Cheryl Miller asks Carlisle about matchups

[TJastal]

I found this little sound byte very interesting watching the mavs - nuggets game last night.



Miller: Ok talk about the different matchups, do you like to play small or would you rather play big or is that all dependant on Denver right now?

Carlisle: Well.., we're gonna try to play our game, we'll go a little smaller at times, but we like to play bigger guys, and we're gonna look to play our game the best we can.

Miller: Alright, thanks coach.

First off, my hats off to Rick Carslisle, great coach who isn't afraid to play to his strengths. I wish the spurs had a coach like this.

Fellow spurs fans, ask yourself... if basketball was like a game of Simon Says wouldn't it be nice to have a coach who wasn't afraid to be Simon and dictate a matchup once in awhile? This never seems to cross Pop's mind anymore or he just doesn't bother. Maybe he figures its not his job to help his team find favorable matchups. Maybe he figures that's his players' jobs.

Whatever the reason, consequently the dog and pony show has gotten stale and predictable over the years. Enough so that we now see opposing coaches deliberately tanking games in order to face his team in the playoffs.

Regardless of Carslisle's personal opinion of Pop as a coach, I would bet you dollars to donuts that behind closed doors Carlisle is licking his chops at the thought of facing the turd towers and/or Stephen Jackson in a small ball lineup as opposed to tangling with any of Memphis, OKC, or LA.

Thoughts? Comments? Flames?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Hypothetical Pop intrview :

Miller: Ok talk about the different matchups, do you like to play small or would you rather play big or is that all dependant on <insert_team> right now?

Pop: There are no different matchups... <long_stare>

[Mugen]

Pop owned Carlisle last time they met in the playoffs. Rick's a good coach but i'm pretty sure he's not "lickin his chops" to face an improved Spurs team that already beat him once before.

[101A]

Are you arguing that the Spur's playing Big is "playing to their strength" - which is what Carlisle is advocating? I would suggest the Spur's strength lies more in their shorter players - thus Pop ostensibly might give the exact same answer.

[SenorSpur]

I just hate it that, ever since 2006, Pop has felt compelled to favor "small-ball" lineups - especially during crunch time. This evolution has also led to him devaluing the advantage of having size on the roster. Instead he has developed a preference for the stretch-4.

Everyone knows the Spurs have had a size disadvantage coming into this season. It's even more surprising that the Spurs have gone throughout the entire season without a 5th big - especially considering this compressed schedule. This certainly isn't a benefit to our resident HOF big man (Duncan), who, on most nights, still must be relied upon to bear the brunt of frontline responsibility because Pop refuses to pair him up with another bigman.

There are always times when it's certainly appropriate to stretch the floor, however if you're sacrificing rebounding, post defense and interior scoring in the process, what's the point?

Practically every major contender in the West has the ability to throw out a lineup of dual-seven footers - or at the very least keep one on the floor at all times. Meanwhile the Spurs have the memory of having been physically mauled in the playoffs for two straight years, partly because of the declining play of Duncan, injuries to Manu and of course, and of course, matchup disadvantages in the frontcourt.

Without the ability to consistently generate low-post offense, the 3-pt shot has become the Spurs favorite offensive weapon. A strategy that doesn't bode well for an expected deep playoff run.

I really thought the Memphis playoff series would have been a referendum for Pop to change his thinking on this. Sadly, that doesn't appear to be the case.

[TJastal]

Pop owned Carlisle last time they met in the playoffs. Rick's a good coach but i'm pretty sure he's not "lickin his chops" to face an improved Spurs team that already beat him once before.

I'm sure he's not losing all that much sleep over '09.

That was back when the mavs' center rotation consisted of the ancient corpse of "dust chip" Dampier and Drew Gooden.

Just peering over a few of the box scores, he had to start rookie Beabois, Quentin Ross (due to ankle sprain of Marion), & Gooden at center in that 2nd game of the series (lol).

He had not nearly the size in the paint or on the wings that he has today. He also doesn't have to worry about Hill suffocating Terry anymore either. No doubt Terry will see copious amounts of Gary Neal now, which will get his salivary glands working overtime.

[K-State Spur]

I found this little sound byte very interesting watching the mavs - nuggets game last night.



First off, my hats off to Rick Carslisle, great coach who isn't afraid to play to his strengths. I wish the spurs had a coach like this.

Fellow spurs fans, ask yourself... if basketball was like a game of Simon Says wouldn't it be nice to have a coach who wasn't afraid to be Simon and dictate a matchup once in awhile? This never seems to cross Pop's mind anymore or he just doesn't bother. Maybe he figures its not his job to help his team find favorable matchups. Maybe he figures that's his players' jobs.

Regardless of Carslisle's personal opinion of Pop as a coach, I would bet you dollars to donuts that behind closed doors Carlisle is licking his chops at the thought of facing the turd towers and/or Stephen Jackson in a small ball lineup as opposed to tangling with any of Memphis, OKC, or LA.


