Game thoughts Bulls @Spurs Jan 29

[cd021]

Game Guide

Starters
PG-Tony Parker
SG-Nando De Colo
SF-Othyus Jeffers
PF-Tim Duncan
C-Jeff Ayers

Bench
PG-Cory Joseph
SG-Patty Mills
SF-Marco Belinelli
PF-Boris Diaw
C-Aron Baynes

1st Quarter-The Spurs opened up the game, predictably, rather flat. A combination of turnovers and being out rebounded hurt the spurs in the opening period. They attempted just 14 shots and scored just 15 points, while turning the ball over 5 times.


The Bulls used their size to their advantage grabbing 6 offensive rebounds and scoring 6 points off of them in route to a 21 point quarter.

The Spurs were put to the test with a slew of mismatches.

De Colo on Dunleavy Jr- A 4 inch advantage over De Colo

Mills on Buttler-A 5 inch advantage over Mills.
Spurs trail 16-21

Second Quarter

After Mils hit a 3 pointer at the end 1st, the Spurs opened up on a 16-3 run to start the second. The Bulls offense sputtered to start scoring 5 points in just 6:10. The spurt helped the Spurs take a 31-26 lead.

The Spurs closed the half out in ugly fashion, however scoring 1 basket in 6 minutes ( A De Colo 3pt) and missed their last 7 shots.

The Spurs scored just 36 points in the 1st half. Trailing the Bulls 36-40


3rd Quarter

The Bulls began to pull away by using a balanced attack. The Spurs certainly didn't help 9 turnovers cost the Spurs valuable possesions.

Boozer-6 pts
Butler-8 pts
Dunleavy Jr.- 4pts
Noah-4 pts

Spurs trail 68-61

4th Quarter

The Spurs opened the 4th with

Joseph
De Colo
Belinelli
Bonner
Ayers

After Gibson took advantage of a mismatched Bonner, Pop quicked ditched that poor unit for Parker, Joseph, Belinelli and Duncan and Diaw.

Gibson and Hinrick helped slam the door shut in the fourth. Armed with a 7 point lead and playing a injury ravanged team, those two combined for 16 of the teams 28 points. After trailing by 11 with 5:24 to play Hinrick drilled a 3 and counted Diaws layup with a floater over Duncan to effectively end the Spurs night.

Spurs lose 86-96

[cd021]

Game Thoughts


The Spurs rotation was in tatters due to 4 rotation players (including 3 starters) out. Gone with those 4 player, were the Spurs length. De Colo, at 6'5 was the Spurs biggest wing. Parker, Mills and Duncan carried the Spurs through out.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Belinelli-Had another rough game. His value to the Spurs is his offense. His offense would have certainly come in handy both against the Bulls and against Rockets.

Simply put he needed to score more to help shoulder the load. His 11 points on 11 shots ,didn't particularly help.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diaw-A Jeckly/Hyde performance ,indeed. In his last 5 games, entering tonight averaged 15.5 ppg while shooting 58% FG and 90% of his 10 3's.

Tonight-29 minutes, 4 pts, 4 shots, 3 rebounds, -19

I honestly forgot he was on the floor. He tried to stop Boozer but had it going in the post. Grabbing 3 boards is unacceptable. Duncan grabbed more than 1/3 of our team boards. The Bulls were +8 on the glass and +8 on the offensive boards.

After playing great against the Rockets, anything more that he gave us would have been greatly appreciated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duncan-As Doug Collins (btw enjoyed him as commentator) pointed out, how plodding Duncan was. Against Noah, Duncan predictable had a tough time.

He did connect on 7-14 from the field, including 3 of his jumpers. But 3 times he had his shot blocked in the post. That along 4 turnovers (credit that to the Bulls length) Duncan was a mixed bag. For what its worth he had a -21 but he was the best option of any of our bigs.

The Bulls defense, in some ways reminds me OKCs. Duncan isn't going to get much on offense via the post but has to make the most of the opportunities given. He did post 16 and 12 on the 2nd night of a back to back (while logging 65 minutes total)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ayers and Baynes- Both are just...I...when Splitter returns, the Spurs need to use a 3 man rotation. I don't trust either of them at all. Ayers had a +16 (I have no idea how) turnovers and fouls fronted Boozer to start the game and somehow gave up gave up a layup to him despite being taller than Boozer.

16 min, 0 pts, 4 PF, 2 T.O ( A Perkins stat line)

Baynes logged 9 minutes and was on the floor during one of the Spurs runs, he didn't impress. It would have been nice to see more boarding but just 2.

Never quite STs love affair but its apparently lust. He is never going to be a true backup center for the Spurs.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mills-He his job on offense, whatever happened defensively could be chalked up to genetics. He was mismatched on Hinrick and Butter at times but his offense was needed.

Pop thought so as well, he was on the floor late which showed some approval. Connected on 2 of the Spurs 5 3's and helped the Spurs shake off a rough start to stay competitive (relatively) for most of the game.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parker-Parker over dribbled quite a bit and missed some make able passes. I noticed a couple of times where he missed Diaw (who has been red hot lately) stationed, wide open on the 3pt line.

He did carry the Spurs offensively. Managing 20 pts, and 6 assists on 45%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bonner- Got burned in the post and didn't space the floor. To Pops credit he only played him 7 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph-If he learned how to shoot open jumpers, he could be rather useful. At least he doesn't take shots he knows he can't make, thats something.

8 points in 26 minutes. He did have nice assist that lead to a Bonner layup but thats about it in play-making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffers-Active defense. Playing Dunleavy fairly well. Only logged 15 minutes. His one shot (a Derick Fisher looking 3) clanked.

If he was more useful on the offensive end Pop could have played him more but points were hard to come by.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[cd021]

Long winded, I know. My apologies.

[Prime Time]

I find it humorous how this season ST users claimed Green/Splitter/Leonard were only relevant because of the Big 3/System, but as it appears - the Big 3 need them just as much.

[Prime Time]

Oh where are my manners, Great read man :toast Always appreciate it when a user does stuff like this, especially for people who missed the game.

[freetiago]

the starters outside of Parker/Duncan were basically scoreless
Nando hit one 3 and the rest of his 5 points were in garbage time

pretty scary to think theyre gonna be using this lineup on the Rodeo trip
might be the first losing Rodeo trip ever
the only NBA caliber rotations players they will have

Backcourt:
Parker
Belenelli

Frontcourt:
Duncan
Diaw
Splitter (takes a long time to get rhythm back after an injury)

[Baam]

Good stuff, thanks for the thoughts as I didn't catch the game... Getting very worried about Tim, he gets his numbers on O but on D it's been so painful to watch lately...

Also Boris can't rebound he should play strictly SF if Kawhi is not there next to him... Also could be tired tbh...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ayers had a +2. Baynes had a +14.

Baynes was setting screens that actually got Parker and Mills open. He did not allow layup drills. It is not hard to figure out.

Yes he does look a bit frenetic but that is because he only knows one speed: balls to the wall. At one point Diaw and Tony are sitting there holding their dicks on the right wing. Baynes goes and sets a pick anyway which Parker uses to rub off his man and get an easy look. It worked even with awful spacing because Baynes refuses to stand around with his dick in his hand. He hits that shit with no hesitation.

And wtf kind of expectations do you have for rebounding? 2 boards in 9 min is 8 per 36. It's not great but by the same token it is better than decent especially after watching how hard we got torched on the boards. He hits shots and FT, grabs a couple of rebounds, doesn't foul at all --which you hear incessant winching about,-- gets an assist and doesn't turn the ball over. We succeed when he is on the court yet you fucking winch about it.

You guys are so used to the pussy brand of basketball and it makes me sick. You deserve teams like The Blazers and the jump shooting PF. bleh!

[wildchild]

Thanks cd021!!!!

