One Simple Request

[Blackjack]

These games are just uninspiring and mind-numbing. For the life of me, I just can't grasp what the hell Pop's really trying to do . . .

He's not tanking, as Tim and Manu are still out there busting their ass and Tony's been playing hurt up until today. But he's not trying to win, as he's never given the team and players any type of consistency to build anything fruitful.

Meanwhile, Keith Bogans continues to get his minutes and Hairston (the guy who outplayed him and, for all intents and purposes, beat him out for the job) can't even sniff the action -- Mahinmi was given up upon before being given the opportunity to be given up on (his option wasn't picked up, so allowing him to help or be useful for the time he's here just doesn't make sense ... right?).

This team's flawed; has been since Day 1. I never happened to drink the Kool-Aid that this team had what it took to win a championship with this group, or that RJ possessed the type of game to really propel the Spurs to the next level. The Spurs have won with a consistent formula consisting of particular types of players filling particular, specialized roles, and they didn't replenish those requisite facets/needs with the right people -- Bowen, Horry, Barry and serviceable 7-footers aren't made up for by Bogans, Bonner, Mason and a plethora of wings 6-7 or below manning the middle for an aging Tim.

So if I understood that going into the season and many others did as well, surely Pop and the crew knew they had some work to do. I mean, I know they were hopeful and optimistic (and they had reason to believe this team could be one or two, right, moves away from capturing another title), but they couldn't have been blind or ignorant of their reality, right?

And that was the outlook and hope for this presently constructed team given good health . . .

They haven't been healthy, and they still haven't filled those integral roles for their championship formula -- what's ensued has been predictable (to an extent; no one could see this clusterfuck of circumstance) and woefully below their standard. So the fact that they're not in the championship discussion is more frustrating and depressing than surprising.

Surprising is the thought process and rationale we've come to expect from Coach Pop. I've never witnessed a year, with him at the helm, that lacked as much discipline and consistency as this one. There's just no reasonable end-game to the logic or payoff for the madness -- it's simply throwing shit against the wall and seeing what sticks (he's acquiesced to the point of losing his core, proven principles. Only the flesh he inhabits suggests he's the man that's guided this team to four titles).

So I accepted this team's fate a good while ago and have been bearing witness to their games more than living or dying with each win or loss -- even lowered expectation can't prevent the empty feeling these outcomes bring, though. (Watching Tim play at this level and knowing that it's not promised for next year, just makes you sick to the stomach.) But watching Hill and Blair grow has been a bit of a saving grace. A glimmer of hope moving forward, at least.

This all-in bet the team placed was for a two-year window, and it could still be cashed in. They'd have to make some great, shrewd and smart moves, but, theoretically, it could be done. So if this team's going nowhere this year and the health of Tim, Tony and/or Manu is paramount moving forward, it's time for the team to start gearing up for next year. Allow the young guys to play through mistakes, evaluate them, maybe take a flier on a D-Leaguer or someone of that ilk, and bury Bogans, Finley and Mason on the bench -- see if you have or can find the perimeter defender needed and/or a cheap supporting cast member for next year.

Again, give me a light at the end of the tunnel, a reason to look forward to the game and, just maybe, a glimmer of hope.

That's all I ask.

[FeZZy]

:toast

[TD 21]

This team's flawed; has been since Day 1. I never happened to drink the Kool-Aid that this team had what it took to win a championship with this group, or that RJ possessed the type of game to really propel the Spurs to the next level. The Spurs have won with a consistent formula consisting of particular types of players filling particular, specialized roles, and they didn't replenish those requisite facets/needs with the right people -- Bowen, Horry, Barry and serviceable 7-footers aren't made up for by Bogans, Bonner, Mason and a plethora of wings 6-7 or below manning the middle for an aging Tim.

So if I understood that going into the season and many others did as well, surely Pop and the crew knew they had some work to do. I mean, I know they were hopeful and optimistic (and they had reason to believe this team could be one or two, right, moves away from capturing another title), but they couldn't have been blind or ignorant of their reality, right?

And that was the outlook and hope for this presently constructed team given good health . . .

They haven't been healthy, and they still haven't filled those integral roles for their championship formula -- what's ensued has been predictable (to an extent; no one could see this clusterfuck of circumstance) and woefully below their standard. So the fact that they're not in the championship discussion is more frustrating and depressing than surprising.

Here's what many people have failed to realize: Bowen and Horry are irreplaceable. No, they weren't Hall-of-Famers or even All-Stars, but they were two of the best role players of all-time and they fit this team, both on the court and the culture of the team, to a tee. So it's easy to say "they haven't replaced Bowen, Horry (and to a lesser extent, Barry)", but honestly, they couldn't/can't.

What they could have done is brought in a legit wing stopper, instead of masquerading Udoka 2.0 as one. They also could have brought in a combo forward who can guard mobile four's, instead of using a multitude of options to do that, all of which are unappealing and ineffective. But still, nobody they could have realistically brought in would have replaced the "corporate knowledge" of Bowen/Horry.

I agree, though, that the Spurs need to find out what they have with Mahinmi/Hairston. Bring in an Almond now, find out what he can do. Don't wait until next season and have the same questions with regards to Hairston, or think about the latest one that got away, in Mahinmi (I doubt he makes a Scola level impact and don't get me wrong, I wanted Udrih gone too, but he, like Udrih, could very well show he's a capable rotation player), or wonder "is Almond (insert any D-Leaguer's name you want) an NBA player/fit on this team?". They need to find all of that out now.

If I'm the front office, I'm already planning for next season. Unfortunately, their two biggest needs: wing stopper and athletic, shot blocking man, are likely to go unfilled. Unless you consider Bell or someone of that ilk the answer to the former and Splitter the answer to the latter.

Like I said in the "building for the future" thread, I'm guessing Ginobili and Hairston are re-signed and Splitter, Bell, Cook and Almond are signed, which leaves the 1st round pick (I'd assume it'll be an SF or a SF/PF) and third PG left. Is that a championship caliber team? Unless Splitter makes a fairly sizable impact and Bell finds the fountain of youth, it isn't. The others? Filler/cheap replacements for the players likely to depart.

[Sean Cagney]

Some are saying this and that, but forget about 6'9 athletic Gist who can board and shoot too! I bring him in next year and Splitter, play Hairston and Ian now and get ready for next year, they can be a key to a title run! These older role guys are not working, it's clear as day. Let Mason go, let Finley go, Let Bonner GO! Get some new guys in here and let them play now or early next year! The future can still bring another title, but this team now is taxed.

[TD 21]

Some are saying this and that, but forget about 6'9 athletic Gist who can board and shoot too! I bring him in next year and Splitter, play Hairston and Ian now and get ready for next year, they can be a key to a title run! These older role guys are not working, it's clear as day. Let Mason go, let Finley go, Let Bonner GO! Get some new guys in here and let them play now or early next year! The future can still bring another title, but this team now is taxed.

Did you watch Gist in the '09 summer league? He was one of the worst players on the team and like McClinton, didn't look like anything resembling an NBA player. Sure, he has the physical tools, but that's not enough. Even before that, Gist was a fringe prospect and a long shot to be a long term NBA player. Hairston and Mahinmi I'm intrigued with and think both could be rotation players in the NBA, but neither will ever be a "key to a title run!". It's going to take myriad things, all more profound than throwing a bunch of random young, athletic players on the court, to get this team back to being a championship caliber team.

[LongtimeSpursFan]

Here's what many people have failed to realize: Bowen and Horry are irreplaceable. No, they weren't Hall-of-Famers or even All-Stars, but they were two of the best role players of all-time and they fit this team, both on the court and the culture of the team, to a tee. So it's easy to say "they haven't replaced Bowen, Horry (and to a lesser extent, Barry)", but honestly, they couldn't/can't.

What they could have done is brought in a legit wing stopper, instead of masquerading Udoka 2.0 as one. They also could have brought in a combo forward who can guard mobile four's, instead of using a multitude of options to do that, all of which are unappealing and ineffective. But still, nobody they could have realistically brought in would have replaced the "corporate knowledge" of Bowen/Horry.

I agree, though, that the Spurs need to find out what they have with Mahinmi/Hairston. Bring in an Almond now, find out what he can do. Don't wait until next season and have the same questions with regards to Hairston, or think about the latest one that got away, in Mahinmi (I doubt he makes a Scola level impact and don't get me wrong, I wanted Udrih gone too, but he, like Udrih, could very well show he's a capable rotation player), or wonder "is Almond (insert any D-Leaguer's name you want) an NBA player/fit on this team?". They need to find all of that out now.

If I'm the front office, I'm already planning for next season. Unfortunately, their two biggest needs: wing stopper and athletic, shot blocking man, are likely to go unfilled. Unless you consider Bell or someone of that ilk the answer to the former and Splitter the answer to the latter.

Like I said in the "building for the future" thread, I'm guessing Ginobili and Hairston are re-signed and Splitter, Bell, Cook and Almond are signed, which leaves the 1st round pick (I'd assume it'll be an SF or a SF/PF) and third PG left. Is that a championship caliber team? Unless Splitter makes a fairly sizable impact and Bell finds the fountain of youth, it isn't. The others? Filler/cheap replacements for the players likely to depart.

You want to play Hairston/Mahinmi or D-League players when Spurs are trying to make the playoffs? Do you know what would happen if Pop did this and they fall to 9th or 10th place? Good God! Fans need to realize the grass is not always greener on the other side of the mountain. If Hairston or Mahinmi wants to play let them earn a spot by showing it in practice. Putting these two out there 'so we can see what they can do' is something no coach would do during a regular season game.

[spurs10]

Tonight Tim, Manu, and Dice scored 67 pts. Add Hill in there and we break 80. It is quite clear that our additional role players are where we are falling short. As Detroit killed us on offensive rebounds, you couldn't help but wonder why a 7-foot shot blocker continues to ride the bench and why for much of the period where the game was lost (despite Manu's heroics) nobody over 6'7 was on the floor.
OK Thunder is going to be a tough one. I hope somebody in our locker room has some kind of plan.

[TD 21]

You want to play Hairston/Mahinmi or D-League players when Spurs are trying to make the playoffs? Do you know what would happen if Pop did this and they fall to 9th or 10th place? Good God! Fans need to realize the grass is not always greener on the other side of the mountain. If Hairston or Mahinmi wants to play let them earn a spot by showing it in practice. Putting these two out there 'so we can see what they can do' is something no coach would do during a regular season game.

Right, because Hairston/Mahinmi, because they don't play, that automatically means they're worse than Bonner/Bogans. Who cares if they get 7th or 8th and get embarrassed by the Lakers or Nuggets in the first round or get 9th or 10th and don't make the playoffs? Unless you're Holt (or just trying to be technical), there is no difference.

Hairston clearly earned a spot with his play in summer league/training camp/preseason, yet when the real games started, Bogans was mysteriously ahead of him in the rotation. Why? Because he's a veteran NBA player, which automatically means, in Pop's mind, that he's better.

Something no coach would do? You obviously don't follow the NBA very closely. Let me give you an example: the Pacers benched Ford, a proven NBA player in the prime of his career making $8 million a season, for Price, an unproven late 2nd round pick and why? Because they wanted to find out, in a lost season, if Price is an NBA player and if he could help them going forward.

[MannyIsGod]

The most frustrating aspect of this season to date is how Pop seems hell bent on winning his way or not at all. The chances this team wins a championship are very small but the chances of this team winning a championship with Keith Bogans playing meaningful minutes are non existent. He's an incredibly below average NBA player and should not be used or viewed as anything more.

Pop needs to start Richard Jefferson and he needs to start McDyess and he needs to play the players on this team with the highest ceilings. That means that he's going to have to settle on a rotation and that on some nights players in that rotation will not do as well as others or make mistakes but that shouldn't mean a knee jerk lineup change. The Spurs are who they are and at this point the best approach to take is a hands off approach.

The micromanaging of this team reeks over Pop's lack of humility. The man acts as if he can make something happen by tinkering with every aspect of the rotation but all that ends up happening is players have lost confidence or have become more mired in quicksand than ever.

The Spurs are who they are and if these talented players are going to figure out how to play with each other in an effective manner then they're going to do it through extended playing time and not because of some new lineup Pop has come up with. Its time to play the most talented players on the team and its time to let them figure things out for themselves.


PS Never play Bogans again. Not if you're down to 5 players. Keep him on the bench and deal with the technicals. Seriously.

[Blackjack]

Here's what many people have failed to realize: Bowen and Horry are irreplaceable. No, they weren't Hall-of-Famers or even All-Stars, but they were two of the best role players of all-time and they fit this team, both on the court and the culture of the team, to a tee. So it's easy to say "they haven't replaced Bowen, Horry (and to a lesser extent, Barry)", but honestly, they couldn't/can't.

No, you're never going to replace the Horry's and Bowen's of the world with an equal, identical player. But it's not about finding their carbon copy. You're looking to find comparable skill sets and character that can become a working part of the needed supporting cast -- a different build, personality or area of expertise, there's nothing wrong with that.

So it's not that they haven't found someone with Horry's clutch shot-making and intelligence as a stretch 4 or that they haven't replaced the relentless, tireless, and lockdown defender Bruce was for years ... it's that they attempted to address each respective loss with players that had neither the tools, acumen or ability to even approximate those two's contribution -- if you can't address something adequately, it's an effort in futility to find close enough and hope for the best.

In other words, don't prevent yourself from finding the next Horry (as it pertains to the team) by thinking he can't look more like Haslem -- chasing the perfect mold, almost always nets an inferior player to fill it.


What they could have done is brought in a legit wing stopper, instead of masquerading Udoka 2.0 as one. They also could have brought in a combo forward who can guard mobile four's, instead of using a multitude of options to do that, all of which are unappealing and ineffective. But still, nobody they could have realistically brought in would have replaced the "corporate knowledge" of Bowen/Horry.

Agree. And as it pertains to the corporate knowledge, you're right. They couldn't have brought anyone in to replace it as if it were something tangible. But you've got to attempt to bring in the type of player that's capable of acquiring and utilizing it effectively. You can't simply do without.

A championship-caliber supporting cast can come in all shapes, sizes and skill sets (as long as they're in compliment to the stars), but there's a common thread with which they're made up and of the character they possess.

Obviously, the amount of help the Big 3 needs is greater than it's ever been and changed as their effectiveness has waned -- there's no guarantee that the complimentary player of yesteryear has the same effect or benefits as they would've in the past, nowadays. But there's no doubt that without the right supporting cast, a championship's out of the question -- they're out there to be molded in theory, but theories are often left empty.

There's no getting around needing the right players to win it all, which is why so few ever get the opportunity.


If I'm the front office, I'm already planning for next season. Unfortunately, their two biggest needs: wing stopper and athletic, shot blocking man, are likely to go unfilled. Unless you consider Bell or someone of that ilk the answer to the former and Splitter the answer to the latter.

Well, they've got Hairston and Mahinmi in the fold (which would seem a decent pair to evaluate for the suggested roles), but it's become pretty clear that the latter, for whatever reason, isn't in their plans. There's no reason Hairston shouldn't be given Bogans minutes and the opportunity to prove his worth moving forward, though. And, no, I wouldn't view Bell as the answer on the wing or a position defender like Splitter becoming an athletic, shot-blocking big.


Like I said in the "building for the future" thread, I'm guessing Ginobili and Hairston are re-signed and Splitter, Bell, Cook and Almond are signed, which leaves the 1st round pick (I'd assume it'll be an SF or a SF/PF) and third PG left. Is that a championship caliber team? Unless Splitter makes a fairly sizable impact and Bell finds the fountain of youth, it isn't. The others? Filler/cheap replacements for the players likely to depart.

I've yet to really sit down and put to the screen exactly how I'd move forward. There's just too many variables to consider: Is RJ moveable and at what cost or lack thereof; what's Manu's market and can he be retained without preventing the Spurs from acquiring the needed, complimentary talent to win a title; is moving Tony the only way to bring in enough, or the right, parts to put the team back into contention; is Splitter really going to sign; and what will the Draft bring? To say nothing of the CBA, there's plenty to consider.

As you and many know, I'm hoping to see McGuire here and given an opportunity next year. I've got to believe he's going to come cheap, given he's a role player that's been buried on an also-ran's bench, but there's no one else I've really targeted of that ilk -- I'm very much open to any and all with the requisite size and tools for each respective role.

[LongtimeSpursFan]

Right, because Hairston/Mahinmi, because they don't play, that automatically means they're worse than Bonner/Bogans. Who cares if they get 7th or 8th and get embarrassed by the Lakers or Nuggets in the first round or get 9th or 10th and don't make the playoffs? Unless you're Holt (or just trying to be technical), there is no difference.

Hairston clearly earned a spot with his play in summer league/training camp/preseason, yet when the real games started, Bogans was mysteriously ahead of him in the rotation. Why? Because he's a veteran NBA player, which automatically means, in Pop's mind, that he's better.

Something no coach would do? You obviously don't follow the NBA very closely. Let me give you an example: the Pacers benched Ford, a proven NBA player in the prime of his career making $8 million a season, for Price, an unproven late 2nd round pick and why? Because they wanted to find out, in a lost season, if Price is an NBA player and if he could help them going forward.

Spurs are trying to keep playoff position. Huge difference.

[Obstructed_View]

Finley and Bogans didn't earn the playing time they've gotten, so anyone that suggests Pop's rotations are based upon who earns it has no foundation for their argument.

[mountainballer]

Again, give me a light at the end of the tunnel, a reason to look forward to the game and, just maybe, a glimmer of hope.

That's all I ask.

a lottery pick 2010?
(the first one in 13 years. Tim was the last)
(ok, half serious, half gallows humor)
however, I'm a draft maniac anyhow and to tell the truth, in the last weeks I started to put players on my watch list, who are ranked in the # 10-15 region by the mocks.
(Greg Monroe anyone? Splitter-Blair-Monroe.....that could be a great frontcourt in some years)

[dbestpro]

The most frustrating aspect of this season to date is how Pop seems hell bent on winning his way or not at all.

I think, just ,maybe I figured out what Pop is trying to do. He knows that there is no way we can match the bigs of the Lakers. He must have surmised that he has to take the bigs off the floor by making LA match up against smaller and quicker players. (of course our smaller players are notoriusly slow and old)

If this doesn't work during the regular season and we miss the playoffs then maybe we get lucky in the lottery. No way Mahinmi will resign with the way he has been treated this year, so no need to play him. No need to waive Ian because Pop does not want to give him a chance to go off this season while we struggle inside.

Call it Popalogical.

[wut]

defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense defense

....that's the reason, the answer and the riddle.

[benefactor]

The hardest thing for me to watch is this teams lack of direction. Surely they do not think that they can win it all with this current group of players, but at the same time nothing was done to fix that with a trade...one that would either help this year or give the team some options to look at next year. If the Spurs have scrapped the "all in" mentality then they need to do it and go into full rebuild mode. If not, they need to do what is necessary to keep this competitive. But hey, with the decisions that Pop is making right now one must wonder if a trade would even help.

My biggest fear in the next two seasons is this team becoming like the early '90's Celtics or the '01-'03 Jazz...teams that are trying blindly to hang on to things that gave them past success when it is obvious that those days have ended and it's time to start over.

[Xevious]

PS Never play Bogans again. Not if you're down to 5 players. Keep him on the bench and deal with the technicals. Seriously.

:lol

And we haven't even played Cleveland yet. Lebron is going to quadruple double us if Keith Bogans is our lock-down guy.

This team needs to be blown up. I'm not ready to give up on Tony, as long as he gets some rest this summer. And god bless Manu and Tim, they've been busting their asses. Blair and Hill are solid role players. But everybody else needs to be traded or let walk after they expire.

But then comes the tricky part. Do you really try to rebuild around our aging "big 3" again in hopes of winning a fifth ring? At one point point do you give up and give Tim the option to be traded so he can search for his fifth ring elsewhere?

[Dice]

Obviously, the amount of help the Big 3 needs is greater than it's ever been and changed as their effectiveness has waned -- there's no guarantee that the complimentary player of yesteryear has the same effect or benefits as they would've in the past, nowadays. But there's no doubt that without the right supporting cast, a championship's out of the question -- they're out there to be molded in theory, but theories are often left empty.


This is the best, down to earth, observation I've seen on this board by a long time Spurs fan. As much as other fans complain about the other guys, in my mind the Big 3 are the ones who aren't getting it done, especially at the ends of games. Manu played huge in the fourth but he also turned the ball over three different times if memory serves me correctly.

I'd also say that as big as Manu is for the Spurs, Tony's impact is bigger.

[redskinfan]

I think I have figured this out, ok Pop is not playing these Malik and Ian because he would look bad if they come in and actually give the team a spark and having everyone say that he should have been playing these guys alot earlier kind of like the the George Hill thing from last years playoffs, so it is my belief that his reputation is far more important than possibly having these guys save their season....lets see what all the Popsuckers have to say!

[Bruno]

I don't really blame for not giving playing to prospects like Hairston or Mahinmi. It's not like they are some kind of great prospects who could have a big impact.

IMO, Pop's biggest mistake is the lack of consistency in his choices. This team badly needs chemistry and Pop is changing his mind for every game. Bonner went from starter to DNP-CD. It's impossible for a team to get some kind of identity with a coach like that.

Spurs' FO also deserve to be blamed for having done nothing at the trade deadline. Even if the RJ trade hasn't worked, I think it's damn stupid to have given up on the season like they did. With a good trade and some players playing better, Spurs could have done some noise this year and be a solid outsider. By standing pat, Spurs have no chance at all. :depressed

[Obstructed_View]

I don't really blame for not giving playing to prospects like Hairston or Mahinmi. It's not like they are some kind of great prospects who could have a big impact.

IMO, Pop's biggest mistake is the lack of consistency in his choices. This team badly needs chemistry and Pop is changing his mind for every game. Bonner went from starter to DNP-CD. It's impossible for a team to get some kind of identity with a coach like that.

