can someone with insider PM me the article?

way too long to Paste, but he has rockets at 9, mavs at 6, spurs at 3, OKC #1

Mav at 6?

quote:

---

Mav at 6?

---

Tyson > Brenden

Hollinger cracks me up. I have to wonder what NBA players think of him after reading some of his player analysis. I like this gem on the Laker's Odom trade:

quote:

---

After management's bizarre and seemingly impulsive decision to trade Lamar Odom to Dallas for a free year of HDNet and a keg of Lone Star

---

Mavs are way better than the spurs. Tim Duncan is done.

San Antonio Spurs: Measuring stick for the Mavericks

quote:

---

Mavs are way better than the spurs. Tim Duncan is done.

---

The short season and no real training camp or preseason greatly favors the teams that are really well coached and stayed nearly or completely intact.

Staying intact after losing to an 8 seed is a great idea. Ask the Mavs.

http://slumz.boxden.com/f16/espn-west-conference-standings-predictions-1672186/

Denver at #2 is most hilarious to me. Wow.

Just to keep some of the other previews together (from Sports Illustrated):

Southwesthttp://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/chris_mannix/12/16/southwest.division.preview.2011/index.html##?sct=nba_bf1_a7

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/lee_jenkins/12/16/pacific.division.preview.2011/index.html##?sct=nba_t11_a4

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/britt_robson/12/16/northwest.division.preview/index.html?sct=nba_t11_a8

Champs previewhttp://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/12/21/breaking-down-the-2011-12-contenders/?eref=sircrc


[This message has been edited by Iowaggie (edited 12/21/2011 10:44p).]

Anybody who doesn't take the Spurs seriously in a shortened season will do so to their detriment.

Vince Carter, Jason Kidd, Dirk Nowitzki, Jason Terry, Shawn Marion, etc will all be benefited by the extended off season and the shortened season. More rest is going to benefit the veteran, older players.

And for the same reason, it will benefit the Spurs.

I don't know that the Spurs will finish as high as #3 for the simple fact that Pop will purposely throw a few games just to rest Tim and Manu when they have those ridiculous back to back to back games.

Meh. If the season was set up like 1999 maybe. But 60+ games is a lot to pack into a shortened season. Veteran teams will be forced to sit out the older guys for handfuls of games just for the sake of saving their legs come playoff time; which will cause teams to not play at full strength on given nights. To me, the teams that have the advantage will be the competitive young teams such as OKC, Chicago, MIA, etc.

Did Hollinger create a 2 page mathmatical formula to come up with these rankings?

It's a short season with lots of games. Doesn't favor older teams. I think most teams are hoping to lock up a spot in top 4 or 5 and coast into playoffs.

People forget about the Spurs because it's convenient. Last year they were supposed to be middle of pack playoff team. Maybe win one series.

San Antonio's late season fade and playoff performance was not the aberration. The aberration was the lightning start which clouded everybody's judgement of the Spurs. After the quick start, they played to expectations. Just a middling, good team. Not bad enough to get in lottery. Not good enough to make a run.

Their formula has been simple. Have one awesome player. Surround him with a couple of good players and good coach. No cure for the common birthday. Now Duncan is just a good player surrounded by role players that don't look so good anymore.

For what it's worth, Duncan looks a lot better this season than last season. He hasn't been this spry since a couple seasons ago.

quote:

---

Just a middling, good team. Not bad enough to get in lottery.

---

Just a middling good team with the best record in the West by 4 games and coasted down the stretch when they had the top seed locked up and some nagging injuries to rest?

quote:

---

Not bad enough to get in lottery.

---

By a long shot, considering they were the only WC team with over 60 wins last year.

quote:

---

Now Duncan is just a good player surrounded by role players that don't look so good anymore.

---

Duncan can't bring it the same way he used to, but Duncan, Parker and Ginobili all had a PER over 20 last year. The only other team with 3 players in the top 30 in PER was the Lakers with Kobe/Gasol/Bynum.

