BBALL BREAKDOWN: How OKC beat the SPURS in 6

[spursparker9]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iw8x3H7hUyE

[MAxEric]

Hope POP will go to watch this video and learn from his poor rotation...

[daslicer]

This video in a nutshell "Donovan using the vanilla towers gave the thunder unlimited second chance points that broke the spurs back. Spurs could have ran more pick and roll to get Kanter off the court but even when they did Donovan still kept him out there so it's no guarantee it would have worked. Kawhi and LMA ran too many iso plays while the bench relied on ball movement but couldn't hit shots."

[DMC]

Pop had no one to intentionally foul and when he tried he couldn't even do that.

[spursparker9]

Basically Pop became Poop

[Nbadan]

Ouch...video hurts...but it's true...Donovan out-coached POP this series...

[Nbadan]

Adams hurt the Spurs...but Adams is a terrible free throw shooter...a liability on the floor....Hack-A-Adams.....

[Nbadan]

I think eeeennnnuuuusss Kanter is the OKC match up the spurs need to worry about...well...besides Westbrook....

[spurs10]

Good review. Glad he mentioned the officiating giving the edge to OKC in Game 2 & 5.

[spurs10]

I think eeeennnnuuuusss Kanter is the OKC match up the spurs need to worry about...well...besides Westbrook.... He was basically saying that if we would gone after Kanter more in the pick-n-roll we would have hurt them because Kanter was a defensive liability.

[Nbadan]

Enus is a defensive liability on motion offense..GS is gonna find that out really quick..but it was the Kanter/Adams tandem that hurt the Spurs..not just Kanter....

[kobyz]

I still shaking my head about that pathetic and soft rebounding game spurs played, warriors small ball lineup with green at center will give a better fight on rebound and would get out with less damage, just pathetic how soft and naive our team is and how that keep costing us titles...

[DarrinS]

Great analysis, but kinda glossed over how terrible the bench played.

One great point was how successful the PnR was against Kanter. Should've kept attacking that to force Donovan to abort that lineup.

[K...]

So here's the outcoaching....Dovan "i see your not going to play a legit C, pop, are you for real?"

Pop "David west and diaw and fine"

Donovan "kool, i got tons of weird white bigs and of course that weird african dude"

Pop "david west and diaw are fine"



The other coaching argument i have seen "why didn't pop go small sooner" which is equal to "why didn't pop try his other shit players, you know the shittier ones"

[InRareForm]

Sad but the truth

[kobyz]

For the second year in a row we soft our way out of the competition... Someone should open a thread about why spurs keep wetting their pants come playoff time and how to fix it!!!!!!!!!!!

[UZER]

He was basically saying that if we would gone after Kanter more in the pick-n-roll we would have hurt them because Kanter was a defensive liability.

Attacking someone's weakness is not Pops style. That would fall in line with him making adjustments which he doesn't. He just always says they made shots, they played harder.

Pop just runs system system system. Why do you think he always says he's never worried about what other teams are doing? And that he's always only concerned about what his team does.

[DarrinS]

For the second year in a row we soft our way out of the competition... Someone should open a thread about why spurs keep wetting their pants come playoff time and how to fix it!!!!!!!!!!!

It wasn't a matter of effort or toughness. Asking West and Diaw to out-rebound centers is like asking Tony and Patty to guard Russ and KD. :lol

[RD2191]

Pop. That's it. That's the reason.

[EVAY]

I thought that rebounding was terrible all series and second chance points that IKC got off that rebounding was their winning edge.

Pop really is stubborn.

[Arcadian]

Pop. That's it. That's the reason.

So if we were to delete Pop from the equation, and plug in another decent coach, the Spurs win that series?

[spurs10]

So if we were to delete Pop from the equation, and plug in another decent coach, the Spurs win that series? I'm a big fan of Pop's, but sometimes feel like he isn't playing to win. I got the feeling that when he saw Tim struggling he didn't see us going far. He knew David West couldnt match up at Center, but he kept playing him until we lost. I't's hard to imagine why he didn't go ballistic when we got fucked multiple times by the refs- calls that cost us the games. Game 5 was a win if they call the intention flagrant foul by Adams. Game 2 the same if they call the obvious elbow into Manu. He kind of said something game 2, but not much.

[RD2191]

So if we were to delete Pop from the equation, and plug in another decent coach, the Spurs win that series?