Spurs' FO also deserve to be blamed for having done nothing at the trade deadline. Even if the RJ trade hasn't worked, I think it's damn stupid to have given up on the season like they did. With a good trade and some players playing better, Spurs could have done some noise this year and be a solid outsider. By standing pat, Spurs have no chance at all. :depressed

The Spurs did worse than stand pat, they gave away a center for nothing when everyone else is trying to get bigger to compete with LA.

[Bruno]

The Spurs did worse than stand pat, they gave away a center for nothing when everyone else is trying to get bigger to compete with LA.

Ratliff was at the deep end of the bench. Spurs didn't get significantly worse. I also think Spurs will sign another vet PF/C for the playoffs (if they make it).

[hater]

oh shit. I just realized Bonner didn't play :lol


If Pop is making such huge changes then that is exactly the reason why he needs to insert Hariston + Ian.

[Obstructed_View]

Ratliff was at the deep end of the bench.

So what? Not playing him was as much a mistake as getting rid of him. If you want to compete with the Lakers, you just got rid of your tallest guy with NBA experience.

[team-work]

In an unrealistic wish, I want to see how Finley/Bogans/Jefferson beats Hairston/Ian/Ratliff in 1-on-1 or 3-on-3 games before I'm convinced about the playing time they get.

[redskinfan]

I don't really blame for not giving playing to prospects like Hairston or Mahinmi. It's not like they are some kind of great prospects who could have a big impact.
IMO, Pop's biggest mistake is the lack of consistency in his choices. This team badly needs chemistry and Pop is changing his mind for every game. Bonner went from starter to DNP-CD. It's impossible for a team to get some kind of identity with a coach like that.

Spurs' FO also deserve to be blamed for having done nothing at the trade deadline. Even if the RJ trade hasn't worked, I think it's damn stupid to have given up on the season like they did. With a good trade and some players playing better, Spurs could have done some noise this year and be a solid outsider. By standing pat, Spurs have no chance at all. :depressed

thats true since Bogans and Bonner are such great prospects and we dont wanna take time away from them and the team is winning, good point Bruno..

[MrFundamental]

In an unrealistic wish, I want to see how Finley/Bogans/Jefferson beats Hairston/Ian/Ratliff in 1-on-1 or 3-on-3 games before I'm convinced about the playing time they get.
And how exactly does that translate to NBA game playing time? Hell, I'm guessing some of those And 1 street ball guys could probably beat Duncan 1 on 1, so I guess that means we should bench him too, eh? :downspin:

[MrFundamental]

IMO, Pop's biggest mistake is the lack of consistency in his choices. This team badly needs chemistry and Pop is changing his mind for every game. Bonner went from starter to DNP-CD. It's impossible for a team to get some kind of identity with a coach like that.
IMO, that comes down to the players playing consistently. Mase got his minutes and didn't do anything with them, why should Pops take another chance on him when he doesn't provide?


Spurs' FO also deserve to be blamed for having done nothing at the trade deadline. Even if the RJ trade hasn't worked, I think it's damn stupid to have given up on the season like they did. With a good trade and some players playing better, Spurs could have done some noise this year and be a solid outsider. By standing pat, Spurs have no chance at all. :depressed
Do you have some insider info. that said the FO didn't try to do anything? Or do the Spurs have some sort of exemption that would force the other teams to go along with whatever trade they wanted?

[Obstructed_View]

It's amazing to me that the Spurs have a philosophy of cracking rock with a thousand hammer-blows, but Spurs fans can't seem to see how dozens of poor decisions can turn a great team into an average team. If there's any chance Hairston can play better defense than Bogans, then he's worth a shot. If there's any chance Mahinmi can play better defense than Bonner, then he's worth a shot. Regardless, the fact that both are still question marks at this point in the season when the Spurs are sliding down the standings is unforgivable.

[MrFundamental]

Finley and Bogans didn't earn the playing time they've gotten, so anyone that suggests Pop's rotations are based upon who earns it has no foundation for their argument.
You're right, that 30 minutes/game Finley's been averaging over the past 3 games are way too much... wait... :sleep

Bogans OTOH must have nude pics of Pops for the time he's been getting.

[Obstructed_View]

IMO, that comes down to the players playing consistently. Mase got his minutes and didn't do anything with them, why should Pops take another chance on him when he doesn't provide?

Because Pop has given Bogans minutes from day one and he hasn't provided. Mason is putting up better numbers than Bogans despite not getting consistent burn. Who has the bigger upside? Pro athletes are creatures of habit, and NBA jump shooters moreso. The lineup changes being made with this team qualifies as flailing and smacks of panic. If a coach can't be a stabilizing force, then he's not much use.

[MrFundamental]

If there's any chance Hairston can play better defense than Bogans, then he's worth a shot.And perhaps he shows he can't in practice.


If there's any chance Mahinmi can play better defense than Bonner, then he's worth a shot.
Bonner had a DNP yesterday and hasn't really been using up minutes since he came back.


Regardless, the fact that both are still question marks at this point in the season when the Spurs are sliding down the standings is unforgivable.
Are you advocating they completely give up this season?

[Chomag]

It's amazing to me that the Spurs have a philosophy of cracking rock with a thousand hammer-blows, but Spurs fans can't seem to see how dozens of poor decisions can turn a great team into an average team. If there's any chance Hairston can play better defense than Bogans, then he's worth a shot. If there's any chance Mahinmi can play better defense than Bonner, then he's worth a shot. Regardless, the fact that both are still question marks at this point in the season when the Spurs are sliding down the standings is unforgivable.

IF only those 2 players were not question marks. Some here keep mocking saying both are trash. That maybe true but how does one know this either way. Non, of us expect them to be saviors but some of us believe that they have skills that can be very useful to this team. Whats the worst that could happen? Lose a couple of games while you try them out a bit, well that's pretty much happening right now.

If they suck so much as some of you think they do, then what are you afraid of? it's a win, win to try them out because if they do suck you didn't lose much anyway.

[Obstructed_View]

You're right, that 30 minutes/game Finley's been averaging over the past 3 games are way too much... wait... :sleep


Who said Finley played in the last three games? Nice strawman. Go get it.

[MrFundamental]

Because Pop has given Bogans minutes from day one and he hasn't provided. Mason is putting up better numbers than Bogans despite not getting consistent burn. Who has the bigger upside?
Neither, yet I'm guessing Bogans' is playing better D, however little that difference probably is.


Pro athletes are creatures of habit, and NBA jump shooters moreso.
Great, then he should put up a thousand shots in practice, keep his jumper warm for when he gets his chances.


The lineup changes being made with this team qualifies as flailing and smacks of panic.
No shit. Do you think they were expecting to be in 7th after last off season? There should be panic from everyone, the FO and the players.

[MrFundamental]

Who said Finley played in the last three games? Nice strawman. Go get it.
You said "Finley... didn't earn the playing time they've gotten", I was pointing out that he hasn't had playing time, so you quote was wrong. PS, that wasn't a strawman.

[MrFundamental]

That maybe true but how does one know this either way.
Practice?!?!?!?


Non, of us expect them to be saviors but some of us believe that they have skills that can be very useful to this team. Whats the worst that could happen? Lose a couple of games while you try them out a bit, well that's pretty much happening right now.

If they suck so much as some of you think they do, then what are you afraid of? it's a win, win to try them out because if they do suck you didn't lose much anyway.
The team can't afford any more losses, even the couple they would probably lose from that experiment.

[Obstructed_View]

And perhaps he shows he can't in practice.
You mean Toros practice? :lol

Bogans shows he can't play defense in games, but Pop continues to start him and compare him to Bruce Bowen in the press. Nobody has to guess about that. Bogans started from day one and got heavy minutes from the second he arrived in town, much to everyone's puzzlement. Mason has had no consistent role the entire season, yet he currently has put up better numbers than Bogans in similar minutes. If one guy is better than the starter in games and can't get any consistent minutes, what makes you think that somehow they're evaluating all their options properly?


Bonner had a DNP yesterday and hasn't really been using up minutes since he came back.
Other than starting the two previous games before that. What part of "Not an NBA starting center" do you fail to understand?


Are you advocating they completely give up this season?
Where on earth did you pull that from? I'm suggesting they've got very little time to save it. Pop has talked about defense being a priority for the team for a while, yet he's starting players and rolling out lineups that can't defend their position.

[Obstructed_View]

You said "Finley... didn't earn the playing time they've gotten", I was pointing out that he hasn't had playing time, so you quote was wrong. PS, that wasn't a strawman.

So you're saying that Michael Finley has never gotten playing time as a Spur?

[MrFundamental]

So you're saying that Michael Finley has never gotten playing time as a Spur?
You're saying Finley didn't earn his playing time the last 3 games?

[Obstructed_View]

The team can't afford any more losses, even the couple they would probably lose from that experiment.

Yes, we'd hate to risk this huge hot streak Matt Bonner and Keith Bogans shutting down opposing teams with their stifling defense. Can't risk the contribution those guys are going to make to a deep playoff run.

[Obstructed_View]

You're saying Finley didn't earn his playing time the last 3 games?

So you're saying that Pop gives players playing time that they deserve because Finley hasn't played the last three games?

This is fun. Stupid, but fun.

[Spurminator]

It's amazing to me that the Spurs have a philosophy of cracking rock with a thousand hammer-blows, but Spurs fans can't seem to see how dozens of poor decisions can turn a great team into an average team.

Right now we're pounding the rock for a few minutes using a screwdriver, then switching to an icepick for a few more minutes, then a hammer, then back to the icepick, then we're trying a mini shovel, then a spoon, then a screwdriver again, then a paperclip...

At some point it would be nice to settle on the hammer.

[Chomag]

Practice?!?!?!?


The team can't afford any more losses, even the couple they would probably lose from that experiment.

Well isn't that another mistake from the man you seem to speak so highly of? Pop should have worked on the youth early on but didn't. I agree that it's much harder now and should have been done at the start of the season.

Can't afford any loses? Because the line ups you keep defending are doing so well...

[MrFundamental]

You mean Toros practice? :lol
Do they not practice?


Bogans shows he can't play defense in games, but Pop continues to start him and compare him to Bruce Bowen in the press. Nobody has to guess about that. Bogans started from day one and got heavy minutes from the second he arrived in town, much to everyone's puzzlement.I agree, he gets too many minutes. The Bogans experiment should be nearing it's end. That doesn't mean that Hairston deserves a shot by default.


Mason has had no consistent role the entire season, yet he currently has put up better numbers than Bogans in similar minutes. If one guy is better than the starter in games and can't get any consistent minutes, what makes you think that somehow they're evaluating all their options properly?
Stats don't show everything. But if you want to look at stats, Bogans is currently shooting betting, rebounding better, has less TO/game, and more steals. :downspin:



Other than starting the two previous games before that. What part of "Not an NBA starting center" do you fail to understand?Nothing, who said anything about him starting all the time? See, that would be a strawman you just posted.


Where on earth did you pull that from? I'm suggesting they've got very little time to save it. Pop has talked about defense being a priority for the team for a while, yet he's starting players and rolling out lineups that can't defend their position.So you say that they should start playing an unproven big man and a D-leaguer to save the season? :rollin

[MrFundamental]

Yes, we'd hate to risk this huge hot streak Matt Bonner and Keith Bogans shutting down opposing teams with their stifling defense. Can't risk the contribution those guys are going to make to a deep playoff run.
You're right, we could sure use some lock-down D from that strawman team you're building to get us over this hump...

[MrFundamental]

So you're saying that Pop gives players playing time that they deserve because Finley hasn't played the last three games?

This is fun. Stupid, but fun.
Hey, you're the one that started with the asinine posts, I'm just continuing your flawed logic.

[MrFundamental]

Well isn't that another mistake from the man you seem to speak so highly of? Pop should have worked on the youth early on but didn't. I agree that it's much harder now and should have been done at the start of the season.
What could he have done to work on it considering who their team was at the start of this year?


Can't afford any loses? Because the line ups you keep defending are doing so well...
I'm defending the line ups they're trying? :nope

I'm defending throwing in the season to play some un-provens because people have a chicken little complex going on here.

[MrFundamental]

At some point it would be nice to settle on the hammer.
What if the hammer was small ball :lol

[Spurminator]

What's Dikembe up to these days?

:shootme

[Chomag]

What could he have done to work on it considering who their team was at the start of this year?


I'm defending the line ups they're trying? :nope

I'm defending throwing in the season to play some un-provens because people have a chicken little complex going on here.

Throwing away the season? Last time I checked the Spurs are struggling. Ian and Hairston have no part in how bad the Spurs are now. So I would say that the current roster is throwing in the season more then Hairston and Ian are.

Do you honestly think that currently the Spurs are still conteders?

[MrFundamental]

Throwing away the season? Last time I checked the Spurs are struggling. Ian and Hairston have no part in how bad the Spurs are now. So I would say that the current roster is throwing in the season more then Hairston and Ian are.
The Spurs are only 2.5 behind Dallas SW and 5 behind Denver in the West. Yeah, they're struggling, but not enough to start throwing D-leaguers in the mix; especially after everyone is calling for some consistency.


Do you honestly think that currently the Spurs are still conteders?
No, but I haven't thought that for a while. Now the question is, do they possibly throw away the season to start playing everyone, or do they try to find a line up that works and possibly salvage the season the best they can.

[Obstructed_View]

Do they not practice?
I'm sure the Toros practice. Does Pop bring Bogans down to Austin to practice with them?


Stats don't show everything. But if you want to look at stats, Bogans is currently shooting betting, rebounding better, has less TO/game, and more steals. :downspin:
Umm...yeah. If you want to look at stats:
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q228/GeneralPurpose/Spurstalk/Uhhhdurrrdurrrdurr.jpg



Nothing, who said anything about him starting all the time? See, that would be a strawman you just posted.

Who said anything about starting him all the time? Um, the coach?




Popovich opened with his 17th unique starting lineup, and one he said he plans to keep for the time being: Matt Bonner for Antonio McDyess at center, Keith Bogans for Richard Jefferson at small forward. http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/84670157.html


So you say that they should start playing an unproven big man and a D-leaguer to save the season? :rollin
The only reason one is unproven and the other is a D-leaguer is because of the guy that thinks starting Bogans and Bonner is a good idea. The guy you're defending with really lame chumpdumper type arguments.


You're right, we could sure use some lock-down D from that strawman* team you're building to get us over this hump...

Let's make it simple enough for you to follow: When the Spurs are losing, and they've got two guys that are getting minutes and not producing, I'm wondering why anyone should be worried at your warnings that putting in two other guys will result in losses because they won't produce. It's not like the team has been relying on all that production from those two guys in order to beat juggernauts like Indiana and Philly.

* You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[HarlemHeat37]

It isn't difficult to understand..

The Spurs aren't going anywhere with their current lineup..they should play their young guys to see if they have any game and whether the Spurs should look to keep them next year and beyond..the Spurs should be looking at the future at this point..it's not a difficult concept to understand..it doesn't make a difference to the team right now because the guys that are currently playing can't possibly give the team a better chance to win..Bogans is one of the worst players in the NBA and our bigs don't provide any needs..

This argument that Hairston didn't do enough in practice doesn't make any sense..

Generally, when 2 role players are battling for a position, the one that outplays the other will win the role, especially when he does by a significant margin..their stats in preseason were:

Bogans: 14.3 MPG, 1.7 PPG on 9.5% from the field, 1.7 RPG, 0.4 APG..
Hairston: 15 MPG, 6.6 PPG on 55.2% from the field, 2.1 RPG, 2 APG..

Hairston was also significantly better defensively, which is obvious to anybody that watched in preseason..those are very, very solid role player stats for a guy playing 15 MPG per game..instead, the role went to Bogans, a guy that had one of the worst preseasons imaginable..it was also funny because Hairston knew the system better too..

LOL @ "Toros- do they not practice?"..he leads the entire D-league in scoring..he literally could not do anything else to "prove" that he deserves a shot..

Ian should play by default, because of the type of physical tools he brings..it should have been a no-brainer to play him early in the season, especially since McDyess takes a few months to get in game shape..

These guys might not end up being good enough to contribute, there's a very solid chance that this will be the case..the whole point is that the team should find out what they have now that they have to think about the future..it would make sense if the players ahead of them were contributing, but they simply aren't..

[MrFundamental]

I'm sure the Toros practice. Does Pop bring Bogans down to Austin to practice with them?
I don't know, I also don't know what that has to do with how Hairston looks when practicing.



Umm...yeah. If you want to look at stats:
http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q228/GeneralPurpose/Spurstalk/Uhhhdurrrdurrrdurr.jpg



Great, you can see I'm right.


Who said anything about starting him all the time? Um, the coach?

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/spurs/84670157.html


And that lasted a whole game, Awesome!!!


The only reason one is unproven and the other is a D-leaguer is because of the guy that thinks starting Bogans and Bonner is a good idea. The guy you're defending with really lame chumpdumper type arguments.
That's the only reason. What a fuckin joke. Do you really think that Hairston and Mahinmi are outperforming everyone in Practice and the only reason that Pops doesn't play them is because of Bogans and Bonner? Wow, pass whatever the hell you are smoking.



Let's make it simple enough for you to follow: When the Spurs are losing, and they've got two guys that are getting minutes and not producing, I'm wondering why anyone should be worried at your warnings that putting in two other guys will result in losses because they won't produce. It's not like the team has been relying on all that production from those two guys in order to beat juggernauts like Indiana and Philly.
Yes, you are completely right. Let's just fill the team with D-Leaguers cause it could possibly work. :downspin:


* You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
You started it ;)
But, yes, I do know what it means, perhaps you should double check.

[HarlemHeat37]

Also with Bogans, he literally has no skills..at least Mason and even Finley are great NBA shooters..Bogans literally has no skills..he also isn't a good leaper, he doesn't have any lateral quickness, his basketball IQ is pretty low since he commits a ton of stupid fouls..what exactly does he have that makes him worthy of being on an NBA roster, let alone STARTING?!..

He's getting more minutes with the Spurs than he was with a horrible Bucks team last year..

[MrFundamental]

These guys might not end up being good enough to contribute, there's a very solid chance that this will be the case..the whole point is that the team should find out what they have now that they have to think about the future..it would make sense if the players ahead of them were contributing, but they simply aren't..
If that's the case, then they should actually prepare for next season. Bench Tony the rest of the year and let him heal. Bench RJ until he figures out the system, and play new guys the rest of the year.

[MrFundamental]

Also with Bogans, he literally has no skills..at least Mason and even Finley are great NBA shooters..Bogans literally has no skills..he also isn't a good leaper, he doesn't have any lateral quickness, his basketball IQ is pretty low since he commits a ton of stupid fouls..what exactly does he have that makes him worthy of being on an NBA roster, let alone STARTING?!..
Bogans has a better FG% then Mase. RMJ is shooting terrible this year. But yes, that doesn't mean either should be starting.

[SpurNation]

The mentality of a competitor always makes them believe they have a shot at winning.

But is it better to let a season go in order to have a shot at getting higher caliber talent? Or is it best to pursue the goal of winning it all now with mediocre talent and possibly lose out on what could help the team in the future after acquiring talent?

I haven't seen this team, this year, show as of yet an ability to be consistent enough to win it all much less compete at a level to even garnish hope that they could miraculously be competitive in a playoff situation.

That said...a competitor will always do their best to win no matter the circumstances. But if your ammunition is proving to be duds...a general might have to consider retreating so as to reload with a more effective arsenal.

It wouldn't be "giving up" more so than trying to insure that your next campaign has a chance.

That said...I'll root and hope this team finds a way to win this year...but I wouldn't be upset if they call it in until next year. To that I wouldn't mind seeing what Ian, Malik and possibly somebody else from the D-league might provide. But doing that would obviously be calling it in. And I don't think you would want something like that to be THAT obvious.

It would be interesting to see if better talent would be the difference or if it truly is the coaching philosophy that's causing the problems thus far. Perhaps a little of both?

[ElNono]

Is that you TPark?

[Obstructed_View]

Bogans has a better FG% then Mase. RMJ is shooting terrible this year. But yes, that doesn't mean either should be starting.

1/1000 of a percent better. :lol

Shit, you don't even believe the crap you're peddling in these threads.

[MrFundamental]

That said...I'll root and hope this team finds a way to win this year...but I wouldn't be upset if they call it in until next year. To that I wouldn't mind seeing what Ian, Malik and possibly somebody else from the D-league might provide. But doing that would obviously be calling it in. And I don't think you would want something like that to be THAT obvious.
I agree, I wouldn't mind seeing that happening.


It would be interesting to see if better talent would be the difference or if it truly is the coaching philosophy that's causing the problems thus far. Perhaps a little of both?
Perhaps both, I think Pops has had it relatively easy with finding rotations to use and use constantly, the past couple years have shown that you can't always rely on that. It's tough to say if he should just stick with a starting five through thick and thin, or continue tweaking hoping to find a diamond somewhere.

[MrFundamental]

1/1000 of a percent better. :lol

Shit, you don't even believe the crap you're peddling in these threads.
You brought up stats. Are you saying that's worse shooting? And after yesterday it's up to 1/10 fg% and 5/10ths 3 pt%

[Obstructed_View]

You brought up stats. Are you saying that's worse shooting? And after yesterday it's up to 1/10 fg% and 5/10ths 3 pt%

No, I said Mason was putting up better numbers, and you brought up individual stats expecting not to be called out on it. Are you saying that 1/1000 of a percent shooting makes up for the three more points that Mason's scoring? Are you really?

[benefactor]

Is that you TPark?
lol...I was thinking the same thing while I was reading.

[MrFundamental]

No, I said Mason was putting up better numbers, and you brought up individual stats expecting not to be called out on it. Are you saying that 1/1000 of a percent shooting makes up for the three more points that Mason's scoring? Are you really?
No I'm not saying anything like that strawman you put forth. If you only wanted to talk about scoring you should have said so.

