Two things about Tim

[Brodels]

I'm watching last night's Sonics game right now, and I noticed something about Duncan.

In past years, fans have pleaded with Duncan to come away from the basket and face up so he could do some damage without always being faced with double teams. It seems to me that so far this season he is playing away from the basket a lot.

I understand the need to create some space, but he has the greatest array of post moves in the whole game. He can drop a hook or take that turnaround or throw an up and under in. He'll have to continue to mix up his game, but I would like to see him get the ball in deep post position more of the time. Teams will have to double team him in that situation, and the other Spurs should get good looks.

It's well known that when Duncan gets the ball in the post, he often tends to hold it for quite a while, survey the situation, and either make his move or find an open teammate. Sometimes he needs to catch the ball in the post and immediately make his move without thinking. He's just too good to be waiting for double teams to come. He could avoid many of them if he would make his move quickly at least some of the time.

I know these are well-known Tim-isms, but I think that Duncan could minimize the effect of poor games like last night's if he aggressively made his move right away and played closer to the basket when his jumper/bank shot isn't falling.

Thoughts?

[Phenomanul]

I agree with your assesment.... Kori should let him know at the next press conference...

[timvp]

I'm watching last night's Sonics game right now, and I noticed something about Duncan.

In past years, fans have pleaded with Duncan to come away from the basket and face up so he could do some damage without always being faced with double teams. It seems to me that so far this season he is playing away from the basket a lot.

I understand the need to create some space, but he has the greatest array of post moves in the whole game. He can drop a hook or take that turnaround or throw an up and under in. He'll have to continue to mix up his game, but I would like to see him get the ball in deep post position more of the time. Teams will have to double team him in that situation, and the other Spurs should get good looks.

It's well known that when Duncan gets the ball in the post, he often tends to hold it for quite a while, survey the situation, and either make his move or find an open teammate. Sometimes he needs to catch the ball in the post and immediately make his move without thinking. He's just too good to be waiting for double teams to come. He could avoid many of them if he would make his move quickly at least some of the time.

I know these are well-known Tim-isms, but I think that Duncan could minimize the effect of poor games like last night's if he aggressively made his move right away and played closer to the basket when his jumper/bank shot isn't falling.

Thoughts?

Good points. I think the Spurs need to get back to more 4-down plays for Tim. The motion offense is great and all, but it doesn't work in the playoffs. The Spurs won two championships running 4-down. Last year the motion offense wasn't too useful in the playoffs. I see it more as a gimmick offense rather than something you can count on.

The more Duncan is in the post, the better. No matter what AHF says.

[Rick Von Braun]

Good points. I think the Spurs need to get back to more 4-down plays for Tim. The motion offense is great and all, but it doesn't work in the playoffs. The Spurs won two championships running 4-down. Last year the motion offense wasn't too useful in the playoffs. I see it more as a gimmick offense rather than something you can count on.

The more Duncan is in the post, the better. No matter what AHF says. I disagree. I think 4-down was one of the main reasons why we lost in the playoffs. Last year, the motion offense wasn't useful because we didn't run it (properly at least). How many passes to a back cutter you saw last playoffs?

I've seen the game against Seattle twice, and we didn't run any motion at all. We run a lot of 4-down yesterday, over and over, and look at the results. Most of the guys were standing in the perimeter, and there was very little passing to cutters. Too much dribble by the player with the ball, too much standing around waiting for Duncan to do something while he was miserably ineffective. We run 7 pick and rolls against the Lakers, and we run ZERO yesterday. Not even the 2-man game was on. Don't you think it is logical to (at the very least) run pick & rolls between Parker/Manu/Barry and Timmy? Jerome James and Danny Forston are not fast and mobile. This play alone would have created so many opportunities.

Yesterday, our deffensive game was horrid, but our offense was not much better. I can assure you that if we had run more motion against the Seattle bigs we should have won the game.

