Monroe: Finley now Spurs' reluctant elder

[duncan228]

Finley now Spurs' reluctant elder (http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/64683482.html)
Mike Monroe

There is a bond among NBA players selected in each draft class, especially among first-round picks.

Many compete against one another in college games, sometimes in the NCAA tournament. They meet at the league's pre-draft camp in Chicago. They attend rookie orientation classes before their initial seasons. They follow one another's careers.

As the seasons pass, the bonds grow stronger among those who last.

It has gotten easier for Spurs swingman Michael Finley to follow the remaining members of the Class of 1995, in which he was the 21st selection by the Phoenix Suns. Of the 29 players selected in the first round, only seven remain. Of those, two are Finley's teammates, Antonio McDyess (No. 2 overall) and Theo Ratliff (No. 18).

Finley easily ticks off the rest: “There's ‘Dice' and Theo, KG (Kevin Garnett, No. 5) and 'Sheed (Rasheed Wallace, No. 4), Kurt Thomas (No. 11), Joe Smith (No. 1) ... and has anybody picked up ‘Stack?'”

In fact, Jerry Stackhouse, the No. 3 overall pick in 1995, continues to await a free-agent offer.

Technically speaking, Brent Barry (No. 15 overall), remains on the Rockets' roster, but he has not reported to training camp and appears headed for a contract buyout and retirement. The rest of the class is out of the league.

At age 36, and 26 days older than Ratliff, Finley has become the oldest player on a Spurs roster that became so much younger, on average, over the summer that coach Gregg Popovich hasn't once referred to this team as being older than dirt.

Just don't call Finley the Spurs' elder statesman. He rejects the designation, a euphemism for over-the-hill-but-still under contract.

Elder statesmen are more valuable for advice offered to players who were still in grade school in 1995 than for on-court contribution.

“I don't think I'm at that point in my career,” Finley said. “I think I can give that, as well as contribute on the court. So I'm just trying to do whatever I can to make the team better. If it means being a little more vocal to some of the young guys, I'm going to do that.”

He receives no argument from Popovich, who contends Finley's worth to the Spurs hasn't diminished.

“He is just as valuable as ever,” Popovich said. “There's no maybe about it. He's very valuable to us. He's a wonderful player; conscientious at both ends of the court. He shoots the basketball and is a great leader for us, on and off the court.”

Finley showed up for last season's training camp 15 pounds lighter than when he finished the 2007-08 campaign. If anything, he was even leaner when camp opened this year.

“He seems ageless to me,” Popovich said. “He hasn't lost even a half a step. He's the same as he's been the last four or five years, but there's a method to that. He comes early. He stays late. He watches what he eats. He's very, very strict with himself.”

Finley's role this season is one that Popovich is still trying to determine in the final 10 days before the regular-season opener on Oct. 28. With Richard Jefferson likely to take the starting small forward spot that Finley filled in 77 games last season, the veteran figures to be a key reserve, available at both perimeter scoring spots.

“I don't know what role I'll have yet,” Finley said. “I'm just going to continue to do what I've been doing since I've been on this team. But I don't even think the coaching staff knows what the rotations are going to be. That's what the preseason is for — to figure those things out. Hopefully, within the first month, we'll have a better understanding of our roles.”

Jefferson was a 15-year-old high school sophomore in Phoenix when Finley joined the Suns as a rookie. Then, he saw Finley's game as one worth emulating.

Now, plugged into Finley's spot in the Spurs' starting lineup, he has tried to learn how to play it by watching Finley, both in practices and in preseason games like Friday's victory over the Cavaliers. Finley started that game opposite Cleveland's LeBron James.

“Being able to watch him and pick up on the things he does, and the way he finds shots and the way he knows the offense, has helped immensely,” Jefferson said. “We play a very similar position, though he's more of a (big guard), and I'm more of a (small forward). Still, to see how he finds things, the reads that he makes, as long as I pay attention to all that, it helps my learning curve.”

[Blackjack]

“He is just as valuable as ever,” Popovich said. “There's no maybe about it. He's very valuable to us. He's a wonderful player; conscientious at both ends of the court. He shoots the basketball and is a great leader for us, on and off the court.”

Finley showed up for last season's training camp 15 pounds lighter than when he finished the 2007-08 campaign. If anything, he was even leaner when camp opened this year.

“He seems ageless to me,” Popovich said. “He hasn't lost even a half a step. He's the same as he's been the last four or five years, but there's a method to that. He comes early. He stays late. He watches what he eats. He's very, very strict with himself.”

Let the baby seal-beating, ledge-jumping and, overall, over-reacting commence.:hat

[urunobili]

Finley FTW!

[MaNu4Tres]

Finley won't get as much time. That only happened due to the pathetic talent our team had once Manu was injured. He will be great in a limited spot up shooting role this year.

[VivaPopovich]

I want a guarantee that Bonner won't be the starting PF/C on a team with Mcdyess, Blair, Ratliff.

[Spurs Brazil]

I'm fine with Finley playing 10-15 minutes. Anything more is too much

[boutons_deux]

Methinks Pop doth defend too much.

He must know there is widespread, serious doubt that Michael contributes anything, and contributes nothing when he's not scoring.

[Samr]

A vet like that is a valuable asset, in small doses. I think everyone here wants to trade finley not because he sucks, but because they're afraid if he's still on the roster Pop is going to use him at the expense of other guys. I don't think that's going to happen unless there's injury issues.

[Steve-O-Matic]

You half to have a half-step to lose a half-step. Finley lost what was left of his steps years ago.

[Manufan909]

Let the baby seal-beating, ledge-jumping and, overall, over-reacting commence.:hat

God, I hope Pop doesn't believe that drivel. Does he actually pay attention when Fin attempts to play D? It is just fucking sad, like a retard trying his hand at long division.

[wildbill2u]

Pop believes Finley hasn't lost a step because of his work ethic and physical fitness regiment. What happened to Bowen who also had a great work ethic and physical fitness regimen?

[exstatic]

Pop believes Finley hasn't lost a step because of his work ethic and physical fitness regiment. What happened to Bowen who also had a great work ethic and physical fitness regimen?
Two more years, that's what happened. Bowen's 38. You can only play so long, no matter what your ethic. If it were just a matter of hard work, Jordan would still be playing.

[Fabbs]

Two more years, that's what happened. Bowen's 38. You can only play so long, no matter what your ethic. If it were just a matter of hard work, Jordan would still be playing.
Like Finley since 2007?
Unreal how you PopaFinley supporters keep spinning this.

[Fabbs]

boutons_deux
Steve-O-Matic
Manufan909
wildbill2u
nicely done.

[Spursfan 87]

Finley still a valuale player for this team. He's still the best shooter in the team, and plays decent D for his age, but he cant play 30 mpg, 10-15 min is just right.

[portnoy1]

Mason Jr. / Malik Hairston / Marcus williams is what finley has to fight thru to get minutes. If Malik Hairston can hit a open 3's I wanna see him start and have a trade for a 7 footer immediately involving Finley/Mason jr./Bonner.

[HarlemHeat37]

Finley doesn't have to "fight" against those guys, other than Mason..Hairston has to actually make the team, and Finley is simply a better player than Williams, even at this age..

If Hairston continues to improve and makes the team, and Bogans can show some consistency, I would expect Pop to heavily reduce Finley's minutes, even though that seems unlikely given their intimate relationship..

[bigdog]

Mason Jr. / Malik Hairston / Marcus williams is what finley has to fight thru to get minutes. If Malik Hairston can hit a open 3's I wanna see him start and have a trade for a 7 footer immediately involving Finley/Mason jr./Bonner.

I don't see why Finley would have to fight through Williams or even Hairston to get minutes. Finley at 40 would be better than Williams, and Hairston still has to develop a consistent jumper.

[MaNu4Tres]

Pop believes Finley hasn't lost a step because of his work ethic and physical fitness regiment. What happened to Bowen who also had a great work ethic and physical fitness regimen?

Spurs needed offense last year with Manu out. That is why Finley played more than Bowen. If Manu had been healthy all year it would have been different.

[beachwood]

I've always like Finley and never quite understood why he takes so much crap from Spurs fans. He's a smart player who has had some big moments for this team. I think he'll get about 15-20 min a game.

[Fabbs]

I've always like Finley and never quite understood why he takes so much crap from Spurs fans. He's a smart player who has had some big moments for this team. I think he'll get about 15-20 min a game.
Same exact thing said every preseason since Finley has been here.
1-4 on titles so far and 25-45 minutes in many a playoff game (mostly losses at that, two series to Dallas).

What don't you understand?

[bless1187]

i actually like M. Finley, but just not in the starting role. I always said that in last years playoff, M. Finley was our 3rd best performer other than Tony and Timmy. I'm probably one of the few that believes that there isn't really that much difference between R. Mason Jr and M. Finley; they are both good outside shooter, they are both not the best defender since both of them don't really have the quickness to keep up with the leagues better SG or SF, but at least M. Finley has got more size and strength than R. Mason Jr.

[loveforthegame]

Finley still has value to this team off the bench. He's a team player and represents what the Spurs look for on and off the court.

