I Hate the Spurs

[mkogav]

I'll take the Suns playing anyone on most days, just not the Spurs.  I have seen enough flops, whining, and cheaps shot for a while.

Seriously, unless u r from France or San Antonio, related to Eva Longoria, or a Wake Forest sycophant, how could u enjoy watching the Spurs in the playoffs?

If it makes the Spurs fans feel any better, I would watch the Spurs over the Bucks.

Mk

I can't read your mind, obviously, but I can read your posts, and it seems obvious to me that you don't really like basketball. You make like certain players or certain styles of play, but when a team, like the Spurs, doesn't play like you've already conceived of how the game should be played, you say they are boring, terrible, etc. People have made the case repeatedly for how and why the Spurs are not boring and are amazing to watch, but you've got other ideas of what constitutes basketball. That's fine, but simply repeating "boring" is both not an argument and pretty childish.

Wow, personal attacks. Nice.

Anyway, when did I ever say they were "boring"? I never wrote that once.

Do us all a favor and check ur facts.

Mk

[jaketwice]

I'll take the Suns playing anyone on most days, just not the Spurs.  I have seen enough flops, whining, and cheaps shot for a while.

Seriously, unless u r from France or San Antonio, related to Eva Longoria, or a Wake Forest sycophant, how could u enjoy watching the Spurs in the playoffs?

If it makes the Spurs fans feel any better, I would watch the Spurs over the Bucks.

Mk

I can't read your mind, obviously, but I can read your posts, and it seems obvious to me that you don't really like basketball. You make like certain players or certain styles of play, but when a team, like the Spurs, doesn't play like you've already conceived of how the game should be played, you say they are boring, terrible, etc. People have made the case repeatedly for how and why the Spurs are not boring and are amazing to watch, but you've got other ideas of what constitutes basketball. That's fine, but simply repeating "boring" is both not an argument and pretty childish.

This is a Spurs bashing thread. "I hate the Spurs" is necessarily a statement of preference. Why is any mind reading necessary?

You can't argue with subjective preference.

Moreover, I think the Spurs play the game in an ugly way: the mere fact that someone disagrees does not make my opinion, or any other opinion wrong. And vice versa... ...though I do think you'll change your mind if you watch the New Orleans series.

--
The Spurs seem to try and get fouls called against the other team all the time: that's not playing the game, that's playing the rules. They do it with more histrionics than is necessary, and at times it seems to be the focus of their offense.

THAT is an objective contention that you might reasonably attack.


--

Finally: I think that a couple of good points were made in response to concrete things other people said:

1). if LBJ is such a draw, and if there was LESS interest in a series he was involved in than is ordinary, I think you do have to consider whether the opponent caused fans to lose interest.

2). if ANY series involving the Suns is interesting (which I would tend to agree with) then whether the Spurs were playing them or someone else was playing them, the series would be interesting.  It's a tautology that defeats the argument that a series in which the Spurs were involved was interesting BECAUSE of the Spurs.

[wdleehi]

I'll take the Suns playing anyone on most days, just not the Spurs.  I have seen enough flops, whining, and cheaps shot for a while.

Seriously, unless u r from France or San Antonio, related to Eva Longoria, or a Wake Forest sycophant, how could u enjoy watching the Spurs in the playoffs?

If it makes the Spurs fans feel any better, I would watch the Spurs over the Bucks.

Mk

I can't read your mind, obviously, but I can read your posts, and it seems obvious to me that you don't really like basketball. You make like certain players or certain styles of play, but when a team, like the Spurs, doesn't play like you've already conceived of how the game should be played, you say they are boring, terrible, etc. People have made the case repeatedly for how and why the Spurs are not boring and are amazing to watch, but you've got other ideas of what constitutes basketball. That's fine, but simply repeating "boring" is both not an argument and pretty childish.

This is a Spurs bashing thread. "I hate the Spurs" is necessarily a statement of preference. Why is any mind reading necessary?

You can't argue with subjective preference.

Moreover, I think the Spurs play the game in an ugly way: the mere fact that someone disagrees does not make my opinion, or any other opinion wrong. And vice versa... ...though I do think you'll change your mind if you watch the New Orleans series.

--
The Spurs seem to try and get fouls called against the other team all the time: that's not playing the game, that's playing the rules. They do it with more histrionics than is necessary, and at times it seems to be the focus of their offense.

THAT is an objective contention that you might reasonably attack.


--

Finally: I think that a couple of good points were made in response to concrete things other people said:

1). if LBJ is such a draw, and if there was LESS interest in a series he was involved in than is ordinary, I think you do have to consider whether the opponent caused fans to lose interest.

2). if ANY series involving the Suns is interesting (which I would tend to agree with) then whether the Spurs were playing them or someone else was playing them, the series would be interesting.  It's a tautology that defeats the argument that a series in which the Spurs were involved was interesting BECAUSE of the Spurs.

1) Fans lost interest because Lebron and the Cavs couldn't hang with the Spurs. 

