View Full Version : Small Ball Cost This Team
blaze89
05-25-2006, 12:12 AM
Pop, is that you? I knew you sound familiar. You've come to the right place to get some feedback about what went wrong in the series, but try to LEARN from your mistakes. You can't persuade anyone that you were right, because you are trying to do that from a fishing boat. Everybody makes mistakes, only smart people learn from them. Ok? Ok.
Yes Pop, come to a message board where we have numerous Monday Morning Quarterbacks (what would be the basketball equivalent to that phrase?) all diagramming plays on what the Spurs should have done.
MadDog73
05-25-2006, 09:11 AM
We play Nazr and/or Rasho significant minutes, and we lose in 5.
That's my story and I'm sticking with it.
1Parker1
05-25-2006, 09:29 AM
You know what I just realized????
Where the hell was.........Oberto?! I recall game 3 (?) where he played significant minutes and, despite getting ticky-tacky fouls, was a pretty good rebounder, defender on Dirk. I also recall Pop saying in the postgame that he liked what he saw from Oberto and that he would be playing him more. I can understand why Pop decided to go with small ball with the way Nazr/Rasho were playing. But I don't understand is why he didn't play Oberto? :wtf
DarrinS
05-25-2006, 09:41 AM
Are you guys STILL talking about this?? OMG.
I'll concede that if we played a center, we have better interior D and we have slightly better rebounding.
There is a cost for doing this.
1) You give up some offensive ability
2) You potentially put Tim in foul trouble (he can't guard Howard or Nowitzki)
3) You remove a perimeter defender and Dallas is a good shooting team
Pop has explained this over and over. Wha't so hard to understand? I saw Nazr play in game 2 and saw a VERY quick run by the Mavs.
Last time I checked, Pop has 3 rings as a HC and this board's members have 0.
SLOVENIAN 8
05-25-2006, 09:44 AM
Spurs lost with Dallas becouse of stupid coaching, without centers under the basket, in all this games the defens was not like before and dallas bitches have free road to the rim. Run and gun, and now Phoenix beat them becouse they play without real centers the whole seasno and some france guy Diaw killed them...
Not even try Rasho , i dont count that shit 1s playing time in whole game : Stupid, stupid. 7 players only in 7 games bullshit....
Pop has explained this over and over. .
:lmao Yes, he is so smart. As I said, explanations from a fishing boat are less... convincing. He didn't even try playing OUR game, so we will never know. And this is the ABSOLUTE FACT: WE WILL NEVER KNOW. If Pop says, that big ball wouldn't work, I can choose not to believe him. I have every right to do that, especially because he lost the series with his smart approach. His approach was not good enough.
So can we write down two facts and all agree with them?
1. We don't know, what would be with big ball approach.
2. Pop's approach was not good enough to win series.
strangeweather
05-25-2006, 10:40 AM
Run and gun, and now Phoenix beat them becouse they play without real centers the whole seasno and some france guy Diaw killed them...
Not even try Rasho , i dont count that shit 1s playing time in whole game :
Yeah, as similar as Rasho and Diaw's games are, clearly the same approach would have worked for us with Rasho. :rolleyes
SLOVENIAN 8
05-25-2006, 10:51 AM
Yeah, as similar as Rasho and Diaw's games are, clearly the same approach would have worked for us with Rasho. :rolleyes
I am trying to tell that Phoenix play that type of game the whole season, and they are good in that, but Spurs did not play small ball complete season so it is hard to win if you change the lineup in last 7 games like that, 7 players play all the time and other seat on bench and dont even try with them.... suicide...
strangeweather
05-25-2006, 10:56 AM
I am trying to tell that Phoenix play that type of game the whole season, and they are good in that, but Spurs did not play small ball complete season so it is hard to win if you change the lineup in last 7 games like that, 7 players play all the time and other seat on bench and dont even try with them.... suicide...
It's normal for teams to shorten their rotation in the playoffs -- we really only used 7 guys to beat Detroit last year. And in the past, we've often switched our rotation to matchup better with other teams.
The real problem is that Rasho was a very poor matchup, Nazr was ineffective and mistake-prone, and when we went to a smaller lineup, we didn't have a large SF or mobile PF that was good enough. Horry was the best we had, and he looked old, so we ended up playing even smaller guys.
We need to plug that hole in the roster this offseason.
