Was Pop Vindicated?

[timvp]

1. Small Ball destroyed the Mavs. Nellie proved you can go small and have success, even if you get outrebounded by the Mavs.

2. Nazr a no show. Spurs fans wanted Nazr to play last season. He's now in Detroit and didn't play a second in their first round series sweep. I guess Nazr isn't Baby Hakeem.

3. Rasho benched. Sam Mitchell played Rasho early on in the series against the Nets, but then benched him and ultimately gave Rasho a DNP-CD in Game 6. It's hard to blame Mitchell, since Rasho had by far the worst per minute +/- of anybody on the Raptors when he did play.

Perhaps Pop was right that small ball could work and that Nazr and Rasho just weren't right for the playoffs, as their new teams found out.

Hmmmmmmm. . .

[picnroll]

Welcome to reality.

[ALVAREZ6]

It's a different type of small ball though.


The Warriors put out a bunch of athletic, quick, high-jumping, dunking, streaky shooting guards with Richardson, Baron Davis, Ellis, Pietrius, Jackson. The Spurs' small ball consisted of Finley, Tony, Manu, Beno, Brent...not all of those guys can run quite like Golden State. The Spurs' guards don't have the versatiliy that Golden State does...Ellis, Baron, Richardson,Jackson..those guys do a bit of everything and are good at it. Beno, Brent, Finley, Manu, Tony...good players, but more one-dimensional. It's just a different mold of players that Golden State has, I don't know if you can see what I mean, but when playing small ball I'd take the Warriors' small ball scheme over the Spurs'.

[smeagol]

but when playing small ball I'd take the Warriors' small ball scheme over the Spurs'.

No question about it.


For starters, Warriors' small ball worked.

[picnroll]

It's a different type of small ball though.


The Warriors put out a bunch of athletic, quick, high-jumping, dunking, streaky shooting guards with Richardson, Baron Davis, Ellis, Pietrius, Jackson. The Spurs' small ball consisted of Finley, Tony, Manu, Beno, Brent...not all of those guys can run quite like Golden State. It's just a different mold of players that Golden State has, I don't know if you can see what I mean, but when playing small ball I'd take the Warriors' small ball scheme over the Spurs'.
Doesn't mean small ball wasn't the way to go. Just means Spurs were one small horse away from pulling it off comfortably. Even with the horses they had they were one Argentinian screw up from a likley title. Add even Barnes to last years team and there is no game 7 even. Damn I wanted the Spurs to pick up Barnes this year.

[Bruno]

4. Evans a no show. Spurs fans wanted to sign Reggie Evans this summer. He's now in Denver and didn't play a second in their first round series loss. I guess Evans isn't Baby Rodman. :p:

[timvp]

Welcome to reality.

I agreed with Pop last year that Nazr and Rasho wouldn't work versus the Mavs. I didn't even totally disagree with small ball last year, considering the alternatives.

But yeah, the point is the Spurs lost more due to personnel rather than coaching error. Perhaps if Nazr and Rasho went elsewhere and did something in the playoffs, then Pop could be questioned. But that duo went elsewhere and ended up where they left the Spurs -- getting DNP-CD's on the bench when it mattered.

[timvp]

4. Evans a no show. Spurs fans wanted to sign Reggie Evans this summer. He's now in Denver and didn't play a second in their first round series loss. I guess Evans isn't Baby Rodman. :p:

Obviously because the Nuggets advanced and Najera wasn't their worst +/- player.

:cooldevil

[cherylsteele]

No question about it.


For starters, Warriors' small ball worked.
And that is their normal way of playing....we were doing it on the fly. Sort of OJT.

[GrandeDavid]

Nazr has little heart and toughness on the court. I never cared for him as a Spur. I think Pop did well following the general evolution of the game, incorporation of small ball and so on. But he gets paid the big bucks to do that. I'm sure his staff and players fill his ear as well. So I don't think he deserves massive props, but if you are talking about those who served up scathing critism toward those moves, then yes, he's vindicated. I, for one, have never been in that group.