Well.....duh

[tholdren]

It wasn't a matter of effort or toughness. Asking West and Diaw to out-rebound centers is like asking Tony and Patty to guard Russ and KD. :lol
You're an idiot. It was 100% because of this.

[dbestpro]

The losses that the Spurs had early in the regular season were accented by going at our center rotation. As the season progressed teams tended to do that so much as Boban actually became a factor. Donovan simply did what other teams tried to do early on. The requirement to play West because he gave up so much is why the Spurs are on the outside looking in. Either West or Diaw but not both at the same time. Bonner's spot was a waste, as well, which could have been used for another center.

[DarrinS]

You're an idiot. It was 100% because of this.

It was 100% because the players didn't play hard?

Mmmkay :rolleyes

[tholdren]

It was 100% because the players didn't play hard?

Mmmkay :rolleyes

Then your blind, because no one gave more effort than OKCs players. Half of SA's disappeared.

[SD126]

So if we were to delete Pop from the equation, and plug in another decent coach, the Spurs win that series?

Uh.....no. Spurs bench blows. Everyone on that bench can go. Anyone stays and it's status quo, with another disappointing end with butthurt fans doing this exact same thing next year.

NEXT...

[DarrinS]

Then your blind, because no one gave more effort than OKCs players. Half of SA's disappeared.

"your" retarded :lol

[tholdren]

"your" retarded :lol
When beat by logic, always go after spelling. "your" not smart

[DarrinS]

When beat by logic, always go after spelling. "your" not smart

If you want logic, watch the video in the OP.

It's better than ":cry play harder guyz :cry".

[ceperez]

Pop's in game coaching didn't maximize the mismatches. I can understand that he doesn't do this in the regular season but for playoff games, it is disappointing.

The fundamental problem however is that both Aldridge and Leonard haven't mastered the 'beautiful game'. Spurs played like the Thunder in offense with less capable go to players. Unfortunate.

[tholdren]

If you want logic, watch the video in the OP.

It's better than ":cry play harder guyz :cry".

I think that's exactly what the video narrator tries to explain when he says there are 4 guys standing. Although I didnt have to watch the video because I watched the games. And yes, it was about how hard they played. 100%. You play hard = not standing.

You : "oh man Im so cool, I can get this really awesome avatar then it doesn't matter that I post 23k times and their all shitty because I'm controversial. Now where can I find some emojis?"

[kobyz]

It wasn't a matter of effort or toughness. Asking West and Diaw to out-rebound centers is like asking Tony and Patty to guard Russ and KD. :lol

You very wrong, game 2 first quarter performance was very lackadaisical, like they were very naive by underestimate the opponent and didn't understand it was a must win game in order not to get entangle and more pressure, that quarter costed us the game and all series in an insight... No good reason that after game 1 would be that much drop off in level of play, they didnt gave their best fight, even on rebounds you could do better, it's not all about size, pressure got into the team, they couldn't close games... Same story was last season, we were on fantastic roll coming into last game of regular season, were too naive not seeing how the New Orleans game was a must win game, didn't give our all, entangled ourselves with the 6th seed and worst situation and a ruined momentum instead of facing the Mavs to help us more get going and to found ourselves, exactly what we needed that season, against Clippers couldn't finish close games and losing series... Just pathetic how naive and soft we are the last couple of years...

[AFMadison]

Lol this is hilarious to me

[therealtruth]

He's more concerned about the 1200 planets than trying to win a basketball game.

[TheDoctor]

Pop is the Ned Stark of the NBA. Unwilling to bend and adapt he got into trouble. Then when he tried to amend some, it was too little too late and got killed.

[wildbill2u]

The rebounding was the key to the series. Not only did it give them control of the game and second chance points, it was a tremendous energizer for OKC players and fans when they kept getting those rebounds and put backs. And while giving props to the "Vanilla Towers" strategy, it completely overlooks how well Westbrook, Durant, and Ibaka also rebound. It's not coincidence they are the best rebounding team in basketball. And that whichever team controls the rebounding, controls the game and usually wins over the long hall.

What could Pop have done to combat the OKC two big man strategy?. Our first option was Duncan and LMA. but LMA stays outside too much and Duncan was playing on bad wheels and clearly wasn't mobile enough to play well--or for lots of minutes--no matter how hard he tried. Pop just didn't have any combination of bigs on the bench that could compete with OKC's size for 30 minutes per game.