When a team open the 4th with Joseph-De Colo-Belinelli-Bonner-Ayers, that's never a good sign.
However, we haven't got any better, maybe I'd have preferred Mills -even if it wasn't his best night-in that lineup.


pretty scary to think theyre gonna be using this lineup on the Rodeo trip
might be the first losing Rodeo trip ever

[jeebus]

Ayers had a +2. Baynes had a +14.

Baynes was setting screens that actually got Parker and Mills open. He did not allow layup drills. It is not hard to figure out.

Pretty much. Banes was getting his guards open for good looks by setting hard picks. He also wasn't bullied around on the defensive end either, unlike a certain fairy boy. Pop was probably drunk in the 1st half though and though that it was Errors, not Baynes, leading to Ayres getting bulk 2nd half minutes.

[silverblackfan]

Thanks for the effort. It was a hard game to watch, especially at the 2/3 position. The team just cannot get a stop when required. The offense gets a bit more stagnant now that Manu is not around to mix it up. I honestly think the reason Marco is missing shots is due to the extra effort on defense. Not good defense, but extra effort to pressure his man by running more.
BTW, I believe Jeffers got the start. He would want you to have that right, I suspect.

[admiralsnackbar]

Unnecessary apology -- good write-up for those of us who missed the game. Thanks for taking the time, man!

[Brazil]

good reading cd

[ajballer4]

One correction: On your starters and bench... Jeffers started, and Bellinelli came off the bench (you forgot him)

[ManuTastic]

Impressed by this; you must have a cast iron stomach to watch this game, my man. Thanks for the writeup.

[DMC]

I find it humorous how this season ST users claimed Green/Splitter/Leonard were only relevant because of the Big 3/System, but as it appears - the Big 3 need them just as much.

It's still a valid point. The big 3 "system" is the big 3 + role players. Remove one side of that equation and you have a problem. I don't get the point of your objection.

[DMC]

Thanks for the effort. It was a hard game to watch, especially at the 2/3 position. The team just cannot get a stop when required. The offense gets a bit more stagnant now that Manu is not around to mix it up. I honestly think the reason Marco is missing shots is due to the extra effort on defense. Not good defense, but extra effort to pressure his man by running more.
BTW, I believe Jeffers got the start. He would want you to have that right, I suspect.

The reason Marco is missing shots is because we don't have any paint presence at the moment other than Tim, and he's basically not there at most time. Marco can get a shot off quicker than Bonner (hell, so can a dead person), but he still needs an open look.

[EVAY]

Thank you for the write-up; I am always impressed that people are willing to put their thoughts in writing. I don't have the guts.

I would agree with most of your observations as well, although I do believe that Baynes is better than you do. He is such a huge body, that rebounding or not, he helps our guards get free much more than any other big with the possible exception of Diaw. Diaw stays with his pick long enough to help our guards, but Tim has become just terrible at it this season. Baynes also does a very good job 'blocking out' for our cutting guards…much more than any other big except Tiago.

[DMC]

I think Baynes is lacking physical conditioning. I think that's why he doesn't get the playing time we think he should.

[Chomag]

I think Baynes is lacking physical conditioning. I think that's why he doesn't get the playing time we think he should.

More consistent PT would fix that.

[DMC]

More consistent PT would fix that.

He cannot get his conditioning during games. He has to get it during practice. The duty of a role player is to be ready when his number is called. It's not the coach's responsibility to get the guy conditioning minutes. Surely the 2 or 3 days between games is ample time for him to get in shape.

[spurs10]

Great game thoughts, thanks! Very well stated. At least Tiago might return for the road trip.

[cd021]

One correction: On your starters and bench... Jeffers started, and Bellinelli came off the bench (you forgot him)

You're right. I forgot he started. Will change,thanks.

[cd021]

Ayers had a +2. Baynes had a +14.

Baynes was setting screens that actually got Parker and Mills open. He did not allow layup drills. It is not hard to figure out.

Yes he does look a bit frenetic but that is because he only knows one speed: balls to the wall. At one point Diaw and Tony are sitting there holding their dicks on the right wing. Baynes goes and sets a pick anyway which Parker uses to rub off his man and get an easy look. It worked even with awful spacing because Baynes refuses to stand around with his dick in his hand. He hits that shit with no hesitation.

And wtf kind of expectations do you have for rebounding? 2 boards in 9 min is 8 per 36. It's not great but by the same token it is better than decent especially after watching how hard we got torched on the boards. He hits shots and FT, grabs a couple of rebounds, doesn't foul at all --which you hear incessant winching about,-- gets an assist and doesn't turn the ball over. We succeed when he is on the court yet you fucking winch about it.

You guys are so used to the pussy brand of basketball and it makes me sick. You deserve teams like The Blazers and the jump shooting PF. bleh!

I didn't love Baynes performance. I may have missed some of those screens but if you believe that he would have had 16pts and 8 boards then we are done here.

That plus 14 is highly misleading. As i stated, the Bulls went through a funk (as they usually do) they hit 1 basket in 6 minutes. The Spurs (mostly Mills) helped the Spurs get back into the game.

He doesn't show very much outside of garbage time. He is an foul machine and turnover prone as well. At the moment, he is a situation big and that situation is usually garbage time.

[cd021]

Aron Baynes (Per 36 minutes)

P.E.R-11.1
Blocks-.4
PF-5.3
Turnovers-2.5
Net Rating- -6 (only Spur to have a negative rating, Min. 250 minutes)

It isn't so much Pop not playing him as Baynes not playing very well in the minutes he does get. Ayers isn't great either but Baynes can't even seem to surpass him in the rotation.

[wildbill2u]

In Every game the player Ayers is "guarding" takes him out on the high post, sometimes as far away as the 3pt arc and then simply drives past him for a layup. Or they take him off the pick and roll. He seems to be limited to a range of about two feet around the basket on defense and offense.

Boris is back to 'no shoot Boris" mode. He tried a few determined drives or post moves to get inside but without much in the way of results. If he continues to shoot 4 shots per game we are going to be easily outscored at that position at a time when we are lacking in scorers for him to pass to. His value as a passer is negated by the current roster.

Belinelli has lost his confidence. He was shooting as a reflexive catch and shoot, but now is being chased off the line and settling for long 2s. His matador defense often consists of waving at his man as they go by him.

Joseph and Mills are simply too small to play defense against bigger stronger players for long periods of time on the court. Their effort is often there, but eventually they get isolated against a taller opponent who just beats them one on one. They try hard, but the old adage that a good big man will beat a good small man over time is evident and their deficiencies can't be hidden, especially when Bonner and Ayers are the players supposed to cover as the second line of defense.

The Spurs are playing guys for long minutes together who Pop would ordinarily be spotting in among starters.We may be able to beat some bad teams this way, but we're not going to beat the better teams and some of the middle range teams are going to be licking their chops to think they may get a win against the Spurs.

It is going to be a very long middle of the season.

[cd021]

In Every game the player Ayers is "guarding" takes him out on the high post, sometimes as far away as the 3pt arc and then simply drives past him for a layup. Or they take him off the pick and roll. He seems to be limited to a range of about two feet around the basket on defense and offense.

Boris is back to 'no shoot Boris" mode. He tried a few determined drives or post moves to get inside but without much in the way of results. If he continues to shoot 4 shots per game we are going to be easily outscored at that position at a time when we are lacking in scorers for him to pass to. His value as a passer is negated by the current roster.

Belinelli has lost his confidence. He was shooting as a reflexive catch and shoot, but now is being chased off the line and settling for long 2s. His matador defense often consists of waving at his man as they go by him.

Joseph and Mills are simply too small to play defense against bigger stronger players for long periods of time on the court. Their effort is often there, but eventually they get isolated against a taller opponent who just beats them one on one. They try hard, but the old adage that a good big man will beat a good small man over time is evident and their deficiencies can't be hidden, especially when Bonner and Ayers are the players supposed to cover as the second line of defense.

