The last play of the first half

[exstatic]

...was the reason Duncan was OFF the floor in game 6. The shot Ray Allen hit then was probably an 8 or 8.5 on degree of difficulty. The one he hit today was about a 4. Just use Duncan's man for the screen, and he's out on an island. It wasn't even difficult. Spo drew it up and went RIGHT AT Tim.

[Seventyniner]

...was the reason Duncan was OFF the floor in game 6. The shot Ray Allen hit then was probably an 8 or 8.5 on degree of difficulty. The one he hit today was about a 4. Just use Duncan's man for the screen, and he's out on an island. It wasn't even difficult. Spo drew it up and went RIGHT AT Tim.

Careful, you're going to start a flame war...

For the record, I completely agree with you.

[johnpaulwall21]

...was the reason Duncan was OFF the floor in game 6. The shot Ray Allen hit then was probably an 8 or 8.5 on degree of difficulty. The one he hit today was about a 4. Just use Duncan's man for the screen, and he's out on an island. It wasn't even difficult. Spo drew it up and went RIGHT AT Tim.

You take chances with your best players period.

[exstatic]

You take chances with your best players period.

Nope. You play the play. SA played GOOD initial defense, forcing a bad shot in June. I would rather take a chance on the bounce of a ball than give them an easy shot like today. The ball might bounce your way, but Timmy's never going to cover J Shuttleworth on a 3. You SAW how easy that was today.

[DMC]

Spurs have played better than they should have for the past couple of years. People want to examine the end of the road causes but truth is they were way out of their depth both times and just momentarily returned to the mean.

[exstatic]

Spurs have played better than they should have for the past couple of years. People want to examine the end of the road causes but truth is they were way out of their depth both times and just momentarily returned to the mean.

Sorry. Back to back years of WCFs and Finals are not a fluke.

[DMC]

Sorry. Back to back years of WCFs and Finals are not a fluke.

I didn't call them a fluke. I said "better than they should".

Spurs benefited from some flukey circumstances last season, and the year before as well. The Clippers were injured and we got the Jazz in the 1st round. We hit our ceiling in the WCF and that was that. In 2013, OKC got knocked off by Memphis as RW went down against Houston. We sweep a depleted Lakers team (we would have beaten anyhow) in the 1st, only have to play 4 games... then we meet the Warriors who should never beat the Spurs even on a good night. We beat a Memphis team that had no business in the WCF and were just happy to be there.

In the Finals Danny Green sets the NBA Finals record for 3s, that's pretty flukey. Gary Neal goes off as well. Outside of that and one decent game by Manu and a circus shot by Tony, we played uninspired ball. So if you don't think being dragged through the Finals by your role players is "flukey", I cannot help you.

[exstatic]

I didn't call them a fluke. I said "better than they should".

Spurs benefited from some flukey circumstances last season, and the year before as well. The Clippers were injured and we got the Jazz in the 1st round. We hit our ceiling in the WCF and that was that. In 2013, OKC got knocked off by Memphis as RW went down against Houston. We sweep a depleted Lakers team (we would have beaten anyhow) in the 1st, only have to play 4 games... then we meet the Warriors who should never beat the Spurs even on a good night. We beat a Memphis team that had no business in the WCF and were just happy to be there.

In the Finals Danny Green sets the NBA Finals record for 3s, that's pretty flukey. Gary Neal goes off as well. Outside of that and one decent game by Manu and a circus shot by Tony, we played uninspired ball. So if you don't think being dragged through the Finals by your role players is "flukey", I cannot help you.

"Out of their depth" implies flukiness. You might call one year a fluke, but not two in a row.

[DMC]

"Out of their depth" implies flukiness. You might call one year a fluke, but not two in a row.

Both years had extenuating circumstances and in 2012 they were backdoor swept. Had they met stronger teams in the 1st two rounds, who knows.

They were out of their depth. No way you can match up that Spurs roster with that OKC roster, and especially that Spurs roster with that Heat roster.

[313]

...was the reason Duncan was OFF the floor in game 6. The shot Ray Allen hit then was probably an 8 or 8.5 on degree of difficulty. The one he hit today was about a 4. Just use Duncan's man for the screen, and he's out on an island. It wasn't even difficult. Spo drew it up and went RIGHT AT Tim.

the thing is, MIA needed three, so I don't see why they panicked and left their men for the rebound. They could have just stuck to their assignments, and let Bosh get a put back, or at worst they run another play. I'd take that over an open Ray Allen corner 3.

