PDA

View Full Version : If Spurs stay healthy do they get the #1 seed over the Lakers



JordansBulls
11-23-2010, 04:01 PM
If Spurs stay healthy do they get the #1 seed over the Lakers?

Also do the Spurs need the top seed or HCA to beat the Lakers in a series?

Avenged
11-23-2010, 04:07 PM
1. Not if the Lakers are healthy as well.

2. They're going to need all of their stars healthy, and a little bit of luck to beat the Lakers in a 7 game series in my opinion.

alencp3
11-23-2010, 04:09 PM
2008 again Lakers and Hornets 1,2

tcav701
11-23-2010, 04:16 PM
I dont think the Spurs care what seed they get. Their stars will get the rest they need and they will drop a couple games they probably should win.

They know they are capable of beating anyone in the playoffs no matter the seed.

sp1derm00
11-23-2010, 04:17 PM
Lakers are 12-2 without their starting AND backup centers and Kobe coming back from offseason knee surgery.

Fairly certain that the Lakers will improve further once Bynum is back. Also sure that the Spurs are playing the just about the best ball they're capable of.

shep33
11-23-2010, 04:18 PM
Even if LA doesn't finish first out west, though I think they probably will, they can still win a series on the road. In fact the Lakers have won atleast one game on the road in their last 8 playoff series, and 11 outta the past 12 I believe.. only series they haven't won a playoff series over the last 3 years was when they went to the finals was vs. the Celtics in '08.

marques724
11-23-2010, 04:31 PM
No

Rangerchick
11-23-2010, 04:35 PM
I dont think the Spurs care what seed they get. Their stars will get the rest they need and they will drop a couple games they probably should win.

They know they are capable of beating anyone in the playoffs no matter the seed.

They toasted the Mavs last year even though they were the lower seed, and they're deeper and better this year.

faze38
11-23-2010, 04:37 PM
No they will not be the number 1 seed but I think the Spurs can go toe to toe with anybody no matter how many games they have at home it only take 1 win in LA to take homecourt advantage! The Spurs are experianced and when healthy good enough to beat anybody in the league!

John Walls Era
11-23-2010, 04:39 PM
I don't know if the Spurs will even win that division. Its a long season and they are a group of vets.

But who knows, teams need to stop leaving Bonner open.

JordansBulls
11-23-2010, 04:44 PM
Lakers are 12-2 without their starting AND backup centers and Kobe coming back from offseason knee surgery.

Fairly certain that the Lakers will improve further once Bynum is back. Also sure that the Spurs are playing the just about the best ball they're capable of.

True, but look at the schedule of the teams they have beaten thus far vs who the Spurs have beaten.

http://espn.go.com/nba/team/schedule/_/name/lal/los-angeles-lakers

http://espn.go.com/nba/team/schedule/_/name/sa/san-antonio-spurs


I think the Lakers will be the #1 seed anyway, but the only decent team they played thus far is Denver.

Jenceman
11-23-2010, 04:50 PM
Nope,unless the Lakers hobble into the playoffs.

D1JM
11-23-2010, 05:08 PM
Lakers have had an easy schedule

Gibby23
11-23-2010, 05:12 PM
True, but look at the schedule of the teams they have beaten thus far vs who the Spurs have beaten.

http://espn.go.com/nba/team/schedule/_/name/lal/los-angeles-lakers

http://espn.go.com/nba/team/schedule/_/name/sa/san-antonio-spurs


I think the Lakers will be the #1 seed anyway, but the only decent team they played thus far is Denver.

True, but look at the Lakers track record over the last 3 years, and they look better this year.

Gibby23
11-23-2010, 05:14 PM
Lakers have had an easy schedule

I know, they always start off with an easy schedule and a lot of home games because of some award shows later in the year at staples. It should be a good test for us tonight. Scoring PG's hurt us.

dtmagnet
11-23-2010, 05:17 PM
Lakers are on a different level than everyone else IMO.

Iggz53
11-23-2010, 05:18 PM
I really don't see that happening

truplayer199
11-23-2010, 05:20 PM
No. This team is pretty old, they'll start to break down eventually.

Giraffes Rule
11-23-2010, 05:22 PM
Lakers are 12-2 without their starting AND backup centers and Kobe coming back from offseason knee surgery.

Fairly certain that the Lakers will improve further once Bynum is back. Also sure that the Spurs are playing the just about the best ball they're capable of.

I disagree. They have a lot of improvement to make on the defensive end, and they're capable of improving that as the season goes on.


No. This team is pretty old, they'll start to break down eventually.

Biggest misconception in the NBA. Manu, Duncan, and McDyess are the only players on the Spurs over 30.

ClipperfanKevin
11-23-2010, 05:28 PM
The toughest teams that the Lakers have faced are the Nuggets, Trailblazers, and the Suns.... They lost 2 out of 3, and the win was against a hobbled Blazers team. On the other hand, the Spurs emphatically beat teams like the Jazz, Thunder, Bulls, and Magic. Last season was last season, if we're going to speculate for this season, lets use this season as a reference. Sure Bynum will make the Lakers a stronger team, but when he comes back he'll need to get acclimated into the offense which could mean some losses.

JayW_1023
11-23-2010, 05:31 PM
The Lakers are still the class of the West, even as a Spurs fan i know this. But The Spurs are playing at a high level now. Let's hope they can play like this in april.

nickdymez
11-23-2010, 05:40 PM
The toughest teams that the Lakers have faced are the Nuggets, Trailblazers, and the Suns.... They lost 2 out of 3, and the win was against a hobbled Blazers team. On the other hand, the Spurs emphatically beat teams like the Jazz, Thunder, Bulls, and Magic. Last season was last season, if we're going to speculate for this season, lets use this season as a reference. Sure Bynum will make the Lakers a stronger team, but when he comes back he'll need to get acclimated into the offense which could mean some losses.

