To some they probably are. Not to me, just like the Rockets' titles aren't. I'm just saying that we've heard this "the Finals are boring", "Finals don't have the best team", etc...stuff before in the national media. Whoever wins out is the best team that year. Period. That's the purpose of the playoffs.
It will be interestsing , when its all said and done, to debate whether or not the 1999 Spurs or the 2003 Spurs or Nets are the worst NBA champs ever. Probably its 99 still. Ehh, I'm just razzing. Anyway, a legitmate arguement can be made for the Spurs being among the least compelling champs around, ever: 1. they've won it before, so thats no story 2. Duncan has the look and charsma of an Easter Island head. The big fundamental? come on. He's a nice guy but neither his game nor his personality has any flash and very little aesthetic value. That is fine from a basketball standpoiont, not so good for making an indelible impression standpoint 3. No sidestories, unless you count Kevin Willis long quest for a title. 4. all defense, half court offense. Blah 5. Popovich is arrogant, ugly, whiny and boring. At least Phil jackson funny, though a prick. 6. Robinson's last season? OK, that's fine, about as memorable as Nate Thurmonds or Bob Laniers last season. All in all, unless you're from SA, this team is highly forgettable.
The average score was 88-87 in that series. I don't think the shooting was quite as horrible. this years average score is around 89-80 Spurs, less offense than that, but more than 98, which, thanks to that horredous 54 point game by Utah, couldn't have happened to somebody who deserved it more, was an average of 88-80
1. Actually, I think that alot of people still don't credit the Spurs with the title in 99, so it's almost like their first title. They can finally get a title without an asterik. 2. That's a fair one...but he's still fun to watch. 3. This is where you're wrong. The whole Jason Kidd/Tony Parker matchup is a huge sidestory. Considering Jason Kidd has been thought by many to come to SA next year and take Parker's job, watching them battle it out has been very interesting. 4. It's less defense and more sloppy offense... 5. Since when does a coach need to be entertaining and good looking? Your point is absurd. 6. At this point I think you're just hating on the Spurs. I think that there's plenty of stuff that should make us interested in this series. It's the game itself that is what makes us not care. Horrible basketball.
1. a title is a title 2. sort of, but he's no Hakeem, Michael, Charles, Magic, Larry, Clyde 3. Huge sidestory? maybe if you believe the hype. Jason Kidd to San Antonio has been a pipe dream all season, it's been pretty obvious for the past year that he is staying in NJ. The only place where you hear otherwise is in Spurs fans dreams 4. great. 5. A coach doesn't NEED to be entertaining/attractive, etc., but it certainly helps if he is not a complete jerk (like Pop, have you ever seen one of his press conferences after a loss? All he does is talk about the refs and abuse reporters) and a guy you can root for, a la Rudy, or the Zen Master like Jackson, or Mr. Showtime like Pat Riley. To deny this is to be absurd 6. Fine, but who really cares about Robinson's last season outside of SA? Find a matchup since 1980 that was less compelling than this one. There really isn't one.
Rockets Knicks was ugly but it did have 2 HOF centers going head to head at least. The Spurs-Nets really only storyline is the Jason Kidd/Parker deal. It's been pretty boring, but i guess to Spurs fans all that matters is the ring, so congrats. I can see how the rest of the league felt in 94 though...hard to appreciate a boring series when u don't really have a rooting interest. Low-scoring is one thing, bad basketball with turnovers, sloppy play, etc is another. To be fair, the Finals is going to be boring as hell until the east becomes more competitive anyway. Ever since 99, the East has been a total joke. These Nets are awful. I can't believe the Spurs are struggling so badly unless a clearly inferior team.
laker sixers, where Magic had his amazing rookie run and scored 40 in the iinfamous center game (yeah I know he didn' t play c the whole time, bla). Well I remember watchin that game and I was barely in preschool. No way was that less interesting than this. Also, those were the days of high scoring 80's ball, adn the beginning of Showtime. No way. If you mean the 83 run, I think Dr.J and Moses' only titles, plus the championship drive of one of the greatest teams of all time? Sorry, I remember that one too. Rox-Knicks Let's see, Hakeem and Patrick, college rivals, slugging it out for the title after a decade in the nba at last? Game 6 where the alltime leading shotblocker blocked a 3 pointer ath the buzzer that saved the series? 7 games? Hell, new york was involved. Every time new york is involved its a big deal by default. Lakers-Nets? Lets just say that Shaq and Kobe have more personality in their pinky toe than Duncan. Yeah, it was a squash match, but hey it was just the lakers continuing to be great. Nope,this one is clearly the most blah finals of all time.
