it really is unbelievable, isn't it? yet all they yell about is the CLASS that they have.... he really showed his ass on that one....
For some real analysis - most of which is done on the Rockets boards, not the NBA Dish one - the consensus is still out as to whether or not we are in a conference in which a real center is needed. The SPurs probably have the next best center in the league and a great PF and we see how they did in the playoffs. Certainly, the Rockets still need a decent center, but Rudy is taking a different approach to getting through the West, just like he took a different approach to led the team to the first 2 championships and just like he took a different approach last year with all the ISO's to get the team going in the right direction. AS to records, the ROx were 2-2 against the T-Pups, either 1-2 or 2-2 against the JailBlazers (cant remember off the top of my head), and 2-2 against the Mavs. The Rockets had as many problems against the Clippers and Nuggets and Warriors of the World as they did against the upper echelon teams. All fans on this BBS have been over this stuff many many times in the proper forum. Last year the Rockets fielded a 47-35 team, a great improvememnt over the year before and a great record, playoffs or not. This year they improved with the additions of Glen Rice and Eddie Griffen while ridding themselves of players who no longer cared to play for the Rockets with a level of passion that is expected out of team leaders Francis and Mobley. Denying that the Rockets are an up and coming team while the Spurs, as good as they are, which is presently better than the Rockets, are a team that is stuck in neutral, is denying fact.
The season that you are using (1994-95), the Rockets came from the sixth seed to win and the Spurs were the #1 seed. Most would agree that is laying down. The season of 1993-94, the Spurs were ousted in the first round by the Jazz. Utah 3, San Antonio 1 Apr. 28 San Antonio 106, Utah 89 @ San Antonio Apr. 30 Utah 96, San Antonio 84 @ San Antonio May 3 Utah 105, San Antonio 72 @ Utah May 5 Utah 95, San Antonio 90 @ Utah Going down quickly in the first round with home court advantage seems like laying down to me. Your basic premise is that the Spurs are superior to the Rockets. By selectively picking the <i>right times</i> in history, that concept will be true. Several years ago, (pre Duncan) the Spurs were a lottery team rebuilding and the Rockets were in the playoffs. You don't mention that, just crow about recent years while the Rockets are in a rebuilding/transitional stage. <b> Wishfull thinking, twisting of reality. Weak * reference. </b> Based on the info that I posted above, you are doing what we are accused of. As far as trolls and true flame wars on other BBS sites, they don't last long here because the instigator is booted in short order. Keep that in mind if you wish to remain here. Change your attitude/tone and you will fit in here. Keep the chip on the shoulder and you will be shunned or even booted. Mango
You are aware the only reason you have 2 titles is because Jordan was retired and you never had to meet the Bulls, right? I could've sworn I saw Jordan playing that 2nd year... Also, this is a notice to both ZRB and Spurs fans. It's absolutely ridiculous to say that the Rockets championships are asterisked, and the Spurs championship isn't, or the other way around. Spurs fans-- it's ok to win a title after 50 games, but it isn't ok to win back to back championships with Jordan out for one of those years? Everyone here sounds like they are trying to make a negative out of one team to boost the other. You don't have to do that. If you like to complain and give out asterisks, fine. Chalk our championships up to MJ being gone over a season, but don't turn right around and say that winning after a 50 game season isn't worthy of an asterisk. Keep the same standards for both teams. It's also the same for saying that the Rockets are worthy of our championships (with MJ gone for over a season) and then saying that the Spurs championships were tainted. Either both teams won legit championships, or both should be given an asterisk. Imho, a championship is a championship and both teams won. Also, how in the hell do you compare the Rockets record some two years ago to the team we have now? That was our one rebuilding year, the year when the talent was much less and so was the experience. That team is not even comparable to the one we will put on the floor next season. By the way, KIR, don't expect much objectivity about the Spurs here. It's a good board, esp. on Rockets talk in the main forum, but you've come to the wrong place for Spurs debates. Here are some examples. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20384 http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20221