[exstatic]

Both years had extenuating circumstances and in 2012 they were backdoor swept. Had they met stronger teams in the 1st two rounds, who knows.

They were out of their depth. No way you can match up that Spurs roster with that OKC roster, and especially that Spurs roster with that Heat roster.

Games aren't played on paper.

[DMC]

Games aren't played on paper.

Your quips aren't homogenous. Spurs were at pinnacle of their ability, and it would have been a huge upset if they beat Miami. Odds are created on paper.

[exstatic]

Your quips aren't homogenous. Spurs were at pinnacle of their ability, and it would have been a huge upset if they beat Miami. Odds are created on paper.

The Spurs level the odds by using advanced statistics. They seek efficiencies and avoid their opposite. Technically, they always play above their talent level, but to say that somehow this will come to a stop this year is folly. It's almost an identical cast of characters, and they know their roles very well.

[DMC]

The Spurs level the odds by using advanced statistics. They seek efficiencies and avoid their opposite. Technically, they always play above their talent level, but to say that somehow this will come to a stop this year is folly. It's almost an identical cast of characters, and they know their roles very well.

So saying they play above their talent level is somehow different than saying they played out of their depth? Aren't you just mincing words? Eventually it comes down to who you have on the court, and that's not a knock on Pop's system at all. Players have to be able to make adjustments on the fly and many on the Spurs roster can barely dribble (Leonard, Bonner, Splitter, Tim), catch (Ayres) or shoot (Splitter). Many cannot defend (Marco, Tony, Patty, CoJo, Ayres) and no system will overcome the lack of raw talent, and it's folly to think other teams with overwhelming talent cannot use advanced statistics as well.

[Chinook]

I agree. I said as much in my last thread. Duncan is a huge liability, especially on the perimeter. Even if he had been in during Game Six, he would have just been screened off. And he would not have been in position to get the board like some think he would have because he been out near the three-point line. Duncan's a great rebounder because of timing and understanding of positioning. But he doesn't have the athleticism to win a lot of 50-50 boards. He would have had to have been really lucky. Not worth it at all.

And yes, playing for the rebound was a losing strategy, which is why Pop didn't tell them to do so.

[Seventyniner]

So saying they play above their talent level is somehow different than saying they played out of their depth? Aren't you just mincing words? Eventually it comes down to who you have on the court, and that's not a knock on Pop's system at all. Players have to be able to make adjustments on the fly and many on the Spurs roster can barely dribble (Leonard, Bonner, Splitter, Tim), catch (Ayres) or shoot (Splitter). Many cannot defend (Marco, Tony, Patty, CoJo, Ayres) and no system will overcome the lack of raw talent, and it's folly to think other teams with overwhelming talent cannot use advanced statistics as well.

To an extent I think that is possible. With equal coaching/systems/whatever, superior talent should win. But coaching can definitely shore up a small talent gap, or even a medium-sized one like the Spurs had against the Heat.

I can only imagine what this board would have been like if the Spurs had actually won the title. And yet, the difference between winning and what happened was razor-thin and nothing that big personnel and system decisions should be based on.

[exstatic]

So saying they play above their talent level is somehow different than saying they played out of their depth? Aren't you just mincing words? Eventually it comes down to who you have on the court, and that's not a knock on Pop's system at all. Players have to be able to make adjustments on the fly and many on the Spurs roster can barely dribble (Leonard, Bonner, Splitter, Tim), catch (Ayres) or shoot (Splitter). Many cannot defend (Marco, Tony, Patty, CoJo, Ayres) and no system will overcome the lack of raw talent, and it's folly to think other teams with overwhelming talent cannot use advanced statistics as well.
They play above their talent level all the time. If you feel we're saying the same thing, then what you said was as relevant as saying they wear black and silver. Yes, and they did last year and this year, and they will next year.

Playing above your talent level isn't a fluke if you always do it.

As for other teams, most don't care or don't think they can do it. If Pop were coaching OKC, they'd probably have two LoBs by now, but Scott Brooks insists on ISOs and a complete lack of a system. Other teams could use it, but few do.

[LakerHater]

Coach Pop already admitted he made a mistake not havin Tim out there!

[Juggity]

I understand why Pop made the decision to keep him out. And hindsight, of course, is 20/20. But I do think there was a better than 50% chance for Duncan to secure that rebound on LeBron's miss.

