San Antonio Spurs 100, Los Angeles Lakers 81: Gregg Popovich and the Spurs’ silent ascent
The San Antonio Spurs and Gregg Popovich didn’t provide the Los Angeles Lakers a full-on beating, but their 100-81 victory was impressive. And it looked like it hurt, if only a little.
The Spurs’ usual late season surge has come fashionably late this season, but here it is, roughly a month behind schedule. And I suspect the other party-goers are taking notice, whispering amongst themselves and circling the punch bowl.
The Spurs beat the Lakers in Los Angeles by 19. In recent games the Spurs have traveled away from the AT&T Center to beat the Heat (+11), Thunder (+3), and Celtics (+21). The AT&T Center crowd cheered the Spurs to impressive home victories against Rockets (+17) and Magic (+12). And just two weeks back, the Spurs put up a near franchise record 147 points in a carpet bombing campaign against the Warriors.
Over this stretch, Tim Duncan has been uneven, while George Hill, Richard Jefferson and, especially, Manu Ginobili have taken their games to the (all decorated in cliche, I know) next level. But Gregg Popovich deserves much of the credit for San Antonio’s recent push.
Gregg Popovich’s insertion of Manu Ginobili into the starting line-up is easily his biggest win of the season. But Popovich’s insistence on playing a ‘centerpiece’ wing defender (Keith Bogans, who, in honesty, previously didn’t deserve the minutes) is finally starting to take shape as a smart move, especially when that wing defender is the more impressive three-headed monster of Bogans-Jefferson-Hairston. The Spurs were able to throw a steady-stream of agitators at Kobe Bryant, and they can tag team defend him with the aforementioned trio of wings, as well as Manu Ginobili and George Hill. In retrospect, one can see that Popovich has been building towards this since training camp.
Just prior to Tony Parker’s injury, and Popovich’s decision to start Manu Ginobili, the Spurs’ coach also changed course with Richard Jefferson. Popovich wisely gave up on Richard Jefferson as a small-ball four, and restricted the majority of Jefferson’s minutes to small forward. But more than this, Jefferson now plays the majority of his minutes with Manu Ginobili, something that has greatly helped the team. This was a deliberate decision by Popovich, and it’s had several positive effects for the Spurs.
Jefferson’s rebounding and ability to score in transition are noticeably improved. Richard Jefferson was a must-be-accounted-for offensive threat against the Lakers, and this wasn’t the case earlier in the season. Some of this is Richard Jefferson’s growing understanding of the Spurs’ schemes, but most of it is his coach’s careful consideration of how to play him, and with whom. Richard Jefferson is no longer an offseason bust.
But these big picture items tend to crowd the game-by-game decisions that make Popovich a fantastic coach. Take yesterday’s game. Gregg Popovich threw a curve ball at the Lakers by playing Matt Bonner and Antonio McDyess on Ron Artest. By utilizing bigs on Artest, Popovich was able to reduce the damage Lamar Odom usually inflicts on the Spurs–Odom was primarily guarded by wings, not bigs, even though Phil Jackson likes to play small with Odom at power forward. Richard Jefferson, to his credit, played noteworthy defense against Odom, and Popovich may have found a solution for a pestering problem.
Yesterday’s win over the Lakers was confirmation of San Antonio’s newfound take-us-seriously trajectory. It’s not just one game. It’s one game at the end of an impressive series of games. I woke up this morning with a strange confidence: the Spurs are title contenders. Yes, these Spurs. I haven’t been able to write that since October.
The Spurs are currently ranked third in John Hollinger’s Power Rankings. San Antonio’s strength of schedule over their last 25% of their games is .542, easily the most difficult of the playoff bound teams. And the Spurs’ point differential against those teams is an incredibly healthy +8.68. Yesterday’s defeat of the Lakers dog ears a remarkable turnaround.
BlaseE
April 5th, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Interesting stats, BlaseE. It means we stay in games and generally take care of business against inferior teams. That’s always been the Spur’s style. I’m glad to see we haven’t lost that in any appreciable way.
I have come to expect the best from the G-man and Duncan, so their performances last night were not surprising.
Rather, I was dazzled by a few of our role players.
For one, the Red Rocket played good defense, passed well, did a decent job rebounding, and impacted the game through overall scrappy play– despite only draining two three pointers. It all resulted in 8 points, 3 rebounds 2 assists and a steal. Don’t believe I’m saying this, but Bonner was actually “versatile!” Maybe he had a really good sandwich before tipoff.