Since when did a spurs fan earn the right to come in here and try to talk smack? One abbreviated title a few years ago and now 10 years later they still earn the right to talk? Puh lease. You want performance? Take a look back at your MVP (Most Valuable Puss *) when Hakeem almost single handedly set your team into tank mode for the upcoming seasons since they knew Robinsina would never take them nowhere. One fluke of a title, and believe me everyone in the world knows it was an absolute fluke, and you can talk? Guess that makes Spurs fans the Bill Waltons of fandom. One fluke a season for a title, and all the sudden your something of an expert. It is nice that you can talk recent history. Seems you forgot how your team tanked an entire season. At least the Rox never had to tank a season, disappointing all their fans to become a winning team again. Id call that lying down. "Lets just quit for a whole season get the top pick and then make some noise. Who cares about the fans wholl pay good money this year to watch us" Danny Ferry? Bowen? Cherokee Parks? Terry Porter? Ha ha Ha. What a free agent magnet San Antonio is. And by the way Steve Smith was not a free agent pick up. Cherokee Parks. Dear God no you didnt. I thought only the Clipps of yesteryear would hail Cherokee one of the great Free Agents interested in their great team. Ha Ha Ha. Dude anyone of about 4 or 5 teams could of won the title the year the spurts did. Luck was on their side. Obviously. Other than being beat down in the playoffs last year where have the spurts been since? So what if the Rox didnt make the playoffs last year. Id rather them not make the playoffs than looking as absolutely pathetic as the girly men of San Antonio did last year in their four game beat down. Ive seen red headed stepchildren get beat less than the spurts did last year. Does anyone in the world honestly think the Spurts are going to win another title? Or that Robinson really has anything left? (Not that the Mermaid ever had anything to give besides one phony MVP trophy), or that outside of Cherokee Parks that the Spurts will lure any decent Free agents. Not. You better keep your smack to NBA Live 1999 cause thats all the game the Spurs will ever have.
If winning a championship in a year Jordan isn't on an NBA roster warrants an asterik........... spurs 99 champs* lakers 00 champs* lakers 01 champs* ...........word...
Well said Dreamshake. Harsh, but well said. I don't really beleive in the * championship term. Any team that wins an NBA title is good IMO. You could probably come up with some * for every team that wins a championship if you looked hard enough.
Carrie, you are an idiot. You do know that Jordan played in 1995? Maybe you don't remember, but the Bulls and Jordon lost to Orlando in the playoffs, saw their interior weaknesses to their team, and then stole your monster PF--whom everyone in your organization were too big of weenies to handle--as their final piece to three more rings. Further, the only Spurs triumph ever came in a weak year in the shortened season also after Jordon retired. Think before you post my friend. Do you also remember the only triumphs of significance in Rocket-Spurs series/games that actually meant something were won by the Rockets Lot's of teams own the Rockets in the regular season, but few teams own them when it actually means something, and the Spurs are not one of them. Come to think of it, between the Spurs and Suns fans, the Rockets have broken more hearts than anyone. Maybe we should understand where you are coming from and take pity on you, on second thought, not!!! MrSpur, I often enjoy your posts and a little debate, but your defense of Carrie and the particular classless Spurs fans dicussed in the thread is pretty off base for you. Being a "homer" is OK, but perspective has to come in there somewhere.
a full regular season + a full post season = a full championship anything else is an *championship i don't go for the "jordan wasn't playing" thing because 1) everyone played a full season, and there's no guarantee jordan would have made it to the championship anyway...see the 2nd season; and, 2) jordan played the second season. good enough to drop the "double nickel" on the knicks and good enough to get beated by the magic. there was a FULL SEASON in the rocket's case, none in the spurs case. Cat, if we're going to use YOUR logic, then no championship from the day jordan retired will be legitimate. that is some SERIOUSLY flawed logic you're using. the only measure you can use is whether or not the standard nba season and postseason was played. the spurs did NOT fit that standard. is it a trophy still? yes. be proud of it. but be cognizant that it was during a 1/2 season.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Spurs fans love to paint themselves as the 'class' of the NBA. While the <b>team</b> may be pretty high up there, a lot of the fans I hear from are far from it. Instead, they love to shun reality, remain even more homer than some of us Rocket fans (seriously), and think every other team that beats them sucks as far as fan-base goes. What's the point of a lot of this, kir? That the Rockets are trying to work back into playoff contention? No sh*t. Great job with the status report, I'm sure ESPN will be calling you any day now. rockHEAD doesn't like the Spurs...that's pretty well established. So I can see if he got your ire up with his initial comments. But if you're going to try and come in here and talk smack, at least have something intelligent and rational to say. Bringing up the Jordan shtick or 'impressive record' against the Rocks the last few years is tired and baseless. Or if you just want to trade some smack with rockHEAD, at least look at the way Mr. Spur is trying to do it. Otherwise, the Spurs have plenty of their own concerns to worry about. Although, when going to one of your rose-colored boards, yeah you probably wouldn't know it...
