If the Cavs and Spurs had played 20 times this month, I am now convinced San Antonio would have won 18-19 times. For Denver it would be 15-16; ditto Utah; for Phoenix, 13-14; and ditto Dallas, the tough matchup they avoided with the Golden State upset. Which is to say that the Spurs' fourth championship was the opposite of a fluke. Having seen all but one of their 20 games in the post-season, I think they were the most complete and inevitable champion since the second Jordan Bulls outfit of the mid-90s.
I was singing a slightly different tune ten days ago, of course, when I made the case that the Cavs could play the Spurs tough. Four games later, the convention wisdom--that the Spurs had too much talent, experience, will power, and everything else for the Cavs--was obviously wiser. Without going back and rereading my wayward post, I think I based my premise on the Cavs being competitive on at least two of three factors emerging. But in fact none of them developed. Read 'em while I weep.
The Cavs' perimeter defense would deter Parker and Ginobili
Parker's Finals MVP trophy gives you a clue how this one turned out. Yes, Larry Hughes was waylaid by plantar fasciitis, but Hughes would have had to be at the very top of his game to derail Parker's glory in this series. From the onset, the soon-to-be Mr. Longoria blew past two or three Cavs at a time en route to his trademark banker while taking a header into the photographers. By Games Three and Four, he had settled into such a comfort zone that not only the teardrop but the heretofore unreliable trey had become money in the bank. And when Parker wasn't bedeviling the Cavs, Ginobili was, as always, waiting for the step-up moment that would be most deflating to his opponents' resolve. The competitive killer instinct of Parker and Ginobili is more ferocious than any guard tandem since Dumars and Zeke back in the day.
LeBron would hit his midrange jumpers
You knew the Spurs wouldn't give LeBron a chance to penetrate; not without making him prove he could nail that 15-footer. It was unreasonable to expect King James to continue the long-range accuracy he'd demonstrated against the Pistons, and, at 5-20 FG from beyond the arc, he didn't. But what really doomed the Cavs was LeBron shooting just 40 percent (28-70 FG) from two-point range. What that stat says is that San Antonio was able to deny the superstar both layups and free throws. I've ripped ABC commentator Mark Jackson in the past, but he was dead-on in his repeated calls for the Cavs to post-up LeBron more often. Yes, Bruce Bowen came up huge, and the Spurs have the depth and commitment to assure that LeBron never discovered the comfort zone Parker was able to create for himself. But how does a player like LeBron operating under the new hand-checking rules only get 29 free throws in 170 minutes during this series? (By comparison, Ginobili shot 30 FTA in 117 minutes.) As someone who has praised Cavs' coach Mike Brown for his defensive schemes, I've got pile on with the critics of his offensive sets. Yes, guys like Varegao, Pavlovic and Gooden are probably destined to play stupidly in terms of shot selection and overall ball movement. But put your athletic superfreak down in the paint and see what happens a little more often--especially when it was obviously the best thing Cleveland had going on offense.
Daniel Gibson would maintain his swagger
This was a gut call that turned out to be inaccurate. I figured Gibson had absolutely nothing to lose and thus would continue to play out of his mind. Instead, the law of averages caught up with him and he reverted to his regular season mortality, shooting 44 percent from field overall and just 32 percent from three-point territory. Thus, the long-ball threat that killed the Pistons and freed up James was out of the equation.
A couple more minor points before we close the books on this slaughter. Brown made a big mistake not giving Eric Snow more burn when it was apparent Hughes couldn't go. No way a no-hope like Damon Jones deserves 65 minuts to Snow's 41. Sure, Jones is a three-point threat that could open up the floor for LeBron is ways Snow couldn't. But Jones can do anything but shoot, whereas Snow can defend and dish (despite his scant minutes, his 9 assists were third-best on the team this series). Watching Damon Jones trying to guard Parker and company was this mismatch in microcosm.
Finally, you are going to hear all about how this experience will enormously abet LeBron and make the Cavs the presumptive favorites to return for next year's finals. It is a viable theory, but I'd actually argue that it is the Spurs who benefited most from their experience this season. Consider how much two of their starting five, Oberto and Parker, grew in confidence and role-expansion over these past 20 games. Consider that Duncan looks healthy and is surrounded with players who will enable him to stay home in the paint at both ends of the floor, extending his career. Consider that Ginobili's deal with the devil--enabling him to hit every big shot and put himself in the perfect position to generate big rebounds, steals, etc., has obviously been extended. Consider that Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili are all signed through 2009-10, and that of the top 10 in their rotation, only Oberto, Finley and Vaughn are eligible for free agency this off-season. A year from now, we could very well be hearing about "one for the thumb" as it relates to championship rings for Tim Duncan.