This is a pretty stupid post. Im not going to weigh in past this because i would feel stupid if i did.

Rafer17
11-23-2010, 05:44 PM
Lakers are just too good at everything. so much depth

todu82
11-23-2010, 05:48 PM
No, I think it is going to be 1 and 2 for these 2 teams this year but the Lakers will be the #1 seed.

Raph12
11-23-2010, 05:49 PM
LA doesn't have Bynum back yet and their chemistry is really clicking, Pau is having the best year of his career, while their bench looks solid... If LA is unhealthy, Spurs could take it, otherwise LA takes it.

Showmeyourtds
11-23-2010, 05:54 PM
Lakers are the best and the Spurs are a team of the past. They're both playing great early but when the Lakers get healthy they will be the #1 seed.

JasonJohnHorn
11-23-2010, 05:56 PM
the Spurs are awesome. The Lakers are awesome.

the Spurs however have a group of slightly older players (Duncan, Mcdysse), and also some undersized players (Blair), and inexpeirenced players (splitter). As the season goes on these things are going to factor in to the Spurs record coming down to earth, along with Bonner's 3P%. the quick start, as well as Jefferson's aparent comfort in the system, Hill and Parker and Ginobili finding a comfortable middle ground in respect to minutes and ball handling duties, and Duncan's improved play (he's been slow getting out of the gate) will ensure that they have home court in the first round and likely wont have to face LA until the conference finals.

But LA will likely get bynum back and have been playing great and will play better once Odom goes back to the bench and bring the true depth of the Lakers back.

That said, when I put my money down for a team before tip off of game one, I put it down on the Spurs. So I think when the playoffs roll around the only three teams that I can see winning it all is LA, SA, and BOS.

ClipperfanKevin
11-23-2010, 05:58 PM
This is a pretty stupid post. Im not going to weigh in past this because i would feel stupid if i did.

There's nothing stupid about that post. The Spurs hold a better record than the Laker's currently, and they've had a much tougher schedule. What's stupid about that? Should we take away that the Lakers are a better team because they've started off worse on an easier schedule? 2 of the 3 "playoff" teams that the Lakers have played to start the season have beat them, and the one that they beat was just getting over the loss of their starting center, and a huge knee injury to their star.

SouthSideRookie
11-23-2010, 06:07 PM
It usually takes time to come to the realization that your team isn't good enough to win it anymore, especially when they go on a hot streak like the Spurs are going through.

ClipperfanKevin
11-23-2010, 06:11 PM
It usually takes time to come to the realization that your team isn't good enough to win it anymore, especially when they go on a hot streak like the Spurs are going through.

That's a quitter's mentality. The only time a basketball team should believe that they aren't good enough to win it anymore is after they've been eliminated from the playoffs.

D1JM
11-23-2010, 06:13 PM
I know, they always start off with an easy schedule and a lot of home games because of some award shows later in the year at staples. It should be a good test for us tonight. Scoring PG's hurt us.

but its an advantage of having an easier schedule at the beginning than later on in the season. Those though games in feb, march are going to help them get ready for the playoffs

JayW_1023
11-23-2010, 06:20 PM
Either way Pop cares less about the eight seed...as long as the squad is healthy and focussed in april.

Bruno
11-23-2010, 06:37 PM
They could.

Tony Parker is sure playing like a man who's in a contract year, who's assets are about to be split in half, I'll say that much. Just as I anticipated, got him in multiple fantasy leagues.

RaiderLakersA's
11-23-2010, 06:55 PM
...Meaning that being healthy automatically equates to wins for the Spurs? Come on now, let's be real. I like what the Spurs are doing so far this year, and no doubt they are a well-coached team, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. Healthy or not, every player has good nights and bad nights. I'm not completely sold on the Spurs being able to overcome a bad night by one of it's big 3.

RaiderLakersA's
11-23-2010, 06:58 PM
They could.

Tony Parker is sure playing like a man who's in a contract year, who's (sic) assets are about to be split in half, I'll say that much. Just as I anticipated, got him in multiple fantasy leagues.

Eva and Tony have a prenup agreement. His assets aren't going anywhere. And it's not like Eva is your ordinary, run of the mill, well, desperate housewife. That woman is a big money earner herself. It would be a different story if Tony were married to a reality star/rap video model (like Shaq soon will be) or a singer who was only a one-hit wonder (like Nas was). :D

Giraffes Rule
11-23-2010, 06:59 PM
They could.

Tony Parker is sure playing like a man who's in a contract year, who's assets are about to be split in half, I'll say that much. Just as I anticipated, got him in multiple fantasy leagues.

Not really a contract year though, since he's under contract for 4 more years...

numba1CHANGsta
11-23-2010, 06:59 PM
This is the Spurs last breathe, this wont last all season long, they will fall and will be eliminated in the first round: 1. Lakers 2. Thunder. 3. Hornets 4. Mavs 5. Spurs

kdspurman
11-23-2010, 07:00 PM
...Meaning that being healthy automatically equates to wins for the Spurs? Come on now, let's be real. I like what the Spurs are doing so far this year, and no doubt they are a well-coached team, but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. Healthy or not, every player has good nights and bad nights. I'm not completely sold on the Spurs being able to overcome a bad night by one of it's big 3.


Tim Duncan has had a few games with single digit scoring, and guess what, other guys stepped up. That's the advantage of having more guys who can score. He's the 4th leading scorer on the team with contributions from arguably the best back court thus far (manu/tony) and RJ putting up 17ppg early on. Not to mention Bonner's streaky shooting and a guy by the name Gary Neal that most folks dont know. This is all done without really getting our main acquisition Splitter integrated in the system yet. So one or even 2 of our big 3 can be off and we have other weapons.