[jjktkk]

I think I have figured this out, ok Pop is not playing these Malik and Ian because he would look bad if they come in and actually give the team a spark and having everyone say that he should have been playing these guys alot earlier kind of like the the George Hill thing from last years playoffs, so it is my belief that his reputation is far more important than possibly having these guys save their season....lets see what all the Popsuckers have to say!

I almost wasn't going to reply to your bone-head theory, but I couldn't help myself. BTW I'm no "pop-sucker". With all the wacky line up changes, and lack of playing and sticking with a consistant lineup, Pop is tarnishing his reputation.

[elbamba]

Did you watch Gist in the '09 summer league? He was one of the worst players on the team and like McClinton, didn't look like anything resembling an NBA player. Sure, he has the physical tools, but that's not enough. Even before that, Gist was a fringe prospect and a long shot to be a long term NBA player. Hairston and Mahinmi I'm intrigued with and think both could be rotation players in the NBA, but neither will ever be a "key to a title run!". It's going to take myriad things, all more profound than throwing a bunch of random young, athletic players on the court, to get this team back to being a championship caliber team.

Did you see Hill in 2008 summer league? Summer league is a great place to showcase talent but in the end it does not mean squash. You have to let players actually play in a real game that counts.

[Obstructed_View]

No I'm not saying anything like that strawman you put forth. If you only wanted to talk about scoring you should have said so.

Again, let's revisit the definition of "strawman", which is a fallacy created by misrepresenting the opposing opinion.

Let's review the tape, shall we?

I said Mason puts up better numbers. You then said "if you want to look at stats, Bogans is currently shooting betting (sic)"

Asking if you are giving Bogans' .001 shooting percentage the same weight as Mason's two and a half extra ppg is completely logical based upon the argument you attempted to put forth. There's no strawman argument there. If you don't like questions asking if your statements are meant the way you stated them, perhaps you shouldn't be twisting my arguments and asking ridiculous questions that have nothing to do with them.

Despite the turmoil and uncertainty Mason has had to face this season, which has at least in-part contributed to his game going to hell, he's still putting up better scoring numbers than Bogans and all other stats are at least as good to a point of statistical irrelevance. Therefore if one were to posit that Mason should be getting the same opportunities at a secure position in the rotation to prove himself, there's not really a rational argument against it.

[Obstructed_View]

lol...I was thinking the same thing while I was reading.

I've thought that since he appeared out of nowhere blowing Pop and asking ridiculous questions in response to facts. When someone's pretending to be Chumpdumper without the wit, it's probably TPark.

[ElNono]

I've thought that since he appeared out of nowhere blowing Pop and asking ridiculous questions in response to facts. When someone's pretending to be Chumpdumper without the wit, it's probably TPark.

This is the guy that said we traded Ratliff because he was a washed up 37 year old with a bad back, then the next day Theo played 20 minutes, blocked two shots, and played the night right after in a back to back. :lmao

I'm not saying the Ratler was our savior. But he was barely given a chance, and he was obviously traded to save money, and because we simply do not play bigs enough, nothing else.

[Obstructed_View]

I'm not saying the Ratler was our savior. But he was barely given a chance, and he was obviously traded to save money, and because we simply do not play bigs enough, nothing else.

I'd say that the Ratliff salary dump means that there's a belief somewhere in the front office that the Spurs have zero chance to make a title run. Again, I'm not sure why someone hasn't been called to answer why he was on the roster at all this season if he wasn't going to play.

[MrFundamental]

Again, let's revisit the definition of "strawman", which is a fallacy created by misrepresenting the opposing opinion.
You mean like saying " Are you saying that 1/1000 of a percent shooting makes up for the three more points that Mason's scoring? Are you really?"

Yep, seems to me that you are misrepresenting my opinion on that matter.

[MrFundamental]

This is the guy that said we traded Ratliff because he was a washed up 37 year old with a bad back, then the next day Theo played 20 minutes, blocked two shots, and played the night right after in a back to back. :lmao
Good for Theo, holy shit, we should have given him 10 million for that output. :sleep

BTW, aside from his 2 blocks, what were his other stats for the 2 games?

15.5 minutes 1 point 1 block, .5 assist, .5 TO, and 2.5 rebounds

Mind numbing...


I'm not saying the Ratler was our savior.Yep, just highly alluding to it...


But he was barely given a chance, and he was obviously traded to save money, and because we simply do not play bigs enough, nothing else.Bullshit.

[MrFundamental]

Again, I'm not sure why someone hasn't been called to answer why he was on the roster at all this season if he wasn't going to play.
We should ask every team that that has over 12 men on their roster. :downspin:

[ElNono]

Good for Theo, holy shit, we should have given him 10 million for that output. :sleep

Why would we give him 10 million if he was signed for 1 million?


Yep, just highly alluding to it...
Bullshit.

Hey, it's not my fault that you're butthurt because it took Theo one day to shred your entire argument in tiny little pieces. If you want to argue with the boxscore, go right ahead...

[Obstructed_View]

You mean like saying " Are you saying that 1/1000 of a percent shooting makes up for the three more points that Mason's scoring? Are you really?"

Yep, seems to me that you are misrepresenting my opinion on that matter.


Let's review the tape, shall we?

I said Mason puts up better numbers. You then said "if you want to look at stats, Bogans is currently shooting betting (sic)"

Asking if you are giving Bogans' .001 shooting percentage the same weight as Mason's two and a half extra ppg is completely logical based upon the argument you attempted to put forth. There's no strawman argument there. If you don't like questions asking if your statements are meant the way you stated them, perhaps you shouldn't be twisting my arguments and asking ridiculous questions that have nothing to do with them.

EDIT: I don't want to know how you thnk I misrepresented you, because I clearly did not. Your aim is not to do anything but troll the people that have shredded your popsucking ways for the last five years.

[Obstructed_View]

We should ask every team that that has over 12 men on their roster. :downspin:

No matter who you post as, you're still a fuckin idiot. Plonk.

[MrFundamental]

Why would we give him 10 million if he was signed for 1 million?
Why would we play him more when he's only averaging 1 point, 2.5 boards, and 1 block a game for Charlotte?


Hey, it's not my fault that you're butthurt because it took Theo one day to shred your entire argument in tiny little pieces. If you want to argue with the boxscore, go right ahead...:rollin What a joke. Shit, Bonner puts up a better stat line then that. Shit Bonner even had 2 blocks against Denver, looks like we found our Ratliff replacement there.

[Blackjack]

http://thewindow.freedomblogging.com/files/2009/12/12_10_09-derailment0635-600x342.jpg

It's even somewhat Spurs-related (if you look closely;)).

[MrFundamental]

EDIT: I don't want to know how you thnk I misrepresented you, because I clearly did not. Your aim is not to do anything but troll the people that have shredded your popsucking ways for the last five years.
Yeah, 5 years, 2 championships, what a fuckin loser. :rolleyes


No matter who you post as, you're still a fuckin idiot. Plonk.http://lh5.ggpht.com/_jiQufRdZKJw/STuDJtjbQ2I/AAAAAAAAAc8/J80tcm8IVXg/InternetToughGuy-732335_thumb%5B1%5D.jpg

[MrFundamental]

EDIT: I don't want to know how you thnk I misrepresented you, because I clearly did not.
Yes, you did. Where did I say that Bogans' shooting percentage made up for Mason's better point average? I didn't say it anywhere, I said that Bogans had some better stats then Mason after you brought it up. Don't get pissed at me that I'm not kowtowing to the fucking chicken little attitude around here. Though I would probably make a fortune on high-quality umbrellas here.

[rayray2k8]

Ithink I'm gonna get a drink to go along with my :corn:

[Blackjack]

Alright, two simple requests . . .

I'd appreciate arguments rooted in the belief that their merit improves this team's chances this or next year, and that they prevent me from experiencing the feelings this squad's consistently come to elicit (their one true consistency).

RTB, and thanks.:toast

[dc_spursfan]

I might be wrong but I think Pop needs PJ back. PJ was a voice that Pop respected and trusted to tell him the truth.

[Mel_13]

It isn't difficult to understand..

The Spurs aren't going anywhere with their current lineup..they should play their young guys to see if they have any game and whether the Spurs should look to keep them next year and beyond..the Spurs should be looking at the future at this point..it's not a difficult concept to understand..

This really says it all. :toast

Much of the rest of the discussion here is just debating meaningless details. The big picture is clear: this year's team is toast, time to focus on next season and beyond.

[Obstructed_View]

But Bogans shoots better than Mason. Didn't you hear TPark, I mean Eric, I mean whoever? That means Pop is a genius because, well, because...well how many rings do you have?

[MaNu4Tres]

This really says it all. :toast

Much of the rest of the discussion here is just debating meaningless details. The big picture is clear: this year's team is toast, time to focus on next season and beyond.

Agreed totally.

I'm all for a rotation as such just to see what we have in Hairston and Mahimni.


w/ out Parker
Hill
Hairston
Jefferson
Duncan
McDyess

Manu
Blair
Mahimni

w/ Parker
Parker
Hill
Jefferson
Duncan
McDyess

Manu
Hairston
Blair
Mahimni


It won't happen though with Pop as a coach.

[MrFundamental]

But Bogans shoots better than Mason. Didn't you hear TPark, I mean Eric, I mean whoever? That means Pop is a genius because, well, because...well how many rings do you have?
So cute.

[MrFundamental]

It won't happen though with Pop as a coach.
It shouldn't happen unless the realization that this season is gone comes. Until there is that smattering of hope that the team will get out of the 1st round, they shouldn't attempt to add 2 more to an inconsistent roster.

[ElNono]

Why would we play him more when he's only averaging 1 point, 2.5 boards, and 1 block a game for Charlotte?

We can't play him more. He's been traded, remember?


What a joke. Shit, Bonner puts up a better stat line then that. Shit Bonner even had 2 blocks against Denver, looks like we found our Ratliff replacement there.

Bringing up single games is all you have... :lmao
You want to look at career averages? I didn't think so.

I told you once already, you gotta step up your game, 'Mr Fundamental'...

[Obstructed_View]

This team is not toast. It's not too late to turn it around. John Lucas took a 9-11 Spurs team and went 25-4 with the exact same roster. There's no reason to think the Spurs aren't playing below their potential.

[MrFundamental]

We can't play him more. He's been traded.
We should totally take him back then, and get MN to give us Darko, we'd be unstoppable!!! :downspin:




Bringing up single games is all you have... :lmao
You want to look at career averages? I didn't think so.
You brought up 2 games like they mean something. What a fucking joke. So 2 games shows we should have kept Theo, yet one game doesn't mean shit? Jesus christ this forum is fuckin ridiculous.

[MaNu4Tres]

It shouldn't happen unless the realization that this season is gone comes. Until there is that smattering of hope that the team will get out of the 1st round, they shouldn't attempt to add 2 more to an inconsistent roster.

Mahimni and Hairston can be doing what Bonner/Mason/Bogans have been doing for the past month.

They can't do worse. Our defense as is relatively pathetic night in and night out.

Mahimni and Hairston at least possess more defensive skill sets than any of those three players that are in the rotation.

And don't tell me they wouldn't be able to grasp the philosophy, they have been in the program long enough to be aware of defensive assignments and the plays offensively.

I really think Spurs are trying to lower Mahimni's value as much as possible, so they can possibly resign him to a 3-4 year on the cheap ( similar to Blair's).

[Blackjack]

This really says it all. :toast

Much of the rest of the discussion here is just debating meaningless details. The big picture is clear: this year's team is toast, time to focus on next season and beyond.

Eventually, the discussion finds its way back to the OP (sometimes?).:lol

[MrFundamental]

Mahimni and Hairston can be doing what Bonner/Mason/Bogans have been doing for the past month.
How exactly do you know that? Have you been with the coaching staff or are you just basing that off of 1 game for Ian and the D-league for Hairston?


They can't do worse. Our defense as is relatively pathetic night in and night out.
And it could be completely pathetic with them it, so I would say they could do worse.


Mahimni and Hairston at least possess more defensive skill sets than any of those three players that are in the rotation.
Based on what? The fact Ian is almost 7 feet?


And don't tell me they wouldn't be able to grasp the philosophy, they have been in the program long enough to be aware of defensive assignments and the plays offensively.
Then why haven't they broke the rotation already? Obviously it's not as simple as knowing the theory behind everything.


I really think Spurs are trying to lower Mahimni's value as much as possible, so they can possibly resign him to a 3-4 year on the cheap ( similar to Blair's).
I'm guessing they probably could have done an extension like that if they truly wanted him back.

He could end up being the next Dwight or he could end up being the next Darko, but IMO we'd have to come to the realization that this season is over if we are going to start experimenting with prospects.

[MaNu4Tres]

This team is not toast. It's not too late to turn it around. John Lucas took a 9-11 Spurs team and went 25-4 with the exact same roster. There's no reason to think the Spurs aren't playing below their potential.

So now we are going to bring up the past to justify the teams inconsistency for the past 54 games?

This team has shown zero signs of improvement from day 1.

Take off the homer glasses.

This team is toast. Especially with Mason/Bogans and Bonner playing significant roles. Replacing them with Mahimni and Hairston wouldn't hurt the team anymore than Mason/Bogans and Bonner already are.

[MrFundamental]

Mahimni and Hairston can be doing what Bonner/Mason/Bogans have been doing for the past month.
How exactly do you know that? Have you been with the coaching staff or are you just basing that off of 1 game for Ian and the D-league for Hairston?


They can't do worse. Our defense as is relatively pathetic night in and night out.
And it could be completely pathetic with them it, so I would say they could do worse.


Mahimni and Hairston at least possess more defensive skill sets than any of those three players that are in the rotation.
Based on what? The fact Ian is almost 7 feet?


And don't tell me they wouldn't be able to grasp the philosophy, they have been in the program long enough to be aware of defensive assignments and the plays offensively.
Then why haven't they broke the rotation already? Obviously it's not as simple as knowing the theory behind everything.


I really think Spurs are trying to lower Mahimni's value as much as possible, so they can possibly resign him to a 3-4 year on the cheap ( similar to Blair's).
I'm guessing they probably could have done an extension like that if they truly wanted him back.

He could end up being the next Dwight or he could end up being the next Darko, but IMO we'd have to come to the realization that this season is over if we are going to start experimenting with prospects. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a combination of Hill, Blair, Hairston, and Mahinmi on the court.

[ElNono]

We should totally take him back then, and get MN to give us Darko, we'd be unstoppable!!! :downspin:

We can't take him back... again, Mr Fundamental. You need to step up your game.


You brought up 2 games like they mean something. What a fucking joke. So 2 games shows we should have kept Theo, yet one game doesn't mean shit?

But when you bring up a single game or two is ok?
And it was you, not me, that claimed the guy had a bad back and couldn't play 20 minutes a game. He obviously can.


Jesus christ this forum is fuckin ridiculous.

What? You dish it out but can't take it? Definitely sounds like TPark...
Stop bringing that weaksauce if you don't like getting your ass handed to you every other post...

[MrFundamental]

We can't take him back... again, Mr Fundamental. You need to step up your game.
See: sarcasm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm)



But when you bring up a single game or two is ok?
And it was you, not me, that claimed the guy had a bad back and couldn't play 20 minutes a game. He obviously can.
OK, I'll admit, technically he can play 15 minutes, albeit at a really low level that wouldn't help the Spurs.


What? You dish it out but can't take it? Definitely sounds like TPark...
Stop bringing that weaksauce if you don't like getting your ass handed to you every other post...
Can't take what, your asinine posts? You're right. They are so contradictory and fallacious it makes my head hurt. :bang

[Mel_13]

Eventually, the discussion finds its way back to the OP (sometimes?).:lol

:lol

Except for one small point, I agreed with everything in your OP. That portion of Harlem's post just distilled it down to it's essence.

[ElNono]

Eventually, the discussion finds its way back to the OP (sometimes?).:lol

Black, your OP was tops, as usual... :tu

Nowadays, I just hope that they play hard every night, that's all. Sometimes it will be enough to win and sometimes it won't be.
One day I think we need to take on the possibility that some players might just not be listening anymore. I wonder sometimes what goes on Mason's head or even RJ, who didn't see the floor in OT at all. They all say the right things, but I'm not sure they really are on the same page.

[ElNono]

See: sarcasm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm)

It's hard to tell what's serious and what isn't with you. You bring really weak shit to almost every post.
You sound ALMOST EXACTLY like TPark...


OK, I'll admit, technically he can play 15 minutes, albeit at a really low level that wouldn't help the Spurs.

So you admit you were wrong. Good, that's a good start.
And wether he could help the Spurs or not, is entirely opinion.


Can't take what, your asinine posts? You're right. They are so contradictory and fallacious it makes my head hurt. :bang

You admit you're wrong, but my posts are asinine? :rollin
I mean, the only one having problems with my posts is you.
Again, this is how it works: You bring the weak sauce, you get called out for it. It's not that hard. It shouldn't make your head hurt at all.

[MrFundamental]

It's hard to tell what's serious and what isn't with you. You bring really weak shit to almost every post.
:blah


So you admit you were wrong. Good, that's a good start.
I was kind of wrong about minutes. He isn't playing 20/game. Let me know when the season is over and he didn't miss a game was was still averaging above 15.



You admit you're wrong, but my posts are asinine? :rollin
I mean, the only one having problems with my posts is you.
Again, this is how it works: You bring the weak sauce, you get called out for it. It's not that hard. It shouldn't make your head hurt at all.
Yes, I got called out for bringing up a single game when you used 2. :lmao

I guess I should call the medics cause I got burned after that one. :rolleyes

[ElNono]

I was kind of wrong about minutes. He isn't playing 20/game. Let me know when the season is over and he didn't miss a game was was still averaging above 15.

You want to make this about the amount of minutes and it's irrelevant.
Did Matt Bonner play every game for the Spurs? No.
The point is that he's not a washed up 37 years old with a bad back and can still play some minutes for his team.

Or are you going to deny that you said he was a 37 year old with a bad back?



Yes, I got called out for bringing up a single game when you used 2. :lmao
I guess I should call the medics cause I got burned after that one. :rolleyes

I offered to compare Ratliff blocking career averages against Bonner, but you declined. Hey, again, you bring the weak sauce, and you get called out for it...

[MrFundamental]

You want to make this about the amount of minutes and it's irrelevant.
I made it about the amount of minutes to start with. :bang

Did Matt Bonner play every game for the Spurs? No.No, isn't that a good thing?

The point is that he's not a washed up 37 years old with a bad back and can still play some minutes for his team.Are you extrapolating an entire season based on 2 games?


Or are you going to deny that you said he was a 37 year old with a bad back?I said that and still do, he's not going to last the rest of the season for Charlotte avg. 20 minutes a game.


I offered to compare Ratliff blocking career averages against Bonner, but you declined. Hey, again, you bring the weak sauce, and you get called out for it...Ha, might as well bring back fucking Manute Bol then, his career block average was higher then Ratliffs. :downspin:

[elbamba]

You want to play Hairston/Mahinmi or D-League players when Spurs are trying to make the playoffs? Do you know what would happen if Pop did this and they fall to 9th or 10th place? Good God! Fans need to realize the grass is not always greener on the other side of the mountain. If Hairston or Mahinmi wants to play let them earn a spot by showing it in practice. Putting these two out there 'so we can see what they can do' is something no coach would do during a regular season game.

They are losing without putting those players on the Court. Usually they are losing because they do not have enough gas to finish the game.

[ElNono]

I made it about the amount of minutes to start with. :bang

No you didn't:



Yes, it's because Pops likes small ball, not that he's a ~37 y/o center with a bad back, that he didn't see playing time. :lol


No, isn't that a good thing?

Irrelevant. That's not what we're talking about here.


Are you extrapolating an entire season based on 2 games?

I'm not, are you?


I said that and still do, he's not going to last the rest of the season for Charlotte avg. 20 minutes a game.

No, this is what you said:



Yes, it's because Pops likes small ball, not that he's a ~37 y/o center with a bad back, that he didn't see playing time. :lol

There's no need to backpedal now...



Ha, might as well bring back fucking Manute Bol then, his career block average was higher then Ratliffs. :downspin:

Moving the goalposts won't help you. Let's hear it one more time: You bring the weak sauce, you get called out for it.

[MrFundamental]

No you didn't:
OK, you're right, it started with your false claim that the only reason Ratliff wasn't seeing time was because Pops only wanted to play small.


Irrelevant. That's not what we're talking about here.
Then why the fuck did you bring up Bonner?


I'm not, are you?
You seem to think that Ratliff will continue getting 15/game, so it would seem that you are extrapolating an entire season over 2 games for Charlotte.


No, this is what you said:

There's no need to backpedal now...
So if I never brought up playing time, then why in the fuck do you continue to do so. Holy shit red herrings.



Moving the goalposts won't help you. Let's hear it one more time: You bring the weak sauce, you get called out for it.
You keep repeating that same tired line, yet you still haven't posted anything substantial. If you want to go back to the beginning of the conversation let's do so, but for you to go on one track and try to prove a point, then go back to my initial point when you are shown to be full of shit and then attempt to call my posts weak is fucking hypocritical.

[MrFundamental]

As I said before, Ratliff was brought in at the beginning of the season because of certain positives, at the trade deadline those positives were outweighed by saving Holt some money. That is why they signed him initially and then traded him for what amounts to cash. Apparently it really was that hard for you to understand.

[ElNono]

As I said before... :blah


Yes, it's because Pops likes small ball, not that he's a ~37 y/o center with a bad back, that he didn't see playing time. :lol


http://ethicsoup.typepad.com/.a/6a00e554e81be388340120a58210a4970c-320wi


We know what you said... :lmao

[MrFundamental]

We know what you said... :lmao
Fuck you really are stupid.


