Please. Shaq had five fouls at the end of that game... there's nothing he could've done if Duncan had the opportunity to go straight at him. The problem, if you watch the tape, is the sagging defense by the four other Laker defenders (could've been def three seconds, but remember this is LA). They kept Duncan from exposing Shaq by going to the basket, and instead made him either give up the ball to the perimeter or take a 10-13 foot bank shot. BTW, your posts in this thread prove you have a clear track record of hate for the Spurs... guess that disqualifies your views as well. Let's go over that series, if you want. In reality, the Blazers and Kings were beaten pretty handily as well. But let's forget about that. Look at the Spurs and Lakers. In game 1, the Spurs didn't fold at all... Kobe just had an unreal game from the field, and the Lakers won by 10-15 points. There was no folding, though. In game 2, the Spurs led for most of the way, before the Lakers took over late and won by about 6. In game 3, the Spurs were somewhat in the game for most of the way (down between 5-15 points), but when they got down by about 17-20 with six minutes left they sent in the bench. How you play in the last six minutes of a game that's already been decided does not make you any less of a team. In game 4, the Lakers clearly outclassed the Spurs, but things like that happen sometimes. The Lakers were up 3-0, and playing better than any team in a long while. The Spurs were on the road, and obviously in a lot of trouble. True, the Kings' loss in game 4 was by less, but that game was in Sacramento. Truthfully, the Spurs were only "blown out" in one game, and the huge margin in the other game was due largely to the Spurs pulling all their starters in the 4th quarter. If that makes them quitters, then I can find an example of virtually every team in the league being quitters. All the Spurs did was perpetuate the well deserved soft label they've carried for almost a decade. If you think it's soft, fine; but the Spurs have something in that last decade that only three other teams have: a championship. So the Lakers would have beaten at least one of the Rocket title teams? Pure conjecture. So is the statement that the Lakers will automatically beat the Spurs in the second round this year, but I don't see you calling that "conjecture"...
If Robinson is the second best player on the Spurs, then what does that say about the rest of the team? The Spurs are a one-man show, and I can't wait to enjoy their demise live and in person in games three and four! NBA! Love it Live!
The Spurs were only blown out in one game?!?!?!?! What series were you watching?!?!?! They set the NBA PLAYOFF HISTORY RECORD FOR BIGGEST MARGIN OF DEFEAT IN A Conference Finals series!!!!!! The only game that was competitive was Game 2. They lost by an avg of 23 ppg in their 4 losses. Stop with your lame spin attempts. They were flat out KILLED. How can you even try to argue that? Your excuses are out of control. You are probably more of a Spurs homer than even Mr. Spur.
Oh, and your recollection of that last play is a total joke. Duncan was one on one isolated with Shaq. Shaq had 5 fouls. That was Duncan's chance right there to take it to Shaq, to win the game for his team, to finally exorcise a little bit of the demons from the biggest playoff A$$ kicking in NBA history. What does he do? He tries a hesitant, soft, fadeaway and gets blocked. Gimme a break with the help defense crap. Duncan put up a soft, crappy shot instead of being aggressive and taking the ball to the rack.
Your excuses are out of control. I explained how one quarter when no one cares, and one game, can skew numbers for an entire series. You did absolutely nothing to disprove that. Want to talk about that last play? Duncan backed Shaq in, and got that eight foot turnaround he consistently makes. The only difference is that this time he was hacked on the arm, and considering it's the Lakers, there was no call. Duncan doesn't have any so called demons... he's beaten the Lakers once, they've beaten him once. The margins of the victories (which were skewed by fourth quarters where the Spurs pulled all their starters) mean nothing except to biased fans like yourself looking for reasons to be critical. Wins are wins, whether by one point or 50, and right now, the Spurs and LA are even when it comes to major postseason series. (and sweeps) By the way, ZRB, Hakeem Olajuwon was a one man show... and so was Tim Duncan in 1999.