Pop's willingness to go small is often frustrating - but Carlisle, despite the quote, doesn't offer a great counterexample.

When Kidd/Dirk are struggling with match-ups, Carlisle has had to employ a gimmicky zone - that's not playing HIS game (Carlisle didn't employ 2 minutes of zone in his entire career at Detroit and Indiana), that's trying to match-up.

As for licking his chops, I'm guessing Carlisle preferred Dirk's possible matchups with San Antonio when Jax wasn't on the roster. Not that he's afraid now, but it was easier vs. the Spurs roster as of last week.

Also, bear in mind that Pop got the better of Carlisle the last time the two teams matched up in postseason - despite Carlisle having the better roster.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

I'm sure he's not losing all that much sleep over '09.

That was back when the mavs' center rotation consisted of the ancient corpse of "dust chip" Dampier and Drew Gooden.

Just peering over a few of the box scores, he had to start rookie Beabois, Quentin Ross (due to ankle sprain of Marion), & Gooden at center in that 2nd game of the series (lol).

He had not nearly the size in the paint or on the wings that he has today. He also doesn't have to worry about Hill suffocating Terry anymore either. No doubt Terry will see copious amounts of Gary Neal now, which will get his salivary glands working overtime.

He shouldn't be losing sleep over '09 because the Mavs won that series. It was 2010 they lost, where they had Haywood and Dampier, and Beaubois wasn't a factor till game 6, by which point, too little too late for the Mavs.

[Mugen]

I'm sure he's not losing all that much sleep over '09.

That was back when the mavs' center rotation consisted of the ancient corpse of "dust chip" Dampier and Drew Gooden.

Just peering over a few of the box scores, he had to start rookie Beabois, Quentin Ross (due to ankle sprain of Marion), & Gooden at center in that 2nd game of the series (lol).

He had not nearly the size in the paint or on the wings that he has today. He also doesn't have to worry about Hill suffocating Terry anymore either. No doubt Terry will see copious amounts of Gary Neal now, which will get his salivary glands working overtime.

like amused pointed out, spurs beat them in '10.

The Mavs center rotation isnt that much better than it was back then with the loss of Chandler.

They're getting nothing out of Odom and Kidd/Terry/Marion are all a year older. I don't know if the Spurs would be favored in a playoff series but I don't think it'd be that bad matchup for a SA since they don't really have a post player that can exploit our interior D.

I feel a lot better about our chances in beating them after acquiring Jax who guarded NOwitzki pretty well the last game.

So no, i still don't think that Carlisle would be thrilled to face this Spurs team, regardless of small ball/bonner/etc.

[DesignatedT]

Carlisle doesn't want anything to do with the Spurs.

[purist]

why is this deserving of its own thread?:sleep

[DeadlyDynasty]

Cheryl Miller is fucking SCARY

[therealtruth]

Pop owned Carlisle last time they met in the playoffs. Rick's a good coach but i'm pretty sure he's not "lickin his chops" to face an improved Spurs team that already beat him once before.

The reason the Spurs won was because of the emergence of George Hill and Dice's defense.

Also Carlisle has gotten better since then. He did some of his best coaching in the playoffs last year. Sweeping Phil Jackson? That's something Pop never came close to. He's less rigid and more willing to make adjustments on the fly. In the meantime Pop has become more rigid and less willing to make adjustments.

[therealtruth]

I just hate it that, ever since 2006, Pop has felt compelled to favor "small-ball" lineups - especially during crunch time. This evolution has also led to him devaluing the advantage of having size on the roster. Instead he has developed a preference for the stretch-4.

Everyone knows the Spurs have had a size disadvantage coming into this season. It's even more surprising that the Spurs have gone throughout the entire season without a 5th big - especially considering this compressed schedule. This certainly isn't a benefit to our resident HOF big man (Duncan), who, on most nights, still must be relied upon to bear the brunt of frontline responsibility because Pop refuses to pair him up with another bigman.

There are always times when it's certainly appropriate to stretch the floor, however if you're sacrificing rebounding, post defense and interior scoring in the process, what's the point?

Practically every major contender in the West has the ability to throw out a lineup of dual-seven footers - or at the very least keep one on the floor at all times. Meanwhile the Spurs have the memory of having been physically mauled in the playoffs for two straight years, partly because of the declining play of Duncan, injuries to Manu and of course, and of course, matchup disadvantages in the frontcourt.

Without the ability to consistently generate low-post offense, the 3-pt shot has become the Spurs favorite offensive weapon. A strategy that doesn't bode well for an expected deep playoff run.

I really thought the Memphis playoff series would have been a referendum for Pop to change his thinking on this. Sadly, that doesn't appear to be the case.

Pop believes Ginobli's injury is the reason they lost. He doesn't realize that having better bigs would have helped. Pop used to close with a stretch 4 in Robert Horry. But Horry had length and was a much superior defender and rebounder and playmaker than Bonner. Plus he could actually hit clutch shots.