I'm telling you at the time (considering the season isn't static) it was a decent move, now the negatives outweigh the positives in keeping him. Is it that hard to understand?
Again, apparently that is really hard to understand.

[MrFundamental]

I can post pictures too :downspin:
http://loudounlady.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/pot-kettle-black.jpg

[ElNono]

Fuck you really are stupid.

http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/7176/umad23xv.jpg


Again, apparently that is really hard to understand.

There's nothing hard to understand about what you said:


Yes, it's because Pops likes small ball, not that he's a ~37 y/o center with a bad back, that he didn't see playing time. :lol

LOL indeed... :lmao

[MrFundamental]

I can post pictures too :downspin:
http://loudounlady.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/pot-kettle-black.jpg
...

[Obstructed_View]

So now we are going to bring up the past to justify the teams inconsistency for the past 54 games?

No, I'm pointing out history to show that teams with far less talent than the current Spurs team were able to turn completely around with just the players they had. This team's still in playoff contention and at one point was beating teams with relative ease.


This team has shown zero signs of improvement from day 1.
Quite the contrary, in fact. They've gotten quite a bit worse as the experiments continue and the bad players get more playing time than the ones with any upside.


This team is toast. Especially with Mason/Bogans and Bonner playing significant roles. Replacing them with Mahimni and Hairston wouldn't hurt the team anymore than Mason/Bogans and Bonner already are.

I agree that replacing them wouldn't hurt the team. I'd say moving Mason into a consistent reserve role would do wonders for his game going forward. Punishing guys for mistakes has clearly been a dismal failure, but you won't convince me that this season is toast until the Spurs are eliminated from contention. It'll be a shame if it happens.

[TD 21]

No, you're never going to replace the Horry's and Bowen's of the world with an equal, identical player. But it's not about finding their carbon copy. You're looking to find comparable skill sets and character that can become a working part of the needed supporting cast -- a different build, personality or area of expertise, there's nothing wrong with that.

So it's not that they haven't found someone with Horry's clutch shot-making and intelligence as a stretch 4 or that they haven't replaced the relentless, tireless, and lockdown defender Bruce was for years ... it's that they attempted to address each respective loss with players that had neither the tools, acumen or ability to even approximate those two's contribution -- if you can't address something adequately, it's an effort in futility to find close enough and hope for the best.

In other words, don't prevent yourself from finding the next Horry (as it pertains to the team) by thinking he can't look more like Haslem -- chasing the perfect mold, almost always nets an inferior player to fill it.



Agree. And as it pertains to the corporate knowledge, you're right. They couldn't have brought anyone in to replace it as if it were something tangible. But you've got to attempt to bring in the type of player that's capable of acquiring and utilizing it effectively. You can't simply do without.

A championship-caliber supporting cast can come in all shapes, sizes and skill sets (as long as they're in compliment to the stars), but there's a common thread with which they're made up and of the character they possess.

Obviously, the amount of help the Big 3 needs is greater than it's ever been and changed as their effectiveness has waned -- there's no guarantee that the complimentary player of yesteryear has the same effect or benefits as they would've in the past, nowadays. But there's no doubt that without the right supporting cast, a championship's out of the question -- they're out there to be molded in theory, but theories are often left empty.

There's no getting around needing the right players to win it all, which is why so few ever get the opportunity.



Well, they've got Hairston and Mahinmi in the fold (which would seem a decent pair to evaluate for the suggested roles), but it's become pretty clear that the latter, for whatever reason, isn't in their plans. There's no reason Hairston shouldn't be given Bogans minutes and the opportunity to prove his worth moving forward, though. And, no, I wouldn't view Bell as the answer on the wing or a position defender like Splitter becoming an athletic, shot-blocking big.



I've yet to really sit down and put to the screen exactly how I'd move forward. There's just too many variables to consider: Is RJ moveable and at what cost or lack thereof; what's Manu's market and can he be retained without preventing the Spurs from acquiring the needed, complimentary talent to win a title; is moving Tony the only way to bring in enough, or the right, parts to put the team back into contention; is Splitter really going to sign; and what will the Draft bring? To say nothing of the CBA, there's plenty to consider.

As you and many know, I'm hoping to see McGuire here and given an opportunity next year. I've got to believe he's going to come cheap, given he's a role player that's been buried on an also-ran's bench, but there's no one else I've really targeted of that ilk -- I'm very much open to any and all with the requisite size and tools for each respective role.


You're echoing my sentiments on this. That's basically what I was saying in my second paragraph.

I think they flat out didn't do their homework on Jefferson. That, or they just were desperate to do something significant and found acquiring him to be as close as they could come to that or they were arrogant and thought "we're the Spurs, sure Jefferson has been in decline for two years as a defender/rebounder, but under our watch we can make him return to his near All-Star level because if we could have significantly lesser talents playing significant roles on championship teams, why couldn't we make this guy?".

My thoughts exactly on Hairston/Mahinmi. I wouldn't consider Bell the answer either, but he is an upgrade on Bogans and my guess is the Spurs, rumored to be interested in Bell this season, would jump at the chance to sign him, either with what's left of the mid-level exception after signing Splitter or with the bi-annual exception. You can bring up the Wright's and McGuire's (he in particular, what with his known immaturity and inability to shoot) of the world, but I doubt the Spurs would sign one of them and ask them to fulfill that role, while the Batum's and Ariza's are unavailable -- unless someone bowls either team over. So if the Spurs can't land Bell or someone of that ilk, then don't be surprised if Bogans is re-signed. The Spurs probably view Hairston as their Wright/McGuire.

Splitter, even though his shot blocking numbers are underwhelming, draftexpress claims he's a vastly improved shot blocker.

My guess is they fail to land the Batum type they need at SF and the Thomas type they need at PF and instead end up masquerading Splitter as the Thomas type and Bell or Bogans again as the Batum type.



Spurs are trying to keep playoff position. Huge difference.

This about covers that...


Mahimni and Hairston can be doing what Bonner/Mason/Bogans have been doing for the past month.

They can't do worse. Our defense as is relatively pathetic night in and night out.

Mahimni and Hairston at least possess more defensive skill sets than any of those three players that are in the rotation.

And don't tell me they wouldn't be able to grasp the philosophy, they have been in the program long enough to be aware of defensive assignments and the plays offensively.

I really think Spurs are trying to lower Mahimni's value as much as possible, so they can possibly resign him to a 3-4 year on the cheap ( similar to Blair's).

[Blackjack]

:lol

Except for one small point, I agreed with everything in your OP. That portion of Harlem's post just distilled it down to it's essence.

Absolutely, that essence he captured was exactly the reason for the request. But, truth be told (I'm sure you're the only one that will see this ;)), the OP was never intended to be the subject of a thread. It was originally a response to a Hairston thread, and, like most of my ramblings, slowly and steadily meandered into a much broader take (which is what tends to happen when I'm left feeling punch-drunk and in a general malaise after a Spurs game these days).

As I touched on to end the OP and Harlem expounded upon (basically giving the rationale to grant my request), it's not difficult to realize what they should be doing: the Spurs need to get busy living, or get busy dying (I guess that would make Pop "Red" and in need of his own "Andy" -- hell of a movie :hat).


Black, your OP was tops, as usual... :tu

Nowadays, I just hope that they play hard every night, that's all. Sometimes it will be enough to win and sometimes it won't be.
One day I think we need to take on the possibility that some players might just not be listening anymore. I wonder sometimes what goes on Mason's head or even RJ, who didn't see the floor in OT at all. They all say the right things, but I'm not sure they really are on the same page.

All you can really do is hope for good health, continued progress from Hill and Blair, and maybe even some playing time for Malik -- which could prevent this year from being a total loss. If they're healthy to end the year (relatively speaking), the young guys have gotten some good experience and you've found out whether Malik's a rotation player moving forward, that's a positive development in my view.

As for the guys not listening, it's a fair question to ask. The word that comes to mind is "stale" and it's just permeated throughout the whole organization (on and off the court). There's just too much acquiescing going on, whether it's coaches or players, and not enough fire, foot-in-ass or individuality that brings the type of character needed for a team to thrive or sustain.

This team needed some fresh blood and air from their newer arrivals, what they got were conformists doing their best to not step on anyone's toes; hindsight sure treats Jack well . . .


I think they flat out didn't do their homework on Jefferson. That, or they just were desperate to do something significant and found acquiring him to be as close as they could come to that or they were arrogant and thought "we're the Spurs, sure Jefferson has been in decline for two years as a defender/rebounder, but under our watch we can make him return to his near All-Star level because if we could have significantly lesser talents playing significant roles on championship teams, why couldn't we make this guy?".

From what I've gathered, they simply knew the Big 3 wouldn't be enough and that upgrading the talent was an absolute must. The market was deemed to be one for the buyer, but their options were basically Vince or RJ (neither without flaws or an ideal fit). And after they couldn't get Carter without including Hill and Mason, RJ was seemingly viewed as a move that had to be done, given the package they had to offer.

Having said that, I can't help but feel that the '04 experience Pop had with RJ weighed into the decision pretty heavily. The thing that stood out most to me (when hearing Pop talk about him to start the season), was how he believed RJ would fit in the locker room. How he had a great sense of humor and would really fit in with this group.

I believe that's what gave Pop the belief (some might say blinders) that he could harness RJ's game and mold it into something that could help to fill the gaps, so to speak, and propel the team moving forward. I'm not sure Pop's able to come to that conclusion or bank on him with Holt's money if he hadn't coached him in '04.


My thoughts exactly on Hairston/Mahinmi. I wouldn't consider Bell the answer either, but he is an upgrade on Bogans and my guess is the Spurs, rumored to be interested in Bell this season, would jump at the chance to sign him, either with what's left of the mid-level exception after signing Splitter or with the bi-annual exception.

Health permitting and not knowing for sure what's going to be attainable at the moment, Bell could be a nice pick up -- it'd certainly be expected, from a Spurs standpoint, if the price is right. But I'm not someone who's all that high on him or clamoring for his services.


You can bring up the Wright's and McGuire's (he in particular, what with his known immaturity and inability to shoot) of the world, but I doubt the Spurs would sign one of them and ask them to fulfill that role, while the Batum's and Ariza's are unavailable -- unless someone bowls either team over. So if the Spurs can't land Bell or someone of that ilk, then don't be surprised if Bogans is re-signed. The Spurs probably view Hairston as their Wright/McGuire.

McGuire's someone that could seemingly be had on the cheap and could occupy the bench -- I wasn't suggesting letting him take on the Bowen role (maybe some day, but not off the bat). The Spurs are going to have to fill out the roster with some players of his ilk, I'd just prefer he be one of them; it'd be nice to see a potential defender on the wing with his physical attributes in the program (whether you reap the rewards 1, 2 or 3 years from now).


Splitter, even though his shot blocking numbers are underwhelming, draftexpress claims he's a vastly improved shot blocker.

I've never formulated my opinion of Splitter's capabilities by his numbers. Its not that there's nothing to glean from them, but there are some things that only need the naked eye: Splitter's success, if it's to be significant, will be in his ability to make people shoot over the top of that big body and his ability to move his feet. Like all guys of his size, he's bound to run into some blocks along the way, but he possesses neither the innate sense of timing or explosiveness to ever be the prototypical shot-blocker -- He'd sure beat the hell out of RJ, Fin, Bogans and Mason at the rim, though.:hat


My guess is they fail to land the Batum type they need at SF and the Thomas type they need at PF and instead end up masquerading Splitter as the Thomas type and Bell or Bogans again as the Batum type.


Damn, Tyrus really was an ideal fit for the times . . .

Pretty safe assumption, though. But it's just too early to tell what the options really are. I mean, if RJ's gone, that opens up all sorts of possibilities. If Manu's gone, it's hard not to see them having a net loss with whomever they bring in to take his place. And should they trade Tony or have any combination of these three things happen? It's anyone's guess what the hell will happen.

For now, I'd be satisfied just to see the Spurs' youth comprise more of the supporting cast; it's time to get a jump on next year.

[TD 21]

That was obvious and given what they had to offer, Jefferson was the best the Spurs could do. What concerned me from day one was their acting as if he was still the 03-07 Jefferson. It's like they were oblivious to his obvious loss of lateral quickness and bad habits that he had acquired over the past few years.

Agreed. They seemingly put too much stock in Jefferson's "fitting in in the locker room" and not enough in Jefferson's fitting in on the court. I know he's not a guy who can run pick-and-roll and break people down off the dribble, but he is an established 20 ppg scorer in this league and to see the lack of plays run for him is mind boggling. If anything, I thought they'd be force feeding Jefferson, particular during stretches where they play 4-in-5 or back to back, so that they didn't have to tax the big three, yet could still have enough firepower to win those games.

Pop has set Jefferson up to fail. It doesn't excuse his poor play, but it is a reason for it. He's utilized him as if he's a prime Marion. He's not now, nor was he ever that type of player. Who brings in a player with 2 years/$29 million remaining on his contract and doesn't let him play to his strengths? It's mind boggling.

Obviously I can't say for sure, but I have a fairly good idea of what's going to be attainable, in terms of adding a wing stopper and honestly, I can't see a better short term answer than Bell. I'm aware of the obvious pitfalls (age, lack of height/athleticism, etc.), but still.

I doubt they bring in an athletic wing who can't shoot. I just don't see it. The Spurs look for shooters/defenders on the wing. When's the last time they brought in a raw athlete? I'm guessing Cook and Almond replace Bonner and Finley next year.

Splitter will probably be good for about 1 bpg. But just to have someone not named Duncan with length (and in Splitter's case, mobility) on the back line will be nice. You think Splitter's better/will turn out better than Varejao and Gortat?

Thomas was ideal. And acquiring him could have killed two birds with one stone because it would have freed them up to shop Splitter for Batum. They need to give Parker an ultimatum: play for the national team this summer (given the state he's in physically) and we'll be shopping you around. Next year is probably their last shot at even pretending to build a championship team around Duncan and they can't allow it to be undermined by Parker being overly loyal. He's beat up, he needs to rest.

[Blackjack]

Wow . . .:wow

I just read this whole thread trying to ascertain MrFundamental's (it's not TPark; too many links and stats) purpose or the basis of his logic, and I've come up empty; apparently practice carries a lot of weight for a team that doesn't do it during the season and playing players like Hairston (who outplayed Bogans for the job) and Mahinmi (who's now the only player other than Tim capable of bringing what he does defensively) as part of the supporting cast is throwing away the season (it's Chicken Little, even).

Oh, and I especially like the part about adding two more players to the mix is something that's going to be detrimental to the team. I guess the thinking is, why risk disrupting inconsistency by throwing in another variable and risking inconsistency? Well, no need to worry, 'cause Pop still hasn't settled on a rotation (nor does he seem close to doing so), the supporting cast is stale, borderline inept, and it all comes to a head with Bogans and his bountiful minutes -- playing a guy like Hairston in his stead would truly be paramount to tanking, wouldn't it?:lol

One more thing, they can't risk losing ground? Really? 'Cause what I've been witnessing is a whole bunch of fail with some personnel that's shown no sign of turning it around, so I can't see an argument (a valid one that comes from anyone who's actually watched all parties involved and possesses a decent basketball acumen) that wins out on the merits of the players in question: The Spurs are heading to nowhere but an early-ouster or the lottery and playing guys who aren't getting it done, or likely to be here next year, over guys that possibly could, on both counts, makes absolutely zero sense.

RTB, son.

R T B . . .

[Blackjack]

Pop has set Jefferson up to fail. It doesn't excuse his poor play, but it is a reason for it. He's utilized him as if he's a prime Marion. He's not now, nor was he ever that type of player. Who brings in a player with 2 years/$29 million remaining on his contract and doesn't let him play to his strengths? It's mind boggling.

I agree, in that it's not one-hundred percent on RJ that he's looked a shell of his former self, but I'm not sure having him succeed in the fashion that's got him his money is conducive to winning.

There are some players that are gifted, talented and viewed as stars because their stats and individual ability impresses or amazes at times. But when you really break them down and ask how much of what they do or excel at would constitute a winning ball player, someone that's impact on the game isn't quantifiable with stats necessarily, that's where you see their true worth. I'd ask this: What is it about RJ's acumen for the game, offensive repertoire or defensive ability that truly stands out? What is there about his game that makes others better or makes the game easier for others, and how useful is he if he's not out in the open court and putting points on the board?

There's no doubt in my mind Pop and the Spurs could find a way to make RJ look more like the player people have grown accustomed to over the last couple of years, but I'm afraid it'd only translate into the Spurs mirroring the teams he put those numbers up on (which, sadly, they're not too far from).


Obviously I can't say for sure, but I have a fairly good idea of what's going to be attainable, in terms of adding a wing stopper and honestly, I can't see a better short term answer than Bell. I'm aware of the obvious pitfalls (age, lack of height/athleticism, etc.), but still.

Like I said, it's not sexy or all that desirable, but it could be a decent pick up at the end of the day -- it seems all but certain if his price is right.


I doubt they bring in an athletic wing who can't shoot. I just don't see it. The Spurs look for shooters/defenders on the wing. When's the last time they brought in a raw athlete? I'm guessing Cook and Almond replace Bonner and Finley next year.

See, you're talking about what they're going to do and I was simply stating what I'd like them to do. I don't really have much of a disagreement with the players (or players along the same lines) you've mentioned the Spurs are likely to sign.

As an aside, apparently McGuire got traded to the Kings for a second-rounder . . . :(


Splitter will probably be good for about 1 bpg. But just to have someone not named Duncan with length (and in Splitter's case, mobility) on the back line will be nice. You think Splitter's better/will turn out better than Varejao and Gortat?

In terms of level of player and status in the league, more or less comparable. Splitter's a more offensively talented player and maybe more gifted than both, but his impact and worth (somewhat like the RJ argument) might not be as great as someone like Varejao (with his hustle, energy and savvy) or Gortat (who's a stronger more disruptive defender). I think he'll be viewed as the better player and probably put up more impressive stats, I just question whether that will mean he's a better, more valuable player.


Thomas was ideal. And acquiring him could have killed two birds with one stone because it would have freed them up to shop Splitter for Batum. They need to give Parker an ultimatum: play for the national team this summer (given the state he's in physically) and we'll be shopping you around. Next year is probably their last shot at even pretending to build a championship team around Duncan and they can't allow it to be undermined by Parker being overly loyal. He's beat up, he needs to rest.

:tu

[AnthonyM]

Damn, I think MrFundamental posted all 110 of his posts in this thread....

[mountainballer]

Obviously I can't say for sure, but I have a fairly good idea of what's going to be attainable, in terms of adding a wing stopper and honestly, I can't see a better short term answer than Bell. I'm aware of the obvious pitfalls (age, lack of height/athleticism, etc.), but still.


for quite some time I would have agreed, even at this deadline, if we got Bell as a fall back option instead of getting nothing.
however, this summer I would really hate to see such a move. another time a then 34 years old player. hell no. as long as the argument was, this is the best to extend the championship window, it made some sense. but in the current situation it's just a move with no upside but a lot of downside for the future. (once more a washed up guy takes the minutes a player like Hairstone, or another young guy, would desperately need for his development).
not that I knew a great option, especially when thinking that the best offer will be the LLE (assuming MLE, or major part of it will go to Splitter).
Daniels signed for the LLE with Boston. I guess this will be the bar. we won't get a player who can be a stopper AND is a good shooter for that money.
Antoine Wright might be an interesting option for the LLE. his shooting has improved in the last 2 years and he could be a decent defender in a good system. no real stopper of course. I'm still hoping that Hairston develops this qualities.
btw. Mo Evans has a player option this summer. maybe he opts out, his role with the Hawks has decreased. he makes 2.5 million per. yes, he isn't young any more either, but at 31 he should have 2 or 3 decent years left. if I remember right, the Spurs were interested in signing him in 2006. maybe there is enough left from the MLE after Splitter to offer him. (like Splitter gets 3years/10M and Evans 3years/7.5M)



Splitter will probably be good for about 1 bpg. But just to have someone not named Duncan with length (and in Splitter's case, mobility) on the back line will be nice. You think Splitter's better/will turn out better than Varejao and Gortat?


Splitter is a much more talented player than both. no doubt about that. if this guarantees that he will provide more impact? don't know. but for me the point is: it could happen. he could become a decent to good NBA player. I mean Marc Gasol or Scola level.
Spurs currently have very little of those options, where the best case is a starter quality player.
Splitter isn't a shot blocker, right.
we still have this draft and a pick from 14 to 22.
this draft is deep in 2 areas, that's power bigs (PF, PF/C) and combo forwards.
if we see Tim-Blair-Splitter-Dice as our rotation next year and Splitter-Blair as core for the future, a mobile shotblocker looks like the best compliment for both situations. I'm a big fan of Greg Monroe, but maybe Ekpe Udoh is the better option considering this. with Jerome Jordan as a fall back option.

[BillMc]

You want to play Hairston/Mahinmi or D-League players when Spurs are trying to make the playoffs? Do you know what would happen if Pop did this and they fall to 9th or 10th place? Good God! Fans need to realize the grass is not always greener on the other side of the mountain. If Hairston or Mahinmi wants to play let them earn a spot by showing it in practice. Putting these two out there 'so we can see what they can do' is something no coach would do during a regular season game.

This!

[Agitator]

Here's what many people have failed to realize: Bowen and Horry are irreplaceable. No, they weren't Hall-of-Famers or even All-Stars, but they were two of the best role players of all-time and they fit this team, both on the court and the culture of the team, to a tee. So it's easy to say "they haven't replaced Bowen, Horry (and to a lesser extent, Barry)", but honestly, they couldn't/can't.

What they could have done is brought in a legit wing stopper, instead of masquerading Udoka 2.0 as one. They also could have brought in a combo forward who can guard mobile four's, instead of using a multitude of options to do that, all of which are unappealing and ineffective. But still, nobody they could have realistically brought in would have replaced the "corporate knowledge" of Bowen/Horry.