[bigfan]

I read up here today one thing they are on Avery about was adjusting his lineup to try to match the GS lineup. I hope Pop stays big most of the time. I think his plan of getting back after a shot and not worrying too much about offensive rebounds is a great technique and could work in the future.

[exstatic]

Small ball actually worked pretty well against PHO in that last game. I wish Pop hadn't showed that much of his hand that early. Fin is physical enough to match on Matrix, unlike Barry, and if you can keep Thomas off the floor, and drag Marion out to the perimeter to guard his man, Amare has to guard Tim, and those two contend for most of the rebounds. I like that matchup.

[SequSpur]

whut dus vinikated mean?

[BigBeezie]

Well, I wouldn't call the Spurs a completely small ball team. The best player is still 6-11 at PF, and Horry and Elson get consistent minutes. They are 6-10 and 7-0 respectively. I think the Elson move was very good for how the game is changing to a more fast paced version. Elson is very athletic, so we'll see how his minutes are effected against PHO.

[L.I.T]

I think it just Pop knows when to drop a crap investment...Nazr and Rasho (for what the Spurs needed) were crap investments.

What it comes down to, is that Pop is not as set in his ways as we might be led to believe. He can make adjustments on the fly. I still firmly believe that it was his move to small ball that extended the series last year to 7. Quietly, he was able to bring in some players this year that will allow him to better match-up and play 'small ball'.

That being said, the idea line-up for the Spurs still remains: Parker, Manu, Bowen, Horry and Duncan. That is, if Horry plays like he did against the Nuggets. I just wonder if Horry has enough left in him to play some spot minutes on Amare.

It's not a small-ball line-up per se, just a flexible one. Now, if we see Finley in for Horry, well, I actually think you can get away with that against the Suns, it would just be kinda funny to watch.

[ata]

1. Small Ball destroyed the Mavs. Nellie proved you can go small and have success, even if you get outrebounded by the Mavs.

2. Nazr a no show. Spurs fans wanted Nazr to play last season. He's now in Detroit and didn't play a second in their first round series sweep. I guess Nazr isn't Baby Hakeem.

3. Rasho benched. Sam Mitchell played Rasho early on in the series against the Nets, but then benched him and ultimately gave Rasho a DNP-CD in Game 6. It's hard to blame Mitchell, since Rasho had by far the worst per minute +/- of anybody on the Raptors when he did play.

Perhaps Pop was right that small ball could work and that Nazr and Rasho just weren't right for the playoffs, as their new teams found out.

Hmmmmmmm. . .

Are you high, drunk or just halucinating? By far?
Try to prove that with some numbers.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I don't think Pop is vindicated on small ball for two main reasons:

1) He went away from the system they had run all year, and the guys were confused at times. Not to mention getting killed on the glass and in the paint by Dallas

2) The bigger issue is Pop tried to play small ball when he didn't have the personnel for it. While small ball might have been the right strategy, it's the wrong one you don't have the personnel for it.

[ALVAREZ6]

Even with the horses they had they were one Argentinian screw up from a likley title.And you're going to put the blame of the small ball failure on one Ginobili play? I'd check some other players and coaching decisions that occurred throughout that series before blaming Gino. Manu was the player that hit that clutch 3-pointer immediately before that stupid foul, so if anything, it cancels out.

[exstatic]

Without small ball, Mavs probably take that series in five. We weren't very good at it, but it put us within seconds of moving on to the WCFs.

[itzsoweezee]

popovich wasn't right about anything

1. the warriors' zone destroyed the mavs. something popovich refused to do.

2. the warriors have the type of athletes that can play effective small ball, the spurs don't

3. the heat proved you can beat the mavs playing a traditional lineup

conclusion: the only thing popovich proved was that he chose the worst possible defense to play against the mavs: man-to-man using a small ball lineup w/ players that aren't athletic enough to do it effectively

popovich was a fucking idiot in that series.

