Hollins "We're in front of the basket and missing layups, SA didn't do anything"

[Amuseddaysleeper]

from the post game conference :lol

[Frank Dux]

Cool, hopefully he's telling his players that.

[BillMc]

They were missing layups for a reason.

There will be people who see tim's low point total and say he had a bad game. But Tim was a major disruption in in the paint. He can let other people score, just play D like that the whole series Timmy and we'll be fine.

[Russ]

After a blowout win, you just hope the opposing coach will say something like this. :)

[Reck]

LOL the idiot couldn't even remember one of his players name..

[HI-FI]

affirmative action ftw

[milkyway21]

Duncan passing the ball to other teammates(4 asst), took care of the D in the middle

[thunderup]

:lol he's salty. That unrotted corpse looking bitch is one of the shittier overrated coaches in the league.

[timtonymanu]

:lol He was being smug in 2011. Hopefully we continue to win.

[EricB]

Avery Johnson esqu post game FTW

[hater]

:lmao black coach

[siraulo23]

no he said, theres some plays where the grizz couldnt make layups/easy baskets at the rim and spurs had nothing to do with them missing those layups

he gave credit to the spurs d and that they didnt play well

[td4mvp21]

To be fair, they did miss some shots they would normally make. Spurs D was very locked-in and tough, though.

[Uriel]

This guy couldn't even remember Bayless' name. :lol

[weebo]

Spurs packed the paint and dared them to shoot from the outside.

[siraulo23]

This guy couldn't even remember Bayless' name. :lol

:lol

[SA210]

LOL the idiot couldn't even remember one of his players name..


:lol I laughed at that

[Kidd K]

Hollins apparently didn't expect solid interior defense. :lmao

Dude is as shellshocked as Zach Randolph when he got yanked at the end of the game.

[exstatic]

He's a dinosaur who's at odds with his advanced stat driven front office. I don't see him there for the long run. One of the reasons they traded Gay was that Hollins insisted on playing him to close out games ,when advanced stats said they were WAY worse defensively with him on the floor instead of Allen, and no better on offense. Reminded me of Moneyball when Beane traded that guy that Howe kept playing in front of their walk-drawing first base candidate. :lol

[HarlemHeat37]

It's a little more difficult adjusting in this series than it was against Vinny Del Negro and Scott Brooks, tbh:lol..

[milkyway21]

all our bigs were in single-pt scoring
Duncan 6
Splitter 1
Diaw 2
Blair 6

D?

[exstatic]

Pop needs to take this fool to the wood shed in 5.

[Rebounds]

If he' really convinced of that then it's an early out for the Fizzlies. But I think they're thoroughly embarrased and next game they want a TKO by halftime. Gonna be an interesting game 2.

[Obstructed_View]

Looks like he got his scouting reports from ESPN, who seems to think this is the 2011 defense and the 2004 offense.

[Kidd K]

He's a dinosaur who's at odds with his advanced stat driven front office. I don't see him there for the long run. One of the reasons they traded Gay was that Hollins insisted on playing him to close out games ,when advanced stats said they were WAY worse defensively with him on the floor instead of Allen, and no better on offense. Reminded me of Moneyball when Beane traded that guy that Howe kept playing in front of their walk-drawing first base candidate. :lol

Tbh, Pena was much better than Scott Hatteburg and imo had little to nothing to do with them playing better. Pena's career also lasted much longer (he's still playing now a dozen years later) and is much better defensively. Trading Pena just to play Hatteburg was pretty much his worst move.

I totally get what you're saying (it's right), but that's a bad example. :P

[DMC]

He said that they didn't miss point blank layups because of San Antonio. He wasn't dissing SA. He was refusing to give his team an easy out of "oh they played better".

[Whisky Dog]

It's a little more difficult adjusting in this series than it was against Vinny Del Negro and Scott Brooks, tbh:lol..

True, like I said before the series they played by far the easiest schedule to get to the WCF. The Clippers are athletic but the most undisciplined and worst coached team in the playoffs while OKC was a shell of their 2012 team with no Harden and no Westbrook.

[roycrikside]

I think Gay was much more of a problem on offense than defense. The Grizz starting five with Prince had the second-lowest pts allowed per 100 possessions in the league. The Grizz with Gay were the third-lowest, so not a big drop off. (The Spurs starters were the lowest, btw, by a LOT.)