I agree, though, that the Spurs need to find out what they have with Mahinmi/Hairston. Bring in an Almond now, find out what he can do. Don't wait until next season and have the same questions with regards to Hairston, or think about the latest one that got away, in Mahinmi (I doubt he makes a Scola level impact and don't get me wrong, I wanted Udrih gone too, but he, like Udrih, could very well show he's a capable rotation player), or wonder "is Almond (insert any D-Leaguer's name you want) an NBA player/fit on this team?". They need to find all of that out now.

If I'm the front office, I'm already planning for next season. Unfortunately, their two biggest needs: wing stopper and athletic, shot blocking man, are likely to go unfilled. Unless you consider Bell or someone of that ilk the answer to the former and Splitter the answer to the latter.

Like I said in the "building for the future" thread, I'm guessing Ginobili and Hairston are re-signed and Splitter, Bell, Cook and Almond are signed, which leaves the 1st round pick (I'd assume it'll be an SF or a SF/PF) and third PG left. Is that a championship caliber team? Unless Splitter makes a fairly sizable impact and Bell finds the fountain of youth, it isn't. The others? Filler/cheap replacements for the players likely to depart.

I was shocked when I heard about them getting traded.

Still don't understand that.

[LOL@MavsFan]

ds

[MrFundamental]

Wow . . .:wow

I just read this whole thread trying to ascertain MrFundamental's (it's not TPark; too many links and stats) purpose or the basis of his logic, and I've come up empty; apparently practice carries a lot of weight for a team that doesn't do it during the season and playing players like Hairston (who outplayed Bogans for the job) and Mahinmi (who's now the only player other than Tim capable of bringing what he does defensively) as part of the supporting cast is throwing away the season (it's Chicken Little, even).
Other then preseason, when did Hairston outplay Bogans? On what do you base Mahinmi's defense, his size? And can you name any other team in the NBA with an above .500 record and current playoff spot that is looking to take a chance on what essentially amounts to 2 rookies?


Oh, and I especially like the part about adding two more players to the mix is something that's going to be detrimental to the team. I guess the thinking is, why risk disrupting inconsistency by throwing in another variable and risking inconsistency? Well, no need to worry, 'cause Pop still hasn't settled on a rotation (nor does he seem close to doing so), the supporting cast is stale, borderline inept, and it all comes to a head with Bogans and his bountiful minutes -- playing a guy like Hairston in his stead would truly be paramount to tanking, wouldn't it?:lol
So do you really think more inconsistency is better? Should they really start from the ground up in rotations? Considering the unknown is how well Hairston and Mahinmi would do, I would say yes, that is tantamount to tanking.


One more thing, they can't risk losing ground? Really? 'Cause what I've been witnessing is a whole bunch of fail with some personnel that's shown no sign of turning it around, so I can't see an argument (a valid one that comes from anyone who's actually watched all parties involved and possesses a decent basketball acumen) that wins out on the merits of the players in question: The Spurs are heading to nowhere but an early-ouster or the lottery and playing guys who aren't getting it done, or likely to be here next year, over guys that possibly could, on both counts, makes absolutely zero sense.
Wait a sec, you say that they are heading for a first round loss or lottery, yet you disagree that they can't risk losing ground? What? Or have you given up and are content with the fact that the upside of this season is a first round loss? If so, I'd be more then happy to give major minutes to Ian, Hairston, Blair, and Hill. Hell, then bench Bogans, Mason, Parker, Duncan, and play with an 8 man rotation that includes Jefferson (he's got to learn the damn system sometime), Dice, Bonner, and Ginobili. Let's prepare for next season, at which point hopefully Pops can expand his playbook and maybe the team will play like they should.

[MrFundamental]

You want to play Hairston/Mahinmi or D-League players when Spurs are trying to make the playoffs? Do you know what would happen if Pop did this and they fall to 9th or 10th place? Good God! Fans need to realize the grass is not always greener on the other side of the mountain. If Hairston or Mahinmi wants to play let them earn a spot by showing it in practice. Putting these two out there 'so we can see what they can do' is something no coach would do during a regular season game.
Seconded!

[ElNono]

And can you name any other team in the NBA with an above .500 record and current playoff spot that is looking to take a chance on what essentially amounts to 2 rookies?

Oklahoma City Thunder

Ibaka, Harden and Maynor (while he was there)...
Westbrook is also a sophomore...

[ElNono]

Plenty of teams integrating rooks and sophomores too...
Denver with Ty Lawson, Cleveland with JJ Hicks...

The thing is, playoffs teams rarely get good draft picks (other than via trade), that's why you don't see more of that.

[MrFundamental]

Oklahoma City Thunder

Ibaka, Harden and Maynor (while he was there)...
Westbrook is also a sophomore...
They've all played the whole year, little bit of a difference ;)

[MrFundamental]

Plenty of teams integrating rooks and sophomores too...
Denver with Ty Lawson, Cleveland with JJ Hicks...

The thing is, playoffs teams rarely get good draft picks (other than via trade), that's why you don't see more of that.
I meant after the All-Star break like people are saying the Spurs should do now (and considering they've played Blair and Hill, so I would have been wrong from the start). Apologies if I wasn't specific.

[ElNono]

Well, the request to play Hairston and Mahinmi isn't new. Guys like Blackjack or Harlem have been talking about it for a while now, not since the All Star break...

But even then, if what you're putting out there isn't getting it done, why not give them 10 minutes and see what you get?

[MrFundamental]

Well, the request to play Hairston and Mahinmi isn't new. Guys like Blackjack or Harlem have been talking about it for a while now, not since the All Star break...

But even then, if what you're putting out there isn't getting it done, why not give them 10 minutes and see what you get?
Because the unknown is what is going on behind the scenes. If they are woefully under-performing in practice, why throw them to the dogs in a real game? I agree Pops should have attempted to play them from the beginning, but I'm not privy to practice film or notes, so I can't say it's my place to second guess his decisions, unless something comes out to the contrary about their performance.

[ElNono]

Because the unknown is what is going on behind the scenes. If they are woefully under-performing in practice, why throw them to the dogs in a real game? I agree Pops should have attempted to play them from the beginning, but I'm not privy to practice film or notes, so I can't say it's my place to second guess his decisions, unless something comes out to the contrary about their performance.

So you don't know either... which basically means your opinion is as good as Black's or anybody else...

[MrFundamental]

So you don't know either... which basically means your opinion is as good as Black's or anybody else...
Congrats, you got to the bottom of opinions. :rolleyes

Now what makes you think they deserve to play? Just because some current players haven't been playing well? Why do they deserve to play by default?

[BillMc]

The Spurs are only 2.5 behind Dallas SW and 5 behind Denver in the West. Yeah, they're struggling, but not enough to start throwing D-leaguers in the mix; especially after everyone is calling for some consistency.

I agree. MrFundamental makes some very good points.:toast

[ElNono]

Now what makes you think they deserve to play? Just because some current players haven't been playing well? Why do they deserve to play by default?

Why not? The current guys are not getting it done, and it's not just a single game or two. A guy like Bogans has been sucking for half a season now.
Defensively speaking, a guy like Bonner simply does not have the tools. This isn't news.

I defended playing Bogans when the season started because he was shooting lights out, but once that went off the window, the guy really can't give you anything else. And the reason the other guys should play is because those are the guys that the FO decided to keep and can give you a variant. Should the FO have decided to move them or trade them for other players, then we would be advocating for playing those other guys.

Like Harlem said, this is not about saviors. It could very well be that neither Mahinmi or Hairston have much to give, if anything at all. But when the guys that are getting the minutes are consistently not giving you anything either, there's no reason not to hand out 10 minutes and see what you have.
I mean, it's not like Pop didn't do it already with Finley earlier in the season.

[MrFundamental]

Why not? The current guys are not getting it done, and it's not just a single game or two. A guy like Bogans has been sucking for half a season now.
I agree, Bogans' minutes shouldn't break 20 let alone the 35+ he just had.


Defensively speaking, a guy like Bonner simply does not have the tools. This isn't news.
True, but that's when the other 4 need to step it up. As Pops has said, it's called "team defense" for a reason.


And the reason the other guys should play is because those are the guys that the FO decided to keep and can give you a variant. Should the FO have decided to move them or trade them for other players, then we would be advocating for playing those other guys.
That's the thing, they may have had to keep them as no one else wanted them. Perhaps they tried to move Ian and had no takers, and it seems they only called up Hairston because Tony is injured.


Like Harlem said, this is not about saviors. It could very well be that neither Mahinmi or Hairston have much to give, if anything at all. But when the guys that are getting the minutes are consistently not giving you anything either, there's no reason not to hand out 10 minutes and see what you have.
I mean, it's not like Pop didn't do it already with Finley earlier in the season.
And as I see it, that should have been done earlier in the season, I can't see a winning team attempting to do that now. I agree Bogans should be limited, but I think the rotations should be limited to 8 players (possibly 9): Hill, Parker, Duncan, Dice, Blair, Bonner, Jefferson, Ginobili, and a combination of minor minutes for Fin, Mase, or Bogans.

[OldSilentHill]

This is the best, down to earth, observation I've seen on this board by a long time Spurs fan. As much as other fans complain about the other guys, in my mind the Big 3 are the ones who aren't getting it done, especially at the ends of games. Manu played huge in the fourth but he also turned the ball over three different times if memory serves me correctly.

I'd also say that as big as Manu is for the Spurs, Tony's impact is bigger.

Yes, bec when Tony does nothing he brings his intangibles to the floor.

Oh, wait...:rolleyes


Maybe you were talking about a negative impact...

[ElNono]

True, but that's when the other 4 need to step it up. As Pops has said, it's called "team defense" for a reason.

Tim Duncan already needs help on defense.
Manu Ginobili already needs help on defense.
Tony Parker, hobbled, needs help on defense.

If, on top of that, you keep on adding role players that do not play defense, then you're compounding the problem, not solving it. Matt Bonner has been with the team for 4 seasons. He has no excuse for not knowing the system, or missing defensive rotations. And that's besides the fact that even when he does get it right, he simply does not have the tools to actually stop people.
When the argument is that your starters have been selected to set the defensive tone (Pop said it, not me), then it makes zero to put that guy in that position.


That's the thing, they may have had to keep them as no one else wanted them. Perhaps they tried to move Ian and had no takers, and it seems they only called up Hairston because Tony is injured.

Why they kept them is irrelevant. They're the guys that are there now and could give you a variant. Plus, they supposedly already know the system. They should have an advantage over those who do not.


And as I see it, that should have been done earlier in the season, I can't see a winning team attempting to do that now. I agree Bogans should be limited, but I think the rotations should be limited to 8 players (possibly 9): Hill, Parker, Duncan, Dice, Blair, Bonner, Jefferson, Ginobili, and a combination of minor minutes for Fin, Mase, or Bogans.

A cursory look at the schedule can tell you that the only reason we have the record we currently do is because we were consistently beating teams under .500 and because we were playing a bulk of our games at home. We just lost to two teams under .500 on the road and struggled mightily to beat another. Granted, a small sample size, but in my opinion it's indicative that our current record is fool's gold.

If the coaching staff would be currently fielding a consistent rotation, then I would agree with you that those are the players. I would actually move Bonner to the minor minutes category (should really be a situational category). But the coaching staff keeps on tinkering right now, so if we're being inconsistent for the sake of finding a solution to our struggles, handing some small minutes to other players to see what they can give you is not going to make things any more inconsistent. They already are.

[MrFundamental]

Tim Duncan already needs help on defense.
Manu Ginobili already needs help on defense.
Tony Parker, hobbled, needs help on defense.
Team defense.


If, on top of that, you keep on adding role players that do not play defense, then you're compounding the problem, not solving it. Matt Bonner has been with the team for 4 seasons. He has no excuse for not knowing the system, or missing defensive rotations. And that's besides the fact that even when he does get it right, he simply does not have the tools to actually stop people.
When the argument is that your starters have been selected to set the defensive tone (Pop said it, not me), then it makes zero to put that guy in that position.
I agree, Pops needs to figure out what he actually wants, defense at all positions, or consistent team D while taking the chance at minimal D at one position.



Why they kept them is irrelevant. They're the guys that are there now and could give you a variant. Plus, they supposedly already know the system. They should have an advantage over those who do not.
It's not irrelevant when you claimed they kept them for a reason. If the only reason they had to keep them was because no one else wanted them, why should they play?


If the coaching staff would be currently fielding a consistent rotation, then I would agree with you that those are the players. I would actually move Bonner to the minor minutes category (should really be a situational category). But the coaching staff keeps on tinkering right now, so if we're being inconsistent for the sake of finding a solution to our struggles, handing some small minutes to other players to see what they can give you is not going to make things any more inconsistent. They already are.
According to Wayne Winston (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/02/17/notes-from-wayne-winston-part-1/) Bonner is included in a top 3 rotation. You can't give someone like that minor minutes. And yes, you can actually be more inconsistent by adding 2 more variables to the equation. Looking back, Hairston had a chance at the beginning of the season with getting minutes, he under performed. I agree that Ian hasn't really had as good of a chance, but with his propensity to foul, and Pops having no tolerance for stupid fouls, I'm not really surprised he hasn't gotten to play too much. Perhaps they are working with him on that; to play some actual D instead of getting in trouble and getting called for a foul (see: Tim Duncan).

[ElNono]

One other issue to consider as far as defense goes, is that the league has gone with twin towers almost on every top team. It's easy to say 'team defense', but if Tim already has his hands full with Gasol, he can't just leave him alone to help with Bynum. Rinse and repeat with Perkins/Garnett, KMart/Nene, etc etc etc...
That's why Harlem keeps pointing out the need for another legit 7 footer...
Dice was the guy we got for that role, but he's a step slow and he's still somewhat undersized. He's been playing better, so there's always a glimmer of hope, but being undersized and not that mobile means he already is in a disadvantaged position.

[MrFundamental]

One other issue to consider as far as defense goes, is that the league has gone with twin towers almost on every top team. It's easy to say 'team defense', but if Tim already has his hands full with Gasol, he can't just leave him alone to help with Bynum. Rinse and repeat with Perkins/Garnett, KMart/Nene, etc etc etc...
That's why Harlem keeps pointing out the need for another legit 7 footer...
Dice was the guy we got for that role, but he's a step slow and he's still somewhat undersized. He's been playing better, so there's always a glimmer of hope, but being undersized and not that mobile means he already is in a disadvantaged position.
And that's when your team defensive rotations have to be solid, and you can't have a big man that gets into foul trouble.

[TJastal]

One other issue to consider as far as defense goes, is that the league has gone with twin towers almost on every top team. It's easy to say 'team defense', but if Tim already has his hands full with Gasol, he can't just leave him alone to help with Bynum. Rinse and repeat with Perkins/Garnett, KMart/Nene, etc etc etc...
That's why Harlem keeps pointing out the need for another legit 7 footer...
Dice was the guy we got for that role, but he's a step slow and he's still somewhat undersized. He's been playing better, so there's always a glimmer of hope, but being undersized and not that mobile means he already is in a disadvantaged position.

McDyess would be fine starting next to Tim, especially with the way he's been playing lately, but the problem is the backups, Blair and Bonner are just too weak defensively to have on the court together. This could be the reason Pop moved Bonner to the starting lineup, in order to "hide" both of their defensive shortcomings.

This situation is okay for the 2nd unit (McDyess and Blair are a solid backup combo) but this leaves the starting lineup in a twist, in need of a starting quality center. It puts alot of added pressure on Tim Duncan. The situation could have been remedied by keeping Ratliff and placing him in the starting lineup, using the 1st half of the season developing Ian Mahinmi, or by working a trade for a young shotblocker like Tyrus Thomas. Despite these options, Popovich elected to be a lazy stubborn jackass and give Duncan no help whatsoever. Which is inexcusable.

[ElNono]

Team defense.

You need to have defensive players to play team defense. When we had Bowen it was a lot easier to double up other guys. When Duncan had enough lift to come from the weak side as a help defender and block shots it was a lot easier to allow penetration. These days, because Tim's decline and lack of perimeter defenders, once a guy beat his man he's pretty much into our paint.


It's not irrelevant when you claimed they kept them for a reason.

Quote where I said that? I said they FO decided to keep them. I don't know the reasons, and they're irrelevant. If the FO really wanted to dump them, they could easily done so. Shit, they can still waive them and get two more guys from the Toros. They can send Hairston back to the D-League and get somebody else from there.


If the only reason they had to keep them was because no one else wanted them, why should they play?

Because the guys that are getting playing time are not getting it done? Because we keep on changing lineups anyways, so there's really no reason not to play them for a modicum of time to see what you have?
It's undeniable that the Spurs spent considerable resources on both players. Why not take a look at what you got for your money?


According to Wayne Winston (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/02/17/notes-from-wayne-winston-part-1/) Bonner is included in a top 3 rotation. You can't give someone like that minor minutes.

LOL, that's points better than average per 48, in other words, an offensive chart. You want to see overall numbers on 5 man floor combinations, including offense, defense, plus/minus and win/loss? here (http://www.82games.com/0910/0910SAS2.HTM)

Look at the Win%. Out of the top 10 lineup combinations, the very first to include Bonner is ranked 6, the other one is dead last.
Actually, the dead last one is ranked #4 in minutes played. Just sad.


And yes, you can actually be more inconsistent by adding 2 more variables to the equation. Looking back, Hairston had a chance at the beginning of the season with getting minutes, he under performed.

When? He logged more than 5 minutes in 4 games this season. He only logged 10 minutes or more in one single game.


I agree that Ian hasn't really had as good of a chance, but with his propensity to foul, and Pops having no tolerance for stupid fouls, I'm not really surprised he hasn't gotten to play too much. Perhaps they are working with him on that; to play some actual D instead of getting in trouble and getting called for a foul (see: Tim Duncan).

I'm personally not that high on Ian myself. But honestly, I'm sick tired of the layup parade, and it's way too easy to get Duncan out of the way these days. Honestly, if you go back to the start of the season, Blair used to make all those dumb fouls too. He corrected that by the 4th or 5th game. Would it be the same with Ian? You don't know until you try.

[ElNono]

And that's when your team defensive rotations have to be solid, and you can't have a big man that gets into foul trouble.

I don't care how good your rotations are, there's a gap in the talent level, defensively speaking. You take a team like the Lakers, and we could rotate and help on players because we already had his top player single covered. Nowadays, Odom posts RJ, and how do you send help? Tony Parker isn't going to do much at all to bother him. Send any of the two bigs and you just gave two 7 footers entry right under the rim. On top of that, outside of Manu and perhaps Hill, we basically have nobody that can either take a charge or steal a ball.

[MrFundamental]

Quote where I said that? I said they FO decided to keep them.
OK, you didn't say for a reason, but you say they decided to keep them, when in fact that decision may have been because they couldn't get rid of them. In other words, if I decide to give you a broken TV and you decline, I didn't decide to keep the TV, I only have it by default.


If the FO really wanted to dump them, they could easily done so.
How?

Shit, they can still waive them and get two more guys from the Toros. They can send Hairston back to the D-League and get somebody else from there.
And what good would that do? You still have 2 D-leaguers that aren't going to play. You seem to be advocating change for the sake of change, not because it will help.


LOL, that's points better than average per 48, in other words, an offensive chart. You want to see overall numbers on 5 man floor combinations, including offense, defense, plus/minus and win/loss? here (http://www.82games.com/0910/0910SAS2.HTM)

Look at the Win%. Out of the top 10 lineup combinations, the very first to include Bonner is ranked 6, the other one is dead last.
Actually, the dead last one is ranked #4 in minutes played. Just sad.
And Bogans is in the 2nd and 3rd ranked unit for win percentage, I don't think you want to go that route ;)


When? He logged more than 5 minutes in 4 games this season. He only logged 10 minutes or more in one single game.
And he didn't do anything with the time given to him, even in scrub time. You are advocating they get 10 a piece, yet when he had time he didn't produce.

I'm personally not that high on Ian myself. But honestly, I'm sick tired of the layup parade, and it's way too easy to get Duncan out of the way these days. Honestly, if you go back to the start of the season, Blair used to make all those dumb fouls too. He corrected that by the 4th or 5th game. Would it be the same with Ian? You don't know until you try.[/quote]
Blair still fouls way too much, which is probably why he doesn't see the floor as much as he should. Against Indy he played 10 minutes and had 5 fouls.

[MrFundamental]

I don't care how good your rotations are, there's a gap in the talent level, defensively speaking. You take a team like the Lakers, and we could rotate and help on players because we already had his top player single covered. Nowadays, Odom posts RJ, and how do you send help? Tony Parker isn't going to do much at all to bother him. Send any of the two bigs and you just gave two 7 footers entry right under the rim.
And how would Ian or Hairston solve that?


On top of that, outside of Manu and perhaps Hill, we basically have nobody that can either take a charge or steal a ball.
And you don't need that all the time. Hell the Spurs are only ~.5 steals a game behind Cleveland and Orlando.

BTW, the new 48MoH article (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/02/23/the-root-of-all-defensive-evil/) basically reiterates what we are both saying, the Spurs are letting teams get to the hoop to easy and fouling too much as a result. I think in the end we both recognize the problem, yet have differing opinions on how to solve it.

[MrFundamental]

LOL, that's points better than average per 48, in other words, an offensive chart. You want to see overall numbers on 5 man floor combinations, including offense, defense, plus/minus and win/loss? here (http://www.82games.com/0910/0910SAS2.HTM)

Look at the Win%. Out of the top 10 lineup combinations, the very first to include Bonner is ranked 6, the other one is dead last.
Actually, the dead last one is ranked #4 in minutes played. Just sad.
If opponents getting to the rim is now supposedly the problem, it seems that a unit of Parker-Ginobili-Jefferson-Bonner-Duncan is the best at solving that problem.


