Maybe the Spurs turn the corner with Fin's departure?

[toki9]

First of all, I don't think the front office letting Fin go (or Haislip, or sending Ratliff to the Bobcats) is a capitulation on their part, necessarily...the Spurs weren't going to win or lose the championship because of these guys...It's still the 3 + Jefferson and Dyess, with Hill and Blair providing help and Mason and Bonner contributing, and it always was...

Second, with the airing-out of Mason's unhappiness and Fin's departure, some (not necessarily all) of "chemistry" issues have been revealed...perhaps this will allow them to get a better handle on team chemistry...

Third, maybe this kicks Pop's butt a little bit as well...regardless of what he may believe, when the guys you've counted on want to bail (Fin?) it has to make you think about what you're doing...maybe this will get him to cut back on "experiments"...and it will force him to tighten his rotation (something he was probably in the process of doing already)...and giving Hairston and Mahinim some burn may also yield some positive results...

Fourth, what happens to the remaining team members when a respected guy bails on them? Most likely, they either want to splinter or they huddle together (unless they're completely apathetic)...hopefully it will be the latter with the Spurs...

Anyways, just trying to find some positives with all the "turmoil" (at least by the Spurs standard) of the past few weeks...

[Sean Cagney]

and giving Hairston and Mahinim some burn may also yield some positive results...




^^^^ Yep, we all have been thinking this in here and on other boards for a while. I think they are part of the future here, hopefully.

[Shifty]

...maybe this will get him to cut back on "experiments"...and it will force him to tighten his rotation (something he was probably in the process of doing already)...and giving Hairston and Mahinim some burn may also yield some positive results...

Isn't that kind of contradictory?

[toki9]

Isn't that kind of contradictory?

No, i don't think so...

Cutting down on experiments like having 4 guards and a forward out there where the tallest guy is 6'7", playing players out of position, etc...sticking with more traditional alignments position-wise...

Tightening rotation ("Tighten" meaning fine tune, not necessarily "shorten")...have an established substitution patterns so the players can prepare for their entry/exit/etc...stick with your core players, with fringe players getting extraneous time...

Giving Malik and Mahinmi some burn...plugging in Malik into the rotation at the 3 behind Jefferson and Bogans...plugging in Mahinmi at the 5 behind Duncan and Bonner (but he'll probably get mostly garbage minutes until he really outplays someone on the court)...

[Shifty]

No, i don't think so...

I still think it is but ok.


Cutting down on experiments like having 4 guards and a forward out there where the tallest guy is 6'7", playing players out of position, etc...sticking with more traditional alignments position-wise...

I agree with this but please check this out:

http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/03/02/notes-from-wayne-winston-part-3/

something to consider.

[TD 21]

You're missing the point. It wasn't that Finley, Ratliff or Haislip were going to "win the Spurs the championship" (though I'd still argue that to have any chance against the Lakers, the Spurs needed Ratliff), but, particularly in the case of Ratliff, the Spurs giving him away is symbolic. Make no mistake, it was a clear indication that the front office thinks this group isn't championship material because if they thought they were, then there is no chance they hand away a veteran big (always the rage this time of year) for essentially nothing. Pinching pennies was more a priority.

That being said, I like the fact that Finley, in particular, is gone. Finally, the Spurs have a set rotation. Many will quibble with it, including me, but at least we know which eight are playing the majority of the minutes, which two are seeing spot minutes and which two aren't playing. There's no longer a cadre of past their prime veterans/never was' having delusions about playing a bigger role than they had, no longer eight or nine guys who think they have a shot at starting. Talent and chemistry are important, but you also need role definition.

When I think of the '07 team, they were not an overly talented team, but they had excellent role definition. I can still remember the playoff rotation that season, the exact point Vaughn would enter (four minutes left in the first), little things like that and the entire team was locked in because they knew exactly when they'd play, what position they'd play and generally, how long they'd play. That big. I'm not suggesting this team goes on to the championship now (unfortunately, they're two pieces short), but I think they're slowly but surely moving in the right direction. It made sense to have veteran role players when they big three were young. Now, they are the veterans (along with McDyess) and the Spurs need younger pieces around them.

[toki9]

You're missing the point. It wasn't that Finley, Ratliff or Haislip were going to "win the Spurs the championship" (though I'd still argue that to have any chance against the Lakers, the Spurs needed Ratliff), but, particularly in the case of Ratliff, the Spurs giving him away is symbolic. Make no mistake, it was a clear indication that the front office thinks this group isn't championship material because if they thought they were, then there is no chance they hand away a veteran big (always the rage this time of year) for essentially nothing. Pinching pennies was more a priority.

I'm not so sure that you can be so definitive about that. It's really a matter of interpretation. Pop and RC may believe that they have enough talent to get the job done without Ratliff and thus chose to save Peter Holt's money. It's a benign interpretation, but you can't rule it out. Your interpretation is also possible (and may even be more probable given the struggles that the teams had), but I'm not sure if it's really that clear.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

:lol @ Spurs fans who still think we are contenders this year.

Good luck with that.