First off, I'm all in favor of keeping KG here. I love the guy, and I can't imagine watching our team without him.
The main thing I don't understand about the Boston deal is...don't we want to see KG win? Doesn't KG want to win? Why the hell would he agree to go to Boston? Do you think that PP and KG are going to play 2-on-5? Don't get me wrong, I'm as big of a Scalabrine fan as the next guy, but KG has no chance to win with the Celts, and I think it would be an awfully cold-hearted move to send him there.
Phoenix, on the other hand, might make sense if you're going to trade KG at all. Of course, I still don't want to, and I also happen to think that Amare has been helped quite a bit by the Nash effect. Marion is the key piece that we should want, but more would obviously need to be thrown in. I'd kill to include Barbosa, and draft picks are a must, namely Atlanta's future pick.
Again, I really don't want to believe that this could happen. We've just traded James for Howard, which is a huge move on our part, if what I've read about the KG-James locker room stuff is true. If Randy and Craig take the strides that are expected from 2nd-year players, that would be muchas exciting.
Main thing I want to happen - let's drop Ricky and Blount (if we can). I would even include our pick (!) if we could get a good "known quantity" ... as much as I love Foye and Smith, I really don't want to watch the growing pains of another rookie - I guess losing 3 #1 draft picks (soon to be 5 picks) will do that to a guy! Let's move out the immaturity, get some vets who know their role, and keep our 2 young talents (sorry Rashad, you're not on this list yet).
Perhaps a question for you all: would you rather fire McHale for trading KG now and rebuilding, fire him for letting KG walk for no compensation at the end of the season? This last option assumes that he's unable to tweak our roster enough to create a winning team.
with all the wolves chatter nationally (strangely nothing new outta our hometown reporters), can you please start up a thread about trading KG, and if it's worth it? now that it might be closer to reality, i'm about to come to grips with it, disgusting as the whole thing is.
i heard that denver is trying to get artest, and are looking to ship nene or camby. what does anyone think of a three way trade, with davis to sac, camby to minny and artest to denver?
at any rate, brit, please start a new thread. the clan is awaiting you, and i don't dig the rube prognostidcation at kfan.
I'm sorry to post too much on this subject, but it's driving me crazy. During the time of the the rumor, I've done the opposite of the grieving process, starting with acceptance and moving backward toward denial (I expect to be there tomorrow). Right now, I'm in anger.
WTF that this trade is considered by the brass or the fans. We talk about a nucleus of ok NBA players and think that's better than having KG???? What's with our pieces without KG on the floor? It's a disaster. We've become so accustomed to having a superstar that we think trading KG will turn an extra into one. It won't. Not Foye or McCants or Smith or whoever is picked in the draft at #5 or #7. I remember driving to see the 76ers while they had Barkley just to see him play. How many times do you think I bought those tickets after he left?
Remember how the sixers recovered from that trade? They had soul crushing seasons before lucking into AI. Look at Atlanta, or Boston, or Charlotte, or NO, or Milwaukee or memphis etc. You can stay in the cellar for quite awhile when you don't have a GREAT (not just good) player to mesh your team.
Our best bet is to trade Davis for a PG (assuming Conley won't make it to #7), draft a big, trade Jaric for another big and play well enough to be one and done in the playoffs while finishing the Boston and LAC trades by losing our picks. Finally, KG is over the hill, and we will have our first round picks for building each year while hoping for a superstar #1 or 2 pick. If we go to the cellar now, we're still handcuffed by the traded picks so we stay down for a little more time than I can stomach.
I promise, this is my last post on the subject (the last paragraph shows I've arrived early in denial), and hopefully my last fillibuster ever. Only Britt should make these long posts.
I agree with Patrick. Didn't we learn our lesson about taking unwanted PGs from Boston after the last trade with them? Besides, ESPN's Trade Machine says Kurt Thomas is untradeable until he exercises an option in his contract for 2007-2008 or otherwise works out an extension.
Finally, if this trade did somehow happen, you could move Timberwolves games to the Sports Pavilion at the University of Minnesota and still might not get sellouts on a nightly basis. McHale may be that stupid, but I hope to God Taylor isn't.
