Reply With Quote
True, but that's only because they took both games in Memphis in '04.
(Sorry, Sequ, this isn't a bowling topic so you can take your bowling glove off)
I've seen Extra Stout and a couple others mention this, but I think it deserves it's own thread. After the Spurs win the first two games at home in a series, they've been horrible as of late in getting the job done on the road.
If you take out the first round series in which the Spurs swept an inferior Grizzlies team and take out the Finals due to their different format (2-3-2), the Spurs don't have a great track record in getting one of the road to come back home up three games to one.
2006
The Spurs win the first two games at home versus the Kings. The Kings bounce back and win the next two games at home.
2005
The Spurs win the first two games at home versus the Sonics. The Sonics bounce back and win the next two games at home.
2004
The Spurs win the first two games at home versus the Lakers. The Lakers bounce back and win the next four games.
2003
The Spurs win the first two games at home versus the Lakers. The Lakers bounce back and win the next two games at home.
You have to go back all the way to the 2001 series against the Mavericks to find a time the Spurs won their first two games at home and then got a split on the road. That's more than six years ago.
So not only are the Jazz undefeated at home in the playoffs and have beaten the Spurs in each of their visits this year, the Spurs are going out on the road to try to accomplish something they haven't done in six years. And even then, it was against the Mavericks.
It'd be great to break that streak this season, but this might be something to ponder for Spurs fans gassing up the riverboats.
Prepare for battle.
True, but that's only because they took both games in Memphis in '04.
A friend of mine is a Jazz fan and I said the same thing to him. We need a split but every time we're up 2-0, the series always ends up being 2-2. The Spurs are playing so well right now, I think they will be able to win one of these games in Utah. The Phoenix crowd in Game 5 of that series was annoying as all and they fought through it. I believe they will put it out for one of the games in SLC.
Yeah I disqualified Memphis earlier in the post because, well, everyone sweeps Memphis.
Memphis doesn't count. That series was the first part of the "Memphis Grizzlies: First Round Bye" trilogy. Sweeping Memphis was also championship kryptonite for the winning team.
I think the Spurs drop the next one simply because this long ass rest period, they had a good rhythm going and Manu was turning into Super Manu. After 3 long days Manu as well as the other Spurs have had time to cool off. Another thing that might catch the Spurs off-guard is that pissed off Utah crowd. Ultimately I think the Spurs will manage to win one game over there and come back in Game 5 ready the step on their throats.
the split. Get the next two.
It all depends on how the Spurs work their offense, board, take care of the ball, and shoot. I think the defense will be there, but they need to keep up the firepower while taking better care of the ball. It will be difficult for Utah to win 2 because they just have a hard time matching up, doesn't matter if you play in Zimbabwe.
It's more than just the configuration of the series that's similar.
I made the same argument last night to someone who is convinced that the Spurs have never played better ball and that the Jazz have no chance. I think, in some ways, there's more to worry about this time than there was in other, similar cir stances.
For instance, in 2005, the Spurs won the first two at home against Seattle by 22 and 17 and it appeared that they would sweep the Sonics out in 4. They lost Game 3 in Seattle by 1 point when Duncan missed a tip at the buzzer. They then got throttled in Game 4. After looking like a safe bet to sweep, the Spurs came an amazing Ginobili pass, a great Duncan finish, and a just-wide Ray Allen 3 pointer from facing a Game 7.
2006 with Sacramento was somewhat similar, though after a Game 1 s ing of the Kings by 34, Game 2 at home was the overtime spawned by the Barry Bounce at the end of regulation. Still, the Spurs went out on the road, lost Game 3 on Martin's buzzer-beater, and then got hammered in Game 4. Despite dominating most categories, the Spurs won Game 5 at home by only 11 and many were convinced that a Game 7 loomed, despite the Spurs' having taken a 2-0 lead.
2004 brought us the Spurs winning 2 home games against LA by 10 and 13 only to be followed by losses in LA by 24 and by 8, which begot .4.
2003 had the Spurs winning home games by 5 and by 19, only to go out to LA and drop Game 3 by 15 and Game 4 by 4 (as Kobe and Shaq combined to make 31-40 FT). That series brought us Horry's rim-out at the end of Game 5.
The point, I think is that Games 1 and 2 haven't very frequently meant much for the Spurs when they've gone out on the road for Games 3 and 4. Likewise, it's clear that a series that appears to be in the bag can quickly turn from a likely sweep to a 6 or 7 game heartstopper -- it can only take only play, like Duncan's miss in Seattle or Martin's make in Sacramento. Crazy things happen on the road (Kobe and Shaq get 41 FTA; Mark Wunderlich gets intimidated by Jack Nicholson and makes ridiculous calls) and those things can change a series.
Lots of work for the Spurs this weekend.
Get 1.
But do you remember a major player for any of those teams saying to the media that his team had reached the ceiling and basically isn't good enough?
Now's the time to finish them. They doubt themselves and each other. Finish them off.
Dang! How do you guys remember all this stuff? When the buzzer goes off I just mentally mark it up as a win/loss and forget everything else. I'm impressed.
Oh, I agree with you about that. My point -- and I think timvp's as well -- is that looking at Games 1 and 2 and saying "This will be easy" is both shortsighted and contrary to a long history with this bunch of Spurs.
In the old days, the 1999 and 2001 teams were absolute killers on the road after getting anything done at home. The trend in 1999 is obvious (split at home against Minnesota, sweep games 3 and 4; sweep at home and on the road against LA and Portland; sweep at home against New York, get games 4 and 5 on the road). The 2001 team took 2 at home against the T'Wolves, got Bavetta-ed in Game 3, and then took care of business in Game 4. They took a similar path against the Mavs that year, winning Games 1 and 2, getting Game 3 and then giving back Game 4, but still coming home up 3-1.
I think what were looking at, is their consistent good play on the road, their big wins in the playoffs so far on the road, in Denver, in Phoenix.
Thats what I think these people are basing them on.
Utah plays much better at home, they aren't likely to miss makeable shots like they did in SA and they will have their fans to buoy them if they start to sag like they've done in two straght second quarters. The Spurs will have to be demons on the boards, because that keys everything they do.
YOU CAN DO IT
Absolutely!!! We've got to do it!!
I think the 2005 Finals are just as relevant even tho they're a 2-3-2. Spurs made Detroit look like in the first two games, then smelled worse in dropping the first two in Detroit.
Break the trend. Get 1.
I actually have faith in them more than I ever have. This year (despite the better record last year) has been their best performance year on the road. I think they can win at least one. It will be ing hard but they can do it
Teams shoot lower percentages in Utah because the balls are pumped up with more air. All rebounding instincts go to in that scenario.... Is it a wonder that Utah's rebounding margin at home is more than 4 rebounds greater than their margin on the road?
Also, let's not forget that since '03 the Spurs have always managed to get at least one game in Phoenix. So much for them being more talented.
Well one thing is this is a good road team.
I have not been overwhelmed by the first two games. A win is a win but Utah has outplayed the Spurs in the second half of both games. Game 1 I could forgive because of the quick turnaround but game 2 was the same despite both teams having equal rest.
The blinders need to be on and all focus has to be on the next game, whether that is game 3, game 4 or whatever. Get one!
The extra home game in each series, particularly early in the playoffs, come in "handy" financially.
The Spurs will split in SLC and close it out in Game 5 in SA.
and I know Timvp discounted finals appearances because of the 2-3-2 format, but the Spurs also won games 1 & 2 by blowouts in '05 against Detroit, then thoroughly got blown out in games 3 & 4.
There is no doubt the Spurs have a bad history with 2-0 leads.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
