One Big Shot...

[Buzkashi]

On the day after the Suns were eliminated by the Spurs from the playoffs 4-1, I can't help but wonder about the biggest what-if in the entire series. What if Tim Duncan never made that 3 point shot in game one to force double overtime? What if that shot missed? I think the series could easily be 4-1 right now for the Suns, rather than the other way around. (Just a note, I am not a Suns fan. I am a Rockets fan, and I have been reading these boards for a couple of years now. )

Based on the fact that Tim Duncan is NOT in any shape or form a 3 point shooter, this just leads me to think that as much as success in the playoffs are determined by coaching, effort, determination and skill, it is also based on luck. This is not to take anything away from the Spur's excellence at all, as it is indisputable that they are the most successful team of this decade. But I am just pointing out for a team to have so much success, it needs to have a fair amount of luck as well. And I think this is an element that is overlooked many times when us as fans and analysts evaluate teams. Many people are going to look at the Suns and say, "they are done, they lost 4-1 in the first round of the playoffs." However, the reality is that the answer is not as simple as that. We all like to think that we can control our fates, and that factors such as coaching, effort, determination and skill are enough to bring us where we want to go ( in this case, win the NBA championship). However, the truth is that luck plays a big factor in what happens.

Once again, I want to clarify that I don't think the Spurs got LUCKY and beat the Suns. I am just isolating one event in the series, which is Tim Duncan's 3 pointer and how it changed the whole series.

[Magz50]

See my Sig. That was a sweet stroke.

[NetsForce]

If Duncan missed that shot the Spurs would have still won in 5 (they wouldn't have mailed in game 4).

[snaquille oatmeal]

Based on the fact that Tim Duncan is NOT in any shape or form a 3 point shooter

didn't he hit a clutch 3 pointer to take a one 1 point lead that left .04 on the clock in a famous playoff game against the Lakers a few years ago? (btw Shaq was on his grill for that shot, unlike the one he hit against the Suns where Shaq was left standing at the ft line with a "was I suppossed to cover timmy?" look on his face.

[triplet1984]

^ That was a 2 pointer from around the FT line

[snaquille oatmeal]

I can't access youtube at work to confirm, but Ill take your word for it.

[schneiderjazz]

-= original quote snipped =-

didn't he hit a clutch 3 pointer to take a one 1 point lead that left .04 on the clock in a famous playoff game against the Lakers a few years ago?

I don't think it was a 3 pointer. It was more like a one handed 18 footer falling siedways with Shaq on his face.

[triplet1984]

on the other hand, it looked like Duncan's three pointer was actually a set play, if so Popovich certainly had confidence in him, so its not all luck then.

[whambamslam]

on the other hand, it looked like Duncan's three pointer was actually a set play, if so Popovich certainly had confidence in him, so its not all luck then.

Sorry, but after the game Popovich said that Duncan was his 3rd option.

[ChampionRed]

-= original quote snipped =-

Sorry, but after the game Popovich said that Duncan was his 3rd option.

He still had the confidence to make him an option. I'm sure even Duncan can make a wide open 3 pointer more times then not. It's not that hard to believe he made it WIDE OPEN. Now if someone was there to contest the shot and then he made it, that's a different story. He had time to set his feet, shoot, and follow through. Just a nice play by Manu finding Duncan wide open.

[HarlemHeat37]

definitely a great play by Manu, but I found it interesting that Duncan recognized that he needed to stay at the 3-point line and had the confidence to shoot, instead of cutting to the basket, which he usually would have done..

[Joseph17]

It's not really about luck. It's about being able to come through in the clutch. The Spurs are just better at doing that. In a close game, the Spurs would probably win about 80% of the time. It's like the difference between the Lakers and the Kings from a few years ago.