# Unit eFG eFGA FTA Close dClose Reb T/O
8 Parker-Ginobili-Jefferson-Bonner-Duncan .415 .385 +24 34% 23% 46.0% +2%

[ElNono]

OK, you didn't say for a reason, but you say they decided to keep them, when in fact that decision may have been because they couldn't get rid of them.

That's speculation. And honestly, it doesn't matter.


In other words, if I decide to give you a broken TV and you decline, I didn't decide to keep the TV, I only have it by default.

You can offer the TV to other people. You can simply toss it in the curb.
The analogy is not very good. The Spurs simply have options besides trading them if they don't want them to be part of the roster. Do you disagree with that?


How? And what good would that do? You still have 2 D-leaguers that aren't going to play.

How do you know they're not going to play? Are you privy to the coaching staff notes or discussions? (Yes, I'm pulling the same bullshit you're pulling on everyone else)


You seem to be advocating change for the sake of change, not because it will help.

How do you know it won't be helpful? Can you know if you don't try?


And Bogans is in the 2nd and 3rd ranked unit for win percentage, I don't think you want to go that route ;)

Hey, you brought the numbers to make a point. I actually watch all the games. I trust my eyes more than a spreadsheet.
But I also think it really paints the defensive picture. We simply DO NOT have good defenders on this team anymore with the exception of a couple of guys that show up in pretty much every lineup combo there... (TD, Hill)


And he didn't do anything with the time given to him, even in scrub time. You are advocating they get 10 a piece, yet when he had time he didn't produce.

We gave over half a season to Bogans, basically for nothing. Is it too much to ask to give him 10 mins on 10 straight games and see what he can give you?


Blair still fouls way too much, which is probably why he doesn't see the floor as much as he should. Against Indy he played 10 minutes and had 5 fouls.

He's also severely undersized. I understand that he has a really big wingspan and he can leap (compared to TD anyways), but tall guys simply shot over him. I actually have looked at Blair closely defensively lately, and he really doesn't do much of anything other than try to hold position and pray for a miss so he can corral the rebound. I love the kid and his energy, but that's just not going to get it done at the other end. (Rookie caveat emptor and what not).

[ElNono]

And how would Ian or Hairston solve that?

Lateral quickness. The reason RJ can't guard Odom is not size. It's that Richard simply does not have the lateral quickness to prevent anybody from going around him and straight to the basket.
We need more athletes to match against other athletes.


And you don't need that all the time. Hell the Spurs are only ~.5 steals a game behind Cleveland and Orlando.
BTW, the new 48MoH article (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/02/23/the-root-of-all-defensive-evil/) basically reiterates what we are both saying, the Spurs are letting teams get to the hoop to easy and fouling too much as a result. I think in the end we both recognize the problem, yet have differing opinions on how to solve it.

We used to be one of the top teams generating turnovers about 3 seasons ago. It's part of everything. Sometimes stops don't just come from contesting shots. But yes, the layup parade has been a huge problem. And the reason we foul so much is because we also no longer have an above average shot blocker in TD. And this takes us back to why I wanted to see a little more of Ratliff. He's a guy that might not do many things right. But he can either block or change shots enough to give the defense time to recover.
But that's obviously history now.

[MrFundamental]

That's speculation. And honestly, it doesn't matter.
It completely matters relative to your claim.


You can offer the TV to other people. You can simply toss it in the curb.
The analogy is not very good. The Spurs simply have options besides trading them if they don't want them to be part of the roster. Do you disagree with that?
No, I don't disagree. Do you disagree that it makes less sense to drop those 2 now and pick up 2 other journeymen when these 2 don't play anyway?


How do you know they're not going to play? Are you privy to the coaching staff notes or discussions? (Yes, I'm pulling the same bullshit you're pulling on everyone else)
I don't know, I basing it off the past 2 months. Though it seems Ian is actually getting some minutes.


How do you know it won't be helpful? Can you know if you don't try?
Of course you can't completely know, but you can have a good idea from things other then game minutes.


\Hey, you brought the numbers to make a point. I actually watch all the games. I trust my eyes more than a spreadsheet.
Unless that spreadsheet happens to agree with you... :rolleyes


How do you know it won't be helpful? Can you know if you don't try?
Of course you can't completely know, but you can have a good idea from things other then game minutes.


Is it too much to ask to give him 10 mins on 10 straight games and see what he can give you?
At this point in the season, yes.

[ElNono]

If opponents getting to the rim is now supposedly the problem, it seems that a unit of Parker-Ginobili-Jefferson-Bonner-Duncan is the best at solving that problem.

But then you increase second chance points (2nd worst rebounding lineup) and decrease offensive output (2nd worst eFG, and worst eFGA).

Coincidentally, do you think think it's by pure chance that Bonner is part of the two worse rebounding lineups listed there?

[ElNono]

It completely matters relative to your claim.

Again, I asked you for a quote to any claims, and you responded:


OK, you didn't say for a reason

What claim?


No, I don't disagree. Do you disagree that it makes less sense to drop those 2 now and pick up 2 other journeymen when these 2 don't play anyway?

Ok, we agree then that the Spurs could have moved them and they didn't.
And it does make sense in Ian's case. The Spurs could have dumped his salary and saved on the luxury tax. timvp actually mentioned being surprised that the Spurs didn't do exactly that.


I don't know, I basing it off the past 2 months. Though it seems Ian is actually getting some minutes.

So you don't know, but somehow your opinion carries more weight for no reason whatsoever...


Of course you can't completely know, but you can have a good idea from things other then game minutes.

Like what? I mean, Hairston hasn't even been with the team for long stretches, so practices are out of the question at least for him.


Unless that spreadsheet happens to agree with you... :rolleyes

I've yet to see you posting a spreadsheet that doesn't agree with you... :rolleyes
But I didn't bring the numbers game here, you did.


At this point in the season, yes.

Based on what? Are you privy to coaching notes or decisions nobody knows about?

[MrFundamental]

But then you increase second chance points (2nd worst rebounding lineup)
Which is a side effect of letting teams shoot jumpings and holding them to a low percentage.

and decrease offensive output (2nd worst eFG, and worst eFGA).
I think we want eFGA to be low:

eFGA = the effective shooting percentage allowed to opponents.
But, yes, the poor shooting has hounded the team as well.


Coincidentally, do you think think it's by pure chance that Bonner is part of the two worse rebounding lineups listed there?
Of course not.

[MrFundamental]

Again, I asked you for a quote to any claims, and you responded:

What claim?
Wow:

And the reason the other guys should play is because those are the guys that the FO decided to keep
So you're saying the reason they kept them is insignificant to the fact that they are still on the team, is that what I'm getting?


Ok, we agree then that the Spurs could have moved them and they didn't.
And it does make sense in Ian's case. The Spurs could have dumped his salary and saved on the luxury tax. timvp actually mentioned being surprised that the Spurs didn't do exactly that.
Gotta have someone on the active roster.


So you don't know, but somehow your opinion carries more weight for no reason whatsoever...
:bang Holy shit. Isn't that the point of this fucking place, to argue opinions? Christ, this place would be pretty fucking boring if everyone agreed.


I've yet to see you posting a spreadsheet that doesn't agree with you... :rolleyes
So I'm supposed to post something that doesn't agree with me? :downspin: That would have to be the dumbest fucking thing to do if I wanted to show myself right.

But I didn't bring the numbers game here, you did.
I did, then you attempted to debunk my numbers by posting your own.


Based on what? Are you privy to coaching notes or decisions nobody knows about?
Yes, I actually am. I have Pops' number on speed dial.

Jesus, just when you actually start to have some substantial posts and get somewhere, you post some bullshit like this again. You must seriously be hurt about that Ratliff trade, I suggest counseling.

[ElNono]

Which is a side effect of letting teams shoot jumpings and holding them to a low percentage.

It's also a side effect of having a poor rebounder in the lineup.
As the timeless PJ Carlesimo once said: "Defense doesn't end with a stop. Defense ends with a defensive rebound".


I think we want eFGA to be low:

Yes, we do, we do. :toast


But, yes, the poor shooting has hounded the team as well.

I would characterize it as poor offensive execution. I think we're not getting the shots we really want, because of a number of reasons, including having our big 3 either on the decline or hobbled.

[ElNono]

Wow:

I must be blind. I still see no reason spelled out there.


So you're saying the reason they kept them is insignificant to the fact that they are still on the team, is that what I'm getting?

You must have trouble either reading or comprehending.


Gotta have someone on the active roster.
Sure. Doesn't have to be Ian or Malik though.


:bang Holy shit. Isn't that the point of this fucking place, to argue opinions? Christ, this place would be pretty fucking boring if everyone agreed.

The point is that when you post your opinion, you have to back it up.
And when you're shown to be wrong, you need to let it go.


So I'm supposed to post something that doesn't agree with me? :downspin: That would have to be the dumbest fucking thing to do if I wanted to show myself right.

The dumbest thing you do is to keep on pushing the same opinions when they've been debunked.


I did, then you attempted to debunk my numbers by posting your own.

Well, when we're talking defense and you bring up an offensive chart, I mean, what else there is to add?


Yes, I actually am. I have Pops' number on speed dial.

:rolleyes


Jesus, just when you actually start to have some substantial posts and get somewhere, you post some bullshit like this again. You must seriously be hurt about that Ratliff trade, I suggest counseling.

I have substantial posts with a lot of people here. But when you bring garbage, then I can play that game too.

[Blackjack]

As stated before, I actually took the time to read this whole thread in an effort to ascertain MrFundamental's purpose and the logic for the incessant gibberish ... and failed miserably.

I found one pretty solid take:

As I said before, Ratliff was brought in at the beginning of the season because of certain positives, at the trade deadline those positives were outweighed by saving Holt some money. That is why they signed him initially and then traded him for what amounts to cash. Apparently it really was that hard for you to understand.
That's all, folks . . .

What exactly are you arguing?

More of the same? Fuck exhausting all options and allowing the team to have a better idea of what they have and will need moving forward?

The arguments you've presented, at best, maintain the status quo, which, last time I checked, wasn't good enough and would only preclude the team from improving now and setting themselves up better going into next year.

I formulate my views on my own experiences and with my own eyes; simply allowing the decisions of Pop to be the be-all end-all (as it pertains to players -- smaller contributors) when they're based mostly on a comfort level and in a risk-adverse fashion, is not exactly my cup of tea.

They're are pros and cons to everything in life, infusing a little more youth, energy and talent into the supporting cast of a stale team, isn't all that risky of a decision at this point -- the pros far outweigh the cons now, and moving forward . . .

[MrFundamental]

As stated before, I actually took the time to read this whole thread in an effort to ascertain MrFundamental's purpose and the logic for the incessant gibberish ... and failed miserably.
You're right, I should have just posted

"Pops is teh suxxorz, long live Ian, long live Malik, take us to the promise land, anyone that disagrees is a popsucker" :downspin:


The arguments you've presented, at best, maintain the status quo, which, last time I checked, wasn't good enough and would only preclude the team from improving now and setting themselves up better going into next year.Wasn't good enough to what exactly?


They're are pros and cons to everything in life, infusing a little more youth, energy and talent into the supporting cast of a stale team, isn't all that risky of a decision at this point -- the pros far outweigh the cons now, and moving forward . . .Fuck, I've said the same fucking thing. If you would pull your head out of your ass you probably would have seen it. Shit it was in a reply to one of you posts

Wait a sec, you say that they are heading for a first round loss or lottery, yet you disagree that they can't risk losing ground? What? Or have you given up and are content with the fact that the upside of this season is a first round loss? If so, I'd be more then happy to give major minutes to Ian, Hairston, Blair, and Hill. Hell, then bench Bogans, Mason, Parker, Duncan, and play with an 8 man rotation that includes Jefferson (he's got to learn the damn system sometime), Dice, Bonner, and Ginobili. Let's prepare for next season, at which point hopefully Pops can expand his playbook and maybe the team will play like they should.

You don't seem to think this team will do dick anyway, so why not completely give up and give the team to youth and athleticism.

Christ, I didn't know Spurs fans were some of the most pretentious assholes around, if you don't kowtow and sing Kumbaya-Pops-Sucks, you apparently don't know shit. :rolleyes

[Blackjack]

:lol

You, my friend, are a ruh-tard.:tu

[MrFundamental]

:lol

You, my friend, are a ruh-tard.:tu
And you, my friend, are un-original. :sleep

[Blackjack]

http://npinopunintended.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/zach-galifianakis.jpg
RUH-TARD

[MrFundamental]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_3g742JOHG6U/SKdgsAHeTYI/AAAAAAAAAVU/zwNZ3ME8o5w/s400/thief.gif

Un-Original

[Blackjack]

The original's often better; no need to improve upon.:tu

[Mel_13]

These games are just uninspiring and mind-numbing. For the life of me, I just can't grasp what the hell Pop's really trying to do . . .

He's not tanking, as Tim and Manu are still out there busting their ass and Tony's been playing hurt up until today. But he's not trying to win, as he's never given the team and players any type of consistency to build anything fruitful.

Meanwhile, Keith Bogans continues to get his minutes and Hairston (the guy who outplayed him and, for all intents and purposes, beat him out for the job) can't even sniff the action -- Mahinmi was given up upon before being given the opportunity to be given up on (his option wasn't picked up, so allowing him to help or be useful for the time he's here just doesn't make sense ... right?).

This team's flawed; has been since Day 1. I never happened to drink the Kool-Aid that this team had what it took to win a championship with this group, or that RJ possessed the type of game to really propel the Spurs to the next level. The Spurs have won with a consistent formula consisting of particular types of players filling particular, specialized roles, and they didn't replenish those requisite facets/needs with the right people -- Bowen, Horry, Barry and serviceable 7-footers aren't made up for by Bogans, Bonner, Mason and a plethora of wings 6-7 or below manning the middle for an aging Tim.

So if I understood that going into the season and many others did as well, surely Pop and the crew knew they had some work to do. I mean, I know they were hopeful and optimistic (and they had reason to believe this team could be one or two, right, moves away from capturing another title), but they couldn't have been blind or ignorant of their reality, right?

And that was the outlook and hope for this presently constructed team given good health . . .

They haven't been healthy, and they still haven't filled those integral roles for their championship formula -- what's ensued has been predictable (to an extent; no one could see this clusterfuck of circumstance) and woefully below their standard. So the fact that they're not in the championship discussion is more frustrating and depressing than surprising.

Surprising is the thought process and rationale we've come to expect from Coach Pop. I've never witnessed a year, with him at the helm, that lacked as much discipline and consistency as this one. There's just no reasonable end-game to the logic or payoff for the madness -- it's simply throwing shit against the wall and seeing what sticks (he's acquiesced to the point of losing his core, proven principles. Only the flesh he inhabits suggests he's the man that's guided this team to four titles).

So I accepted this team's fate a good while ago and have been bearing witness to their games more than living or dying with each win or loss -- even lowered expectation can't prevent the empty feeling these outcomes bring, though. (Watching Tim play at this level and knowing that it's not promised for next year, just makes you sick to the stomach.) But watching Hill and Blair grow has been a bit of a saving grace. A glimmer of hope moving forward, at least.

This all-in bet the team placed was for a two-year window, and it could still be cashed in. They'd have to make some great, shrewd and smart moves, but, theoretically, it could be done. So if this team's going nowhere this year and the health of Tim, Tony and/or Manu is paramount moving forward, it's time for the team to start gearing up for next year. Allow the young guys to play through mistakes, evaluate them, maybe take a flier on a D-Leaguer or someone of that ilk, and bury Bogans, Finley and Mason on the bench -- see if you have or can find the perimeter defender needed and/or a cheap supporting cast member for next year.

Again, give me a light at the end of the tunnel, a reason to look forward to the game and, just maybe, a glimmer of hope.

That's all I ask.

This thread once held such promise....

[Blackjack]

I blame it all on MrFundamental. . .:smokin

[MrFundamental]

Yep, all my fault for having the audacity to disagree. My bad everyone, continue bitching and moaning.

[ElNono]

This thread once held such promise....

There's a guy that knows how to bring the Bonner weak sauce and still keep it civilized... :lol

[Blackjack]

That's it, though. You never stated why it is you disagree . . .

I don't have any problem with disagreement and if you're legitimately new to the board, maybe that's some sort of revelation to you.

I have discussions with people here all the time and I'd like to think I'm not one to come off as a condescending prick; that's never been my shtick.

But you've filled this thread with a whole bunch of nothin'; nothing in the way of suggestions to improve the team and it's standing now, or in the near future. So, maybe even somewhat regrettably, I broke character and decided to fight mind-numbing, leading-to-nowhere logic with a "Ruh-tard". (If all else fails, eh?)

I'm not a Pop basher, I just happen to differ with his approach when it comes to his dealing with their younger players. But, apparently, if you're not rationalizing every one of his decisions or deferring to all his logic, you're "kowtowing". . .

Well, consider me one kowtowin' sonbitch ... you're welcome:toast

[MrFundamental]

That's it, though. You never stated why it is you disagree . . .

I don't have any problem with disagreement and if you're legitimately new to the board, maybe that's some sort of revelation to you.

I have discussions with people here all the time and I'd like to think I'm not one to come off as a condescending prick; that's never been my shtick.

But you've filled this thread with a whole bunch of nothin'; nothing in the way of suggestions to improve the team and it's standing now, or in the near future. So, maybe even somewhat regrettably, I broke character and decided to fight mind-numbing, leading-to-nowhere logic with a "Ruh-tard". (If all else fails, eh?)

I'm not a Pop basher, I just happen to differ with his approach when it comes to his dealing with their younger players. But, apparently, if you're not rationalizing every one of his decisions or deferring to all his logic, you're "kowtowing". . .

Well, consider me one kowtowin' sonbitch ... you're welcome:toast
http://files.myopera.com/Mysticmaster/blog/facepalm.jpg

You don't want to come off as a condescending prick, at the same time your post makes you sound like a condescending prick. Gotcha. As I said, continue the Pops is teh suxxorz, go D-League talk.

[TD 21]

I agree, in that it's not one-hundred percent on RJ that he's looked a shell of his former self, but I'm not sure having him succeed in the fashion that's got him his money is conducive to winning.

There are some players that are gifted, talented and viewed as stars because their stats and individual ability impresses or amazes at times. But when you really break them down and ask how much of what they do or excel at would constitute a winning ball player, someone that's impact on the game isn't quantifiable with stats necessarily, that's where you see their true worth. I'd ask this: What is it about RJ's acumen for the game, offensive repertoire or defensive ability that truly stands out? What is there about his game that makes others better or makes the game easier for others, and how useful is he if he's not out in the open court and putting points on the board?

There's no doubt in my mind Pop and the Spurs could find a way to make RJ look more like the player people have grown accustomed to over the last couple of years, but I'm afraid it'd only translate into the Spurs mirroring the teams he put those numbers up on (which, sadly, they're not too far from).



Like I said, it's not sexy or all that desirable, but it could be a decent pick up at the end of the day -- it seems all but certain if his price is right.



See, you're talking about what they're going to do and I was simply stating what I'd like them to do. I don't really have much of a disagreement with the players (or players along the same lines) you've mentioned the Spurs are likely to sign.

As an aside, apparently McGuire got traded to the Kings for a second-rounder . . . :(



In terms of level of player and status in the league, more or less comparable. Splitter's a more offensively talented player and maybe more gifted than both, but his impact and worth (somewhat like the RJ argument) might not be as great as someone like Varejao (with his hustle, energy and savvy) or Gortat (who's a stronger more disruptive defender). I think he'll be viewed as the better player and probably put up more impressive stats, I just question whether that will mean he's a better, more valuable player.



:tu

I get it, the Spurs are a slow it down, grind it out, half court team that generally either plays through Duncan in the post or with Parker/Ginobili operating up top in a pick-and-roll. Obviously, that's not conducive to Jefferson, a runner and a jumper, who excels by leaking out, getting out on the break and finishing in transition. But you don't become a 20 ppg scorer in this league (generally speaking, there are exceptions like O'Neal) without being able to score in a multitude of ways. Jefferson has never been a great shooter, but he's gradually improved as his career has wore on and he's always been adept at slashing and getting to the free throw line. In other words, he has enough of a well rounded offensive game that, even though his strengths may not jive with that of the Spurs system, he should still be effective in other ways. That he's not is a failure on his part, on the team and on the coaching staff, but it's not because he shouldn't be capable of scoring (and thriving at times, considering he's essentially an afterthought for opposing defenses on this team) within' the system.

Basketball is a cerebral game, far more technical than most either realize or give it credit for, but at the end of the day, the basics are simple. Generally speaking, if you have talent, commitment and work ethic, things should work well. Jefferson and the Spurs may not be a perfect marriage, but it should be a lot better than it is.

I understand your point with regards to McGuire, but can't see the Spurs bringing him in, for reasons previously stated. The Wizards dumped him in order to get under the luxury tax line.

I agree with what you said about Splitter.



for quite some time I would have agreed, even at this deadline, if we got Bell as a fall back option instead of getting nothing.
however, this summer I would really hate to see such a move. another time a then 34 years old player. hell no. as long as the argument was, this is the best to extend the championship window, it made some sense. but in the current situation it's just a move with no upside but a lot of downside for the future. (once more a washed up guy takes the minutes a player like Hairstone, or another young guy, would desperately need for his development).
not that I knew a great option, especially when thinking that the best offer will be the LLE (assuming MLE, or major part of it will go to Splitter).
Daniels signed for the LLE with Boston. I guess this will be the bar. we won't get a player who can be a stopper AND is a good shooter for that money.
Antoine Wright might be an interesting option for the LLE. his shooting has improved in the last 2 years and he could be a decent defender in a good system. no real stopper of course. I'm still hoping that Hairston develops this qualities.
btw. Mo Evans has a player option this summer. maybe he opts out, his role with the Hawks has decreased. he makes 2.5 million per. yes, he isn't young any more either, but at 31 he should have 2 or 3 decent years left. if I remember right, the Spurs were interested in signing him in 2006. maybe there is enough left from the MLE after Splitter to offer him. (like Splitter gets 3years/10M and Evans 3years/7.5M)



Splitter is a much more talented player than both. no doubt about that. if this guarantees that he will provide more impact? don't know. but for me the point is: it could happen. he could become a decent to good NBA player. I mean Marc Gasol or Scola level.
Spurs currently have very little of those options, where the best case is a starter quality player.
Splitter isn't a shot blocker, right.
we still have this draft and a pick from 14 to 22.
this draft is deep in 2 areas, that's power bigs (PF, PF/C) and combo forwards.
if we see Tim-Blair-Splitter-Dice as our rotation next year and Splitter-Blair as core for the future, a mobile shotblocker looks like the best compliment for both situations. I'm a big fan of Greg Monroe, but maybe Ekpe Udoh is the better option considering this. with Jerome Jordan as a fall back option.