DarrinS
05-25-2006, 11:17 AM
:lmao Yes, he is so smart. As I said, explanations from a fishing boat are less... convincing. He didn't even try playing OUR game, so we will never know. And this is the ABSOLUTE FACT: WE WILL NEVER KNOW. If Pop says, that big ball wouldn't work, I can choose not to believe him. I have every right to do that, especially because he lost the series with his smart approach. His approach was not good enough.
So can we write down two facts and all agree with them?
1. We don't know, what would be with big ball approach.
2. Pop's approach was not good enough to win series.
You forgot another fact
3. In game 2, Nazr played about 12 minutes, and the Spurs got torched in game 2.
travis2
05-25-2006, 11:43 AM
So can we write down two facts and all agree with them?
1. We don't know, what would be with big ball approach.
2. Pop's approach was not good enough to win series.
1. Know? No. Have a pretty damn good idea? Yeah, we do.
2. No, that's not true. What is true is that the execution was not sufficient. Since you can't claim the execution of the plan was perfect, you can't claim the plan itself was insufficient.
strangeweather
05-25-2006, 11:46 AM
You forgot another fact
3. In game 2, Nazr played about 12 minutes, and the Spurs got torched in game 2.
Don't forget -- he managed to collect 4 fouls in that span.
1. Know? No. Have a pretty damn good idea? Yeah, we do.No, we don't. Half of the coaching staff was FOR big ball. I guess they are stupid and don't know the team. :lol
2. No, that's not true. What is true is that the execution was not sufficient. Since you can't claim the execution of the plan was perfect, you can't claim the plan itself was insufficient.
Combined with #1 - with big ball this execution might be sufficient. We will never know. Pop's fault.
You forgot another fact
3. In game 2, Nazr played about 12 minutes, and the Spurs got torched in game 2.
No, I didn't forget. It's just a stupid fact, so I didn't mention it. You see, I don't write stupid facts. But you can do that, no problem. :lol
travis2
05-25-2006, 11:53 AM
No, we don't. Half of the coaching staff was FOR big ball. I guess they are stupid and don't know the team. :lol
Combined with #1 - with big ball this execution might be sufficient. We will never know. Pop's fault.
Half the coaching staff? Your source for this?
DarrinS
05-25-2006, 11:54 AM
No, we don't. Half of the coaching staff was FOR big ball. I guess they are stupid and don't know the team. :lol
Combined with #1 - with big ball this execution might be sufficient. We will never know. Pop's fault.
We are ONE FOUL AWAY from WINNING the series! WTF is it that you people don't get?
travis2
05-25-2006, 11:55 AM
No, I didn't forget. It's just a stupid fact, so I didn't mention it.
No, it's an inconvenient fact.
We are ONE FOUL AWAY from WINNING the series! WTF is it that you people don't get?
I don't get it. I don't understand how can this be mentioned all the time? Look... if I give you a stupid example, maybe you'll understand. Suppose we are playing against Portland in round 1. We lose the series 4-3, actually the series look EXACTLY like the last one against Mavs. You could use the same argument, saying that we were just one foul away from winning the series so the tactics just HAD to be good. You know that would be VERY wrong. Now to get back to reality and away from that stupid example - we are talking about Mavs here. But the idea is the same: we could be playing tactics that would make the difference between us and Mavs BIGGER - in our favor, of course. Now, I don't need you to agree with arguments in this topic - but do you understand the idea in last few sentences? How close we were to be playing against Suns now is not that important, if we were (somehow) capable to be even better. You don't have to agree, that we had better options, but you have to see that the "one foul away" argument is not valid! If we were better, that foul wouldn't mean anything.
No, it's an inconvenient fact.
I don't accept this term. There are no inconvenient facts. But I might have addressed this particular stupid fact in this thread before... :rolleyes
Melmart1
05-25-2006, 12:09 PM
Small ball didn't work for the Spurs because they made stupid mental mistakes down the stretch of close games. They couldn't inbound a ball or made a dumb foul. There was also some obvious home cooking in games 3 and 4. But it gave us a chance to win despite not having the proper personnell to carry it off correctly. It was our only alternative. You can NOT go big against the Mavs with Rasho or Nazr, period.
Blaming Pop does not give the Mavs credit for being a good team. It's ridiculous and childish to assume that the Mavs did nothing to win this series and it was all on the Spurs and their coaching.
It was our only alternative.