God, I would hope we could do better. I've seen a similar version of this rumor as well, but it had the Wolves getting better players back. I guess we would clear salary, but that's about it. I would hope at the very minimum in this deal we could also get Atlanta's unprotected #1 for next year.
If not, definitely do not do that trade. Although, it would be cool to see KG on the Suns....
That would be godawful for the Wolves. The number five is the only decent piece. A number 24 pick probably has less than a 20 percent chance of having a solid NBA career, the three players we would get aren't worth anything and the cap space is worthless because free agents aren't going to want to come to a decimated club. If McHale even considers that its yet another embarassment for the Wolves.
Thoughts?!
I sure hope not.
KG for the #5 pick and future cap space?!
Boston gets Marion for a #5 and 2 players they don't even want.
Please.
Latest rumor I've heard...
KG to Phoenix
Marion to Boston
Minnesota gets...Kurt Thomas, Theo Ratliff, Sebastian Telfair, #5 and #24 pick.
Thoughts?
Yesterday Bump made a good point about the trade. We're excited about a player (AJ) who put up his numbers on a terrible team. It seems like we got pretty badly burned by that last year. It sounds alot more like their fans (at least) would be interested in dealing PP. Maybe they are as enamored with the #7 pick and role players as we are by the #5 and role players.
And we should remember, in our excitement about how great these players seem, is that we're just hoping for the 5th best rookie with the boston pick, or the 7th best rookie with ours. This is not the 5th or 7th best nba player... and it's unlikely either will even be an all star. The Celts would be the team that got some excitement out of the trade and a playoff team (although a ruined future). We would only be getting something different. A break from the slow descent we've been treading since the western conference finals. Silly hope is better than this path.
According to the latest NBA consensus mock draft, we've got a shot at Brewer at #7
http://www.nba.com/draft2007/board/mock.html
Since I don't think it's a sure thing that KG walks after the 2008 season, I'd rather see what happens if the Wolves could get Brewer or some other quality player than trade KG before the season even starts.
Remember that the Wolves have some leverage with KG at least for this season. Few teams are likely to gut their roster enough to match his salary in a trade unless they have some assurance that they'll have him beyond just this season.
And I still think it's unlikely KG just walks after next season without getting some salary assurances beyond the mid-level. Does anyone really think KG is going to sign a mid-level contract even if it means getting to join a serious contender? When he accepted a pay cut with his last contract, it wasn't THAT big of a pay cut...
Moneyapolis -
Any given team cannot trade first round picks in consecutive years. So, for your Boston trade I'd rather do this year #5 and we get our #1 pick back that we owe them. That would work for me, along with Jefferson, Theo's Ghost, Filler [hopefully GG (unlikely), Rondo (unlikely), or Gomes (likely)] Please, no Wally back.
That would give us the #5 and #7 this year. (Brewer for sure and Conley if available, otherwise BPA.) We'd also then only owe the Clippers a number 1 pick, which is still top 10 protected.
Under no circumstances do I want to see Wally and his bloated contract back in MN.
I like the proposed Celtics trade (except the Wally wrinkle that moneyapolis has thrown out), but the more I think about it...the more I think this could have been an intentional leak on the part of the twin doofus GMs to drive up the value of their assets.
How about this?
Wolves: Jefferson, #5, Theo, Wally, maybe next year's #1
Celtics: KG, Hassell, maybe a 2nd rounder
Celtics willl need to deal some guys for a shooter, but then they'll have a contender (at least in the East). They also get a much needed defensive presence - crucial for getting anywhere in the playoffs.
We get #5 and keep #7. We draft Brewer with #5 so we get a defensive stopper. Pray Conley falls to #7 (unlikely) or maybe B. Wright will still be there. We also get Theo and his expiring contract. Maybe we could make a deal for Przybilla if the Blazers draft Oden. And Wally was always a fan favorite here.
I would miss KG dearly, but I could definitely root for that team if we ditched Pretty Ricky. Hell, we could even keep Blount for a year if we can't move him. Maybe he would be a little more focused without his cackling cohorts.
Is this feasible? It worked on Trade Checker but I don't know how draft picks factor in as far as matching contracts. What do you guys think? Are we getting enough value? Remember, KG would be gone next year anyway. It would be nice to try to get the pieces for another run with Garnett but we've already mortgaged the franchise and can't afford to do it again, especially with the West as competitive as it is now.