The Spurs are playing guys for long minutes together who Pop would ordinarily be spotting in among starters.We may be able to beat some bad teams this way, but we're not going to beat the better teams and some of the middle range teams are going to be licking their chops to think they may get a win against the Spurs.

It is going to be a very long middle of the season.

Props on a great take. I agree 100%

[DMC]

In Every game the player Ayers is "guarding" takes him out on the high post, sometimes as far away as the 3pt arc and then simply drives past him for a layup. Or they take him off the pick and roll. He seems to be limited to a range of about two feet around the basket on defense and offense.

Boris is back to 'no shoot Boris" mode. He tried a few determined drives or post moves to get inside but without much in the way of results. If he continues to shoot 4 shots per game we are going to be easily outscored at that position at a time when we are lacking in scorers for him to pass to. His value as a passer is negated by the current roster.

Belinelli has lost his confidence. He was shooting as a reflexive catch and shoot, but now is being chased off the line and settling for long 2s. His matador defense often consists of waving at his man as they go by him.

Joseph and Mills are simply too small to play defense against bigger stronger players for long periods of time on the court. Their effort is often there, but eventually they get isolated against a taller opponent who just beats them one on one. They try hard, but the old adage that a good big man will beat a good small man over time is evident and their deficiencies can't be hidden, especially when Bonner and Ayers are the players supposed to cover as the second line of defense.

The Spurs are playing guys for long minutes together who Pop would ordinarily be spotting in among starters.We may be able to beat some bad teams this way, but we're not going to beat the better teams and some of the middle range teams are going to be licking their chops to think they may get a win against the Spurs.

It is going to be a very long middle of the season.

yep

[Prime Time]

It's still a valid point. The big 3 "system" is the big 3 + role players. Remove one side of that equation and you have a problem. I don't get the point of your objection.
Fans implied TP/Manu/Duncan MADE all the role players relevant, as if they would be scrubs without them. But the role players have played well without the Big 3 before (Last year vs. Miami/Chicago, This year vs. GSW) But I'm yet to see a convincing performance by this current team. My objection would be - Spurs fans are spoiled, Leonard/Green/Splitter saved this franchise.

[DMC]

Fans implied TP/Manu/Duncan MADE all the role players relevant, as if they would be scrubs without them.

They did and they would be irrelevant. Some were irrelevant already as evidence.

But the role players have played well without the Big 3 before (Last year vs. Miami/Chicago, This year vs. GSW) But I'm yet to see a convincing performance by this current team. My objection would be - Spurs fans are spoiled, Leonard/Green/Splitter saved this franchise.
Playing well in a game without the big 3 and having a winning season without the big 3 are completely different things.

Your objection is retarded as fuck.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I didn't love Baynes performance. I may have missed some of those screens but if you believe that he would have had 16pts and 8 boards then we are done here.

That plus 14 is highly misleading. As i stated, the Bulls went through a funk (as they usually do) they hit 1 basket in 6 minutes. The Spurs (mostly Mills) helped the Spurs get back into the game.

He doesn't show very much outside of garbage time. He is an foul machine and turnover prone as well. At the moment, he is a situation big and that situation is usually garbage time.

I have no idea what he would get if he played 36 mpg. You just shit in the idea that he might get 8 but then at the same time shit on getting 2 at the rate that would get him 8. Outside of two games where he shot like warmed over shit, his shot has been pretty good. Up until the Htown hack a shack debacle he had been keeping his fouls down. Look at the log.

You did miss the screens because it was how Patty was getting open. You should pay attention to Baynes play help defense and protect the rim. He does it better than anyone else on the bench. You seem hell bent on giving credit to everyone but Baynes for his stretch.

[cd021]

I have no idea what he would get if he played 36 mpg. You just shit in the idea that he might get 8 but then at the same time shit on getting 2 at the rate that would get him 8. Outside of two games where he shot like warmed over shit, his shot has been pretty good. Up until the Htown hack a shack debacle he had been keeping his fouls down. Look at the log.

You did miss the screens because it was how Patty was getting open. You should pay attention to Baynes play help defense and protect the rim. He does it better than anyone else on the bench. You seem hell bent on giving credit to everyone but Baynes for his stretch.

Hellbent? really? Why would i even bother to hold a vendetta against Baynes? Read my post on the last page. I posted some advanced stats of Baynes. Both him and Ayers have played rather poorly. Baynes foul rate is 5.4, has a - 6 net rating and while he does grab boards at a high rate (11 per 36 minutes) (thus my bitching about 2 boards) he seldom blocks shots (.4 block rate) gets to the line or even shoots well from the field (44%).

He can hit a jumper and is surprisingly good athlete given his body type. He does intrigue but he hasn't shown anything to suggest he is backup center material, on the Spurs at least.

BTW you mentioned that his per 36 minutes for the Bulls game (rebounding)was 8. I used that same Principal to come up with the 16pts and 8 rebounds numbers. I didn't give credit to De Colo, or Ayers, I also didn't give a glowing review of Diaw or Bellinelli.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Hellbent? really? Why would i even bother to hold a vendetta against Baynes? Read my post on the last page. I posted some advanced stats of Baynes. Both him and Ayers have played rather poorly. Baynes foul rate is 5.4, has a - 6 net rating and while he does grab boards at a high rate (11 per 36 minutes) (thus my bitching about 2 boards) he seldom blocks shots (.4 block rate) gets to the line or even shoots well from the field (44%).

He can hit a jumper and is surprisingly good athlete given his body type. He does intrigue but he hasn't shown anything to suggest he is backup center material, on the Spurs at least.

BTW you mentioned that his per 36 minutes for the Bulls game (rebounding)was 8. I used that same Principal to come up with the 16pts and 8 rebounds numbers. I didn't give credit to De Colo, or Ayers, I also didn't give a glowing review of Diaw or Bellinelli.

You said you would have liked to see better than 2 boards. And you are cherry picking bad stats. I can cherry pick good stats as his per36 numbers for points assists and rebounds are excellent. but fuck it the per36 fouls look bad so fixate on those.

And ffs I wish people would stop using fouls as the standard by which all players should be judged. As if that is not something all aggressive players go through when they are learning the league or something that is commonly improved upon with simple experience. Nevermind that he has clearly improved in that regard. The Houston game was an aberration of his recent norm.

[Kidd K]

Bulls were missing 1 of their top 8 players.

Spurs were missing 4 of their top 6 and just played a hard game the night before.

Not gonna win every game under those circumstances.

[HarlemHeat37]

It would be nice if Baynes added some rim protection, considering he's a 7-foot "bruiser", tbh..

Limited sample size, but 53% against him at the rim is pretty terrible, so far..

I'm always an advocate of giving players a chance to earn a spot, though, and Ayres certainly hasn't done anything to warrant a permanent spot in the rotation..

[Prime Time]

They did and they would be irrelevant. Some were irrelevant already as evidence.

Playing well in a game without the big 3 and having a winning season without the big 3 are completely different things.

Your objection is retarded as fuck.
:lol Acting like Danny Green or Tiago Splitter wouldn't be useful in another team. Active defenders who can hit their shot when called upon, Lets just thank the lord we have the Big 3 to make them look 'good'. Fact is, Spurs aren't doing shit without their role players.

Role players however have came up big when they needed too without our 'stars'. Never once did I say San Antonio could win through-out the season without the Big 3. Nice way of putting words in my mouth, almost as clever as your 'retarded' insult.

But sure, anything to hype up the Big 3 at this point of their careers.

[Prime Time]

I do feel if Parker was replaced with Leonard, Spurs would be winning more of these games. Maybe that's because of Kawhi's knack of playing well whenever Tony is out. Averaged nearly 16/7 last season during that stint where Parker was injured, including a 24/13/4 performance.