I'd be surprised if Finley plays more than 10 minutes a game if everyone is healthy. The only time I see him logging more than that is foul trouble for Jefferson or a b2b night of rest for Ginobli.

Jefferson, Ginobli, and Mason will eat most the 2/3 minutes. The only competition for Finley right now is Bogans and it's not like he's proved better yet. Even if Hairston or Williams makes the team they have a ways to go before beating out Finley.

[Kori Ellis]

1-4 on titles so far and 25-45 minutes in many a playoff game (mostly losses at that, two series to Dallas).

What don't you understand?

I'm not sure what "1-4 on titles so far" means, but Michael Finley has never played 45 minutes in "many a playoff game" for the Spurs.

And who did you want the Spurs to play on the wing last year against Dallas? Manu was hurt and Finley was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mason in the postseason last year.... both offensively and defensively.

[Fabbs]

I'm not sure what "1-4 on titles so far" means, but Michael Finley has never played 45 minutes in "many a playoff game" for the Spurs.

And who did you want the Spurs to play on the wing last year against Dallas? Manu was hurt and Finley was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mason in the postseason last year.... both offensively and defensively.
1 title in 4 years. All with the idea that Finley was brought in 2006 just to be an off the bench spark and get a title. Props Fin for 2007, now step aside gracefully for better players.

since my quote was 25-45 in "many a playoff game"....Finley has 25-45 many a reg and playoff game, much to the Spurs downfall.

We chronicled last year how well Mason was doing until Popped jacked with him at point guard while removing GHill from point guard (44-22 record with Hill at that). Bowen outdid Finley at the small wing both defensively (duh) and offensively vs Dallas in last years playoffs.

[Fabbs]

btw here are but two of his 40+ playoff games, (47 each to be exact), vs Dallas 2006, granted both OTs. And both losses. And the 2nd being an elimination game.
And vs. the team that paid him 20 million to leave.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=260515006
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=260522024

Here's another beauty, the WCFs Game 1 vs the Lakers.
0-5 in 22 minutes to go with his usual sucky D. (Bowen 5-8)
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=280521013
3-9 Gm 2 to drop up to 0-2 (Bowen 3-5)
0-2 in Gm 4 when Mr. Finley finally took him out as Barrdog was nailing treys (oh yeah Bruce 3-5 again to go with real defense).

That's enough.

[portnoy1]

1 title in 4 years. All with the idea that Finley was brought in 2006 just to be an off the bench spark and get a title. Props Fin for 2007, now step aside gracefully for better players.

since my quote was 25-45 in "many a playoff game"....Finley has 25-45 many a reg and playoff game, much to the Spurs downfall.

We chronicled last year how well Mason was doing until Popped jacked with him at point guard while removing GHill from point guard (44-22 record with Hill at that). Bowen outdid Finley at the small wing both defensively (duh) and offensively vs Dallas in last years playoffs.
Bottom line is he gets to many minutes. People like to say that lack of talent is responsible for that. Thats only half the problem, the other half is that Pop likes Finley. In the same Series Matt Bonner was the Starting Center. Dampier was getting O boards left and Right, Popovich knows just like the rest of us that Bonner is not a great rebounder. Pop had Thomas/Oberto/Gooden all statistically and realistically better rebounders than Bonner. However Bonner didn't lose his starter spot although he was not hitting 3's or getting rebounds. Finley didn't play any better than mason did in last season's playoff lost to Dallas. However when there was a need for a change defensively; Bowen ofcourse got the Nod and he replaced Mason jr. in the starting lineup instead of old-man Finley taking a sitdown. Pop coulda even played hill at the 2 since Dallas was small all the time with a 3 guard rotation of Jkidd/Barea/Terry but he didn't, he stuck with Finley and Bonner.

[Kori Ellis]

1 title in 4 years. All with the idea that Finley was brought in 2006 just to be an off the bench spark and get a title. Props Fin for 2007, now step aside gracefully for better players.

Tim, Tony, Manu and Bowen all had 1 title in 4 years too.. not just Finley.


since my quote was 25-45 in "many a playoff game"....Finley has 25-45 many a reg and playoff game, much to the Spurs downfall.

He's averaged 26 mpg in the playoffs with the Spurs. He's also been the leading scorer every year in the postseason outside of the Big 3.


We chronicled last year how well Mason was doing until Popped jacked with him at point guard while removing GHill from point guard (44-22 record with Hill at that).

Pop moving Mason to point didn't cause the guy to be the turnstile that he was on D in the postseason vs Dallas... that was all on Mason.


Bowen outdid Finley at the small wing both defensively (duh) and offensively vs Dallas in last years playoffs.

Even if that were true -- you need TWO wing players on the floor. So Bowen and ... who did you want the Spurs to play? Udoka? :lol

I think it simply nuts to try to pin the Spurs playoff record in the last four years on Finley.

And I think he'll play about 12-15 mpg .. some games he'll probably play closer to 20, and I think he'll rack up some DNP-CDs too.

[portnoy1]

Finley is not that bad, its just that some of the younger athletic guys on the team lose important minutes cause Pops love for Finley. He can still do alot of things offensively, unfortunately the spurs just use him as a spot up shooter. Hill lost time to him last year in the playoffs along with Mason Jr.

[Mel_13]

Finley is not that bad, its just that some of the younger athletic guys on the team lose important minutes cause Pops love for Finley. He can still do alot of things offensively, unfortunately the spurs just use him as a spot up shooter. Hill lost time to him last year in the playoffs along with Mason Jr.

Who are these younger, athletic guys from whom Finley stole minutes?

In 2005-2006?

In 2006-2007?

In 2007-2008?

In 2008-2009?

I look forward to your answers.

[Fabbs]

Tim, Tony, Manu and Bowen all had 1 title in 4 years too.. not just Finley.
So we agree!? The Big Three with Brucie Bowen added were on a 2 of 3 roll and Finley was considered one of the prize FA side pieces of summer 2005 leading into 2006. Instead Pop-A-Coatail abandons Championship winning ball for small ball and plays Finley 47 two games and how many the rest? Owned by the Mavs and their rookie coach. Slice it any way you want, Finley joins the Spurs and plays much more then the off the bench 10-15 we all thought he would and the Spurs mini Dynasty plans are derailed. Meanwhile Dallas beats us twice.


He's averaged 26 mpg in the playoffs with the Spurs. He's also been the leading scorer every year in the postseason outside of the Big 3.
Exactly. What happened to the "10-15" off the bench role player? 4th leading scorer? Big deal. He has carte blance freedom to shoot from his husband and plays zero D, not to mention all the stuff that does not show up in the boxscores (tipping passes, altering shots, boxing out on D). As the Spurs abandoned their Tough D personality and began losing in the playoffs.
(Now granted Dick Bavettas b.s. vs Timmy D on Dirk cost us one game whereupon we did play classis tough Spurs D.)


Pop moving Mason to point didn't cause the guy to be the turnstile that he was on D in the postseason vs Dallas... that was all on Mason. No but all the bball intelligents on the board agreed it jacked with Mason and GHills head. Doesn't excuse Masons D but why change.
What the excuse for Finleys turnstile D?


Even if that were true -- you need TWO wing players on the floor. So Bowen and ... who did you want the Spurs to play? Udoka?
Lewie Scola :depressed


I think it simply nuts to try to pin the Spurs playoff record in the last four years on Finley. There is no denying the Spurs winning playoff record and style comparison before and after Finley. Nor Dallas'.


And I think he'll play about 12-15 mpg .. some games he'll probably play closer to 20, and I think he'll rack up some DNP-CDs too.
We've been hearing that for 4 straight years, we shall see. Pops quotes in this article don't give any indication we will not see the same b.s. continued.

[portnoy1]

Who are these younger, athletic guys from whom Finley stole minutes?

In 2005-2006?

In 2006-2007?

In 2007-2008?

In 2008-2009?

I look forward to your answers.I answered it in my last post. I wasn't talking about previous years just last season. Ghill and Mason Jr.

[UnWantedTheory]

btw here are but two of his 40+ playoff games, (47 each to be exact), vs Dallas 2006, granted both OTs. And both losses. And the 2nd being an elimination game.
And vs. the team that paid him 20 million to leave.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=260515006
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=260522024

Here's another beauty, the WCFs Game 1 vs the Lakers.
0-5 in 22 minutes to go with his usual sucky D. (Bowen 5-8)
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=280521013
3-9 Gm 2 to drop up to 0-2 (Bowen 3-5)
0-2 in Gm 4 when Mr. Finley finally took him out as Barrdog was nailing treys (oh yeah Bruce 3-5 again to go with real defense).

That's enough.

Using stats from over 3 years ago when he was 33? Different team and different time.

[Mel_13]

I answered it in my last post. I wasn't talking about previous years just last season. Ghill and Mason Jr.

:lol@ Mason being more athletic. Mason averaged 30.4 minutes per game. How many more minutes do you think he could actually play?

Hill is 6' 1'', don't think he could play too much SF.

[portnoy1]

I was thinking 2 guard not SF ( Bowen/Udoka )

[portnoy1]

hill 6-2 and a crazy wingspan/athleticism. Mason Jr. got his minutes taken from him in the Playoffs by Finley.

