Lowe: Seven takeaways from the Spurs series win over Houston..

[spursistan]

863052449581588481

[Chinook]

Fuck Lowe. Now let me read this article.

[spursistan]

Fuck Lowe. Now let me read this article.
Some nice words on LDN, though..

[Seventyniner]

I hadn't thought to compare Ryan Anderson to Matt Bonner before that article, actually.

[testies]

This idiot predicted Lockets in 6

[Chinook]

Some nice words on LDN, though..

:cry I take all back, Zach! :cry

[MarCowMar]

Best article I've read yet on the series. Loads of details.

[Pocho La Pantera]

Manu Ginobili for ever...

[Mr. Body]

This idiot predicted Lockets in 6

This. He's been wrong about the Spurs all season. He didn't think we'd get to 50 wins.

[dabom]

Lowe taking a shit on Chinook with those takes. :lmao

[Horse]

I hadn't thought to compare Ryan Anderson to Matt Bonner before that article, actually.

Fuck that I would take the red rocket over that big-nosed fuck anyday.

[SAGirl]

Lowe has been made to eat shit by the Spurs pretty much.

That said it was a very good article... one of his better ones from recent memory (except one other he did highlighting Manu's career? I can't recall if that was him.. anyways...)

He did highlight Gasol who I think was great in the games the team won, contesting shots right at the rim.

And he also commended Pop playing Anderson, Simmons and Murray through the season, specially finding some minutes for Anderson and Murray, even when they spent large chunks of the season outside of the rotation bc you are bound to hit some snags in a deep playoff run that may require on of them to play more minutes than coach thought. So Pop did get his well earned recognition for having guys, deep bench guys ready to play.

He liked Murray... as do we all. :toast

Murray is going to be good. His feel and craft jump off the screen. The Spurs' point guard situation is one of the most important short- and long-term questions in the league. Tony Parker (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/1015/tony-parker)'s status is uncertain. Patty Mills (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/4004/patty-mills) is a free agent, and the Spurs want him back. He is an important part now of their culture. It's tempting to suggest the Spurs can get by with Mills and Murray as place-holders until they figure out a permanent answer in the starting lineup. San Antonio can clearly win 55-plus games in the regular season that way. I'm beginning to think they could do it starting one of Matt Bonner's favorite sandwiches on the wing.
But can they compete with Golden State and LeBron with a Mills-Murray-and-maybe-Parker trio? We'll see in the next round whether Mills and Murray are enough. Leonard's prime, and Aldridge's early 30s, are not to be wasted.

Got to love the Danny reference:

• Danny Green (http://www.espn.com/nba/player/_/id/3988/danny-green)'s attempts at dribbling used to be a reliable source of humor. They are still sort of awkward and slow, but Green can do stuff off the bounce now. It has been perhaps the most improved part of his game this season. He is decisive and confident going by guys closing out on him, and acting without hesitation makes up for a lot of athletic limitations.
Also: Harden's closeouts in this series were a joke, from the jump.
• Green's transition defense remains the most randomly awesome skill in the NBA.

[DAF86]

You can tell Lowe is one of the few media guys that actually knows the Spurs and doesn't just throw lazy cliche phrases.

[Seventyniner]

Fuck that I would take the red rocket over that big-nosed fuck anyday.

Especially since Ryan Anderson is making $20 million this season (almost 1/5 of the cap) and Bonner never made over $4 million in any season.

The Rockets' problem was paying and playing Anderson as a 2nd or 3rd option and a full-time starter. Bonner was at his best as the 4th or 5th option and as a bench player.

Plus Bonner isn't one of those under-the-radar dirty players.

[DMC]

This is all bullshit. If Harden gets that shot off in game 5 and the Rockets win in 6, Lowe uses the same points to say why the Spurs lost.

It all hinges on a missed shot here, a block there, a twisted ankle, a rotation, a missed defensive assignment, some hot shooting on a couple nights... Most of the shit Lowe mentions are just post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.

[DAF86]

This is all bullshit. If Harden gets that shot off in game 5 and the Rockets win in 6, Lowe uses the same points to say why the Spurs lost.

It all hinges on a missed shot here, a block there, a twisted ankle, a rotation, a missed defensive assignment, some hot shooting on a couple nights... Most of the shit Lowe mentions are just post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.

What if one guy says "Curry is an overrated Kobe wannabe" and, just after a season, Curry ends up having some of the most efficient basketball seasons of all-time? What kind of fallacy is that?

[Chinook]

Especially since Ryan Anderson is making $20 million this season (almost 1/5 of the cap) and Bonner never made over $4 million in any season.

The Rockets' problem was paying and playing Anderson as a 2nd or 3rd option and a full-time starter. Bonner was at his best as the 4th or 5th option and as a bench player.

Plus Bonner isn't one of those under-the-radar dirty players.