Once again, there is no reason why the Spurs should be a one-trick pony. You can always mix it up. If your perimeter shooters are not hitting from the outside, let our slasher move and create opportunities for the rest of guys. Yesterday, I would have taken Manu or Parker driving to the basket to get the basket, the foul, or an easy opportunity for Timmy for a dunk or putback after penetration/shot anytime.

[Brodels]

I disagree. I think 4-down was one of the main reasons why we lost in the playoffs. Last year, the motion offense wasn't useful because we didn't run it (properly at least). How many passes to a back cutter you saw last playoffs?

I've seen the game against Seattle twice, and we didn't run any motion at all. We run a lot of 4-down yesterday, over and over, and look at the results. Most of the guys were standing in the perimeter, and there was very little passing to cutters. Too much dribble by the player with the ball, too much standing around waiting for Duncan to do something while he was miserably ineffective. We run 7 pick and rolls against the Lakers, and we run ZERO yesterday. Not even the 2-man game was on. Don't you think it is logical to (at the very least) run pick & rolls between Parker/Manu/Barry and Timmy? Jerome James and Danny Forston are not fast and mobile. This play alone would have created so many opportunities.

Yesterday, our deffensive game was horrid, but our offense was not much better. I can assure you that if we had run more motion against the Seattle bigs we should have won the game.

Once again, there is no reason why the Spurs should be a one-trick pony. You can always mix it up. If your perimeter shooters are not hitting from the outside, let our slasher move and create opportunities for the rest of guys. Yesterday, I would have taken Manu or Parker driving to the basket to get the basket, the foul, or an easy opportunity for Timmy for a dunk or putback after penetration/shot anytime.

I disagree about last night's game. It was just a poor effort all the way around.

The thing about the motion offense is that a good defense will render it almost useless. When teams like Detroit are able to keep with the motion, the Spurs end up taking a last-second shot.

The motion offense can be useful, but it's like a Nellie scheme: it gets you lots of points during the regular season against crappy teams, but when things slow down in the playoffs and defenses tighten, it fails. All of sudden cutters are all marked. The lane gets packed. That's one reason why Dallas and Sacramento don't ever win anything.

The Spurs need to run it some, but giving the ball to Duncan in the post allows him to use his significant advantage in talent to defeat the opponent.

Motion offense is crap in the playoffs against good defensive teams. The Spurs need to keep in the mix, but it needs to be one part of the offense, not the primary option.

[timvp]

I disagree about last night's game. It was just a poor effort all the way around.

The thing about the motion offense is that a good defense will render it almost useless. When teams like Detroit are able to keep with the motion, the Spurs end up taking a last-second shot.

The motion offense can be useful, but it's like a Nellie scheme: it gets you lots of points during the regular season against crappy teams, but when things slow down in the playoffs and defenses tighten, it fails. All of sudden cutters are all marked. The lane gets packed. That's one reason why Dallas and Sacramento don't ever win anything.

The Spurs need to run it some, but giving the ball to Duncan in the post allows him to use his significant advantage in talent to defeat the opponent.

Motion offense is crap in the playoffs against good defensive teams. The Spurs need to keep in the mix, but it needs to be one part of the offense, not the primary option.

Amen to that. That's exactly how I feel.

[Rick Von Braun]

We are going to agree to disagree then. If you didn't see the static offense we run yesterday, we were watching different games.

Good motion offense will always create good opportunites and easy baskets. If they Detroit defense runs man-to-man defense and they try to keep up, motion will at the very least create mismatches with properly set screens. In the past, with Bowen and Malik we didn't have the personnel to run it, but we can field a team with Parker/Manu/Brent/Horry/Tim that can run circles around any defense.

If you are concerned about Detroit D, be concerned that they have a very good frontcourt and a lot of bodies to through to TimD in the low post. The Wallace "twins" and Dice frontcourt is not to shabby at all. If the physical play of Forston and James can make Tim to have an off day, I wonder what the Pistons could do. Play 4-down systematically against them, and be certain we will lose badly.