[Horse]

My version of aaron rodgers R-E-F-S

[therealtruth]

Spurs have never been a good offensive rebounding team but that can help.

[DPG21920]

The rebounding was the key to the series. Not only did it give them control of the game and second chance points, it was a tremendous energizer for OKC players and fans when they kept getting those rebounds and put backs. And while giving props to the "Vanilla Towers" strategy, it completely overlooks how well Westbrook, Durant, and Ibaka also rebound. It's not coincidence they are the best rebounding team in basketball. And that whichever team controls the rebounding, controls the game and usually wins over the long hall.

What could Pop have done to combat the OKC two big man strategy?. Our first option was Duncan and LMA. but LMA stays outside too much and Duncan was playing on bad wheels and clearly wasn't mobile enough to play well--or for lots of minutes--no matter how hard he tried. Pop just didn't have any combination of bigs on the bench that could compete with OKC's size for 30 minutes per game.

All they needed to do to combat that strategy was punish them on the other end. OKC going big, gave up something on the defensive end. What that was, was a healthy amount of uncontested mid-range jumpers which SA shot all year better than anyone.

Spurs didn't make them pay on that end and that's why Billy was allowed to stay with that. What people seemingly fail to realize is that even with OKC rebounding advantage, FT advantage & bench advantage, every single game was close. It wasn't like those things "solved" the Spurs.

OKC made decision to go for one thing (rebounding) and the expense of being able to contest a lot of the Spurs shots on defense and the Spurs flat out missed. Make a few more shots and all of those OKC adjustments are all for nothing.

[UZER]

Spurs have never been a good offensive rebounding team but that can help.

Because pop would rather have old stiffs or guys with 0 athleticism because they will always be standing in the right place on D regardless if they can get a rebound, loose ball, etc.

[tholdren]

The rebounding was the key to the series. Not only did it give them control of the game and second chance points, it was a tremendous energizer for OKC players and fans when they kept getting those rebounds and put backs. And while giving props to the "Vanilla Towers" strategy, it completely overlooks how well Westbrook, Durant, and Ibaka also rebound. It's not coincidence they are the best rebounding team in basketball. And that whichever team controls the rebounding, controls the game and usually wins over the long hall.

What could Pop have done to combat the OKC two big man strategy?. Our first option was Duncan and LMA. but LMA stays outside too much and Duncan was playing on bad wheels and clearly wasn't mobile enough to play well--or for lots of minutes--no matter how hard he tried. Pop just didn't have any combination of bigs on the bench that could compete with OKC's size for 30 minutes per game.
rebounding was half the reason

[Amuseddaysleeper]

All they needed to do to combat that strategy was punish them on the other end. OKC going big, gave up something on the defensive end. What that was, was a healthy amount of uncontested mid-range jumpers which SA shot all year better than anyone.

Spurs didn't make them pay on that end and that's why Billy was allowed to stay with that. What people seemingly fail to realize is that even with OKC rebounding advantage, FT advantage & bench advantage, every single game was close. It wasn't like those things "solved" the Spurs.

OKC made decision to go for one thing (rebounding) and the expense of being able to contest a lot of the Spurs shots on defense and the Spurs flat out missed. Make a few more shots and all of those OKC adjustments are all for nothing.

OKC also had their role players step up much better than we did. To me, OKC was definitely the better team in this series. They executed much better in fourth quarter situations and the Spurs rarely looked dominant after Game 1, whereas OKC finished the series dominant with Game 6.

Foye alone probably hit more 3's than Mills did in a quarter of the minutes, Waiters scored more than Danny Green, and Aldridge came crashing down to earth at the worst time after the first two wonderful games.

Spurs looked slow as hell, but on the upside they were gonna lose in 5 at the absolute most vs the Warriors anyway.

[wildbill2u]

All they needed to do to combat that strategy was punish them on the other end. OKC going big, gave up something on the defensive end. What that was, was a healthy amount of uncontested mid-range jumpers which SA shot all year better than anyone.

Spurs didn't make them pay on that end and that's why Billy was allowed to stay with that. What people seemingly fail to realize is that even with OKC rebounding advantage, FT advantage & bench advantage, every single game was close. It wasn't like those things "solved" the Spurs.