I think for either Boston or the Twolves sake, a KG/PP combination should be intriguing. There are no guarantees with the draft even with Oden and Durant, (although, I'd roll with either of those odds) and the young guns for Boston have only shown potential on inferior/bad teams. Likewise, for Foye, McCants or Smith.
The point I am making is that, for either Mchale or Ainge, the chance to pair up two proven commodities in the NBA should be intriguing and either one of them would be stupid not to explore the option. Not stupid, for Mchale to trade KG to Boston for their draft pick and whomever else we desire from BOston's roster, or stupid for Ainge to not consider sending PP to the Wolves for our pick and whomever else we can give him off our roster.
Either one would be stupid for not seriously considering the chance to pair up KG with PP on each one's respective roster. PP has always needed a player in KG's mold to play alongside him and KG has always need someone of PP's caliber to play along side him. There are few sure things in the NBA, and a KG/PP combination would not mean a sure shot at a championship for either Boston or the Twolves. But as far as a sure way for either team to get back to the playoffs next year and perhaps for several more years to come, the KG/PP combo is about as sure as you can get in the NBA barring both players remains injury free.
if the rumors are true, I just hope the Wolves front-office is doing due dilligence by shopping around their other assets: Ricky Davis, Mark Blount, Trenton Hassell, T-Hud... I think there's still more upside to improving KG's supporing cast and keeping Foye as there is in going for broke and moving. KG's got 5 years left, and he can still be part of a contender even once he's past his prime -- just gotta get one or two solid vets to complement him and Foye. We'll be happier than moving him and becoming the post-Barkley 76ers or post-Shaq Lakers.
If Boston did any sort of this KG trade it is obviously contingent on KG signing an extension or not opting out... I think that is a given.
As for us doing a switcheroo and trying to get PP, I think it would take at least Foye, #7, Davis (for expiring) and then probably Ainge's pick of what's left of our roster to match salaries. I guess that option would be better than keeping KG and making minimal moves the rest of the off-season, but I don't see that happening.
A threeway with Atlanta and getting the #3 pick would be awesome, I'd love that. Al Horford would definitely be the pick then at #3 to replace KG. Hopefully we could also get Brewer at #5 or #7 (or whatever happens, hopefully we end up with two lottery picks.)
We could "trade" our draft pick this season, but we'd have to draft the guy Boston wants and then make the trade no earlier than July 1st.
why would Boston trade away their future if they will only have KG for 1 season? Isn't next year the last year of KG's contract? If it did happen it would be funny to see KG and Wally back together again.
The best way to do the Celtics trade is to get Atlanta involved.
This way, we could get the #3 and the #7 picks, or the #3 and #5 picks, with Atlanta getting the #7 pick (or the #5, depending on the scenario).
Atlanta wants to move down and if we could offer them something to move down a few slots we should do it. (I have no idea what we or Boston could offer them, but there has to be something).
Getting the third pick would get us Horford which would be huge.
Regardless of what Boston fans say, Ainge is smart enough to realize KG is better than Jefferson, much much better. Green doesn't contribute on a consistent basis, Telfair is a complete bust. Why wouldn't Boston do the trade? Green's potential isn't worth KG's jockstrap.
Here's why the trade to Boston won't happen:
Wally is still there and if I recall correctly, KG has a trade veto clause in his contract, doesn't he?
In regards to the Boston trade. Boston needs to get better. The lure of KG for young talent on Boston's roster is the tantalizing prospect of pairing KG and Paul Pierce. I think that pairing would make Boston a legitimate contender in the Estern conference immediately. The downside is that the window for building a championship around KG and Pierce is small and eventually they would need some young talent surrounding them to go from contender to legitimate shot at a championship.
What about the opposite scenario. Would Mchale like to see the Timberwolves and a Paul Pierce/KG combonation? If so, what would be required to make the trade. Ricky? Blount? Marko? Hassell? Howard? One or more of these for the salary matchups and then some young talent such as Foye, Smith, and McCants and this years #1. Should we do it? Can we?
Here is a question. Can the Wolves even trade their #1 pick this year without violating the terms of the trade with the CLippers for Jaric that sent them a future #1 and Cassell? The pick to the Clippers is still protected, but if the Wolves have a good year next year, they lose next years pick to the CLippers. They cannot trade away two first round picks in a row. I suppose they could make the pick and then trade it away. Or Can they?
More from Celticsblog:
http://www.celticsblog.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=848...
http://www.celticsblog.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=849...