Perhaps Kobe’s crummy offense was simply due to an off night, but maybe, just maybe, Kobe’s 33% shooting was due to Bogans’ stellar defense. Because I’m a fan, I’m going to pretend Bogans shut the Black Mamba down. Backing up my argument is the Bogeyman’s +/- stats: +26, baby, the game’s highest.
RJ shot 50 percent from the field, dropped 15 points, snagged six boards, and did what God designed him to do: grab the ball and drive it with authority. Nice.
By the way, did anyone catch the interview with TP. An ABC reporter asked him what went through his mind when he saw George Hill go down, and Parker responded by talking about his own workout routine and when he expects to come back. The reporter re-uttered the question and TP, said his first thoughts were, “I want to play (or something to that effect).” No show of concern for Hill, whatsoever. Now I don’t think Parker is any kind of egotist, but he may be lacking a little in the p.r. department.
@ cesar
I was wondering the same thing.
Anyone else notice that when we get a technical or two we end up playing better? I think the team is kicking it into gear.
Calm down. IT takes 4 games to beat the Lakers this year, not just one.
Trade Manu? Why wouldnt you listen to an offer before you said no?
TP our best PG? We will have to see. Everyone here said that Hill was nowhere near being able to fill his shoes. He did just that. We still have to see how Tony fits himself back into the rotation.
Pop for coach of year again? So were hot right now. Lets not make the last couple weeks of the season our highlight. We’re still sitting at the bottom of the seedings. Keep the momentum and win a series or two.
I never said George wouldn’t fill Tp’s shoes, I said that TP & George are different players and not mutually exclusive.
We need them both especially if we’re building toward next season.
I’ve said time and again that we need to keep TP & George. We need them in a 3 guard rotation. It’s hard enough to find quality guards let alone two of em, you hang onto em when you can.
I think we’re still a ways from being contenders for the crown just yet. I do however believe that a huge portion of the credit for the late season surge is on Pops head.
I’ve posted this up numerous times. Pushed this barrow up hill & down dale. He coachs for the playoffs, and doesn’t give a rats for the rest of the season.
The man gets into his players heads and leverages performance out of them slowly over the course of 82 games time and time again.
The man knows what he is doing, but we still have people who jump up and down after each loss and scream f0r his head.
I love this franchise and I hope they maintain this form, but either way I feel very optimistic about next year.
George is so far improved, we can have one of the leagues strongest rotations at the 1 & 2 if we resign Manu. Blair & Hairston have made strides, McDyess looks comfortable and we can stick Bonner in for 12 or 15 minutes per game as a 10th option.
IF we can add splitter our team is going to be a very challenging proposition for the rest of the league.
@VP–I’ve written in comments before, and maybe it merits a longer, more dedicated post, but I start Tony as soon as he’s ready. Move Hill to the bench. For all the talk about Parker being a ball hog and affecting Ginobili, what you guys don’t seem to remember is the dynamic has always been when Ginobili’s on his game, everyone defers to him (even Duncan). Parker has always been great about letting Manu do his thing and picking his spots in transition or when Manu needs a rest.
Keep the starters, with Parker for Hill. Let Hill come in for Manu (where he gets his usual rest) and turn the offense over to Duncan and Parker.
Then bring Manu back in for Parker at the end of the first with Bonner or Blair for Duncan, and let Manu run the second unit (thereby solving our second unit’s problems).
Wash, rinse and repeat in the second half.
Remember, the rotations shorten dramatically in the playoffs so I would not be suprised to see Manu, Hill and Parker being the only guards in the rotation and Jefferson/Bogans getting the run at small forward.
One of RJ’s biggest assets is he can absorb a lot of minutes. Jefferson after 30 minutes is not much different than Jefferson after 10 minutes.
Jim Henderson
April 5th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
“Hill was playing very good WITH or WITHOUT Parker. It’s RJ & Manu that appear to be the issue. That’s why you play your best point guard, a point guard I remind you, that has run the point for us during our last three championship runs.”
Sure Hill was playing good with Tony, but his numbers as well as Manu’s and RJ’s soared when Tony shots were divided among that three. When Parker went down, the structure of the team was changed from the old Big 3 as we knew them to Manu (first option) Duncan (second option) with Hill and Jefferson turning into key support players for those two. This was supposed to happen months ago but did not while Parker was on the court.
