Celtics VS Spurs

[PPAW4Life]

The Spurs would have given the C's a handful.

Just because they are more experienced and wouldn't fold under the pressure.

They got guys who can hit shots if they're left open - unlike the Lakers role players.

I think the star power of TD/Manu (healthy)/Parker > KB/Gasol(tissue soft and gutless)/Odom(wet noodle soft and heartless) could have played the C's big 3 to a standstill at least on the Spurs HC.

C's in 7 but it would have been a terrific series.

The only reason the Spurs lost was because of refs and the fact they didn't want to play stronger defense on Kobe....they basically refused to foul him and play physical with him and that made it so much easier for him to cut them up inside and make plays for the role players.

Spurs had huge leads against the Lakers in two games and sat on them....refusing to rely on their defense and then their offense went south.

[pballa]

I think people are still thinking of the Spurs teams that won a Championships in the past. This years Spurs team would not have fared any better against the Celtics.

according to ur sig....

the lakers got beat by a handicapped guy?

that sucks

[mickifree]

Let's face it, when comparing the Lakers to the Spurs they lack experience. Spurs would never have fallen apart like the Lakers did in game 6, and i don't need to call Cleo the psychic to prove it.

wait a minute... didnt the spurs blow a 20 point lead in game 1 vs the lakers? and 17 point lead in the elimination game? good way of not falling apart

[microfib4thewin]

Spurs only scored 86 points on average against the Lakers. How much would they have scored against a much tougher defense?

Besides, Spurs fans can't talk as if their team 'would not have backed down' when they lost by an average of 20 at NO and blowing a 19 and 17 point lead against the Lakers.