Actually Phoenix held SAS to somewhere between 104-105 (just eyeballing the games) offensive efficiency, which if extrapolated over the course of an entire season would have put them somewhere in the top 3-4 among western conference defenses last year.
Except the countless times when they don't. But let's not let selective use of history get in the way of making general statements.
I swear Houston has the most impossible fans. My point is inarguable. You can not argue the fact that Offense helps Defense When the Balls is steadily going into the Basket, it makes it easier to defend. You opponent is forced to take the ball out on the sideline, giving you time to set up you defense on the other end of the floor, You prevent transition baskets, and you have the ability to either pressure the ball or read and react. But does defense help offense? Of course it does. When you stop your opponent from scoring it sets up transitional baskets, also not giving your opponent a chance to run defensive sets. Like I said the point is inarguable. The current team that we have will find more success using Offense to help Defense. Because of the type of personnel that we have. If you know anything about basketball its pretty black and white. The End.
The Suns averaged 109.5 points in that series, SAS averaged 100 the Suns shot 48 percent from the field and 46 from 3 point Nash, Goran, Amare all had big offensive games during the series. I would believe that a more potent offensive is the reason that the Suns swept the Spurs. If you look at the Spurs this year. they are a much better offensive team. Im sure POP knew he needed some more Off firepower or he would see a similar result this year
You can believe whatever you want to believe but it doesn't change facts. Suns played very good defense on the Spurs. The type of defense that SA played all season long, THAT'S how well Phoenix played defense in that series, they held SA to 5 PP100 under their season average. BTW, the Spurs aren't a "much better" offensive team. They're barely better than last year. There's a reason that defense matters three times as much as offense when it comes to NBA champions.
i kinda feel i am wasting my time to argue with you. have i ever said offense is not important? have i ever said those teams had the worst offense? why do you keep twisting what we said. do you know what the bull's pg said in an interview posted on espn. in general he emphasized they focused on defense and started with defense. if you have to rank the importance of offense and defense. i would put defense is #1 then offense as 2nd. rox has already had high efficient offense before shane trade. their game score has been over 100 average since day one. the defense improvement after shane trade clearly triggered our recent surge but remember the winning stretch has been really tested by title contenders.
I think I'm the only person remaining in this thread who is NOT arguing for or against this. I'm only arguing the existence of the proper sports adage...whether or not it is true in practice is not why I replied to your originally. I'm just saying that "A good Offense is a Great Defense" is in fact the most used sports adage between the two. "A good defense is great Offense" is not the correct sports adage...it refers to military strategy, and arguing like lawyers and maybe boxing. You said everyone got that mixed up...I'm saying you got it mixed up. Give up "The End"
wouldn't doubt it. Can we say "the rope a dope in the 'Rumble in the Jungle'" took that to an extreme. I actually never heard either version used in boxing. hence "maybe" I was thinking maybe someone compared the Offense and scared tactics of Tyson to military strategy "A good defense is a great offense" ie., FIRST STRIKE!!