I agree with your comments about Bell, but I'm not sure there's a better realistic option available, unless you want to see the job handed to Hairston and a flier taken on McGuire/Wright or someone of that ilk. If the Spurs want someone proven (if in decline), better than Bogans, without giving up any assets and for a reasonable price on a short-term contract, then Bell will probably be their best option available.

Wright is more or less Bogans. He's more of a long-armed, almost spidery type defender, but he's an inconsistent shooter and not quite a stopper.

Evans is a slightly better version of Bogans, but again, not a stopper.

I give you credit though, those are both affordable, realistic options, that I wouldn't be surprised to see the Spurs look in to. But given the choice between Bell, Wright and Evans, I'm picking Bell. I know he's not ideal, but his worst is still comparable to those two's best.


I was shocked when I heard about them getting traded.

Still don't understand that.

Who, Bowen and Horry?

Jefferson was the best the Spurs could do for Bowen, who's contract was valuable until July 1st because of the partial guarantee, which means whoever acquired him (and Oberto) could instantly waive them and reap the rewards -- in the form of cap savings.

Horry, on the other hand, retired (though I still don't think he officially has). He had outlived his usefulness as a player.

[Blackjack]

You sure bring a whole lot of nothin'.

I've still yet to hear your assessment on team and what it is that would be the best way to go moving forward. . .

Any thought, or would you just prefer to disagree with what everyone else has to say and not offer anything of your own?

[ElNono]

You sure bring a whole lot of nothin'.

I've still yet to hear your assessment on team and what it is that would be the best way to go moving forward. . .

Any thought, or would you just prefer to disagree with what everyone else has to say and not offer anything of your own?

He endorses everything Pop is doing... even though he has no idea what Pop is doing... :lol

[MrFundamental]

You sure bring a whole lot of nothin'.

I've still yet to hear your assessment on team and what it is that would be the best way to go moving forward. . .

Seriously, you didn't read the thread.

But to reiterate, the Spurs should focus on an 8 man rotation, specifically: Hill, Parker, Jefferson, Ginobili, Dice, Duncan, Bonner, and Blair; possibly 9 with Mason/Bogans/Finley playing minor minutes relieving the tired.

Or if we are scrapping the season, I already posted what I would recommend.

[MrFundamental]

He endorses everything Pop is doing... even though he has no idea what Pop is doing... :lol
Yep, that's exactly fucking right :downspin:

Wait, sorry, Pops is teh suxxorz, hooray D-League

[Blackjack]

He endorses everything Pop is doing... even though he has no idea what Pop is doing... :lol

Yeah, pretty much (the guy got me to act like a condescending prick ... the nerve).:lol

[Blackjack]

Seriously, you didn't read the thread.

But to reiterate, the Spurs should focus on an 8 man rotation, specifically: Hill, Parker, Jefferson, Ginobili, Dice, Duncan, Bonner, and Blair; possibly 9 with Mason/Bogans/Finley playing minor minutes relieving the tired.

Or if we are scrapping the season, I already posted what I would recommend.

No, I did read that. But what's the end-game?

What does that lead to?

If you're arguing for the possibility of a couple of more home playoff games, there's an argument to be made. But other than that, and there's no guarantee playing Bogans over Hairston accomplishes that, I can't see the downside you obviously believe to be there . . .

[Blackjack]

Jefferson has never been a great shooter, but he's gradually improved as his career has wore on and he's always been adept at slashing and getting to the free throw line. In other words, he has enough of a well rounded offensive game that, even though his strengths may not jive with that of the Spurs system, he should still be effective in other ways. That he's not is a failure on his part, on the team and on the coaching staff, but it's not because he shouldn't be capable of scoring (and thriving at times, considering he's essentially an afterthought for opposing defenses on this team) within' the system.

You're absolutely right that he has the talent, tools and ability to contribute more in the offense. But to the extent that his reputation suggested, at least prior to arriving, he's just never going to live up to the bill; RJ's game garnered star status once he became a leading player on a bad team, which was due to the amount of offense that depended upon and was run through him.

Injuries have robbed him of lateral quickness and playing on bad teams have ingrained some terrible habits, and that's just not a recipe for success as the Spurs' small forward.


Basketball is a cerebral game, far more technical than most either realize or give it credit for, but at the end of the day, the basics are simple. Generally speaking, if you have talent, commitment and work ethic, things should work well. Jefferson and the Spurs may not be a perfect marriage, but it should be a lot better than it is.

And I agree. He should be better, I'm just skeptical it should really be difference-making.


I understand your point with regards to McGuire, but can't see the Spurs bringing him in, for reasons previously stated. The Wizards dumped him in order to get under the luxury tax line.

Like I said, it's a personal preference. The Spurs passed him up for Williams in the Draft and his lack of a 3-point shot doesn't bode well for the Spurs' interest. The Kings apparently gave up a second-rounder, though, so it's possible they view him as an option moving forward.

[MrFundamental]

No, I did read that. But what's the end-game?

What does that lead to?

If you're arguing for the possibility of a couple of more home playoff games, there's an argument to be made. But other than that, and there's no guarantee playing Bogans over Hairston accomplishes that, I can't see the downside you obviously believe to be there . . .
What other argument would there be if I didn't think they would get more playoff games? And likewise there is no guarantee that Hairston playing will accomplish that either, which is why I think Bogans' minutes should be minimal, if any.

[ElNono]

What other argument would there be if I didn't think they would get more playoff games? And likewise there is no guarantee that Hairston playing will accomplish that either, which is why I think Bogans' minutes should be minimal, if any.

So, in your opinion, who do we play more if Bogans plays less?

[MrFundamental]

So, in your opinion, who do we play more if Bogans plays less?
More minutes to Hill and Ginobili, with some to Mason and Finley.

[Blackjack]

I guess the question is: Weighing the pros and cons, is sticking with the status-quo, and letting things just play out, a better option than attempting to infuse the team with a little energy and athleticism at the expense of Bogans and/or a few minutes here and there from Mason, Bonner, Jefferson, etc.

I've never suggested they tank the season. I only requested a little bit of life infused into a stale roster and that they get a jump on next year, given their current trajectory.

Again, the pros outweigh the cons, as far as I'm concerned.

[TD 21]

You're absolutely right that he has the talent, tools and ability to contribute more in the offense. But to the extent that his reputation suggested, at least prior to arriving, he's just never going to live up to the bill; RJ's game garnered star status once he became a leading player on a bad team, which was due to the amount of offense that depended upon and was run through him.

Injuries have robbed him of lateral quickness and playing on bad teams have ingrained some terrible habits, and that's just not a recipe for success as the Spurs' small forward.



And I agree. He should be better, I'm just skeptical it should really be difference-making.



Like I said, it's a personal preference. The Spurs passed him up for Williams in the Draft and his lack of a 3-point shot doesn't bode well for the Spurs' interest. The Kings apparently gave up a second-rounder, though, so it's possible they view him as an option moving forward.

If you mean statistically, of course not. He went from number one option on the Bucks (because Redd and Bogut were injured) to number four option on the Spurs. I expected him to drop from 19.6 ppg to about 15 ppg.

True, but I figured he'd be so excited to be, as he called it, "relevant" again, that he'd play with more energy and effort than he has and I figured, at least when the Spurs went through grueling stretches in the season, where they play and travel a lot in a short time, that he could shoulder the load offensively in some of those games, but he hasn't even done that. Now, he almost seems resigned to being practically being a non-contributor on this team. His confidence is shot.

I remember an on court huddle during a 20 second timeout a few weeks back where he had his hands on his knees and was basically hiding from Pop for about half of it. Pop needs to give him a game where he plays him 40+ minutes and calls his number frequently. I don't care how poorly he plays, let him play through it and at least try to get him going.

Make no mistake, I never thought he alone was a difference maker, what I thought was, he as a fourth option could be. Big difference.

[ElNono]

More minutes to Hill and Ginobili, with some to Mason and Finley.

Hill is already playing 30+ minutes. Same for Manu. This is when TP is actually available (I'm looking at the Indiana game for reference).
I don't really see Pop extending those minutes.
Offensively, if Mason is hitting (out of the 3, he's the one that showed up more often this season) then it could work.
Defensively though, Mason, Finley or Bogans are all contesting for who can suck more. We need to upgrade from those guys next season.

[MrFundamental]

Hill is already playing 30+ minutes. Same for Manu.
Hill is at 27 and Manu is also at 27. Jefferson is only at 31 as well, throw some minutes his way.


Defensively though, Mason, Finley or Bogans are all contesting for who can suck more. We need to upgrade from those guys next season.
Won't get any argument from me there. Too bad we didn't get anything for them before they leave.

[ElNono]

Hill is at 27 and Manu is also at 27. Jefferson is only at 31 as well, throw some minutes his way.

I would prefer that, if anything, because he has consistently given us more points than the alternatives and because we know he can play the extra minutes.

[benefactor]

As of right now, arguing rotation minutes is pretty pointless. This team is not going anywhere. If they make the playoffs, then they will be bent over in the first round.

That said, play the young guys.

[Obstructed_View]

The Spurs should go into the stretch run with one mantra in mind: Keep It Simple, Stupid.

The Spurs need more minutes from their best players to get them ready for the postseason. In addition, they need to replace bad players that have no upside with young players that have upside, like Hairston, Blair and Mahinmi. They also need to continue to trust the vets that haven't hit their stride, like RJ, Dice and RMJ. Bonner can play his way back into a spot as a role player, but guys like Finley and Bogans need to be leading the cheers on the sideline.

What you currently see on the roster is the guys that are rowing the boat for the rest of the season. The only way to have a chance is to get all of them rowing together, and taking advantage of what each individual can offer to the team.

[Blackjack]

If you mean statistically, of course not. He went from number one option on the Bucks (because Redd and Bogut were injured) to number four option on the Spurs. I expected him to drop from 19.6 ppg to about 15 ppg.

No, I wasn't speaking statistically. I think most people had the expectation that his scoring would be down a good amount, but figured his actual impact would still be that of a "star"; RJ would still be someone that had to be accounted for and would represent a sizeable upgrade in the firepower department. But what we've been made witness to in his time here, is that he wasn't just overpaid or on a bad contract, he was ridiculously overpaid on a ridiculous contract.

He was on a contract netted (pun not intended) because of star-like offensive production on a bad team, not undeniable talent that would translate across the board. Even the seeming strides he made as a shooter have been rendered minimal because he's not seeing the ball enough and getting into the same rhythm or flow he would when he was putting up numbers as a first or second option.

He's just not a low-maintenance, efficient scorer that's capable of excelling off the ball offensively. And since he doesn't do much of anything else anymore (past surgeries and irreparable bad habits probably the two biggest culprits), it's almost understandable with the benefit of hindsight -- no less disappointing, though.


I remember an on court huddle during a 20 second timeout a few weeks back where he had his hands on his knees and was basically hiding from Pop for about half of it. Pop needs to give him a game where he plays him 40+ minutes and calls his number frequently. I don't care how poorly he plays, let him play through it and at least try to get him going.

I hear you, I'm just not sure how much they can really do at this point (and you're right about his confidence being shot). I've been disappointed we haven't seen more of the two-man game with Tim and RJ, which is something that's shown flashes at times, and more backdoor/duck-ins in the halfcourt; some Princeton-type action that he's had some success with over the years. But, at this point, and with the rotations and health in flux, it's hard to envision the team having enough cohesion and an overall base for RJ to really find his place and way in this offense.

It pretty much is what it is . . .

[TD 21]

No, I wasn't speaking statistically. I think most people had the expectation that his scoring would be down a good amount, but figured his actual impact would still be that of a "star"; RJ would still be someone that had to be accounted for and would represent a sizeable upgrade in the firepower department. But what we've been made witness to in his time here, is that he wasn't just overpaid or on a bad contract, he was ridiculously overpaid on a ridiculous contract.

He was on a contract netted (pun not intended) because of star-like offensive production on a bad team, not undeniable talent that would translate across the board. Even the seeming strides he made as a shooter have been rendered minimal because he's not seeing the ball enough and getting into the same rhythm or flow he would when he was putting up numbers as a first or second option.

He's just not a low-maintenance, efficient scorer that's capable of excelling off the ball offensively. And since he doesn't do much of anything else anymore (past surgeries and irreparable bad habits probably the two biggest culprits), it's almost understandable with the benefit of hindsight -- no less disappointing, though.



I hear you, I'm just not sure how much they can really do at this point (and you're right about his confidence being shot). I've been disappointed we haven't seen more of the two-man game with Tim and RJ, which is something that's shown flashes at times, and more backdoor/duck-ins in the halfcourt; some Princeton-type action that he's had some success with over the years. But, at this point, and with the rotations and health in flux, it's hard to envision the team having enough cohesion and an overall base for RJ to really find his place and way in this offense.

It pretty much is what it is . . .

I agree with virtually everything you said.

Unfortunately, you're probably right about it being what it is. At this point, you'd be beyond niave to believe that Jefferson will miraculously begin to look comfortable and fit seamlessly within' the offense. It's just not going to happen, not this season, at least.

I'm surprised though, that Pop, long lauded for the depth of his playbook, hasn't run more stuff for Jefferson. Look at the Magic, they just took a play out of the Nets old playbook when they had Carter, running what they called a "12" play (1-2 side pick-and-roll with Nelson and Carter, whereby they forced a switch and had Carter in a post-up with a small guard on him), milked it to death and ended up beating the Cavs in large part due to the success of that.

Couldn't/shouldn't the Spurs being doing something similar with Jefferson? Earlier in the season, they were running some stuff for him, particularly early in games, trying to get him off. A few post-ups, even an alley-oop play a few times, but now, nothing. It's like they've just conceded that he's not what they thought or were hoping he was going to be, so they're not going to work with what they have. Pop's forced him into playing the role of a prime Marion, which is only exacerbating the problem.

[Blackjack]

Yeah, you'd think they'd find more ways than a back screen and lob to the rim from Tony in the corner or the occasional iso, but not so much . . .

But it's not like RJ ever really excelled with anything other than an iso or finishing out on the break and off the creativity of others, so maybe there really isn't all that much to do; the Princeton-type stuff is really the only thing I feel they've failed to really try to incorporate.

[TD 21]

Yeah, you'd think they'd find more ways than a back screen and lob to the rim from Tony in the corner or the occasional iso, but not so much . . .

But it's not like RJ ever really excelled with anything other than an iso or finishing out on the break and off the creativity of others, so maybe there really isn't all that much to do; the Princeton-type stuff is really the only thing I feel they've failed to really try to incorporate.

I don't think Jefferson is a great post-up player by any stretch and I realize the Spurs usually have Duncan down on the block or Blair, but whatever happened to posting up Jefferson? Pop was all excited about finally having a wing who could post-up and at the other end, not get posted up by opposing wings. That's all been out the window the past few months as well. Pop hasn't done enough to attempt to get Jefferson going, that's my issue. If he's as great a coach as many think of him as, he should be able to incorporate Jefferson more smoothly than he has thus far.

[Obstructed_View]

I've been disappointed we haven't seen more of the two-man game with Tim and RJ, which is something that's shown flashes at times, and more backdoor/duck-ins in the halfcourt; some Princeton-type action that he's had some success with over the years.
:toast
There were a number of Spurs that played the 2 man game well last year. It's completely gone this season. Mason and Duncan were very good at it, and Duncan and Manu can just shred a defense with it.

[Blackjack]

It's not hard to remember how great of an attribute his post ability was deemed to be by Pop going into the season and how useful it'd end up being, so it is rather odd that it's been neglected as much.

Having said that, I've been pretty disappointed with the effort RJ's put forth when given the opportunity, usually doing nothing more than turning, surveying on his pivot and settling for the jumper, so I'm not sure how fruitful it'd really end up being . . .

The fact that the team wasn't able to come into camp healthy and on equal footing has really put this team behind the 8-ball from Day 1 (and it doesn't seem they've ever been able to get out from behind it, for a multitude of reasons). Had they had something intact, a cohesion and continuity with their core from the jump, it would've have been much easier for the newer players to acclimate and find their collective games and roles. But since there wasn't a skeleton in place or a puzzle only in need of a few pieces to be complete, it's been as if they were just opening a box up to discover something in need of a complete assembly -- some of the pieces and where they'd end up were known (the Big 3 basically), but they had to find themselves and their chemistry with each other as much as the newer players had to find their chemistry with them.

It's just been a frustrating year . . .

[SenorSpur]

These games are just uninspiring and mind-numbing. For the life of me, I just can't grasp what the hell Pop's really trying to do . . .

He's not tanking, as Tim and Manu are still out there busting their ass and Tony's been playing hurt up until today. But he's not trying to win, as he's never given the team and players any type of consistency to build anything fruitful.

Meanwhile, Keith Bogans continues to get his minutes and Hairston (the guy who outplayed him and, for all intents and purposes, beat him out for the job) can't even sniff the action -- Mahinmi was given up upon before being given the opportunity to be given up on (his option wasn't picked up, so allowing him to help or be useful for the time he's here just doesn't make sense ... right?).

This team's flawed; has been since Day 1. I never happened to drink the Kool-Aid that this team had what it took to win a championship with this group, or that RJ possessed the type of game to really propel the Spurs to the next level. The Spurs have won with a consistent formula consisting of particular types of players filling particular, specialized roles, and they didn't replenish those requisite facets/needs with the right people -- Bowen, Horry, Barry and serviceable 7-footers aren't made up for by Bogans, Bonner, Mason and a plethora of wings 6-7 or below manning the middle for an aging Tim.

So if I understood that going into the season and many others did as well, surely Pop and the crew knew they had some work to do. I mean, I know they were hopeful and optimistic (and they had reason to believe this team could be one or two, right, moves away from capturing another title), but they couldn't have been blind or ignorant of their reality, right?

And that was the outlook and hope for this presently constructed team given good health . . .

They haven't been healthy, and they still haven't filled those integral roles for their championship formula -- what's ensued has been predictable (to an extent; no one could see this clusterfuck of circumstance) and woefully below their standard. So the fact that they're not in the championship discussion is more frustrating and depressing than surprising.

Surprising is the thought process and rationale we've come to expect from Coach Pop. I've never witnessed a year, with him at the helm, that lacked as much discipline and consistency as this one. There's just no reasonable end-game to the logic or payoff for the madness -- it's simply throwing shit against the wall and seeing what sticks (he's acquiesced to the point of losing his core, proven principles. Only the flesh he inhabits suggests he's the man that's guided this team to four titles).

So I accepted this team's fate a good while ago and have been bearing witness to their games more than living or dying with each win or loss -- even lowered expectation can't prevent the empty feeling these outcomes bring, though. (Watching Tim play at this level and knowing that it's not promised for next year, just makes you sick to the stomach.) But watching Hill and Blair grow has been a bit of a saving grace. A glimmer of hope moving forward, at least.

This all-in bet the team placed was for a two-year window, and it could still be cashed in. They'd have to make some great, shrewd and smart moves, but, theoretically, it could be done. So if this team's going nowhere this year and the health of Tim, Tony and/or Manu is paramount moving forward, it's time for the team to start gearing up for next year. Allow the young guys to play through mistakes, evaluate them, maybe take a flier on a D-Leaguer or someone of that ilk, and bury Bogans, Finley and Mason on the bench -- see if you have or can find the perimeter defender needed and/or a cheap supporting cast member for next year.

Again, give me a light at the end of the tunnel, a reason to look forward to the game and, just maybe, a glimmer of hope.

That's all I ask.

:toast

Well stated and well written.

As Spurs fans, or fans of any team for that matter, if your team is not in championship contention, all you want is hope for a brighter, more promising future. That said, the Spurs immediate and long-term future is very murky right now.

[TD 21]

It's not hard to remember how great of an attribute his post ability was deemed to be by Pop going into the season and how useful it'd end up being, so it is rather odd that it's been neglected as much.

Having said that, I've been pretty disappointed with the effort RJ's put forth when given the opportunity, usually doing nothing more than turning, surveying on his pivot and settling for the jumper, so I'm not sure how fruitful it'd really end up being . . .

The fact that the team wasn't able to come into camp healthy and on equal footing has really put this team behind the 8-ball from Day 1 (and it doesn't seem they've ever been able to get out from behind it, for a multitude of reasons). Had they had something intact, a cohesion and continuity with their core from the jump, it would've have been much easier for the newer players to acclimate and find their collective games and roles. But since there wasn't a skeleton in place or a puzzle only in need of a few pieces to be complete, it's been as if they were just opening a box up to discover something in need of a complete assembly -- some of the pieces and where they'd end up were known (the Big 3 basically), but they had to find themselves and their chemistry with each other as much as the newer players had to find their chemistry with them.

It's just been a frustrating year . . .

It is odd. Pop seemingly gave up on Jefferson quickly, which is baffling after he raved about him after acquiring him. As fans, we can write a player off; as a coach, he shouldn't. Especially when that player is making $14 million a year and was deemed to be the primary piece that would vault his team back into championship contention.