[ALVAREZ6]

popovich wasn't right about anything

1. the warriors' zone destroyed the mavs. something popovich refused to do.

2. the warriors have the type of athletes that can play effective small ball, the spurs don't

3. the heat proved you can beat the mavs playing a traditional lineup

conclusion: the only thing popovich proved was that he chose the worst possible defense to play against the mavs: man-to-man using a small ball lineup w/ players that aren't athletic enough to do it effectively

popovich was a fucking idiot in that series.:tu

[ata]

popovich wasn't right about anything

1. the warriors' zone destroyed the mavs. something popovich refused to do.

2. the warriors have the type of athletes that can play effective small ball, the spurs don't

3. the heat proved you can beat the mavs playing a traditional lineup

conclusion: the only thing popovich proved was that he chose the worst possible defense to play against the mavs: man-to-man using a small ball lineup w/ players that aren't athletic enough to do it effectively

popovich was a fucking idiot in that series.

Word.

+ who was benched during Mavs series and can play zone defense?

[Obstructed_View]

1. Small Ball destroyed the Mavs. Nellie proved you can go small and have success, even if you get outrebounded by the Mavs.
Don Nelson's small ball destroyed the Mavs. Nellie proved you can go small as a team philosophy and win a first round series against a team that you completely own. He has small players who are extremely athletic; they are at the top of the league in rebounds, steals and blocked shots. Add to that it's what he's done all year.

Pop proved that if you try to change your team philosophy two games into the playoffs, that you get beat by lower seeded teams, including dropping a game seven at home. Pop's version of small ball last year would be like Nelson suddenly dropping Biedrins into the post and running 4 down as soon as the playoffs start.


2. Nazr a no show. Spurs fans wanted Nazr to play last season. He's now in Detroit and didn't play a second in their first round series sweep. I guess Nazr isn't Baby Hakeem.

3. Rasho benched. Sam Mitchell played Rasho early on in the series against the Nets, but then benched him and ultimately gave Rasho a DNP-CD in Game 6. It's hard to blame Mitchell, since Rasho had by far the worst per minute +/- of anybody on the Raptors when he did play.

Perhaps Pop was right that small ball could work and that Nazr and Rasho just weren't right for the playoffs, as their new teams found out.

Hmmmmmmm. . .
Um, small ball didn't work. The Spurs were upset in the playoffs. Nazr and Rasho were good enough to be the centers on a team that won 63 games in the regular season and then went 8-5 to finish without them.

[wildbill2u]

Lots of things go into making 'small ball' a potent force in the league, not least among them some of the new rules that prevent defensive hand checking.

Cycles come and go, sometimes depending on the type of players that come into the league. When you had Shaq, Robinson, Tim, etc in their prime, the dominance of the big centers was the way to go--and it was fueled, consciously or unconsciously, by the league rules--and the way the refs called the fouls.

Shaq still lowers his shoulder when bulling in to the hoop or uses his massive left arm to sweep defensive players away but he gets called far more frequently now and so can't simply push defensive players out of his way.

[td4mvp21]

It was the zone defense. Dallas did not go to the rim enough, as the zone forced them to become dependent upon jumpshots and it screwed them over. Also, the Warriors have YOUNG, ATHLETIC small ball lineups. Spurs do not.

[clubalien]

nellie might have told small ball would beat the mavs. Remember nellie did come to our training camp before and he had a reason to see the mavs lose.

So nellie told pop how to beat the mavs and pop couldn;t do it.

As the saying goes fire pop!

[exstatic]

Zones are great, unless you want defensive rebounds. It totally opens up lanes for offensive rebounders. Dallas was already killing us on the boards, and we should have handed them more? With M2M, you have someone to put a body on.

[td4mvp21]

Zones are great, unless you want defensive rebounds. It totally opens up lanes for offensive rebounders. Dallas was already killing us on the boards, and we should have handed them more? With M2M, you have someone to put a body on.

