Reply With Quote
Who exactly is discounting Duncan and the Spurs?
Who exactly is discounting Duncan and the Spurs?
no joke..
i wonder what his first post was...a pic of joe montana holding the lombardi trophy for all the doubters??
there seem to be a couple of posts about so called "experts" who are saying the spurs would have lost the game against phoenix had nash been in the game, inlcuding people even before the series saying that the suns will take it
There seems to have been a recent growth in the Perceived Disrespect department at SpursTalk. It's as if the Spurs have been disrespected if they're not in the midst of every basketball conversation taking place right now. It's as if the Spurs are being disrespected if the basketball media fails to annoit the Spurs as the likely champions.
It's remarkable, given how many around SpursTalk seem to take such great pride in the times when the Spurs are "flying under the radar."
If the Spurs win a championship, they'll get all kinds of respect. Until then, they're just like every other team left in these playoffs -- they're not reigning champions and they have to win at 11 more games to sieze this year's crown. That won't be easy with a formidable opponent like Phoenix as the immediate obstacle.
Both of those are prefectly legitimate thoughts.
Can you say with 100% certainty that the Spurs would have won Game 1 if Nash had played the last minute of the game? Can you say with 100% certainty that the Spurs will win this series? I know that I can't, no matter how much I might root for and believe in the Spurs.
I'm not talking about the spurs "flying under the radar"....they do that every year and thats fine with me. I don't care if they are not in every basketball conversation. It just seems that when they are being discussed it's always "the spurs are too old, the spurs will lose...etc" or something along those lines.
Skip Clueless was one. Well, he's is just that - Clueless. It is amazing that a mediocre bore like him has a gig at ESPN.
They would be legitimate thoughts if they themselves had said the Suns MIGHT have won had Nash been on the court.
I always thought there was a bit of disrespect up until 1999. However, the Spurs did nothing to dissuade that until they won their first le. They took some for the 99 le, but any team that won it that year would have. I don't believe there is an anti-Spur bias out there in the media or the NBA. I don't believe anyone is "out to get" them. If you believe that the Spurs are getting disrespected, you are certainly en led to your belief but think of it this way....like FWD said, if the Spurs win, the respect will come.
Huh?
So now your quarrel is with the certainty of someone else's opinion? My point is that you can't say with 100% certainty that the Suns wouldn't have won Game 1 with Nash available. If it's legitimate for you to say that the Suns wouldn't have won with or without Nash, it seems to me equally legitimate for an "expert" to say that the Suns "would" have won with Nash and lost because he wasn't available.
I might disagree with the expert's opinion, but my disagreement doesn't make the opinion illegitimate.
I think on the Nash issue, FWD and Scarab agree but from different angles. Anyone who says the Suns would have definetly won with Nash in at the end is stupid...no one knows for sure and never will.
Sigh... the downside to the deep playoff runs is the profileration of bandwagon takes.
Its the ferocity of the pomposity of the frustration over the situation which behooves and bewitches as well as similtaniously deceives yet overacheives the curiosity of the colostomy....if that's your bag.Huh?
So now your quarrel is with the certainty of someone else's opinion? My point is that you can't say with 100% certainty that the Suns wouldn't have won Game 1 with Nash available. If it's legitimate for you to say that the Suns wouldn't have won with or without Nash, it seems to me equally legitimate for an "expert" to say that the Suns "would" have won with Nash and lost because he wasn't available.
I might disagree with the expert's opinion, but my disagreement doesn't make the opinion illegitimate.
I never said that they would have lost had Nash still been on the court. , anything could have happened either way. All I'm saying is that the media (some people not all), have been saying for certain that they would have won had Nash still been on the court.
WTF is with the newbies showing up whining about respect?
Damn, I think it happens every year in the playoffs. A couple of beat writers aren't all over SA's nuts early in the playoffs and some rooks show up to cry about us not getting respect.
Who cares? It's round 2. Spurs win 11 more games and we'll have the respect we deserve.
Man...you just straight up metamucil!Its the ferocity of the pomposity of the frustration over the situation which behooves and bewitches as well as similtaniously deceives yet overacheives the curiosity of the colostomy....if that's your bag.
Oh, so because i've only just started posting here I'm a bandwagon fan?
Sure. My quarrel isn't necessarily with scarab -- it's more with those who get upset with an unequivocal opinion ("The Suns would have won with Nash.") while being absolutely certain in expressing just the opposite opinion ("The Suns would not have won, even with Nash.").
As a broader point, I think the effort to derive disrespect from the national media is ridiculous. For every "expert" who is even suggesting that the Suns would have won with Nash in the game late, I can find another (Marc Stein, for instance) who's perfectly willing to pimp the Spurs. While the Spurs aren't the reigning champions they (and the Pistons) are big bullies left in these playoffs, and it makes sense to me that some media-types would be willing to openly root against those teams for a variety of reasons. The opinions of those media guys are absolutely meaningless; but the writers have done their jobs, I guess, by getting some people riled up into a feeling of disrespect.
That's absolutely fine for other members of the media to root for other teams, I don't see why everyone has to be a Spurs fan, but to not look at the game objectively is what annoys me.
You got the reference....excellent!Man...you just straight up metamucil!
Again, that's the point FWD is trying to make. Everyone's biased. Let me guess, you're in HS still right? Get used to it, we live in a biased world.
But who says they have to? Most of the "experts" whose views are being challenged are guys who aren't paid to be objective. They write columns that are intended to be controversial.
Again, I'm responding here just because I'm tired of seeing groups of threads and posts within threads complaining about a lack of respect. Wherever it might be lacking, the Spurs need to earn that respect.
It's a conspiracy, mah bruthah...a C-O-N.....spiracy!You got the reference....excellent!
Well, barring another head butt incident, the Suns should have Nash for the entire game tonight. So let's see how the Spurs handle Nash for 48 and if they win or not.
Now with those stiches in place though, how much of a lick will it take to open that nasty gash back up again? BB can be a pretty rough sport, especially in those scrums for loose balls and rebounds. What's the chance Nash takes a lick on that nose and starts bleeding again?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
