View From the Spurs - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

gps · 05-03-2006, 08:48 AM

It's always funny how the other team sees things. Check out this article from the SA news. It's pretty funny.

Buck Harvey: It's not over, and neither is the West title

Web Posted: 05/03/2006 01:00 AM CDT

San Antonio Express-News

The Dallas Mavericks watched, with feet up, and they had one pressing concern. Who has the bag of Cheetos?

Dirk Nowitzki licked the yellow-orange off his fingers, which is about how he treated the Grizzlies. The Mavericks swept Memphis with only one tight game, so they could sit back Tuesday night for some late-night enjoyment.

Another pressing concern developed as they watched. The Spurs are the ones Dallas has targeted — but do the Mavericks want these Kings, either?

Mostly the Mavericks rested, which is why everyone thinks they are clearly in the best position in the West. As the Spurs and Kings beat up each other, the Mavericks get to wait.

Something else happened Tuesday, however, as Bonzi Wells earned a few more million on his next contract. The Spurs, pressed as if these were the conference finals, had to jam all their pieces together to survive.

How bad is this?

Bruce Bowen had his own question. "Remember when we swept Memphis?"

Before this discussion begins, something should be noted: No Spur is looking ahead to the next round.

Not after the previous week in Sacramento, not after Tuesday. The Kings proved yet again they are closer to a first seed than an eighth. Don't be surprised if the Spurs have to play a Game 7 in consecutive playoff series.

But that's also what Bowen is talking about. This isn't easy. This is, well, the way a Dallas series would be.

Gregg Popovich concurs. He joked Tuesday night that, if he'd had any smarts, he would have dumped games and secured the No. 4 seed in the West. At least he appeared to be joking.

But there's another side to these tests, and that is Bowen's point. Two years ago the Spurs swept Memphis, looking efficient and powerful in doing so. Then they won the first two games against the Lakers in the next round before running into a few things that didn't go their way.

"We didn't react well then," Bowen said, "because we weren't ready. This is making us dig deep. And these dig-down games can help you."

They can help you realize how crazy any one night can be, and Tuesday was another. The Spurs' strategy was to keep Mike Bibby and Brad Miller off the 3-point line, then back off of Wells and Ron Artest.

The numbers said they should. Wells shot 22 percent from the 3-point line this season, and Artest 30 percent. Then Wells threw in all three of his on the way to 38 points, and Artest made four.

The Spurs responded as they did a year ago. Manu Ginobili recovered his Manu-ness, crossing over past Artest, dunking. Tony Parker found his jumper. Bowen countered Wells by putting up 16 points of his own. And Tim Duncan played as he has to play for the Spurs to win another championship.

That said, it was still tied at 93 with three minutes left. One burp here, and the defending champs would face elimination in Sacramento.

That's when Duncan backed in Miller for a score, and Artest missed a baseline jumper. Bowen followed with a lefty runner, but Wells kept matching the Spurs. Only when Ginobili made a Ginobilian drive — hard with his left — did the Spurs stretch their lead to five.

By doing so, the Spurs earned something. And this means more than sweeping a bad team, doesn't it?

"I think so," Brent Barry said. "These kinds of games are preparatory. You can learn from losses, and how you react means a lot."

The Spurs might get the chance to learn from another loss in this series. But going to a Game 7 has other advantages for the Spurs. Close out Friday, and the Spurs have to travel halfway across the country to host Dallas as early as Sunday. Win at home against Sacramento on Sunday, and they will wait for the Mavericks.

The disadvantage, naturally, is that the Kings could eliminate them. But if the Spurs play as they did Tuesday — if Wells can't find yet another level — then there's reason to see this first round as scary and tough and beneficial.

What the Spurs won't get?

Only Cheetos.

ocelot_ark · 05-03-2006, 08:51 AM

Somehow the Spurs struggling and taking 6/7 games to beat an 8 seed is supposed to help them beat a younger, more powerful 4 seed?