[HarlemHeat37]

It's easier to replace a high-usage player in the regular season than a group of high-end role players, tbh..

Look at the Clippers without Paul, Bulls without Rose, etc..if you have a good system with solid role players and 1/2 capable shot-creators, it's easy to replace a Parker or Paul during the season..

You'll need those stars in the playoffs when defenses lock down, but it's easy to replace them during the regular season, as the Spurs have shown many times..

[Kidd K]

It would be nice if Baynes added some rim protection, considering he's a 7-foot "bruiser", tbh..

Limited sample size, but 53% against him at the rim is pretty terrible, so far..

I'm always an advocate of giving players a chance to earn a spot, though, and Ayres certainly hasn't done anything to warrant a permanent spot in the rotation..

That's because he's almost always out of position on help defense. He's like the anti-Ibaka

[cd021]

You said you would have liked to see better than 2 boards. And you are cherry picking bad stats. I can cherry pick good stats as his per36 numbers for points assists and rebounds are excellent. but fuck it the per36 fouls look bad so fixate on those.

And ffs I wish people would stop using fouls as the standard by which all players should be judged. As if that is not something all aggressive players go through when they are learning the league or something that is commonly improved upon with simple experience. Nevermind that he has clearly improved in that regard. The Houston game was an aberration of his recent norm.

What stat did I over look? :lol

Per 36

12.8 ppg (10th on team)

2.4 assists (10th on team)

2.5 turnovers (5th on team)

besides his rebounding (which I said was great) he hasn't shown anything that stands out in advanced stats or even the eye test.

I don't usually use fouls as a "standard" but its the 2nd highest foul rate on the team (Behind Ayers). Its one thing if he were swatting shots like Mutombo but he just isn't (8th on team in blocks rate, behind Boris Diaw) he also has a negative assist to turnover ratio 2.4/2.5.

If his job is be a presence in the paint and crass the glass, then he is only doing one very well. His 104 D-rating is 8th on the team. Tied with Patty Mills, the difference is Mills has a O-rating of 114 (+10) while Baynes is at 98 (-6)


Unless you have more, i'd prefer not to speak about Baynes again.

[DMC]

:lol Acting like Danny Green or Tiago Splitter wouldn't be useful in another team. Active defenders who can hit their shot when called upon, Lets just thank the lord we have the Big 3 to make them look 'good'. Fact is, Spurs aren't doing shit without their role players.

Danny was let go how many times? No team does shit without role players. Oddly the same big 3 won 3 rings with different role players each time. I guess all the role players SA had during that time were superstars that were underutilized.


Role players however have came up big when they needed too without our 'stars'. Never once did I say San Antonio could win through-out the season without the Big 3. Nice way of putting words in my mouth, almost as clever as your 'retarded' insult.

Role players are just role players. Most of those in SA wouldn't see much playing time in other systems. How's Blair doing in Dallas? How about Gary up in Milwaukee? George Hill is a starting PG but he's the least valuable starter and could easily be replaced by any PG with decent handles. Why wasn't Patty Mills playing for a different team after he was released from Portland? Why was Marco so cheap? Why isn't Matt Bonner being wooed to another franchise? Kawhi in LA would be basically a dunker, probably never developed a 3pt shot.

It's about the big 3 and really it's about the big 1 and that's Tim Duncan. Your post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacious takes are run of-the mill for fans with superficial understanding of the game.


But sure, anything to hype up the Big 3 at this point of their careers.

That's not my M.O. and anyone here can attest to that.

[DMC]

I do feel if Parker was replaced with Leonard, Spurs would be winning more of these games. Maybe that's because of Kawhi's knack of playing well whenever Tony is out. Averaged nearly 16/7 last season during that stint where Parker was injured, including a 24/13/4 performance.

OK now I'm convinced you're just a troll. You lay it on too thick to be any good at it though. Too much too soon.

[TheGoldStandard]

I do feel if Parker was replaced with Leonard, Spurs would be winning more of these games. Maybe that's because of Kawhi's knack of playing well whenever Tony is out. Averaged nearly 16/7 last season during that stint where Parker was injured, including a 24/13/4 performance.

:td

[ElNono]

thanks :tu

[wildchild]

Kawhi in LA would be basically a dunker, probably never developed a 3pt shot.


Dunk after run a pick and roll? Alley-oop? Only fast-break? Basically a dunker like...Blake Griffin?
Just kidding.
Anyway, Clippers/Lakers haven't a top perimeter defender right now, Leonard could be a valuable acquisition.

So a dunker guy -who isn't 3's shooter and his team forcing him to be one, when he gets more comfortable playing in low post/mid-range shooter- and great defensive player, maybe one of best five SF, 22 years old in his third in the league?
16-8 guy in LA this season?

Well, LA would be the right fit for the kid. Some guys can't easily recognize the potential of young players, maybe Leonard would have better luck with other team.

After all, he's a SoCal boy...

[DMC]

Dunk after run a pick and roll? Alley-oop? Only fast-break? Basically a dunker like...Blake Griffin?
Just kidding.
Anyway, Clippers/Lakers haven't a top perimeter defender right now, Leonard could be a valuable acquisition.

So a dunker guy -who isn't 3's shooter and his team forcing him to be one, when he gets more comfortable playing in low post/mid-range shooter- and great defensive player, maybe one of best five SF, 22 years old in his third in the league?
16-8 guy in LA this season?

Well, LA would be the right fit for the kid. Some guys can't easily recognize the potential of young players, maybe Leonard would have better luck with other team.

After all, he's a SoCal boy...

You look at a kid who's being developed by a master and you try to artificially place that kid in another, far worse system without considering he probably doesn't develop in the same way, and might not even see much playing time. Mike D doesn't coach defense, so Leonard probably doesn't get a chance to play (not talking about the Clippers here).

Just imagine Paul George went to LA instead of Indy and sat the bench most of the time. He's still a role guy, pretty much. It's about their situations as much as it is about them until they are established.

Leonard doesn't have great handles but does have huge hands. He can maneuver with the ball and avoid turning it over UNTIL he puts it on the floor. He's good on the break but not great in traffic. He's a decent shooter but not a confident one. These are things that take time to develop, if they ever do.

[RD2191]

I wouldn't be surprised if Kawhi left to a Cali team. He said he was a big Lakers fan growing up.

[Prime Time]

Danny was let go how many times? No team does shit without role players. Oddly the same big 3 won 3 rings with different role players each time. I guess all the role players SA had during that time were superstars that were underutilized.

Role players are just role players. Most of those in SA wouldn't see much playing time in other systems. How's Blair doing in Dallas? How about Gary up in Milwaukee? George Hill is a starting PG but he's the least valuable starter and could easily be replaced by any PG with decent handles. Why wasn't Patty Mills playing for a different team after he was released from Portland? Why was Marco so cheap? Why isn't Matt Bonner being wooed to another franchise? Kawhi in LA would be basically a dunker, probably never developed a 3pt shot.

It's about the big 3 and really it's about the big 1 and that's Tim Duncan. Your post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacious takes are run of-the mill for fans with superficial understanding of the game.


That's not my M.O. and anyone here can attest to that.
Again with going off-topic. I never said anything about the Big 3 in their prime, those guys were straight-out legends. Blair is doing just fine in Dallas, not sure what the argument is there. Improved in every category.. so

Danny Green's open threes I will admit came from SA's current system, but I fail to see how the Big 3 made his defense any better. Not just anyone can contain Curry.

Neal always sucked. Spurs system or not, He was just a chucker.