Giraffes Rule
11-23-2010, 07:01 PM
This is the Spurs last breathe, this wont last all season long, they will fall and will be eliminated in the first round: 1. Lakers 2. Thunder. 3. Hornets 4. Mavs 5. Spurs

So you think the same Mavs team that got beat by the Spurs last season in the first round is going to beat a better Spurs team this year? :clap:

Niro
11-23-2010, 07:06 PM
lakers first seed hands down

numba1CHANGsta
11-23-2010, 07:07 PM
So you think the same Mavs team that got beat by the Spurs last season in the first round is going to beat a better Spurs team this year? :clap:

yup, the Mavs are built to last longer than the Spurs and have better bigs than the Spurs. Also, dont believe into the hype, the Spurs are just hot right now

Mplsman
11-23-2010, 07:09 PM
Lakers will probably close on them.

RaiderLakersA's
11-23-2010, 07:09 PM
Tim Duncan has had a few games with single digit scoring, and guess what, other guys stepped up. That's the advantage of having more guys who can score. He's the 4th leading scorer on the team with contributions from arguably the best back court thus far (manu/tony) and RJ putting up 17ppg early on. Not to mention Bonner's streaky shooting and a guy by the name Gary Neal that most folks dont know. This is all done without really getting our main acquisition Splitter integrated in the system yet. So one or even 2 of our big 3 can be off and we have other weapons.


Scoring isn't everything. When Tim isnt scoring, he still brings defense and leadership. You HAVE to account for him.

When Bonner's "streaky" shooting turns into Bonner's "consistent" shooting, call me. Until then....

bovice163
11-23-2010, 07:11 PM
Eva and Tony have a prenup agreement. His assets aren't going anywhere. And it's not like Eva is your ordinary, run of the mill, well, desperate housewife. That woman is a big money earner herself. It would be a different story if Tony were married to a reality star/rap video model (like Shaq soon will be) or a singer who was only a one-hit wonder (like Nas was). :D
I don't normally post much, as you can tell by my post count, but WHAT?! :speechless: :facepalm: :mad:

Every single song on Illmatic was new and innovative, which is why Illmatic is generally considered the greatest hip hop album of all-time. It Was Written had a few great tracks, and even some of his unreleased stuff is incredible.

If the Spurs could stay healthy, then it would be a neck and neck race for the #1 seed between the two, but I would give the benefit of the doubt to LA since with their depth they are able to absorb the blows from injury. I personally believe the Spurs are playing some of the best basketball they're capable of right now, so they can really only go downhill from this point on.

kgjfan243
11-23-2010, 07:13 PM
No the lakers will be the first seed. I can see the spurs grabbing the 3rd or 4th spot.

tdunk21
11-23-2010, 07:13 PM
prolly it doesnt matter for spurs about the seeding as long as all are healthy going into the playoffs...but am happy spurs beat couple big teams like bulls, magic, jazz, thunder...

RaiderLakersA's
11-23-2010, 07:16 PM
I don't normally post much, as you can tell by my post count, but WHAT?! :speechless: :facepalm: :mad:

Every single song on Illmatic was new and innovative, which is why Illmatic is generally considered the greatest hip hop album of all-time. It Was Written had a few great tracks, and even some of his unreleased stuff is incredible.

If the Spurs could stay healthy, then it would be a neck and neck race for the #1 seed between the two, but I would give the benefit of the doubt to LA since with their depth they are able to absorb the blows from injury. I personally believe the Spurs are playing some of the best basketball they're capable of right now, so they can really only go downhill from this point on.

You missed my point. I like Nas. Of all of the hip hop artists (as opposed to rappers) he's at the top of my play rotation. My point was simply that he divorced what's her name and she took him to the cleaners. He's still paying incredible sums to her, last I heard. Everyone should get a prenup, whether men or women, because divorce is hell.

I wouldn't mind the Spurs being a surprise team in the playoffs. I prefer them over Phoenix, Houston, NO, Portland and Mavericks in the West.

Storch
11-23-2010, 07:17 PM
I don't think either team really care about the regular season standings as long as they make the playoffs. These are two elite playoff teams with a bunch of seasoned veterans that have played in big games. I'm sure their coaches are more concerned of giving them as much rest as possible and not the #1 seed.

But, i'll go with the Lakers because they've had a better record than the spurs recently. And the Lakers have a great bench, something they haven't had in years. A good 4 or 5 games each year can be attributed towards the inconsistency of the bench play and losing leads. The Spurs are definitely a great team and I wouldn't be surprised if they took the spot.

bovice163
11-23-2010, 07:22 PM
You missed my point. I like Nas. Of all of the hip hop artists (as opposed to rappers) he's at the top of my play rotation. My point was simply that he divorced what's her name and she took him to the cleaners. He's still paying incredible sums to her, last I heard. Everyone should get a prenup, whether men or women, because divorce is hell.

I wouldn't mind the Spurs being a surprise team in the playoffs. I prefer them over Phoenix, Houston, NO, Portland and Mavericks in the West.

Yeah, I reread what you posted and realized I read it out of context. I agree with your post now.

I forgot to add, when it comes down to seeding, I don't really think it's at the top of Pop's priorities. As long as they are healthy going into the playoffs, then it was a successful season for them.

kdspurman
11-23-2010, 07:24 PM
yup, the Mavs are built to last longer than the Spurs and have better bigs than the Spurs. Also, dont believe into the hype, the Spurs are just hot right now

Built to last longer? How so? Dallas is actually OLDER than san antonio is, and san antonio has in essence rebuilt their team without becoming a team that has to tank to get a high draft pick.

We are better built for the future cause we have a young point guard on the rise and a young big man on the rise.

cabernetluver
11-23-2010, 07:28 PM
It strikes me as an odd supposition that the Spurs of this year are significantly better than last year while there is no doubt that the Lakers this year (the bench) are much better than last year.

Lakers last year were 1. Assuming good health for all, they will be 1 this year too.

tangent12
11-23-2010, 07:45 PM
The Spurs are an ancient team, so no.

JayW_1023
11-23-2010, 07:53 PM
The Spurs are an ancient team, so no.

