Spurs 2014 > Warriors 2015

[Spurs m8]

Has to be said...this Warriors team has been so underwhelming when it comes to the crunch...they're lucky they had such an easy road thru the playoffs.

Spurs rose to the occasion...Warriors can barely hang on against a highly depleted opposition.
granted...they have Bron screwing the Cavs...but still...Spurs would have swept these scrubs 100%

[Bernkastel]

Well, yeah. The Heat or Spurs would beat them imo

[ShackEelOKneel]

Well, yeah. You couldn't shut down 1 person and have that be your way of winning.

[Kvnzhangyay]

Only in the finals. Spurs were on fire the whole finals, not so much in the other rounds

[DMAVS41]

Yea, probably, but it's a lot closer than most of you think.

[GIF REACTION]

GSW probably only beat 2014 Miami out of the last 3 years of NBA finalists. Maybe they beat OKC in 2012 too... But they lose to 2014 Spurs, 2013 Heat and Spurs and 2012 Heat

[BlakFrankWhite]

Duh...

Spurs beat two title calibre teams in OKC and Heat..

[navy]

Duh...

Spurs beat two title calibre teams in OKC and Heat..
OKC and Miami were shells of themselves to be fair.

[Noyze]

Well, I don't think anyone thinks these Warriors would beat the Spurs. SA has multiple weapons to game-plan for, plus they marginalize the opposing star players.

[scandisk_]

2014 heatles would steam-roll steph's ass with ease.

[Springsteen]

If I had a magic genie in a lamp one of my three wishes would be to remove you from the Spurs fanbase.

[1987_Lakers]

The same Spurs who went 7 games vs a #8 seed Mavs and went only 2-2 against OKC in the WCF with Ibaka playing?

[ShackEelOKneel]

Only in the finals. Spurs were on fire the whole finals, not so much in the other rounds

The Spurs stomped through the 2nd and 3rd rounds too. The only round that was questionable was the 1st against Dallas, which is what unleashed the beast.

[Spurs m8]

If I had a magic genie in a lamp one of my three wishes would be to remove you from the Spurs fanbase.

lol

Says more about you being a loser than anything else tbh

RENT FREE

[Spurs m8]

The same Spurs who went 7 games vs a #8 seed Mavs and went only 2-2 against OKC in the WCF with Ibaka playing?

I was wondering how one could draw such a retarded overall conclusion, then I saw the Lakers part of your name.

[J Shuttlesworth]

We'll see. If the Warriors lose in the first round next year, then they are equal.

[zoom17]

Yes better coach, experience and chemistry.

[EwingMan]

OKC and Miami were shells of themselves to be fair.

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1384227/no_medium.gif

[1987_Lakers]

I was wondering how one could draw such a retarded overall conclusion, then I saw the Lakers part of your name.

History will look at the warriors as the better team 20 years from now.

67-15
#2 Offense (Basically #1 since Curry sat out a bunch of 4th quarters)
#1 Defense
+10.1 Point Differential
MVP Curry

Deal with it.

[RedBlackAttack]

That Spurs team was far better than this Warriors squad. Not remotely close. If the Cavs trotted out this roster against last year's Spurs team, it would be four really lopsided games. Miami would have beaten this year's GS team, imo. Probably OKC too.

Really a down year for the NBA with all the injuries.

[TheBigVeto]

To be fair, this is the Warriors' first visit to the finals. The Spurs have been there many times.

[navy]

No
They clearly were. It's not debatable.

[EwingMan]

if okc minus harden is a shell of its former self, sure.

[navy]

if okc minus harden is a shell of its former self, sure.
Ibaka got hurt. The bench was trash that year as well

Clearly not OKCs best team

[rmt]

To be fair, this is the Warriors' first visit to the finals. The Spurs have been there many times.

That experience (or lack of on the part of the Warriors) really shows. Kerr has stumbled with the coaching - really this Cavs team should already have been swept. Spurs 2015 would have done the same thing to this Cavs team as Spurs 2007 did - only worse. Spurs 2015 had even more offensive firepower - not a prime Duncan/Bowen but not a bad replacement in Kwahi. + Danny Green for whoever else might be hot. For sure, Spurs bigs would not be making Mosgrov and TT look like Wilt (game 3?)

[EwingMan]

Ibaka got hurt. The bench was trash that year as well

Clearly not OKCs best team

rollplayer out two games = excuse.

let me know when okc, bench included, is good enough to be considered a contender-- i was under the impression they were title favorites the last three years...

