Spursfanfromafar
06-16-2014, 09:41 AM
This forum here is filled with a lot of BS & S***. Finding good takes is like finding 10 needles in a haystack these days. But in the last 5 or so years that I have been a member in this forum, there have been some really good calls. Which have been proven right by the Spurs' 5. Here are some of what I thought were those:
a) Small ball is bad: Spurstalk used to go nuts about smallball by Pop. It only gave marginal value add to the Spurs. They had to get bigger in many positions - at center (instead of the likes of McDyess, BLair etc) and at SF (SFs who played big unlike HWSNBN Dick, Bogans, Finley, even Hill). Small ball was Pop's way to adjusting to the post-SSOL era, but it always gave diminished returns for the Spurs from 2007 onwards. And Spurstalk was right to go apoplectic about it. Or atleast the good guys/gals in ST.
b) Splitter-Duncan / Diaw-Duncan: Some good folks here were right about when to play Splitter-Duncan and when to play Diaw-Duncan. And Pop did the needful there just as those folks wanted.
c) Replacing HWSNBN: Spurstalk exploded with anger with HWSNBN was signed for an extension. In hindsight it wasn't a bad move and it enabled the extension of some other contracts, but saddled with HWSNBN was a major blow for the Spurs' contention chances. RCB's master move to dump him for a regressed Jackson (and the simultaneous addition of Diaw, Jackson & Mills) was the turning point - apart from, of course, Hill's trade for Leonard.
d) Bonner's cutting down to size: Matt Bonner was an useful one-dimensional situational player all along. Only Pop thought he was Robert Horry's replacement. The Spurs' contention chances only increased when the Red Mamba was used as minimally as possible. Something that ST always wanted.
e) Staying with the core: But for a minuscule minority, the majority in ST wanted the Spurs core to remain intact despite the lean years from 2007-2010. Turned out their views matched that of the men who mattered - Holt, RCB, Pop.
5. It will stay with me.
a) Small ball is bad: Spurstalk used to go nuts about smallball by Pop. It only gave marginal value add to the Spurs. They had to get bigger in many positions - at center (instead of the likes of McDyess, BLair etc) and at SF (SFs who played big unlike HWSNBN Dick, Bogans, Finley, even Hill). Small ball was Pop's way to adjusting to the post-SSOL era, but it always gave diminished returns for the Spurs from 2007 onwards. And Spurstalk was right to go apoplectic about it. Or atleast the good guys/gals in ST.
b) Splitter-Duncan / Diaw-Duncan: Some good folks here were right about when to play Splitter-Duncan and when to play Diaw-Duncan. And Pop did the needful there just as those folks wanted.
c) Replacing HWSNBN: Spurstalk exploded with anger with HWSNBN was signed for an extension. In hindsight it wasn't a bad move and it enabled the extension of some other contracts, but saddled with HWSNBN was a major blow for the Spurs' contention chances. RCB's master move to dump him for a regressed Jackson (and the simultaneous addition of Diaw, Jackson & Mills) was the turning point - apart from, of course, Hill's trade for Leonard.
d) Bonner's cutting down to size: Matt Bonner was an useful one-dimensional situational player all along. Only Pop thought he was Robert Horry's replacement. The Spurs' contention chances only increased when the Red Mamba was used as minimally as possible. Something that ST always wanted.
e) Staying with the core: But for a minuscule minority, the majority in ST wanted the Spurs core to remain intact despite the lean years from 2007-2010. Turned out their views matched that of the men who mattered - Holt, RCB, Pop.
5. It will stay with me.