[Ode to Triple Ocho]

turning the corner without Fin won't make your team any younger/better defensively or make that limp shriveled 14 million dollar penis vanish

[Kamnik]

:lol @ Spurs fans who still think we are contenders this year.

Good luck with that.

ANYTHING is possible in the playoffs!

YES, we don't stand a chance to a healthy LA team... but if one of their top players would be out because of an injury we have a legitimate shot at the finals. :toast

Never underestimate the heart of a champion. (TD, Manu, TP)

[Chomag]

Never underestimate the heart of a champion. (TD, Manu, TP)

It's not their heart that is in question. Their old tiered legs are having to carry to much burden because of the lack production from key role players.

[J.T.]

The Spurs still don't have what they need to dominate good teams in a playoff series. Right now I'd consider it a successful season if they don't get swept by anyone.

[mexicanjunior]

Pop and RC may believe that they have enough talent to get the job done without Ratliff and thus chose to save Peter Holt's money.

They must be watching another team...there has been no indication that this team can do anything special past the regular season.

[GhosTown]

The main thing about Finley leaving is that it finally showed that the vets don't believe in this foolish coach. I am still waiting on TD or TP to step up and put him in his place but I don't think either have to balls to do so.

[Agloco]

The Spurs still don't have what they need to dominate good teams in a playoff series. Right now I'd consider it a successful season if they don't get swept by anyone.

This.

[Ode to Triple Ocho]

The main thing about Finley leaving is that it finally showed that the vets don't believe in this foolish coach. I am still waiting on TD or TP to step up and put him in his place but I don't think either have to balls to do so.

The coach isn't the problem. It's your old and overrated (Manu/Parker) players.

[Obstructed_View]

The coach isn't the problem. It's your old and overrated (Manu/Parker) players.

Keith Bogans is still starting and Theo Ratliff was given away for nothing. I assure you that the coach is the problem.

[HarlemHeat37]

LOL @ Laker fan giving analysis..

[TD 21]

I'm not so sure that you can be so definitive about that. It's really a matter of interpretation. Pop and RC may believe that they have enough talent to get the job done without Ratliff and thus chose to save Peter Holt's money. It's a benign interpretation, but you can't rule it out. Your interpretation is also possible (and may even be more probable given the struggles that the teams had), but I'm not sure if it's really that clear.

Think about it logically. In essence, the Spurs needed a better, more versatile version of Ratliff, so what does trading him away signal? Reportedly, he was brought in to guard Gasol. The Spurs trading him for essentially nothing, so that they could pinch pennies, is a clear indication of how they view this team.

[MaNu4Tres]

The sad thing is we know this team's potential with Bogans starting and having minutes.

Same with Bonner...

1st or 2nd round exit team at best...

Unfortunately we don't know what this teams' potential could be with Hairston and Mahinmi. And Pop apparently refuses to want to find out.

[argginmanuoblifaniac]

Dumping Finley didn't hurt the Mavs. We became their bitch and they made finals. Just like that. And the only thing that changed was Finley. And didn't we also beat the Mavs this year without Finley?


I'd say dumping the losing karma that Finley brought upon this franchise the day he signed with it is probably the biggest step the team can take forward.


I know Finley has his defenders but anyone that thinks this team was the same after he signed with it(2007 lucky we didn't play the Mavs championship or not) as it was before, either was totally out of touch with the Spurs or a newbie fan.

The 2005 Spurs won what was probably their most impressive championship and were clearly set up for a true dynasty run. The major change between the 2005 champions and the 2006 Mavs bitch was the addition of Finley and Van Exel. Was Finley that caused the change, we became identical to the Mavs teams that had Finley on them the second he came here.

And anyone that doesn't think Finley is a cancer is clueless, even when he's not intentionally doing it. It's in his pouting sulking body language when he is playing bad or not happy with his role, it's in his I'm the only guy on the team with any heart shotchucking play when he is playing good. It's in the way he carries himself on the team, the fact that he attempts to lead when is not a leader and is not needed to be one.


That why the Mavs chose to let go of him, and it was the right decision for them. Stackhouse was better.

The 2005 team had just bumped off a defending champ in 7 games to win a title, it did not need Michael Finley to become a leader of it and the Spurs were the weaker for it happening.

And anyone that thinks the Spurs are trying to make Finley look bad is out of touch too. The Spurs usually produce bad press when they think there might be fan backlash over a move. There was no fan backlash for getting rid of Finley, no need for the bad press. The only guy upset in the entire world about Finley was Pop, and if he is upset it is obviously because he feels betrayed.

No other reason.

I personally don't hate Finley for wanting out, I thank him for it, and just wish it had come at a point when this team still had a dynasty run ahead of it. However mad or not, that doesn't change the fact that his signing was a dynasty derailing one.

Hopefully he'll go LEAD the Lakers like he did the Spurs. They need his leadership just like the 2005 Spurs did. I don't think Phil will be that stupid though, he obviously knows suck when he sees it or else he wouldn't have 10 rings.


The again, the greatest challenge left to Phil and his 10 rings may be to see if he can equal the Spurs achievement of winning a ring with Finley playing a major role.

My prediction is that this team will now begin to play the best basketball it has played since 2005, better than any team that had Finley on it.