Bill Simmons is right: Spurs were one rebound away from winning the title.

[ninephive]

If they won in game 6, Parker would have been a lock.
If they won in game 7, Duncan would have been a lock.

Exactly, I totally agree with this. After Parker's Game 1 clincher and a solid series through Game 5, and ESPECIALLY after his killer sequence at the end of G6 in regulation (despite an overall poor game), I think he would have gotten it.

Green would have had a good case also, but his status as a role player and Parker's performance for the rest of the playoffs would have been enough to break that decision.

Duncan had an outside chance if SAS would have won in 6, but he didn't have as convincing a case as Parker or even Green IMO. That said, if we win in 7, I believe he wins his 4th FMVP considering Parker's injury continued getting worse and he underperformed in G6 & 7 outside of the G6 closing sequence (or what should have been).

[guy]

Did he EVER pick the Spurs to win last year? Now they were just one rebound away? Revisionist hack.

Umm, thats not the same thing.

[guy]

Exactly, I totally agree with this. After Parker's Game 1 clincher and a solid series through Game 5, and ESPECIALLY after his killer sequence at the end of G6 in regulation (despite an overall poor game), I think he would have gotten it.

Green would have had a good case also, but his status as a role player and Parker's performance for the rest of the playoffs would have been enough to break that decision.

Duncan had an outside chance if SAS would have won in 6, but he didn't have as convincing a case as Parker or even Green IMO. That said, if we win in 7, I believe he wins his 4th FMVP considering Parker's injury continued getting worse and he underperformed in G6 & 7 outside of the G6 closing sequence (or what should have been).

Ummm, it was clearly Duncan had they won in 6 (or 7 actually). He had an all-time great first half, and he was also the only one putting up relatively impressive numbers through that point averaging 20+/10+. Had they won that game, I guarantee that first half he was having would've been considered all-time great. Parker who had a poor series doesn't change that just cause of those two plays.

[ninephive]

Yep. I've said several times that I agree with Pop's decision. It's the same move he made throughout the season when in the same situation, opposing team needing a three, so you put all guys out there that can defend the three. Duncan had been coming out of the game in that situation all season long. Add to that that the Heat were a below average rebounding squad last year and before the fact it doesn't seem like a bad move on paper.

Can't switch it up just because you are in a deep Finals game. Pop sticks to his game plan and I respect him for that. Ray Allen hit one of the most clutch shots in NBA history and that's all she wrote.

I agree, the depth chart of "grabbing a rebound" on a miss is so far below leaving a shooter open for a 3 on a switch, it would have been difficult to think that out in advance. I don't think any coach would have said, "Well, we might get what we wanted in Lebron taking a fairly contested 3, but if and when he misses, we need our best rebounder in to hope that he is in position to grab a long rebound."

That said, JVG caught it right away on the broadcast (which goes to show how good of a caller he is IMO), but even that is hindsight and easy to do. My only argument for keeping Duncan (and later Parker in OT) in the game is that these are the guys who got you here and more than that are veterans that have the intangibles in these situations. You even saw Parker be the one to put a hand in both Lebron and Allen's face, even though he's not originally guarding either of those guys and is the furthest defender from Allen on the court.

[ninephive]

Ummm, it was clearly Duncan had they won in 6 (or 7 actually). He had an all-time great first half, and he was also the only one putting up relatively impressive numbers through that point averaging 20+/10+. Had they won that game, I guarantee that first half he was having would've been considered all-time great. Parker who had a poor series doesn't change that just cause of those two plays.

After G6, Duncan was averaging 1 more PPG than Parker on more minutes. Take into consideration Parker runs the offense, had more clutch moments, and carried his team to the Finals, I think Parker wins it (so did most of the media, especially after Parker's big G5, leading the Spurs in scoring in a turning game.

[scm5]

Bill Simmons is like nails on a chalk board.

Did he EVER pick the Spurs to win last year? Now they were just one rebound away? Revisionist hack.

Simmons, Bayless, and Smith ... damn I hate ABC/ESPN.

Give me TNT and Shaqtin-a-fool any day of the week.

I understand not liking Bill Simmons, I don't like him either, but your logic is confusing me and maybe I'm missing something. Why did he need to have picked the Spurs to win last year in order for him to be right about them being one rebound away from winning?