i need a bumper sticker with this quote on it. this is THE REASON i have problems with the spurs. it's not the players. hell, i like duncan. and i like rose. but it's the arrogant, "CLASSY" fans that can call themselves classy in one breath, but say "BFD (Big F*ucking Deal)" about spurs' fans booing a group of sunshine kids in the very next breath. the spurs fans i do meet with some semblance of rationalism i'm cool with. but the arrogant, hypocritical ones who think the spurs and pop can do no wrong (until Pop gets fired, then they'll all chime in with Jay Howard and Greg Simmons about how it was about time they fired that loser, Popovich) i find to be void of objectivity....
Cat, if we're going to use YOUR logic, then no championship from the day jordan retired will be legitimate. What? I'm not in the Jordan corner at all on this one. I'm just merely using him as an example of how you could perceive the Rockets championship as asterisked, and I don't see how it's less valid than the reasoning behind the Spurs championship. It's a shame we don't have archives back to January of 1999 when we considered ourselves championship contenders... I'd bet that there was virtually no one on this board who was considering it an asterisked season at the time. If Pippen, Barkley, and Dream had coexisted and we won the championship that year, do you really think you'd be calling it asterisked? I highly doubt it.
The Cat, it's a terrible example. on one hand, you have people saying the houston championship isn't legit because a certain player didn't play the first year, and only played 1/2 of the second year. since when was the nba based around michael jordan (marketing excluded)? the nba is LARGER than michael jordan. the nba is about a set of rules that stays fairly consistent from year to year (i.e. length of court, # of games, height of goal, etc.) small variations is these rules...ok...but when you play 1/2 a season, it's just not a small variation. you're changing the way in which champions, TRUE CHAMPIONS, have been decided since the league existed...by a full season. if it weren't that way, why not just play 25 games? 30 games? 15 games?
They only won that championship because of Avery Johnson and Mario Elie... the rest of those guys don't know how to win championships... Avery and Mario carried 'em the whole way
True champions are decided in the playoffs, not in 50 or 82 game seasons. I know some argue that certain teams and players typically step it up at the end of 82 game seasons, but I don't find that to be valid. Everyone knew it was a 50 game season, and everyone put forth maximum effort towards the end of the season and the playoffs. And the Spurs won.
so why not just have a 50 game season every season??? i mean, since all the matters is the post season, why not cut it to 30 games???
so why not just have a 50 game season every season??? It wouldn't be the best way to evaluate in basketball. Certain teams, like the Rockets this year, look very average in the first part of the season and playoff-quality in the second. I'll admit, things can change. But, it's extremely rare for a team to be non-playoff quality for 50 games and then turn into a contender. All the possible contenders in 99 were right there, giving it everything they had come postseason. The Spurs were better. Imho, if you are a contending basketball team, you should be able to raise your game a level for the playoffs, no matter when they are. A 50 game season is too short to evaluate talent, wins and losses, etc. when you look at the league as a whole. But if every season in league history had been 50 games, I don't think the list of champions would be much different at all.
It's like when I hear a Frenchie talking about being the dominant soccer nation in the world. France has got on World Cup Championship as opposed to four by Brazil, three by Italy and Germany, and two each by Argentina and Uruguay. France is still in England's league, one sorry fluke bought championship. Sorry San Antonio fans, but you have one sorry ring from an exceptionally sorry year against an exceptionally sorry opponent, NY. When you get the second ring then you can grace us with your presence and comments on this board. Otherwise, like I say to the French, keep dreamin boys!
