timvp
06-09-2013, 03:32 PM
Actual questions I've gotten either on the forum, in chat, via PM or on email...
Why the hell did Gary Neal play so much in Game 1?
I was as perplexed as anyone else while watching the game. However, after seeing the film, I started to understand Pop's thinking. He wants as many ballhandlers on the court as possible due to the Heat blitzing pick-and-rolls. Love him or hate him, Neal is one of the better ballhandlers on the team in halfcourt situations. If Pop uses a lineup of Parker, Ginobili and Neal at the same time, that -- in theory, at least -- makes it a lot easier for the Spurs to survive if Miami takes away Parker's playmaking ability.
That said, I'm not sure I agree with Pop. When you combine Neal's poor shooting in the playoffs with his terrible defense, it's difficult to stomach his minutes. But I guess if Pop is dead set on playing him, let's hope Neal starts hitting more of his shots and there's a player he can hide on defensively. But, Pop, that player isn't Ray Allen. Neal on Allen is just asking for trouble.
Why did you turn into a miserable fa**ot?
Ha. I'm the happiest person in San Antonio. The Spurs are in the Finals in 2013 (Two thousand thirteen!). Not only that, they are up 1-0. On the personal front, everything is great. Work-wise, I've landed my dream contract. It may take away from some of what I can say on SpursTalk -- but everything else about it is positive.
Are you concerned about Manu Ginobili?
Yes and no. I'm somewhat concerned because he's obviously still not all the way healthy and thus a re-injury could happen at any moment. But on the other hand, I think he's doing a great job. He's still -- even in this somewhat limited state -- a very, very, very good player. He's easily the most underrated player in the series right now. Sure, his stats aren't going to jump off the page but he's still the same difference-maker he's always been. Ginobili does it a little differently now (for example, instead of scoring the bucket, he may be breaking down the defense and making the pass prior to the pass that leads to the score -- two points is two points though now the rudimentary stats we have at our disposal will miss what Ginobili is doing more often than not) but he's still extremely important to the Spurs.
Your [sic] making a fool out of yourself. Don't run from that Grizzlies prediction, OWN IT. You melted down and embarrassed yourself, OWN IT.
I've owned it. I made the prediction of Grizzlies in 6 and the Spurs won in 4. Looking at it that way, I was obviously dead wrong. However, going back and reading my prediction, I'll still stand by what I laid out. The main reason I thought the Spurs were screwed was Parker's health. He couldn't beat Steve Blake off the dribble against the Lakers. Versus the Warriors, he at times looked barely 75-80%.
It turned out that not only was Parker able to get healthy, he put together the best series of his life. Outside of the end of Game 2 (when he struggled in the second half and the Spurs almost blew their big lead because of it), he was damn near perfect. Add in Matt Bonner outplaying Zach Randolph and those two unforeseen (by me, at least) factors could turn a prediction completely around.
But, yeah, I'll own the poor result of the prediction. I won't, however, blame myself for not seeing those events play out like that (though I can probably forget about a career in medicine after misdiagnosing Parker's level of injury).
Do you think the Spurs can win Game 2?
It's obviously going to be extremely difficult. The vast majority of home teams who lose Game 1 bounce back with a Game 2 victory. The Heat, specifically, have been great at bouncing back after Game 1 losses. ("Great" doesn't do their bounce-back efforts justice, if we're being honest.)
I thought the Spurs played very well in Game 1. I know the storyline being pushed by some is the Spurs didn't play that well yet still won -- but I disagree. Other than missing some shots and a few poor rotation on Heat three-point shooters, San Antonio was virtually flawless. If the Spurs would have hit more threes, they wouldn't have only gotten those points from the made shots but it would have also opened up the lane -- leading to even more points. In Game 1, if the good guys would have hit ~40% on threes, they probably win by 15-20 points … so, no, I don't agree the Spurs didn't play well.