Excuses, that's all those are. The Celtics transformed their roster two and a half years ago, then proceeded to instantly look like they'd been playing together for years. The Lakers made a significant in-season addition two years ago, then proceeded to instantly look they'd been playing together for years. I gave this Spurs team time, realizing that a team so set in their ways would probably take longer than most to come together. But once they'd had training camp and roughly half a season together, there is no excuse. By the rodeo trip at the latest, this team should have looked like a well oiled machine.

So many people talk about "all the new players figuring out their roles", when in reality, other than Jefferson, there wasn't much adapting to do role-wise. McDyess, Bogans and Ratliff were all brought in play the same role they always have, only in the case of Bogans, he went from a secondary wing defender to primary one -- a step up, but the same role. I know players have to get used to playing with one another and learn the plays, rotations, etc., but these guys are generally thought of as high IQ, hard working, veteran players. They should have had this thing figured out by now. As for injuries, this has probably been one of the healthier teams in the league. Outside of Parker, not a single top eight player has been injured for more than a couple of games.

[Blackjack]

It is odd. Pop seemingly gave up on Jefferson quickly, which is baffling after he raved about him after acquiring him. As fans, we can write a player off; as a coach, he shouldn't. Especially when that player is making $14 million a year and was deemed to be the primary piece that would vault his team back into championship contention.

One more thing that I failed to mention, the guy should spend .90% of his time on the left side in the halfcourt; he's just not capable of attacking the seams off the dribble going left (as it inevitably ends in a pull-up halfway to the bucket). If he's got a straight-line drive at the top of the key or he's anywhere where he can go left to right, he's alright. So if I'm Pop, I start running some action that allows him to attack the seams off of closeouts, or once the defense has been swung through good ball movement, from the left side.


Excuses, that's all those are. The Celtics transformed their roster two and a half years ago, then proceeded to instantly look like they'd been playing together for years. The Lakers made a significant in-season addition two years ago, then proceeded to instantly look they'd been playing together for years. I gave this Spurs team time, realizing that a team so set in their ways would probably take longer than most to come together. But once they'd had training camp and roughly half a season together, there is no excuse. By the rodeo trip at the latest, this team should have looked like a well oiled machine.

So many people talk about "all the new players figuring out their roles", when in reality, other than Jefferson, there wasn't much adapting to do role-wise. McDyess, Bogans and Ratliff were all brought in play the same role they always have, only in the case of Bogans, he went from a secondary wing defender to primary one -- a step up, but the same role. I know players have to get used to playing with one another and learn the plays, rotations, etc., but these guys are generally thought of as high IQ, hard working, veteran players. They should have had this thing figured out by now. As for injuries, this has probably been one of the healthier teams in the league. Outside of Parker, not a single top eight player has been injured for more than a couple of games.

I can't say I didn't fully expect this response immediately after submitting the post (this seems to be one of our better back-and-forth topics :lol)

I think we eventually agreed to disagree, so it's probably an effort in futility ... but what the hell . . .

They're just not excuses from my standpoint; they're facts. And since I'm not one advocating that those facts are the reasons they're not winning a championship, I can't see how you'd view it as an excuse on my behalf (but maybe you're just speaking broader terms?).

In my view, you've just taken a too simplistic approach; the game of basketball is all about rhythm, timing and confidence (in game and body) and if a team's not on the same page or in the same place, it's almost impossible to fulfill potential.

When I talk about equal footing, you've got to consider the team and personnel of today and where each individual is collectively at that given time; not who and what they were when they were winning championships. Fact of the matter is, Tim needed the first month and a half of the regular season for his training camp because of a degenerative condition forcing him to take it easy; Tony was slowed with the plantar fascia, ankle injury and overall wear-and-tear; and Manu was coming off surgery and the longest layoff of his career, which had him trying to find his game and the overall confidence in his body. The Big 3 wasn't coming into camp coming off a restful summer after a year of playing ball together consistently, allowing them to pick up where they left off, more or less ... they were fighting an uphill battle to get themselves right; they were behind the proverbial 8-ball from the jump.

Like anything that needs to be put together, there needs to be a foundation and it has to be built incrementally; you can't skip steps if you want to have success. And since they had such a hard time getting their most important pieces, their foundation, up to speed and in sync ... everything else that followed was compromised; they didn't even have a returning supporting cast that was used to playing with the Big 3 as the Big 3 (the roles within the Big 3 and how they interacted with themselves and the team, as it pertains to basketball, were altered with Tony being forced to play a much more prominent role because of the condition of Tim and the injuries, which lead to the absence, of Manu).

That's why I made the analogy of opening a box to find the need for a complete assembly.

It wasn't bringing in the perfect player (a la Pau Gasol) into a ready-made, cohesive unit. It wasn't bringing in a couple of star players that possessed perfect skill sets and played the right positions to compliment each other and a younger supporting cast (who happened to have their two most important players and supporting cast primed, ready and on equal footing to start training camp). This was a team two-years and two-thirds of their lineup removed from a championship, and though the most important characters remained the same, the actual state of their game, health and fitness, suggested otherwise; bringing in two new starters (RJ and 'Dyess -- I guess you could include Bogans), allowing for the adjustment of Hill and Mason (whose roles were in flux and unknown) and a adding a rookie like Blair (someone you have to let play through mistakes), was never something that was going to come easy. Had everything gone perfectly, it would have taken almost half the season to really see this team start to play to potential; it's gone far from perfect.

There's not a doubt in my mind if this team comes into this season with a healthy, in shape, Big 3, ready from Day 1, that they're fighting for the 2 or 3 seed ... none whatsoever. They were a second tier team after all the additions and had the opportunity to capture a title if they could manage to acquire some frontcourt help and add a better overall player on the wing defensively (which they didn't). But because of the way it all started and all that's happened since (injury, uncertainty, losses, frustration, etc.), they've ended up in an untenable situation that will inevitably leave them coming up short of expectation.

It is what it is, though, and I know we'll have to agree to disagree. :lol

[TD 21]

One more thing that I failed to mention, the guy should spend .90% of his time on the left side in the halfcourt; he's just not capable of attacking the seams off the dribble going left (as it inevitably ends in a pull-up halfway to the bucket). If he's got a straight-line drive at the top of the key or he's anywhere where he can go left to right, he's alright. So if I'm Pop, I start running some action that allows him to attack the seams off of closeouts, or once the defense has been swung through good ball movement, from the left side.

I can't say I didn't fully expect this response immediately after submitting the post (this seems to be one of our better back-and-forth topics :lol)

I think we eventually agreed to disagree, so it's probably an effort in futility ... but what the hell . . .

They're just not excuses from my standpoint; they're facts. And since I'm not one advocating that those facts are the reasons they're not winning a championship, I can't see how you'd view it as an excuse on my behalf (but maybe you're just speaking broader terms?).

In my view, you've just taken a too simplistic approach; the game of basketball is all about rhythm, timing and confidence (in game and body) and if a team's not on the same page or in the same place, it's almost impossible to fulfill potential.

When I talk about equal footing, you've got to consider the team and personnel of today and where each individual is collectively at that given time; not who and what they were when they were winning championships. Fact of the matter is, Tim needed the first month and a half of the regular season for his training camp because of a degenerative condition forcing him to take it easy; Tony was slowed with the plantar fascia, ankle injury and overall wear-and-tear; and Manu was coming off surgery and the longest layoff of his career, which had him trying to find his game and the overall confidence in his body. The Big 3 wasn't coming into camp coming off a restful summer after a year of playing ball together consistently, allowing them to pick up where they left off, more or less ... they were fighting an uphill battle to get themselves right; they were behind the proverbial 8-ball from the jump.

Like anything that needs to be put together, there needs to be a foundation and it has to be built incrementally; you can't skip steps if you want to have success. And since they had such a hard time getting their most important pieces, their foundation, up to speed and in sync ... everything else that followed was compromised; they didn't even have a returning supporting cast that was used to playing with the Big 3 as the Big 3 (the roles within the Big 3 and how they interacted with themselves and the team, as it pertains to basketball, were altered with Tony being forced to play a much more prominent role because of the condition of Tim and the injuries, which lead to the absence, of Manu).

That's why I made the analogy of opening a box to find the need for a complete assembly.

It wasn't bringing in the perfect player (a la Pau Gasol) into a ready-made, cohesive unit. It wasn't bringing in a couple of star players that possessed perfect skill sets and played the right positions to compliment each other and a younger supporting cast (who happened to have their two most important players and supporting cast primed, ready and on equal footing to start training camp). This was a team two-years and two-thirds of their lineup removed from a championship, and though the most important characters remained the same, the actual state of their game, health and fitness, suggested otherwise; bringing in two new starters (RJ and 'Dyess -- I guess you could include Bogans), allowing for the adjustment of Hill and Mason (whose roles were in flux and unknown) and a adding a rookie like Blair (someone you have to let play through mistakes), was never something that was going to come easy. Had everything gone perfectly, it would have taken almost half the season to really see this team start to play to potential; it's gone far from perfect.

There's not a doubt in my mind if this team comes into this season with a healthy, in shape, Big 3, ready from Day 1, that they're fighting for the 2 or 3 seed ... none whatsoever. They were a second tier team after all the additions and had the opportunity to capture a title if they could manage to acquire some frontcourt help and add a better overall player on the wing defensively (which they didn't). But because of the way it all started and all that's happened since (injury, uncertainty, losses, frustration, etc.), they've ended up in an untenable situation that will inevitably leave them coming up short of expectation.

It is what it is, though, and I know we'll have to agree to disagree. :lol

Good point. Jefferson is at his best in the half court when he can, from the left going to his right, off a ball fake drive against a defender closing out hot and explode to the rim, finishing with either a dunk, an and-one or two free throws. But this is generally predicated on either Duncan drawing a double team or Parker/Ginobili's penetration collapsing the defense. Problem is, Duncan's isn't getting doubled much anymore and Parker, due to injuries, isn't penetrating and collapsing the defense as much as he usually does, so we're seeing Jefferson in that scenario less and less.

They're excuses, man. Think about it: when you have talent, commitment and supposedly high IQ players (in most cases), there's no excuse to look this poor. I could see not necessarily being contenders, or underachieving to an extent, but this team should at minimum be firmly entrenched as a top four seed in the conference. Yeah, I am speaking in broader terms.

I know the individual state that each member of the big three entered the season in, but like I said, if shouldn't take over 50 games for this team to "come together". At this point, if they're to do that, it'll happen in the back third of the season. We should have seen more by now.

It's easy to say, after the fact (given the success of those two franchises) that those were all perfect fits. Not that anyone thought they were bad fits at the time, but the point is those two teams found a way to make it work and they did it quickly. Again, I gave this team plenty of time, even argued people who had written them off completely or called them irrelevant, but it's become clear in recent weeks that it's not about giving them time; they're just flat out not good enough. Can they improve upon what they've shown so far? Probably, but at best, what are we looking at here, 2nd round fodder? Even if you didn't think they were championship material, anything less than 3rd round (barring them being decimated by injury) had to have been considered a disappointment entering the season, right? Whatever excuses or reasons, as you like to call them, you want to bring up, the reality is this team still should have been better than they are.

[Blackjack]

They're excuses, man. Think about it: when you have talent, commitment and supposedly high IQ players (in most cases), there's no excuse to look this poor. I could see not necessarily being contenders, or underachieving to an extent, but this team should at minimum be firmly entrenched as a top four seed in the conference. Yeah, I am speaking in broader terms.

I know the individual state that each member of the big three entered the season in, but like I said, if shouldn't take over 50 games for this team to "come together". At this point, if they're to do that, it'll happen in the back third of the season. We should have seen more by now.

You'll get no argument for me that they've underachieved. The only thing I've alluded to were circumstances that only helped to exacerbate an already tough situation. There are reasons the team looks this poor, a chain of events and confluence of circumstance, that have lead to the product they've put out on the floor. And unless you feel that individual players are dogging it or the coach is utterly inept and/or tanking the season (I'm sure there's some that believe that), that's just the reality of it; I'm not excusing, more so diagnosing.


It's easy to say, after the fact (given the success of those two franchises) that those were all perfect fits. Not that anyone thought they were bad fits at the time, but the point is those two teams found a way to make it work and they did it quickly.

I honestly said and knew it then; they were just great, ideal fits.

Gasol is an absolutely ridiculous fit in the Triangle and he's a deferential star that would gladly play Robin to Kobe's Batman. I don't think they advance to the Finals in '08 without the benefit of a hobbled Manu, but, be that as it may ... he was, they did, and they've been reaping the rewards ever since. Had they lost to the Spurs, though ... maybe it's not viewed in quite the same, quick light (which might be a more proper perspective). In any event, there just weren't the hurdles to overcome incorporating a player like Gasol into that mix.

The thing I loved about Boston's trades (even if I can't stand whom they traded for) was that they fit together seamlessly; acquiring star players with already defined games allowed them to put their team together like a puzzle of skill set: KG plays a high-post game, Pierce works off the elbows, slashes and creates off the dribble, and Allen works off of screens, movement and lives for the three. All of this benefited a guy like Rondo by keeping the paint open, as he's similar to Parker, and it allowed the Perkins, Powe's and Davis' of the world to clean up as well. Defensively they had the length and versatility to lock people up and give people fits; KG, Perkins, Posey, Pierce and Rondo complimented each other equally well defensively. It was just a very well put together team that could only, feasibly, be put together the way it was; the Draft brings a lot of unknowns you do your best to build around and work with ... trades and free-agency allow you to really find the right, sometimes perfect, pieces.

So when you have the right pieces and you're able to start the season the way they were, naturally, things come together quicker; even with the right pieces though, there's no guarantee they win a championship if Pierce or KG's coming off of what Manu did (which I suppose, to a lesser degree, is my point: You need shit to go right when it's all said and done).



Even if you didn't think they were championship material, anything less than 3rd round (barring them being decimated by injury) had to have been considered a disappointment entering the season, right?

Before the season started, I expected a Lakers matchup in the WCF. So, yeah, anything less would have been a disappointment. If you were to ask me that question now, and were to give me the team I'd expect them to be if everything had gone right, I'd have them competing with Denver and Dallas for the right to play the Lakers (as I think it'd pretty much be a toss-up after the moves from Dallas and what I've witnessed from the Nuggets; I'd actually worry more about Dallas that Denver, though).

[mountainballer]

It's just been a frustrating year . . .

oh wait. the best has yet to come.:bang

as discussed in the other thread, the rotations are becoming that mind boggling that I really really don't know what's to expect.
maybe Pop is one of this Haute Cuisine chefs, who suddenly lose their sense of taste. they still know how to cook and what to put into the mix, but they no longer can produce this special taste. then they start to try and try and the results become less and less satisfying. in the end they panic and trow into the pot whatever they find in the kitchen. I fear we are only at the beginning of the panic phase.

most frustrating: Tim has a great season (his last at this level?) and Manu looks as if he is becoming the special player we know. and we will still be far from contender level. what a waste.

[TD 21]

You'll get no argument for me that they've underachieved. The only thing I've alluded to were circumstances that only helped to exacerbate an already tough situation. There are reasons the team looks this poor, a chain of events and confluence of circumstance, that have lead to the product they've put out on the floor. And unless you feel that individual players are dogging it or the coach is utterly inept and/or tanking the season (I'm sure there's some that believe that), that's just the reality of it; I'm not excusing, more so diagnosing.



I honestly said and knew it then; they were just great, ideal fits.

Gasol is an absolutely ridiculous fit in the Triangle and he's a deferential star that would gladly play Robin to Kobe's Batman. I don't think they advance to the Finals in '08 without the benefit of a hobbled Manu, but, be that as it may ... he was, they did, and they've been reaping the rewards ever since. Had they lost to the Spurs, though ... maybe it's not viewed in quite the same, quick light (which might be a more proper perspective). In any event, there just weren't the hurdles to overcome incorporating a player like Gasol into that mix.

The thing I loved about Boston's trades (even if I can't stand whom they traded for) was that they fit together seamlessly; acquiring star players with already defined games allowed them to put their team together like a puzzle of skill set: KG plays a high-post game, Pierce works off the elbows, slashes and creates off the dribble, and Allen works off of screens, movement and lives for the three. All of this benefited a guy like Rondo by keeping the paint open, as he's similar to Parker, and it allowed the Perkins, Powe's and Davis' of the world to clean up as well. Defensively they had the length and versatility to lock people up and give people fits; KG, Perkins, Posey, Pierce and Rondo complimented each other equally well defensively. It was just a very well put together team that could only, feasibly, be put together the way it was; the Draft brings a lot of unknowns you do your best to build around and work with ... trades and free-agency allow you to really find the right, sometimes perfect, pieces.

So when you have the right pieces and you're able to start the season the way they were, naturally, things come together quicker; even with the right pieces though, there's no guarantee they win a championship if Pierce or KG's coming off of what Manu did (which I suppose, to a lesser degree, is my point: You need shit to go right when it's all said and done).




Before the season started, I expected a Lakers matchup in the WCF. So, yeah, anything less would have been a disappointment. If you were to ask me that question now, and were to give me the team I'd expect them to be if everything had gone right, I'd have them competing with Denver and Dallas for the right to play the Lakers (as I think it'd pretty much be a toss-up after the moves from Dallas and what I've witnessed from the Nuggets; I'd actually worry more about Dallas that Denver, though).

Based on the job he's done in the past, I hesitate to call Pop "utterly inept", but the job he's done this season and to a lesser extent last season, has been utterly inept. It's tough to put a number on it, but I honestly feel if he had just played more traditional, logical lineups, that this team would have at least a few more wins.

Where we differ is on the extent of the underachieving. My position is that despite all the "reasons" that you cite, that they should still be better than they are. Your position is that they're about where they should be given all the "reasons" that you cite, correct?

I knew Gasol would fit in well too, but I honestly didn't think to myself the day it happened that, "the Spurs are in trouble". I thought for at least that season and possibly one more, they could hold them off. But things changed drastically, instantly, with that trade and I'm not sure anyone could have foresaw the Lakers winning roughly 80% of their games with Gasol, never losing 3 games in a row with him and not only going to back to back Finlas (and winning one championship), but not ever really seriously being challenged in the past two Western Conference playoffs. I agree, the Spurs have more hurdles to overcome, but the Lakers, theoretically, should have had some (for perspective on this, Kerr once said it takes two full years to learn the triangle) hurdles to overcome.

Again, it's not that I necessarily disagree with your take (in fact, I agree with your take on the Celtics), but to act as if there should have been no issues whatsoever is ridiculous. The reality is their collective talent, commitment, hard work and overall IQ for the game won out, as it should be doing for the Spurs. Does that necessarily make them a contender? No, but what the fuck are they doing in 7th, battling for their playoff lives? Here's what you fail to mention: the schedule early on was conducive to their situation. Plenty of home games, games spread out, weak competition and yet they didn't take advantage of any of it or look as if they had progressed as a team throughout it.

[Blackjack]

Where we differ is on the extent of the underachieving. My position is that despite all the "reasons" that you cite, that they should still be better than they are. Your position is that they're about where they should be given all the "reasons" that you cite, correct?

Incorrect. My position is that the perceived "excuses" (sorry, couldn't resist :hat) played a very large role in preventing the team from being who I viewed them to be going into the season: a Western Conference finalist (all things assumed equal and no upgrades to the roster). I don't have any disagreement that they should be better off than they are, but it's of no real consequence to me: the times have called for a championship-or-bust mentaltity and the difference between the 4th or 7th-seed and being first or second-round playoff fodder, seems irrelevant to someone whose pocketbook isn't affected by a couple of home playoff games.

Again, it's not an argument from me. It's a diagnostic. What's happened, as I alluded to in the OP, has been predictable to an extent; never did I mention that it was excusable or acceptable. They should be fighting for homecourt, regardless of what they've had to deal with, but it just doesn't elicit any great emotion on my behalf; fourth, seventh ... first-round, second ... it's just inconsequential . . .



I knew Gasol would fit in well too, but I honestly didn't think to myself the day it happened that, "the Spurs are in trouble".

Nor did I (the Lakers made it to the Finals a year ahead of schedule thanks to an ankle injury and a tarmac, as far as I'm concerned).


I agree, the Spurs have more hurdles to overcome, but the Lakers, theoretically, should have had some (for perspective on this, Kerr once said it takes two full years to learn the triangle) hurdles to overcome.

Again, it's not that I necessarily disagree with your take (in fact, I agree with your take on the Celtics), but to act as if there should have been no issues whatsoever is ridiculous. The reality is their collective talent, commitment, hard work and overall IQ for the game won out, as it should be doing for the Spurs. Does that necessarily make them a contender? No, but what the fuck are they doing in 7th, battling for their playoff lives? Here's what you fail to mention: the schedule early on was conducive to their situation. Plenty of home games, games spread out, weak competition and yet they didn't take advantage of any of it or look as if they had progressed as a team throughout it.

It seems my only real contention with your view is the parallel you've drawn between the Spurs of this year and the Lakers and Celtics of '08; that's what it really seems to come down to. In one scenario you've got a team, Lakers, integrating a player that's pretty much exactly what the doctor ordered: a highly intelligent, and highly skilled frontcourt player whose game needed little-to-no adjustment upon arrival (the Triangle isn't nearly the chore for an intelligent big who's accustomed to facillitating offense as a go-to player). And in the next scenario you've got a team, Celtics, that was put together the right way (fundamentally sound) and that had their two best players primed, healthy and hungry from the jump (none of which you could say for the Spurs).

The Spurs weren't capable of locking people down and allowing their defense to sustain them as they built cohesion; their Big 3's skill sets weren't hand-picked to compliment each other; they didn't have the hunger of a Pierce, Garnett and Allen (perceived underachievers); and they didn't have the type of youth, athleticism and/or physical attributes they possessed in their supporting cast.

My argument was never that Boston didn't have hurdles to overcome or that it was a piece of cake. My argument is that, unlike the Spurs, they actually had the tools and circumstance to clear those hurdles.