THE SPURS OFFENSE: Strengths and Weaknesses

[cutewizard]

Guys, many of you here have excellent technical knowledge on Basketball, would you share more on the Spurs offense.

Its philosophy, unique features, strengths, weaknesses....evolution through the years, players who are best fitted, players who could benefit with it, etc

In a way that is comprehensive to simple fans like myself (who lack technical basketball know-how).


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


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbcMo6g_HqM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOEtYb2s_wM

Hope to hear from you! Thanks a lot!

[TheMulletMan3000]

Go to YT channel Half Court Hoops and search Spurs.

[TheMulletMan3000]

Coach Daniel also has some stuff on Spurs.

[Solid D]

This is not a troll comment nor personal issue I have but it would make a remarkable difference if Danny Green could regain his three-point shooting accuracy that he had in 2012-13 (.429), 2013-14 (.415), and 2014-15 (.418). His 2015-16 season (.332) was way off.

[Kawhi 5-0]

I suppose this resource-based model fits best as the I/O model (opportunities and threats) involves more of a positioning proposition. The Spurs can't change conferences, etc.

One weakness of the Spurs offense is its imitability. Bud took it to Atlanta. The ball moves in Golden State (Kerr). Brown's approach even has the summer league Sixers looking pretty good.

What's less easy to imitate (and therefore more of a strength) are the player relationships. With Duncan gone, we've lost part of that core. At least we still have Ginobili and Parker to help communicate what has traditionally worked.

Seems like the ball moved less last year.

If I understand Pop's philosophy, the ball movement is to make up for inferior talent and athleticism. It's also to make the other team work on defense.

Our big studs are Kawhi and LaMarcus. LMA
is older and his offensive game is more polished. Kawhi is still finding his groove. Seems like Kawhi has an inordinate amount of trouble in situations that he takes a defender off the dribble (trying to penetrate). I think he will improve on his ability to catch defenders off guard. It's really a mind game at that point. Kawhi still has some growing to do in getting to the basket. Also, he hasn't figured out how to draw fouls in these situations. The more successful he is at beating defenders off the dribble, the more foul calls he will get. He has to prove his dominance before he gets the superstar foul calls.

Gasol will be a nice addition. I think he'll be a nice fit on both ends. We'll be missing Timmy's court awareness and Bobo's passing, but Gasol is an excellent distributor.

--Paul

[BSfromTX]

Spurs offense has always evolved to take advantage of the strengths for that season and any rule changes.

Duncan prime- 4 down
manu prime- pnr
tp and Manu prime- up tempo/penetrate&kick out/ pnr
kawhi, Diaw and aging big three- beautiful game (my favorite)
kawhi and LMA- more iso (stagnant and not my favorite)

just my opinion on what I have seen. This year I HOPE to see the younger players play a lot and be more of a motion offense with more early offense/ fast beaks

[Hoops Czar]

This is not a troll comment nor personal issue I have but it would make a remarkable difference if Danny Green could regain his three-point shooting accuracy that he had in 2012-13 (.429), 2013-14 (.415), and 2014-15 (.418). His 2015-16 season (.332) was way off.

Danny Green is a rhythm shooter playing alongside four ISO players who like to play in the half court. :lol The slow space and lack of floor spacing is why Green struggled shooting during the RS. When the Spurs picked up the pace in the PS, Green found his shot. If he's going to have any success shooting this year, the Spurs are going to have to push the tempo to get Green some transition catch and shoot opportunities because he doesn't excel in a half court offense with very little ball movement. He might have more success playing with the second unit.

[Solid D]

Danny Green is a rhythm shooter playing alongside four ISO players who like to play in the half court. :lol The slow space and lack of floor spacing is why Green struggled shooting during the RS. When the Spurs picked up the pace in the PS, Green found his shot. If he's going to have any success shooting this year, the Spurs are going to have to push the tempo to get Green some transition catch and shoot opportunities because he doesn't excel in a half court offense with very little ball movement. He might have more success playing with the second unit.

You have a valid point but he had a stretch there where he was missing off the fast break, secondary offense and in some of their standard half-court plays, ex. the 1-5 rub, which they've been running since "Hector was a pup." He was clearly off.

[Solid D]

Guys, many of you here have excellent technical knowledge on Basketball, would you share more on the Spurs offense.

Its philosophy, unique features, strengths, weaknesses....evolution through the years, players who are best fitted, players who could benefit with it, etc

In a way that is comprehensive to simple fans like myself (who lack technical basketball know-how).