It's safe to bet the Heat will play better in Game 2. LeBron will come out with more aggression from the opening tip. In Game 1, he seemed to be content taking a backseat at times and then wasn't able to rev it up in the fourth quarter. In Game 2, I expect him to come out like a rabid hyaena that's trapped in a corner.
Timvp just shut up. How can believe in the Spurs if you picked the Heat to win?
This is such an illogical (yet common) question that it's tough to answer. My prediction of the Heat winning the series was based on looking at facts, viewing history as it relates to those facts and then concluding what I thought was statistically the most plausible outcome. That is completely different than figuring out which team I'm rooting for to win the series. It's so polar opposite that I struggle to understand how some people get it confused.
Of course I want the Spurs to win. I've never wanted the Spurs to win a series more than this series. The prediction doesn't even enter my mind other than when I'm answering these questions. Do I want to be right prediction-wise? Hell no. I don't care at all about potentially being wrong. In fact, perhaps my favorite thing about sports is that no matter how much you know or how perfect you think you understand what will happen, the human element within games is impossible to predict.
As someone who gives their opinion on everything that happens with the Spurs, I'm going to be wrong plenty. But overall I'll put my record up against anyone else, tbh.
The Spurs turned it over only four times in Game 1 and still only won by four points. Aren't they doomed since they are going to turn it over more in every other game this series?
Not necessarily. While obviously the Spurs will never take care of the ball that well again (I expect them to average between 12 and 15 turnovers per game going forward in this series), they can make up for it elsewhere. As mentioned earlier, shooting more accurately would make a big difference. They could do a much better job on the boards, especially considering the Heat are weak in that area. On D, while they won't hold LeBron to 18 points again, they can do a better job of closing out on open looks from three-point land.
But, yeah, the Spurs need to improve going forward in this series because that Game 1 turnover total was unsustainably low.
I'm pissed at you because you're supposed to be our leader. The forum looks up to you and Kori and we need you to be a leader. Why pick this time to be a coward?
I apologize but I don't have any interest in being a rah-rah cheerleader or the head of the Baseline Bums. On SpursTalk, I type out my honest opinions and I can't control much beyond that. Whether you love it, hate it, disagree, agree, log off and go away from ever, become my lifelong friend, or wish death upon me -- I can't be concerned with that if my goal is to offer my humbly honest opinions.
Over the years, I guess most of my opinions have been positive -- but that's mostly because the Spurs have been so damn good for so damn long. Yes, I predicted wins throughout all the championship years, but that's not because I thought I was the Coyote of the internet, it was because I honestly thought the Spurs were the better team.
Are you concerned about LeBron possibly defending Parker for the rest of this series?
No. The Heat won't do that. LeBron has enough on his plate as it is. If they tried to make him their lead defender on Parker, he'd be burnt out by halftime.
And, really, I haven't seen reason why the Spurs should be too afraid of that alignment. LeBron is a big dude, which makes him rather easy to screen. Plus, if he's on TP, that means he's not lurking as a help defender -- which is where I think he's best.
I expect LeBron to be on Parker at the end of games. It's not a bad idea by the Heat just because it gives the Spurs a new look to go against and it could be difficult to shift gears and take advantage of it right away. But I can't imagine they'd be dumb enough to expand LeBron on TP much more than that.
Do you have PTSD after the Thunder series?
What? No. If I could survive Rockets 1995, Lakers 2004 and Mavericks 2006, I can survive anything as a Spurs fan :lol
Don't tell me you are going to post a thread saying Game 2 is a must-win. You're not, right?
No, I've probably used up my word count for the day on this thread. But, seriously, the Spurs need to go after this game. If they lose, the Spurs technically have homecourt advantage -- but in actuality, it's a stretch to say it's much of an advantage. Beating the Heat three times in a row, even if all games are at home, is an extremely tall task that is pretty darn unreasonable.
To be more realistic about things, the Spurs will need to win another road game in order to win this series. They have three chances to get one starting tonight.