OKC made decision to go for one thing (rebounding) and the expense of being able to contest a lot of the Spurs shots on defense and the Spurs flat out missed. Make a few more shots and all of those OKC adjustments are all for nothing.

You must have been watching a different game than I was. The Spurs starters were playing the same way they played all season. Pound the ball into LMA or Kwahi and depend on their ISO skills and a great shooting percentage to win. OKC is known for that offense, eh? And we've always sneered at them because of the reliance on Durant and Westbrick-- and we just knew they'd crack in the fourth quarter and go hero ball and miss shots. Didn't happen.

On the other hand, I saw a lot of determined defensive pressure on our two guys from OKC which led to late shots and bad shots. Even if they were able to kick it out to one of the other players who were standing around watching the Big 2 operate against double and sometimes triple teams with all that length, the shots we got were rushed or bad shots. We looked a lot like the older version of the OKC offense, relying on two scorers to have great games. Uncharacteristically, OKC actually passed the ball sometimes and gave a lot of effort on defense. They looked a lot like us.

[DPG21920]

You must have been watching a different game than I was. The Spurs starters were playing the same way they played all season. Pound the ball into LMA or Kwahi and depend on their ISO skills and a great shooting percentage to win. OKC is known for that offense, eh? And we've always sneered at them because of the reliance on Durant and Westbrick-- and we just knew they'd crack in the fourth quarter and go hero ball and miss shots. Didn't happen.

On the other hand, I saw a lot of determined defensive pressure on our two guys from OKC which led to late shots and bad shots. Even if they were able to kick it out to one of the other players who were standing around watching the Big 2 operate against double and sometimes triple teams with all that length, the shots we got were rushed or bad shots. We looked a lot like the older version of the OKC offense, relying on two scorers to have great games. Uncharacteristically, OKC actually passed the ball sometimes and gave a lot of effort on defense. They looked a lot like us.

It did happen. OKC scored under 100 in 4 out of 6 games. This was a top 2 offense that got shut down for the most part. The reason they scored as much as they did was FT disparity and offensive rebounds. Even with that could barely crack 100.

Spurs did play the way they did all season. They got shots they got all season and made. They missed. It happens. GS isn't missing and you are seeing what happens.

And again, while OKC did well on the shots they contested, they gave up more uncontested looks than contested FOR THE ENTIRE SERIES. I have never seen a team get more "open" looks than "contested" through 6 games. I'm all for giving credit - I just don't think Wins/Losses dictate that credit but how it happened.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

It did happen. OKC scored under 100 in 4 out of 6 games. This was a top 2 offense that got shut down for the most part. The reason they scored as much as they did was FT disparity and offensive rebounds. Even with that could barely crack 100.

Spurs did play the way they did all season. They got shots they got all season and made. They missed. It happens. GS isn't missing and you are seeing what happens.

And again, while OKC did well on the shots they contested, they gave up more uncontested looks than contested FOR THE ENTIRE SERIES. I have never seen a team get more "open" looks than "contested" through 6 games. I'm all for giving credit - I just don't think Wins/Losses dictate that credit but how it happened.

In regards to keeping OKC under 100, you're right that's great and what the Spurs would love to do heading into the series. It's the same thing with both GS games in SA where Spurs held GS under 95 points and still managed to lose a game, and the one game they won GS shot the poorest they had all season and the Spurs barely won.

I think the offense was the elephant in the room for this team all season. They were great against most of the league, but when it came to the elite (especially on the road) the Spurs struggled a lot of the time putting the ball into the basket. The one other game they won vs OKC after Game 1 they were in absolute god mode from downtown in Game 3 (8/13 from downtown at one point) and hung on to win by 4.

I think even if the Spurs played GS, they'd still struggle to score because this team just isn't good enough on offense against the other elite teams. It was always going to be something that would haunt on the Spurs. As well as the inability to keep teams off the FT line in these playoffs.

[kobyz]

I still shaking my head about that pathetic and soft rebounding game spurs played, warriors small ball lineup with green at center will give a better fight on rebound and would get out with less damage, just pathetic how soft and naive our team is and how that keep costing us titles...

Warriros proving my point and showing how pathetic spurs is...

[tholdren]

Warriros proving my point and showing how pathetic spurs is...
No - OKC proving the point about attacking the rim and FTA/Rebounding wins in this league. KL and LMA too afraid to do either.