Don't worry, it gets terrible ratings and is on the cancellation express. Simmons wil be groveling back to page2 in no time.
looking at the spurs team, i think its all the more impressive if they manage to finish off the nets. look at their team: 1. tony parker, 21 years old, french point guard in second season. 2. stephen jackson, 25 year old journeyman who can barely dribble, yet still gets playing time and makes a solid contribution. 3. bruce bowen, no one really cared about him or wanted him. but after an offseason of hard work, became the best 3 point shooter in the league. (think what would happen if Posey could do that) 4. tim duncan, the only star the spurs have. incredibly dominant, like shaq, but doesnt have to bulldoze through people to score. 5. robinson, a shell of his former self, yet still great defensively. now, their bench: malik rose, he's gotta be only 6'5", but has incredible desire and hustle. actually played well AFTER receiving his big payday. Manu, just insanely fun to watch. brings complete chaos to the floor whenever he checks in. oh yeah, he's a rookie drafted in the second round several years ago. Kevin Willis, well, he can't block shots, he cant catch the ball, rarely is able to finish. still, an effective rebounder in spot minutes. and last but not least: Steve "mother*******" Kerr. does the guy ever miss in the clutch? ever? looking at the team on paper, i think it's an amazing accomplishment for them to be in the position they are in. just a team of ragtag players, journeymen, and veterans with only a single star to lead them. their backcourt is so young and inexperienced, and it's showed in the finals with no one being able to knock down shots. In earlier rounds, their offense looked much better. the nets just happen to match up well defensively. all the games have been nail-biters, and as a basketball fan i would rather watch that than shaq bulldozing his way to the rim and dunking on todd mchoullough.
MrSpur, WTF are you posting Spur crap on a Rockets board? Even though the Spurs are in the Finals, we don't care and it's boring according to the rest of the country. Oh, well, the Astros are doing well, right guys?
I didn't realize one had to be a Rockets fan to post here. I know I'm not the only one who apparently fails to meet this previously unannounced requirement.
Greg Popovich's role in making these finals ugly has been humongous. I'm sick of seeing timeouts every time the Nets string two baskets together. Also, I wish he'd let his team run free a little more. Does he call every play downcourt? The Spurs sure play like he does. Also, with a bench as deep as heirs, the Spurs could afford to run sometimes. I mean, how do you have guys like TP, Speedy, Ginobili, with running big men like Duncan, Robinson, and Willis, and play slow-it-down, grind-it-out basketball for a full 48 minutes every game? Thats just boring. It almost makes me sick that this team got past Dallas with no Dirk, who got past Sacramento, with no Webber, and are going to win the title. At least Dallas and Sac played competent offensive basketball and could score, even against "great defensive teams" like the Nets. I guess, my point in all this is, Damn the Spers. They're ruining the NBA finals. Friggin' asterisk bastards. That feels better.
What a craptacular Finals. Definitely the lowest the NBA has ever been. Thank God it's over, and get well soon C-Webb and Dirk so this travesty doesn't happen again.
Tim Duncan is the f****** man. Two blocks away from a quadruple double in the clinching game of the finals. I believed he was the best player in the game before and now I have no doubt in my mind. I like the Spurs just to watch the way he plays. Anyone who can hit a 15-18 foot bank shot with consistency has no words available in our language to describe him because they just aren't worthy of his play.
Not so much in this game, but in other losses Byron Scott's in game coachiing tactics are questionable at best. WHile the Supurs were clearly the superior team, Scott didn't do the nets any favors. He deserves all the blame for the Mutombo fiasco. I bet if they made a plus/minus ratio for mutombo it would be very, very, negative for the nets. I don't know why he bothered with him at all, he couldn't stop duncan, like pretty much everybody else, and he was a huge obstacle on offense, not only did he not help, but he made 3 second violations, clogged up the lane, and was generally in the way. Aaron Williams and Collins would have been shredded by Duncan, but at least they knew how to fit in the offense.