And while I'm not going to classify Game 2 as a must-win, I do think the Spurs need to play well. If the Heat romp and get back to feeling good about themselves, they'd suddenly regain a firm grasp of the series, IMO.
What do you think the Spurs biggest strengths and biggest weaknesses are against the Heat going forward?
To keep it short, I think the biggest strength is probably Tim Duncan. I love him in this matchup against the Heat. After going up against Dwight Howard, Andrew Bogut and Marc Gasol, it's a nice change of pace for him to go up against the relatively finesse frontline on Miami.
As far as weakness, I think it's the fact that the Spurs rely on so many players in order to do well. Unlike every championship team in the last 30-plus year, the Spurs don't have an unstoppable superstar player or a historically great defense. They are trying to win it in a manner the NBA hasn't seen in decades. And while it's not impossible, it will remain a challenge for everyone to keep pulling their weight as a true team. If you think about it, this Spurs teams best attribute (their all-for-one, one-for-all way of playing) is also their biggest potential weakness (as long as we don't consider injury and fatigue proneness as a weakness).
LOL. Does your dumb ass still think the Heat will win the series?
Putting my prediction cap on, I still think the Heat should be favored. Game 1 was an awesome step forward for the Spurs but this is far from over. To put a number on it, before the series I gave the Spurs a 30% shot of winning the series. Now I'm thinking something around 36-38%.
When it comes down to it, I think the Heat are more likely to reach and sustain a high level of play. The Spurs need all of their moving parts to continue playing really damn well. The Heat, on the other hand, just need LeBron to reach ~95% of his peak play and have their other players knock down open shots. Comparing those two criteria, I think the latter is more likely -- if I'm making an official, honest prediction.
Did LeBron James only score 18 due to the Spurs defense or did he choke?
Give the Spurs credit, they had a gameplan to slow LeBron and it worked to perfection. Watching the film, a lot of the time they were basically throwing a soft triple-team on LeBron whenever he had the ball. I've never seen Pop show so much attention at one player -- but it's warranted in this case and it was effective in Game 1.
The worry is that LeBron will adjust and find open three-point shooters more often, which will force the Spurs to counter-adjust and stop sending soft triple-teams. The straw that could break the Spurs back is if Chris Bosh or Shane Battier starts knocking down threes. The Spurs can keep an eye on Ray Allen or Mike Miller when collapsing on LeBron -- but it'd be impossible if the Heat are able to surround LeBron with hot three-point shooters at the other positions.
(That's one thing to watch in Game 2. If Bosh and Battier stay cold, the Spurs should be able to hang. If they get it going, things could change for the worse in a hurry.)
How the Spurs defend LeBron will be the ultimate balancing act going forward.
You seem like a different person from the other Spurs championships. Do you not like the Spurs as much? Did you outgrow the Spurs and don't follow as much?
Ha, it's amazing what people surmise based on a prediction (especially since most of these people just popped back up because the Spurs are in the Finals). For the record, I may be getting old after 15 years on the internet writing about the Spurs but I am as obsessed as ever. This remains my one hobby in life; I don't follow any other team or sport or TV show or anything else. I watched every Spurs game -- and a vast majority of them multiple times. I don't claim to be a better fan than anyone else but I haven't changed much over the years. Hell, in recent months, I've had to watch more basketball than ever.
What changed since the championship years isn't me. What has changed is the Spurs. No longer are the Spurs the most dominant team in the league with the NBA's best player who should be considered favorites to win the title. In 1999, 2003, 2005 and 2007, I honestly thought the Spurs were the best team in each of their series.
The 2013 Spurs are an underdog story. This team -- due to a variety of reasons, most of which involve age -- shouldn't even be here. Based on history, they don't have any business of winning a championship. That's why this is different. Those four championship teams were mostly about living up to their potential and avoiding missteps. Today's team is about breaking molds and winning despite what the history books say.
I'm enjoying the hell out of this underdog role. It's different -- but at least equally as awesome. You should enjoy it to. Soak it in and enjoy. This is a once in a lifetime type of ride.