Sure it does, but this Spurs team isn't that great of a rebounding team to begin with, unless they come out with the gameplan to rebound. Apparently it works because GS played a zone almost the entire series and Dallas shot horribly. Spurs would have given up a lot of offensive boards to the Mavs with man-to-man, so why should they play that when a zone works more effectively?

[exstatic]

OK, you're not understanding. Playing M2M, we already gave them 11+ ORBs per game in that series. With zone, that could have been 15-17.

It worked for GS, because they are a better rebounding, more athletic team than we are. Why do you think more teams don't play zones all the time? YOU GET KILLED ON THE BOARDS. It's the achilles heel of the zone, and why most teams only use it part time or as a change up.

[angel_luv]

1. Small Ball destroyed the Mavs. Nellie proved you can go small and have success, even if you get outrebounded by the Mavs.

2. Nazr a no show. Spurs fans wanted Nazr to play last season. He's now in Detroit and didn't play a second in their first round series sweep. I guess Nazr isn't Baby Hakeem.

3. Rasho benched. Sam Mitchell played Rasho early on in the series against the Nets, but then benched him and ultimately gave Rasho a DNP-CD in Game 6. It's hard to blame Mitchell, since Rasho had by far the worst per minute +/- of anybody on the Raptors when he did play.

Perhaps Pop was right that small ball could work and that Nazr and Rasho just weren't right for the playoffs, as their new teams found out.

Hmmmmmmm. . .

Point 1. Point 2.
With you so far.

Point 3.
You lost me.

:lol

[td4mvp21]

OK, you're not understanding. Playing M2M, we already gave them 11+ ORBs per game in that series. With zone, that could have been 15-17.

It worked for GS, because they are a better rebounding, more athletic team than we are. Why do you think more teams don't play zones all the time? YOU GET KILLED ON THE BOARDS. It's the achilles heel of the zone, and why most teams only use it part time or as a change up.

True, but Dallas thrived on 1-on-1 matchups offensively. That's why the zone worked very well against them. They are not a good passing team, in regards to running their offense. They don't get a lot of assissts. The zone makes them pass it around more, thus it disrupted their offense when GS played it. It got Dallas out of sync because they were not able to take advantage of the 4-5 guys that could play very well in 1-on-1 situations. You do give up a lot of rebounds, but who knows how it would have worked with Spurs vs. Mavs. We will never find out :spin. Maybe just for stretches in the fourth quarter would have worked well.

[whottt]

If by vidicated you mean owned, yes.

Pop gets no free pass just because Nellie outcoached AJ.


Ok so Dirk would have scored on Rasho and Nazr...as opposed to everyone else we put on him?

Pop's small ball lineup was horrible because he didn't(and still doesn't) have the personnel to run it effectively against the Mavs.

Nelly = roster of 6'8 guys
Pop = No a one on the roster.

Nelly = Traded for Jack
Pop = Replaced him with Hedo


Nah...Pop doesn't get to coat-tail Nelly.


Pop was pissed because of the lack of boards from Nazr and Rasho and decided to make a point IMO....

There was at least one game we lost that all we needed was some kind of interior rebounding presence and Pop had Finley out there....



And if Dirk doesn't get injured in 03, Pop likely gets outcoached by Nelly too....although not as badly as LB in 91.

[td4mvp21]

And if Dirk doesn't get injured in 03, Pop likely gets outcoached by Nelly too.
Bullshit. The Spurs were better than the Mavs that year. Mavs had no defense at all to stop the Spurs, and Spurs had defense to stop the Mavs.

[baseline bum]

And if Dirk doesn't get injured in 03, Pop likely gets outcoached by Nelly too.

This is stupid. Dallas was much more competitive without Nowitzki than with him. Duncan absolutely torched the Mavs anytime Nowitzki was on the floor. Look up the boxscores. Najera's defense on Duncan was the major factor in their 17 point comeback to win game 5, and stave off elimination in the SBC Center. Finley, Van Exel, and Nash was more than enough on the offensive end to erase anything they missed with Dirk out.