Mills was always an explosion of offense. He led the entire Basketball Olympics in scoring, was that the Big 3 as well? As for this season, Mills has worked his ass off to thin down and improve his touch. The contested shots he takes has nothing to do with the Big 3. All you're proving is Spurs are good at finding hidden talent, not that they make scrubs into good players.

Bonner? Same argument as Gary, they both struggle here. The thing about BonBon is he can't do anything outside of shooting threes, so this a classic case of it going both ways - System makes Bonner better, Bonner makes system better... until the post-season of course.

"Kawhi in LA would be a dunker." What? Kawhi's work ethic thrives harder than any other player on the Spurs. Last season, in his two best scoring games (vs. CLE, @ CHI) he only made ONE three. In the last 2 games of the finals, Leonard only made a total of TWO threes. That's right, he averaged 20/13/2 steals .... while shooting .286% from downtown. Leonard would be near All-Star level on any struggling team, if anything San Antonio's system is holding him back. Don't even try to make him sound bad.

Lol I can't believe I'm actually having this discussion. Seriously, just a couple of years ago Spurs were stuck with the likes of Udoka, Bogans, Thomas, Mason, Jefferson, etc. And now you want to act like Spurs have nothing but scrubs for Role Players?? And you say I'm the troll...

[Prime Time]

:td
Alright confession time, due to a busy schedule the only games I've seen as of late were vs. POR, @ATL, and @MIA. I had no idea Parker was dropping 17/20/37 in those other games I missed. I actually take back that particular comment.

[wildchild]

Leonard doesn't have great handles but does have huge hands. He can maneuver with the ball and avoid turning it over UNTIL he puts it on the floor. He's good on the break but not great in traffic. He's a decent shooter but not a confident one. These are things that take time to develop, if they ever do.


Agree with you, good development takes time, Leonard hasn't playtime here, not at least like a young player needs to develop.

About Mike, he loves athletic players and Kawhi is a better option than Nick Young now. Who knows...

[cd021]

I wouldn't be surprised if Kawhi left to a Cali team. He said he was a big Lakers fan growing up.

Duncan was as well.

[RD2191]

Duncan was as well.
Magic fan wasn't he? And Kawhi is a Cali guy, so he has ties and fam over there.

[DMC]

Again with going off-topic. I never said anything about the Big 3 in their prime, those guys were straight-out legends. Blair is doing just fine in Dallas, not sure what the argument is there. Improved in every category.. so

Danny Green's open threes I will admit came from SA's current system, but I fail to see how the Big 3 made his defense any better. Not just anyone can contain Curry.

Neal always sucked. Spurs system or not, He was just a chucker.

Mills was always an explosion of offense. He led the entire Basketball Olympics in scoring, was that the Big 3 as well? As for this season, Mills has worked his ass off to thin down and improve his touch. The contested shots he takes has nothing to do with the Big 3. All you're proving is Spurs are good at finding hidden talent, not that they make scrubs into good players.

Bonner? Same argument as Gary, they both struggle here. The thing about BonBon is he can't do anything outside of shooting threes, so this a classic case of it going both ways - System makes Bonner better, Bonner makes system better... until the post-season of course.

"Kawhi in LA would be a dunker." What? Kawhi's work ethic thrives harder than any other player on the Spurs. Last season, in his two best scoring games (vs. CLE, @ CHI) he only made ONE three. In the last 2 games of the finals, Leonard only made a total of TWO threes. That's right, he averaged 20/13/2 steals .... while shooting .286% from downtown. Leonard would be near All-Star level on any struggling team, if anything San Antonio's system is holding him back. Don't even try to make him sound bad.

Lol I can't believe I'm actually having this discussion. Seriously, just a couple of years ago Spurs were stuck with the likes of Udoka, Bogans, Thomas, Mason, Jefferson, etc. And now you want to act like Spurs have nothing but scrubs for Role Players?? And you say I'm the troll...

No, I didn't use the word "scrubs". That's your strawman, you joust it. The word was used twice by you and that's the first and only times it's been used other than in this paragraph as a reference.

You said "Spurs fans are spoiled, Leonard/Green/Splitter saved this franchise".

That's patently false. The Spurs have won 50 games a season for how many seasons? Even back when Leonard and Green were puppies in high school the Spurs were winning 50+ games a season.

Now you pretend that three role players saved the franchise? Saved it from what exactly? I think you have it backwards; this franchise saved those role players. Leonard will make more money because he was in the Finals last year. That wouldn't have happened with almost any other team, and no way he gets the time he got last year on any other competitive team.

You're putting the cart before the horse.

[Prime Time]

No, I didn't use the word "scrubs". That's your strawman, you joust it. The word was used twice by you and that's the first and only times it's been used other than in this paragraph as a reference.

You said "Spurs fans are spoiled, Leonard/Green/Splitter saved this franchise".

That's patently false. The Spurs have won 50 games a season for how many seasons? Even back when Leonard and Green were puppies in high school the Spurs were winning 50+ games a season.

Now you pretend that three role players saved the franchise? Saved it from what exactly? I think you have it backwards; this franchise saved those role players. Leonard will make more money because he was in the Finals last year. That wouldn't have happened with almost any other team, and no way he gets the time he got last year on any other competitive team.

You're putting the cart before the horse.
Well you claimed they were "irrelevant", by irrelevant did you mean in terms of their recognition or actual talent? We may have a misunderstanding here lol.

Alright, I agree with your argument for the most part. But by "Save this franchise", I more or less meant "Gave the Big 3 a chance for number five." Should have really specified.

If the Spurs didn't have Green/Leonard/Splitter, they would basically be at the level they are at now. Which as you and I know is - no where near the word "contender." That's why I find it humorous when Spurs fans try to make Green/Splitter out to be some no-talented scrubs who could be easily replaced. When if players like those were so easy to find, the whole '09-'11 Saga wouldn't have happened.

[DMC]

They did and they would be irrelevant. Some were irrelevant already as evidence.

Playing well in a game without the big 3 and having a winning season without the big 3 are completely different things.

Your objection is retarded as fuck.


Well you claimed they were "irrelevant", by irrelevant did you mean in terms of their recognition or actual talent? We may have a misunderstanding here lol.

Alright, I agree with your argument for the most part. But by "Save this franchise", I more or less meant "Gave the Big 3 a chance for number five." Should have really specified.

If the Spurs didn't have Green/Leonard/Splitter, they would basically be at the level they are at now. Which as you and I know is - no where near the word "contender." That's why I find it humorous when Spurs fans try to make Green/Splitter out to be some no-talented scrubs who could be easily replaced. When if players like those were so easy to find, the whole '09-'11 Saga wouldn't have happened.

You can see what was actually said in context. Irrelevant is irrelevant. Which role player was making the difference for another franchise before we acquired them? They are all talented. Rich white men won't pay you millions without you being at least serviceable in the NBA. That's what the term "role" in "role player" means. They play a role, and that role on good teams utilizes their strengths. With guys like Green and Splitter, that role is more clearly defined because their talent has a narrow bandwidth. Danny cannot run the point, doesn't have a post up game, isn't a great passer. He's a shooter and a decent defender. Splitter has a decent post up game, passes ok, cannot shoot jump shots, cannot handle the ball, defends ok at the rim but not much on anything outside of 6'. Then you get someone like Manu who can do all of that, can even play the post if he was a bit taller, passes, dribbles, shoots, drives, good FT shooter, good defender.... those guys are rarely if ever considered role players. Those guys "save" the team.

If one of these role players steps out of the role and carries the team, I'll reconsider.

Without the big 3, the Spurs role players would be irrelevant. Some were before they came to SA.

You could have said "revitalized" instead of "saved". Calling a role player the savior of a franchise is hyperbole unless that's one bad ass role player. Most of our role players are plug and play guys. We could find better ones but we don't want to spend the money. It works for the Spurs because of the big 3's willingness to sacrifice individual numbers for balance and wins.

