Lakers-Spurs series was a changing of the guard
For many reasons, the Western Conference finals between the L.A. Lakers and the San Antonio Spurs emphasized a changing of the guard in the NBA, or at least the Western Conference. The Spurs are still a good team but somewhere along the line, a certain quality about that team that been a strength (experience) turned into a weakness (age).
Or at least the Spurs appeared old when faced with a younger, intense and talented team that has come into its own and now has confidence in its own abilities.
The Lakers beat the Spurs, 100-92, last night at the Staples Center to win the conference finals, 4-1, and await either Boston and Detroit where the Celts lead that series, 3-2. As they did in several games this series, the Spurs led early -- by 13 after the first quarter, by 17 during the second and even by 10 in the third. But the Laker defense muffled the Spurs and in the fourth period, Kobe Bryant took over, much as he did in Game 1 and scored 17 points.
Now, Bryant's contention during an interview after last season that, "At this point I'd go play on Pluto" seems laughable. And the direction for the Spurs, winners of four NBA titles since 1999, seems uncertain.
Comments
I think we're jumping the gun a little bit here with this sensationalism.
A blown call here, a 3 point shot there and this series is a lot more even than most people think, not unlike the Spurs - Suns series this year. Those games were hard fought and the final series score was not necessarily indicative of what had taken place.
Let us also not forget 2006. The spurs were too 'old' then. They were considered done as the younger and more athletic mavericks had dethroned the champs to become the new Western Conference heavyweights.
The spurs will retool this offseason around a great trio. They wanted to give this squad one more shot, and getting to the western conference finals in probably the most competitve conference the league has ever seen is nothing to sneeze at. Tim Duncan proved that he still has a few good years left in him by averaging a career playoff high in rebounding. If Timmy's good, the spurs are good.
The spurs will contend for a few more years and then, and only then, will it be a changing of the guard.
Posted by: Ryan | May 30, 2008 11:06 AM
hey Ryan give it up that was last year next year the sperms will be another year slower older they are not a dynasty! cant win back to back much less a 3-peat...
enjoy your return to the bottom
spurs 3.5 rings***
*strike season dont count only full
Posted by: gil | May 30, 2008 4:11 PM
Would be nice to see the guard change to a new dynasty, and not a team that had a 3-peat just a few years ago though. Not sure if it counts as a changing of the guard so much as a returning of the uniform...
Posted by: Jay Maduro | May 30, 2008 4:30 PM
The whole reason for the Spurs loss to the Lakers was really the over all team matchups. The Lakers real strength other than a strong starting five is thier bench. They have the best bench in the league.
Ginobli is actually a real problem now. Do you keep him or get a better free agent out there that will give you a different look for the West conference teams and keep you competetive then play genobli of the bench still? It would give them a stronger bench. Or do you trade him?
I say trade him and get this team some young slasher in there. The Spurs could use a fast break type player to speed up the squad. The're half court game is not getting it done well enough to keep going.
I have to say I'm happy the N.B.A. is getting stronger. One more Detroit/Spurs borefest and I was going to stop watching for a while.
Posted by: thomas | June 1, 2008 3:24 AM