|
i keep seeing things saying "spurs are so much weaker after losing robinson", or "the other western powers are too great, with their offseason moves". who are we kidding? rasho nesterovic is a pretty damn good fill in for robinson, and popovich will be great this season in improving this guy. and the addition of turkoglu - honestly, this guy could start for the majority of nba teams out there. and the addition of robert horry - okay, i know he's been sucking it up in the past couple seasons (especially playoffs), but that good ol' intangible called "experience" can really help this considerably young team.
who'd they lose? speedy claxton, who had a decent postseason, but where was he in the first 82 games? and by letting stephen jackson go, all they lost was a fairly inconsistent player. spurs have immense starting talent and considerable depth, which is definite recipe for success.
....which brings me to team everybody loves to hate, the lakers. damn, this team has it all: except chemistry. chemistry seems to be perhaps the most important attribute in a team. hell, look at the kings? they have 1 great player in cwebb, and the rest are a bunch of good-okay players. but the core starters have been together a while and learned each other's playing styles, which is why they've been so successful. look at the old bulls dynasty: jordan was always great, but it took a few years playing with pippen, rodman, etc. before they could bring it together as a team. hell, even the kobe/shaq combination didnt dominate right away (i dont think).
i predict the lakers will have a strong start, falter a bit in late december through the all-star break, and come back strong again until the playoffs.
|