Gay was shipped because A) He was making WAY too much money and B) He was an ineffient scorer. Now his shots are going to Randolph, Gasol and Conley.

He is not a bad defender though. Toronto had the fifth-lowest pts allowed per 100 with him in its lineup. Two top fives for one guy on two separate teams? Can't be a coincidence.

[Stabula]

True, like I said before the series they played by far the easiest schedule to get to the WCF. The Clippers are athletic but the most undisciplined and worst coached team in the playoffs while OKC was a shell of their 2012 team with no Harden and no Westbrook.

It's hard to say the Spurs didn't have the easiest road to the WCF when they were paired up with the biggest failure in sports history in the first round.

[Obstructed_View]

It's hard to say the Spurs didn't have the easiest road to the WCF when they were paired up with the biggest failure in sports history in the first round.

The Grizzlies might have had the easiest road, but the Spurs definitely had a first round bye.

[The Reckoning]

Hollins doing some damage control to save his ass from being fired

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Memphis was a mediocre offensive team going into the playoffs. They were losing vs the Clips until Griffin went gimp and beat a thin Thunder squad missing their 2nd option on offense and 2nd best perimeter defender.

We figured out and limited a top offense in GSW. Now Memphis is the second coming? I don't know that there is a more overrated team than the Grizz.

[DMC]

Memphis was a mediocre offensive team going into the playoffs. They were losing vs the Clips until Griffin went gimp and beat a thin Thunder squad missing their 2nd option on offense and 2nd best perimeter defender.

We figured out and limited a top offense in GSW. Now Memphis is the second coming? I don't know that there is a more overrated team than the Grizz.

This take is going to be hard to swallow once Memphis closes us out.

[Mr. Body]

Memphis was a mediocre offensive team going into the playoffs. They were losing vs the Clips until Griffin went gimp and beat a thin Thunder squad missing their 2nd option on offense and 2nd best perimeter defender.

We figured out and limited a top offense in GSW. Now Memphis is the second coming? I don't know that there is a more overrated team than the Grizz.

This is all correct.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This take is going to be hard to swallow once Memphis closes us out.

Hope you are not this much of a pussy irl.

[DPG21920]

This take is going to be hard to swallow once Memphis closes us out.

I agree with the logic of some of the posts, but I do feel Spur fans are once again over simplifying things. Memphis is a damn good team and there are still a lot of Spurs question marks. Luckily, the Spurs defense is the least of those question marks and with an offensively limited team like MEM, that might be enough to get them through the series. We'll see.

But MEM has easily been one of the most resilient teams in the league, especially in the playoff this year.

[howbouthemspurs]

:lmao Awesome!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I agree with the logic of some of the posts, but I do feel Spur fans are once again over simplifying things. Memphis is a damn good team and there are still a lot of Spurs question marks. Luckily, the Spurs defense is the least of those question marks and with an offensively limited team like MEM, that might be enough to get them through the series. We'll see.

But MEM has easily been one of the most resilient teams in the league, especially in the playoff this year.

'Spurs fans' oversimplify things and then you come back with

1) Memphis is good team
2) Spurs defense doesn't matter
3) Memphis is resilient

Okey dokey.

[lmbebo]

Spurs did what they had to do today.

Memphis will come back and make this a tough series. I still believe Spurs in 6.

[weebo]

Spurs won't play as well as they did today and the Grizzlies won't play as bad as they did today. Having said that, I still think the Spurs have the Grizzlies number this year. They just seem to match up better this time around than they did last time they faced each other in the playoffs.

[DPG21920]

'Spurs fans' oversimplify things and then you come back with

1) Memphis is good team
2) Spurs defense doesn't matter
3) Memphis is resilient

Okey dokey.

You missed the point and I was not going to re-post all of my analysis on the Spurs/Mem match up from previous threads.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I didn't notice them missing too many easy layups tbh, although I saw plenty of great Spurs defence... maybe Hollins was watching a different game? :lol

[Biggems]

This guy couldn't even remember Bayless' name. :lol

that was funny, but not as funny as when D'Antoni got bested by a bottle of water in the post game presser after the Spurs beat some Suns ass.