...pass the bong.

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocelot_ark

Somehow the Spurs struggling and taking 6/7 games to beat an 8 seed is supposed to help them beat a younger, more powerful 4 seed?

...pass the bong.

don't play stupid sacramento was the hottest team coming into the playoffs and had they another week they would have moved up even further. sorry skippy there is nothing dallas does that nears sacramento's toughness and physicality. i am not going to tell you that the spurs will beat dallas but to write off the defending champ and use youth as a reason is misguided and silly.

DwD · 05-03-2006, 09:23 AM

GG, is that why Dallas blew Sacramento out the last time they played them and then Sacramento went and did the same thing to San Antonio a night later?

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 09:27 AM

[QUOTE=DwD]GG, is that why Dallas blew Sacramento out the last time they played them and then Sacramento went and did the same thing to San Antonio a night later?[/QUOTE

i guess. what's your point? oh you don't have one you are cherry picking games again in the regular seaosn to to try and prove a useless point.

oh and to fill you in things are a slight bit different in the playoffs than in the reg season.

sixeightmkw · 05-03-2006, 09:37 AM

we'll just have to wait and see, fisrt, to see who we are going to play, then how well each team plays. I assume it will be SA, but they have struggled with Sac this entire series except for the first game. I hope it goes to 7 games, then I hope SA only gets one day off like we did last year. The Mavs are focused right now. SA is not the same team they were last year. This will be a good series.

kg_veteran · 05-03-2006, 09:37 AM

Buck Harvey's a good writer, but that article is little more than rhetoric.

I remember the Mavs saying the same things in years past when they were the ones playing long series and their opponents were done in 4 or 5 games.

It doesn't help a team like the Spurs to go 6 or 7 games in the first round. Period. And no matter what is said in the paper, the Spurs know that the next round will be much more difficult to win than this one.

mary · 05-03-2006, 09:45 AM

Quote:

don't play stupid sacramento was the hottest team coming into the playoffs and had they another week they would have moved up even further.

Lets examine this claim for a moment.

Kings Record

Since All-Star 20-9 (0.690)
Last 20 (0.650)
Last 10 8-2 (0.800)
April 7-2 (.778)

Memphis Record

Since All-Star 20-10 (0.678)
Last 20 15-5 (0.750)
Last 10 8-2 (0.800)
April 8-1 (0.890)

Nice try though. For your efforts, you win a free spin

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Buck Harvey's a good writer, but that article is little more than rhetoric.

I remember the Mavs saying the same things in years past when they were the ones playing long series and their opponents were done in 4 or 5 games.

It doesn't help a team like the Spurs to go 6 or 7 games in the first round. Period. And no matter what is said in the paper, the Spurs know that the next round will be much more difficult to win than this one.

I agree with you 100%. This year the Mavs have the best opportunity to advance and compete for a championship. I think what bruce is saying, and I agree with him, is that th4e Kings have forced the Spurs into tightening their game earlier than they ever have. I think this is a good thing and prepres us for a grind it out slugfest type series against the mavs. I cannot immagine that the mav players feel like their quick series helped them mentally and physically prepare for a brutal 7 game series. I remember in 2003 when we played a pesky phoenix team in the first round. They trapped the hwll out of us and we struggled in 6 games.. Their style of play prepared us for Dallas' defense in the WCF. Last year the Seattle series helped us prepare for a physical grind it out series that we had the with the pistons. this is what i believe what bruce is saying. I may be wrong but a team that has accomplished what the spurs have in the last couple of years does not require a spurs player to 'make up' positives about a current series in order to feel good about themselves..

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

Sorry, but that's nothing more than spin. Kings were a hot team, but they weren't the hottest.