Bad reasoning. The Lakers are older actually. And Boston proved agecan be an asset instead of a liability.

JayW_1023
11-23-2010, 07:57 PM
I expect the Lakers to be #1 and far and away the best team when fully healthy. Last season the Spurs lost to basically all the West contenders in the season, but i'll take less wins just so we are healthy come postseason.

It's great to see what Manu is doing with starters minutes. Even at 33 he is a top 5 SG in the NBA.

Sly Guy
11-23-2010, 08:02 PM
there is no way. As much as I have respect for the majority of the spurs organization, the LA roster is too loaded.

numba1CHANGsta
11-23-2010, 08:06 PM
Built to last longer? How so? Dallas is actually OLDER than san antonio is, and san antonio has in essence rebuilt their team without becoming a team that has to tank to get a high draft pick.

We are better built for the future cause we have a young point guard on the rise and a young big man on the rise.

Well Im not looking any further of the 2010-2011 season, im looking at right now and right now the Mavs are built to contend longer than the Spurs for many reasons:

1. The Mavs have a better bench: Terry, Marion, Haywood, Barea

Compared to: Bonner, Hill

2. Not including Dirk and Duncan, the Mavs have better Bigs: Chandler, Haywood, both 7-footers

Compared to:Blair(6-7), Bonner(6-10), McDyess(6-9), Splitter(6-11)

3. Offense, in a Best of 7 series, the Mavs have more players that would step up and have more reliable players to play big which means more offense, Jefferson and Duncan cant carry a heavy load all season long, and Parker and Manu can give u an average of about 20 a night.

So in conclusion, the Spurs are averaging 107 points a game, do you really think that will last all season long? and How will the Spurs fair against a bigger frontcourt? The Spurs play at Dallas on Friday, lets see how that game goes

Bruno
11-23-2010, 08:07 PM
Eva and Tony have a prenup agreement. His assets aren't going anywhere. And it's not like Eva is your ordinary, run of the mill, well, desperate housewife. That woman is a big money earner herself. It would be a different story if Tony were married to a reality star/rap video model (like Shaq soon will be) or a singer who was only a one-hit wonder (like Nas was). :D

Smart man, didn't know they had a prenup agreement.


Not really a contract year though, since he's under contract for 4 more years...

Really? That's news to me. According to hoopshype this is the last year of his contract and he's getting paid 13.5 million.

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/san_antonio.htm


Regardless, there is extra motivation coming from somewhere- he is playing infinitely better than he was last year.

Azzacadabra
11-23-2010, 08:18 PM
Lakers are gonna finish number one, however, I wouldn't be surprised if the Spurs finished #1. They always have had the wherewithal to surprise people with success (because they're not outspoken) yet it's not very surprising at all. They're an excellent team.

Joshtd1
11-23-2010, 08:18 PM
Well Im not looking any further of the 2010-2011 season, im looking at right now and right now the Mavs are built to contend longer than the Spurs for many reasons:

1. The Mavs have a better bench: Terry, Marion, Haywood, Barea

Compared to: Bonner, Hill

2. Not including Dirk and Duncan, the Mavs have better Bigs: Chandler, Haywood, both 7-footers

Compared to:Blair(6-7), Bonner(6-10), McDyess(6-9), Splitter(6-11)

3. Offense, in a Best of 7 series, the Mavs have more players that would step up and have more reliable players to play big which means more offense, Jefferson and Duncan cant carry a heavy load all season long, and Parker and Manu can give u an average of about 20 a night.

So in conclusion, the Spurs are averaging 107 points a game, do you really think that will last all season long? and How will the Spurs fair against a bigger frontcourt? The Spurs play at Dallas on Friday, lets see how that game goes

So basically..the Mavs and Spurs have the same teams as last year, with the exception that the Spurs added the best big man in Europe. How again are the Mavs going to beat the Spurs when they couldnt even do that last year, and the Spurs are much better this year because their two best pickups last season are fully adjusted to the system now. I really don't get your reasoning.

Joshtd1
11-23-2010, 08:21 PM
Anyway, its possible for Spurs to get #1, but I don't think we will. I think just the fact that Pop is keeping TD and Manu from playing the least amount of minutes as possible in the regular season will probably cost us a few games, along with giving TD/Dice games off on back to backs as well.

When it comes to the playoffs though, I like our chances against pretty much anyone. Can't wait to play against Boston/LA because those are the two teams I think are the best in the NBA, so they will be good tests to measure up how good we really are.

By the way, I still don't understand how people think we are so old? Dice/Manu/Duncan are the only guys over 30, everone else is relatively young.

numba1CHANGsta
11-23-2010, 08:31 PM
So basically..the Mavs and Spurs have the same teams as last year, with the exception that the Spurs added the best big man in Europe. How again are the Mavs going to beat the Spurs when they couldnt even do that last year, and the Spurs are much better this year because their two best pickups last season are fully adjusted to the system now. I really don't get your reasoning.

not quite, dont forget the Mavs acquired Chandler past offseason, and Splitter will be inconsistent all year, and how are the Spurs much better? what has changed? Just cuz Jefferson and Bonner are hot right now? The Spurs couldnt beat a frontcourt of West and Okafor how do u think they will fair against Dirk and Chandler/Haywood? Your Spurs aint scoring 107 points all season i can guarantee you that

el_primo_nano
11-23-2010, 08:42 PM
They might. But they can't beat them in a 7 game series with both teams at 100%. Lakers are playing out of their minds right now

Hawkeye15
11-23-2010, 08:51 PM
Considering how crappy Duncan has looked, and we all know he will get better, sure, if they stay healthy, the Spurs can grab the #1 seed. But will Pops play Manu and Duncan a ton of minutes down the stretch? What are the chances the Spurs stay healthy with so many vets on their roster?
I see no reason why not, but they are leading LA by .5 games, and their starting center hasn't even played yet

Giraffes Rule
11-23-2010, 08:52 PM
Really? That's news to me. According to hoopshype this is the last year of his contract and he's getting paid 13.5 million.