[Mr. Body]

How many layups did they even get? How many didn't actually go in? Not a whole lot. They lost by a bunch; missed layups weren't the issue. I can only guess he's trying to charge his troops.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You missed the point and I was not going to re-post all of my analysis on the Spurs/Mem match up from previous threads.

If you say so.

The 'good team' specifically was 18th in offensive efficiency. The Spurs defense not mattering is claptrap considering NBA games typically go for ~95 points. Even low scoring games provide a large potential for variance. This is not baseball where there are ~5 runs scored by a team. With so many possessions ie samples there is more potential for the difference to manifest.

That should be especially evident when the variable that 'doesn't matter as much' resulted in an 83 point output.

And the Grizzlies getting resilient strangely coincided with Griffin being robbed of his athleticism by a high ankle sprain and Del Negro showing a dramatic inability to adjust. I get the correlation with coming back from 2-0 and 1-0 but I very strongly disagree as to cause. Griffin and Westbrook were huge components of their teams and then *poof*. That makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than 'resilience' making a difference.

[DPG21920]

If you say so.

The 'good team' specifically was 18th in offensive efficiency. The Spurs defense not mattering is claptrap considering NBA games typically go for ~95 points. Even low scoring games provide a large potential for variance. This is not baseball where there are ~5 runs scored by a team. With so many possessions ie samples there is more potential for the difference to manifest.

That should be especially evident when the variable that 'doesn't matter as much' resulted in an 83 point output.

And the Grizzlies getting resilient strangely coincided with Griffin being robbed of his athleticism by a high ankle sprain and Del Negro showing a dramatic inability to adjust. I get the correlation with coming back from 2-0 and 1-0 but I very strongly disagree as to cause. Griffin and Westbrook were huge components of their teams and then *poof*. That makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than 'resilience' making a difference.

Huh? I said the defense of the Spurs is the least of concerns. Also, IIRC Memphis was one of the league leaders in come from behind wins this entire season.

[aal04]

Yes thats right Hollins.

Spurs played like Chit, brought their C game, and beat ya ass.

[41times]

Hollins is an idiot. Memphis was not ready for the bright lights and big stage like the Veteren Spurs

[TheGoldStandard]

Grizz had more rebounds, more points in the paint and more FTs. They shot 43% which isn't bad but they didn't take a 3 and we did, we shot lights out in that area and were at 52%. We played great all around, Randolph will get into the series but his out put will even out whatever one else did. We'll take this series in 5

[jmanu20]

:lol He was being smug in 2011. Hopefully we continue to win.

Hopefully we do win the series and they can tell him "nice series, Tank." I know that word pissed him off in 2011 because he refused to fess up to it.

[Obstructed_View]

You missed the point and I was not going to re-post all of my analysis on the Spurs/Mem match up from previous threads.

Then perhaps you could just list two or three of these "question marks" you referred to so we don't have to go doing searches to see what you're talking about. Only fair since you're accusing other Spurs fans of over-simplifying but didn't provide any substance in response.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You cannot come from behind if you cannot score.

'And least of concerns' is an interesting characterization. I prefer 'a very lopsided advantage.' If Memphis cannot generate 90 points I don't see them winning very much if at all. That would require a dominating defensive performance on their part just to have a shot to win. They shoot a godawful percentage. The 43% they shot today has been their average for the post season and only 1 point worse than their season average.

If we can manage 95 ppg --well below our average-- then I just don't see them being able to beat us.

[DPG21920]

Then perhaps you could just list two or three of these "question marks" you referred to so we don't have to go doing searches to see what you're talking about. Only fair since you're accusing other Spurs fans of over-simplifying but didn't provide any substance in response.

They have been re-hashed frequently, by multiple people. My reference was to Spur fans essentially saying Spurs will sweep Golden State, it's so easy! All you have to do is is "x" and it's game over! Things like that. I picked SA to win the series and listed numerous times why. But when people see a game like this, they get over confident and over simplify things as if it is easy to replicate and win by 20 every game.

The concerns I have in order is: Duncan's health, the amount of 3's taken & rebounding. Rebounding was not an issue today, Duncan's health is still iffy to me and even though they were good looks, taking 30 3's is a lot.

[DPG21920]

You cannot come from behind if you cannot score.

