PDA

View Full Version : Alamo Woes: These new-look San Antonio Spurs getting lost in transition



duncan228
12-26-2009, 04:29 PM
http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/12/26/amd_mitch_duncan.jpg
Tim Duncan still nets 20 points most nights, but the Spurs no longer are an elite team.

Alamo Woes: These new-look San Antonio Spurs getting lost in transition (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/2009/12/26/2009-12-26_alamo_woes.html)
Mitch Lawrence
NY Daily News

With six trips to the Finals and four titles starting in 2000, the Lakers are the obvious pick for the team of the decade.

No team comes close to what the Lakers accomplished, and that includes the Spurs, the only other team in the conversation.

But the great Spurs teams from earlier in the decade and the one that comes to the Garden Sunday night to play the Knicks couldn't be more different.

"The real bottom line is we're still an inconsistent team, and we have a long way to go," coach Gregg Popovich said the other day. "It's great to see we have character, and we're going to keep fighting, but that's not going to be good enough against the big boys."

Not so long ago, the Spurs were the NBA's big boys, winning titles in 1999, 2003, 2005 and 2007.

The only big boys in the West now are the Lakers, and maybe the Nuggets if Chauncey Billups can stay healthy the rest of the way.

The Spurs are no better than second-tier material. They entered the weekend with a ho-hum 15-11 record and have lost five straight games against teams with winning records since defeating the Rockets on Nov. 27.

All told, they're 2-10 against teams with winning records.

Just a few seasons ago, that record was reversed. So they haven't exactly measured up to the big boys and even teams that won't be around in June. But they'll get the Lakers on Jan. 12, the first time they'll play the defending champs. After the new year, they'll also play Cleveland and Orlando for the first time this season. So let's see how they do.

But even with their winning record, the Spurs haven't been fooled by how 13 of their 15 wins have come against teams that are headed for the lottery.

"We're trying to turn the corner," Tim Duncan said after a recent win at Golden State. "But we've got to start beating some of the more elite teams before we say we have turned it."

Duncan, approaching 34, is still a force in his 13th season. He still gets his 20 points and 10 rebounds and two blocks a game, even if he's no longer the same, fierce defender at the rim.

But Manu Ginobili, who changed plenty of playoff and Finals games during the '05 and '07 title drives with his forays to the basket and clutch foul shots, is a shadow of himself. His contract expires this summer, but he's no longer mentioned as a blue-chip free agent. Tony Parker is again playing as if he just got off the plane from Paris. Three new starters, including former Net Richard Jefferson, are having their ups and downs trying to adjust to a new system.

"It's not like we're getting blown out of these games," Jefferson said the other night from San Antonio, before the Spurs lost to a Portland team that didn't have Brandon Roy and Joel Przybilla. "We've been right there a lot."

But being "right there" is not what made the Spurs a dominant team in the decade. Nor is it what made them the league's model franchise. Look around the NBA and a couple of former Spurs executives are running franchises: Danny Ferry in Cleveland and Sam Presti in Oklahoma City.

They were hired because they came from an organization that spent money wisely, didn't exceed the salary cap, made shrewd trades and had great success always drafting late in the first round.

But since winning the title against LeBron James in 2007, the Spurs failed to get out of the second round in 2008, and then last spring couldn't get out of the first round for the first time since 2000, when they didn't have Duncan for the postseason.

With the clock running on Duncan's career, they decided to do a makeover last summer and give their Hall of Fame center his final shot at winning a fifth ring. They made the deal with the Bucks for Jefferson to give them a desperately needed athlete on the perimeter; signed Antonio McDyess to add size to the frontcourt; imported another starter, Keith Bogans; and drafted DeJuan Blair for more frontcourt bulk.

But the way the season has started, it looks like Jefferson arrived in the Alamo City about five years too late to cash in on a ring.

"But I think the window for us is a little bigger than people think," he said. "I think it's a good two-three years for us. You have to understand our situation, with three new starters and some young guys who are learning the system. Now compare that to Denver, who has been together for a few seasons. Boston has been together for a couple of seasons. Same with Utah."

Jefferson could have added the Lakers, who became a championship team again when they stole Pau Gasol from Memphis two seasons ago.

"I'm not using it as an excuse, but all those teams have been together longer than we have," Jefferson said. "So they have a higher rate of understanding of what they're doing and how to accomplish things. We're still learning. For us, we've got to get to March and April before we understand what we're doing."

By then, the Spurs will know if Duncan is still playing with the same energy and at the same all-NBA level that he's had in the first quarter of the season. They'll see if someone can give them the creativity and explosion to get to the basket that Ginobili once provided, but, due physical limitations, can't do now. They'll see if Parker has gone back to figuring out how to play like a playmaker, instead of a scoring point guard.

If everything comes together, the Spurs can get back to being one of the big boys. If not, the window Jefferson talked about being open for the next two or three years might well be shut.

Cant_Be_Faded
12-26-2009, 04:37 PM
All told, they're 2-10 against teams with winning records.