Kings Record

Since All-Star 20-9 (0.690)
Last 20 (0.650)
Last 10 8-2 (0.800)
April 7-2 (.778)

Memphis Record

Since All-Star 20-10 (0.678)
Last 20 15-5 (0.750)
Last 10 8-2 (0.800)
April 8-1 (0.890)

Nice try though. For your efforts, you win a free spin

hey mary why don't you pull out the winning percentages of those teams..

I must get some clarification from you..are you telling me that memphis was a better team because they had a better record?

mary · 05-03-2006, 09:50 AM

Is that clarification..or is that backtracking?

Spin..spin...spin...

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mary

Is that clarification..or is that backtracking?

Spin..spin...spin...

spin to a mavs fan? hahahahahahah..why spin to our little brother.. you make me laugh mary...Hhahahahaha

i want you to tell me that you think memphis is a better team that sacramento? yes or no.

dirno2000 · 05-03-2006, 10:12 AM

Usually the better team is the team that wins more games.

I guess your measure of a team is how many times they beat the Spurs.

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dirno2000

Usually the better team is the team that wins more games.

I guess your measure of a team is how many times they beat the Spurs.

No. My point is that Sacramento has been playing at a high level for the last few weeks of the reg. season. In other words their playoffs started a month ago while most of the other playoff teams have coasted into the second season. They have carried their intensity into this playoffs and ,if we are fortunate to advance, this series will help us. I was trying to get mary to tell me that more wins makes a team better (I don't agree with that).. Then she would realize that if she admitted that then she would have to admit the Spurs are better than the Mavs... the issue of who is a better team this season between the spurs & mavs will be resolved in a couple of weeks.

kg_veteran · 05-03-2006, 10:33 AM

George - You need to admit that Memphis was just as hot (or hotter) than the Kings were, coming into the playoffs.

Perception always tends to change after the fact. Before the series, a lot of media pundits said the Grizzlies would give the Mavs a tough series. It's a testament to how well the Mavs played that they didn't, not an indication that the Grizzlies suddenly suck.

Re: the Spurs, you're saying it's a good thing that they're being extended in Round 1. I totally disagree. The playoffs are a battle of attrition. The longer you play in each round, the worse it is for your team. The Mavs were saying the same thing about a "brutal" Houston series preparing them for Phoenix, while Phoenix swept Memphis. It didn't work out that way.

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

George - You need to admit that Memphis was just as hot (or hotter) than the Kings were, coming into the playoffs.

Perception always tends to change after the fact. Before the series, a lot of media pundits said the Grizzlies would give the Mavs a tough series. It's a testament to how well the Mavs played that they didn't, not an indication that the Grizzlies suddenly suck.

Re: the Spurs, you're saying it's a good thing that they're being extended in Round 1. I totally disagree. The playoffs are a battle of attrition. The longer you play in each round, the worse it is for your team. The Mavs were saying the same thing about a "brutal" Houston series preparing them for Phoenix, while Phoenix swept Memphis. It didn't work out that way.

Memphis is a nice regular season team without a go to guy. you just need to look at their 0-12 playoff record to understand that. I did not stae it was good thing for the Spurs to play in this type of series Bruce Bowen stated that in the above mentioned article. He said that this type of series prepares you for following rounds for which I agree with him. Attrition? No the better team always wins in a 7 game series whether you play 7 or you only play 4 in the previous round. If the playoffs were a battle of attrition that means the winner of the other bracket will have played less games therefore whomever advances (dallas /SA) would be at a disadvantage. So then the Clippers/Lakers would be better off that the Spurs/mavs in the WCF because they would have played less games. I don't agree with that and I assume you do not either.

Bookit · 05-03-2006, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Gervin

hey mary why don't you pull out the winning percentages of those teams..

I must get some clarification from you..are you telling me that memphis was a better team because they had a better record?

