| << | >> | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | |||||
 previous |
next  |
| | |
| oh geez | 1:55pm 6/18/2003  |
|
First the givens: yes, the NBA finals were hardly a model of the best play in the league, and instead devolved into a series of low-scoring slug fests, and yes, the blame for that lies squarely on the shoulders of the New Jersey Nets and the victorious San Antonio Spurs. But let's get a few things straight. The Spurs are the NBA Champs. To earn this title they defeated the daunted Los Angeles Lakers (thank god for that), as well as two other excellent teams in the Dallas Mavericks and the Nets. I'm getting sick of listening to everyone try to belittle the Spurs' accomplishments. When they won it all in 1999 Phil Jackson proclaimed it the "asterisk title" because the season had been shortened because of labor disputes. This year the Spurs detractors don't have that excuse, but they're pointing to everything from the ugly play, the low television ratings, and now Tim Duncan's lack of high profile ad contracts to discredit San Antonio. I realize i'm not going to dissuade popular opinion, but let me just state that some of us casual basketball fans appreciate the no-frills, hard-nosed work ethic that Tim Duncan brings to the game. A lot more than the pathetic posturing and whining of media darlings like Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal. Mp3ing continues ... halfway through the P's, 94 albums to go. | |
| last edited 1:55pm 6/18/2003 | back to top |
| | |
| previous |
next |