duncan228
11-08-2008, 11:20 PM
What made Spurs ruins them today (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/What_made_Spurs_ruins_them_today.html)
Buck Harvey
Blame it on bad luck. Blame it on bad personnel decisions.
Blame it on Bruce Bowen and Michael Finley entering their golden years. Blame it on the bronze medal.
Blame it on the beard, too, if you wish.
But also blame it on the Spurs' philosophy.
This happens to be the same philosophy that made them champions.
Right now, none of the blame matters. The Spurs have trouble scoring, and they have trouble stopping others from scoring, and that's a combination once unthinkable with a healthy Tim Duncan on the floor.
Then Duncan sits, and unthinkable becomes unbelievable. The Spurs' lineup at times on Friday night became precisely what Jeff Van Gundy said it was while announcing for ESPN.
Then, as if Walter Berry were back in town, Van Gundy said those Spurs on the floor represented the least talent of any group in the league.
Any NBA team that loses two all-star level players will suffer, and then there are the other injuries that have stopped the Spurs from building cohesion. All of these broken parts add up — Kurt Thomas' hamstring, Fab Oberto's heartbeat, George Hill's thumb, Ian Mahinmi's ankle and Finley's jumper.
Still, the Spurs aren't just struggling, and this isn't just about injuries. This is about the Spurs' philosophy.
Once they found their three stars, they chose to build everything to fit around them. Gregg Popovich valued intelligence and personality in his locker room, and the Spurs' staff searched for players who paid attention and listened to detail.
The Spurs weren't averse to talent. They just believed chemistry mattered above all else in their supporting cast.
It's worked well enough to sometimes beat those who jumped higher and scored more easily. Last spring, with Manu Ginobili already limping, the Spurs didn't edge the Hornets on the road in a Game 7 because they were physically superior.
The Spurs have ended up with this shallow talent pool sometimes out of necessity. Drafting low in the first round, with Peter Holt's payroll needing to stay under the luxury tax, the Spurs have had to find bargains.
Sometimes, too, they've made the right moves, only to have them backfire. Tiago Splitter, for example, is a 7-footer who would help the Spurs' defense, and the rising Euro lured him to stay overseas.
But sometimes the Spurs have passed up talent because they wondered if it would fit their exact puzzle. They wondered, for example, if Luis Scola would be a good partner for Duncan, since Scola is more of a scorer than a defender.
Anyone who has seen Scola in Houston knows that, yes, he could play next to Duncan. Today, Scola could play 40 minutes next to Duncan.
The Spurs, trying to duplicate what worked before, gave a lot of money to Matt Bonner. They thought Bonner, like Robert Horry, could shoot threes and extend a defense. Bonner, unlike Horry, strains to do anything else.
They rewarded Bowen with a 3-year deal, when others would have been hesitant given his age, because he represented the ultimate example of chemistry. Powerful in his role with the Spurs, he might not have played for other teams.
The Spurs have always loved Finley's professionalism, and they saw something similar in the collegiate profile of Hill. Ime Udoka was made to be a Spurs piece under Popovich, and then there's the bright spot of this early season.
Roger Mason Jr., with versatility that allows him to blend and make shots, looks like a steal.
With a healthy Ginobili and Tony Parker, Mason would be an ideal complement. But with those currently in uniform, Mason is not enough.
That's the status of this roster of role players. They made sense because they fit — individually, they are not enough.
They will look awful again, and they will struggle to win even a few games in the next weeks. If Ginobili and Parker can't find their form fast enough when they return, the Spurs will be in the lottery.
Then?
The Spurs' philosophy will be tested again.
Buck Harvey
Blame it on bad luck. Blame it on bad personnel decisions.
Blame it on Bruce Bowen and Michael Finley entering their golden years. Blame it on the bronze medal.
Blame it on the beard, too, if you wish.
But also blame it on the Spurs' philosophy.
This happens to be the same philosophy that made them champions.
Right now, none of the blame matters. The Spurs have trouble scoring, and they have trouble stopping others from scoring, and that's a combination once unthinkable with a healthy Tim Duncan on the floor.
Then Duncan sits, and unthinkable becomes unbelievable. The Spurs' lineup at times on Friday night became precisely what Jeff Van Gundy said it was while announcing for ESPN.
Then, as if Walter Berry were back in town, Van Gundy said those Spurs on the floor represented the least talent of any group in the league.
Any NBA team that loses two all-star level players will suffer, and then there are the other injuries that have stopped the Spurs from building cohesion. All of these broken parts add up — Kurt Thomas' hamstring, Fab Oberto's heartbeat, George Hill's thumb, Ian Mahinmi's ankle and Finley's jumper.
Still, the Spurs aren't just struggling, and this isn't just about injuries. This is about the Spurs' philosophy.
Once they found their three stars, they chose to build everything to fit around them. Gregg Popovich valued intelligence and personality in his locker room, and the Spurs' staff searched for players who paid attention and listened to detail.
The Spurs weren't averse to talent. They just believed chemistry mattered above all else in their supporting cast.
It's worked well enough to sometimes beat those who jumped higher and scored more easily. Last spring, with Manu Ginobili already limping, the Spurs didn't edge the Hornets on the road in a Game 7 because they were physically superior.
The Spurs have ended up with this shallow talent pool sometimes out of necessity. Drafting low in the first round, with Peter Holt's payroll needing to stay under the luxury tax, the Spurs have had to find bargains.
Sometimes, too, they've made the right moves, only to have them backfire. Tiago Splitter, for example, is a 7-footer who would help the Spurs' defense, and the rising Euro lured him to stay overseas.
But sometimes the Spurs have passed up talent because they wondered if it would fit their exact puzzle. They wondered, for example, if Luis Scola would be a good partner for Duncan, since Scola is more of a scorer than a defender.
Anyone who has seen Scola in Houston knows that, yes, he could play next to Duncan. Today, Scola could play 40 minutes next to Duncan.
The Spurs, trying to duplicate what worked before, gave a lot of money to Matt Bonner. They thought Bonner, like Robert Horry, could shoot threes and extend a defense. Bonner, unlike Horry, strains to do anything else.
They rewarded Bowen with a 3-year deal, when others would have been hesitant given his age, because he represented the ultimate example of chemistry. Powerful in his role with the Spurs, he might not have played for other teams.
The Spurs have always loved Finley's professionalism, and they saw something similar in the collegiate profile of Hill. Ime Udoka was made to be a Spurs piece under Popovich, and then there's the bright spot of this early season.
Roger Mason Jr., with versatility that allows him to blend and make shots, looks like a steal.
With a healthy Ginobili and Tony Parker, Mason would be an ideal complement. But with those currently in uniform, Mason is not enough.
That's the status of this roster of role players. They made sense because they fit — individually, they are not enough.
They will look awful again, and they will struggle to win even a few games in the next weeks. If Ginobili and Parker can't find their form fast enough when they return, the Spurs will be in the lottery.
Then?
The Spurs' philosophy will be tested again.