2) The Suns/Spurs series was interesting because it was two good teams battling it out. 

[Steve Weinman]

Finally: I think that a couple of good points were made in response to concrete things other people said:

1). if LBJ is such a draw, and if there was LESS interest in a series he was involved in than is ordinary, I think you do have to consider whether the opponent caused fans to lose interest.

The 'opponent causing fans to lose interest' would seem to have mostly to do with the fact that the Spurs pasted Bron and the Cavs, and that Danny Ferry and Mike Brown hadn't put together a team that could compete with SA.  I have a hard time assessing blame to San Antonio for playing the game well.

-sw

[fairweatherfan]

Both sides of this argument are to some degree right - the Spurs are first and foremost, the most intelligent and most successful team of the last 10 years.  When this year's C's have played truly transcendent ball they have reminded me more of the Spurs than any other team.  The Spurs move the ball phenomenally well and get more open shots than any team in the league, never fold under pressure, and always seem to make the correct decision when it counts.  The fan of the game of basketball in me appreciates what they do consistently with three stars and a bunch of aging role players.

On the other hand, they also flop more often and more egregiously than anyone else in the league - yes everyone else does it, look at Powe and Posey on our team, but they are by far the most blatant, and do so with a frequency and a dramaticism that is laughable when someone else is playing them and infuriating when your team is.  Not to mention that Bowen has had enough "questionable" incidents to make it clear that he actively tries to at least aggravate and at worst deliberately injure players on the other team. This makes it impossible for me to root for them.

In short, the Spurs are the Duke of the NBA: talented, ruthlessly efficient, and an order of magnitude more intelligent than most of their opponents, but also underhanded, manipulative of the referees, petulant, and rarely spectacular to watch.  Basically, they're really really good, but they suck.

[mkogav]

Both sides of this argument are to some degree right - the Spurs are first and foremost, the most intelligent and most successful team of the last 10 years.  When this year's C's have played truly transcendent ball they have reminded me more of the Spurs than any other team.  The Spurs move the ball phenomenally well and get more open shots than any team in the league, never fold under pressure, and always seem to make the correct decision when it counts.  The fan of the game of basketball in me appreciates what they do consistently with three stars and a bunch of aging role players.

On the other hand, they also flop more often and more egregiously than anyone else in the league - yes everyone else does it, look at Powe and Posey on our team, but they are by far the most blatant, and do so with a frequency and a dramaticism that is laughable when someone else is playing them and infuriating when your team is.  Not to mention that Bowen has had enough "questionable" incidents to make it clear that he actively tries to at least aggravate and at worst deliberately injure players on the other team. This makes it impossible for me to root for them.

In short, the Spurs are the Duke of the NBA: talented, ruthlessly efficient, and an order of magnitude more intelligent than most of their opponents, but also underhanded, manipulative of the referees, petulant, and rarely spectacular to watch.  Basically, they're really really good, but they suck.

I quite agree.

Plus, they r BORING 

That was for u Ersatz, 

Mk

[jaketwice]

Both sides of this argument are to some degree right - the Spurs are first and foremost, the most intelligent and most successful team of the last 10 years.  When this year's C's have played truly transcendent ball they have reminded me more of the Spurs than any other team.  The Spurs move the ball phenomenally well and get more open shots than any team in the league, never fold under pressure, and always seem to make the correct decision when it counts.  The fan of the game of basketball in me appreciates what they do consistently with three stars and a bunch of aging role players.

On the other hand, they also flop more often and more egregiously than anyone else in the league - yes everyone else does it, look at Powe and Posey on our team, but they are by far the most blatant, and do so with a frequency and a dramaticism that is laughable when someone else is playing them and infuriating when your team is.  Not to mention that Bowen has had enough "questionable" incidents to make it clear that he actively tries to at least aggravate and at worst deliberately injure players on the other team. This makes it impossible for me to root for them.

In short, the Spurs are the Duke of the NBA: talented, ruthlessly efficient, and an order of magnitude more intelligent than most of their opponents, but also underhanded, manipulative of the referees, petulant, and rarely spectacular to watch.  Basically, they're really really good, but they suck.

TP. There's nothing else to say about this as far as I'm concerned.

[chrismihm]

I think the Spurs/Suns series was so exciting because I wanted to see a the suns beat the spurs.  The suns are pretty exciting and fun to watch and the Spurs are not, in my opinion.  I think that has a lot to do with why it as such an exciting series at first.  Who was rooting for San Antonio? 

[wdleehi]

I think the Spurs/Suns series was so exciting because I wanted to see a the suns beat the spurs.  The suns are pretty exciting and fun to watch and the Spurs are not, in my opinion.  I think that has a lot to do with why it as such an exciting series at first.  Who was rooting for San Antonio? 

I was. 


I am never a big fan of teams that don't play defense.