[navy]

rollplayer out two games = excuse.

let me know when okc, bench included, is good enough to be considered a contender-- i was under the impression they were title favorites the last three years...
Ibaka is the rim protector. 2 games in a 7 game series is a lot. No saying Spurs wouldn't have won anyways, but that certainly wasnt the best okc team.

OKC has been a contender since 2012. Now? Who knows Durant might not be healthy and could take the next train outta there.

[EwingMan]

That experience (or lack of on the part of the Warriors) really shows. Kerr has stumbled with the coaching - really this Cavs team should already have been swept. Spurs 2015 would have done the same thing to this Cavs team as Spurs 2007 did - only worse. Spurs 2015 had even more offensive firepower - not a prime Duncan/Bowen but not a bad replacement in Kwahi. + Danny Green for whoever else might be hot. For sure, Spurs bigs would not be making Mosgrov and TT look like Wilt (game 3?)

funny, because the 2015 spurs weren't good enough to beat a fringe playoff contender for seeding, and then got bounced in the first round. their playoff experience really showed :oldlol:

[1987_Lakers]

Last years Spurs were a great team, no doubt. But I believe people only remember how they performed in the Finals and forget about the rest.

This is a team that had the same supporting cast from 2012-present. In 2012 they lost 4 straight to OKC. In 2013 they lost to Miami and they were took to 6 games by Golden State. They weren't some sort of juggernaut team. They were a very good team that got hot at the right time.

[EwingMan]

Ibaka is the rim protector. 2 games in a 7 game series is a lot. No saying Spurs wouldn't have won anyways, but that certainly wasnt the best okc team.

OKC has been a contender since 2012. Now? Who knows Durant might not be healthy and could take the next train outta there.

i suppose i just wouldn't consider either of those teams shells (if miami was that weak, i imagine the pacers would've given them more trouble). spurs exorcised their demons imo, against the next two best teams (who were very good).


i'm excited to see if okc can finally put it together, and if gsw can continue to play at a high level.

[Bigsmoke]

Maybe but the Warriors run is more impressive.

The Spurs were on revenge mode against an old exhausted heat team. they were desperation mode too because thats probably the only shot of winning it with the core they had.

[Young X]

Last years Spurs were a great team, no doubt. But I believe people only remember how they performed in the Finals and forget about the rest.

This is a team that had the same supporting cast from 2012-present. In 2012 they lost 4 straight to OKC. In 2013 they lost to Miami and they were took to 6 games by Golden State. They weren't some sort of juggernaut team. They were a very good team that got hot at the right time.They were dominant for the entire season. Hell, they won 62 games in a ridiculously tough conference, and even their record/MOV was deflated due to them not playing anyone over 30 MPG. That team was easily as good as if not better than this Warriors team.

[Bigsmoke]

They were dominant for the entire season. Hell, they won 62 games in a ridiculously tough conference, and even their record/MOV was deflated due to them not playing anyone over 30 MPG. That team was easily as good as if not better than this Warriors team.

The Warriors won 67 while playing better offense and defense.


Hell, the 2013 warriors gave the Spurs problems.

[Cleverness]

Last years Spurs were a great team, no doubt. But I believe people only remember how they performed in the Finals and forget about the rest.

This is a team that had the same supporting cast from 2012-present. In 2012 they lost 4 straight to OKC. In 2013 they lost to Miami and they were took to 6 games by Golden State. They weren't some sort of juggernaut team. They were a very good team that got hot at the right time.

Yup. And that 2013 Golden State team had 1 all-star who was injured for the entire series with a completely torn right hip flexor.:eek: :eek:

Interesting how the 2015 Spurs, in a crucial game vs the Pelicans, LOST... and immediately thereafter the Warriors beat the Pelicans 4 games straight wow:eek: :eek:

[nba_55]

Last year's spurs are getting overrated. They went to 7 games against Mavericks.

[Young X]

The Warriors won 67 while playing better offense and defense.


Hell, the 2013 warriors gave the Spurs problems.No ones denying that the Warriors had a better regular season, but that doesn't make them a better team overall.

The 2014 Spurs faced better playoff competition and dominated to a greater extent.

Beating the KD/Westbrook led Thunder and the defending champs >>> anything the Warriors have done.