'And least of concerns' is an interesting characterization. I prefer 'a very lopsided advantage.' If Memphis cannot generate 90 points I don't see them winning very much if at all. That would require a dominating defensive performance on their part just to have a shot to win. They shoot a godawful percentage. The 43% they shot today has been their average for the post season and only 1 point worse than their season average.

If we can manage 95 ppg --well below our average-- then I just don't see them being able to beat us.

I agree and have said the same things. That doesn't mean that the Spurs will sweep MEM (which after games like this, people seem to think Spurs should win every game by 20 seemingly).

[GrandeDavid]

After a blowout win, you just hope the opposing coach will say something like this. :)

Exactly! Surprisingly poor sportsmanship by Hollins and hopefully a little bulletin board material, so to speak, for the Spurs. Pop would never say something so idiotic. Pop truly is on a class of his own.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I agree and have said the same things. That doesn't mean that the Spurs will sweep MEM (which after games like this, people seem to think Spurs should win every game by 20 seemingly).

But you haven't said those things. You have more or less discounted the tremendous advantage we have when Memphis has the ball. And really who do you have more faith in making adjustments? Popovich or Hollins?

I don't think we are going to beat them every game much less by 20 points but I think saying that they are favored over us in any game is completely unfounded. They are a flawed team.

[Budkin]

He was a smug pos in 2011 and it seems like he still is.

[DPG21920]

:lol I have said those things. Exactly (in fact I believe I actually referenced the 90 point mark). I did not repost in here, but in my pre series analysis and even post game 1, I said those exact things. The difference being the tone of my posts was not "it's so easy on paper it's basically guaranteed!"

[DMC]

Huh? I said the defense of the Spurs is the least of concerns. Also, IIRC Memphis was one of the league leaders in come from behind wins this entire season.

The Thunder were up pretty good on them in that last game and the Grizz just walked them down and took it. They came back on us tonight but fortunately we hit some big shots. What the Grizz lack is outside shooting that they can trust. Obviously they don't like to rely on it, having great offensive rebounding and great inside presence, but a fast paced high scoring team that plays defense like SA can put them so far in the hole so fast they might not recover in time.

Still, I don't like how some people pretend the Grizz just got lucky to be here. We could be facing the Thunder. Then what.

[DPG21920]

But you haven't said those things. You have more or less discounted the tremendous advantage we have when Memphis has the ball. And really who do you have more faith in making adjustments? Popovich or Hollins?

I don't think we are going to beat them every game much less by 20 points but I think saying that they are favored over us in any game is completely unfounded. They are a flawed team.


Well think about it this way too: Let's say Zbo and Gasol comine for 50 points (which would be huge and not likely 4 games out of 7) - who gets them the other 40? Look at what the Spurs were able to do to a much better scoring backcourt in Curry/Klay and now you are expecting Prince/Conley/Bayless to get you 40 (a low estimate because that's assuming Zbo/Gasol combine for 50).

Like HH said, it's not that Zbo and Mark aren't capable, it's just one of the stronger things the Spurs are built around (post defense).

If the Spurs don't turn it over and if they rebound and hit a decent amount of three's, they should be able to get that 90-95 points which should win you games against this MEM team. Especially if Zbo struggles.

This was before you posted it.

[DPG21920]

The Thunder were up pretty good on them in that last game and the Grizz just walked them down and took it. They came back on us tonight but fortunately we hit some big shots. What the Grizz lack is outside shooting that they can trust. Obviously they don't like to rely on it, having great offensive rebounding and great inside presence, but a fast paced high scoring team that plays defense like SA can put them so far in the hole so fast they might not recover in time.

Still, I don't like how some people pretend the Grizz just got lucky to be here. We could be facing the Thunder. Then what.

That's essentially the point of what I said to Fuzzy.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Then I fail to see what if any point that you have had in this thread. That we should expect more of the same offensive output by the Grizz and less from the Spurs?

Unless Hollins can figure out how to defend the three point line without opening up the lane, the Grizz are fucked.

[Arcadian]

Some people are defending a fear or concern for the Grizzlies? :lol What the fuck? We're not gonna win every game by 20, but we should be clear favorites by now, and we might sweep. That's not overconfidence.