[lurker23]

The Finley haters are ridiculous, as always. I've said it before and I'll say it again: many contending teams would love to have a guy like Finley for less than $3 million. He's a solid, no drama veteran who shoots at a clip few can match, whether they be 35 or 25 years old. On defense he's no Bruce Bowen, but there are plenty of other NBA players who are worse defenders.

I'm not saying the guy is LeBron James. I'm not even saying he's a starting player on a championship team anymore. But for 10-20 minutes a game, he can be quite good. Many have argued that he gets too many minutes under Pop. Sometimes, this has been the result of Pop's bias toward veterans; more often, it has been because, due to injury or lack of depth, Finley was the best option. If the Spurs have a healthy Ginobili and Jefferson, Finley should be able to slide into a more comfortable position minutes-wise and responsibilities-wise, one that is more fitting the point he's at in his career.

[Kori Ellis]

We've been hearing that for 4 straight years, we shall see. Pops quotes in this article don't give any indication we will not see the same b.s. continued.

No you haven't. You have been wishing but you haven't been hearing it. In previous years, he was the first wing off the bench -- the main backup to Manu/Bowen, and expected to play around 25 mpg... which he did.

With RJ here now, a healthy Manu, and TP/Hill getting playing time together, there's really not much room this year for Finley to get more than 15 mpg unless someone get hurt.

And, I won't even comment on the fact you wanted Scola to play the wing for the Spurs.

[Fabbs]

Using stats from over 3 years ago when he was 33? Different team and different time.
2008 playoff series vs Lakers started May 21, 2008 so that was a whole 17 months ago. Should we break out his stats vs Bruces' in last years 1-4 loss vs, who is that team, oh yeah Dallas. Again. :lol:depressed
As to his being 33 vs Dallas I in 2006, yes shouldn't Finley have been that much better?

[Kori Ellis]

hill 6-2 and a crazy wingspan/athleticism. Mason Jr. got his minutes taken from him in the Playoffs by Finley.

Mason shot 37% in the playoffs and was the worst defender on the court. He's lucky he even played 22 mpg.

[Mel_13]

So we agree!? The Big Three with Brucie Bowen added were on a 2 of 3 roll and Finley was considered one of the prize FA side pieces of summer 2005 leading into 2006. Instead Pop-A-Coatail abandons Championship winning ball for small ball and plays Finley 47 two games and how many the rest? Owned by the Mavs and their rookie coach. Slice it any way you want, Finley joins the Spurs and plays much more then the off the bench 10-15 we all thought he would and the Spurs mini Dynasty plans are derailed. Meanwhile Dallas beats us twice.


I've tried, without success, to get you to give a straight answer before. I'll try again.

Let's assume that what you say here is the absolute truth and that Pop's performance in the 2006 playoffs was worthy of his dismissal.

So, it's the day after Game 7 and Fabbs has been granted the authority to fix the situation. So after firing Pop and waiving Finley, you must now identify the man to lead the Spurs back from the debacle of the 2006 loss to Dallas.

I challenge to provide a straight answer.

Name your top 3 choices to succeed Pop after you fire him on May 23, 2006. To make things easier you may name any coach who was available for hire between May 22, 2006 and today.

Just three names, please.

[Fabbs]

No you haven't. You have been wishing but you haven't been hearing it. In previous years, he was the first wing off the bench -- the main backup to Manu/Bowen, and expected to play around 25 mpg... which he did.

And, I won't even comment on the fact you wanted Scola to play the wing for the Spurs.
I think some search feature would show plenty of 10-15 minute expectation with occasional bursts of up to 25. Not regular 25s with many a 40 in key playoff games! Losses to boot.

Are you gonna comment on his 25+ including 40+ playoff games?

A Scola Dunkar Bruce frontline you don't like? Oh well.

[lurker23]

With RJ here now, a healthy Manu, and TP/Hill getting playing time together, there's really not much room this year for Finley to get more than 15 mpg unless someone get hurt.


Exactly. There's only 96 minutes of SG/SF minutes to go around, maybe 106 if the Spurs play small ball for a while. In a playoff game, Jefferson will play 35 minutes and Ginobili will play 30 minutes. That leaves about 30-40 minutes. Unless you think Pop will completely bench Mason, Hairston, Bogans, and only play Hill 10 mpg (backup PG only), there's not going to be much more than 10-20 minutes left for Finley.

[UnWantedTheory]

So we agree!? The Big Three with Brucie Bowen added were on a 2 of 3 roll and Finley was considered one of the prize FA side pieces of summer 2005 leading into 2006. Instead Pop-A-Coatail abandons Championship winning ball for small ball and plays Finley 47 two games and how many the rest? Owned by the Mavs and their rookie coach. Slice it any way you want, Finley joins the Spurs and plays much more then the off the bench 10-15 we all thought he would and the Spurs mini Dynasty plans are derailed. Meanwhile Dallas beats us twice.


Exactly. What happened to the "10-15" off the bench role player? 4th leading scorer? Big deal. He has carte blance freedom to shoot from his husband and plays zero D, not to mention all the stuff that does not show up in the boxscores (tipping passes, altering shots, boxing out on D). As the Spurs abandoned their Tough D personality and began losing in the playoffs.
(Now granted Dick Bavettas b.s. vs Timmy D on Dirk cost us one game whereupon we did play classis tough Spurs D.)

No but all the bball intelligents on the board agreed it jacked with Mason and GHills head. Doesn't excuse Masons D but why change.
What the excuse for Finleys turnstile D?


Lewie Scola :depressed

There is no denying the Spurs winning playoff record and style comparison before and after Finley. Nor Dallas'.


We've been hearing that for 4 straight years, we shall see. Pops quotes in this article don't give any indication we will not see the same b.s. continued.

Then it must be true. :rolleyes I think I will stick with the Orgs. opinion over all of the bball intelligents on here.


And again, different teams at different times.
You cant really compare his minutes at 32-33 to those of which will be coming up, years later, at the age of 36. Quit with the weather forecasts and the wannabe history lessons regarding this crap.

I am not a diehard Fin supporter, but some of what you people say regarding him is just pure bullshit. It seems we like our scapegoats on here. Also, regarding our Vets this year, how many know our system? Do you want Bonner to be one of our vocal leaders too? Timmy, Manu, and Tp can only do so much. We only have so many players left over from years past.

:lobt::lobt::lobt::lobt: :flag::lobt2:

[UnWantedTheory]

2008 playoff series vs Lakers started May 21, 2008 so that was a whole 17 months ago. Should we break out his stats vs Bruces' in last years 1-4 loss vs, who is that team, oh yeah Dallas. Again. :lol:depressed
As to his being 33 vs Dallas I in 2006, yes shouldn't Finley have been that much better?

Again due to lack of options. Who else was there? Gino was hurt was he not? I suppose you would prefer an inefficient offensive game going with Bowen or udoka then. We needed scoring which has been for quite some time(without all the big 3) one of our downfalls. Despite what he did or didnt do, we had to go with the potentially better offensive game.

[loveforthegame]

Might as well blame Finley for the health of Duncan and Ginobli that last two post seasons too. That couldn't possibly have anything to do with the struggles and early exits.

[exstatic]

Like Finley since 2007?
Unreal how you PopaFinley supporters keep spinning this.

Uh, I am no Finley apologist. I was disappointed by him picking up his option this year. I was simply pointing out that Fin is two years younger than Bowen, and that makes a difference, no matter what conditioning you do.

[ElNono]

No you haven't. You have been wishing but you haven't been hearing it. In previous years, he was the first wing off the bench -- the main backup to Manu/Bowen, and expected to play around 25 mpg... which he did.

Not last season. Even your husband commented the mistake the Spurs were making by extending Fin for two seasons, and the only caveat was if Fin would have played for 15 or so minutes on a reduced role.
I couldn't agree more with him, except I was pretty sure Pop would give him the bulk of minutes. I just expected Pop to take the minutes away from Mason, not Bowen.
This is a guy whose last playoff series should have been vs the Lakers in the WCF a season ago.

But here we are. Unless Pop pulls a Bowen-alike retirement season for Fin, he's going to be playing more than 15 mins a game.

[benefactor]

When I saw this thread this morning I knew it would be littered with Fabbs posts before the afternoon was out.

I am on the fence about Finley. With the new additions I am much more at ease than I was last year, but I still don't fully trust Pop with him. I really, REALLY hope everyone stays healthy...because that will be the key to keeping Finley in the range of minutes that best plays to his strengths.

[portnoy1]

In that case will Bonner start?

[The Truth #6]

If Manu is healthy and playing his aggressive, helter-skelter style (which is a good thing), then I suppose I can see how Finley's minimalist approach to the game is helpful. As Hollinger (or another PER analyst) mentioned, Finley doesn't make any mistakes, yet he hardly contributes much outside of the open jumpshot and passing the ball to the open man. Obviously, Pop loves that Finley plays perfectly within the system, yet we need a player who is able to do more than just pass the ball and hit the occasional jumpshot. Pop sees Finley as someone who never makes mistakes; I consider him someone who doesn't offer a lot to the team. However, I do think his poise is quite helpful for executing during a last second play and other specific moments.