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/san_antonio.htm


Regardless, there is extra motivation coming from somewhere- he is playing infinitely better than he was last year.

Yeah, he signed an extension a few weeks ago.
http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/tony_parker_contract_extension_101030.html

He's playing better this year because he's healthy. Last season he had ankle and foot injuries all year. This year he's healed up, and didn't play international ball in the off season so he's fresh too. People forget how good Parker was 2 years ago.


not quite, dont forget the Mavs acquired Chandler past offseason, and Splitter will be inconsistent all year, and how are the Spurs much better? what has changed? Just cuz Jefferson and Bonner are hot right now? The Spurs couldnt beat a frontcourt of West and Okafor how do u think they will fair against Dirk and Chandler/Haywood? Your Spurs aint scoring 107 points all season i can guarantee you that

I take it you haven't watched any Spurs games at all. Jefferson isn't just hot right now. He worked with Popovich one on one in the off season to learn the system better and added the corner 3 shot that Bowen brought to the table. They've added a couple three point shooters this year (Neal and Anderson) and Blair hasn't even started playing really well year. You're selling the Spurs way too short.

Joshtd1
11-23-2010, 09:02 PM
not quite, dont forget the Mavs acquired Chandler past offseason, and Splitter will be inconsistent all year, and how are the Spurs much better? what has changed? Just cuz Jefferson and Bonner are hot right now? The Spurs couldnt beat a frontcourt of West and Okafor how do u think they will fair against Dirk and Chandler/Haywood? Your Spurs aint scoring 107 points all season i can guarantee you that

Yall lost to them as well :rolleyes: However we did beat a front court of Millasp/Al Jeff, and Lewis/Howard...

Lol Tyson Chandler, if you think he's your savior good luck. Spurs are much better because they are full healthy. Parker was injured all of last year, Manu had that broken nose in the playoffs.

Either way you put it, you aren't going to convince me the Mavs are built to last longer then the Spurs until the Mavs actually beat them in the playoffs, seeing as Spurs won last year with a team that isnt as good as it is this year.

number1nykfan25
11-23-2010, 09:07 PM
Do you really think the lakers care about the number one seed probably not. Does it really matter if they play denver portland utah or dallas?

Hawkeye15
11-23-2010, 09:07 PM
Yall lost to them as well :rolleyes: However we did beat a front court of Millasp/Al Jeff, and Lewis/Howard...

Lol Tyson Chandler, if you think he's your savior good luck. Spurs are much better because they are full healthy. Parker was injured all of last year, Manu had that broken nose in the playoffs.

Either way you put it, you aren't going to convince me the Mavs are built to last longer then the Spurs until the Mavs actually beat them in the playoffs, seeing as Spurs won last year with a team that isnt as good as it is this year.

is someone in here claiming the Mavs are better than the Spurs? Didn't the Spurs beat them up in the playoffs (as expected by anyone who understands stats)? The Mavs are a paper thin 55 win team. The Spurs, if they can actually enter the playoffs healthy, are as good as anyone

Giraffes Rule
11-23-2010, 09:21 PM
is someone in here claiming the Mavs are better than the Spurs? Didn't the Spurs beat them up in the playoffs (as expected by anyone who understands stats)? The Mavs are a paper thin 55 win team. The Spurs, if they can actually enter the playoffs healthy, are as good as anyone

Yes, "numba1CHANGsta" said that the Mavs would be the 4 seed, the Spurs at the 5 seed and that the Mavs would beat them in the first round.

Gibby23
11-23-2010, 09:28 PM
but its an advantage of having an easier schedule at the beginning than later on in the season. Those though games in feb, march are going to help them get ready for the playoffs

Not really. Did you see how the Lakers struggled late in the season last year? The Bulls usually pick it up at the end of the season when they have more home games, that is when the Bulls have made their runs thepast couple of years.

Bishnoff
11-23-2010, 09:33 PM
I highly doubt it.

zambo4president
11-23-2010, 10:03 PM
Spurs are good but they aren't deep enough to beat the Lakers.

tdunk21
11-23-2010, 10:17 PM
not quite, dont forget the Mavs acquired Chandler past offseason, and Splitter will be inconsistent all year, and how are the Spurs much better? what has changed? Just cuz Jefferson and Bonner are hot right now? The Spurs couldnt beat a frontcourt of West and Okafor how do u think they will fair against Dirk and Chandler/Haywood? Your Spurs aint scoring 107 points all season i can guarantee you that

i stopped reading after that....:laugh2:

JordansBulls
11-23-2010, 11:58 PM
Do you really think the lakers care about the number one seed probably not. Does it really matter if they play denver portland utah or dallas?

I'm sure the Lakers want HCA throughout.

Raps08-09 Champ
11-24-2010, 12:08 AM
Lakers probably going to finish 1st.

Spurs probably like 5 wins off them.

JordansBulls
11-24-2010, 02:20 AM
Lakers probably going to finish 1st.

Spurs probably like 5 wins off them.

Dallas was only 2 off last year.

Bruno
11-24-2010, 02:24 AM
Yeah, he signed an extension a few weeks ago.
http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/tony_parker_contract_extension_101030.html


Don't know how I missed that, thanks for the link.

eXpLiiCt
11-24-2010, 02:36 AM
The Lakers are/is the Peyton Manning of basketball.

SouljahPhil...
11-24-2010, 02:55 AM
I think no..lakers will get the no seed..

Spurs either no 2 or 3....

nigerianking
11-24-2010, 03:20 AM
Lakers have had an easy schedule

what was that again?

Mochalman
11-24-2010, 03:22 AM
the past few years the spurs havent been going for the best record, just play and stay healthy since they know they'll be in the playoffs. they just need to stick to that and be ready for another playoff run.