[look_at_g_shred]

No - OKC proving the point about attacking the rim and FTA/Rebounding wins in this league. KL and LMA too afraid to do either.
I don't agree much with you, but I agree with this :tu

[look_at_g_shred]

In regards to keeping OKC under 100, you're right that's great and what the Spurs would love to do heading into the series. It's the same thing with both GS games in SA where Spurs held GS under 95 points and still managed to lose a game, and the one game they won GS shot the poorest they had all season and the Spurs barely won.

I think the offense was the elephant in the room for this team all season. They were great against most of the league, but when it came to the elite (especially on the road) the Spurs struggled a lot of the time putting the ball into the basket. The one other game they won vs OKC after Game 1 they were in absolute god mode from downtown in Game 3 (8/13 from downtown at one point) and hung on to win by 4.

I think even if the Spurs played GS, they'd still struggle to score because this team just isn't good enough on offense against the other elite teams. It was always going to be something that would haunt on the Spurs. As well as the inability to keep teams off the FT line in these playoffs.
Spurs just needed a 3rd consistent scorer and that series is over in 5

[kobyz]

No - OKC proving the point about attacking the rim and FTA/Rebounding wins in this league. KL and LMA too afraid to do either.

So you agree that spurs are pathetic(afraid)... Spurs let okc to do too much damage than what they should and small ball warriors winning the boards against them proving my point big time, spurs soft and pathetic...

[aal04]

I brought this up earlier this year

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=258250&p=8474802#post8474802

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Spurs just needed a 3rd consistent scorer and that series is over in 5

That's a pretty big thing to need. Considering they didn't have anything close to that.

[MaNu4Tres]

That's a pretty big thing to need. Considering they didn't have anything close to that.

They don't need a 3rd scorer, they just need a competent play-maker off bench and a diver in a big who can roll in PNRs, finish well/ suck in weak-side perimeter D -- which opens up open shots for the spot up shooters. Having the diver in the motion offense would open everything back up.

[TD 21]

They don't need a 3rd scorer, they just need a competent play-maker off bench and a diver in a big who can roll in PNRs, finish well/ suck in weak-side perimeter D -- which opens up open shots for the spot up shooters. Having the diver in the motion offense would open everything back up.

They also need a true stretch four (28 threes from rotation bigs, 43 total from all bigs) and Bertans, at least next season, isn't the answer. Even if he were capable of being it, we all know how Pop treats non Parker/Ginobili foreigners in their first season in the NBA.

Lastly, they need a point guard that, in addition to being able to make plays, can defend the dynamic/physically imposing types. With the offensive responsibility Leonard now has, he can't be expected to full time guard Durant/Westbrook, for example and when he's not, the alternative, on Westbrook, can't be Parker/Mills.

[MaNu4Tres]

They also need a true stretch four (28 threes from rotation bigs, 43 total from all bigs) and Bertans, at least next season, isn't the answer. Even if he were capable of being it, we all know how Pop treats non Parker/Ginobili foreigners in their first season in the NBA.

Lastly, they need a point guard that, in addition to being able to make plays, can defend the dynamic/physically imposing types. With the offensive responsibility Leonard now has, he can't be expected to full time guard Durant/Westbrook, for example and when he's not, the alternative, on Westbrook, can't be Parker/Mills.

Regards to stretch 4, I love the versatility Marvin Williams could bring at that spot. He has the girth and strength to hold his own inside -- Harkless as well.

Lance Thomas is a stretch four option for cheap if SA has to utilize most of cap to fill other holes -- would be solid end of bench pick up for depth -- he had a very good year in NY.

Trade Diaw/ Mills for Teague. Try to trade down and get Celtcs 31 & 35 for 29th( good chance Bos tries to consolidate picks) or Milwaukee for their 36th and 38th + next yrs 2nd. Target two of Onauku, Payton II, Diallo, Levert, Brogdan, or Maker. Sign Plumlee for 4-6 mil per, Williams or Harkless for 8-10 mil per, Lance Thomas or Jason Thompson on the cheap.

Players I'd be shopping for picks if Spurs can't package any with Diaw: Mills, Anderson.

[TD 21]

Regards to stretch 4, I love the versatility Marvin Williams could bring at that spot. He has the girth and strength to hold his own inside -- Harkless as well.