What we as fans don't see is Finley the respected lockerroom leader, and that is something Pop obviously appreciates. Finley is a positive part of Spurs culture so its good that he's around (I guess), but I do think he will take minutes from other players who could benefit from the playing time. Until proven otherwise, I expect him to play more than he should. When has he not?

[MaNu4Tres]

Mason shot 37% in the playoffs and was the worst defender on the court. He's lucky he even played 22 mpg.

Something I have been preaching to the choir all summer. Good to hear it from someone else that knows what their talking about.

[MaNu4Tres]

Finley gets undeserved hate by morons on this board.

[Obstructed_View]

Fabbs has always been an idiot.

Fixed

[spurs1990]

[B]
Elder statesmen are more valuable for advice offered to players who were still in grade school in 1995 than for on-court contribution.



Dejuan Blair was 6 years old when Fin got drafted:wow

Despite everything, I'm glad Mike is still a Spur. I still remember how excited I was on Aug 31 2005 when he announced. I wish I could have seen what SpursTalk looked like that day.

http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/finley_050902.html

[duncan228]

I wish I could have seen what SpursTalk looked like that day.

Finley Picks Spurs !!!!

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24269

[whottt]

That thread is a true classic. Everyone laughing at the Mavs and Heat and claiming scoreboard.

Little did we know that our championship would not be defended, and we would in fact become the Mavs' bitch, and the Heat would win the championship.

Both of the teams that missed out on Finley, were better than the Spurs, and the only championship we have won since, was one where we were lucky to duck the Mavs.


That thread is like the last time we weren't the Mavs' official bitch...a moment in time, crystalized in that thread.

That demarcation point, of us not only not getting better at that point, but actually becoming the Mavs' bitch, is just a little too coincidental, and coincidences like that tend to follow Finley around...

It's just like Dallas losing 21 in a row to LA in LA and when does the streak end? When Finley missed a game with injury.


I realize Ultimate Victim, or should I say, False Leader, has his fans...


But the fact of the matter is, even if you don't believe his on court game hurts us, it's undeniable reality that Pop's fondess for putting him on PFs has lead to Dirk becoming Wilt against us...and guys like Brandon Bass becoming X-Factor in elimination games. It is definitely because of him whether you think it's his game that's causing it or not.


Also this...there is not a shred of evidence anywhere the Finley will play well in a reduced role and mountain to the contrary.

He certainly hasn't played well in reduced role up to this point in his Spurs' career, something everyone has conveniently forgotten, and he is a classic volume shooter and that is the toughest bench jump of them all.

But the most jarring thing about this is Pop considers his contributions invaluable...


Invaluable to what? Futility?


Anyway, Mike the Ultimate Victin Finley is king of mesmerization...but I still have hope the spell will fade soon. Then again, I'm not sure anyone has ever cast a spell to the degree Finley has, and this includes religious figures and dictators....so who knows if it is even capable of fading,.

[Manufan909]

If Manu is healthy and playing his aggressive, helter-skelter style (which is a good thing), then I suppose I can see how Finley's minimalist approach to the game is helpful. As Hollinger (or another PER analyst) mentioned, Finley doesn't make any mistakes, yet he hardly contributes much outside of the open jumpshot and passing the ball to the open man. Obviously, Pop loves that Finley plays perfectly within the system, yet we need a player who is able to do more than just pass the ball and hit the occasional jumpshot. Pop sees Finley as someone who never makes mistakes; I consider him someone who doesn't offer a lot to the team. However, I do think his poise is quite helpful for executing during a last second play and other specific moments.

What we as fans don't see is Finley the respected lockerroom leader, and that is something Pop obviously appreciates. Finley is a positive part of Spurs culture so its good that he's around (I guess), but I do think he will take minutes from other players who could benefit from the playing time. Until proven otherwise, I expect him to play more than he should. When has he not?

:toast I may be a Fin hater, but props on the post. If Fin can do awesome as the 5th/6th SG/SF, I'm glad. But if he is still in the top 4 come the POs, the above 3 better play 85 minutes. But then Hairston would be screwed (I know he isn't an official Spur yet).

Oh, and whottttt and his craziness is back, the season must be almost here.
:flag::flag::flag:

[TDMVPDPOY]

when the spurs signed i thought it be for a short term only

his first year we were jobbed cause of ginos last play

2nd year he got wnat he came for

3rd year he fuckn suck and spurs gave him a extention

4th year waiting for him to be traded....

[Capt Bringdown]

Pop's micro-management of players (make a mistake, hit the pine) doesn't seem to extend to Finley, who gets a free pass because...why? This is what's frustrating to a lot of fans I think.

Finley at 10-15 minutes a game, I'll believe it when I see it.

[Obstructed_View]

But the fact of the matter is, even if you don't believe his on court game hurts us, it's undeniable reality that Pop's fondess for putting him on PFs and superstars has lead to Dirk becoming Wilt against us...and guys like Brandon Bass becoming X-Factor in elimination games. It is definitely because of him whether you think it's his game that's causing it or not.

Also this...there is not a shred of evidence anywhere the Finley will play well in a reduced role and mountain to the contrary.

He certainly hasn't played well in reduced role or coming off the bench up to this point in his Spurs' career, something everyone has conveniently forgotten, and he is a classic volume shooter and that is the toughest bench jump of them all.

But the most jarring thing about this is Pop considers his contributions invaluable...


Invaluable to what? Futility?

:toast

Surprising how many of us seem to have forgotten why Manu went back to the bench the second time, and it's because Finley couldn't play worth a crap unless he was starting.

[Mel_13]

Surprising how many of us seem to have forgotten why Manu went back to the bench the second time, and it's because Finley couldn't play worth a crap unless he was starting.

With all the times Manu went from starting to the bench and back, I have no idea what point in which season you are referring to. Could you provide a little more detail, please. Thanks.

[MaNu4Tres]

With all the times Manu went from starting to the bench and back, I have no idea what point in which season you are referring to. Could you provide a little more detail, please. Thanks.

It was an opinion of Timvp's that most unoriginal people on this board took and ran with as usual.

I don't agree with it.

If a player can play he can play. Finley's numbers have been quite consistent over the 4 years he's been here and his first two years he came off the bench for just about the whole year. At the same time,there were plenty of games where he started the past two years and played bad. If a player can play he can play. Whether its from the bench or starting, the results will be relative over the course of time as long as the minutes and opportunities are roughly the same.

In my mind Manu has gone to the bench to always give the bench a " punch" as Pop would say.

[Mel_13]

It was an opinion of Timvp's that most unoriginal people on this board took and ran with as usual.

I don't agree with it.

If a player can play he can play.

In my mind Manu has gone to the bench to always give the bench a " punch" as Pop would say.

All that debate aside, I'm just curious what OV means by the 'second' time. My best guess is that he is referring to some point in 06-07, but I'm really not sure

[MaNu4Tres]

All that debate aside, I'm just curious what OV means by the 'second' time. My best guess is that he is referring to some point in 06-07, but I'm really not sure

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/MYSA030107_01C_BKNspurs_ginobili_38416a4_html799.h tml


Makes OV's unoriginal opinion somewhat lackluster.

[Mel_13]

That point in 06-07 is about what I thought, but that time frame doesn't really jive with OV's post. I'll just have to wait and see if he comes back into the thread and provides an answer.

[Fabbs]

But the most jarring thing about this is Pop considers his contributions invaluable...


Invaluable to what? Futility?
This one is so stupid it's funny. :rollin
Obstucted Brain
Surprising how many of us seem to have forgotten why Manu went back to the bench the second time, and it's because Finley couldn't play worth a crap unless he was starting.

[Mel_13]

I've tried, without success, to get you to give a straight answer before. I'll try again.

Let's assume that what you say here is the absolute truth and that Pop's performance in the 2006 playoffs was worthy of his dismissal.

So, it's the day after Game 7 and Fabbs has been granted the authority to fix the situation. So after firing Pop and waiving Finley, you must now identify the man to lead the Spurs back from the debacle of the 2006 loss to Dallas.

I challenge to provide a straight answer.

Name your top 3 choices to succeed Pop after you fire him on May 23, 2006. To make things easier you may name any coach who was available for hire between May 22, 2006 and today.

Just three names, please.

Come on, Fabbs. Just three names.

[Fabbs]

Come on, Fabbs. Just three names.
Yourself, Phil Jackson and Kori Ellis.
I'm working on other stuff, I'll give you three more in a moment.
Mike Buhlz the assistant too.

[Fabbs]

Even if that were true -- you need TWO wing players on the floor. So Bowen and ... who did you want the Spurs to play? Udoka? :lol
Here is what you posted when Finley signed:

Finley can miss a few games and no one will sweat it - the Spurs are four/five players deep on the wings.

[Mel_13]

Yourself, Phil Jackson and Kori Ellis.
I'm working on other stuff, I'll give you three more in a moment.
Mike Buhlz the assistant too.


Typical answer. You always come back with some BS, promise a serious answer and never deliver. You would think after all these years of Pop hating, you could name your top 3 choices to have guided the Spurs in the post-2006 years.