The Rockets were dirty as shit in those last three games. MDA's comment about hitting the Spurs (or whatever) was more on-the-nose than I realized.

[Chinook]

What if one guy says "Curry is an overrated Kobe wannabe" and, just after a season, Curry ends up having some of the most efficient basketball seasons of all-time? What kind of fallacy is that?

They call it a manibus crassus fallacy.

[DAF86]

They call it a manibus crassus fallacy.

:lmao

[SAGirl]

The Rockets were dirty as shit in those last three games. MDA's comment about hitting the Spurs (or whatever) was more on-the-nose than I realized.
Agreed.
They obviously refused to call fouls on Harden and he took advantage.
Let's not forget Nene grabbed Dedmon by the neck.
Also, Ariza kicked Danny last night while he was down after that steal.
I am sure I am missing things. but those stand out.

[Phenomanul]

Agreed.
They obviously refused to call fouls on Harden and he took advantage.
Let's not forget Nene grabbed Dedmon by the neck.
Also, Ariza kicked Danny last night while he was down after that steal.
I am sure I am missing things. but those stand out.

Someone, can't remember who, undercut LMA on a putback dunk attempt... and LMA ended up falling chest first on to the floor...

[ErnestLynch]

863052449581588481

Shit article. Hack writer.

[Blackjack]

This is all bullshit. If Harden gets that shot off in game 5 and the Rockets win in 6, Lowe uses the same points to say why the Spurs lost.

It all hinges on a missed shot here, a block there, a twisted ankle, a rotation, a missed defensive assignment, some hot shooting on a couple nights... Most of the shit Lowe mentions are just post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

Well played. :tu

[SquawkinHawkBigCock]

What if one guy says "Curry is an overrated Kobe wannabe" and, just after a season, Curry ends up having some of the most efficient basketball seasons of all-time? What kind of fallacy is that?:lmao

[MaNu4Tres]

Meh. Lowe is great, one of the best writers. But I've found him off on several Spurs takes and I don't blame him since he covers such a wide demographic.

There's people on this board who have more Spurs sense than he does.

[apalisoc_9]

Lowe is great. Fantastic really. He's got a better sense and understanding of the spurs than most vanilla cliche guys but like with most NBA writers and personalities...You're never going to be able to watch a single team play 82 games.

He's been off with the spurs for like a lot but that's common with second-tier teams in terms of popularity.

[pgardn]

"Lowe has been off concerning the Spurs"

How about we say that about 95% of this board with the other 5% just posting cheers.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

DMC. Using latin and claiming a fallacy ignorantly is about as pseudo-intellectual as one can be.

When the Spurs change their pick and roll defenses and the Rocket's efficiency on pnr decreases that is not just happenstance. Frankly arguing post hoc ergo propter hoc when the mechanics are explained in detail with visual evidence is monumentally ignorant.

Similarly, Ryan Anderson and his limitations on defense were explained in detail and the mechanics and quantity of how the Spurs took advantage of it were well fleshed out.

Further, claiming that Lowe could have used these exact points had the Rockets won is plain stupid. Only using the above two examples underscores this quite clearly. The Spurs improving their pnr defense and the Rockets PFs shitty defense would not meet the theme of a Rockets win.

Frankly, it looks like you went to a logic website and picked out a fallacy despite not knowing in the slightest how to apply it and posted the latin in attempt to look intelligent. I have come to expect facile analysis and regurgitated takes from you but this is perhaps your most pathetic yet. I pity you.

[sananspursfan21]

Rob Lowe is a jackass!

[DMC]

DMC. Using latin and claiming a fallacy ignorantly is about as pseudo-intellectual as one can be.

When the Spurs change their pick and roll defenses and the Rocket's efficiency on pnr decreases that is not just happenstance. Frankly arguing post hoc ergo propter hoc when the mechanics are explained in detail with visual evidence is monumentally ignorant.

Similarly, Ryan Anderson and his limitations on defense were explained in detail and the mechanics and quantity of how the Spurs took advantage of it were well fleshed out.

Further, claiming that Lowe could have used these exact points had the Rockets won is plain stupid. Only using the above two examples underscores this quite clearly. The Spurs improving their pnr defense and the Rockets PFs shitty defense would not meet the theme of a Rockets win.

Frankly, it looks like you went to a logic website and picked out a fallacy despite not knowing in the slightest how to apply it and posted the latin in attempt to look intelligent. I have come to expect facile analysis and regurgitated takes from you but this is perhaps your most pathetic yet. I pity you.

Happenstance is that one block here, one missed shot there made the difference in game 5. Had the Rockets won that game, nothing he said would have mattered. All of it would have still occurred but the narrative would be how the Rockets overcame a lower seeding to beat the mighty Spurs at home and put them on the brink of elimination. The game is full of mechanics, the winner seems to get the nod. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Never confront me again.

[DMC]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc?

Well played. :tu

Tu quoque..