[T_L_P]

After G6, Duncan was averaging 1 more PPG than Parker on more minutes. Take into consideration Parker runs the offense, had more clutch moments, and carried his team to the Finals, I think Parker wins it (so did most of the media, especially after Parker's big G5, leading the Spurs in scoring in a turning game.

You're completely right. However, even if they did win game 6, I still would have given the award to Duncan, because of his defense.

[Carbine]

The revisionist history is outstanding here. Good job folks.

Duncan was the MVP had the Spurs won in game 6 or 7.

Parker through 6 games:

16.6 ppg on 43 percent
6.8 apg

Through 7 games:

15.7 ppg on 42 percent
6.4 apg


Duncan through 6 games:

18ppg on 50 percent
12 rpg

Through 7 games:

19 ppg on 49 percent
12 rpg


So not only did he have better numbers (which is what voters look for) but he also had a far greater impact on defense than Parker. Duncan was the anchor, playing great pick and roll defense, rotations, challenging shots near the rim, etc....

How do you give Parker the MVP? What's the argument to support it?

[T_L_P]

The revisionist history is outstanding here. Good job folks.

Duncan was the MVP had the Spurs won in game 6 or 7.

Parker through 6 games:

16.6 ppg on 43 percent
6.8 apg

Through 7 games:

15.7 ppg on 42 percent
6.4 apg


Duncan through 6 games:

18ppg on 50 percent
12 rpg

Through 7 games:

19 ppg on 49 percent
12 rpg


So not only did he have better numbers (which is what voters look for) but he also had a far greater impact on defense than Parker. Duncan was the anchor, playing great pick and roll defense, rotations, challenging shots near the rim, etc....

How do you give Parker the MVP? What's the argument to support it?

Most of us are saying that Duncan deserved the award, but I distinctly remember all of the Finals MVP talk going into game 6 being about Parker.

[davehos]

Umm, thats not the same thing.

LOL yeah .. I was bitter. They kept bring up how the Spurs lost and I was just being salty.

[guy]

After G6, Duncan was averaging 1 more PPG than Parker on more minutes. Take into consideration Parker runs the offense, had more clutch moments, and carried his team to the Finals, I think Parker wins it (so did most of the media, especially after Parker's big G5, leading the Spurs in scoring in a turning game.

Completely disagree. I remember halftime of game 6 and everyone was just in awe of what Duncan did. Yes, after game 5, it was really a toss-up between Parker, Green, and Duncan at that point. But during game 6 and after, I thought it was clear who the media were leaning towards.

[ninephive]

Completely disagree. I remember halftime of game 6 and everyone was just in awe of what Duncan did. Yes, after game 5, it was really a toss-up between Parker, Green, and Duncan at that point. But during game 6 and after, I thought it was clear who the media were leaning towards.

Fair enough, I'm a pretty big Parker fan, so I'm fairly biased. But this is all I remember from G6. Parker has a bad shooting night but still goes for 19/8. Duncan has the big first half but is pretty silent in the 2nd. Spurs blow the 10 pt lead coming into the 4th quarter and find themselves down by 3 with under 2 mins left. Parker is trying to create like always on a bizarre play and finds himself 1 on 1 with LBJ with the shot clock winding down. Step-back 3 from straight-away over the outstretched arm of James and drills it. I'm off the couch. Then LBJ starts choking the game away in front of our eyes to the point where I feel bad for him. Parker steals the ball and goes the other way with a leaner for the go-ahead bucket. Then Parker gets another steal and outlets to Ginobili to go up by 4. At this point in my mind if there was any doubt who gets the MVP, Parker gets it on this sequence and the G1 sequence alone, since his numbers were not that far off TD's. I honestly would have been happy seeing either of them get it at that point, but the way Parker was a legit MVP candidate before his injury at the end of the season, and how he came back and led them into the Finals with a dominant performance to sweep Memphis (basically the opposite of what CP3 did against the Grizz), I was really thinking Parker would get it. Of course, then you have Ginobili (who I consider the only player that really choked) have arguably the worst game of his career (8 TO's...first time in his career) and the rest is history.

[R.I.P.]

The Milwaukee Bucks will make the play-offs.

The Hawks are one of the worst teams in the whole league.

-Bill Simmons on Preview Podcast

I don

[Smoke117]

Something new and interesting I see...