There easily on pace to win 72 games, and get very liitle attention, people are still talking OKC and lakers (when talking west teams) more then the 29-4 spurs. There's no hype surrounding tommorows game like there was for denver, boston and Miami.

Here we have a team that made no significant up grades, a core of (aging) players that have been together forever, coming out the gate on absolute FIRE..I watch the spurs and what they do seems effrotless, when it comes to execution, there precise, and call audibles like peyton manning.

Talk about balance, look no futher then the spurs, youth, speed, fundamentals, range, defense, veterens, bigs, smalls, coaching, you name it they have it.

Papabear wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:This has got to be one of the lowest profiling teams in the history of the NBA.

There easily on pace to win 72 games, and get very liitle attention, people are still talking OKC and lakers (when talking west teams) more then the 29-4 spurs. There's no hype surrounding tommorows game like there was for denver, boston and Miami.

Here we have a team that made no significant up grades, a core of (aging) players that have been together forever, coming out the gate on absolute FIRE..I watch the spurs and what they do seems effrotless, when it comes to execution, there precise, and call audibles like peyton manning.

Talk about balance, look no futher then the spurs, youth, speed, fundamentals, range, defense, veterens, bigs, smalls, coaching, you name it they have it.

Papabear Says

I hope the game is not a blood bath. Since we know that we are going to loose can't we give AR some burn time?

We don't know that we're gonna lose. C'mon Papa, why play the game?

Sangfroid wrote:

Papabear wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:This has got to be one of the lowest profiling teams in the history of the NBA.

There easily on pace to win 72 games, and get very liitle attention, people are still talking OKC and lakers (when talking west teams) more then the 29-4 spurs. There's no hype surrounding tommorows game like there was for denver, boston and Miami.

Here we have a team that made no significant up grades, a core of (aging) players that have been together forever, coming out the gate on absolute FIRE..I watch the spurs and what they do seems effrotless, when it comes to execution, there precise, and call audibles like peyton manning.

Talk about balance, look no futher then the spurs, youth, speed, fundamentals, range, defense, veterens, bigs, smalls, coaching, you name it they have it.

Papabear Says

I hope the game is not a blood bath. Since we know that we are going to loose can't we give AR some burn time?

We don't know that we're gonna lose. C'mon Papa, why play the game?

I agree, I wont't just mark this down as a L, but this is by far the biggest test of the season. If we win, (don't know how we do tat without gallo).

Mean while, did you see Kobe the last 2 games, he is playing under heavy fustration, he's shooting when ever where ever, and it doesn't matter who's guarding him..resulting in 29% shooting 15 turovers in the last couple of games.

knicks1248 wrote:Mean while, did you see Kobe the last 2 games, he is playing under heavy fustration, he's shooting when ever where ever, and it doesn't matter who's guarding him..resulting in 29% shooting 15 turovers in the last couple of games.

Kobe's gettin' old. It happens. The refs also T'ed him up for silliness (on the refs part) lately too so that hasn't helped.

I still think the Lakers are three-peating either way.

VDesai wrote:Tim Duncan is averaging about 13 ppg yet the Spurs are the best team in the league. They've got someone I've never heard of getting 8 ppg off the bench for them. Sometimes its about coaching and teamwork, not superstars.

you talking about gary neal? guy's a 26 year old rookie.

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

VDesai wrote:Tim Duncan is averaging about 13 ppg yet the Spurs are the best team in the league. They've got someone I've never heard of getting 8 ppg off the bench for them. Sometimes its about coaching and teamwork, not superstars.

clearly you havent been paying attention to the Melo threads

I think this understates just how good Tony Parker has been, just as it does how good their top 11 are

I dont think they are, and they are showing that 4 very good players are just as good as the coveted pair of superstars.

I think Amare/Felton are just as good as Duncan/Parker right now today. The big difference is our secondary guys in Gallo/Chandler/Fields are all 22-23 years old and still learning their NBA games. RJ and Manu arent more talented per say, but they are 100x more consistant. They are playoff tested NBA rotation players. The difference is telling night in and night out. Spurs are cutting edge when it comes to consistancy.