Hope to hear from you! Thanks a lot!

cutewizard, you ask several questions here and it makes this a very multi-faceted subject. The Spurs have a fairly extensive playbook from what I've seen. When people refer to the Spurs' motion offense, it is sort of misleading because that is a very general statement. Their offense changes from trip to trip down the floor, so they might run a Flex set one time, a 3-2 motion play the next, or run post sets to capitalize on matchups. Regarding their philosophy, there is a pretty decent coaches clinic video of Pop that is good, as I recall. There may be a few of the principles you've heard or noticed over a period of time. Here is that video:


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

[All Mighty Janitor]

I've always referred to the Spurs offense as a motion offense. I not sure how accurate that is so don't quote me. From what I've heard, it has been a motion offense at least since Pop started coaching. The offense has a set of principals that makes it look more free flowing, but can only be pulled off by high IQ players. The most important aspect is to not force the issue (at least early in the shot clock). You need an initial action to get the defense out position (Duncan in the post drawing a double team,or a Tony/Manu pick n roll, taking advantage of a mismatch). After that you take advantage of the scrambling D. You start looking for the best shot possible by moving the ball around taking advantage of the defense trailing behind the play. It sounds simple, but you can mess it up by holding the ball looking to make a play thus allowing the D to get back into position or making a bad pass that gets stolen. This is why you need high IQ players or players how have played in the system for a couple of years(this is why Bonner has stuck around :lol.) Players don't grow up playing like this so they are not used to it. It makes Spurs difficult to replace at times.

Any ways...These are what I think the strengths and weaknesses are when done well:
Strengths:
-generates [E: open]efficient shots.
-makes the defense tried physical and mentally
-everyone gets involved boosting team morale
-allows the team to be competitive even without a star player(like 2015 Hawks). [E: It maximizes a role players effectiveness by allowing them to play to their strengths and minimizes weaknesses.]
-even if the motion stalls, it will still create mismatches that can be exploited
Weaknesses:
-you need smart players to make it work
-can eat up the shot clock looking for a good shot
-because you don't force the issue unless the shot clock is low, the team doesn't draw many fouls
-[E: It takes the ball out of your stars hands thus lowing their stats.] Star players can desire more touches and shots which can disrupt the offense. Need to find unselfish stars then find the balance for team success
-[E: requires a lot of moving around. can tire the offensive players if poorly managed]

That's all I can think of for now. I might add to this later.

[ceperez]

I suppose this resource-based model fits best as the I/O model (opportunities and threats) involves more of a positioning proposition. The Spurs can't change conferences, etc.

One weakness of the Spurs offense is its imitability. Bud took it to Atlanta. The ball moves in Golden State (Kerr). Brown's approach even has the summer league Sixers looking pretty good.

What's less easy to imitate (and therefore more of a strength) are the player relationships. With Duncan gone, we've lost part of that core. At least we still have Ginobili and Parker to help communicate what has traditionally worked.

Seems like the ball moved less last year.

If I understand Pop's philosophy, the ball movement is to make up for inferior talent and athleticism. It's also to make the other team work on defense.

Our big studs are Kawhi and LaMarcus. LMA
is older and his offensive game is more polished. Kawhi is still finding his groove. Seems like Kawhi has an inordinate amount of trouble in situations that he takes a defender off the dribble (trying to penetrate). I think he will improve on his ability to catch defenders off guard. It's really a mind game at that point. Kawhi still has some growing to do in getting to the basket. Also, he hasn't figured out how to draw fouls in these situations. The more successful he is at beating defenders off the dribble, the more foul calls he will get. He has to prove his dominance before he gets the superstar foul calls.

Gasol will be a nice addition. I think he'll be a nice fit on both ends. We'll be missing Timmy's court awareness and Bobo's passing, but Gasol is an excellent distributor.

--Paul

Spurs are going to be hard pressed to re-create the camaraderie of the the 2014 championship team.

GSW has a massive advantage considering the horrible loss to the Cavs, they are seeking revenge just like the Spurs 2014 team. In addition they got Durant who has a good relationship with Curry and Igoudola (from Team USA).

Spurs had Duncan as the glue for everyone, now he's gone. The glue guy for Spurs right now is Mills.

[Hoops Czar]

Spurs are going to be hard pressed to re-create the camaraderie of the the 2014 championship team.