And yes, I will agree that those Boston fans (on Celticsblog.com) can be some of the worst homers EVER, but still, some of them are pretty knowledgable. Every now and then you'll laugh out loud regarding their idiocy in which they value their own players, but if you are a Celtics fan, it's a great website.
There is a poll going on the sidebar of the website: "Would you trade Al Jeff for KG?" The answer is a resounding "NO" 76%-24% in favor of NOT trading AJ for KG. That's just crazy. So, perhaps you see where I am coming from when I say there is no way they will trade AJ, GG AND the #5 pick. It just won't happen. Perhaps if we swap with our pick, which some people suggested on there as well. Then again, it doesn't really matter what the fans think, since they aren't running the team, but I think Ainge is pretty enamored with AJ as well. And he should be, the kid is 22 years old and quickly becoming one of the best young posts in the game. He came from High School to the Pros and averaged 16 and 11 last year. Hell, I'd love to have him on the wolves for the next 10-12 years.
If we do a trade and get any combo of AJ, GG, #5, salary relief, I think it would be a steal. As Mike pointed out, Boston could be good this year but then they would suck. I don't see PP and KG doing too much for the Celtics outside of a very limited window of perhaps 1-2 years.
In response to midlife crisis, if we somehow got the #5 and #7 I'd probably try to get Conley 7. At 5 I'd go for Brewer (who should be there.) If Conley is gone at 7, try to trade down (for a different PG) or go for a big - like Noah I guess. I just think Brewer is going to be an absolute stud and we should pray that he drops to #7.
Thanks for the blog spot, College Wolf. It's bizarre to see how the Boston folks think KG and Al are comparable... and I think we are often guilty of the same. There will be a tragic drop off if we trade Garnett. It's been a dozen years since we've seen what a team without a great talent looks like. I still think the trade would be impossible to refuse, but I agree with Mike that it won't happen. It would make Boston brilliant for a year and then stinkstinkstinkstinkstinkstinkstink.
Also, with the departure of Mike James, we have to realize that Jaric is taken off the block. Assuming they are not beginning the season by tanking, Hudson cannot be the backup for Foye. I think Davis has to be next trade. I'm hoping our apparent need for a PG tilts Atlanta's hand towards taking Conley #3. I am in favor of any scenario that has Brandon Wright falling toward us.
And BTW, who would people take with a #5 and #7 pick. Would one of those be traded?
KG rumors are flying more than usual on the web. At realgm a poster who supposedly has broken news in the past said KG's reps were having talks with the Suns on an extension and have offered Atlanta's pick next year, a pick this year and either Marian or Amare. I don't buy it because I don't think McHale would trade KG to a Western Conference club.
The Boston deal is the most realistic Garnett trade scenario I've ever heard, but I still doubt it happens. My guess is that McHale knows trading Garnett before the upcoming draft would yield the best haul they can ever get, so he's seeing what is offered. In the end nothing will happen and KG will be around for the next two years trying to rebuild with the youngsters.
For the record, I would do that Boston trade 10 minutes ago. The only possible way I would ever see it happening is if we swapped the #7 with KG for that offer (including their #5.)
Here is what Boston fans have to say about it:
http://www.celticsblog.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=843...
I know I'm odd this way, but I think cornerstone players should have the opportunity of ending their career the way they want to. Every time I hear "I know this is a business" from a player I cringe, b/c basketball is an escape from the regular world for me.
However, I don't think an offer like that could be ignored. It's a great draft to have two early picks, and Jefferson is more than just solid.
There is a problem, though, and it's a doozy. How could Wittman handle a team full of rookies? Can we trust him to set up clear and acceptable roles to avoid locker room chaos?
We can reminisce over the T-wolves with Laettner, Rider, and D marshall.
College,
You've got to factor in KGs massive contract (which requires a lot of salary in return), his still dominant game, the C's desperation, and the fact that Ainge is a terrible GM.
It could happen.
No way the Wolves are making the trade for Al Jefferson and filler, though I'd concede they may do the deal without either GG or the pick (but not both).
If that trade is truly on the table with the Celtics, it should have happened the minute it was offered.
I'd guess it's something from the Wolves front office, rather than the Celtics. I am a pretty ardant follower of the C's... (my second favorite team) and there is NO WAY they will give up Al Jeff, GG, AND the #5. That's preposterous.
GG + #5 OR Al Jeff + Theo's Ghost + Filler... but no way we get their FOUR best trade assets...(AJ, GG, #5, Theo expiring) Mark my words.