Why the hell did Gary Neal play so much in Game 1?
I was as perplexed as anyone else while watching the game. However, after seeing the film, I started to understand Pop's thinking. He wants as many ballhandlers on the court as possible due to the Heat blitzing pick-and-rolls. Love him or hate him, Neal is one of the better ballhandlers on the team in halfcourt situations. If Pop uses a lineup of Parker, Ginobili and Neal at the same time, that -- in theory, at least -- makes it a lot easier for the Spurs to survive if Miami takes away Parker's playmaking ability.
That said, I'm not sure I agree with Pop. When you combine Neal's poor shooting in the playoffs with his terrible defense, it's difficult to stomach his minutes. But I guess if Pop is dead set on playing him, let's hope Neal starts hitting more of his shots and there's a player he can hide on defensively. But, Pop, that player isn't Ray Allen. Neal on Allen is just asking for trouble.
Why did you turn into a miserable fa**ot?
Ha. I'm the happiest person in San Antonio. The Spurs are in the Finals in 2013 (Two thousand thirteen!). Not only that, they are up 1-0. On the personal front, everything is great. Work-wise, I've landed my dream contract. It may take away from some of what I can say on SpursTalk -- but everything else about it is positive.
Are you concerned about Manu Ginobili?
Yes and no. I'm somewhat concerned because he's obviously still not all the way healthy and thus a re-injury could happen at any moment. But on the other hand, I think he's doing a great job. He's still -- even in this somewhat limited state -- a very, very, very good player. He's easily the most underrated player in the series right now. Sure, his stats aren't going to jump off the page but he's still the same difference-maker he's always been. Ginobili does it a little differently now (for example, instead of scoring the bucket, he may be breaking down the defense and making the pass prior to the pass that leads to the score -- two points is two points though now the rudimentary stats we have at our disposal will miss what Ginobili is doing more often than not) but he's still extremely important to the Spurs.
Your [sic] making a fool out of yourself. Don't run from that Grizzlies prediction, OWN IT. You melted down and embarrassed yourself, OWN IT.
I've owned it. I made the prediction of Grizzlies in 6 and the Spurs won in 4. Looking at it that way, I was obviously dead wrong. However, going back and reading my prediction, I'll still stand by what I laid out. The main reason I thought the Spurs were screwed was Parker's health. He couldn't beat Steve Blake off the dribble against the Lakers. Versus the Warriors, he at times looked barely 75-80%.
It turned out that not only was Parker able to get healthy, he put together the best series of his life. Outside of the end of Game 2 (when he struggled in the second half and the Spurs almost blew their big lead because of it), he was damn near perfect. Add in Matt Bonner outplaying Zach Randolph and those two unforeseen (by me, at least) factors could turn a prediction completely around.
But, yeah, I'll own the poor result of the prediction. I won't, however, blame myself for not seeing those events play out like that (though I can probably forget about a career in medicine after misdiagnosing Parker's level of injury).
Do you think the Spurs can win Game 2?
It's obviously going to be extremely difficult. The vast majority of home teams who lose Game 1 bounce back with a Game 2 victory. The Heat, specifically, have been great at bouncing back after Game 1 losses. ("Great" doesn't do their bounce-back efforts justice, if we're being honest.)
I thought the Spurs played very well in Game 1. I know the storyline being pushed by some is the Spurs didn't play that well yet still won -- but I disagree. Other than missing some shots and a few poor rotation on Heat three-point shooters, San Antonio was virtually flawless. If the Spurs would have hit more threes, they wouldn't have only gotten those points from the made shots but it would have also opened up the lane -- leading to even more points. In Game 1, if the good guys would have hit ~40% on threes, they probably win by 15-20 points … so, no, I don't agree the Spurs didn't play well.