GSW has a massive advantage considering the horrible loss to the Cavs, they are seeking revenge just like the Spurs 2014 team. In addition they got Durant who has a good relationship with Curry and Igoudola (from Team USA).

Spurs had Duncan as the glue for everyone, now he's gone. The glue guy for Spurs right now is Mills.

:lmao

[Kawhi 5-0]

Spurs are going to be hard pressed to re-create the camaraderie of the the 2014 championship team.

GSW has a massive advantage considering the horrible loss to the Cavs, they are seeking revenge just like the Spurs 2014 team. In addition they got Durant who has a good relationship with Curry and Igoudola (from Team USA).

Spurs had Duncan as the glue for everyone, now he's gone. The glue guy for Spurs right now is Mills.

Mills is certainly important. I see him as critical on the defensive end. While he may not be an elite defender in terms of length and size at the PG position, he sets a tone when he enters the game. He expends his energy in the hustle he brings to defending. Cory Joseph did this well also.

Back to our subject of offense, Mills always seems to get to the right spots offensively. There's no hesitation in his movement (cuts) nor in his shot. He's always ready (and looking) to shoot.

Another intangible with Mills is his enthusiasm on the bench. Cleveland is a great example of how this bench enthusiasm spills over to the five on the court. It's a more collegiate atmosphere. That energy is invaluable.

--Paul

[Hoops Czar]

Mills is certainly important. I see him as critical on the defensive end. While he may not be an elite defender in terms of length and size at the PG position, he sets a tone when he enters the game. He expends his energy in the hustle he brings to defending. Cory Joseph did this well also.


:lmao

[cutewizard]

cutewizard, you ask several questions here and it makes this a very multi-faceted subject. The Spurs have a fairly extensive playbook from what I've seen. When people refer to the Spurs' motion offense, it is sort of misleading because that is a very general statement. Their offense changes from trip to trip down the floor, so they might run a Flex set one time, a 3-2 motion play the next, or run post sets to capitalize on matchups. Regarding their philosophy, there is a pretty decent coaches clinic video of Pop that is good, as I recall. There may be a few of the principles you've heard or noticed over a period of time. Here is that video:


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

-----------------------------------------------

Thank you good Sir!

Mabuhay (long live) and more power!

[cutewizard]

I've always referred to the Spurs offense as a motion offense. I not sure how accurate that is so don't quote me. From what I've heard, it has been a motion offense at least since Pop started coaching. The offense has a set of principals that makes it look more free flowing, but can only be pulled off by high IQ players. The most important aspect is to not force the issue (at least early in the shot clock). You need an initial action to get the defense out position (Duncan in the post drawing a double team,or a Tony/Manu pick n roll, taking advantage of a mismatch). After that you take advantage of the scrambling D. You start looking for the best shot possible by moving the ball around taking advantage of the defense trailing behind the play. It sounds simple, but you can mess it up by holding the ball looking to make a play thus allowing the D to get back into position or making a bad pass that gets stolen. This is why you need high IQ players or players how have played in the system for a couple of years(this is why Bonner has stuck around :lol.) Players don't grow up playing like this so they are not used to it. It makes Spurs difficult to replace at times.

Any ways...These are what I think the strengths and weaknesses are when done well:
Strengths:
-generates [E: open]efficient shots.
-makes the defense tried physical and mentally
-everyone gets involved boosting team morale
-allows the team to be competitive even without a star player(like 2015 Hawks). [E: It maximizes a role players effectiveness by allowing them to play to their strengths and minimizes weaknesses.]
-even if the motion stalls, it will still create mismatches that can be exploited
Weaknesses:
-you need smart players to make it work
-can eat up the shot clock looking for a good shot
-because you don't force the issue unless the shot clock is low, the team doesn't draw many fouls
-[E: It takes the ball out of your stars hands thus lowing their stats.] Star players can desire more touches and shots which can disrupt the offense. Need to find unselfish stars then find the balance for team success
-[E: requires a lot of moving around. can tire the offensive players if poorly managed]

That's all I can think of for now. I might add to this later.

---------------------------------------------

Thank you!