[whottt]

Bullshit. The Spurs were better than the Mavs that year. Mavs had no defense at all to stop the Spurs, and Spurs had defense to stop the Mavs.


Whatever....they still beat us at least one game without Dirk. And all of the games were close.


Our defense wasn't what won game 6 for us.

[whottt]

This is stupid. Dallas was much more competitive without Nowitzki than with him. Duncan absolutely torched the Mavs anytime Nowitzki was on the floor. Look up the boxscores. Najera's defense on Duncan was the major factor in their 17 point comeback to win game 5, and stave off elimination in the SBC Center. Finley, Van Exel, and Nash was more than enough on the offensive end to erase anything they missed with Dirk out.


So you are saying the Mavs were better without Dirk? And my point was stupid?


Do you honestly believe the Mavs were better without Dirk?



I agree the games were tougher once Dirk went out...but part of that was adjustments by Nelly...that could have been made with Dirk healthy.

[td4mvp21]

Whatever....they still beat us at least one game without Dirk. And all of the games were close.


Our defense wasn't what won game 6 for us.

The games were close because the Mavs without Dirk gave us more trouble than they did with Dirk. The Spurs blew the Mavs out in the first half of Game 1 (I still don't know how we lost that game), we blew them out in Games 2 & 3 with Dirk, and we blew them out in Game 4 without Dirk. Games 5 and 6 were close (except in the fourth when Kerr hit all those threes in Game 6).

[whottt]

This is stupid. Dallas was much more competitive without Nowitzki than with him. Duncan absolutely torched the Mavs anytime Nowitzki was on the floor. Look up the boxscores. Najera's defense on Duncan was the major factor in their 17 point comeback to win game 5, and stave off elimination in the SBC Center. Finley, Van Exel, and Nash was more than enough on the offensive end to erase anything they missed with Dirk out.



Nelly = Traded for Jack

Pop = replaced him with Hedo.


Pop couldn't tell a choker from a clutch player if his life depended on it. He'd stick the choker out there on some kind of principle.

[whottt]

The games were close because the Mavs without Dirk gave us more trouble than they did with Dirk. The Spurs blew the Mavs out in the first half of Game 1 (I still don't know how we lost that game), we blew them out in Games 2 & 3 with Dirk, and we blew them out in Game 4 without Dirk. Games 5 and 6 were close (except in the fourth when Kerr hit all those threes in Game 6).



Got it...Mavs were better without Dirk....great take.

I guess maybe Dallas should pay someone to take Dirk off their hands or something.

[baseline bum]

So you are saying the Mavs were better without Dirk? And my point was stupid?


Do you honestly believe the Mavs were better without Dirk?


Yes. The 2003 Mavericks were better without Dirk when they played the Spurs. Nowitzki was the biggest defensive liability in the league at that time. Duncan and Malik Rose absolutely destroyed him in that series. If Dirk never gets hurt, that series ends in 5.

[whottt]

Nelly outcoaching AJ doesn't validate Pop...

Two different equations...


I am still waiting for Pop to win a series he shouldn't....the truest mark of a great coach...hasn't happened yet.

[whottt]

If Duncan isn't a FA, I doubt Kerr sees the court in that series...and I doubt we win it. Jack wasn't enough by himself.

Even without Dirk...which most people would consider a liability for a team.


And the Mavs did beat us with Dirk....


I just don't agree that Nelly outcoaching AJ somehow gets Pop off the hook for being outcoached by AJ.

[bdictjames]

So should we play small ball against the Suns?

[exstatic]

True, but Dallas thrived on 1-on-1 matchups offensively. That's why the zone worked very well against them. They are not a good passing team, in regards to running their offense. They don't get a lot of assissts. The zone makes them pass it around more, thus it disrupted their offense when GS played it. It got Dallas out of sync because they were not able to take advantage of the 4-5 guys that could play very well in 1-on-1 situations. You do give up a lot of rebounds, but who knows how it would have worked with Spurs vs. Mavs. We will never find out :spin. Maybe just for stretches in the fourth quarter would have worked well.
Oh, I agree that as a change up, it would have worked. Throw some 2-3 at them and some matchup zone. You just can't run it all the time. The zone is fine...right up to the time the shot is released, and then it's a HUGE advantage to an aggressive OReb team like Dallas. We actually outshot them last year in that series. They just had more attempts.

