What if this is the difference between playing the Nuggets and the Spurs? What if Parker and Ginobili cannot play or are ineffective because of their injuries? Would you say that they mean more to the Spurs than Lawson and Gallinari mean to the Nuggets? Lawson is really good, but I'd still have to say Parker/Ginobili are more important to their team's success. Don't get me wrong. If we get the 6 seed, then so be it. I'm the one just praying that we make the playoffs, and getting irritated at people rooting for the Jazz on this thread. At the end of the day, getting in is the most important thing. But if you had a choice, would you take Nuggets with an injured Lawson and Gallinari out, or Spurs without Parker and Manu? And the whole Memphis thing, it's an interesting argument. I just prefer to face teams that don't have a defensive stopper like Tony Allen or Iguodala. Harden needs to ball out if we want to have a chance against anyone.
I want to just comment on one thing. I bet you anything if we face the SPURS, we will get out coached in all possible way EVEN if they are Parker and Ginobili less. Pop is no joke in the playoffs. You DO NOT want to play against Pop who knows how to use all his weapons to adjust to different circumstances.
it looks like we might tie with warriors on the win-loss column but we own tie break. it means we might move up to 6th to face nuts. it may not be as bad as some ppl are thinking. this team needs to learn to play better defense for future not just good offense.
We will get out coached by Pop, George Karl & Scott Brooks it doesn't matter so why not face an aging team?
It's also good to see if they have the mental toughness to face the demon that swept them. Ticket sales and other commercial income might be hurt however.
Let's stay on 7th seed, I don't think going for 6th and matching up Denver is a good choice, we might be winless in playoff. Against SA or OKC, we can steal one or two games.
I am a bit annoyed at people citing Memphis and Denver as no star teams so we would have it easier with them. To me they are more like a team full of stars like the early 2000s Pistons and Kings used to be. The Rockets basically have no chance with either.
Actually yeah... but I think Pistons were a tad better.... although Denver and Memphis are full of allstars and borderliner allstars
Of course the old Pistons were better, they had proven to be champions lol. But before they won it all and beat a team of 4 HOFers, no one said they were a team of stars as well. It's just that the champion status elevated a lot of players' stock afterwards. If you look at the talent more closely and know that they also have incredible chemistry like the Pistons as well, it's actually not that far off. Not to mention the coaching aspect. Especially George Karl, he is no joke in playoffs. Have people already forgetten what he did to the Rockets in playoffs when he was with the Sonics in the 90s?
Why do people keep saying Pops or Karl will be no joke in the playoffs? Far as I can tell neither has reay coached a team further than you thought possible. The sonics lost as an 8th seed. Sure they made some finals runs... With great players. The spurs without healthy squads lose. When healthy and when they were winning they only had the best Pf of all time, a hof point and a shooting guard eerily similar to our current best player coming of their bench. Talent wins. Matchup is very importa t. If the rockets lose in the first round (likely) it will be because they don't have the same talent. Personally I'd prefer the spurs and grizzlies and clippers. We seem like we can play the spurs tight at least... And you never know with their health. The grizzlies might not have the offense. And the clippers seem streaky. The thunder still strike me as the best in the west and the rockets obviously don't play denver well.
What are you talking about? Pop won it all in a couple of years when the Spurs were not the top favorites. Even last year they sweep the 1st and 2nd round before losing to the Thunder and definitely went further than a lot of people predicted in preseason. As for Karl, as far as I remember, his Sonics team was always underdog against the Rockets, yet they won every damn time, overcoming Hakeem and out coaching Rudy T in the process. That's not impressive coaching job? Of course, no coach can win without talent. But the point is that both are much proven and experienced and would definitely outcoach McHale who never even coached a playoffs game.
Well said, JayZ. People give way too much credit for coaching. Pops has been so terrific, the Spurs has gotten to NBA trophies the last two years, testament to their best regular season record.
You know the same coach who coached the Spurs to no trophy last 2 years is also the same coach who coached them to the No 1 seed in regular season, right? If you couldn't tell the difference of achievement between a No 1 seed and then a 1st/2nd round exit, and a 6/7 seed and then a 1st/2nd round exit, then only God can help you. Only Pop got the Spurs the former while most coaches would get them the latter given the same roster.
You are right. Three future hall-of-famers could only give you a 6th or 7th seed with a less capable head coach. Your basketball knowledge is amazing. Smh...
good coaching gets you a good regular season record most of the time and hot talent gets you playoff wins.