Weak Flabby, very weak.

[Fabbs]

From the Finley signs thread:
1. timvp
The scary thing is Finley might be the best player on the team at guarding Amare Stoudemire.

2. T Park
lol.
Did Finley actually have a go at guarding him?

3.timvp
Yeah, and he guarded him better than anyone on the Spurs.

4. sa_butta
wouldnt Duncan match up with Amare?
or are you saying switching on D. Finley would
be giving up 3 inches.

5. timvp
Yeah, Duncan or another big will probably guard Amare. But if the Spurs go small, Finley has shown that he can hang with the beast.

and whottt gave us a quote from Findawgs agent...
On WOAI Finley's agent said part of the reason he signed with the Spurs over the Heat was that he'll get more chances to punish the Mavs playing for the Spurs...:lmao:lmao

[Fabbs]

That thread is a true classic. Everyone laughing at the Mavs and Heat and claiming scoreboard.
bumpworthy indeed. :toast
This post got absolutely ripped:

What a nightmare. The spurs throw in one of their best role players in Brent Barry in place of old fuck in Michael Finley. This will guarantee the Heat will win the championship. I guess Poppovich is stupid because I never thought he would do this. Van Exel should retire. He hasn't done crap for Portland. Last I remember Portland didn't make the playoffs. Congratulations in trying to give the heat the championship.


Here was a funny one:
Captain Late
Thank heavens Scola couldn't afford to come over this year. hehehe

[Fabbs]

Typical answer. You always come back with some BS, promise a serious answer and never deliver. You would think after all these years of Pop hating, you could name your top 3 choices to have guided the Spurs in the post-2006 years.

Weak Flabby, very weak.
You think yourself would make a weak, very weak coach? Okay, self ownage but okay.
Phil Jackson? typical SpurFan homer hate response. And I'm not in love with Phils coaching but he rules Pop.
Kori Ellis i think she's got a lot more coaching skills then you might know.
Mike Budenholzer maybe not now that he's allowed himself to become a submissified wimp to Pop but i think he has skills, could have done it in 06.

[raspsa]

If a player can play he can play. ... Whether its from the bench or starting, the results will be relative over the course of time as long as the minutes and opportunities are roughly the same.

I agree. If he has game, it really doesn't matter.

[Mel_13]

You think yourself would make a weak, very weak coach? Okay, self ownage but okay.
Phil Jackson? typical SpurFan homer hate response. And I'm not in love with Phils coaching but he rules Pop.
Kori Ellis i think she's got a lot more coaching skills then you might know.
Mike Budenholzer maybe not now that he's allowed himself to become a submissified wimp to Pop but i think he has skills, could have done it in 06.

So, no straight answer. You only named one coach that was available at any point from May 23, 2006 to the present day.

The real truth is you don't want to answer the question. You're a one-joke comic and without Pop to hate your routine would die.

I ask again.

Name any three coaches that were available at any point from May 23, 2006 to the present day who would have improved the fortunes of the Spurs over that period of time. (PJ has been gainfully employed during that period)

[Fabbs]

So, no straight answer. You only named one coach that was available at any point from May 23, 2006 to the present day.

The real truth is you don't want to answer the question. You're a one-joke comic and without Pop to hate your routine would die.

I ask again.

Name any three coaches that were available at any point from May 23, 2006 to the present day who would have improved the fortunes of the Spurs over that period of time. (PJ has been gainfully employed during that period)
The truth is, i want to know why am i limited to May 23, 2006 and thereafter?
Yeah i would have run Popped sooner if he refused his proper demotion to defensive coach.
Because i believe Phil J would have heavily considered the Spurs after Kobme got him ran. Which is not to say i can't and won't come up with 20 more choices.

[anakha]

You're a one-joke comic and without Pop to hate your routine would die.

[Mel_13]

The truth is, i want to know why am i limited to May 23, 2006 and thereafter?
Yeah i would have run Popped sooner if he refused his proper demotion to defensive coach.
Because i believe Phil J would have heavily considered the Spurs after Kobme got him ran. Which is not to say i can't and won't come up with 20 more choices.

Can't do it, can you?

And you keep bringing up PJ. You can't seriously think that:

1. The Spurs would demote/fire Pop after the 04-05 season

2. That the man who played in NY and coached in Chicago and LA would ever relocate to San Antonio.

But, let's remove the date limits anyway. I'll grant you that PJ and Riley are superior as coaches. Like PJ, Riley has spent his NBA life in LA, NY, and Miami. He wasn't ever coming to San Antonio, either.

You have repeatedly asserted that Pop's bad coaching has cost the Spurs multiple additional championships.

So beginning with Duncan's arrival in 1997, name a few coaches outside of PJ and Riley who would have led the Spurs to greater success in the Duncan era.

Waiting........

[hater]

saw him on the training vid a few days ago. Finley looks in damn good shape. he could be the most cut player on the Spurs

[mando6599]

“He is just as valuable as ever,” Popovich said. “There's no maybe about it. He's very valuable to us. He's a wonderful player; conscientious at both ends of the court. He shoots the basketball and is a great leader for us, on and off the court.”

I shoot the basketball too and I'll work for much less than Fin.

[Mel_13]

“He is just as valuable as ever,” Popovich said. “There's no maybe about it. He's very valuable to us. He's a wonderful player; conscientious at both ends of the court. [He shoots the basketball and is a great leader for us, on and off the court.”

I shoot the basketball too and I'll work for much less than Fin.

How did this work out for you?

http://www.nba.com/dleague/austin/Toros_to_Hold_Open_Tryouts-050927.html

[mando6599]

How did this work out for you?

http://www.nba.com/dleague/austin/Toros_to_Hold_Open_Tryouts-050927.html


My point being that that statement to me is ridiculous sounding. "He shoots the basketball"? So does everyone else on our team and Pop's not using that as a compliment for them, is he? Just seems silly, imo.

mando

[Mel_13]

My point being that that statement to me is ridiculous sounding. "He shoots the basketball"? So does everyone else on our team and Pop's not using that as a compliment for them, is he? Just seems silly, imo.

mando

Someone pointed a microphone in his face and asked a question about Finley. What was he supposed to say? To me, it was just typical coachspeak, imo. I wish Finley had not picked up his option and we could have just replaced him with a younger player, but for now he's a Spur. Whether Pop wants to play him or trade him, it is in the interest of the Spurs for all public comments to be positive ones.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

My point being that that statement to me is ridiculous sounding. "He shoots the basketball"? So does everyone else on our team and Pop's not using that as a compliment for them, is he? Just seems silly, imo.

mando

Haven't you ever listened to Pop interviews before?

[Mel_13]

Can't do it, can you?

And you keep bringing up PJ. You can't seriously think that:

1. The Spurs would demote/fire Pop after the 04-05 season

2. That the man who played in NY and coached in Chicago and LA would ever relocate to San Antonio.

But, let's remove the date limits anyway. I'll grant you that PJ and Riley are superior as coaches. Like PJ, Riley has spent his NBA life in LA, NY, and Miami. He wasn't ever coming to San Antonio, either.

You have repeatedly asserted that Pop's bad coaching has cost the Spurs multiple additional championships.

So beginning with Duncan's arrival in 1997, name a few coaches outside of PJ and Riley who would have led the Spurs to greater success in the Duncan era.

Waiting........

And Fabbs slinks away again, failing to deliver on his promise of a simple answer to a simple question.

Pop-hate: intact

Finley-hate: intact

Credibility: absent as ever

[benefactor]

lol Fabbs. Mel seems to be in the driver's seat...

http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/animations/y/you_got_owned-3471.gif

[portnoy1]

Someone pointed a microphone in his face and asked a question about Finley. What was he supposed to say? To me, it was just typical coachspeak, imo. I wish Finley had not picked up his option and we could have just replaced him with a younger player, but for now he's a Spur. Whether Pop wants to play him or trade him, it is in the interest of the Spurs for all public comments to be positive ones.
The spurs messed up when they resigned him after 07-08 cause it was 2 years and a player option ( mistake 1) with a no trade clause i believe ( mistake 2 ). So im not to sure if they can trade him, if they wanted to.

[Mel_13]

The spurs messed up when they resigned him after 07-08 cause it was 2 years and a player option ( mistake 1) with a no trade clause i believe ( mistake 2 ). So im not to sure if they can trade him, if they wanted to.


It was one year plus a one year option. He does not have a no-trade clause. He was not available to be traded from the end of the season until the date he made a decision on his option. He had until July 1, 2009 to make that decision. He had not made that decision as of June 24th when the RJ was made and was not available to be traded. Since he exercised his option he can now be traded all the way up to the league trade deadline in February.

[HarlemHeat37]

lol Fabbs. Mel seems to be in the driver's seat...

http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/animations/y/you_got_owned-3471.gif

that's a fucked up gif..

[anakha]

And Fabbs slinks away again, failing to deliver on his promise of a simple answer to a simple question.

Pop-hate: intact

Finley-hate: intact

Credibility: absent as ever

He's pretty much used up his brainpower for the day thinking up his newest names for Popovich, Finley, and everybody else who disagrees with him.