[rmt]

funny, because the 2015 spurs weren't good enough to beat a fringe playoff contender for seeding, and then got bounced in the first round. their playoff experience really showed :oldlol:

You may laugh all you want but I'll take Spurs' playoff experience - especially their Finals performances - 5/6 ain't bad with that loss being as close as they can possibly get. You're barking up the wrong tree when it comes to Spurs and playoff experience.

[EwingMan]

You may laugh all you want but I'll take Spurs' playoff experience - especially their Finals performances - 5/6 ain't bad with that loss being as close as they can possibly get. You're barking up the wrong tree when it comes to Spurs and playoff experience.

the counterfactuals are ridiculous: the team wasn't good enough to make it to the finals. if the benefits of experience would've resulted in sweeping the cavs, you'd think it would've kicked in against a marginal pellies team or a pathetic clippers 'team.'

spurs are a great franchise-but it was no accident that they got knocked out early this year.

[1987_Lakers]

No ones denying that the Warriors had a better regular season, but that doesn't make them a better team overall.

The 2014 Spurs faced better playoff competition and dominated to a greater extent.

Beating the KD/Westbrook led Thunder and the defending champs >>> anything the Warriors have done.

You are not a better team simply because you faced better competition, if that was the case the 2011 Mavs and the 1995 Rockets would have to be considered all time great teams which they are not.

Warriors really haven't struggled this postseason, they had some bumps but that's about it. They are actually #2 in offense & #1 in defense in this postseason, the #1 offense was bounced in the first round.

[Young X]

You are not a better team simply because you faced better competition, if that was the case the 2011 Mavs and the 1995 Rockets would have to be considered all time great teams which they are not.

Warriors really haven't struggled this postseason, they had some bumps but that's about it. They are actually #2 in offense & #1 in defense in this postseason, the #1 offense was bounced in the first round.No, you're a better team by also having a similarly great regular season and then dominating to a greater extent against better playoff competition.

Both teams struggled when they shouldn't have but even against weaker competition...when have the Warriors looked as dominant as the Spurs looked in their run from the semifinals against Portland to the finals against the defending champs?

[1987_Lakers]

No, you're a better team by also having a similarly great regular season and then dominating to a greater extent against better playoff competition.

Spurs were 16-7 in the postseason
Warriors are 15-5 so far

Spurs faced better competition, but they didn't dominate like you are saying.

[rmt]

the counterfactuals are ridiculous: the team wasn't good enough to make it to the finals. if the benefits of experience would've resulted in sweeping the cavs, you'd think it would've kicked in against a marginal pellies team or a pathetic clippers 'team.'

spurs are a great franchise-but it was no accident that they got knocked out early this year.

Just because the Spurs lose to teams with great big men doesn't mean that they don't match up well with teams without a great big man as the Cavs presently are. As in most sports, match ups are key. Spurs have a great (or as good as any other team has) defender for Lebron in Khawi. They have another great defender in Danny Green vs any perimeter player who might get hot. They have a scoring big in Duncan that whoever the Cavs now have would have difficulty defending. The Cav most likely to give Spurs problem is Irving (speedy point guard that Parker would have to defend) who's out.

Spurs' experience (including coaching) would just be the cherry on top as the match ups would carry the series. IMO, one of the big reasons why this Cavs/GSW series is so close is experience - Cavs' (mostly Lebron's) experience vs the lack of experience on GSW/their lack of knowledge of how hard(intensity) they have to play (especially Kerr - why would you not double/triple team Lebron when he's the only one who can consistently score - make someone else beat you).

[Spurs m8]

The Spurs absolutely raped the **** out of Miami last year.
Woulda beat this weak ass CLE team in 4, 100%

As i said, the Warriors have been extremely underwhelming, esp in the Finals.

Having said that, this is great experience for them and will help them in the next few years.

[Young X]

Spurs were 16-7 in the postseason
Warriors are 15-5 so far

Spurs faced better competition, but they didn't dominate like you are saying.Spurs struggled in the first 6 games against Dallas and then went 13-4 despite facing 3 very good to elite teams with a 13.1 point differential. Show me a stretch where the Warriors dominated like that this postseason.

[Timmy D for MVP]

Spurs were 16-7 in the postseason
Warriors are 15-5 so far

Spurs faced better competition, but they didn't dominate like you are saying.

Either you forgot, or didn't actually watch and are regurgitating something you've heard before.

