NBA Playoffs, 2005

[Slumberland]

It wouldn't bother me if I didn't find the Spurs to be the absolute, mind-numbingly, most unlikeable team in the NBA. But that's a personal hurdle for me to cross, or I can just forget the whole thing ever happened.

[matthewk]

Anyone else notice that Hubie Brooks lookes like he just sat up out of his own casket? Yikes!!

[Brando70]

Not a great game last night, but really tough defense by both teams. Duncan came periously close to taking the shape of Karl Malone, but he made some big shots and played very good defense. The Argentinian Receding Hairline also stepped up and sank those clutch free throws to ice it. This game was almost the reverse of Game 6, with the Pistons unable to find their shots.

Anybody see the heated argument between Tim Legler and Greg Anthony on ESPN? Legler actually said that the Spurs winning three championships in seven years was a greater accomplishment than winning three in a row! Anthony, after a bit of stunned silence, did everything but say, "this white boy's crazy." Legler wouldn't admit that he was an idiot, and Anthony kept riding him. Funny stuff.

[davet010]

In a way, I can sort of see a logic in that

Threepeat - team can largely be kept together, with minor upgrades or changes allowing the continuance of some momentum. Unlikely to be much off-court shakeup.

3 in 7 - quite probably significant turnover of personnel, leading to either changes in team style and philosophy, or finding even more players to fit the existing style. Higher chance of front-office/coaching changes as well.

Simplistic maybe, but not entirely stupid.

[Dave]

Duncan came periously close to taking the shape of Karl Malone, but he made some big shots and played very good defense.

I just don't get all of this Duncan implosion talk that has been going on over the past week. Granted, the sheer amount of sports coverage tends to initiate this kind of talk, but no matter what, Duncan already had two rings.

Look at this matchup for Duncan. This is probably the team best equipped to defend him. Two Wallaces who were both equal or better than him (in my opinion) in height, bulk, and athletic ability. Plus, they aren't exactly unskilled defenders. The series, to me, proved more about the Pistons interior defense than Duncan's ability. He's always been a fluky free throw shooter.

I'm happy with the result, I don't like the Pistons and enjoy seeing someone like Horry get another ring and stand out in crunch time.

[reeche]

I just don't get all of this Duncan implosion talk that has been going on over the past week..

That's due to our horrible sports media which basically wants to boil everything down to supreme hero or choker as if those two things are the only options. Yes, Duncan didn't have his best series but you go through history and find that every superstar has had a few bad finals series outside of maybe Jordan or Bill Russell and those two were due to other factors I would argue. The Spurs would not have been there in the finals or won this series without Duncan. I love how Horry, or Ginobill get to occasionally show up and then disappear for long stretches and then grab the sexy headlines (neither of those guys remotely deserved the MVP like some people have suggested imo) but then you can pencil in 25 points and 12 rebounds for boring old Tim Duncan before the game even starts on a consistent basis. Because he isn't dominant in the mold of Shaq or Jordan, the media tends to downgrade him and the Spurs but it's really bad journalism and non analytical thinking which is pretty par for the course for sports writing.

[Leebo33]

Anyone else notice that Hubie Brooks lookes like he just sat up out of his own casket? Yikes!!

[wco81]

Duncan gets the least respect out of superstars by the officiating. He gets a lot of contact and even though he got both McDyess and Rasheed in foul trouble last night, there were a lot of plays which could have been whistled but weren't called.

On the other end, Billups and Hamilton were getting some touch fouls with far less contact when they drove to the hoop.

I guess the officials decided Duncan could draw foul calls virtually every time he pushed into the lane but since they can't, they let a lot of things go.

After Game 4, Stephen A. Smith started braying nonsense about "annihilation" and how he saw absolute fear and despair in Duncan's eyes as he sat on the bench during garbage time of that blowout. From that, ESPN started going on about how Duncan hasn't won without Robinson and that his "legacy" was at stake. Of course they have to hype up the Finals for their sister network ABC.

Stephen A. Smith compared the situation to a few years back when the Spurs got swept 4-0 by the Lakers. Well part of the reason that happened was the officiating allowed players like Horry to manhandle Duncan. If Duncan got the kind of officiating Shaq did, or now Stoudemire, who are able to dip their shoulders to create room and then gather up and go up for a jump hook uncontested because they'd made their defenders flinch backwards, then Duncan would be unstoppable. Instead of 25/12, he would have averaged more like 35/20.

[ubrakto]

Congrats to the Spurs. They earned it. They deserved it. They were the better of two relatively equal teams last night.

I can't help but whine a little about the way the game was called last night, though. I'm making no accusations that it was unbalanced. And it's not that there were a bunch of phantom calls. Mostly, they were legit. I just don't get how, after six games of no-blood, no-foul they can justify the number of ticky-tack, away from the ball calls.

It was game 7 for god's sake and within five minutes Ginobili, Billups and Rasheed Wallace were all on the bench with foul trouble. Gee, what a shock that the teams combined for the lowest NBA Finals halftime score in the shotclock era. Things calmed down more by the fourth quarter, I thought, but its a shame we didn't really get to see some of the great matchups in full force (Duncan vs. Sheed especially).