No. Let's just stop this here, coz it doesn't go anywhere. Our team always has more alternatives because we are a great team. Only worst teams have one alternative.
Blaming Pop does not give the Mavs credit for being a good team. It's ridiculous and childish to assume that the Mavs did nothing to win this series and it was all on the Spurs and their coaching.
Maybe someone said that, but not me and I haven't seen it in this thread. Mavs are a great team, but so are Spurs. We can not change Mavs. We can not make them worse. The only thing we can do is, to make us better. Or the way we play, that is.
travis2
05-25-2006, 12:54 PM
I don't accept this term. There are no inconvenient facts. But I might have addressed this particular stupid fact in this thread before... :rolleyes
No, it's inconvenient to your childish worldview. So you ignore it and/or call it "stupid". Doesn't make it go away or make it less relevant.
Jimcs50
05-25-2006, 01:30 PM
Travis, this is ludicrous, Pop was wrong, and I will never forgive him for it, and nothing or no one can convince me otherwise. The point is dubious, because we have no way of winning this argument.
I just hope that the Suns win the series, because I would stop watching the NBA if Mark Cuban got hold of the Larrry O'Brien Trophy, for Cuban, as Machiavelli before him held, only success and glory really matter, and the means are insignificant.
travis2
05-25-2006, 01:34 PM
Travis, this is ludicrous, Pop was wrong, and I will never forgive him for it, and nothing or no one can convince me otherwise. The point is dubious, because we have no way of winning this argument.
Fine. I think you and your cohorts are wrong and nothing or no one can convince me otherwise.
End of argument.
No, it's inconvenient to your childish worldview. So you ignore it and/or call it "stupid". Doesn't make it go away or make it less relevant.
But even so, I might still addressed it and it is your chilidish worldview, why you choose to repeat it over and over without noticing it was already answered. Do you want it one more time? The TEAM was playing bad. B-A-D The T-E-A-M. Nobody said in this topic, that another center in the game can solve the situation by himself. They are role players. R-O-L-E. Role players can't do shit for you when you are 30 down. The whole team needs to be playing better. I'm sure you understand now. Actually, I'm not sure, only very optimistic.
Fine. I think you and your cohorts are wrong and nothing or no one can convince me otherwise.
End of argument.
Fair enough. Why are we even fighting here, in an argument that can't be won? :depressed
MadDog73
05-25-2006, 01:38 PM
Man, I hope all these Pop haters just quit watching the Spurs and become Piston fans or something...
Those who hate Pop will have to live with him for the foreseeable future.
Can't take it?!? Find another team.
velik_m
05-25-2006, 02:13 PM
Man, I hope all these Pop haters just quit watching the Spurs and become Piston fans or something...
Those who hate Pop will have to live with him for the foreseeable future.
Can't take it?!? Find another team.
Just because you disagree with someone on a particular issue, doesn't mean you hate him.
DarrinS
05-25-2006, 02:13 PM
Man, I hope all these Pop haters just quit watching the Spurs and become Piston fans or something...
Those who hate Pop will have to live with him for the foreseeable future.
Can't take it?!? Find another team.
3 Championships
5th all-time playoff win percentage
Pop is clearly incompetent. Fire his ass!
Jimcs50
05-25-2006, 02:34 PM
Fine. I think you and your cohorts are wrong and nothing or no one can convince me otherwise.
End of argument.
I have cohorts????? Cool, I always wanted to have cohorts.
:)
Jimcs50
05-25-2006, 02:35 PM
Man, I hope all these Pop haters just quit watching the Spurs and become Piston fans or something...
Those who hate Pop will have to live with him for the foreseeable future.
Can't take it?!? Find another team.
Fine, you gonna take your ball and go home now?
:spin
Obstructed_View
05-25-2006, 11:45 PM
At the end of the day. I firmly believe that adhering to the Mavs style of basketball is what cost this team.
I didn't read this whole thread, but I seem to remember AJ rotating three seven footers at the center position. The Spurs didn't adhere to anything but a flawed philosophy.
Obstructed_View
05-25-2006, 11:47 PM
3 Championships
5th all-time playoff win percentage
Pop is clearly incompetent. Fire his ass!
Please can the sarcasm and give a good reason why you don't play either of the centers, even when Horry and Duncan are in foul trouble. How does Oberto jump ahead of them in the rotation? He isn't faster, he isn't a better defender, he isn't a better shooter or rebounder.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.