PDA

View Full Version : Hollinger on Game 4



MaNuMaNiAc
05-12-2008, 12:15 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=spurshornets_080511


SAN ANTONIO -- Maybe it's a one-game mirage, or maybe they were playing possum on us the whole time.

All I know is after three games of watching a team called the Spurs battle the Hornets, Sunday I finally felt like I was watching the defending champion San Antonio Spurs (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=sas).

In evening their best-of-seven series 2-2 with a 100-80 rout of New Orleans, the Spurs did everything we've become accustomed to seeing over the past few years. Each of their big three produced big numbers, with Tony Parker (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3527), Manu Ginobili (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3380) and Tim Duncan (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3173) combining for 54 points in the first three quarters to put the champs up 85-61 before the Hornets waved the white flag.

The Spurs' ball movement was outrageously good, with the ball flying around the perimeter once one of the big three gave it up and seemingly always landing in the paws of an open shooter. That enabled the Spurs to shoot 58.9 percent through three quarters and assist 22 of their 33 field goals; nearly all the ones that weren't assisted were straight screen-and-roll drives by Parker.

"It's all about moving the ball against these guys," Duncan said. "We know where they're coming from and we have to find our shooters and make jump shots."

The offense was a major factor, but the D was just as important. San Antonio stopped the Hornets for the first time all series, by using the same strategy they've used successfully against Phoenix's Steve Nash (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3103) and applying it to Chris Paul (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3930).

They let him get his points (23) but cut off the Hornets' other scorers -- through three quarters his teammates only had 38 points. (Side note: The stats being used here are all through three quarters, since the game had effectively ended by then; we don't care how 12 minutes of Jacque Vaughn (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3195) and Ryan Bowen (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3298) impacted the numbers).

David West (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3721) and Peja Stojakovic (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3119), who destroyed the Spurs in the first two games, combined to shoot 7-for-24, and few of them were easy looks (though the two layups Stojakovic blew in the first six minutes probably were a bad omen).

The Hornets didn't convert a single alley-oop either, after the Paul-to-Tyson Chandler (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3512) hook-up got loose several times in the first two games. In fact, Chandler's only points came when San Antonio intentionally fouled him at the end of the first half.

And perhaps most importantly, Duncan showed his flu bug in the first two games is a thing of the past, dominating the interior with 15 rebounds and four blocks. His defensive presence helped the Spurs hold the Hornets to one second-chance point and 24 points in the paint through three.
"We had the same energy tonight that we had in Game 3 defensively, and that's the best way for us to play," Spurs coach Gregg Popovich said. "We're not a great offensive team, but if we play good defense, that fuels everything we do."

But Duncan's offense had to be the most depressing part for the Hornets. If you're going to constantly double Duncan and let him get 20 points on 9-of-12 shooting, then you're pretty much screwed.

"It makes me laugh when [people] say he's struggling because they double-team every single time," Tony Parker said. "Tonight he made more shots, they let him a little bit open because we keep making 3s."
And with Duncan healthier than he was for Game 1 in particular, it's the one variable that could really change things up when the series goes back to the Big Easy for Game 5 on Tuesday.

Meanwhile, New Orleans has to go back to the drawing board, especially at the defensive end after the Spurs scored at will for a second straight game. It wasn't like New Orleans stopped one thing to give up something else; the Spurs just did whatever they wanted.

Before Game 1, Hornets coach Byron Scott had mentioned that in order to beat the Spurs you have to take away one of their big three, and for two games his team did that by neutralizing Duncan. Sunday, however, they were nowhere close.

"Our intensity was terrible," Scott said. "From Game 1 to Game 4, it's gotten worse, and theirs has gotten better. They're just kicking our butts right now."

"I don't even think we tried tonight," echoed West.

Scott also said some early misses on high-percentage shots -- including Stojakovic's two layups and a couple of open J's by West -- might have frustrated his troops.

"We went back to some of our bad habits early in the season, where we missed some easy shots in the first six to seven minutes of the game and we let that dictate how hard we were going to play at the defensive end," Scott said.

The Spurs still have work left to do, of course. Winning on the road has become a rather difficult proposition in these playoffs, if the first 15 games of the second round are any judge (road clubs are just 1-14). San Antonio has to win at least once in Nawlins if it's going to survive another round.
Additionally, don't expect the Hornets to roll over. They're young, yes, but in talking with both the Mavericks and the Spurs in these first two rounds, it's been clear how much respect opponents have for New Orleans' ability to play beyond its years. The Hornets are unusually smart and team-oriented for young guys, and they're tough. "They have an edge to them," a Spurs exec said.

