# Spurs: Favorites to win it all



## <<<D>>> (Jul 15, 2002)

ESPN:
"There's much more at stake during the long NBA season than homecourt advantage during the playoffs. The grueling 82-game schedule is also meant to test and develop the teams' resilience, consistency and overall character. 

By these measures, then, the odds-on favorite to win the championship...
has to be the San Antonio Spurs"

ESPN Page 2 Article, Spurs are the Favorites??
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/rosen/030402.html


----------



## JGKoblenz (Jul 19, 2002)

I think the Spurs have a better chance to win it all then the Mavs. :yes:


----------



## thegza (Feb 18, 2003)

I don't know how the Spurs seem to do it because on paper the Mavs are obviously in another league of their own. Tim Duncan is quite simply a winner and the big Fundamental just does all the right things to take his team to the top. Tony Parker is also a big asset to the team and fits a perfect duo with Timmy D. Duncan should get MVP as of late because he's really doing all the right things and making the Spurs just so difficult to compete and win against.

Spurs are definately my favorites to win it all this season, Duncan just might be looking at his second NBA ring again! Boy wouldn't that be a nice farewell gift for David Robinson? I'd be so happy for him.


----------



## Nikihotgirl (Apr 13, 2003)

As a lakers fan, I have one question to ask 

Did the spurs have home court in the playoffs in 2001?


P.S. Lets not jump the gun. The playoffs is another season. not saying the will not win, but keep in mind. The lakers are still worlds champion until someone dethrone them, and dethroning them will not be easy.


----------



## CelticsRule (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Nikihotgirl</b>!
> As a lakers fan, I have one question to ask
> 
> Did the spurs have home court in the playoffs in 2001?
> ...


What were the scores of the games when Shaq and Kobe were healthy. I don't see how the playoffs should be any different. Whenever you play the Lakers is a playoff atmosphere game.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

Sorry, laker fans it is the year of the Spur...or at ther very least the KINGS...the laker are out of it.


----------



## Nikihotgirl (Apr 13, 2003)

I hope no one have a problem with me being on this forum. I like talking to blazers, kings, and spurs fans. Your favorite teams have been victims of the lakers for three years.


----------



## CelticsRule (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Nikihotgirl</b>!
> I hope no one have a problem with me being on this forum. I like talking to blazers, kings, and spurs fans. Your favorite teams have been victims of the lakers for three years.


Nobody minds, I just don't see the Lakers going very far this year. the whole thing about champion until being beat is BS. were the Bulls after they dismantled champs until they were beat? The Lakers roll players haven't done much this year and the other teams have all gotten better.


----------



## Nikihotgirl (Apr 13, 2003)

It looks like your favorite team will play the suns in the first round. If the spurs is going to beat the lakers based on the season series between them, what about the suns? Didn't they win the season series against the spurs 3-1. To me, I think any team can take it. No one really dominated the western conference in comparision to the lakers when they dominated. Let me break it down.

The kings lost the season series to the spurs 1-3
The spurs lost the season series to the suns 1-3
The mavericks, well I wont go there.

The lakers were swept by the spurs, ok minus two games played, shaq didn't play!

The lakers even the season series with kings, blazers, t'wolves etc....

Since we're basing our prediction on season series, don't you think its fair to point that out?

I didn't have the time to break down the entire w.c. season series. I hope my point was understood.


----------



## Lethal Vertical (May 9, 2003)

In 2001 SPurs had home court advantage, they lost the first two games in San Antonio closely. Not sure game 1, but they lost game 2 81-88. Then the sereis went back to LA and they got wiped off the floor and unfortuneatly made to look really bad, losing 111-82 and then 111-72. Fisher got like 42 in one of those game 3 or 4 in LA.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

in 2001 Spurs were not nearly as deep as they are now

and in 2001 Lakers were at a whole different level...they were way better than they are now. Shaq was in his prime. They only lost one playoff game that year.


----------



## W1Z0C0Z (Jun 18, 2002)

If the Spurs are the favorites it's only because they are healthy. Don't get me wrong, they are a great team. But with the Kings not having Webber and the Lakers without George and Fox makes the Spurs the favs.


----------



## Lethal Vertical (May 9, 2003)

I think they would be favs anyway.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>W1Z0C0Z</b>!
> If the Spurs are the favorites it's only because they are healthy. Don't get me wrong, they are a great team. But with the Kings not having Webber and the Lakers without George and Fox makes the Spurs the favs.


Except the Spurs *are* injured. They have extreme choke-itis, which manifests in every Lakers-Spurs playoff series since 2000.

And no, I'm not a Lakers fan, at all. In fact, I'd prefer the Spurs to win the series. I deeply wish the Spurs hadn't choked away game four. 

It has convinced me, though, that the Spurs have no chance to win the series. Their game four choke probably sets the tone for the "new" three-game series that results.

The Spurs *are* the better team. Too bad they'll still be watching the Lakers play in the Western Conference Playoffs.

I hope I'm wrong. I just don't think I am.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

*from a Blazer fan*

I am so proud of your team !!!!!
Go all the way,you deserve it !!!

DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD IN L.A.


----------