Your last paragraph is more flawed reasoning. If they didn't have the three you mentioned, they would have another three in that pay range. It wouldn't be the end of the bench.

[cd021]

Magic fan wasn't he? And Kawhi is a Cali guy, so he has ties and fam over there.

Yes, but that doesn't mean he will bolt. Mainly because he can't. He is a RFA. Spurs can match any offer. They also can offer him a 5 year deal.

[Prime Time]

You can see what was actually said in context. Irrelevant is irrelevant. Which role player was making the difference for another franchise before we acquired them? They are all talented. Rich white men won't pay you millions without you being at least serviceable in the NBA. That's what the term "role" in "role player" means. They play a role, and that role on good teams utilizes their strengths. With guys like Green and Splitter, that role is more clearly defined because their talent has a narrow bandwidth. Danny cannot run the point, doesn't have a post up game, isn't a great passer. He's a shooter and a decent defender. Splitter has a decent post up game, passes ok, cannot shoot jump shots, cannot handle the ball, defends ok at the rim but not much on anything outside of 6'. Then you get someone like Manu who can do all of that, can even play the post if he was a bit taller, passes, dribbles, shoots, drives, good FT shooter, good defender.... those guys are rarely if ever considered role players. Those guys "save" the team.

If one of these role players steps out of the role and carries the team, I'll reconsider.

Without the big 3, the Spurs role players would be irrelevant. Some were before they came to SA.

You could have said "revitalized" instead of "saved". Calling a role player the savior of a franchise is hyperbole unless that's one bad ass role player. Most of our role players are plug and play guys. We could find better ones but we don't want to spend the money. It works for the Spurs because of the big 3's willingness to sacrifice individual numbers for balance and wins.

Your last paragraph is more flawed reasoning. If they didn't have the three you mentioned, they would have another three in that pay range. It wouldn't be the end of the bench.

Disagree on the "decent defender" argument. All of them are good-great defenders, Exhibit A: Look at how shitty San Antonio's defense is right now.

It wouldn't be that easy. The only one getting paid is Splitter, Green/Leonard are getting typical role player money. Spurs could never attract role players as lethal as those three. Knowing the Spurs, they'd probably be stuck with re-signing Neal (Marco only signed here to win a ship, his opinion of the team would most likely change had Spurs not made the finals.) and probably end up with someone like Josh Howard or James Johnson.

Green, Splitter, and Leonard aren't easy to replace. Just look at how difficult it is for Spurs to attract a BACK-UP SF/C. That's how tough it was before Leonard/Splitter joined the team. Spurs were stuck starting Jefferson and Blair, in case you forgot those days.

No, Spurs could NOT find better ones. Not even if they had the money. Why? No player likes San Antonio. They couldn't even attract Free-Agents when they had a load of cash, let alone finding quality ones now. If it was so easy to find talented players, Why is it so difficult to find a back-up SF? Hell, finding a back-up should be easy since the Spurs could sign a better starting crew if they just spent a little more cash.

Green/Leonard/Splitter saved this franchise from going down to dog-shit. Call it what you will, but that's the situation.

[DMC]

Disagree on the "decent defender" argument. All of them are good-great defenders, Exhibit A: Look at how shitty San Antonio's defense is right now.

Objection: Look at their inability to get stops even with all their players healthy. Look at their record against other seeded teams.


It wouldn't be that easy. The only one getting paid is Splitter, Green/Leonard are getting typical role player money. Spurs could never attract role players as lethal as those three. Knowing the Spurs, they'd probably be stuck with re-signing Neal (Marco only signed here to win a ship, his opinion of the team would most likely change had Spurs not made the finals.) and probably end up with someone like Josh Howard or James Johnson.

So then do you suppose the Spurs hit the jackpot of talent that no one else knew about? That no other role players in the league could prosper in the SA system? When before SA was Danny considered a great defender? When was he considered a lethal outside shooter? Leonard is the highest draft pick of the Spurs since Tim. He's technically not a role player. Splitter is an agile big. They will always demand more money and get it.


Green, Splitter, and Leonard aren't easy to replace. Just look at how difficult it is for Spurs to attract a BACK-UP SF/C. That's how tough it was before Leonard/Splitter joined the team. Spurs were stuck starting Jefferson and Blair, in case you forgot those days.

Danny Green could be replaced by another long outside shooter. Splitter could be replaced by Asik. Leonard could also be replaced. No NBA player who gets minutes can be easily replaced but they can be replaced. The years and years of success in the Spurs organization is testament to that fact.


No, Spurs could NOT find better ones. Not even if they had the money. Why? No player likes San Antonio. They couldn't even attract Free-Agents when they had a load of cash, let alone finding quality ones now. If it was so easy to find talented players, Why is it so difficult to find a back-up SF? Hell, finding a back-up should be easy since the Spurs could sign a better starting crew if they just spent a little more cash.

If the Spurs had 3 starting spots open, there would be interest. No stud wants to come to SA to come off the bench, but there are good bench guys that would love to start on a competitive team. Every team in the league has at least a couple good players on its roster. How do you suppose that happened?


Green/Leonard/Splitter saved this franchise from going down to dog-shit. Call it what you will, but that's the situation.
Now you're calling it a save again. I guess the groceries saved me from starving instead of saying my ability to earn money to buy groceries saved me from starving. The Spurs saved themselves with their ability to find affordable talent and create a system to get the most from it. But no, you'd prefer to make a few role players into heroes of the winningest franchise in all of sports.

You cannot see the forest for the trees.

[Prime Time]

Objection: Look at their inability to get stops even with all their players healthy. Look at their record against other seeded teams.

So then do you suppose the Spurs hit the jackpot of talent that no one else knew about? That no other role players in the league could prosper in the SA system? When before SA was Danny considered a great defender? When was he considered a lethal outside shooter? Leonard is the highest draft pick of the Spurs since Tim. He's technically not a role player. Splitter is an agile big. They will always demand more money and get it.

Danny Green could be replaced by another long outside shooter. Splitter could be replaced by Asik. Leonard could also be replaced. No NBA player who gets minutes can be easily replaced but they can be replaced. The years and years of success in the Spurs organization is testament to that fact.

If the Spurs had 3 starting spots open, there would be interest. No stud wants to come to SA to come off the bench, but there are good bench guys that would love to start on a competitive team. Every team in the league has at least a couple good players on its roster. How do you suppose that happened?

Now you're calling it a save again. I guess the groceries saved me from starving instead of saying my ability to earn money to buy groceries saved me from starving. The Spurs saved themselves with their ability to find affordable talent and create a system to get the most from it. But no, you'd prefer to make a few role players into heroes of the winningest franchise in all of sports.

You cannot see the forest for the trees.

1 - Spurs were 19-5 when healthy. 14-8 since Tiago injury, 5-5 since Green injury, 1-4 since Leonard injury.

2 - Spurs found a diamond in the rough with Danny. You can't teach the ability to shut down CP3/Curry, or block LeBron in the fast-break (Overall his fast-break D is astounding.) not just any down-town shooter could do that. Hell, most of them are soft.

Green was always known for being a limited player with outside shooting and lock-down defense.

"Although his average athleticism and ball-handling skills only allowed him to convert on 50% of his field goal attempts in these situations—which ranks amongst the worst in this small forward class. He struggles in isolation situations and running the pick and roll for these same reasons, and only converted on 71 of his 135 shots around the rim, for a dismal 53%. While his shortcomings are pretty obvious, he still brings quite a bit to the table in terms of his role-player potential, being able to make open shots and play lock-down defense, which is what he’s most known for." - DraftExpress

Sounds like good ol' Danny to me. No other team was willing to give him a chance, enter Ferry. Again, tons of players can knock in threes with the Spurs' system - but to me, it's Danny's defense and hustle that makes him unique.