Jim Henderson
April 5th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
“The main problem is that RJ had a “head†problem adjusting to the entire Spur system, for some unknown reason, and has used Manu as an excuse & escape mechanism.”
Perhaps. However, RJ’s main problem was that with Tony in the lineup, RJ would have MULTIPLE games where he took only 6-8 shots. How the hell is he supposed to be productive when he’s not being involved? People on this blog have bitched for months that when Tony gets the ball, it sticks in his hands. Perhaps it’s just a coincidence that almost as soon as TP is injured, RJ gets his mojo back and figures out the system (the same one he’d played in for months). This is an even greater coincidence if you consider the difficulty of competition that RJ has played against for the past month. I make this argument without even touching upon the rapid increased production of Hill and Gino. Is it possible that the offense is more efficient with Manu being PG instead of Parker? ( BTW neither are true PGs since Parker is really a combo and Manu is a SG.)
Jim Henderson
April 5th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
“we may ask TP to “dominate†the ball less”
I know this is only a partial quote with regards to what you said, but I couldn’t agree more. Tony CANNOT return to the PG (22 ppg and 6 assts/game) that he was last year. We do not need anymore scoring power as evidence of the results with him out of the lineup. IF Tony can become more of a drive and kick fascilitator, this team will steamroll people perhaps all the way to the finals. Over the past few weeks the West has looked increasingly vulnerable and the Spurs increasingly better. Parker must adjust his game for the sake of the team. We are no longer in 2007 and we no longer need ball domination by any single one player. The reinsertion of Parker into the lineup (wherever he falls) over the next 2 weeks will be very interesting.
@Bushka
I think you’re pretty spot on about Pop. Here’s an example: From my limited view, I thought I saw enough in Hairston just after the all-star break to give him a shot a Bogans role, so I made a substantive case for it a few times on this blog. While I do think it possible that Pop gave the idea some serious thought, in the final analysis he stuck with Bogans by fine-tuning his minutes a bit more, and he also became a little less bashful in his use of Hairston, in spots, during non-garbage minutes.
The results: Bogans has responded with his best all-around play of the season in the past 3-4 weeks, and Hairston has made a fine contribution in spot minutes. I hope Bogans can continue with his inspired play of late, because if he does, and we get through the first round, Pop will have exceeded himself again.
He’s also doing another interesting thing by giving RMJ more significant & regular minutes because he knows that trying something to help a “deep in funk” Mason get his career 38% 3 pt. shooting back before the playoffs would be a boon to the Spurs chances. So far this has not worked out too well, but he’s sticking to it, which I admire. It’s a gutsy call even though his minutes could easily go to a currently more productive Hairston. Hopefully in the end it works. Having that extra 3 pt. shooter off the bench would help indeed!
@Jim–I know we’ve argued about this before, so I’d just like to reiterate that I love Iguodala’s game. I argue about it with Mike Monroe (he doesn’t like non-shooters) quite frequently.
That being said. You in NO WAY, SHAPE or FORM trade Manu Ginobili or Tony Parker for him. In fact, you don’t trade Ginobili for anything and you pay him market value. Why? Because right now the only way you’re getting equal value for him is if you get Kobe, LeBron or Wade in return. He’s that good right now.
And I know, you’re probably thinking what Manu will be two, three years down the line. But there is no two or three years down the line. Duncan is the window, and that window is closing sooner than later. Right now, Manu is an elite player. You do everything in your power to keep that going now.
From a basketball sense, I think it’d be possible to give the 76ers a salary dump with RJ’s expiring contract and maybe Blair or McDyess (contract) as sweetners. With Iggy, I think his best asset to the Spurs is his top flight defense. But if you clear all of your playmakers, you force him to create more (expending energy) and get diminishing returns on that defense.
From a business sense, there are a huge section of season ticket holders (lower level) who have made it clear that with no Manu Ginobili, they’re not renewing. (No Manu, no renew). Losing Ginobili will cost Holt way more at the gate than it will in luxury tax.
Re: Jefferson and Parker.
I tend to think that Jefferson’s play has had nothing to do with Tony Parker leaving and everything to do with Manu Ginobili’s resurgence. And no, the two do not correspond because Ginobili was on his way to being back before Parker went down.
And Ginobili’s play has little to do with Parker being down and everything to do with his health and confidence in his legs.
The Spurs best lineup I would wager is Parker, Manu, RJ/Hill, McDyess and Duncan.
Starting manu and parker together is not the problem, they work fine starting together (I remember one of the suns series). The problem is the bench, we’ve always used manu to give us that ooomph off the bench, but I dont think thatd be too much of a problem.
