Terrific no-call, even better play.
The Thunder
- Thread starter billyshelby
- Start date
Terrific no-call, even better play.
That's EXACTLY what I was thinking. I totally assumed that northeast was refrring to the Thunder.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Serious candidate for post of the year.
Nah, the Spurs have a unique approach to the game as of late. If they are obvious decisions, why don't the other 29 teams do the same?
I'm not sure, but I think having the best big since Shaq and/or Hakeem helps them develop a culture and system of basketball that others don't have. And one of the most underrated players in NBA history coming off the bench.
What Popovich does isn't trickery, it's just flat-out being a better coach than anyone. Ever. That the front office kicks *** really helps.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Good point. I saw an interview with Kevin Durrant the other day, where he was asked if he was happy with where his team was at. He said he was, but if he could do it all over again, he'd go back and lose more playoff games sooner, rather than adding the good players that make up that team. Apparently, he thinks they would have a better chance against the Spurs if they were a bunch of mediocre players with tons of experience in getting their asses kicked, instead of a bunch of good players with slightly less experienece.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
If they had intentionally missed the playoffs instead of being a "meaningless" first round exit in 2010, OKC would be winning the series right now
HipHopAnonymous
Active Member
If Eric Maynor was healthy the Spurs would be toast.
So you admit I am right.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Wrong. He flat out pushed Westbrook with his left hand, thus slowing him and lowering his ascent, making it possible to block the shot. That wasn't a good no-call. It was ********. Just because we love the way the Spurs play team ball doesn't mean we have to praise every thing they do.
Tied for third longest winning streak in nba history, and half of those wins have come in the playoffs. Amazing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Basketball_Association_longest_winning_streaks
NAOS said:
Yes, I've been thinking the same type of thing.
I guess if you changed your point (that the Spurs do unconventional things and have an unconventional approach that apparently flies in the face of common sense) without letting anyone know, then maybe. If you haven't, then I don't know how on earth you determined that. But that's not new.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Disagree. They should have gotten their *** kicked in the first round a year earlier, instead of adding Harden. Then they'd be way better right now.
The Thunder need more lotto picks like Harden needs more facial hair.
They just need a trade or two to get some post scoring and also need to shore up their backup PG position a bit more either by just getting a better Maynor back or by upgrading that position in a trade.
There is'nt a single team in the last decade that has won a championship by drafting 5 or 6 lotto picks and somehow managing to keep them all on the roster for years together. You draft some, you trade some, you sign some. Jazz would have enough trouble just to try and retain all of their 4 current lotto picks once their rookie contracts are up, unless otherwise a couple of them turn out to be mediocre and can be signed for less(in which case we would still need to add more talent anyways).
Actually if the Jazz want to emulate the Spurs they can try and pull a Spurs by drafting good players out of late 1st round picks or second round picks or foreign recruits to add to their current lotto picks. The Jazz seem to have better luck with second round players than with 1st round guys anyways.
The Spurs core is comprised of just one lotto pick. Jazz already have 4.
They just need a trade or two to get some post scoring and also need to shore up their backup PG position a bit more either by just getting a better Maynor back or by upgrading that position in a trade.
There is'nt a single team in the last decade that has won a championship by drafting 5 or 6 lotto picks and somehow managing to keep them all on the roster for years together. You draft some, you trade some, you sign some. Jazz would have enough trouble just to try and retain all of their 4 current lotto picks once their rookie contracts are up, unless otherwise a couple of them turn out to be mediocre and can be signed for less(in which case we would still need to add more talent anyways).
Actually if the Jazz want to emulate the Spurs they can try and pull a Spurs by drafting good players out of late 1st round picks or second round picks or foreign recruits to add to their current lotto picks. The Jazz seem to have better luck with second round players than with 1st round guys anyways.
The Spurs core is comprised of just one lotto pick. Jazz already have 4.
BluesRocker
Banned
Is it bad that I picked the Thunder to win this series but jumped off the bandwagon, and now I want to jump back on?
The Thunder can do it. Its going 7. They should have won game 1. Game 2 they sucked. Game 3 stomped SA.
A lot of teams win those game 3's going away though. So that makes me cautious.
Neverl the less, go Thunder you can do it.
The Thunder can do it. Its going 7. They should have won game 1. Game 2 they sucked. Game 3 stomped SA.
A lot of teams win those game 3's going away though. So that makes me cautious.
Neverl the less, go Thunder you can do it.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
LOL. Who said they did?
I don't know why people always try to make things seem more complicated than they are. You don't avoid adding assets on the off chance that all of your young players turn into all-stars. You add as much talent as possible, build up your team as much you can, and if you end up in the terrible position of having too many good players to be able to pay them all, you trade some of them off, and in the process, continue building.
Anyone who needs an example of a championship team built by stockpiling assets, need look no further than Danny Ainge and the Boston Celtics.
How's that any different from this logic:
Game 1, the Spurs just sucked and still won.
Game 2 they stomped OKC.
Game 3 Spurs just sucked and OKC played really well.