Baller1
11-24-2010, 03:46 AM
The Lakers have had a cake schedule, so I voted Spurs. But it's literally impossible to predict the seeds right now. I'll go ahead and say the top 4 seeds right now will end up being the top 4 though, except for possibly Utah taking the Hornets home court advantage.

JayW_1023
11-24-2010, 09:47 AM
Spurs are good but they aren't deep enough to beat the Lakers.

Duh. The Lakers are the deepest team in the NBA.

But The Spurs are pretty deep as well, and if someone like Bynum goes down we can match LA's depth.

JayW_1023
11-24-2010, 09:51 AM
By the way, I still don't understand how people think we are so old? Dice/Manu/Duncan are the only guys over 30, everone else is relatively young.

Indeed , the 'old' argument is a rotten dead beaten horse.

kdspurman
11-24-2010, 10:07 AM
Well Im not looking any further of the 2010-2011 season, im looking at right now and right now the Mavs are built to contend longer than the Spurs for many reasons:

1. The Mavs have a better bench: Terry, Marion, Haywood, Barea

Compared to: Bonner, Hill

2. Not including Dirk and Duncan, the Mavs have better Bigs: Chandler, Haywood, both 7-footers

Compared to:Blair(6-7), Bonner(6-10), McDyess(6-9), Splitter(6-11)

3. Offense, in a Best of 7 series, the Mavs have more players that would step up and have more reliable players to play big which means more offense, Jefferson and Duncan cant carry a heavy load all season long, and Parker and Manu can give u an average of about 20 a night.

So in conclusion, the Spurs are averaging 107 points a game, do you really think that will last all season long? and How will the Spurs fair against a bigger frontcourt? The Spurs play at Dallas on Friday, lets see how that game goes

1. Better bench? We only have 2 guys on the bench or 2 guys you know? Hill, Bonner, Mcydess is still playing very well (i bet his numbers are close to what chandlers are in less minutes) Splitter, and James Anderson was playing very well before going out with injury.

2. Chandler & Haywood might be 7 feet but so what lol Splitter and Mcdyess are a solid frontline as well. And Blair is undersized but has a nose for the ball better than most 7 footers including dallas's front line. They have the advantage on shot blocking i would say but that's about it. Those guys dont have the basketball IQ of splitter/dice.

3. I dont believe Dallas has more players to step up. Kidd, Terry, Haywood, Butler all disappeared in the playoffs last year. I dont expect them to average 107 points all year, but I do think if you had to bank on someone scoring more i would bet on tp, manu, rj, and duncan before kidd, terry, dirk, and butler. Dirk will get his ofcourse but thats all we know.

xbrackattackx
11-24-2010, 11:14 AM
I think Lakers have this.

And Spurs are better then Mavs, If no other reason because of the Coach.

JordansBulls
11-24-2010, 03:35 PM
I think Lakers have this.

And Spurs are better then Mavs, If no other reason because of the Coach.

Carlisle is no slouch either.

Joshtd1
11-24-2010, 04:05 PM
^^No, but he's not a better coach then Pop.

MikefromMars
11-24-2010, 04:29 PM
No. This team is pretty old, they'll start to break down eventually.

Contrary to what you may think... you're wrong. How are the Spurs old?

I think that this old business needs to be put to rest. I'm tired of people spewing up ESPN re-runs from 3-4 yrs ago. Do you live in a hole?

MikefromMars
11-24-2010, 04:37 PM
yup, the Mavs are built to last longer than the Spurs and have better bigs than the Spurs. Also, dont believe into the hype, the Spurs are just hot right now

Mmk. Because all of the facts say otherwise... I will just assume you're basing your opinion off of a "gut feeling"

Obviously Spurs> Mavs

Duncan, McD, Blair, Splitter, Bonner... The Spurs are not hurting for bigs and in case you haven't turned on your television... The Spurs run the ball now.

tdunk21
11-24-2010, 04:48 PM
Carlisle is no slouch either.

could u support ur statement? or else imma call u ignorant

Chacarron
11-24-2010, 05:13 PM
The toughest teams that the Lakers have faced are the Nuggets, Trailblazers, and the Suns.... They lost 2 out of 3, and the win was against a hobbled Blazers team. On the other hand, the Spurs emphatically beat teams like the Jazz, Thunder, Bulls, and Magic. Last season was last season, if we're going to speculate for this season, lets use this season as a reference. Sure Bynum will make the Lakers a stronger team, but when he comes back he'll need to get acclimated into the offense which could mean some losses.

It's not like Bynum would play for the first time with this team. The team's core is basically intact and Bynum doesn't do much in offense other than getting a few touches on the posts and getting rebounds. He will be very instrumental in the Lakers' defense improving. I honestly don't see how getting Bynum back translates to some losses. If anything, the Lakers would become even better and right away also. Bynum has already been with the Lakers for some time so he would only improve the Lakers on the defensive and offensive end, since Odom would go back to the bench.

ElMarroAfamado
11-24-2010, 09:10 PM
here we go with the Spurs talk ....it happens every year it gets boring...everyone know they are not winning a title this year or anytime soon....the Lakers will get the #1 seed and i would be shocked if they didnt win the title

JordansBulls
11-25-2010, 01:43 AM
They are now 13-1.

koreancabbage
11-25-2010, 01:50 AM
this is a long season and spurs are now known not to be healthy for the most part, so i don't agree with them being healthy in the first place.

I wouldn't count on the Spurs being first as well by the season's end.

this could be their last final run. Now or never moment for them

so don't count on it.

kozelkid
11-25-2010, 02:03 AM
I say neither. Especially not Spurs. They never go for the best record cause they don't need to. They turn it on in the playoffs. I feel the same way about the Lakers. They are two veteran championship teams that know how to turn it on come playoff time. Can't say the same for teams like OKC, Dallas or NO who care more about homecourt advantage so I expect one of those 3.