Lance Thomas is a stretch four option for cheap if SA has to utilize most of cap to fill other holes -- would be solid end of bench pick up for depth -- he had a very good year in NY.

Trade Diaw/ Mills for Teague. Try to trade down and get Celtcs 31 & 35 for 29th( good chance Bos tries to consolidate picks) or Milwaukee for their 36th and 38th + next yrs 2nd. Target two of Onauku, Payton II, Diallo, Levert, Brogdan, or Maker. Sign Plumlee for 4-6 mil per, Williams or Harkless for 8-10 mil per, Lance Thomas or Jason Thompson on the cheap.

Players I'd be shopping for picks if Spurs can't package any with Diaw: Mills, Anderson.

Lowe said on a recent podcast that Williams could get something like 2/$30M.

Harkless is RFA, can only get by as a four in certain match-ups and isn't a floor spacer.

Thomas is intriguing, but just started to shoot 3's this season, is low volume and is probably mostly a corners shooter.

I'm thinking more along the lines of Teletovic.

Like I've said, I don't think the Hawks do that. I don't see why the Celtics, with 8 picks and tons of young players already on the roster, would package 2 in the same range to move up 2 spots. Maybe the Bucks would do it, but they're already out a future 1st thanks to the Vasquez trade.

Thompson doesn't check a single box. For fifth/six big, I'd rather a specialist, like Robinson, who at least provides elite athleticism/rebounding.

[MaNu4Tres]

Lowe said on a recent podcast that Williams could get something like 2/$30M.

Harkless is RFA, can only get by as a four in certain match-ups and isn't a floor spacer.

Thomas is intriguing, but just started to shoot 3's this season, is low volume and is probably mostly a corners shooter.

I'm thinking more along the lines of Teletovic.

Like I've said, I don't think the Hawks do that. I don't see why the Celtics, with 8 picks and tons of young players already on the roster, would package 2 in the same range to move up 2 spots. Maybe the Bucks would do it, but they're already out a future 1st thanks to the Vasquez trade.

Thompson doesn't check a single box. For fifth/six big, I'd rather a specialist, like Robinson, who at least provides elite athleticism/rebounding.

I've mentioned Teletovic about 8 times since last week in other threads. Spurs will definitely make a run at him IMO.

Only thing is, if Spurs sign both him and Plumlee, they'll have little assets to fill in the other roles that are more expensive.

They need to package Diaw/ Mills for a quality rotational player whether its a diver ( Splitter again?) or a stretch 4 ( Ilysova?) or a point guard ( Teague?) in order to be able to fill in the other holes with the 15 mil they shld have in space if TD/ Manu retire and West opts out.

There's so many ways this summer can go, but IMO they need four roles filled -- a PnR diver & rim protector/ rebounder who can play 20-24 mpg, an upgrade at backup PG( a real play-maker), a versatile proven wing who can defend 3-4 positions, and a stretch four is another need but I'd rank the previous three as more important since Kawhi may see more minutes at the 4 next yr.

As for Thompson, I think he can be had for the money Spurs will have available for the 5th big spot after SA utilizes most assets to fill in the relevant roles. Robinson won't get the minimum -- his price should be higher ( 3-5 mil) and SA won't be able to afford that unless they whiff big time in free agency and Robinson would then be the 3rd big in rotation.

[spurtech09]

aw man that's such an easy question.....The refs.....(Ding Ding Ding Ding)....What do I win?

[pjjrfan]

Poor bench play and Adams killing us on the board. Even Tim being a no show in the first 5 games, we shoot better we win going away but guys couldn't hit open shots and the Thunder did.

[SD126]

aw man that's such an easy question.....The refs.....(Ding Ding Ding Ding)....What do I win?

A lifetime supply of sour grapes for using that as your answer.

[TD 21]

I've mentioned Teletovic about 8 times since last week in other threads. Spurs will definitely make a run at him IMO.

Only thing is, if Spurs sign both him and Plumlee, they'll have little assets to fill in the other roles that are more expensive.

They need to package Diaw/ Mills for a quality rotational player whether its a diver ( Splitter again?) or a stretch 4 ( Ilysova?) or a point guard ( Teague?) in order to be able to fill in the other holes with the 15 mil they shld have in space if TD/ Manu retire and West opts out.