Both Sacramento and Memphis were blown out by the Mavs the last time the Mavs played them so it is difficult for us to determine who is better.

sixeightmkw · 05-03-2006, 10:55 AM

ahh, it doesn't really matter anyway. If you sweep a series, you say we get good rest and get to prepare. If you get taken to the brink, you say that it will help you dig inside and learn from the toughness of the series. Both are bull. If I had to take a guess, I would take the sweep over going 6 or 7. Rest is a very determinate factor and they will be able to study everything about the spurs and sac this whole week. Either way, who really cares. Everybody says what they feel will appease them and everyone else.

kg_veteran · 05-03-2006, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Gervin

Memphis is a nice regular season team without a go to guy. you just need to look at their 0-12 playoff record to understand that. I did not stae it was good thing for the Spurs to play in this type of series Bruce Bowen stated that in the above mentioned article. He said that this type of series prepares you for following rounds for which I agree with him. Attrition? No the better team always wins in a 7 game series whether you play 7 or you only play 4 in the previous round. If the playoffs were a battle of attrition that means the winner of the other bracket will have played less games therefore whomever advances (dallas /SA) would be at a disadvantage. So then the Clippers/Lakers would be better off that the Spurs/mavs in the WCF because they would have played less games. I don't agree with that and I assume you do not either.

Nice attempt at spin, George. Memphis was just as hot as the Kings coming into the playoffs, whether you admit it or not.

If you agree with Bruce Bowen, then you and Bruce are both wrong. Losing in the first round doesn't prepare you for the second. Are you honestly saying that the Spurs didn't know what the playoffs were like before this series? I don't see any advantage at all. I see only detriments, including lest rest and more wear and tear on the aging Spurs.

Re: a battle of attrition, I think you misunderstood what I said. It's a battle of attrition in that the longer you play, the more injuries you are likely to sustain, the more wore down your players become, and so forth.

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Nice attempt at spin, George. Memphis was just as hot as the Kings coming into the playoffs, whether you admit it or not.

If you agree with Bruce Bowen, then you and Bruce are both wrong. Losing in the first round doesn't prepare you for the second. Are you honestly saying that the Spurs didn't know what the playoffs were like before this series? I don't see any advantage at all. I see only detriments, including lest rest and more wear and tear on the aging Spurs.

Re: a battle of attrition, I think you misunderstood what I said. It's a battle of attrition in that the longer you play, the more injuries you are likely to sustain, the more wore down your players become, and so forth.

Ok I choose to side with a guy who actually has won 2 championships in the last 3 yrs.

Spin concerning Memphis? They are 0-12 in the playoffs and lack a go to guy how is that possibly spin? Can we please acknowledge the reg season is different than the playoffs? will you give me that?

Let me simplify this for you ... earlier rounds in the playoffs prepare you for later rounds.. you don't have to agree with me but they do..

Aging Spurs? The top 4 players are under 30 (except Duncan).. the rest of the bench play on avg maybe 15-20 minutes.. so for these 'aging ' guys who play 20 minutes a night everyother day this 'attrittion' is supposed to wear them down?

TripleDipping · 05-03-2006, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Nice attempt at spin, George. Memphis was just as hot as the Kings coming into the playoffs, whether you admit it or not.

He is dodging that like Neo dodges bullets.

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TripleDipping

He is dodging that like Neo dodges bullets.

so then tell me the griz re better than the kings at this point in the season. admit that and i will drop it.

sixeightmkw · 05-03-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Gervin

Ok I choose to side with a guy who actually has won 2 championships in the last 3 yrs.

Spin concerning Memphis? They are 0-12 in the playoffs and lack a go to guy how is that possibly spin? Can we please acknowledge the reg season is different than the playoffs? will you give me that?Let me simplify this for you ... earlier rounds in the playoffs prepare you for later rounds.. you don't have to agree with me but they do..

Aging Spurs? The top 4 players are under 30 (except Duncan).. the rest of the bench play on avg maybe 15-20 minutes.. so for these 'aging ' guys who play 20 minutes a night everyother day this 'attrittion' is supposed to wear them down?