SouljahPhil...
11-25-2010, 02:05 AM
I say neither. Especially not Spurs. They never go for the best record cause they don't need to. They turn it on in the playoffs. I feel the same way about the Lakers. They are two veteran championship teams that know how to turn it on come playoff time. Can't say the same for teams like OKC, Dallas or NO who care more about homecourt advantage so I expect one of those 3.

I think Phil already stated the HC would be very important for them this year... I just can't find the exact article but it was written before the season started..

kozelkid
11-25-2010, 02:11 AM
I think Phil already stated the HC would be very important for them this year... I just can't find the exact article but it was written before the season started..

Quite possibly, but knowing Phil especially when he was the Bulls coach, I don't take anything he says serious. The fact that he is limiting Kobe's minutes this season is more of an indicator to me that they don't need the best record than him saying it's important.

Joshtd1
11-25-2010, 02:21 AM
here we go with the Spurs talk ....it happens every year it gets boring...everyone know they are not winning a title this year or anytime soon....the Lakers will get the #1 seed and i would be shocked if they didnt win the title

Don't understand what you have against the Spurs, every thing you post about them is exactly the same and always negative. Were 13-1 yet you still have something negative to say? Don't compare this season to last, we are fully healthy so far, and have most of our new guys from last year used to the system now.

This was an injured team last year that knocked out the #2 seed. Why cant we have a shot if we are actually healthy

Giraffes Rule
11-25-2010, 02:44 AM
this is a long season and spurs are now known not to be healthy for the most part, so i don't agree with them being healthy in the first place.

I wouldn't count on the Spurs being first as well by the season's end.

this could be their last final run. Now or never moment for them

so don't count on it.

You don't agree that they're healthy? I'm confused...

Joshtd1
11-25-2010, 02:54 AM
You don't agree that they're healthy? I'm confused...

:laugh2: Yea that makes two of us.

Fireworld
11-25-2010, 03:31 AM
The Spurs look to be playing their best ball now, the Lakers aren't even healthy yet. I say LA but who knows. I love that SA is playing well! I miss the exiting Lakers VS Spurs games.

cambovenzi
11-25-2010, 03:40 AM
I would bet pretty heavily on the lakers having a better record at seasons end.
They are arguably a better team even without their starting center bynum.
They lead the NBA in PPG and RPG
best point differential in the league.
and they've established themselves as the best team in the league the past 2 seasons.

It took a minor miracle for the spurs to beat the lowly twolves in OT tonight.
just saying.

Giraffes Rule
11-25-2010, 03:55 AM
I would bet pretty heavily on the lakers having a better record at seasons end.
They are arguably a better team even without their starting center bynum.
They lead the NBA in PPG and RPG
best point differential in the league.
and they've established themselves as the best team in the league the past 2 seasons.

It took a minor miracle for the spurs to beat the lowly twolves in OT tonight.
just saying.

The Lakers lost to the Nuggets and the Suns. Just saying. I don't think one game's performance reflects on a team's overall play, otherwise the Celtics are a bad team for losing to the Cavs and the Heat suck because they lost to the Pacers. That kind of logic doesn't really work.

cambovenzi
11-25-2010, 03:58 AM
Im not saying we should judge them solely on one games performance, but its still what? 1/14th of the sample size so far. and it was ugly.

If they lose that game they would have fallen to 12-2.
suddenly not better than the lakers record.

iggypop123
11-25-2010, 03:58 AM
the nba season is young. isnt bonner shooting 70% from 3?

Giraffes Rule
11-25-2010, 04:08 AM
the nba season is young. isnt bonner shooting 70% from 3?

After tonight, I doubt it. I don't know the exact numbers but the Spurs struggled from 3 point land for most of the game.


Im not saying we should judge them solely on one games performance, but its still what? 1/14th of the sample size so far. and it was ugly.

If they lose that game they would have fallen to 12-2.
suddenly not better than the lakers record.

But for as ugly that win was, they also beat good teams in the Magic, Suns, Jazz, Bulls, and Thunder. They were very impressive in some of those games, so I would say that's more indicative of what they are capable of. A win is a win though, and the Spurs continue to win, even if they didn't look good doing it.

SouljahPhil...
11-25-2010, 04:28 AM
Quite possibly, but knowing Phil especially when he was the Bulls coach, I don't take anything he says serious. The fact that he is limiting Kobe's minutes this season is more of an indicator to me that they don't need the best record than him saying it's important.

I will disagree with that...Kobe's minute has been down because of a lot blowouts and due to the fact that brown is playing out of this world(also the bench is better)..We don't need to play kObe they whole game if we have a big lead...As far as I have seen especially the close games his minutes are still high..

lakersfan211
11-25-2010, 04:48 AM
I admit the spurs have suprised me , they have looked really good but us far as beating the lakers In a 7 game series i doubt it , we ended the spurs run in 2008 . even though the spurs have looked good they are YESTERDAYS TEAM .

lakersfan211
11-25-2010, 04:49 AM
we will get the Number 1 seed .

MickeyMgl
11-25-2010, 04:59 AM
Assuming the Lakers GET and then STAY healthy, the answer is no. The answer is probably no even without Bynum.

MickeyMgl
11-25-2010, 05:05 AM
I think the Lakers will be the #1 seed anyway, but the only decent team they played thus far is Denver.

Chicago last night, and even before the date of your post they ran Portland off the court.

JayW_1023
11-25-2010, 05:12 AM
Manu was amazing last night. The Spurs were playing horrible and he flat out bailed us out.

SouljahPhil...
11-25-2010, 05:44 AM
Nice to see LA and Spurs back on top in the west..

JordansBulls
11-26-2010, 12:25 AM
Chicago last night, and even before the date of your post they ran Portland off the court.

I don't think Portland is really any good though.

Avenged
11-26-2010, 02:36 AM
I admit the spurs have suprised me , they have looked really good but us far as beating the lakers In a 7 game series i doubt it , we ended the spurs run in 2008 . even though the spurs have looked good they are YESTERDAYS TEAM .