Again, I'm not taking anything away from the Spurs. In fact they should get more credit because they adjusted to the way the game was being called far better than the Pistons did. They are, and deserve to be the champs. The Pistons have nothing to hang their heads about, though. They just came up a little short.
---Todd

[sfz_T-car]

One more complaint before the corpse gets cold. Al Michaels is not a very good basketball announcer. On the plus side, his voice has a cachet to make any event seem like a big game. He can turn a phrase with the best of them and can throw in the occasional $10 word ("paucity" 2nd qtr last night) without coming off like a Dennis Miller wisenheimer.

I don't think Michaels does enough basketball during the course of the year. Consequently, he doesn't do the main job of a play-by-play man which is to tell the audience what's going on. He consistenly missed calls and substitutions. Some of this may have been due to a very loud building. He may not have been able to hear the refs or the guys in the truck, but an announcer who really knew hoops would have better instincts about what was happening. Since Al wasn't informing the audience, this left a lot of dead air. And Hubie abhors a vacuum. Michaels gives Hubie waaay too much space to yammer on in the second person singular about what should happen instead of what just did happen. The finals in prime time hopefully brings in a less hardcore audience than the regular season. Hubie shoots over their head and Michaels as the familiar everyman doesn't diffuse the complexity.

[reeche]

One more complaint before the corpse gets cold. Al Michaels is not a very good basketball announcer. On the plus side, his voice has a cachet to make any event seem like a big game. He can turn a phrase with the best of them and can throw in the occasional $10 word ("paucity" 2nd qtr last night) without coming off like a Dennis Miller wisenheimer.

I don't think Michaels does enough basketball during the course of the year. Consequently, he doesn't do the main job of a play-by-play man which is to tell the audience what's going on. He consistenly missed calls and substitutions. Some of this may have been due to a very loud building. He may not have been able to hear the refs or the guys in the truck, but an announcer who really knew hoops would have better instincts about what was happening. Since Al wasn't informing the audience, this left a lot of dead air. And Hubie abhors a vacuum. Michaels gives Hubie waaay too much space to yammer on in the second person singular about what should happen instead of what just did happen. The finals in prime time hopefully brings in a less hardcore audience than the regular season. Hubie shoots over their head and Michaels as the familiar everyman doesn't diffuse the complexity.

I agree with you on Michaels and disagree on Hubie. Marv is pretty much the gold standard for me when it comes to Pbp for basketball. He combines knowledge with good tone and doesn't over step his role. By comparison Michaels seems a little too unknowledgable about basketball for my tastes. I love Hubie, however. He combines passion with good knowledge and love of the game for me. He's not trying to be funny, or cute, or whatever which I like. He comes across as caring about the game and appreciating good basketball and gives a credibility that is normally missing from the color guy for me.

[Brando70]

In a way, I can sort of see a logic in that

Threepeat - team can largely be kept together, with minor upgrades or changes allowing the continuance of some momentum. Unlikely to be much off-court shakeup.

3 in 7 - quite probably significant turnover of personnel, leading to either changes in team style and philosophy, or finding even more players to fit the existing style. Higher chance of front-office/coaching changes as well.

Simplistic maybe, but not entirely stupid.

Dave, I see your point, but I think the three-peat is incredibly more difficult. While you can keep the team together, I think the mental and physical exhaustion of winning three NBA championships in a row is harder than winning three over a six or seven year span. Injuries, egos, motivation, and other things are just so much harder to maintain. That's not to take away anything from the Spurs -- a tremendous team, and their three championship squads have all been terrific. But I think what the Jordan Bulls and Lakers accomplished was harder to achieve.

[sfz_T-car]

Reeche - don't get me wrong, I Hubie too. I've learned a lot about basketball from him, when I can understand what he's talking about.

But suppose you're Hubie Brown. You're 70 years old and know more about the NBA than God himself. You shouldn't have to dumb down your schtick because your play-by-play man, who's incidently a football announcer, cannot execute. You have to go small, do your job and bring whatever upside you can to your team's package.

Agree w/ Brando on the threepeat. I think it's harder in a US knockout playoffs system than a season long chase like the Premiership. Luck and timing are much larger factors. If not for injuries to Joe Johnson & Dwyane Wade, both finals teams could have been different. The Spurs might have won last year if not for Derek Fisher's shot. It's more likely that the same team will be the best three years running than it is for the best team to be lucky in three consecutive years.

[wco81]

Threepeats are definitely achievements but the conferences were more unbalanced.

The Eastern Conference champion is now really able to contend (as long as that champion is the Pistons or the Heat) whereas before, you knew teams like the Sixers and the Nets really were no threats to win in the Finals.

Bulls and Lakers had their core players for their runs. Duncan is the main constant but relied heavily on playing with Robinson (one of the 50 best) before this year.

It'll be difficult for the Spurs to repeat. Neither Ginobli nor Parker are at the stature of Pippen or Kobe.

[10spro]

Even though Duncan had a great game, I feel the series MVP was Manu.