It's safe to bet the Heat will play better in Game 2. LeBron will come out with more aggression from the opening tip. In Game 1, he seemed to be content taking a backseat at times and then wasn't able to rev it up in the fourth quarter. In Game 2, I expect him to come out like a rabid hyaena that's trapped in a corner.
Timvp just shut up. How can believe in the Spurs if you picked the Heat to win?
This is such an illogical (yet common) question that it's tough to answer. My prediction of the Heat winning the series was based on looking at facts, viewing history as it relates to those facts and then concluding what I thought was statistically the most plausible outcome. That is completely different than figuring out which team I'm rooting for to win the series. It's so polar opposite that I struggle to understand how some people get it confused.
Of course I want the Spurs to win. I've never wanted the Spurs to win a series more than this series. The prediction doesn't even enter my mind other than when I'm answering these questions. Do I want to be right prediction-wise? Hell no. I don't care at all about potentially being wrong. In fact, perhaps my favorite thing about sports is that no matter how much you know or how perfect you think you understand what will happen, the human element within games is impossible to predict.
As someone who gives their opinion on everything that happens with the Spurs, I'm going to be wrong plenty. But overall I'll put my record up against anyone else, tbh.
The Spurs turned it over only four times in Game 1 and still only won by four points. Aren't they doomed since they are going to turn it over more in every other game this series?
Not necessarily. While obviously the Spurs will never take care of the ball that well again (I expect them to average between 12 and 15 turnovers per game going forward in this series), they can make up for it elsewhere. As mentioned earlier, shooting more accurately would make a big difference. They could do a much better job on the boards, especially considering the Heat are weak in that area. On D, while they won't hold LeBron to 18 points again, they can do a better job of closing out on open looks from three-point land.
But, yeah, the Spurs need to improve going forward in this series because that Game 1 turnover total was unsustainably low.
I'm pissed at you because you're supposed to be our leader. The forum looks up to you and Kori and we need you to be a leader. Why pick this time to be a coward?
I apologize but I don't have any interest in being a rah-rah cheerleader or the head of the Baseline Bums. On SpursTalk, I type out my honest opinions and I can't control much beyond that. Whether you love it, hate it, disagree, agree, log off and go away from ever, become my lifelong friend, or wish death upon me -- I can't be concerned with that if my goal is to offer my humbly honest opinions.
Over the years, I guess most of my opinions have been positive -- but that's mostly because the Spurs have been so damn good for so damn long. Yes, I predicted wins throughout all the championship years, but that's not because I thought I was the Coyote of the internet, it was because I honestly thought the Spurs were the better team.
Are you concerned about LeBron possibly defending Parker for the rest of this series?
No. The Heat won't do that. LeBron has enough on his plate as it is. If they tried to make him their lead defender on Parker, he'd be burnt out by halftime.
And, really, I haven't seen reason why the Spurs should be too afraid of that alignment. LeBron is a big dude, which makes him rather easy to screen. Plus, if he's on TP, that means he's not lurking as a help defender -- which is where I think he's best.
I expect LeBron to be on Parker at the end of games. It's not a bad idea by the Heat just because it gives the Spurs a new look to go against and it could be difficult to shift gears and take advantage of it right away. But I can't imagine they'd be dumb enough to expand LeBron on TP much more than that.
Do you have PTSD after the Thunder series?
What? No. If I could survive Rockets 1995, Lakers 2004 and Mavericks 2006, I can survive anything as a Spurs fan :lol
Don't tell me you are going to post a thread saying Game 2 is a must-win. You're not, right?
No, I've probably used up my word count for the day on this thread. But, seriously, the Spurs need to go after this game. If they lose, the Spurs technically have homecourt advantage -- but in actuality, it's a stretch to say it's much of an advantage. Beating the Heat three times in a row, even if all games are at home, is an extremely tall task that is pretty darn unreasonable.
To be more realistic about things, the Spurs will need to win another road game in order to win this series. They have three chances to get one starting tonight.
And while I'm not going to classify Game 2 as a must-win, I do think the Spurs need to play well. If the Heat romp and get back to feeling good about themselves, they'd suddenly regain a firm grasp of the series, IMO.