[whottt]

So should we play small ball against the Suns?


Sure...our small ball lineup works against the Suns...

The Suns are small, probably the smallest team in the NBA...the Mavs aren't/weren't.


Our 2 guard frontline isn't dwarfed against the Suns like it is against every other team.

[StoneCutter]

Just a couple of random small ball and Mav's thoughts.

A major factor in Pop's decision to go small ball was Tim Duncan. If the Spurs play Rasho or Nazr against Damper/Diop then who does Duncan guard? Duncan is an all-time great defender, but the Spurs don't want him to pick up fouls guarding Dirk. Dirk was also more aggressive last year going to the basket.

Golden State's guards are better penetrators and rebounders and are obviously better suited to the small ball concept. I believe there is a lot more to Golden State's win over Dallas then playing small ball. As their former coach, Nelson knows the Mav's and their weaknesses better then anyone (like Gruden taking over the Buc's and destroying the Raiders). Golden State played with great confidence versus Dallas. Part of that was the fact that they wanted to win for Nelson, knowing Nelson's past with the Mav's organization (Can the Warriors play with the same fire against Houston or Utah? Both of their next round opponents have legit low post players and I am looking forward to either match-up). In last years playoff series versus the Spurs, I believe Dallas benefited from the same thing because of Avery Johnson being their coach. The Mav's played their best ball against the Spurs. Mav's also get up for the Spurs because the Spurs have been done well against them (in-state rival etc). Against other teams, we have seen how mentally fragaile they can be.
Avery must be going nuts after watching a heartless effort. After being eliminated Dirk said that he has to work on his post game. We'll see...

[whottt]

Base and td...I get the point you guys are making and I actually applaud the insight...I agree the Mavs played us better without Dirk...

But where our beliefs diverge is that I think Nelly was the reason for that....and you guys seem to think it was just osmosis or something.


My point is that Nelly is a great coach....

He outcoached AJ, he outcoached Larry Brown...

Pop hasn't outcoached anyone IMO...he's never beaten a superior team.

Unlike AJ, unliike Nelly...unlike Pat Riley.

Maybe LA in 03...maybe, but I'd argue that Rick Fox was a bigger loss for them than anyone admits.


AJ getting outcoached by Nelly doesns't make Pop a better coach, it makes him a worse one IMO.

[ChumpDumper]

How does the series end up with Rasho playing?

4-1?

Were we that much better?

[timvp]

Are you high, drunk or just halucinating? By far?
Try to prove that with some numbers.

I was going to be nice and not post the numbers, but if you really want them that bad here you go:

Plus/Minus Per Minute
Mo Peterson: +.065
Kris Humphries: +.029
Jose Calderon: -.061
Joey Graham: -.091
Anthony Parker: -.108
Chris Cash: -.130
Andrea Bargnani: -.210
TJ Ford: -.220
Rasho Nesterovic: -.434

Points Allowed Per 48 Minutes
Kris Humphries: 87.0
Joey Graham: 93.4
Mo Peterson: 94.4
Jose Calderon: 94.7
Chris Bosh: 96.0
Anthony Parker: 96.8
TJ Ford: 99.2
Andrea Bargnani: 99.7
Rasho Nesterovic: 107.5

Rasho was owned in the playoffs, bottomline. The team was literally twice as worse with him on the court than anyone else on the team. They gave up an amazing amount of points when he was on the court. No one was even in his same ballpark of ineptitude in either category. There's a reason he played 2 minutes in Game 5 and zero in Game 6.

Like I've said, Rasho is a very good regular season center. Put him on your team and he'll win you about five games you wouldn't have won without him. But for whatever reason, he's not good in the playoffs. Any sober person can conclude that from these stats.