Yes we will give you that, so stop using the hairy Sac as an example is the regular season doesn't mean shit. you keep contradicting yourself everytime you say Sac was hot coming in, but then the regular season doesn't matter.

Who gives a shit. If you get your asses beat by, what 20 or 30 in a playoff game, then you suck, so that goes for both Sac and SA. They both got caught with their pants around their ankles.

capitalcity · 05-03-2006, 11:16 AM

George why should dallas fans argue the validity/strength/resilency of first round opponents?

We're done with ours.

grndmstr_c · 05-03-2006, 11:19 AM

The better team at the time will win a 7-game series; that's the reality, and tired legs are not an asset in that respect. To suggest otherwise (or to defend such a suggestion) is ridiculous. What the Spurs (and their fans) have to hope is that the wear and tear on their bodies from the extra games will be less of an issue than any blunting of the Mavs' competitive edge from the extra rest. I personally think that quite unlikely, as the unfolding of a series between well-matched teams (which I consider the Spurs and Mavs to be) will only sharpen the latter even as it exposes the latent and lingering weakness in the former. Of course, the Mavs have their own injury issues to deal with, and the extra rest will be for naught if the time is too short to permit proper healing, but even taking that into account - and I honestly think that fact further supports what myself and other Mavs' fans believe to be the bottom line in this debate - short of the Mavs completely losing their drive to win a championship between now and the start of the second round, I can't imagine a scenario in which an extended first round battle between the Spurs and Kings is anything but a good thing for Dallas.

mary · 05-03-2006, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Yes we will give you that, so stop using the hairy Sac as an example is the regular season doesn't mean shit. you keep contradicting yourself everytime you say Sac was hot coming in, but then the regular season doesn't matter.

haha...good catch

Arne · 05-03-2006, 11:21 AM

I'm just looking forward to playing any second round opponent, since I'm just that confident about our team.

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capitalcity

George why should dallas fans argue the validity/strength/resilency of first round opponents?

We're done with ours.

I must agree that th eMavs historically have been a great first round team..

sixeightmkw · 05-03-2006, 11:22 AM

[QUOTE=George Gervin]Spin concerning Memphis? They are 0-12 in the playoffs and lack a go to guy how is that possibly spin?

and just one other note about this phrase. This team is not the same team as last year or the year before that. The totally redid the roster. And everyone in the media had them taking Dallas to 6 or 7 at least. They said they matched up well against the Mavs, even said they had a deeper bench that the mavs. Nothing matters, not the regular season, not last years playoffs, not the past 3 years, nothing except here and now. The Mavs showed them what was up. San Antonio can't seem to do that against Sac. The Mavs proved they were the better team. San Antonio hasn't done that yet. The Mavs came out focused. San Antonio came out focused, then let it slip right throug their hands. The Mavs showed no weakness. The Spurs showed they are old and tired.

dude1394 · 05-03-2006, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Gervin

don't play stupid sacramento was the hottest team coming into the playoffs and had they another week they would have moved up even further. sorry skippy there is nothing dallas does that nears sacramento's toughness and physicality. i am not going to tell you that the spurs will beat dallas but to write off the defending champ and use youth as a reason is misguided and silly.

I think you mean that nothing the spurs have can match the kings toughness and physicality. Not manu, not bowen, not finley. They are all smallish, finesse players. You would think that Horry could match him but he's too long in the tooth.

There are actually a lot of things that the mavs do that matches the kings toughness and physicality. Our centers are much tougher than theirs, we have stackhouse, griffin and howard to match up with bonzi/artest whereas the spurs don't have anyone with that toughness.

Your team is built on throwing it into duncan or parker taking it in for a kickout to an open 3pt shooter. It's a fine offense, but the spurs are not a physicaly tough team. Their centers are quite suspect and they just aren't athletic.

dude1394 · 05-03-2006, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Gervin

don't play stupid sacramento was the hottest team coming into the playoffs and had they another week they would have moved up even further. sorry skippy there is nothing dallas does that nears sacramento's toughness and physicality. i am not going to tell you that the spurs will beat dallas but to write off the defending champ and use youth as a reason is misguided and silly.