Id also like to note Mcdyess, while I dont have the numbers he actually seems to be hitting those mid range jumpers we expect him to hit, I like that, a lot.
Must be the “Los Spurs” jersey that started the good luck. They oughta wear it more often.
Seriously though, I think that the Spurs have started to take things rather more seriously this time. They have been given the time to jell and the most appropriate “team-ups” on the floor have been determined through all the crappy games that they have played through.
I’m still worried about the return of Tony Parker though. Of course, it’s beautiful to see Manu & RJ and Timmy & Blair (passing of the torch?) developing, as well as Hill being an effective point guard, but what’ll happen when Tony returns to the line up? Will he affect the chemistry that’s formed between the other players? He’s not a
Jason Kidd or Steve Nash kind of point guard that would really facilitate movement in the floor. He’s a shoot-first point guard.
What will also happen to the other recent signees? Hill’s minutes (I observe him to be somewhat like a diesel-powered vehicle – slow at the start, but steady as time progresses)?
Don’t get me wrong – I’m thrilled and excited about how the Spurs have been going through so far, and I think the loss at New Jersey is more of a day-off-obligatory game-so-who-really-cares-who-wins kind of game instead of a need-to-win-or-else-die kind of game. But when a superstar returns from a long break due to injury, how will the Spurs act? I’m not really optimistic that the Tony that would be returning would be the one circa 2007 that laid the smack down on the overconfident, undertalented Cavs (they’ve grown to be much more powerful now).
You fuckers actually think george hill is in the same class as Tony parker ????
Are you smoking crack ?
Sniffing cocaine ?
Eating disco biscuits ?
Tony is one of the best point guards in the league.
It wasnt that long ago when he was demolishing teams
You sure loved him in last years playoffs when he did everything, carried us a whole fucking season.
Jesse Blanchard
April 5th, 2010 at 5:09 pm
If you’ve read my comments recently, you’ll know that I very much agree with your assessment of the “TP coming back line-up/rotation issues”.
Jesse Blanchard
April 5th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Again, if you’ve read my recent comments, you’ll notice that I also very much agree with you that TP being out had no direct relationship to Manu’s resurgence, nor RJ’s issues.
Hobson13
April 5th, 2010 at 5:12 pm
We sometimes have our differences, but I usually enjoy your comments because you typically bring reason, thoughtfulness, and context to your posts. That’s great!
I have just a couple of brief comments in response to your recent post:
“Sure Hill was playing good with Tony, but his numbers as well as Manu’s and RJ’s soared when Tony shots were divided among that three. When Parker went down, the structure of the team was changed from the old Big 3 as we knew them to Manu (first option) Duncan (second option) with Hill and Jefferson turning into key support players for those two. This was supposed to happen months ago but did not while Parker was on the court.”
I do concede that RJ was in a rut earlier on when TP was starting with him, but in my view the problem always laid with RJ, not TP. RJ needed to convince himself that TP was the problem for him, so he started playing better with Manu when he was demoted to the second unit with Ma
Jesse Blanchard
April 5th, 2010 at 5:09 pm
If you’ve read my comments recently, you’ll know that I very much agree with your assessment of the “TP coming back line-up/rotation issues”.
Jesse Blanchard
April 5th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Again, if you’ve read my recent comments, you’ll notice that I also very much agree with you that TP being out had no direct relationship to Manu’s resurgence, nor RJ’s issues.
Hobson13
April 5th, 2010 at 5:12 pm
We sometimes have our differences, but I usually enjoy your comments because you typically bring reason, thoughtfulness, and context to your posts. That’s great!
I have just a couple of brief comments in response to your recent post:
“Sure Hill was playing good with Tony, but his numbers as well as Manu’s and RJ’s soared when Tony shots were divided among that three. When Parker went down, the structure of the team was changed from the old Big 3 as we knew them to Manu (first option) Duncan (second option) with Hill and Jefferson turning into key support players for those two. This was supposed to happen months ago but did not while Parker was on the court.”