Now, if you're defending a fear of the Miami Heat, that's another story. That's totally justified. The good news is, we might have a longer rest period, since the WCF started way sooner than the ECF. :tu

[Whisky Dog]

It's hard to say the Spurs didn't have the easiest road to the WCF when they were paired up with the biggest failure in sports history in the first round.

No it's not. Spurs had the easier first round series (although the clippers are really bad in the playoffs due to their style and no-basketball IQ). That said, GS was playing the best basketball of anyone in the playoffs, had the biggest upset of the playoffs, and were clicking on all cylinders until game 3 when the Spurs were dealt a wake up blow (game2) and clamped their ass down. GS beats the Clippers, the Thunder, or the Grizzlies if they had played any of them in the 2nd round.

Overall the Spurs played the hardest team in the WC in the 2nd round (other than themselves tbh) while the Grizz got a defeated and weak OKC.

[TampaDude]

Then I fail to see what if any point that you have had in this thread. That we should expect more of the same offensive output by the Grizz and less from the Spurs?

Unless Hollins can figure out how to defend the three point line without opening up the lane, the Grizz are fucked.

Yup...it's pick your poison time for the Grizzlies. Spurs in 5.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That's essentially the point of what I said to Fuzzy.

They came back on us because we started giving wide open looks to Pondexter. One bad close out and two wide open threes by Pondexter plus a bad turnover leading to a Bayless dunk. It took all of 1:30. TO Spurs and the best coach in the NBA adjusted. The Grizz scored 1 point in the next 4 minutes for an 11 to 1 run of our own.

It's also like you guys refuse to acknowledge that Westbrook didn't play. In order to come back or build a lead on a team you have to get stops. It's easy to get stops when you're up against a simple offense that has one guy that can create his own shot. They lost a top 20 --at the very least-- player and without him their talent level is akin to the Rockets. So they came back on them, whoopedy friggin do.

[DPG21920]

They came back on us because we started giving wide open looks to Pondexter. One bad close out and two wide open threes by Pondexter plus a bad turnover leading to a Bayless dunk. It took all of 1:30. TO Spurs and the best coach in the NBA adjusted. The Grizz scored 1 point in the next 4 minutes for an 11 to 1 run of our own.

It's also like you guys refuse to acknowledge that Westbrook didn't play. In order to come back or build a lead on a team you have to get stops. It's easy to get stops when you're up against a simple offense that has one guy that can create his own shot. They lost a top 20 --at the very least-- player and without him their talent level is akin to the Rockets. So they came back on them, whoopedy friggin do.


Positives:

MEM, even against an OKC team without Westbrook, won a lot of close games. They did a great job at taking Durant out and OKC was still able to be in every game near the end. So it gives you hope because even if they take TP out of the game, Spurs are a better offensive team than the Westbrook-less Thunder and should be able to be in every game even if TP struggles. Not only that, but the Spurs are a better defensive team than OKC so when you look at both sides of the ball and how OKC was in every game even with some sub par Durant play, you have to feel good about your chances.

Negatives:

Tim's play. On both ends. His stamina looks gone as does his effectiveness over the course of a game/series. Can he find his game and the energy to pick it up and not have to be benched?

Spurs offense. Memphis is quite easily a better defensive team than GS and the Spurs offense sputtered this series in a major way. Spurs were able to win with defense, but if they allow MEM to rebound like GS did and their offense goes to hell, Spurs are in a lot of trouble. Will they find their offense consistently or is their style of play doomed in the playoffs as in previous years when the series gets tough.

Again, before you said any of what you said.

[Sean Cagney]

Cool, hopefully he's telling his players that.

.................

[100%duncan]

You misquoted Hollins tbh.

It was closer to this "Our guys were under the basket and missing shots, I'm sure SA got nothing to do with that."

Title's so wrong tbh.

[Obstructed_View]

The concerns I have in order is: Duncan's health, the amount of 3's taken & rebounding. Rebounding was not an issue today, Duncan's health is still iffy to me and even though they were good looks, taking 30 3's is a lot.

Wow, those are legitimately lame question marks.

[DPG21920]

Wow, those are legitimately lame question marks.

:lol

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Again, before you said any of what you said.

And again, how do you come to said conclusions. We're a better team but.... what? That certainly seems fly in the face of your take that the Grizz are 'resilient.' They struggled beating a severely diminished OKC team. If anything OKC deserves that moniker.