3 - Tiago Splitter was the MVP and Finals MVP of his league before joining the NBA. There's more to him than just 'agility'. He has great instincts on both ends and is really only lacking physicality before being a terrific all-around player.

If you want to use that logic, I could easily say "Timmy could be replaced by Dwight. Tony could be replaced by CP3." 99% of players are replaceable with that mindset. You think Asik would choose SA over Houston? You think any good defensive shooting guards such as Thabo, Tony Allen, Jimmy Butler, etc. would ever join the Spurs? Who could Leonard be replace by? With his salary (1.8m)? Please, intrigue me. I'm curious.

Oh please, the F/O gets all the credit now? How long does this logic apply? Manu/Tony/Bruce aint shit, the F/O were the ones who discovered them. The F/O is the only reason why Duncan is here, he could have easily left to Orlando. Loyalty? Nah, it was the F/O with the usual goods.


Green/Leonard/Splitter are pretty valuable to the Spurs. They could be replaced by a 3-4 particular players, but the odds of any of them joining the Spurs aren't that high. Which is why I stand by what I said - The three of them saved the Franchise from a very deep struggle.

Also, the blue was completely sarcastic before you go ape-shit. I know Green/Splitter/Leonard aren't anywhere near the level of a prime Manu/Tony/Bruce, but techincally all 3 of them were diamonds in the rough.

Y'know, after the Phoenix and Memphis series most of us assumed the days where the Spurs were considered legit contenders came to an end. Just the next season, Spurs gave valuable minutes to Green/Leonard/Splitter and all of a sudden they're 2 games from the finals. And now they don't deserve any credit? Please.

[Baam]

Prime Tiago sucks ball, he just an agile vaginal deal with it. Worst player in two elimination series, how many year in a row does he have to shit the bed before he falls in the Bonner/RJ category? Splitter didn't save shit, wonder what you have been watching the past 3 years...

You also chose to ignore Boris and SJax PO heroics but then again it wouldn't suit your agenda... Yet they shit on Stiffler POs contributions...

[DMC]

1 - Spurs were 19-5 when healthy. 14-8 since Tiago injury, 5-5 since Green injury, 1-4 since Leonard injury.

How were they against seeded teams?


2 - Spurs found a diamond in the rough with Danny. You can't teach the ability to shut down CP3/Curry, or block LeBron in the fast-break (Overall his fast-break D is astounding.) not just any down-town shooter could do that. Hell, most of them are soft.

Spurs found a diamond in the rough in Danny, in George, in Dejuan, in Kawhi, in Patty, in ad nauseum.... Notice your sentence starts with "Spurs found...".


Green was always known for being a limited player with outside shooting and lock-down defense.

"Although his average athleticism and ball-handling skills only allowed him to convert on 50% of his field goal attempts in these situations—which ranks amongst the worst in this small forward class. He struggles in isolation situations and running the pick and roll for these same reasons, and only converted on 71 of his 135 shots around the rim, for a dismal 53%. While his shortcomings are pretty obvious, he still brings quite a bit to the table in terms of his role-player potential, being able to make open shots and play lock-down defense, which is what he’s most known for." - DraftExpress


There's a sizeable gap between serviceable in a system and savior of a team. Danny is serviceable in a system, and that system revolves around the big 3.


Sounds like good ol' Danny to me. No other team was willing to give him a chance, enter Ferry. Again, tons of players can knock in threes with the Spurs' system - but to me, it's Danny's defense and hustle that makes him unique.

No other team was willing to give him a chance because he SUCKED. Danny is the PRIME reason James hit that second look three, as Danny was halfway up the damn court before the rebound was secured on a play where you had to only get the rebound. That's not defense. Sure Danny went off from 3, and he played solid transition defense, but Danny blew a shit ton of assignments and was cold as ice in the last two games.


3 - Tiago Splitter was the MVP and Finals MVP of his league before joining the NBA. There's more to him than just 'agility'. He has great instincts on both ends and is really only lacking physicality before being a terrific all-around player.

He's an ok player in the NBA. Sabonis also won the award and Scola won it twice. He's not the savior of that franchise. He couldn't even get DeJuan Blair's minutes in his 1st season.


If you want to use that logic, I could easily say "Timmy could be replaced by Dwight. Tony could be replaced by CP3." 99% of players are replaceable with that mindset. You think Asik would choose SA over Houston? You think any good defensive shooting guards such as Thabo, Tony Allen, Jimmy Butler, etc. would ever join the Spurs? Who could Leonard be replace by? With his salary (1.8m)? Please, intrigue me. I'm curious.

When you have a core of talent with chemistry and a system that they believe in, you cannot just replace the talent and get the same results. You can replace the role players though. Great teams do it annually and still win. The Spurs got rid of Jefferson. They got rid of Blair. They got rid of Neal. They got rid of Hill. They still win. That's 4 role players, one slightly better than role player guy as well. They had good fortune last year because the big 3 were fairly all healthy at the same time and because Tim was in the best shape he's been in since I can recall. Role players stepped up, but they don't have the ability to stay up else they wouldn't be role players.


Oh please, the F/O gets all the credit now? How long does this logic apply? Manu/Tony/Bruce aint shit, the F/O were the ones who discovered them. The F/O is the only reason why Duncan is here, he could have easily left to Orlando. Loyalty? Nah, it was the F/O with the usual goods.

Green/Leonard/Splitter are pretty valuable to the Spurs. They could be replaced by a 3-4 particular players, but the odds of any of them joining the Spurs aren't that high. Which is why I stand by what I said - The three of them saved the Franchise from a very deep struggle.

The front office and Tim Duncan are the commonalities in the success streak. Everything else has been added or removed, but those remain and the streak remains.


Also, the blue was completely sarcastic before you go ape-shit. I know Green/Splitter/Leonard aren't anywhere near the level of a prime Manu/Tony/Bruce, but techincally all 3 of them were diamonds in the rough.

I know what sarcasm is. You should use that color for your entire post.


Y'know, after the Phoenix and Memphis series most of us assumed the days where the Spurs were considered legit contenders came to an end. Just the next season, Spurs gave valuable minutes to Green/Leonard/Splitter and all of a sudden they're 2 games from the finals. And now they don't deserve any credit? Please.

Ginobili also didn't have a broken arm...that helped.


Also, if these guys that were let go were so shitty, how was it the Spurs still made it to the playoffs? Oh I know, the big 3.

[Prime Time]

How were they against seeded teams?

Spurs found a diamond in the rough in Danny, in George, in Dejuan, in Kawhi, in Patty, in ad nauseum.... Notice your sentence starts with "Spurs found...".


There's a sizeable gap between serviceable in a system and savior of a team. Danny is serviceable in a system, and that system revolves around the big 3.

No other team was willing to give him a chance because he SUCKED. Danny is the PRIME reason James hit that second look three, as Danny was halfway up the damn court before the rebound was secured on a play where you had to only get the rebound. That's not defense. Sure Danny went off from 3, and he played solid transition defense, but Danny blew a shit ton of assignments and was cold as ice in the last two games.

He's an ok player in the NBA. Sabonis also won the award and Scola won it twice. He's not the savior of that franchise. He couldn't even get DeJuan Blair's minutes in his 1st season.

When you have a core of talent with chemistry and a system that they believe in, you cannot just replace the talent and get the same results. You can replace the role players though. Great teams do it annually and still win. The Spurs got rid of Jefferson. They got rid of Blair. They got rid of Neal. They got rid of Hill. They still win. That's 4 role players, one slightly better than role player guy as well. They had good fortune last year because the big 3 were fairly all healthy at the same time and because Tim was in the best shape he's been in since I can recall. Role players stepped up, but they don't have the ability to stay up else they wouldn't be role players.

The front office and Tim Duncan are the commonalities in the success streak. Everything else has been added or removed, but those remain and the streak remains.