Spurs won't make a run at the title, but they are still a very good team. Especially when you look at the WC. Dallas lost their main post defender and didn't replace him with anyone near as good. LA basically conceeded they are done running at a title by giving away Lamar Odom for a bag of skittles, the Hornets were a playoff team, but are no longer, the Thuggets have a third of their players trapped in China for the season. We will see how much losing Tyson Chandler hurt Dallas pretty soon, but I think it is Oklahoma City's conference to lose.

[This message has been edited by Guitarsoup (edited 12/23/2011 6:26p).]

I don't believe this kind of season favors a veteran team. Games are all going to be scrunched together with many back to backs and in some cases back to back to back games. I believe younger teams will make more of an impact this year with their bodies able to handle all of the tight schedules. Mavs play 9 in 12 days during a stretch. That is brutal. I don't look for the spurs or mavs to be viewed as much during the season, but playoff time would hopefully reward the veteran teams.

Somebody should make a list of all the "lakers gave odom away for..." jokes people who think theyre funny tell.

Someone please bookmark this thread. Anyone who thinks the Spurs are even close to being a contender needs to be laughed at.

J.J. Barea: Standing up for Timberwolves fans everywhere.

quote:

---

Someone please bookmark this thread. Anyone who thinks the Spurs are even close to being a contender needs to be laughed at.

---

As you wished. Of course, I can assure you that merely "being a contender" brings little satisfaction to Spurs fans themselves.



Looking back it seems that the consensus, prior to the season's start, was that the shortened/compressed schedule disfavored teams like the Spurs.

We all know, however, that should the Spurs meet postseason success there will be the inevitable onslaught of hindsight bias and after-the-fact rationalizations coupled with revisionist history.

...Ah yes, the unorthodox season preordained Spurs success. A no brainer; just like '99.

who would have thought the Hill for trade would work out so well

who would have thought Danny Greene would emerge

the coup de tat- RC trading Jefferson for essentially Jackson, Diaw and Patty Mills

holy crap if RC doesn't win GM of the year

Congrats, it's the regular season. If you win more than 6 playoff games call me.

I'll make sure to bump this when they do.

quote:

---

J.J. Barea
posted 1:42p, 12/23/11


Someone please bookmark this thread. Anyone who thinks the Spurs are even close to being a contender needs to be laughed at.

---

OK, so it's kinda late but apparently I bookmarked this thread at the time. In 2012, the Spurs won 10 straight playoff games and went to the WCF, then with the same roster in 2013 came within a miracle 3-pointer of winning the title.

Some other quotes:

birdman: "Just a middling, good team. Not bad enough to get in lottery. Not good enough to make a run.... Now Duncan is just a good player surrounded by role players that don't look so good anymore."

Yu Darvish: "Congrats, it's the regular season. If you win more than 6 playoff games call me." (10 games that year, 15 the next, again with the same roster)

J.J. Barea: "Mavs are way better than the spurs. Tim Duncan is done." (Oops)

Well done!

Keep in mind the injury to Westbrook took the Thunder out of the playoffs. That probably had more to do with the Spurs getting to the Finals than anything. They played lights out for 5 games when they got there so props to them.

OKC was a better team than the Spurs in '12. The Spurs ranked 10+ in all major defensive categories that season.

Last year, OKC would not have beaten the Spurs. The Spurs were the much better team. The only team in the NBA that could have beaten last years Spurs team was the Miami Heat. It was a matchup nightmare for the Spurs roster. The Spurs ranked #1-4 in all major defensive categories last season, just like they did in their championship days.

I think the Spurs would have done no worse than push the Thunder to 7, and likely won the series. Remember, OKC/SA went to 6 games the previous year with three of OKC's wins going down to the wire, and that was with Harden.

Regardless, the Spurs and Thunder wouldn't have played until the WCF, so the Spurs were clearly not washed up just yet whether they beat the Thunder or not.

[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 10/16/2013 11:38a).]

Also, there is no guarantee OKC would have gotten by the Grizzlies to get to the Spurs.

Before they played in the playoffs this year, in the past 3 seasons the teams have battled to a 9-9 draw (with 4 going to overtime), which included a 7 game series from two years ago when the Grizzlies were rolling out freaking Sam Young out there since Gay was injured.