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

VDesai wrote:Tim Duncan is averaging about 13 ppg yet the Spurs are the best team in the league. They've got someone I've never heard of getting 8 ppg off the bench for them. Sometimes its about coaching and teamwork, not superstars.

clearly you havent been paying attention to the Melo threads

I think this understates just how good Tony Parker has been, just as it does how good their top 11 are

The Spurs are the team the Knicks should look at. Are they that much more talented then the Knicks? Are Duncan/Manu/RJ/Parker that much superior in talent than Amare/Chandler/Gallo/Felton?

I dont think they are, and they are showing that 4 very good players are just as good as the coveted pair of superstars.

I think Amare/Felton are just as good as Duncan/Parker right now today. The big difference is our secondary guys in Gallo/Chandler/Fields are all 22-23 years old and still learning their NBA games. RJ and Manu arent more talented per say, but they are 100x more consistant. They are playoff tested NBA rotation players. The difference is telling night in and night out. Spurs are cutting edge when it comes to consistancy.

I think they're significantly better... either Blair, Splitter, McDyess, or Bonner would start on the Knicks; I hate RJ but he's their fourth option and would be our second or third; Ginoboli is light years better than any of the Knicks wings; Hill is a premier perimeter defender; Parker is having a far superior season than has numbers suggest

The psurs have a lot of depth and are well coached but that roster is stacked. This isn't like the Spurs teams of the past that were top heavy. They still have great pieces at the top and have the best supporting cast in the league. The Knicks leads aren't as good nor is the supporting cast

PS I'm not necessarily saying the Knicks should be blown up or the benches don't matter... I'm just saying this roster is one of the better ones ever assmbled... who knows, maybe if they stay healthy nad consistent it will be considered one of the best ever. it is really, really good

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

fishmike wrote:

VDesai wrote:Tim Duncan is averaging about 13 ppg yet the Spurs are the best team in the league. They've got someone I've never heard of getting 8 ppg off the bench for them. Sometimes its about coaching and teamwork, not superstars.

clearly you havent been paying attention to the Melo threads

I think this understates just how good Tony Parker has been, just as it does how good their top 11 are

The Spurs are the team the Knicks should look at. Are they that much more talented then the Knicks? Are Duncan/Manu/RJ/Parker that much superior in talent than Amare/Chandler/Gallo/Felton?

I dont think they are, and they are showing that 4 very good players are just as good as the coveted pair of superstars.

I think Amare/Felton are just as good as Duncan/Parker right now today. The big difference is our secondary guys in Gallo/Chandler/Fields are all 22-23 years old and still learning their NBA games. RJ and Manu arent more talented per say, but they are 100x more consistant. They are playoff tested NBA rotation players. The difference is telling night in and night out. Spurs are cutting edge when it comes to consistancy.

I think they're significantly better... either Blair, Splitter, McDyess, or Bonner would start on the Knicks; I hate RJ but he's their fourth option and would be our second or third; Ginoboli is light years better than any of the Knicks wings; Hill is a premier perimeter defender; Parker is having a far superior season than has numbers suggest

The psurs have a lot of depth and are well coached but that roster is stacked. This isn't like the Spurs teams of the past that were top heavy. They still have great pieces at the top and have the best supporting cast in the league. The Knicks leads aren't as good nor is the supporting cast

My point is the Spurs have 4-5 really good players (are any all stars?) and 4-5 really good role players and thats good enough for the best record record in the NBA. Just because Duncan is 35 doesnt mean the window is closed, and they DONT need Melo or some other would be "superstar" to be a great team.

I guess what I am saying is the Knicks have some problems and some holes and need a lot of improvement before they are in the Spurs class. However I am of the thinking that improvement is going to come more from time than changes to the roster. Douglas, Chandler, Gallo, Williams and Fields. 5/8s of our roster is either < 23 or hasnt played a 150 NBA games yet. The other main guy is Felton and at 26 and finally freed to be the talent he was in NC.. whats his upside? Looking pretty good.

We just need to be patient and take our lumps when they come