[Snaq O'Meal]

I've always referred to the Spurs offense as a motion offense. I not sure how accurate that is so don't quote me. From what I've heard, it has been a motion offense at least since Pop started coaching. The offense has a set of principals that makes it look more free flowing, but can only be pulled off by high IQ players. The most important aspect is to not force the issue (at least early in the shot clock). You need an initial action to get the defense out position (Duncan in the post drawing a double team,or a Tony/Manu pick n roll, taking advantage of a mismatch). After that you take advantage of the scrambling D. You start looking for the best shot possible by moving the ball around taking advantage of the defense trailing behind the play. It sounds simple, but you can mess it up by holding the ball looking to make a play thus allowing the D to get back into position or making a bad pass that gets stolen. This is why you need high IQ players or players how have played in the system for a couple of years(this is why Bonner has stuck around :lol.) Players don't grow up playing like this so they are not used to it. It makes Spurs difficult to replace at times.

Any ways...These are what I think the strengths and weaknesses are when done well:
Strengths:
-generates [E: open]efficient shots.
-makes the defense tried physical and mentally
-everyone gets involved boosting team morale
-allows the team to be competitive even without a star player(like 2015 Hawks). [E: It maximizes a role players effectiveness by allowing them to play to their strengths and minimizes weaknesses.]
-even if the motion stalls, it will still create mismatches that can be exploited
Weaknesses:
-you need smart players to make it work
-can eat up the shot clock looking for a good shot
-because you don't force the issue unless the shot clock is low, the team doesn't draw many fouls
-[E: It takes the ball out of your stars hands thus lowing their stats.] Star players can desire more touches and shots which can disrupt the offense. Need to find unselfish stars then find the balance for team success
-[E: requires a lot of moving around. can tire the offensive players if poorly managed]

That's all I can think of for now. I might add to this later.

In the early days, Pop's offence was primarily 4 Down.

It was only after Pop witnessed Magnano's Flex Offence first hand, used by Argentina to defeat the USA, that he began implementing his own Motion Offence. And he had the perfect piece to implement it in Ginobili.

[All Mighty Janitor]

In the early days, Pop's offence was primarily 4 Down.

It was only after Pop witnessed Magnano's Flex Offence first hand, used by Argentina to defeat the USA, that he began implementing his own Motion Offence. And he had the perfect piece to implement it in Ginobili.
I know that the offense was 4 down, but were the offensive principals there early on? For example, did the offense look to only take wide open shots or was there more a focus of forcing the issue to draw fouls?

[Solid D]

I know that the offense was 4 down, but were the offensive principals there early on? For example, did the offense look to only take wide open shots or was there more a focus of forcing the issue to draw fouls?

Sure, the principles were already there. Just because the Argentina NT ran a lot of flex motion offense, doesn't mean that Pop didn't already use motion offenses. There are lots of different motion offenses although they all eventually boil down to read and react 5-0ut, 4-out/1-in, 3-out/2-in, or 2-out/3-in motion (the numbers refer to how many are "out" on the perimeter and how many players are "in" toward the low blocks or baseline). Remember, Pop was influenced by Larry Brown (who learned from Dean Smith) who ran the N. Carolina Motion Offense with a lot of drive and kick action.

[All Mighty Janitor]

Sure, the principles were already there. Just because the Argentina NT ran a lot of flex motion offense, doesn't mean that Pop didn't already use motion offenses. There are lots of different motion offenses although they all eventually boil down to read and react 5-0ut, 4-out/1-in, 3-out/2-in, or 2-out/3-in motion (the numbers refer to how many are "out" on the perimeter and how many players are "in" toward the low blocks or baseline). Remember, Pop was influenced by Larry Brown (who learned from Dean Smith) who ran the N. Carolina Motion Offense with a lot of drive and kick action.
Yeah, that's what I suspected. Thanks for the conformation :toast

[NikosChelsea7]

754768287028969472

[cutewizard]

The Triangle Offense seems to be a good idea, what do you think guys?

[All Mighty Janitor]

The Triangle Offense seems to be a good idea, what do you think guys?
I don't know a whole lot about the Triangle, but from what I heard, it doesn't generate many 3 point opportunities. If we want to make our offense more explosive we should be looking to add 3s where we can. Another problem I've heard is that the triangle can be predictable. I heard that teams have "figured it out" to a point where you can't use it all the time. Our motion offense isn't as predictable as the Triangle, but they both create good shot opportunities for everybody on the floor. We already use elements of the triangle in our sets; I'm not sure we should go out of our way to change the offense with little effect on the type of shots we take.

Just saying what I know and heard to add to the discussion; You'd be better off listening to someone else who is more confidant with their knowledge of the Triangle Offense.

[YGWHI]

The Triangle Offense seems to be a good idea, what do you think guys?

Just because of Pau's familiarity with the Triangle and his passing ability.