Apology Accepted.

:smokin

[whottt]

How does the series end up with Rasho playing?

4-1?

Were we that much better?


Hmmmm...

Game 7......might have been nice if Manu wasn't our Center.

1 point lead...need a rebound or interior presence wouldn't have hurt either...even the stupidest person on the planet could conclude that Nazr Mohammed has a better chance of doing that than Manu or Finley.

All I know is Pop turned Dirk into Wilt Chamberlain in that series....directly...that's why I enjoyed so much the arguments about 03.

[timvp]

My point is that Nelly is a great coach....


Correction, Nellie is a great underdog coach. He's the master of winning series he's not supposed to win by exploiting weaknesses.

However, he's not a guy you want to be coaching a great team. No matter how good a team is, he'll eventually find a way to lose with it. The same craziness that allows him to pull upsets is the same craziness that allows his teams to be upset so much over the years.

Give Nellie the 70-win Bulls and he would have found a way to lose in the playoffs. But then again, give Nellie the 2007 Denver Nuggets and he might have found a way to beat the Spurs.

[whottt]

Raise your hand if you were salivating to play the Mavs in the playoffs again this year...be honest.

Unless you think GS has a better team than the Spurs, that pit in your stomach at that thought likely had more to do with AJ's ownership of Pop last season than it does the Spurs players....

[ChumpDumper]

All this team needed and needs to be one of the best small ball teams in history is a tall small forward who can defend and grab some boards. It is a failure of the front office and coaching staff to choose not to even attempt to develop one since the departure of Hedo.

[whottt]

Correction, Nellie is a great underdog coach. He's the master of winning series he's not supposed to win by exploiting weaknesses.

However, he's not a guy you want to be coaching a great team. No matter how good a team is, he'll eventually find a way to lose with it. The same craziness that allows him to pull upsets is the same craziness that allows his teams to be upset so much over the years.

Give Nellie the 70-win Bulls and he would have found a way to lose in the playoffs. But then again, give Nellie the 2007 Denver Nuggets and he might have found a way to beat the Spurs.


How many times have you seen Nelly lose to an inferior team?


And GS turned to crap when he left.

[Kori Ellis]

All this team needed and needs to be one of the best small ball teams in history is a tall small forward who can defend and grab some boards. It is a failure of the front office and coaching staff to choose not to even attempt to develop one since the departure of Hedo.
Exactly.

[whottt]

All this team needed and needs to be one of the best small ball teams in history is a tall small forward who can defend and grab some boards. It is a failure of the front office and coaching staff to choose not to even attempt to develop one since the departure of Hedo.

Damn...

I wish I knew if you were being sarcastic or not...

If you aren't...great take. If you are...fuck you.

[whottt]

True...if only Pop had more pull with the Spurs FO...his coaching wouldn't be held back.

[E20]

Correction, Nellie is a great underdog coach. He's the master of winning series he's not supposed to win by exploiting weaknesses.

However, he's not a guy you want to be coaching a great team. No matter how good a team is, he'll eventually find a way to lose with it. The same craziness that allows him to pull upsets is the same craziness that allows his teams to be upset so much over the years.

Give Nellie the 70-win Bulls and he would have found a way to lose in the playoffs. But then again, give Nellie the 2007 Denver Nuggets and he might have found a way to beat the Spurs.
A large part of that had to do with the fact that Nelson was with the Mavs for years and knew Dirk, AJ, and Del Harris, like the back of his hand. Other than this one upset he pulled I've never seen him pull another or maybe I was too young to remember.

[timvp]

How many times have you seen Nelly lose to an inferior team?


Nelson made it to the playoffs four times with Golden State in his first tenure with them. In the two seasons where the Warriors won 44 and 43 games to back into the playoffs, they pulled historic upsets in the first round. The other two times the Warriors won 55 and 50 games and the Warriors lost both times in the first round, winning a combined one game in both series combined.