There's so many ways this summer can go, but IMO they need four roles filled -- a PnR diver & rim protector/ rebounder who can play 20-24 mpg, an upgrade at backup PG( a real play-maker), a versatile proven wing who can defend 3-4 positions, and a stretch four is another need but I'd rank the previous three as more important since Kawhi may see more minutes at the 4 next yr.

As for Thompson, I think he can be had for the money Spurs will have available for the 5th big spot after SA utilizes most assets to fill in the relevant roles. Robinson won't get the minimum -- his price should be higher ( 3-5 mil) and SA won't be able to afford that unless they whiff big time in free agency and Robinson would then be the 3rd big in rotation.

Yeah, it's going to be difficult to attain the three necessary rotation pieces and damn near impossible unless one is checked off via trade.

To me, stretch four is clearly ahead of versatile, defensive wing. Sure, it would be nice to have another of those, but it's not essential.

I doubt Leonard plays much more at four. They clearly prefer to play with two bigs as much as possible and they don't have the wing depth to play much that way even if they wanted to.

It's not that I don't think Thompson can be had for cheap, it's that he doesn't check any specific box. He's a competent depth big, but he's not a roller, spacer, rebounder, rim protector or versatile defender.

Maybe Robinson fits in their price range, maybe not. If he does, he'd make more sense than Thompson, because at least he proves athleticism/rebounding.

[YGWHI]

There's so many ways this summer can go, but IMO they need four roles filled -- a PnR diver & rim protector/ rebounder who can play 20-24 mpg, an upgrade at backup PG( a real play-maker), a versatile proven wing who can defend 3-4 positions, and a stretch four is another need but I'd rank the previous three as more important since Kawhi may see more minutes at the 4 next yr.

Also, the PG or the wing, need to be a shooter. Spurs' lack of 3's shooters was an issue during the whole regular season and playoffs.

[MaNu4Tres]

Also, the PG or the wing, need to be a shooter. Spurs' lack of 3's shooters was an issue during the whole regular season and playoffs.

Without question, both have to be good shooters for the motion offense to be optimally effective. I didn't mention it because I thought that was obvious.

[Horse]

No - OKC proving the point about attacking the rim and FTA/Rebounding wins in this league. KL and LMA too afraid to do either.
LMA needs to attack and roll more but kawhi attacked plenty but couldn't get a call to save his life.

[MaNu4Tres]

To me, stretch four is clearly ahead of versatile, defensive wing. Sure, it would be nice to have another of those, but it's not essential.

I doubt Leonard plays much more at four. They clearly prefer to play with two bigs as much as possible and they don't have the wing depth to play much that way even if they wanted to.

It's not that I don't think Thompson can be had for cheap, it's that he doesn't check any specific box. He's a competent depth big, but he's not a roller, spacer, rebounder, rim protector or versatile defender.

Maybe Robinson fits in their price range, maybe not. If he does, he'd make more sense than Thompson, because at least he proves athleticism/rebounding.

I don't think a stretch four is ahead of versatile, defensive wing. Having another versatile, defensive wing will allow him or Leonard to essentially be the stretch four -- would allow Spurs to match up vs. GS more effectively and would allow SA to switch vs. the elite teams more effectively without having the Teletovics on an island when the smart teams utilize their man as the screener in PnRs. Spurs would be a lot more versatile with a versatile wing that can play both ends instead of a one dimensional Teletovic. IMO

[TD 21]

I don't think a stretch four is ahead of versatile, defensive wing. Having another versatile, defensive wing will allow him or Leonard to essentially be the stretch four -- would allow Spurs to match up vs. GS more effectively and would allow SA to switch vs. the elite teams more effectively without having the Teletovics on an island when the smart teams utilize their man as the screener in PnRs. Spurs would be a lot more versatile with a versatile wing that can play both ends instead of a one dimensional Teletovic. IMO

Teletovic is relatively mobile though.

It's not all about the Warriors. They have to be cognizant of the Thunder, Clippers and Cavaliers, too.

[tholdren]

LMA needs to attack and roll more but kawhi attacked plenty but couldn't get a call to save his life.
No one is getting jumper/turnaround/fadeaway calls. Its on leonard for being a kitty cat

[spurtech09]

A lifetime supply of sour grapes for using that as your answer.aw sweet now I can make some wine.....Sour grapes are awesome....