But this PnR article talks about this offense like completely opposite of the Iso-Ball when in fact, the Lakers played a lot of Iso with Kobe in their starting lineup.

If you have on your team, extremely efficient iso scorers like Kawhi and LMA, you should play Iso with them at some point. And mix it up with Motion, like Phil did with the Triangle and Kobe.

[tholdren]

This is not a troll comment nor personal issue I have but it would make a remarkable difference if Danny Green could regain his three-point shooting accuracy that he had in 2012-13 (.429), 2013-14 (.415), and 2014-15 (.418). His 2015-16 season (.332) was way off.
Still don't have anyone that controls the pace. THAT is the issue.

[SpursforSix]

Guys, many of you here have excellent technical knowledge on Basketball, would you share more on the Spurs offense.

Its philosophy, unique features, strengths, weaknesses....evolution through the years, players who are best fitted, players who could benefit with it, etc

In a way that is comprehensive to simple fans like myself (who lack technical basketball know-how).

Hope to hear from you! Thanks a lot!

Thanks for asking. I spend quite a bit of time analyzing advanced metrics and plugging them into some forecasting models I've built. It's fairly complicated but I'll try to explain.

The Spurs have a point guard that dribbles too much and doesn't see the court very well.

[Solid D]

Still don't have anyone that controls the pace. THAT is the issue.

It might HELP the pace if Pop decides to go away from feeding the post so often, with fewer isos and quicker tempo. It's doable with the current personnel.

(Unless you have an axe to grind and current personnel won't ever make you happy.)

[Spurtacular]

Old Gasoft doesn't excite me; and he breaks down by the playoffs nowadays.

[Solid D]

Thanks for asking. I spend quite a bit of time analyzing advanced metrics and plugging them into some forecasting models I've built. It's fairly complicated but I'll try to explain.

The Spurs have a point guard that dribbles too much and doesn't see the court very well.

I think TP is trying to model himself too much after Steve Nash and...well, he's not Steve Nash. Don't get me wrong, I think Tony is a great player, who has really helped the Spurs to win championships. But lately, he's been dominating the ball a bit too much, even though his minutes have been reduced dramatically (fewest min/game in '15-16). He tried to impress upon everyone that the show was not called "Cooking with Timmy."

[SpursforSix]

I think TP is trying to model himself too much after Steve Nash and...well, he's not Steve Nash. Don't get me wrong, I think Tony is a great player, who has really helped the Spurs to win championships. But lately, he's been dominating the ball a bit too much. He tried to impress upon everyone that the show was not called "Cooking with Timmy."

Tony is probably still as good a ball handler as prime Nash but lacks the other two components that made Nash such a weapon. Passing and and the three ball.

[tholdren]

It might HELP the pace if Pop decides to go away from feeding the post so often, with fewer isos and quicker tempo. It's doable with the current personnel.

(Unless you have an axe to grind and current personnel won't ever make you happy.)

you got a shot chart from the spurs for the season and the playoffs? I would like to see where the shots came from. It's not personnel as much as it is the IQ of the personnel.

[Phenomanul]

The Triangle Offense seems to be a good idea, what do you think guys?

The effectiveness of the Triangle offense has waned now that zone defenses are allowed.

[Solid D]

you got a shot chart from the spurs for the season and the playoffs? I would like to see where the shots came from. It's not personnel as much as it is the IQ of the personnel.

Unless you can present a chart of the IQs of said personnel, I refuse to attempt to present a season shot chart.

[tholdren]

Unless you can present a chart of the IQs of said personnel, I refuse to attempt to present a season shot chart.
Refuse all you want - Hoop-sense from LMA and KL was terrible. Which is why neither of them have led a team deep in to the playoffs. If they both continue to try and outshoot the rest of the league it will be a 90s repeat all over again. One of those guys has to get consistent meaningful buckets or get to the line. Softness is a smarts flaw. They both have it.

[Solid D]

Refuse all you want - Hoop-sense from LMA and KL was terrible. Which is why neither of them have led a team deep in to the playoffs. If they both continue to try and outshoot the rest of the league it will be a 90s repeat all over again. One of those guys has to get consistent meaningful buckets or get to the line. Softness is a smarts flaw. They both have it.

Yeah, yeah, yeah...except that the MVP of the '14 Finals and '16 Defensive POY is not soft, IQ wise nor in physical imposition. But we all see the axe you are grinding and understand your POV loud and clear.

