>Mike,
>
>>By far the best team this year? It took a league ruling following the Robert Horry cheap shot to get them past Phoenix (a team than won about 10 more games in the regular season). Then they had the good fortune to face a Warriors team that had already overachieved by reaching the Western finals, then the Cavs, one of the worst teams ever to reach an NBA Finals.
>
>First, the rule was there all the time, if the Suns players are dumb enough to break it, is not the league or Horry's problems. I am tired of this argument, the Spurs, and Ginobili in particular, took a lot of cheap shots in their last years, I yet need to see one Spur leaving the bench to fight, err I mean see if Nash was ok.
>

Yes, they should and undoubtedly did know the rule about leaving the bench. But in this case there were some huge mitigating factors the league office should have taken into account IMO.

1. They hardly strayed from the bench and never came close to Horry or the scene of the fracas. Suns coaches restrained Stoudamire when he had gone about 20 feet. Diaw barely stood up from his chair.

2. Human nature should be considered. When your best player is blatantly cheap-shotted by the opponents' 10th or 11th man, it isn't natural to just sit there with your arms folded across your chest.

3. The situation should be considered. This series was basically for the title -- that was clear even at the time -- and was down to the best of 3 games. Is it in any way fair to suspend an end of the bench guy from one team and, from the other team, a first team all-star and the first guard off the bench? We shouldn't be surprised if other teams try similar goon tactics in future playoff series. How much do you have to lose?

The funny thing was I have never thought of Horry as a dirty player. But that sure as heck was a dirty play. If not for decorum I would say what he ought to do with his seven rings.

>And while I agree about the Cavs, don't tell the Pistons the Cavs suck <g>
>

I didn't say they suck. They got as much as they could out of their talent level and their horribly inappropriate walk-the-ball-up style of play. But they were not a championship caliber team. That they were swept was no surprise.

>You think it is way overblown for this year alone? The Spurs were serious contenders for the past 8 years, winning 4 championships, and it took a 0.4 shot in 2004 and a bad move by Ginobili last year to prevent even better runs.
>

Last year? They lost in the conference finals to the team that lost in the finals. That's a lot of woulda-coulda-shoulda counting that as a near championship.

Again, I am not getting down on the Spurs. They're a very good team and they play the game the right way. Let's just not get carried away with talk of dynasties and all-time great teams.