First of all, Manu, RJ, & Ghill’s numbers were bound to go up without TP’s 17 points, 6 assists per game. And all three of their games’ were on the ascent BEFORE Tony went down. Second, while I do concede that RJ was in a rut earlier on when TP was starting with him, in my view the problem always laid at RJ’s feet, not with TP. RJ needed to convince himself that TP was the problem for him (had to have some reason outside of himself for his struggles), so he started playing better with Manu when he was demoted to the second unit with Manu to prove himself right, that it wasn’t him. Just as an example, RJ’s rebounds suddenly took off soon after he went to the bench. Did TP prevent RJ from rebounding the ball up to his ability? Did Manu do something special that allowed RJ to start rebounding better? I don’t think so. Rebounding is about effort & attitude, which is an internal characteristic. RJ’s problem with TP is his own problem, and I think he’s gotten over it, as long as he is still kept in the rotation more with Manu (primarily for psychological reasons, although Manu & RJ do play well together in general anyway).
“Tony CANNOT return to the PG (22 ppg and 6 assts/game) that he was last year. We do not need anymore scoring power as evidence of the results with him out of the lineup. IF Tony can become more of a drive and kick fascilitator, this team will steamroll people perhaps all the way to the finals.”
TP needed the numbers last year. Manu was not fully healthy the entire year, and was completely out HALF the year. TP understands we don’t need the scoring numbers at this point, and believe me, he’s happy that Manu is “back”, and takes that pressure off him. TP has deferred to Manu for much of his career, and has never complained. I don’t see that happening now. As far as getting to the finals? That’s still a stretch, because our front line is not deep, tall, & strong enough. Certainly LA with Bynum, and perhaps Dallas, pose a formidable roadblock to our title chances. We’ll see. I’m just glad we’re playing much better, so that at least we can threaten some teams.
“RJ’s main problem was that with Tony in the lineup, RJ would have MULTIPLE games where he took only 6-8 shots. How the hell is he supposed to be productive when he’s not being involved?”
If RJ’s not getting involved in this example it’s one of two things: (1) the coach is not running offensive sets that requires RJ’s involvement, or (2) RJ is unsure of his role, what he’s doing out there, or just plain lacks the necessary aggressiveness and confidence to exploit his own strengths when the opportunity presents itself (like driving it hard to the cup, rebounding, etc,). There’s really nothing in TP’s game that necessitates that RJ should be adversely effected by point number above. That said, I lean toward choice number two, which I believe is more on RJ than anyone else.
Sorry for the double post! Apparently I hit the “submit” button before I completed my post without realizing it! Thus, the second post is the complete post in it’s entirety.
@Jim,
Perhaps you’re right about Tony, but I’m concerned that with RJ, Manu, Duncan, and Hill playing well, Tony may be one too many “cooks in the kitchen.” Well, I won’t argue the point with Parker any longer. I do see what you are saying and you do make good points. If Parker can take this team to the next level, I’d have to side with your point of view. However, if Parker cannot make this team (that has taken a number of steps forward in his absence) considerably better, we will have a long offseason of heated debates on this chat.
P.S. I VERY much agree that the Spurs need a big who can primarily rebound, defend, and eat up minutes to help Duncan. I’m not sure if the Spurs beat the Lakers IF Bynum comes back full strength. (Thats a big IF)
@Hobson13
I understand you’re trepidation with TP coming back just when the team is finally playing much better against tougher competition. And I don’t mean to minimize the fact that it is indeed a delicate situation. I just know that it won’t be anything “selfish” on TP’s part that causes any difficulties.
I do think there’s a lot of pressure on Pop to make the right adjustments & get everyone playing on the same page together in the new rotations. But I’m confident that Pop will make the right moves, & his star big three are up to the task of successfully executing his game plan. I just don’t think we have the horses on the front line to get to the finals, unless someone other than us take out the Lakers, and perhaps the Mavs, before the WCF’s.
Jesse Blanchard
April 5th, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Jesse,
I’ve already laid out my case in some detail about this trade matter, and I’m sure you’ve read most of it, so I’ll just make a few bullet point comments.
– You say that you really like Iggy, but I still say that you under-value him. The common refrain that he’s a poor shooter is a misconception, although it is true that it is a part of his game that he could still improve some on, with the right coaches & organization (the Spurs!).
– You appear to almost dismiss the value of the other Sixers in the trade (Dalembert, Williams), while I consider them crucial aspects to the deal, representing a great fit to fill our most pressing current and long-term needs as a franchise.
– I love Ginobli, but you assign too much value to Ginobli when considering his age, aggressive style of play, and his issues with durability.
– In contrast, you don’t give proper value to the younger ages of ALL the Sixers in the deal (by the way, Iggy’s missed all of six games in six years!).
– The three players I would not trade are Duncan, Hill, & Blair.