Nellie is the master at being the underdog. If he's expected to win, he never comes through all the way. That's how the NBA's All-Time leader in wins has never even made it to the Finals as a coach.

[Bruno]

It amazes me how people judge coaches without looking at what players they have.
A playoff serie isn't a chess game between two coaches. In chess, both players start with the same pawns, not in a playoff serie. Spurs haven't lost against Mavs last year because Pop has been outcoached by avery but because mas were a bad matchup. If you had to blame someone, blame Pop as a GM, not as a coach.

[aaronstampler]

1. Small Ball destroyed the Mavs. Nellie proved you can go small and have success, even if you get outrebounded by the Mavs.

2. Nazr a no show. Spurs fans wanted Nazr to play last season. He's now in Detroit and didn't play a second in their first round series sweep. I guess Nazr isn't Baby Hakeem.

3. Rasho benched. Sam Mitchell played Rasho early on in the series against the Nets, but then benched him and ultimately gave Rasho a DNP-CD in Game 6. It's hard to blame Mitchell, since Rasho had by far the worst per minute +/- of anybody on the Raptors when he did play.

Perhaps Pop was right that small ball could work and that Nazr and Rasho just weren't right for the playoffs, as their new teams found out.

Hmmmmmmm. . .

It's not the small ball I have a problem with, it's the small ball with our personnel. Finley and Bowen aren't the rebounders that SJax and JRich are. Hell Baron Davis had 10 rebounds the last game. Their smalls rebound a bit better than ours overall.

Also, their defense is just a lot more gambling and aggressive. They seek to force turnovers and if they give up easy shots, they give up easy shots. Our defense kind of lays back and just tries to force misses.

Finally, I think we play at too slow of a pace offensively to properly take advantage of smallball like Nellie does. Our need to go to Tim kind of negates the smallball offense. We just can't play that fast for 48 minutes, our guys are too old.

[Marcus Bryant]

Nellie is someone who loves basketball and yet, is bored by it.

[Obstructed_View]

I was going to be nice and not post the numbers, but if you really want them that bad here you go:

Plus/Minus Per Minute
Mo Peterson: +.065
Kris Humphries: +.029
Jose Calderon: -.061
Joey Graham: -.091
Anthony Parker: -.108
Chris Cash: -.130
Andrea Bargnani: -.210
TJ Ford: -.220
Rasho Nesterovic: -.434

Points Allowed Per 48 Minutes
Kris Humphries: 87.0
Joey Graham: 93.4
Mo Peterson: 94.4
Jose Calderon: 94.7
Chris Bosh: 96.0
Anthony Parker: 96.8
TJ Ford: 99.2
Andrea Bargnani: 99.7
Rasho Nesterovic: 107.5

Rasho was owned in the playoffs, bottomline. The team was literally twice as worse with him on the court than anyone else on the team. They gave up an amazing amount of points when he was on the court. No one was even in his same ballpark of ineptitude in either category. There's a reason he played 2 minutes in Game 5 and zero in Game 6.

Like I've said, Rasho is a very good regular season center. Put him on your team and he'll win you about five games you wouldn't have won without him. But for whatever reason, he's not good in the playoffs. Any sober person can conclude that from these stats.

Apology Accepted.

:smokin

Too bad that a 63 win team went 8-5 in the playoffs, including getting beat by an inferior division rival, and it's all the fault of two guys who didn't play.

[whottt]

That's how the NBA's All-Time leader in wins has never even made it to the Finals as a coach.


Lenny Wilkens hasn't made a finals?

[timvp]

Lenny Wilkens hasn't made a finals?

Look again in two and a half seasons when Nellie is losing series with GS being the 4th seed.

[Marcus Bryant]

All this team needed and needs to be one of the best small ball teams in history is a tall small forward who can defend and grab some boards. It is a failure of the front office and coaching staff to choose not to even attempt to develop one since the departure of Hedo.

What happens if Sanikidze is that guy and Scola is good enough to start at the 4...?

[ChumpDumper]

Then fine, but they still didn't do anything in the meantime.