P.S.: Rasheed Wallace defends Duncan very well.

[T Park]

how did they win two rings withOUT motion.

:question

[Phenomanul]

how did they win two rings withOUT motion.

:question


With an athletic albeit slowed-by-back-injury center.... the big 50...

Edit: Oh and with a pretty effective 3pt shooter named Steve Kerr....

[ShoogarBear]

I agree that Tim in the low post should be our bread-and-butter option but

a) we only won one championship on the basis of 4-down

b) regarding Brodels description of Tim's options: I agree 4-down becomes stagnant when TD takes too much time deciding what to do. A general rule-of-thumb is if he takes more than two dribbles, a turnover is coming up.

[coz]

I swear to God the sky is falling and hell is freezing over. I never thought that I would live to see the day when SpursTalk posters are PLEADING to run more 4-DOWN !!!!!!!! Have we forgotten the stagnant offense, the 78-74 games, the complete reliance this team has on that play when we run it, the eventual complete lane collapse and clangs from beyond the arc?

Do we need AHF do ressurect his 4-down diagram from the grave?

It's only one loss people, we've got the talent to do more on offense, we're not moving backward simply because we lost one game to Seattle......

[Brodels]

I swear to God the sky is falling and hell is freezing over. I never thought that I would live to see the day when SpursTalk posters are PLEADING to run more 4-DOWN !!!!!!!! Have we forgotten the stagnant offense, the 78-74 games, the complete reliance this team has on that play when we run it, the eventual complete lane collapse and clangs from beyond the arc?

Do we need AHF do ressurect his 4-down diagram from the grave?

It's only one loss people, we've got the talent to do more on offense, we're not moving backward simply because we lost one game to Seattle......

The point is that the Spurs need to use both so they don't become predictable. When the motion offense doesn't work like it didn't against Seattle, it's a good idea to let the best player in the league touch the ball in the post.

Name me one team in the last fifteen years that has one a title while relying solely on a motion offense. You'll notice that teams running motion offenses almost all of the time don't have as much success in the playoffs.

The motion offense simply isn't going to get it done in the playoffs unless it is alternated with other things like four down. The Spurs need to run both. But don't be afraid of four down in moderate proportions.

[Fizzzar]

What I can't believe is that the Spurs gave 113 points to the freakin Sonics and you are complaining about the offense. I didn't watch the game, but 94 points can't be that bad. The Spurs are a defensive minded team, I don't care if they don't score 100, we're not Dallas.

[fonzy16]

agree, 113 definitly too much

[Rick Von Braun]

The point is that the Spurs need to use both so they don't become predictable. When the motion offense doesn't work like it didn't against Seattle, it's a good idea to let the best player in the league touch the ball in the post.Brodels,

Please tell me the quarters and minutes of the game when we run motion. I have the game taped and I can assure you that we run a static and predictable offense 80% of the time in the halfcourt sets.

You are implying that because we run motion, Tim didn't receive the ball in the low post. This is just not true, period. Tim was working in the low and medium post, but he was completely ineffective. He was defended very well by the Seattle frontcourt guys. He became very frustraded by the physical play, and he was taking a step or two away from the post to get more space between him and his defender (and to make the double team more difficult for Seattle). The spacing of our perimeter players was good, classic 4-down. Stop beating a dead horse.

I said:


Yesterday, our deffensive game was horrid, but our offense was not much better.I guess we all agree to that. This was a lousy effort on defense, Seattle bigs toyed with us in the paint with physical play. At the same time, we became very predictable in offense, facilitating the defensive work of the Sonics.

The sky is not falling, and I am certain Pop will adjust the defensive rotations if necessary (TonyM was great against Seattle on defense). We still need a long 3, we don't have the personnel to defend them. On offense, I just wish we run more motion when 4-down is ineffective and Tim is being swarmed by defenders.