Expect an answer tomorrow instead.

[loveforthegame]

I don't believe the Spurs went out and spent the money on Jefferson just to continue giving Finley major minutes.

[Mel_13]

I don't believe the Spurs went out and spent the money on Jefferson just to continue giving Finley major minutes.

Absolutely. There's no way Finley takes minutes from Jefferson. He could, however, take them from Mason. If Mason regresses and Pop want to keep Manu on the bench, Finley could become the starting SG.

[Agloco]

Someone pointed a microphone in his face and asked a question about Finley. What was he supposed to say? To me, it was just typical coachspeak, imo. I wish Finley had not picked up his option and we could have just replaced him with a younger player, but for now he's a Spur. Whether Pop wants to play him or trade him, it is in the interest of the Spurs for all public comments to be positive ones.

Reluctant indeed.......

[The Truth #6]

Ultimately, the issue with Finley is an issue with Pop. It's not Finley's fault that his skills have deteriorated - that's inevitable with all players. Pop loves old veterans and seems to think they improve with age (like wine, perhaps?)

I can see how Finley's work ethic and professionalism are admirable, but it's not like we're the Jailblazers. It's not like the team is full of drug addicts and lazy prima donnas. The team, on the whole, is extremely professional so I'm curious how Finley's approach to the game is somehow leaps and bounds beyond his teammates.

Anyway - props to Finley for coming into camp in incredible shape. What's not to like about that. However, I'm tired of hearing how Pop treats all the players the same when he never scolds Finley for blowing defensive assignments, and is now doing his weird approach with Hill. This hot/cold treatment is not consistent with "treating everyone the same".

(A side question: was small ball an invention to get more minutes to Finley? I'm at least half-way serious. I realize the league was heading that way, but it's kind of dumb to play small players when they aren't very quick - that's kind of the worst of both worlds.)

Does this mean I'm throwing Pop under the bus like Fabbs? - absolutely not. However, Pop's special treatment of Finley, or at least what Finley "represents" to him, is symptomatic of Pop's distrust of youth and embrace of age. We did a youth movement THIS year. What about after 2007 when it was obvious that we got lucky to get to the Finals with that team? Even more lucky to limp to the WCF the next year, which speaks volumes to our 3 man team. Just imagine if the FO had made getting better a younger a priority a few years back?

Luckily, there is so much talent on this team this year that this Finley conversation can hopefully be a thing of the past.

[Obstructed_View]

With all the times Manu went from starting to the bench and back, I have no idea what point in which season you are referring to. Could you provide a little more detail, please. Thanks.

Here's how I remember it. Perhaps someone could help fill in the blanks.

The first time Manu was moved out of the starting lineup there was an outcry from some of the Argentine fans that Manu was being disrespected, but in fact it was either for the playoffs or for matchup reasons. I'm sure a search of the forums will find that information.

Manu's stint on the bench was very successful, but everyone accepted it as temporary, and Manu assumed his starting duties later on. Later on, with Barry and Manu and Finley all playing, there were fluctuations in the starting lineups for a while which prevented anyone from considering any one player a "starter". I think Manu was in the running for sixth man at an earlier time but wasn't the first guy off the bench consistently enough to earn the award.

I know it was discussed here at length when Finley put up fewer stinkers when starting that Pop's rationale for going ahead and making Manu the sixth man was motivated by Fin's production. Pop has always said that Manu's going to the bench was for "the good of the team" and we all know damn good and well it wasn't to improve Manu's production.

[Fabbs]

Does this mean I should be holding Pop accountable as all Spurs Nation should and Fabbs certainly encourages? - absolutely.
Fixed

[Obstructed_View]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/MYSA030107_01C_BKNspurs_ginobili_38416a4_html799.h tml


Makes OV's unoriginal opinion somewhat lackluster.

Actually it confirms much of what I said above. Thanks! :toast

EDIT: And by the way, if you go back and find those posts, it's not outside the realm of possibility that the opinion about Finley was arrived at through a discussion of many people. Sports isn't all that difficult; not many of the opinions are original.

[Mel_13]

Here's how I remember it. Perhaps someone could help fill in the blanks.

The first time Manu was moved out of the starting lineup there was an outcry from some of the Argentine fans that Manu was being disrespected, but in fact it was either for the playoffs or for matchup reasons. I'm sure a search of the forums will find that information.

Manu's stint on the bench was very successful, but everyone accepted it as temporary, and Manu assumed his starting duties later on. Later on, with Barry and Manu and Finley all playing, there were fluctuations in the starting lineups for a while which prevented anyone from considering any one player a "starter". I think Manu was in the running for sixth man at an earlier time but wasn't the first guy off the bench consistently enough to earn the award.

I know it was discussed here at length when Finley put up fewer stinkers when starting that Pop's rationale for going ahead and making Manu the sixth man was motivated by Fin's production. Pop has always said that Manu's going to the bench was for "the good of the team" and we all know damn good and well it wasn't to improve Manu's production.

Here are the facts with no commentary:

In 2005-06 Manu played in 65 games and started 56. The games he did not start were directly following his return from injuries. All 18 games that Finley started were in games that Manu missed or in the games directly after he returned from injury.

In 2006-07 Manu started 36 of the first 45 games. Finley started the other nine games which coincided with a Manu injury. The first time Manu was taken out of the starting line-up when he was healthy was the 46th game of the season on Jan 28, 2007. He was replaced in the starting line-up by Brent Barry, who would start the next 28 games until Barry went down with back spasms on April 1, 2007. Finley finished out the season as the starter. For the year Manu started 36 games, Barry 28, and Finley 16.

At no point in Finley's first two years was Manu sent to the bench to accomodate Finley.

05-06 starting line-ups:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2006_start.html

06-07 starting line-ups:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2007_start.html

[MaNu4Tres]

Actually it confirms much of what I said above. Thanks! :toast

EDIT: And by the way, if you go back and find those posts, it's not outside the realm of possibility that the opinion about Finley was arrived at through a discussion of many people. Sports isn't all that difficult; not many of the opinions are original.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/MYSA030107_01C_BKNspurs_ginobili_38416a4_html799.h tml

"It's probably a more potent attack night after night after night," Popovich said of Ginobili coming off the bench. "I think it makes our bench longer."

No where it states that it was made because Finley performs better as a starter.

As I said earlier in the thread:



If a player can play he can play. Finley's numbers have been quite consistent over the 4 years he's been here and his first two years he came off the bench for just about the whole year. At the same time, there were plenty of games where he started the past two years and played bad. If a player can play he can play. Whether its from the bench or starting, the results will be relative over the course of time as long as the minutes and opportunities are roughly the same.

[Mel_13]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/MYSA030107_01C_BKNspurs_ginobili_38416a4_html799.h tml

"It's probably a more potent attack night after night after night," Popovich said of Ginobili coming off the bench. "I think it makes our bench longer."

No where it states that it was made because Finley performs better as a starter.

As I said earlier in the thread:

Because Barry was the starter when that article was written.

[The Truth #6]

I remember one time (vs. Denver in the 05 playoffs?) Manu went to the bench to help avoid a falloff when the reserves came in (I'm looking at you Beno) and that was before Finley. However, I could be wrong about the year, because we always beat Denver in the playoffs so it's easy to get them confused.

Also, I'm not sure Finley is the only factor in play. I think Pop wisely realized that Manu stands around more than normal when Tony plays. They're both playmakers, so it's better for both of them to have the ball in their hand, so it's best if they split their time on the court, and then play together for "winning time."

Having said that, I do believe there was one moment at the end of one of the seasons where Pop moved Manu to the bench and put Finley in the starting lineup, and I seem to recall most interpreting the situation as a move to help kickstart Finley.

Basically, Pop has moved Manu in and out of the lineup for a variety of reasons, most of which we'll never know, and who knows if Pop even knows his motivations all the time. He likes things boring, but within that he likes to tweek things ever slightly.

[MaNu4Tres]

Because Barry was the starter when that article was written.

He was but Finley started some games before then even when Manu was injured and after.

Spurs got hot during that time and Spurs stuck with Barry for those two months as a starter. Which aids my claim that Finley does not suck coming off the bench. He played his first two years on the Spurs coming off the bench and put up similiar numbers he's put up the last two years starting. Fact is Finley had some bad games starting and some bad games from the bench. That will happen when touches are limited for a volume shooter regardless where he starts the game.




My main point was to explain to OV that the opinion of, "Finley sucking off the bench is the reason why Manu got moved to the bench for him" is laughable.

[ElNono]

My main point was to explain to OV that the opinion of, "Finley sucking off the bench is the reason why Manu got moved to the bench for him" is laughable.

While it's true it wasn't just Finley providing no punch off the bench, he was part of the problem, not the solution...

[MaNu4Tres]

Also, I'm not sure Finley is the only factor in play. I think Pop wisely realized that Manu stands around more than normal when Tony plays. They're both playmakers, so it's better for both of them to have the ball in their hand, so it's best if they split their time on the court, and then play together for "winning time."