[HI-FI]

Coach Pop already admitted he made a mistake not havin Tim out there!

Did he really say that? curious to see a link. I saw an interview where he was still defending that decision, saying he was lugubrious since the Finals.

[tim_duncan_fan]

Niggas we old!

Pretty much time to blow this shit up and rebuild, to be honest.

[exstatic]

I understand why Pop made the decision to keep him out. And hindsight, of course, is 20/20. But I do think there was a better than 50% chance for Duncan to secure that rebound on LeBron's miss.

You don't understand. If Tim's in there for that play in June, THERE IS NO REBOUND. The Heat proved that today. A simple pick and roll, and an easy 3 point shot for the Heat if he's on the floor.

[MultiTroll]

the thing is, MIA needed three, so I don't see why they panicked and left their men for the rebound. They could have just stuck to their assignments, and let Bosh get a put back, or at worst they run another play. I'd take that over an open Ray Allen corner 3.
Ultimate strategy choke job.

[313]

I agree. I said as much in my last thread. Duncan is a huge liability, especially on the perimeter. Even if he had been in during Game Six, he would have just been screened off. And he would not have been in position to get the board like some think he would have because he been out near the three-point line. Duncan's a great rebounder because of timing and understanding of positioning. But he doesn't have the athleticism to win a lot of 50-50 boards. He would have had to have been really lucky. Not worth it at all.

And yes, playing for the rebound was a losing strategy, which is why Pop didn't tell them to do so.

:tu

[313]

Ultimate strategy choke job.
Wot?

[MultiTroll]

Wot?
Ahead by 3 with 6 seconds left.
A two pointer by Miami and Spurs are still ahead by one.

When the ball is in the air why the hell even bother guarding the players inside the arc? By that i mean guarding them as for as giving up the putback two pointer. Guard them against getting even the slightest sniff of an open 3!!! Parker comes running in for the rebound and leaves Ray Allen wide open.
Lets say Miami rebounds (they did, Bosh) but then no three point shooters are open, Parker would have stayed glued to Ray Allen. 6 5 4 Miami has to try some desperato heavily contested three.

[ThaBigFundamental21]

Ahead by 3 with 6 seconds left.
A two pointer by Miami and Spurs are still ahead by one.

When the ball is in the air why the hell even bother guarding the players inside the arc? By that i mean guarding them as for as giving up the putback two pointer. Guard them against getting even the slightest sniff of an open 3!!! Parker comes running in for the rebound and leaves Ray Allen wide open.
Lets say Miami rebounds (they did, Bosh) but then no three point shooters are open, Parker would have stayed glued to Ray Allen. 6 5 4 Miami has to try some desperato heavily contested three.

You are 100% correct. But it's easy to say that now.

[kobyz]

Ahead by 3 with 6 seconds left.
A two pointer by Miami and Spurs are still ahead by one.

When the ball is in the air why the hell even bother guarding the players inside the arc? By that i mean guarding them as for as giving up the putback two pointer. Guard them against getting even the slightest sniff of an open 3!!! Parker comes running in for the rebound and leaves Ray Allen wide open.
Lets say Miami rebounds (they did, Bosh) but then no three point shooters are open, Parker would have stayed glued to Ray Allen. 6 5 4 Miami has to try some desperato heavily contested three.
So with your logic(an it is the right logic) why not to made a foul at the first place, somtimes you guys killing me with not seeing things, Duncan off the floor was not the problem, it was a bad move only in retroactive, I never accuse pop for it, the mistake was not to foul, it's like kids basketball mistake.

[TheGoldStandard]

Foul and make the game easy to win, that's not how the spurs do business

[313]

Ahead by 3 with 6 seconds left.
A two pointer by Miami and Spurs are still ahead by one.

When the ball is in the air why the hell even bother guarding the players inside the arc? By that i mean guarding them as for as giving up the putback two pointer. Guard them against getting even the slightest sniff of an open 3!!! Parker comes running in for the rebound and leaves Ray Allen wide open.
Lets say Miami rebounds (they did, Bosh) but then no three point shooters are open, Parker would have stayed glued to Ray Allen. 6 5 4 Miami has to try some desperato heavily contested three.

oh, right. That's what I was saying

[313]

Foul and make the game easy to win, that's not how the spurs do business

:depressed