– I don’t agree that we should be willing to overpay for Manu now. That would be sacrificing the franchise’s future for the sake of some extra Manu fans/tickets next season, and perhaps a better crack at a another title w/Duncan (a window that could close in the next 2-3 years), a title that in my estimation will never come without a good enough “BIG” man by his side. If we could get someone as good or better than Splitter, and not give up any of our big three, that’s different. Unfortunately, I think it’s unlikely that we can do that without trading Parker and/or Ginobli. Nobody’s going to give us much for RJ, and I would NOT trade Blair. But perhaps you’re undervaluing him as well (plus, you’re almost guaranteed not to get equal value back).
Beyond that, we’ll probably just have to agree to disagree.
I agree that the ideal would be that Tony should come from bench and lead 2nd unit as MG has done for years. He would have lots of shooting chances, so his numbers might still be the same. And his speed & scoring ability would certainly create problems for the others teams 2nd units. But team’s play seems more consistent right now.
As regards frontcourt, I really like how Blair has been playing. In some of the last games he has been a rebound monster, considering his minutes. I would play him in the first unit with TD and leave McD for the second.
i now see why pop refuses to play ian. Did anyone else notice how incredibly slow he was? he was barely getting to half court and the spurs had already taken a shot and the lakers were already fast breaking. slowest player in the nba by far.
Wow, Im not so sure some of yo uare Spurs fans. Many of you are blaming Tony Parker for the Spurs lethargic play earlier this season? Gimme a break. The Spurs are a team that has successfully run a certain defensive/offensive system for nearly a decade- decade. When you replace 6 key members of that system and have a seventh (Finley) no longer producing you are gonna suck, and we did! We have affectively undergone a ‘silent rebuild’.
Give Pop credit for his ability to select the right talent for his system, patience to let players develop, and wizardry at formulating match-ups. Tony Parker being out does not mean he was the reason for our earlier issues, it means the other players realized that that had to get their ‘ish together. George Hill has been awesome. He has done completely was he was drafted to do. But he is not a starting point guard. He is a very good back up and even better 2 guard.
Also remember that, George plays that same way that Tony does (in fact Pop incourages him to score first). As well, most of the ball handling has been done by Manu since TP went out. Finally, we have 3 rings already with TP & Manu playing together.
Pop is a smart man. Sometimes he makes decisionsthat we don’t like but he is a good coach. I think Parker will start coming off the bench and won’t get too heavy of minutes, then we will see how he fits into the new lineup and the coaching staff will go from there. Until then, lets just continue to play Spurs basketball and hope that we have our team at full sterngth physically and mentally come playoff time.
They want to resign Manu now but it’s too late. Now they will have to nearly match the highest offer Manu gets. He will play for the Spurs for a little less than any other team. Manu wants to stay but it’s poor business for him not to get other bids.
TPs game is pick and roll.
Hill can catch and shoot.
Anyone who understands the game can see why RJ doesnt flourish with Parker. He cant get to the rim because Tony runs the PNR virtually all day. Its not a problem when its working for the most part. But when its unsuccessful no one is in attack mode.
Further, Parker didnt do SQUAT for us last playoffs. Im sick of hearing people claim he did. He scored A TON of points, and proved a liability on D and with his TOs.
HE SHOOTS in the 20s on threes.
Los Angeles Lakers,
With their rich history,
Will remain always towers,
Of sports, and friends of victory.
As fans, we love them.
As fans, we follow them.
If they win we appreciate,
If they lost, we keep support.
Long live lakers!
You deserve big prizes!
Lakers Tickets we do buy.
For the price we do not cry!
After a season of media scrutiny and injuries a game with pho looms tonight. With a win here, and consistant play over the following 4 games this spurs team could very likely take the 3 seed from the struggling mavs (with a win against them to close the season. If they do this, they will likely play OKC- A very favorable, yet entertaining, matchup in the first round! GO SPURS GO!
MANU SIGNED THE Extention today. ITS DONE!
Hey Jim,
Wasn’t it TP who broke Nash’s ankles in the last playoff series they played with each other, Nash has only gotten older…really now.
Wasn’t there an earthquake after the Spurs thumped the Lakers?
For everyone who’s down on Tony, its Pop who has Tony running the pick and roll. Because that’s what he does well. George on the other hand is more athletic and Pop is allowing him to have more free reign when comes to attacking the basket.
It doesn’t matter Tony already said he would come off the bench like Manu did before without gripe.