Having said that, I do believe there was one moment at the end of one of the seasons where Pop moved Manu to the bench and put Finley in the starting lineup, and I seem to recall most interpreting the situation as a move to help kickstart Finley.

Basically, Pop has moved Manu in and out of the lineup for a variety of reasons, most of which we'll never know, and who knows if Pop even knows his motivations all the time. He likes things boring, but within that he likes to tweek things ever slightly.

Playing Tim, Manu, Tony together for 30 minutes on the floor would have been detrimental to the Spurs' overall 48 minute attack. It would have been off-balanced. To make it balanced Manu got moved to the bench especially when our role players got up in age from Jan. of 2007 to last year. Moving Manu to the bench let him not only see more touches when he's fresh, but also injected the bench with spark and energy ( something our role players simply didn't provide during this time).

It was more about the team's overall 48 minute balanced attack than one player.

[Obstructed_View]

Here are the facts with no commentary:

In 2005-06 Manu played in 65 games and started 56. The games he did not start were directly following his return from injuries. All 18 games that Finley started were in games that Manu missed or in the games directly after he returned from injury.

In 2006-07 Manu started 36 of the first 45 games. Finley started the other nine games which coincided with a Manu injury. The first time Manu was taken out of the starting line-up when he was healthy was the 46th game of the season on Jan 28, 2007. He was replaced in the starting line-up by Brent Barry, who would start the next 28 games until Barry went down with back spasms on April 1, 2007. Finley finished out the season as the starter. For the year Manu started 36 games, Barry 28, and Finley 16.

At no point in Finley's first two years was Manu sent to the bench to accomodate Finley.

05-06 starting line-ups:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2006_start.html

06-07 starting line-ups:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2007_start.html

Intellectually dishonest much?

Convenient that you just omit the fact that Manu started 23 games the following year while Finley started 61, which is probably when the decision was made. According to what's been posted in attempts to refute me or call me names, I'm correct about Ginobili going to the bench the first time so Hedo could start, as well as a revolving starting lineup after that featuring Ginobili, Barry and Finley.

You can pull up news articles from the wrong time frame all you want, but I was posting on Spurstalk at the time and that's the way I remember it. How about some mysanantonio.com articles from the 07-08 preseason when the decision was made to start Fin instead of Ginobili? I'm not trying to impugn Finley as a player, but I do remember the games where he was shooting much better as a starter than he was off the bench while the transition wasn't affecting Manu's game at all, which seems to be a logical factor in the decision.

And it certainly seems to be an awful lot of hand-wringing by some of you for a relatively throw-away comment, which is only confirmed by your poor memory of it.

[Mel_13]

Intellectually dishonest much?

Convenient that you just omit the fact that Manu started 23 games the following year while Finley started 61, which is probably when the decision was made. According to what's been posted in attempts to refute me or call me names, I'm correct about Ginobili going to the bench the first time so Hedo could start, as well as a revolving starting lineup after that featuring Ginobili, Barry and Finley.

You can pull up news articles from the wrong time frame all you want, but I was posting on Spurstalk at the time and that's the way I remember it. How about some mysanantonio.com articles from the 07-08 preseason when the decision was made to start Fin instead of Ginobili? I'm not trying to impugn Finley as a player, but I do remember the games where he was shooting much better as a starter than he was off the bench while the transition wasn't affecting Manu's game at all, which seems to be a logical factor in the decision.

And it certainly seems to be an awful lot of hand-wringing by some of you for a relatively throw-away comment, which is only confirmed by your poor memory of it.

Wow, you must have me confused with someone else. I asked you what season and what time frame you were referring to in an earlier post. Before you responded there was discussion by others about the Feb,2007 time frame. You responded to those posters as if that was indeed the time you meant. When you answered my question you still did not mention any season or time frame, but asked if someone had details. Since the only time frame you had attached yourself to in any way was during the 06-07 season, I detailed Finley's first two seasons which included that period of time. I never pulled any articles or criticized anyone's position on this. I certainly never called you names, although you now have responded as if I did.

I merely showed that Finley never started during first his two seasons except when replacing an injured player. That is simple fact. Nothing dishonest, intellectually or otherwise.

Now, after saying you couldn't recall which season or time frame, you provide detailed information about 07-08. I asked you to clarify a post. Had you answered with the information you now post here, I would have said thank you and moved on.

Read your post in post #96 and my response to it in post #99. If you still believe I was doing anything other than responding as completely as possible to your post, so be it. All I can do is assure you that whatever debates/conflicts/pissing contests you are having with some members of this board about this subject, I am not among that group.

[Obstructed_View]

Post 99 confirms my recollection in post 96, but then doesn't mention the "second time" Manu went back to sixth man for the following season that I aluded to. I'm well aware that Manu didn't go to the bench in place of Fin in his first two years. I must have assumed that you weren't satisfied with my recollection, which is why you chose to tell me something I already knew as though it were news.

If your incomplete "facts with no commentary" post was intended to confirm what I was saying rather than refute what I was saying, then I do apologize. I'd certainly hope that some of you that know how to search out posts and news articles from past years are actually trying to find information from the beginning of the 07-08 season.

[Mel_13]

Post 99 confirms my recollection in post 96, but then doesn't mention the "second time" Manu went back to sixth man for the following season that I aluded to. I'm well aware that Manu didn't go to the bench in place of Fin in his first two years. I must have assumed that you weren't satisfied with my recollection, which is why you chose to tell me something I already knew as though it were news.

If your incomplete "facts with no commentary" post was intended to confirm what I was saying rather than refute what I was saying, then I do apologize. I'd certainly hope that some of you that know how to search out posts and news articles from past years are actually trying to find information from the beginning of the 07-08 season.

We've now completed the circle. You used the words "second time" in your original post and here again. I could not tell what season or what time frame the "second time" was. Thus my simple question. Your answer never mentioned the 07-08 season. Thus my continued confusion. You referred, in your answer in post 96, to a period of time when Manu, Finley, and Barry were all playing and the line-up was changing. From that "allusion", I drew the conclusion that you were referring to 06-07 when Manu started 36, Barry 28, and Finley 16. It seemed to fit the words in your post. 07-08 when Barry only started one game did not seem to fit what you said in post 96. That is the only reason I did not include data for 07-08.

Again, if you had responded to my question as to what season you meant by the "second time" with an answer of 2007-08 I would have said thank you and moved on.

As to whether I was trying to confirm or refute something with the data posted. In the absence of an explicit answer to my question, I drew the best conclusion my modest deductive powers allowed me. As I have detailed above, I read your comments to mean that you referred to the 2006-2007 season. I posted the data I did to show that any position claiming Finley started ahead of Manu in 2006-2007 for any non-injury related reason was not supported by the facts.

You have now made it clear that you were referring to the 2007-2008 season. Thank you.

[Obstructed_View]

We've now completed the circle. You used the words "second time" in your original post and here again. I could not tell what season or what time frame the "second time" was. Thus my simple question. Your answer never mentioned the 07-08 season. Thus my continued confusion. You referred, in your answer in post 96, to a period of time when Manu, Finley, and Barry were all playing and the line-up was changing. From that "allusion", I drew the conclusion that you were referring to 06-07 when Manu started 36, Barry 28, and Finley 16. It seemed to fit the words in your post. 07-08 when Barry only started one game did not seem to fit what you said in post 96. That is the only reason I did not include data for 07-08.

Again, if you had responded to my question as to what season you meant by the "second time" with an answer of 2007-08 I would have said thank you and moved on.

As to whether I was trying to confirm or refute something with the data posted. In the absence of an explicit answer to my question, I drew the best conclusion my modest deductive powers allowed me. As I have detailed above, I read your comments to mean that you referred to the 2006-2007 season. I posted the data I did to show that any position claiming Finley started ahead of Manu in 2006-2007 for any non-injury related reason was not supported by the facts.

You have now made it clear that you were referring to the 2007-2008 season. Thank you.

And I aplogize for not making that clear immediately, as I wasn't exactly sure which season it was. Your post actually helped me put the pieces together to deduce that it must be the time-frame I was thinking of. Now to find out if there are any facts to support my original statement of if I just remember it incorrectly.

[Mel_13]

And I aplogize for not making that clear immediately, as I wasn't exactly sure which season it was. Your post actually helped me put the pieces together to deduce that it must be the time-frame I was thinking of. Now to find out if there are any facts to support my original statement of if I just remember it incorrectly.

It's all good.:toast

Good luck with advancing your position.

[Obstructed_View]

It's all good.:toast

Good luck with advancing your position.

Yeah, I'm gonna need it. My searching skills on Spurstalk and mysanantonio.com are for shit.

[Fabbs]

lol Fabbs. Mel seems to be in the driver's seat...

http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/animations/y/you_got_owned-3471.gif


And Fabbs slinks away again, failing to deliver on his promise of a simple answer to a simple question.

Pop-hate: intact

Finley-hate: intact

Credibility: absent as ever
You gals from The View confuse my
a. ignoring you
or
b. being busy as i was attending the San Diego Chargers getting worked again with coach Greg Pop, i mean Norv Turner at the helm.


