, so they're not the defending champs. Get over it. The Spurs did in 2004, when they weren't good enough.
Yeah, let's open up this pandora's box again. Good job xoxbillupsxox! This isn't even the finals yet. The first round JUST started. Come on now. And, Spurs fans, you know you shouldn't even have responded to his post. Let's wait til the finals should both our teams get there to really start putting down the smack ... at least most of it.
"NOTE- pistons were the champs last yr,"
plonk!
This logic will make some of these Spurs fans think twice before bringing up the ol' ".04" excuse too..
It is pretty amazing when you think that jsut record wise...Spurs only had one more loss than the Pistons. Even I hadn't realized it. With all the hype behind the Pistons this season, even I myself got caught up in, Spurs were right there with them.
BELIEVE.
Now, that point I would like to clarify. The Pistons could have easily had 66-67 wins had they not already clinched HCA with four games left in the regular season. The Pistons tanked 3 of their last 4 games by playing the third string guys and the inactive rookies for most of those last four games. And, two of those three losses were against teams playing for something (Milwaukee and Washington). Had the Pistons not locked HCA against the entire league, the Pistons would have likely finished 67-15 compared to the Spurs 63-19. Meanwhile, the Spurs had to lock up HCA in the Western Conference and their last couple garbage games were against teams that were not in the playoffs, were not fighting for anything, and resting most of their starters (Minnesota, Utah, and Houston).
Spurs had a tremendous year, all things considered. But, the Pistons league leading record was never really threatened that much. The Pistons had the best record in the NBA throughout the ENTIRE regular season.
Jamstone, you are correct. Most of us know the Pistons were the best team in the league during the season, and thus, why they are odds-on favorites.
I still think there will be some surprises. I only hope it isn't our team that is surprised.
I'd be interested in seeing who the top 10 are. My guess is that the number of playoff wins field narrows pretty quickly after reaching the top ten. You have to have had longevity plus some teams that went a long way year after year.
Here are my top guesses.
1.Auerback probably because of so many great Celtic championship teams.
2. Phil of the Lakers & Bulls
3. Riley is probably up there because of the Lakers as well
4. Red Holtzman of the Knicks great years
5. Maybe Lenny Wilkens because of longevity
my issue with this is it's like pointing out what the spurs' record would have been had there not been so many injuries. in the end, let the records stay as they are and just own up to the one-game margin and leave it at that.
As we all know, the Spurs are never about what the "experts" say and they always bring it on the court. Talk is for people who can't hang. It is frustrating that the "experts" always overlook our boys, but we all know what really matters and that is the 16 wins that it takes to be the last team standing at the end. For all those idiots who want to write off the defending champs... SPURS 122 KINGS 88. ENOUGH SAID.
My issue with that is that there have been plenty of Spurs fans that claim that the Spurs would have had the better regular season record had they been healthy.
And you don't think there's any truth in that? You don't think the fact that the Pistons managed to stay pretty healthy overall throughout the season helped them with their awesome record?
Nobody will ever know for sure if the Spurs were healthy, would they have been able to contest with the Pistons more seriously for the best record. But, if Duncan and Manu had been healthier, I am sure the Spurs would have won a few more games (**ahem, back to back games). Anyways, it's over so who knows for sure.
You don't think it would have been??
Phil is easily #1 just because it took him 15-16 wins to win a championship while the most it ever took Auerbach was 12.
1. Phil Jackson 175-69 .717
2. Pat Riley 155-100 .608
3. Larry Brown 100-89 .529
4. Red Auerbach 99-69 .589
5. K.C. Jones 81-57 .587
6. Lenny Wilkens 80-98 .449
7. Jerry Sloan 78-80 .494
8. Chuck Daly 75-51 .595
9. Don Nelson 70-85 .452
10. Gregg Popovich 69-41 .627
11. Rick Adelman 68-64 .515
12. Billy Cunningham 66-39 .629
T13. George Karl 60-71 .458
T13. John Kundla 60-35 .632
Right, and now the Pistons don't have a young inexperienced backup point to jump on. They also have to face a Michael Finley coming off the bench. They also won't have a missing Ginobili or Rasho Nesterovic for 20 minutes a night to count as they did in the regular season.
Be afraid, Piston Fan. Be very afraid.
Yeah, none of Detroit's starters missed more than 2 games in the regular season. Manu missed considerable time and Duncan was hardly as healthy ever as he is right now. Health is no longer an advantage for the Pistons.
Don't know for sure. Had the Spurs won more games in previous seasons when healthy? Nope. This season was the franchise best. I just point out the Pistons could have easily had a few more wins had the last few games meant anything and if the Spurs or Mavs had pushed them more during the course of the season. Again, who knows?
But, assuming that the Spurs automatically would have had a better record if healthy is conjecture as well, because the Pistons would have likely won more games as well.
spurs had HCA,barely won if not for a prayer by horry in the 5th game.Horry must be the second coming because his prayers are answered on a regular basis.
Make that 175-70 .714
I think you may misunderstand what is meant. The way I took it was that the Spurs would have had a better record than they have now. Whether or not that meant they have a better record than the pistons when all is said and done is debatable.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