But it's only December!


[/era]

DPG21920
12-26-2009, 04:54 PM
I don't even really care about +.500 teams in general. I care about the Spurs beating teams that have a legit shot to win. Going into the playoffs, I want to see the Spurs record against:

Lakers
Boston
Orlando
Denver
Dallas
Atlanta


If the Spurs record against those teams is favorable, I would be happy. But there is a long way to go before that is a possibility.

alchemist
12-26-2009, 04:56 PM
good ol' copy & paste gloom and doom articles with minor changes :wakeup

mingus
12-26-2009, 05:27 PM
i don't understand why so many people are worried about how the season has gone so far. past Spurs' teams have always gotten off to slow starts, and that's with way less player changes that they had to deal with. with as much change as this team has to do with things have gone as they should. it's going to be a slower process than usual. but keep this in mind: Pop and Duncan-led teams have always entered the playoffs playing the best ball, or close to the best ball, they possibly could, health permitting. it's been like clockwork year-in-year-out, and i expect that trend will continue. there's light at the end of the tunnel.

:flag:

DPG21920
12-26-2009, 05:30 PM
They have not always gotten off to slow starts such as this. Also, there is legit reasons for concerns unlike before because coming into the season there were many questions that needed an answer. So far, those answers have almost all been answered negatively.

mingus
12-26-2009, 05:34 PM
They have not always gotten off to slow starts such as this. Also, there is legit reasons for concerns unlike before because coming into the season there were many questions that needed an answer. So far, those answers have almost all been answered negatively.

you're misconstruing what i said. i justified the slower start by saying it's a very new team. there's new pieces to the puzzle, but the same two people in charge of maiking them fit - Duncan and Pop - are still here, and they've done a decent job of it in the past.

HarlemHeat37
12-26-2009, 05:53 PM
This was a good article, obviously a NY article, that actually acknowledges the Spurs struggles being more based on the poor play of Parker and Ginobili, as opposed to strictly blaming "chemistry" and new players..the latter has obviously had a part, but Manu and Tony's struggles are clearly the main problem IMO..

alchemist
12-26-2009, 06:04 PM
This was a good article, obviously a NY article, that actually acknowledges the Spurs struggles being more based on the poor play of Parker and Ginobili, as opposed to strictly blaming "chemistry" and new players..the latter has obviously had a part, but Manu and Tony's struggles are clearly the main problem IMO..
the article isn't good, considering someone got payed to write it makes it a bit worse.

Fabbs
12-26-2009, 06:09 PM
"The real bottom line is we're still an inconsistent team, and we have a long way to go," coach Gregg Popovich said the other day. "It's great to see we have character, and we're going to keep fighting, but that's not going to be good enough against the big boys."
what character? :lol


Jefferson could have added the Lakers, who became a championship team again when they stole Pau Gasol from Memphis two seasons ago.

"I'm not using it as an excuse, but all those teams have been together longer than we have," Jefferson said. "So they have a higher rate of understanding of what they're doing and how to accomplish things. We're still learning. For us, we've got to get to March and April before we understand what we're doing."

"Im not using it as an excuse, but I'm just using it as an excuse."

Pauleta14
12-26-2009, 06:28 PM
"Tony Parker is again playing as if he just got off the plane from Paris."

"They'll see if Parker has gone back to figuring out how to play like a playmaker, instead of a scoring point guard."


ouch! :lol

Gutter92
12-26-2009, 06:31 PM
and here i thought we made the WCF in '08

wijayas
12-26-2009, 08:40 PM
But since winning the title against LeBron James in 2007, the Spurs failed to get out of the second round in 2008, and then last spring couldn't get out of the first round for the first time since 2000, when they didn't have Duncan for the postseason.

I'm just stating the obvious here: we got past the Hornets in the second round in 2008 but got blown by the Lakers in the WCF.

senorglory
12-27-2009, 06:58 AM
I don't follow the logic of this article. Because the Spurs suck this year (per article), they can't legitimately be considered for team of the decade status? Isn't the point of 'team of the decade' to take a long view, as opposed to 'what have you done for me lately?' freakin' nydailynonsense.

TIMMYD!
12-27-2009, 11:50 AM
People who aren't from San Antonio and don't follow every game shouldn't really be writing things about other teams...

Leetonidas
12-27-2009, 11:59 AM
and here i thought we made the WCF in '08

Me too.:lmao

anonoftheinternets
12-27-2009, 12:32 PM
terrible article.

Balance
12-27-2009, 01:28 PM
It looks like there is nothing new or interesting to say about the Spurs.

People should stop complaining and whining about San Antonio not being a contender anymore and watch their games like a Rockets, Suns or Blazers fan should - you may know your team doesn't have a chance but you can still look for the few things that make this game so great. Like watching Tim Duncan as dominant as ever, or the rookie with no ACL but lots of talent, or even the few sparking moments of Manu Ginobili - and I'm talking about basketball, not bats.