I know what sarcasm is. You should use that color for your entire post.


Ginobili also didn't have a broken arm...that helped.


Also, if these guys that were let go were so shitty, how was it the Spurs still made it to the playoffs? Oh I know, the big 3.
You're taking what I said out of context. I said the TRIO of Green/Splitter/Leonard saved the Spurs FROM sleeping in dog shit. You're acting as if I'm saying "Spurs were a bottom-feeder before our role players. Thank god Tiago Splitter drops 20/10 like a mad-man."

Yeah, the Big 3 only made the finals because of the Big 3. All that defense Green/Leonard/Splitter did on Thompson/Curry/Conley/Randolph sure helped. Right? No, the Big 3 did it. It's a team game, take away one of Green/Leonard and Spurs don't even make it past Golden State. But sure, Big 3 did it all.

You're trying to tell me RIGHT NOW if Tim Duncan switched talent with Dwight Howard, and same for TP and CP3, the Spurs wouldn't be in better condition? Really?

:lol Spurs fans need to stop using that "B-But Ginobili was injured :depressed" excuse. Ginobili averaged more points, rebounds, steals, blocks, better FG%, etc. in that Memphis series than he did in the whole season. Memphis was just the better team that year, Why? San Antonio's defense was crap. And now that's fixed, and why is it fixed? Because they got role players who literally fit every one of their needs.

You need to see it as it is. As of 2014, Tony/Manu/Tim are the offensive Big 3, Danny/Kawhi/Tiago are the defensive Big 3.
Even the Big 3 in interviews acknowledge how important their role players are, they're one of the main reasons we're even discussing #5.

Maybe you're just in denial and like to imagine the Big 3 are still good enough to win a title on their own. If so, your entire argument just made a whole lot more sense.

The difference between Hill, Jefferson, Blair, Udoka, etc. and the players we have now are the fact the former got to play with the Big 3 when they were still a lethal offensive asset every game. Take '10 Parker, Duncan, and Ginobili and pair them up with the 14' Leonard, Green, Splitter, Diaw and you have yourself a dominating championship team. The possibility that #5 could happen with the current Big 3 alone should make you realize how good these role players are.

[DMC]

You're taking what I said out of context. I said the TRIO of Green/Splitter/Leonard saved the Spurs FROM sleeping in dog shit. You're acting as if I'm saying "Spurs were a bottom-feeder before our role players. Thank god Tiago Splitter drops 20/10 like a mad-man."

Winning franchises don't get saved by role players. Role players get saved by winning franchises. Stars are different.


Yeah, the Big 3 only made the finals because of the Big 3. All that defense Green/Leonard/Splitter did on Thompson/Curry/Conley/Randolph sure helped. Right? No, the Big 3 did it. It's a team game, take away one of Green/Leonard and Spurs don't even make it past Golden State. But sure, Big 3 did it all.

Spurs made the playoffs before any of those three were playing for the Spurs. They made the playoffs with guys they've since traded or waived or released or whatever. I guess those waived players saved them as well or we just happened to find another stud role player life raft in the middle of a sea of mediocrity to pull us to shore.

You cannot be that fucking stupid.


You're trying to tell me RIGHT NOW if Tim Duncan switched talent with Dwight Howard, and same for TP and CP3, the Spurs wouldn't be in better condition? Really?

You don't switch talent, idiot. You switch players.


:lol Spurs fans need to stop using that "B-But Ginobili was injured :depressed" excuse. Ginobili averaged more points, rebounds, steals, blocks, better FG%, etc. in that Memphis series than he did in the whole season. Memphis was just the better team that year, Why? San Antonio's defense was crap. And now that's fixed, and why is it fixed? Because they got role players who literally fit every one of their needs.

So then the league leading Bulls who lost in the 1st round would have lost whether or not Rose goes down. OKC would have lost last year to Houston regardless whether or not Frogger goes down. Got it. At least I know who I'm dealing with now.

lol Manu played better with a broken arm, yet the team was saved by the role players.


You need to see it as it is. As of 2014, Tony/Manu/Tim are the offensive Big 3, Danny/Kawhi/Tiago are the defensive Big 3.
Even the Big 3 in interviews acknowledge how important their role players are, they're one of the main reasons we're even discussing #5.

Role players are important. They aren't saviors.


Maybe you're just in denial and like to imagine the Big 3 are still good enough to win a title on their own. If so, your entire argument just made a whole lot more sense.

You obviously haven't read my takes if you think that I believe any of that. Your takes are so off center and fallacious that they are laughable. You truly don't understand the game of basketball. It's ok though, I'm here to teach you.


The difference between Hill, Jefferson, Blair, Udoka, etc. and the players we have now are the fact the former got to play with the Big 3 when they were still a lethal offensive asset every game. Take '10 Parker, Duncan, and Ginobili and pair them up with the 14' Leonard, Green, Splitter, Diaw and you have yourself a dominating championship team. The possibility that #5 could happen with the current Big 3 alone should make you realize how good these role players are.
I am not talking about 2010. I am talking about 2011, 2012 and 2013. Spurs made the playoffs all those years, sometimes with the best record in the conference. I guess those role players back then were beasts as well. Too bad we had to let them go and depend on Manu's broken arm against the Grizzlies.

[Prime Time]

Winning franchises don't get saved by role players. Role players get saved by winning franchises. Stars are different.

Spurs made the playoffs before any of those three were playing for the Spurs. They made the playoffs with guys they've since traded or waived or released or whatever. I guess those waived players saved them as well or we just happened to find another stud role player life raft in the middle of a sea of mediocrity to pull us to shore.

You cannot be that fucking stupid.

You don't switch talent, idiot. You switch players.

So then the league leading Bulls who lost in the 1st round would have lost whether or not Rose goes down. OKC would have lost last year to Houston regardless whether or not Frogger goes down. Got it. At least I know who I'm dealing with now.

lol Manu played better with a broken arm, yet the team was saved by the role players.

Role players are important. They aren't saviors.

You obviously haven't read my takes if you think that I believe any of that. Your takes are so off center and fallacious that they are laughable. You truly don't understand the game of basketball. It's ok though, I'm here to teach you.

I am not talking about 2010. I am talking about 2011, 2012 and 2013. Spurs made the playoffs all those years, sometimes with the best record in the conference. I guess those role players back then were beasts as well. Too bad we had to let them go and depend on Manu's broken arm against the Grizzlies.

God damn it you're so stupid. Can you even read a thing I'm saying? The Big 3 aged, they can't DO the things they did in 2010/2011. If they had the same shitty role players (Outside of Hill) they had in those specific years they wouldn't be near a contender, why? Because they AGED. What part of aging don't you understand? God damn, Tim is almost 40 and Manu is in his mid 30's.

:lol No shit you can't switch talent, but your argument was along the lines of "Losing the our stars' chemistry would ruin the flow of this team." which just isn't the case at this point. If you switched Dwight/CP3 with Tim/TP the Spurs would improve, not much else to that. You could make an argument against that had this been 2011, but it's not.

:lol We had Manu, the Bulls didn't have Rose at all. If Derrick was around averaging better stats in the post-season than he did in the regular season the Bulls wouldn't have lost. Seriously? Are you THIS dumb? The situations aren't even comparable.

Damn straight the team's chance to win a title was saved by the role players. We had Manu averaging 20 a game yet the Spurs still lost to the Grizzlies, add Green/Leonard/Splitter and the Spurs sweep Memphis, Want proof? Watch the 2013 WCF.

In 2011 Manu was arguably having the best year of his career. Role players weren't nearly as important then, not when the Big 3 were still playing at high-levels. What part of that is hard to get? The 2014 Big 3 is no where near the 2011 Big 3, the role players are much more important now. Do you even watch the team?