TD's 99 team was probably the best defensive team since the 94 Rockets, they were not a 1-man show. Further, Duncan was great in 99, but no where near the phenom Hakeem showed in 95. I'll agree the championship Rockets and Spurs teams were the closest thing to 1 man shows in recent memory (I think you could add Jordan in around 97 or 98 as well because Pippen and Kukoc were both pretty much A-wall with injuries one of those years), but those guys played great many other years from about 85-01 and only have 3 rings between them. They still needed enough quality players throughout their line-ups to make title runs. You even take one quality role player off from those teams--Thorpe or Maxwell in 94, Horry or Elie in 95, Elliott or Elie in 99--and those teams do not make it out of the WC those years.
If Tim Duncan now is a "one man show", Hakeem Olajuwon back then was a "one man show" as well. The difference between Otis Thorpe, Vernon Maxwell, Kenny Smith, and Robert Horry compared to David Robinson, Steve Smith, Tony Parker, and Malik Rose is very little. Scar: Personally, I don't believe in "one man shows". I know the value of role players, and right now I really think the Spurs have the right cast surrounding Duncan, provided Robinson can get healthy. I was just using that analogy because ZRB went that route, and I was simply saying that if the Spurs are a "one man show" now, other championship teams had been very similar.
Personally: Thorpe, Horry, Maxwell, Smith, Cassell & Elie was about = to Horry, Elie, Drexler, Smith, Casell & Brown which were about = to D-Rob (99), Elliott, Elie, AJ, AD, JJ, Rose & Kersey (big difference is that Hakeem 94-95 > Duncan 99) where are all of the above casts are FAR Superior > to D-Rob02 (even if he comes back), Smith, Bowen, Ferry, Parker, Porter, Rose, AD. I don't think the comarisons of the supporting casts are even close actually. Besides my subjective opinion, look at the Spurs record since the 99 team. Since Duncan shouldn't be getting worse (except the time he was injured), the declining winning % must be do to something. To me it is because w/o question TD has less to work with than before, and especially because the team defense isn't even in the same league as the Spurs used to be. The same thing happened to use post 96--our offense stayed competitive with the best of them but the defense did not, it was good enough to get us relatively deep in the WC playoffs but that was about it.
Yes, but Hakeem was a better one-man show. He also had a supporting cast that was a hundred times tougher than the Spurs. Duncan was not a one-man show in 99. That year was all about the twin towers, as much as you and I both hate to admit it. Robinson was good back then...
Cat, I never thought Duncan was or is a "one man show", D.S. and ZRB summed up my thoughts pretty well. "a hundred times better" might be exaggerated for effect by ZRB, but the Rocks supporting cast were tougher (except for "The Jet", lol). The Spurs picked up one of them, Elie, and he helped them like he helped us... he was tough. I'll even admit David was good, real good. Not in Dream's class, but I don't think you said that. I think of Duncan as more of a PF, so I'm not comparing him to Dream. Duncan feels the same way, doesn't he?
Yeah, that's the main thing is that as well as Duncan is playing right now, it's still not at the level where Hakeem was at (which is the level you have to be at to carry a relatively weak supporting cast like the Spurs currently have). Also, in 99, Elie was the one that finally gave the Spurs some TOUGHNESS. I dont see any player on that team right now with that type of attitude. I think they'll still get by Seattle though just because of the Sonics lacking an answer to Duncan. But beating LA without or with a hobbled DRob? Good luck!!!!!
Here it is guys. The NBA's First Team All-Suck! <marquee> Old Softie Uncan (no D) Bwen (No O) Retire Please Sorry-ass, non-jumping little b*stard </marquee> Cat's big comeback: Yeah, they suck-ass. But its all about how you finish the season. Me: It doesn't matter because THEY SUCK! Cat: Ooohh. Crawls into a hole kidding, KIDDING! Cat rules
Dude, Jeff, do I have to include a smiley all the time?! Cat knows I'm kidding. I've agreed with him more than anyone else on this site! He's one of my favorite posters. I'm just ribbing him because he's a spurs fan. See my "release the hate" posts. Everyone knows I'm not serious. That's why I'm not backing up any of my points. Man, way to ruin a guy's joke there... But, as extra insurance, here:
Ok, cool. Sorry I didn't get the humor. Someone else emailed me about it and I was going off of their reference, not my own. I'll think to do more research next time.
Uh, I hate to dredge up the past and all (yeah right) but uh... *cough*Spurs suck ass!*cough* Embrace the hate and you shall be rewarded.