I don't see it happening either with the way Kobe has been playing.. And how Gasol has actually improved from last season. Not to mention Bynum hasn't even played, Lamar is suddenly playing like an all-star caliber player, and Shannon is absolutely beasting it off the bench.

JordansBulls
11-26-2010, 12:19 PM
I don't see it happening either with the way Kobe has been playing.. And how Gasol has actually improved from last season. Not to mention Bynum hasn't even played, Lamar is suddenly playing like an all-star caliber player, and Shannon is absolutely beasting it off the bench.

My only concern is Tim Duncan. He has looked like he is falling off now.

Drewlius
11-26-2010, 01:35 PM
Im not saying we should judge them solely on one games performance, but its still what? 1/14th of the sample size so far. and it was ugly.

If they lose that game they would have fallen to 12-2.
suddenly not better than the lakers record.

That TWolves game made me believe in this Spurs squad even more. It's hard to get up for a game against one of the absolute worst teams in the NBA. Especially when you have something like a personal 13 game winning streak against them. What really shows a Championship caliber squad is that they pulled it off when they really needed it at the end.

Giraffes Rule
11-26-2010, 01:38 PM
My only concern is Tim Duncan. He has looked like he is falling off now.

I disagree. His low numbers are a result of reduced minutes and more weapons on offense, he's still rebounding and scoring well.

Tmo440
11-26-2010, 01:50 PM
I think the Spurs have a chance this year if everyone stays healthy. They match up very well with the Lakers IMO, and I feel they are just as deep as the Lakers as well

JJ81
11-26-2010, 07:28 PM
HCA or not, the Lakers will prevail come playoff time

JayW_1023
11-27-2010, 10:01 AM
Glad the streak ended vs. a team I respect like Dallas instead of some bottomdwelling team.

Dirk has always been a tough matchup for the Spurs, and it's great to see him still be an elite player after all these years.

Cavs_Fan24
11-27-2010, 10:26 AM
It's gonna be the same song and dance with the spurs this season as the celtics last season. Resting most of your team throught the year and getting in some younger, inexperienced players in the game more often. If the spurs are fresh come playoffs time LOOKOUT!!

GW3 all day
11-27-2010, 10:44 AM
the spurs could get the top seed if they tried hard but I think they would be better off getting the 3rd, 4th, or 5th seed and then turn it on in the playoffs.

JayW_1023
11-27-2010, 10:55 AM
The Spurs have always been a good road team, so seeding is the least of my worries.

numba1CHANGsta
11-28-2010, 03:43 AM
is someone in here claiming the Mavs are better than the Spurs? Didn't the Spurs beat them up in the playoffs (as expected by anyone who understands stats)? The Mavs are a paper thin 55 win team. The Spurs, if they can actually enter the playoffs healthy, are as good as anyone

and my claim still stands, the Spurs lost at home on Friday against the Mavs and almost lost a game against the T-wolves, and what do those teams have in common? a better frontcourt, so yes this Mavs team would beat the Spurs this year round and ppl need to stop bringing out last season because its a whole new season ;)

Giraffes Rule
11-28-2010, 03:57 AM
and my claim still stands, the Spurs lost at home on Friday against the Mavs and almost lost a game against the T-wolves, and what do those teams have in common? a better frontcourt, so yes this Mavs team would beat the Spurs this year round and ppl need to stop bringing out last season because its a whole new season ;)

And the Mavs "better frontcourt" were responsible for Jefferson and Parker having bad nights? I don't think so. The Spurs played awful and sloppy and it was still close at the end.

I'd also like to point out that, had the Spurs won that game, I guarantee this guy wouldn't have come back to say anything.

JayW_1023
11-28-2010, 04:53 AM
and my claim still stands, the Spurs lost at home on Friday against the Mavs and almost lost a game against the T-wolves, and what do those teams have in common? a better frontcourt, so yes this Mavs team would beat the Spurs this year round and ppl need to stop bringing out last season because its a whole new season ;)

The Mavs are a great regular season team, but their history of folding in the postseason is well documented. I'll have to see it to believe it.

JordansBulls
11-28-2010, 04:38 PM
The Mavs are a great regular season team, but their history of folding in the postseason is well documented. I'll have to see it to believe it.

agreed. 10 years in a row of 50+ wins.

ko8e24
11-28-2010, 05:10 PM
Eh, we swept the Spurs in 2001 WCF when they were the #1 seed. No biggie. :)

Joshtd1
11-28-2010, 09:00 PM
and my claim still stands, the Spurs lost at home on Friday against the Mavs and almost lost a game against the T-wolves, and what do those teams have in common? a better frontcourt, so yes this Mavs team would beat the Spurs this year round and ppl need to stop bringing out last season because its a whole new season ;)

Yep, Mavs beat us. No way Chandler/Kidd outplay Parker/Duncan though again, and 17 points for Marion is probably one of the highest totals he's had against the Spurs in his career.Oh and Dirk prob won't be 12-14 against us again as well. Spurs had the game, didn't want to capitalize. I still like Spurs chances against anyone in the West so far.

ElMarroAfamado
11-28-2010, 09:24 PM
ok.

evadatam5150
11-28-2010, 09:33 PM
If Spurs stay healthy do they get the #1 seed over the Lakers?

Also do the Spurs need the top seed or HCA to beat the Lakers in a series?

IF is a big word when you consider the Spurs and the age question.. They're playing good ball now but I think it's important to remember that it's early in the season yet and the bodies should start hitting the floor after the December some time.. The Spurs are surprising me though.. We'll have to see how it all plays out.. It's not like the Lakers are playing error free basketball or look like world beaters.. It's early and anybodies division to win..

JordansBulls
11-28-2010, 11:53 PM
Eh, we swept the Spurs in 2001 WCF when they were the #1 seed. No biggie. :)

You don't have peak Shaq.