And you keep bringing up PJ. You can't seriously think that:

1. The Spurs would demote/fire Pop after the 04-05 season

2. That the man who played in NY and coached in Chicago and LA would ever relocate to San Antonio.

But, let's remove the date limits anyway. I'll grant you that PJ and Riley are superior as coaches. Like PJ, Riley has spent his NBA life in LA, NY, and Miami. He wasn't ever coming to San Antonio, either.

You have repeatedly asserted that Pop's bad coaching has cost the Spurs multiple additional championships.

So beginning with Duncan's arrival in 1997, name a few coaches outside of PJ and Riley who would have led the Spurs to greater success in the Duncan era.
Ah this is progress. You've removed the silly dateline restrictions. Now you have admitted Phil J and Riles would be better. Excellente . Those two are my first choices.

As to Riley and Phil J "never coming to San Antonio ever", assumes facts not in evidence. Two years ago would you say Brett Favre would be QBing the Vikings to a win over Green Bay and a 6-0 record? After Phil left the Flamers and punk ass Kobme whined about him and tattled on Shaq, did you ever see those two remarrying (well in LA that kind of plastic is believeable, but still).
When Paul Westhead coached the Lakers to a title, did you think he would get run a season and 1/10th later when Magic pouted about Norm Nixon? And after the Celtics won in '86 with one of the greatest of all time teams and were primed to repeat then threepeat, did you envision Lenny Bias dying, the '86 West champs Houston being stripped of its two guards by Laker Stern, then as a finale in midseason the then Spurs owner trading Michelle Thompsan an athletic PF/SF which is just what the Flamers needed, for Kwame Brown?

So never say never. Phil J is an opportunist and so is Riles. The thought of winning repeat championships with prime Timmy Dunkar, GNob, Parker, Bowen as a real core and others as great help (DRob, Super Stevie Kerr, Naza-Fab on and on) was certainly a possibility. If i hadn't already had either Phil J or Riles on board, i would certainly have made Phil an offer after 2004. Phil J or Riles would have certainly paid Lewie Scola and told Holt to pay or bail. Also would have taken Josh Howard, altho that was not Poops fault.

The 2006 Spurs just put in any available unemployed NBA coach or assistant. Go and read the thread on "Finley Joins Spurs" to see how many predicted NBA title, maybe even you posted on the thread. Not only PopnFins like T_Pork but even solid posters like Aggie Hoops had the Spurs at 70 wins. Of course Aggie had no idea Popped would do what he did with his affair with Finley and shriveling small balls strategy.

[Mel_13]

You gals from The View confuse my
a. ignoring you
or
b. being busy as i was attending the San Diego Chargers getting worked again with coach Greg Pop, i mean Norv Turner at the helm.


Ah this is progress. You've removed the silly dateline restrictions. Now you have admitted Phil J and Riles would be better. Excellente . Those two are my first choices.

As to Riley and Phil J "never coming to San Antonio ever", assumes facts not in evidence. Two years ago would you say Brett Favre would be QBing the Vikings to a win over Green Bay and a 6-0 record? After Phil left the Flamers and punk ass Kobme whined about him and tattled on Shaq, did you ever see those two remarrying (well in LA that kind of plastic is believeable, but still).
When Paul Westhead coached the Lakers to a title, did you think he would get run a season and 1/10th later when Magic pouted about Norm Nixon? And after the Celtics won in '86 with one of the greatest of all time teams and were primed to repeat then threepeat, did you envision Lenny Bias dying, the '86 West champs Houston being stripped of its two guards by Laker Stern, then as a finale in midseason the then Spurs owner trading Michelle Thompsan an athletic PF/SF which is just what the Flamers needed, for Kwame Brown?

So never say never. Phil J is an opportunist and so is Riles. The thought of winning repeat championships with prime Timmy Dunkar, GNob, Parker, Bowen as a real core and others as great help (DRob, Super Stevie Kerr, Naza-Fab on and on) was certainly a possibility. If i hadn't already had either Phil J or Riles on board, i would certainly have made Phil an offer after 2004. Phil J or Riles would have certainly paid Lewie Scola and told Holt to pay or bail. Also would have taken Josh Howard, altho that was not Poops fault.

The 2006 Spurs just put in any available unemployed NBA coach or assistant. Go and read the thread on "Finley Joins Spurs" to see how many predicted NBA title, maybe even you posted on the thread. Not only PopnFins like T_Pork but even solid posters like Aggie Hoops had the Spurs at 70 wins. Of course Aggie had no idea Popped would do what he did with his affair with Finley and shriveling small balls strategy.

So to sum up your current position:

1. PJ and Riley are better than Pop.

2. In 2006, Pop was the worst NBA coach possible to lead the Spurs. Any available coach would have been better.

3. You still have not provided any names other than PJ or Riley of coaches who would have had more success with the Spurs during the Duncan Era than Pop.

4. You are making incremental progress, so congratulations for that. Keep trying.

[anakha]

:lmao

4 paragraphs and still avoided answering the question.

[Agloco]

The truth is, i want to know why am i limited to May 23, 2006 and thereafter?
Yeah i would have run Popped sooner if he refused his proper demotion to defensive coach.
Because i believe Phil J would have heavily considered the Spurs after Kobme got him ran. Which is not to say i can't and won't come up with 20 more choices.

We appear to have plenty of time......

Fire away.

[Fabbs]

So to sum up your current position:

1. PJ and Riley are better than Pop.

2. In 2006, Pop was the worst NBA coach possible to lead the Spurs. Any available coach would have been better.

3. You still have not provided any names other than PJ or Riley of coaches who would have had more success with the Spurs during the Duncan Era than Pop.

4. You are making incremental progress, so congratulations for that. Keep trying.
1. Yes. Yes they are.

2. Well there could have been some closet NBA coach or assistant coach who also had a man crush on Finley and small balls strategy that would've gotten worked by rookie coach Avery Johnson. I'm not that familiar with that aspect of the NBA.

3. When i hired Riles or Phil we went on a 4 of 5 run. Didn't need to replace them. Nonetheless I'll give you names.

4. I am making progress with you. Excellent!

[Mel_13]

Nonetheless I'll give you names.

Yet another day.

Yet another convoluted, non-responsive post.

Still no answer.

Still waiting.

[Mel_13]

Which is not to say i can't and won't come up with 20 more choices.



Nonetheless I'll give you names.

Still waiting.......

[PUPPETMASTER]

Finley = unpredictable

[Mel_13]

Which is not to say i can't and won't come up with 20 more choices.



Nonetheless I'll give you names.

Still waiting.......

[benefactor]

:lol

[Mel_13]

Which is not to say i can't and won't come up with 20 more choices.



Nonetheless I'll give you names.

Still waiting.......

Thread to be bumped whenever Fabbs posts in Spurs Forum without providing promised answer.

[Baseline]

Trade Finley at the deadline. Maybe we can package him with Mahinmi for a decent big.

[EricB]

Trade Finley at the deadline. Maybe we can package him with Mahinmi for a decent big.

Yeah cause the Spurs have 0 bigs.

[EricB]

I too would like to see this list of mythical 20.

[EricB]

Still waiting.

[benefactor]

lol Fabbs

[benefactor]

We've needed a new forum whipping boy since KBP got banned.

Fabbs...you're hired.

[EricB]

He's avoiding this thread like the plague.

[EricB]

Waiting.....

[EricB]

Still waiting...

[EricB]

Waiting on that list Fabbs.

Were waiting.

[Fabbs]

http://giftsallindia.com/images/prodimg/large/GW937_1lg.jpg

[EricB]

Thats not a list.

Wheres the list.

[EricB]

Waiting for the list of 20 Fabbs.

[Mel_13]

Fabbs back again with yet another ridiculous, nonsensical thread. As to an actual answer to the question posed here, as he promised so longer ago, just pictures of his favorite snack.

Predictably weak.

Predictably laughable.



Which is not to say i can't and won't come up with 20 more choices.



Nonetheless I'll give you names.

Still waiting.......

[Fabbs]

http://dionsdailydeal.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/snickers1.jpg

[Mel_13]

So you've decided to proudly don the mantle of Village Idiot.

Enjoy

[Obstructed_View]

So you've decided to proudly don the mantle of Village Idiot.

Enjoy

He's worn that from his first thread where he kept posting the picture of the comic book guy from The Simpsons over and over because people were pointing out how factually incorrect and stupid he was.

[EricB]

so Fabbs is now the new KBP

awesome way to fall that far pappy. :lmao

[EricB]

Still waiting on that list of 20 Fabbs the fucktard.

[Fabbs]

It's coming.
Many more then 20 too.
http://thesunnah.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/snickers.jpg

[EricB]

You said you had it.

lets see it.

Produce it now or STFU forever.

[Fabbs]

T_Park and The View Gals,
Sorry about being late. Isp connection probs yesterday, the promised day.

Pat Riles
Phil Jackson
Fabbs
Bill Russell
John Wooden
Tim Duncan
Bruce Bowen
Manu GNob
Bob Horry
Billy Walton
Ben Howland
Hakeem O
Aggie Hoops Fan
Tom Thibodeau
Tim Grgurich
Rick Carlisle
Jerry Sloan
Nate McMillan
Rick Adleman
Doug Moe