Spurs are looking a lot like Miami to me. An aging team that can't quite keep up with a younger more physical one.

I haven't read the rest of this thread but I expect that you will throw out prior championships here somewhere to try and validate todays team.

dude1394 · 05-03-2006, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Gervin

hey mary why don't you pull out the winning percentages of those teams..

I must get some clarification from you..are you telling me that memphis was a better team because they had a better record?

Hey gervin...the records speak for themselves and refute your position quite well. Pull out the winning percentages yourself.

Drbio · 05-03-2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Hey gervin...the records speak for themselves and refute your position quite well. Pull out the winning percentages yourself.

Scoreboard.

alexamenos · 05-03-2006, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Gervin

i want you to tell me that you think memphis is a better team that sacramento? yes or no.

I don't think Memphis is a better team than Sacramento.

But then again, I do think Dallas is a better team than Sacramento, by a fair margin.

How are the Spurs doing against the Kings, anyway? Are the Kings, by any chance, giving the Spurs all they can handle?

Cheers

alexamenos · 05-03-2006, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixeightmkw

This [Memphis] team is not the same team as last year or the year before that. The totally redid the roster. And everyone in the media had them taking Dallas to 6 or 7 at least. They said they matched up well against the Mavs, even said they had a deeper bench that the mavs. ... The Mavs showed them what was up. San Antonio can't seem to do that against Sac. The Mavs proved they were the better team. San Antonio hasn't done that yet.

Very well stated.

It's funny, but I don't recall anyone harping about how bad the Grizz are until after the Mavs dominated the Grizz. And I certainly don't recall anyone carrying on about the Greatness of the Kings at halftime of Game 1 in that series.

And this idea floating about....the Spurs are going to gain some valuable experience and learn that it's a long-hard road to the NBA finals????? Experience? Gimmee a break -- they've won two out of the last three. They're not gaining experience, they're showing age and complacency.

Here's a crazy possibility...

The Grizz looked like dog meat because the Mavs dominated them...

Bonzi Wells is having a hell of series because the Spurs are old, slow, and uninspired....

alexamenos · 05-03-2006, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Spurs are looking a lot like Miami to me. An aging team that can't quite keep up with a younger more physical one.

They remind me a lot of the post-superbowl Cowboys of the mid to late 90's. They've still got alot of the talent, they can absolutely shine for brief stretches, but at the end of the day they can't match the energy and hunger of their opponents.

greensborohill · 05-03-2006, 12:35 PM

PWNED

greensborohill · 05-03-2006, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexamenos

It's funny, but I don't recall anyone harping about how bad the Grizz are until after the Mavs dominated the Grizz. And I certainly don't recall anyone carrying on about the Greatness of the Kings at halftime of Game 1 in that series.

and that's all we need to know. . . goodnight, thanks for playing

George Gervin · 05-03-2006, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drbio

Scoreboard.

so the spurs are better than the mavs..scoreboard..

orangedays · 05-03-2006, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexamenos

It's funny, but I don't recall anyone harping about how bad the Grizz are until after the Mavs dominated the Grizz. And I certainly don't recall anyone carrying on about the Greatness of the Kings at halftime of Game 1 in that series.

And this idea floating about....the Spurs are going to gain some valuable experience and learn that it's a long-hard road to the NBA finals????? Experience? Gimmee a break -- they've won two out of the last three. They're not gaining experience, they're showing age and complacency.

Here's a crazy possibility...

The Grizz looked like dog meat because the Mavs dominated them...

Bonzi Wells is having a hell of series because the Spurs are old, slow, and uninspired....

Goodness, what a smackdown. Excellent post.