The Spurs floated through the first round of the playoffs last year. Then they dominated.

Yes the Spurs last year were better. They are just the better team. I've been saying it a lot but no team this year has demonstrated the sharpness that we've seen in the last few years from teams. I think injury plays a large part.

[Spurs m8]

Injuries did play a part.
It was just a weird ass season.
The whole playoff match ups left a lot to be desired too.

[rmt]

Spurs were 16-7 in the postseason
Warriors are 15-5 so far

Spurs faced better competition, but they didn't dominate like you are saying.

Consider:

According to Basketball-Reference, the Spurs scored 120.8 points per 100 possessions in the 2014 Finals, the highest rate since Basketball-Reference began tracking such data in 1985-86.

NBA.com player tracking data determined the Spurs passed the ball 472 more times than the Heat in the 2014 Finals. The disparity was even more evident in Games 3-5, when they averaged 157 more passes per game. And, as Popovich had assumed, that crisp, quick passing led to efficient scoring from multiple contributors. For further proof, look no further than San Antonio's true shooting percentage as a team through those final three games: an astounding 65.1 percent. The individual season champion, Kyle Korver, shot 65.3 percent. "We would have had to play the greatest Games 3, 4 and 5 to overcome that," Battier says.

How radical had the offensive redesign been? In San Antonio's 2014 first-round series with the Mavericks, it had averaged 18.3 3-point attempts per game, which accounted for just 23.6 percent of its field goal attempts. In the second round against Portland, the Spurs had taken an average of 19.2 3-point attempts, for 21.7 percent of its offense. According to ESPN Stats & Information research, San Antonio's 3-point shooting in the 2014 Finals accounted for 32.6 percent of its total offense. The Spurs had attempted an average of 23.6 3-pointers a game in the Finals, second in Finals history, and made 44.8 percent.

San Antonio dominated Miami in just about every conceivable category in those final three games: overall shooting percentage (54.2 percent to 45.2 percent), 3-point shooting percentage (44.8 percent to 38.2 percent), field goal percentage in the paint (65.6 percent to 53 percent). The Spurs dished the ball out for 71 assists to Miami's 44. They outrebounded the Heat 113-94. They even shot more free throws (80-71).

According to Basketball-Reference, the Spurs' offensive rating for Games 3-5 of the Finals (124.9) is the best on record for the past 29 seasons. The 1999-2000 Pacers (120.2) and the 1986-87 Celtics (120.2), each of whom lost the title in the years referenced, were tied for second.

But perhaps the most impressive stat is the bluntest of all: Over the previous three seasons, a span of 293 regular-season and playoff games, the Heat had not once lost three straight games in regulation with LeBron in the lineup. The Spurs not only won the last three games of the 2014 Finals but beat the Heat by an average of more than 19 points a game.

"I had never seen a team that hot," says former Heat veteran Shane Battier, "but we had all been around basketball long enough to know it would even out. They were going to regress to their averages -- only they never did."

Still, Duncan believed the continuity fostered by their organization equipped them with a deep understanding of each others' personalities and tendencies. "Our experience," he explained, "is one of our most valuable assets."

Pacers president and Celtics legend Larry Bird was on that 1987 Celtics team whose offensive rating the Spurs eclipsed in 2014. And Bird, for his part, says the Spurs' performance ranks at least among the best of all time.

"It's right up there," Bird says. "I know Pop doesn't like to say much, but he had to be thrilled to death with what happened. I'm sure they all went back and said, 'Man, we'll never top this.'"

"They found their nirvana through their adversity," Riley says. "That doesn't happen often like that, when you lose the way they did in 2013. It usually destroys a team, makes them go the other way, especially when there's aging. They played three of the greatest games that anybody has ever played. That's what it takes. It takes that kind of adversity and great players and, most importantly, mature, grown-up individuals who have been in the profession a long time, who can take the game of basketball to another level. But that's what they did."

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2015/story/_/page/PresentsSpursHeat/how-spurs-2014-finals-performance-changed-nba-forever

I'd say that they dominated.