[MizzouMerlin]

Arguably the most entertaining team for the past five years (Phoenix Suns) is about to let it's coach walk away. The biggest reason? He won't devote any time to coaching defense. Sure, his team has played an entertaining brand of basketball that is loved by almost every fan, but what does he have to show for it? Three series defeats to the San Antonio Spurs. The Suns were entertaining as hell, but they couldn't win when it mattered.

Contrast this to the Spurs. They don't care if they aren't entertaining or loved. They just want to win. Isn't that what their job is? They don't play the game to make people love them, they play to win. It's their job. Part of that job is playing the league's best defense, and it's a beauty to behold. No team rotates better than the Spurs. No team is as adept at defending the three or slowing down the fast break. No player works as hard as Bruce Bowen. We can all agree that Bowen goes overboard in his actions from time to time, but I challenge you to watch him for a quarter. Just watch everything he does on the defensive end. He fights through screens and chases players with more desire than any other defender in the game.

I think the Spurs have reached a point where you either hate them or love them. There isn't much in between.

However, we should all appreciate what they do well, and I'm not talking about flopping or whining. I'm talking about the defense, the ball-movement, the team play, the ego-less superstars. All things Celtics fans pined for from their team.

Hate the Spurs, but at least appreciate them for what they do.

[Redz]

Arguably the most entertaining team for the past five years (Phoenix Suns) is about to let it's coach walk away. The biggest reason? He won't devote any time to coaching defense. Sure, his team has played an entertaining brand of basketball that is loved by almost every fan, but what does he have to show for it? Three series defeats to the San Antonio Spurs. The Suns were entertaining as hell, but they couldn't win when it mattered.

Contrast this to the Spurs. They don't care if they aren't entertaining or loved. They just want to win. Isn't that what their job is? They don't play the game to make people love them, they play to win. It's their job. Part of that job is playing the league's best defense, and it's a beauty to behold. No team rotates better than the Spurs. No team is as adept at defending the three or slowing down the fast break. No player works as hard as Bruce Bowen. We can all agree that Bowen goes overboard in his actions from time to time, but I challenge you to watch him for a quarter. Just watch everything he does on the defensive end. He fights through screens and chases players with more desire than any other defender in the game.

I think the Spurs have reached a point where you either hate them or love them. There isn't much in between.

However, we should all appreciate what they do well, and I'm not talking about flopping or whining. I'm talking about the defense, the ball-movement, the team play, the ego-less superstars. All things Celtics fans pined for from their team.

Hate the Spurs, but at least appreciate them for what they do.

Nice post Mizzou.  Agreed.

First TP's on me

[tanner]

I hate the Spurs only when they play against us.  To be honest, I wish we had a Bowen or a Ginobili.  I wish we had a Poppovich.   

[Who]

This is beautiful Spurs basketball right now. That third quarter was excellent. Brilliant passing, post play, penetration. Oberto was simply magnificent with some of those passes.

[jay_jay54]

This is beautiful Spurs basketball right now. That third quarter was excellent. Brilliant passing, post play, penetration. Oberto was simply magnificent with some of those passes.

I agree,that was the Spurs,we are accoustom to seeing.I hope they turn this series into a 7game series.

[mustang]

Both sides of this argument are to some degree right - the Spurs are first and foremost, the most intelligent and most successful team of the last 10 years.  When this year's C's have played truly transcendent ball they have reminded me more of the Spurs than any other team.  The Spurs move the ball phenomenally well and get more open shots than any team in the league, never fold under pressure, and always seem to make the correct decision when it counts.  The fan of the game of basketball in me appreciates what they do consistently with three stars and a bunch of aging role players.

On the other hand, they also flop more often and more egregiously than anyone else in the league - yes everyone else does it, look at Powe and Posey on our team, but they are by far the most blatant, and do so with a frequency and a dramaticism that is laughable when someone else is playing them and infuriating when your team is.  Not to mention that Bowen has had enough "questionable" incidents to make it clear that he actively tries to at least aggravate and at worst deliberately injure players on the other team. This makes it impossible for me to root for them.

In short, the Spurs are the Duke of the NBA: talented, ruthlessly efficient, and an order of magnitude more intelligent than most of their opponents, but also underhanded, manipulative of the referees, petulant, and rarely spectacular to watch.  Basically, they're really really good, but they suck.

Absolutely right.

The Suns-Spurs series became progressively less fun to watch over the years, particularly when it became clear that the Suns would never face them at full strength (Johnson in '05, the suspensions in '07, Hill this year) and Stoudemiere would always be a sieve defensively.

When the Spurs are on, it is pretty stupendous to watch. I think I'll always find them disappointing, though, in the end, because they really don't need to act so whiney and high-strung to be as great as they are. It taints the best of their legacy, and leaves a bad taste in many people's mouths.

I don't know what they'll have left if they get past CP and (probably) Kobe, but I'm frightened that Pop will eat Doc alive esp. in-game if we play them in the Finals (and I kind of like Doc).

Either way, I doubt Bill Russell finds them boring...