[tholdren]

Yeah, yeah, yeah...except that the MVP of the '14 Finals and '16 Defensive POY is not soft, IQ wise nor in physical imposition. But we all see the axe you are grinding and understand your POV loud and clear.
bringing up 2014 is ignorant. Tim led that charge and with Tim's decline, ironically - so did KL ability to win a meaningful series. But you fail to mention game 6 the year before when KL choked. There is no "axe" other than tired of reading kids views of a good player who hasn't won a thing being compared to great players. His IQ is shitty as he's bigger, faster, and stronger than almost everyone his position yet he settles for jumpers when it matters. That is stupid. It's much like lebron. Its much like Kyrie Irvings three to win the ring. Its playground ball.

[Solid D]

bringing up 2014 is ignorant. Tim led that charge and with Tim's decline, ironically - so did KL ability to win a meaningful series. But you fail to mention game 6 the year before when KL choked. There is no "axe" other than tired of reading kids views of a good player who hasn't won a thing being compared to great players. His IQ is shitty as he's bigger, faster, and stronger than almost everyone his position yet he settles for jumpers when it matters. That is stupid. It's much like lebron. Its much like Kyrie Irvings three to win the ring. Its playground ball.

The ignorant card is sort of last ditch, and I do mean ditch. Enjoy your position.

[tholdren]

The ignorant card is sort of last ditch, and I do mean ditch. Enjoy your position.
Not a last ditch. Just not a real strong argument for you or KL. His offense is low IQ. His defense is great. Quite the falloff from 2014 FMVP to early dump the past 2 seasons. One would expect him to get better.

[GSH]

The effectiveness of the Triangle offense has waned now that zone defenses are allowed.


I don't know how this turned into a discussion of the triangle, and I really don't want to know. But I saw this comment. I'm not sure that the triangle has ever been successful for a team that didn't have Tex Winter holding a clipboard.

[Solid D]

His offense is low IQ. His defense is great. Quite the falloff from 2014 FMVP to early dump the past 2 seasons. One would expect him to get better.

Hopefully, this message board and my brief discussion with you has served as therapeutic in your journey toward dealing with your disappointments. If not, then just add it to your list.

[tholdren]

Hopefully, this message board and my brief discussion with you has served as therapeutic in your journey toward dealing with your disappointments. If not, then just add it to your list.
You lost. citing something that happened 2 years ago to prop a player is waving the flag.

[BillMc]

I don't know how this turned into a discussion of the triangle, and I really don't want to know. But I saw this comment. I'm not sure that the triangle has ever been successful for a team that didn't have Tex Winter holding a clipboard.

This

[Solid D]

You lost. citing something that happened 2 years ago to prop a player is waving the flag.

Lol :)

[tholdren]

Lol :)
Derrick Rose for KL straight up - your logic = Rose is better since he actually WON the mvp. Doesn't make sense does it?

[jARS mEsH sEt]

bringing up 2014 is ignorant. Tim led that charge and with Tim's decline, ironically - so did KL ability to win a meaningful series. But you fail to mention game 6 the year before when KL choked. There is no "axe" other than tired of reading kids views of a good player who hasn't won a thing being compared to great players. His IQ is shitty as he's bigger, faster, and stronger than almost everyone his position yet he settles for jumpers when it matters. That is stupid. It's much like lebron. Its much like Kyrie Irvings three to win the ring. Its playground ball.

I agree with you on KL having relatively low basketball IQ at the moment. He can't facilitate at an elite level because he doesn't see the floor in that way yet. But Lebron? Are you kidding me? Lebron sees the floor masterfully and makes everyone around him better. It's note even close. Don't lump lebron in with kawhi.

[tholdren]

I agree with you on KL having relatively low basketball IQ at the moment. He can't facilitate at an elite level because he doesn't see the floor in that way yet. But Lebron? Are you kidding me? Lebron sees the floor masterfully and makes everyone around him better. It's note even close. Don't lump lebron in with kawhi.

LeBron has a terrible way of dribbling out the shot clock and launching a three in pivotal moments. No comment on lebrons court vision - just a comment about his shot selection.

[cutewizard]

Thanks for asking. I spend quite a bit of time analyzing advanced metrics and plugging them into some forecasting models I've built. It's fairly complicated but I'll try to explain.

The Spurs have a point guard that dribbles too much and doesn't see the court very well.


----------------------------------------------------

Can Kyle Anderson thrive as our point guard??