[Spurs m8]

Lakers fans lol

Too busy watching Kobe DVDs instead of the finals

[SCdac]

Give me the 05 and 07 team over any of em. Prime Timmy + prime Manu + prime Parker + Bruce Bowen (runner up for DPOY like 4 years in a row) + Horry-Rasho-Nazr-Oberto-Barry-Finley. Spurs beat the #1 ranked offense run by Nash and Amare then beat the defending champs and powerhouse defensive team in the Pistons. People just get caught by the aesthetic of teams with great ball movement, even distribution, and great utilization of the three point line imo. Dominance doesn't have to be the #1 or #2 ranked offense necessarily, if anything defense is the name of the game. It's more of a common denominator for champ teams. But the Warriors have been sufficient defensively all season. the Cavs without key players look wounded.

[EwingMan]

Just because the Spurs lose to teams with great big men doesn't mean that they don't match up well with teams without a great big man as the Cavs presently are. As in most sports, match ups are key. Spurs have a great (or as good as any other team has) defender for Lebron in Khawi. They have another great defender in Danny Green vs any perimeter player who might get hot. They have a scoring big in Duncan that whoever the Cavs now have would have difficulty defending. The Cav most likely to give Spurs problem is Irving (speedy point guard that Parker would have to defend) who's out.

Spurs' experience (including coaching) would just be the cherry on top as the match ups would carry the series. IMO, one of the big reasons why this Cavs/GSW series is so close is experience - Cavs' (mostly Lebron's) experience vs the lack of experience on GSW/their lack of knowledge of how hard(intensity) they have to play (especially Kerr - why would you not double/triple team Lebron when he's the only one who can consistently score - make someone else beat you).

its moot bruh. maybe they're a good matchup against the cavs, but it doesn't matter because they were playing so shitty, they can't prove you right or wrong.

:rolleyes: at the kerr comment. if you think open players getting involved and getting good looks would have been less efficient for the cavs than bron iso-shooting at 40 pc, i don't know what to tell you. he got his and he's exhausted and kerr's squad is up 3-2. spur fans should know the risks of leaving the role-players open better than anybody.

[rmt]

its moot bruh. maybe they're a good matchup against the cavs, but it doesn't matter because they were playing so shitty, they can't prove you right or wrong.

:rolleyes: at the kerr comment. if you think open players getting involved and getting good looks would have been less efficient for the cavs than bron iso-shooting at 40 pc, i don't know what to tell you. he got his and he's exhausted and kerr's squad is up 3-2. spur fans should know the risks of leaving the role-players open better than anybody.

There are role players and there are role players. The only one they really have to worry about is JR - not really Ray Allen - the greatest 3 pt shooter in NBA history. I've been fine with either letting Lebron (see my previous posts) have his (and wearing him down) or double/triple-teaming (more so since Irving went down). It was GSW's offense that was the problem. GSW should not be having so many problems with this depleted team - they were just getting out-played/out-hustled earlier in the series.

[J Shuttlesworth]

The Spurs hit a higher level of play in the finals. I don't think the Warriors played as well at any point in the playoffs as the Spurs did in the finals. The Spurs were also ridiculously good against Portland. They did beat the Thunder and Heat who were greater teams than any of the teams the Warriors faced this year.

Granted, the Thunder didn't have Ibaka, but I'd personally rather play the Harden Rockets than KD/Westbrook.

And yeah, as someone rooting for the Cavs, I would rather play this warrior team than the 2014 Spurs. The Spurs would have probably ended this series in a sweep.

[EwingMan]

Consider:

According to Basketball-Reference, the Spurs scored 120.8 points per 100 possessions in the 2014 Finals, the highest rate since Basketball-Reference began tracking such data in 1985-86.

NBA.com player tracking data determined the Spurs passed the ball 472 more times than the Heat in the 2014 Finals. The disparity was even more evident in Games 3-5, when they averaged 157 more passes per game. And, as Popovich had assumed, that crisp, quick passing led to efficient scoring from multiple contributors. For further proof, look no further than San Antonio's true shooting percentage as a team through those final three games: an astounding 65.1 percent. The individual season champion, Kyle Korver, shot 65.3 percent. "We would have had to play the greatest Games 3, 4 and 5 to overcome that," Battier says.

How radical had the offensive redesign been? In San Antonio's 2014 first-round series with the Mavericks, it had averaged 18.3 3-point attempts per game, which accounted for just 23.6 percent of its field goal attempts. In the second round against Portland, the Spurs had taken an average of 19.2 3-point attempts, for 21.7 percent of its offense. According to ESPN Stats & Information research, San Antonio's 3-point shooting in the 2014 Finals accounted for 32.6 percent of its total offense. The Spurs had attempted an average of 23.6 3-pointers a game in the Finals, second in Finals history, and made 44.8 percent.