What do you think the Spurs biggest strengths and biggest weaknesses are against the Heat going forward?
To keep it short, I think the biggest strength is probably Tim Duncan. I love him in this matchup against the Heat. After going up against Dwight Howard, Andrew Bogut and Marc Gasol, it's a nice change of pace for him to go up against the relatively finesse frontline on Miami.
As far as weakness, I think it's the fact that the Spurs rely on so many players in order to do well. Unlike every championship team in the last 30-plus year, the Spurs don't have an unstoppable superstar player or a historically great defense. They are trying to win it in a manner the NBA hasn't seen in decades. And while it's not impossible, it will remain a challenge for everyone to keep pulling their weight as a true team. If you think about it, this Spurs teams best attribute (their all-for-one, one-for-all way of playing) is also their biggest potential weakness (as long as we don't consider injury and fatigue proneness as a weakness).
LOL. Does your dumb ass still think the Heat will win the series?
Putting my prediction cap on, I still think the Heat should be favored. Game 1 was an awesome step forward for the Spurs but this is far from over. To put a number on it, before the series I gave the Spurs a 30% shot of winning the series. Now I'm thinking something around 36-38%.
When it comes down to it, I think the Heat are more likely to reach and sustain a high level of play. The Spurs need all of their moving parts to continue playing really damn well. The Heat, on the other hand, just need LeBron to reach ~95% of his peak play and have their other players knock down open shots. Comparing those two criteria, I think the latter is more likely -- if I'm making an official, honest prediction.
Did LeBron James only score 18 due to the Spurs defense or did he choke?
Give the Spurs credit, they had a gameplan to slow LeBron and it worked to perfection. Watching the film, a lot of the time they were basically throwing a soft triple-team on LeBron whenever he had the ball. I've never seen Pop show so much attention at one player -- but it's warranted in this case and it was effective in Game 1.
The worry is that LeBron will adjust and find open three-point shooters more often, which will force the Spurs to counter-adjust and stop sending soft triple-teams. The straw that could break the Spurs back is if Chris Bosh or Shane Battier starts knocking down threes. The Spurs can keep an eye on Ray Allen or Mike Miller when collapsing on LeBron -- but it'd be impossible if the Heat are able to surround LeBron with hot three-point shooters at the other positions.
(That's one thing to watch in Game 2. If Bosh and Battier stay cold, the Spurs should be able to hang. If they get it going, things could change for the worse in a hurry.)
How the Spurs defend LeBron will be the ultimate balancing act going forward.
You seem like a different person from the other Spurs championships. Do you not like the Spurs as much? Did you outgrow the Spurs and don't follow as much?
Ha, it's amazing what people surmise based on a prediction (especially since most of these people just popped back up because the Spurs are in the Finals). For the record, I may be getting old after 15 years on the internet writing about the Spurs but I am as obsessed as ever. This remains my one hobby in life; I don't follow any other team or sport or TV show or anything else. I watched every Spurs game -- and a vast majority of them multiple times. I don't claim to be a better fan than anyone else but I haven't changed much over the years. Hell, in recent months, I've had to watch more basketball than ever.
What changed since the championship years isn't me. What has changed is the Spurs. No longer are the Spurs the most dominant team in the league with the NBA's best player who should be considered favorites to win the title. In 1999, 2003, 2005 and 2007, I honestly thought the Spurs were the best team in each of their series.
The 2013 Spurs are an underdog story. This team -- due to a variety of reasons, most of which involve age -- shouldn't even be here. Based on history, they don't have any business of winning a championship. That's why this is different. Those four championship teams were mostly about living up to their potential and avoiding missteps. Today's team is about breaking molds and winning despite what the history books say.
I'm enjoying the hell out of this underdog role. It's different -- but at least equally as awesome. You should enjoy it to. Soak it in and enjoy. This is a once in a lifetime type of ride.