Besides, it's easy to forget the first two games were just as big a beatdown in favor of New Orleans as these past two have been for the Spurs.
Nonetheless, the fact remains that the veteran Spurs have pulled even, and one has to assume that playoff experience is a currency that carries greater weight as we get deeper into a series.

"We went back to being a little inexperienced in this situation," Scott said, "and we just didn't match their effort."

As a result, the defending champions are off the mat. More importantly, they're finally looking like defending champions.

Killakobe81
05-12-2008, 12:17 AM
Hey let me say great win by Spurs ... i never had put dirt on them yet this is what I expect to see from here on out whether they win it all or not who knows but they scare me the most of all teams left ...Detroit is a close 2nd ...

T Park
05-12-2008, 12:18 AM
"I don't even think we tried tonight," echoed West.


You folded the tent up in the second quarter tonight there hypocrite.

E20
05-12-2008, 12:22 AM
Isn't Hollinger ALWAYS WRONG? And isn't HOllinger the only ESPN analyst to pick the Hornets winning the series? If so, Spurs will advance to the WCF. God bless Hollinger.

K-State Spur
05-12-2008, 12:34 AM
Isn't Hollinger ALWAYS WRONG? And isn't HOllinger the only ESPN analyst to pick the Hornets winning the series? If so, Spurs will advance to the WCF. God bless Hollinger.

well, he did pick the Spurs last year before the playoffs.

i've said before, the ONLY bad thing about last year's championship was that it gave him belief in his stupid playoff odds formula.

SpursDynasty
05-12-2008, 12:56 AM
I've said this a million times, but NOH didn't do anything brilliant in Game 1 and Game 2. All they did was get their shots to go down.

theMUHMEshow
05-12-2008, 01:01 AM
Hollinger can go blow himself that bastard...

LEONARD
05-12-2008, 09:33 AM
I've said this a million times, but NOH didn't do anything brilliant in Game 1 and Game 2. All they did was get their shots to go down.

You've put your finger on it Jeff...it's called basketball...making shots is pretty important... :lol

SpurOutofTownFan
05-12-2008, 09:44 AM
You've put your finger on it Jeff...it's called basketball...making shots is pretty important... :lol

:toast

CubanMustGo
05-12-2008, 09:56 AM
Hollinger: "oh fuck my formula didn't predict this shit so I'd better write an article kissing SA's ass."

justanotherspursfan
05-12-2008, 09:58 AM
Hollinger: "oh fuck my formula didn't predict this shit so I'd better write an article kissing SA's ass."

But wait... the Hornets had *much* better regular season stats, which proves the Spurs aren't all that good, right? I mean, how could this possibly happen?

:rolleyes

NoMoneyDown
05-12-2008, 10:03 AM
And perhaps most importantly, Duncan showed his flu bug in the first two games is a thing of the past, dominating the interior with 15 rebounds and four blocks. His defensive presence helped the Spurs hold the Hornets to one second-chance point and 24 points in the paint through three.

Which is why I think the Spurs will win G5 and G6. Who knows what the outcome had been if Tim was 100% for G1 and G2 - the series may have already been over.

GSH
05-12-2008, 11:16 AM
It's just like a fake-psychic gig. Make a prediction, wait to see if it looks to be correct, then adjust. "Someone here has a dead brother with the letter "O" in his name. (No reaction) Wait... maybe that was the letter "A" in his name."

He makes a dumbass prediction about the Spurs, and the first two games went his way. When things start to look bad, it was because it really wasn't the Spurs he was watching. It was some other team called the Spurs. But not really the Spurs. If the real Spurs would have been there, he would have predicted something else.

Monday morning quarterbacks, and retrospect stock analysts. And Hollinger.

DazedAndConfused
05-12-2008, 11:25 AM
Which is why I think the Spurs will win G5 and G6. Who knows what the outcome had been if Tim was 100% for G1 and G2 - the series may have already been over.

The Hornets won both games by nearly 20 points. A healthy Duncan wouldn't have changed those outcomes.

TampaDude
05-12-2008, 11:29 AM
It's just like a fake-psychic gig. Make a prediction, wait to see if it looks to be correct, then adjust. "Someone here has a dead brother with the letter "O" in his name. (No reaction) Wait... maybe that was the letter "A" in his name."

He makes a dumbass prediction about the Spurs, and the first two games went his way. When things start to look bad, it was because it really wasn't the Spurs he was watching. It was some other team called the Spurs. But not really the Spurs. If the real Spurs would have been there, he would have predicted something else.

Monday morning quarterbacks, and retrospect stock analysts. And Hollinger.