San Antonio dominated Miami in just about every conceivable category in those final three games: overall shooting percentage (54.2 percent to 45.2 percent), 3-point shooting percentage (44.8 percent to 38.2 percent), field goal percentage in the paint (65.6 percent to 53 percent). The Spurs dished the ball out for 71 assists to Miami's 44. They outrebounded the Heat 113-94. They even shot more free throws (80-71).

According to Basketball-Reference, the Spurs' offensive rating for Games 3-5 of the Finals (124.9) is the best on record for the past 29 seasons. The 1999-2000 Pacers (120.2) and the 1986-87 Celtics (120.2), each of whom lost the title in the years referenced, were tied for second.

But perhaps the most impressive stat is the bluntest of all: Over the previous three seasons, a span of 293 regular-season and playoff games, the Heat had not once lost three straight games in regulation with LeBron in the lineup. The Spurs not only won the last three games of the 2014 Finals but beat the Heat by an average of more than 19 points a game.

"I had never seen a team that hot," says former Heat veteran Shane Battier, "but we had all been around basketball long enough to know it would even out. They were going to regress to their averages -- only they never did."

Still, Duncan believed the continuity fostered by their organization equipped them with a deep understanding of each others' personalities and tendencies. "Our experience," he explained, "is one of our most valuable assets."

Pacers president and Celtics legend Larry Bird was on that 1987 Celtics team whose offensive rating the Spurs eclipsed in 2014. And Bird, for his part, says the Spurs' performance ranks at least among the best of all time.

"It's right up there," Bird says. "I know Pop doesn't like to say much, but he had to be thrilled to death with what happened. I'm sure they all went back and said, 'Man, we'll never top this.'"

"They found their nirvana through their adversity," Riley says. "That doesn't happen often like that, when you lose the way they did in 2013. It usually destroys a team, makes them go the other way, especially when there's aging. They played three of the greatest games that anybody has ever played. That's what it takes. It takes that kind of adversity and great players and, most importantly, mature, grown-up individuals who have been in the profession a long time, who can take the game of basketball to another level. But that's what they did."

http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2015/story/_/page/PresentsSpursHeat/how-spurs-2014-finals-performance-changed-nba-forever

I'd say that they dominated.

i believe 87's point was that the spurs didn't dominate across the playoffs; but i think beating the post-harden thunder and late-era big 3 heat is better evidence of potential high level play than what gsw has done (and i'm not low on gsw because they dropped two games twice to the grizz or underpowered cavs- you just need to win the series). competition just wasn't very high for gsw this go around. we will have to see next year against a healthy thunder and big 3 cavs.

in anycase, i'd agree with OP's title.

[SyRyanYang]

The same Spurs that lost in the first round with an improved Leonard:lol

[SCdac]

The same Spurs that lost in the first round with an improved Leonard:lol

But a shitty Tony Parker (Spurs starting PG and would-be "franchise player")

2014 and 2015 playoff stats compared:

17 ppg (.49 FG%) / 5 apg -----> 11 ppg (.36 FG%) / 3.6 apg

Parker took 9 three's in the first round against the Clipps and missed all 9 of em. He just wasn't himself. It's hard to pin it all on a young Kawhi. Spurs were just out of sync relative to the previous season.

[Spurs m8]

The same Spurs that lost in the first round with an improved Leonard:lol

Thanks simpleton

[Uncle Drew]

Hell, 2015 Spurs > 2015 Warriors. We saw what happened when both teams were healthy.

[BlakFrankWhite]

But a shitty Tony Parker (Spurs starting PG and would-be "franchise player")

2014 and 2015 playoff stats compared:

17 ppg (.49 FG%) / 5 apg -----> 11 ppg (.36 FG%) / 3.6 apg

Parker took 9 three's in the first round against the Clipps and missed all 9 of em. He just wasn't himself. It's hard to pin it all on a young Kawhi. Spurs were just out of sync relative to the previous season.


How did Parker regress so much in one year? Shocking

[Spurs m8]

Lucky Tonys terrible shooting didn't **** up Game 5 2014 finals tbh
He only started hitting shots in the 4th when it was over.
Tonys contract bums me out.
Not saying i dont want him there, just not on so much coin, and maybe if he keeps this shit up he can take a back step.
He won't though, too ego driven.