Is your effort just to dampen our enthusiasm?

And for all of your talk of Memphis' defense being 'clearly better.' Neither Allen nor Conley can hold a candle to Thomspon's defense vs Parker. Oh and the Spurs averaged 104 ppg vs the GSW. :lol 'sputtered in a major way.'

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol

How many of those 3's were not wide open? For a 'clearly better defensive team' their perimeter defense was clearly inferior. You want us to pass the ball inside when we have a wide open looks? We took what they gave us and feasted.

Want to know a legitimate 'question mark.' The Grizzlies defense. The 'clearly better' defense appears to lack the ability to guard against penetration while keeping us off the three point line. It's an obvious tactical advantage that they had no answer for.

[John B]

Spurs defense would have the Grizz missing layups again in Game 2.

[Indazone]

Memphis is big and slow. Somewhat predictable. Spurs have a lot of looks and can match up in a number of different ways. Should be an interesting series but I don't think the Grizzlies match up well with the Spurs.

[Horse]

That fucker really seemed to be in disbelief.

[DPG21920]

'Spurs fans' oversimplify things and then you come back with

1) Memphis is good team
2) Spurs defense doesn't matter
3) Memphis is resilient

Okey dokey.

Still don't think MEM is resilient?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Still don't think MEM is resilient?

Not particularly.

Resilient teams win. Do you honestly think that Memphis played 'good ball' during that comeback?

[DPG21920]

:lol

[DPG21920]

So win they come back from down 0-2 to win 4 straight, it's because it's LAC. When they come back from down 1 to win 4 straight in tightly contested games, it's because OKC is hobbled. When they get down huge and force overtime by holding the Spurs to 9 points, they didn't win so they aren't resilient. I'm beginning to suspect you don't know the meaning of the word.

It's not a knock on the Spurs to say MEM is a gritty and resilient team. Are they extremely flawed offensively? Yes. Did I pick the Spurs to win the series and say everything you said before you said it? Yes. That doesn't mean MEM sucks, or that their defense is overrated or that they aren't capable of beating the Spurs at least a few games if not in the series. They are a resilient team.

[siraulo23]

this quote is prolly more applicable to game 2 tbh :lol

spurs protected the rim well, but grizz missed some makeable shots off of offensive rebounds

[therealtruth]

this quote is prolly more applicable to game 2 tbh :lol

spurs protected the rim well, but grizz missed some makeable shots off of offensive rebounds

That's part of good defense. You get teams to miss shots they normally make because you're disrupting their offensive rhythm. The opposite is true as well. With bad defense teams can hit shots you wouldn't expect them to hit.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So win they come back from down 0-2 to win 4 straight, it's because it's LAC. When they come back from down 1 to win 4 straight in tightly contested games, it's because OKC is hobbled. When they get down huge and force overtime by holding the Spurs to 9 points, they didn't win so they aren't resilient. I'm beginning to suspect you don't know the meaning of the word.

It's not a knock on the Spurs to say MEM is a gritty and resilient team. Are they extremely flawed offensively? Yes. Did I pick the Spurs to win the series and say everything you said before you said it? Yes. That doesn't mean MEM sucks, or that their defense is overrated or that they aren't capable of beating the Spurs at least a few games if not in the series. They are a resilient team.

The Grizzlies played with heart this game but last game they didn't play 48 minutes. They did better this game. If you want to congratulate them on beating those other teams, you go right ahead. Parroting their teams marketing campaign about grit, grind and struggling resilience doesn't do much for me.

I don't think Memphis sucks but I think that we should be favored in any game. We dealt with some bizarre officiating in the second half and Duncan picked up both his 4th and 5th fouls early in each of the last two quarters. We reacted very poorly to Dooling, Bayless and Pondexter on the perimeter. Neal and Bonner are not the answer to that second unit. We were unable to take advantage of it offensively either.

I will give credit to the Grizzlies on getting Bonner and Neal in pnr situations and taking advantage. I give credit to Randolph for being able to destroy Matt Bonner on the glass. I would also give credit to Tony Allen's defense on Manu in the fourth quarter. That last was impressive play even if him writhing on the floor was pitiful. Kudos to them.

Sorry, I am not overly impressed with Memphis. The dominated the glass, got a lot of perimeter offense and still lost.