:lol

tmtcsc
05-12-2008, 11:53 AM
The offense was a major factor, but the D was just as important. San Antonio stopped the Hornets for the first time all series, by using the same strategy they've used successfully against Phoenix's Steve Nash and applying it to Chris Paul.

They let him get his points (23) but cut off the Hornets' other scorers -- through three quarters his teammates only had 38 points.



What ?

We've put Bruce on Nash to make his life miserable. He can neither pass the ball or score when Bruce locks him down. What a lazy ass article. What do you expect from a Mavs fan ?

ElNono
05-12-2008, 11:56 AM
It's just like a fake-psychic gig. Make a prediction, wait to see if it looks to be correct, then adjust. "Someone here has a dead brother with the letter "O" in his name. (No reaction) Wait... maybe that was the letter "A" in his name."

He makes a dumbass prediction about the Spurs, and the first two games went his way. When things start to look bad, it was because it really wasn't the Spurs he was watching. It was some other team called the Spurs. But not really the Spurs. If the real Spurs would have been there, he would have predicted something else.

Monday morning quarterbacks, and retrospect stock analysts. And Hollinger.

You forgot to add that he'll sweep everything under the 'I just got more data now' rug. The guy is a fake. I wish he would put his money where his mouth is and bet on Vegas on every prediction he makes. He'll be dead broke by now.

T Park
05-12-2008, 11:56 AM
The Hornets won both games by nearly 20 points. A healthy Duncan wouldn't have changed those outcomes.

Yeah, cause 5 points in game one didn't contribute at all to that loss...


Good god...

G-Nob
05-12-2008, 12:18 PM
Point deficits mean nothing. Just like last night the bench played the entire 4th for both teams.

1Parker1
05-12-2008, 12:21 PM
:lol Hollinger is Flip-flopping. Read his articles after games 1 and 2 and he all but said the Spurs are done and he came out with all these "calcs and stats" to show why the Hornets are superior :rolleyes

Jimcs50
05-12-2008, 12:22 PM
:lol Hollinger is Flip-flopping. Read his articles after games 1 and 2 and he all but said the Spurs are done and he came out with all these "calcs and stats" to show why the Hornets are superior :rolleyes

He is always flip floppong, that is no shock here. He is all about stats...that is all.

Strike
05-12-2008, 12:27 PM
The Hornets won both games by nearly 20 points. A healthy Duncan wouldn't have changed those outcomes.
:wtf


Really? So if Duncan had been healthy and gone 10 for 15 instead of 1 for 9, that wouldn't have made any difference in the way the Hornets played? It wouldn't have made any difference in the score?

Are you fucking high?

T Park
05-12-2008, 12:28 PM
He is always flip floppong, that is no shock here. He is all about stats...that is all.


Takes one to know one :)

NoMoneyDown
05-12-2008, 12:30 PM
The Hornets won both games by nearly 20 points. A healthy Duncan wouldn't have changed those outcomes.

And you know this how?

nfg3
05-12-2008, 12:55 PM
"Our intensity was terrible," Scott said. "From Game 1 to Game 4, it's gotten worse, and theirs has gotten better. They're just kicking our butts right now."

Just goes to prove what many have been saying for some time - Spurs championship pedigree and savvy places tremendous pressure on the opposing teams. NO is a young team that hasn't experienced this before. Sometimes you got to go through it to understand and gain that experience needed to win out.

They had better figure it out by Tuesday night because if not then they're done in 6 and they go back to NO just to clean out the lockers.

This team will be together for many years to come and will have their moment to shine but I don't it's going to happen this year.

:flag:

Obstructed_View
05-12-2008, 01:31 PM
The Hornets won both games by nearly 20 points. A healthy Duncan wouldn't have changed those outcomes.

Because Duncan doesn't play defense or anything.

DazedAndConfused
05-12-2008, 02:10 PM
:wtf


Really? So if Duncan had been healthy and gone 10 for 15 instead of 1 for 9, that wouldn't have made any difference in the way the Hornets played? It wouldn't have made any difference in the score?

Are you fucking high?

No dumbshit. It was a combination of adjustments to NOH's offense, Duncan being healthy, the Spurs hitting their open looks, and Manu getting healthier that all contributed to the Spurs wins in Games 3/4. You can't just pin it all on Duncan recovering from a fever.

TampaDude
05-12-2008, 02:31 PM
No dumbshit. It was a combination of adjustments to NOH's offense, Duncan being healthy, the Spurs hitting their open looks, and Manu getting healthier that all contributed to the Spurs wins in Games 3/4. You can't just pin it all on Duncan recovering from a fever.

Dude, you need to worry about the Jazz...the Spurs will be ready for y'all in the WCF...IF you make it...