I've heard the same rumors from credible sources.
More "fruitless trade speculation". This is a quote from Chad Ford on espn.com today. Apparently several GM's disclosed that McHale is officially entertaining Garnett offers......
"If KG's not going to Chicago, where could he go? From what I'm hearing -- and at this point it's just a hot rumor -- the Wolves and Boston Celtics are talking about a Garnett deal."
"In this scenario, Boston would send Al Jefferson, Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair, Theo Ratliff, and change to Minnesota along with the No. 5 pick in the upcoming draft. In exchange, the Celtics would get Garnett. "
I love the Big Ticket, but this wouldn't be a bad deal for the Wolves. Al Jefferson is a stud, Green still has upside, and the #5 will be a very good prospect. Could we do any better?!
It's a sad state of affairs when no current team gives any hope next year of a challenge against the Spurs.
For me though, I lean towards Dallas. As much as Warriors exposed them, they did it with a Nellie panache that might be available to a traditional coach and team. If Nowitzki can figure out how to play big, they'll be back next year without the arrow target Achilles they showed vs GS.
Chad Ford on ESPN.com
Several league sources say the Minnesota Timberwolves are very high on Spencer Hawes.
After his workout against Joakim Noah last week, the Wolves are leaning toward taking him with the No. 7 pick. Word is that Kevin McHale sees a lot of himself in Hawes.
While everyone believes Hawes will stay in the draft, a promise from Minnesota could assure it.
---------------------------------
I hope that's just a smokescreen. Because if Hawes isn't the next McHale, he's going to be a gigantic bust. Why don't we just bring Will Purdue out of retirement?
Mike,
I say Lakers in 7 by 2001 rules, Spurs in 7 by 2007 rules. It may sound trite, but I think that the Spurs have really benefited from the rule changes over the last few years (especially Parker and Ginobli), and at the same time they seem to know how to counter the faster pace of the rules changes.
San Antonio had an incredible run this post season and it was really a shame that their meeting with the Suns didn't happen in the conference finals as that was, in my mind, the most competitive of all the series in the playoffs. The Finals would have been just as lopsided I'm afraid even if the Pistons would have won the East.
The Spurs are a team that are now clicking on all cylinders on both the offensive and defensive ends. 'they have such incredible chemistry and depth that it literally looks like they are throwing two NBA caliber teams at you. I was most impressed with their mental toughness throughout the playoffs. They never get rattled, they play smart and tough basketball, they can play just about any style, and they are the most professional team around in every sense of the word.
This is by far the best organization in the NBA right now. Why would anyone want to leave that team ? I don't see any of these guys eligible doing that when they will be able to compete for another championship next year. I don't know where they pick in the draft, but they are so good at finding players deep that they most likely will come up with another decent player to fill out their already loaded squad.
As usual, a great all-around blog Britt. Can't wait 'til next year to read your excellen and eloquent analysis.
Interesting article on ESPN.com right now:
"After James trade, Foye ready to be full-time starter for Wolves"
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2905868
Great question. The 2000-01 Laker team went 15-1 in the playoffs (versus SAS recent 16-4 mark). I think you're right, Mike, that the aces in the hole would be Shaq versus Oberto/Duncan and Parker and Ginobili versus Shaw/Kobe/Fisher/Fox/Harper. It might even come down to which team Horry was holding the ball for as he squared up for the buzzer beater.
I say the Spurs in 7. Bowen deters Kobe enough and an aging Horace Grant, not to mention Shaq, can't stop Duncan in the low block. Even those dominant Lakers had trouble defending the pick and roll and SAS are superb in that regard. The Spurs actually have more team quickness than those Lakers, crucial in the spread-the-floor modern era.
If Shaq came up huge, delivering 15-20 FG performances and hitting more than half his free throws, you'd have to give it to LA. But San Antonio simply has more reliable performers.
But it is a hell of a scenario.
I was thinking this morning, who would win a series between the current Spurs and the Kobe-Shaq three-peat team. I think this would be a great match-up. I know the two teams played back in the day, but it was before the emergence of Parker and so on.
So, current Spurs v. the middle season of the last Lakers dynasty, who wins a seven game series? The Spurs would have no real answer for Shaq and the Lakers guards would not be able to contain Parker and Ginobli. I envision this match-up complete with current Horry facing a slightly younger version of himself as a Laker.
I say Lakers in seven. You guys?