Spurs' Vaunted Defense Looks Sadly Vulnerable

This guy hasn't been keeping up with Spurs basketball this year.

He's right...that's where it all starts. The Mavericks are far from a better team. But if they win, it's because we're missing all our assignments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duncan228

Spurs' vaunted defense looks sadly vulnerable
David Moore
Dallas Morning News


Michael Finley can't stay with him. The Spurs' insistence on that matchup is the reason Howard finished with 25 points after a slow start. Bruce Bowen is a shadow of his former, defensive self.


The Spurs are in a defensive bind.

The Mavericks exploited that in Game 1.

---

Well hello genius......

We sit a guy all season long, play him sporadically and then expect him to magically pick up where he left off on the defensive end? All that, and he's a year older? Geez.

As early as 2005 I was screaming that the Spurs needed to find someone to start grooming for Bruce's position. So we pick up Udoka, and promptly send him to the end of the bench too.

Now Pop is left grasping at straws hoping that one of these old guys can hold down the fort at their positions. The sad truth is that they cannot. Oh sure, they'll have the occasional game where everything clicks, but those are too few and far in between.

Vulnerable that night, kind of. More illprepared, or for Dallas, lucky.

I don't see Howard, Bass, Barea, and Damp carrying the team again if we stay with the same defensive scheme.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shank

In your eyes, does your team ever legitimately lose a game? Or is it always because of the officiating?

---

thank you for neglecting to read all of my posts in this thread. i was responding to a poster that said we got the short side of the calls and i was agreeing with him and giving examples....

i have continuously stated, that had the Spurs made their layups, they win this game.....please pay attention and stop trying to read and pick out only what you want to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigBinBigD

blah, blah, blah....not this again.

There were bad calls both ways and they even out. Maybe if Pop and the Spurs players wouldn't whine so much about calls (second only maybe to Dan Tony), the fans wouldn't think they were screwed by the refs every time they lose a game. Hilarious that Spurs fans would even mention flopping and ticky-tack fouls. :rollin

---

Spurs dont flop all that much anymore. Manu hasnt really flopped in 2 years. Hell, this year he was hardly on the court enough to flop.

It is nice of you to find one singular post of mine in this thread to call me out on. Why didn't you call me out in other posts where I said we lost cause we couldnt make our layups. We missed 10-12 layups...we make those, we win the game easily. But no, you simply pick and choose which posts you want to reply to....I was using the post you questioned in to discuss the calls I feel we got shafted on. I never claimed that is why we lost the game......but your jaded reading comprehension says otherwise.

next time, try reading the entire thread before making silly assumptions and accusations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sribb43

Thats the best you've got....is blaming the refs, weak:rollin

---

ok for the 3rd time, and it has become apparent that the reading comprehension of Mavs fans is considerably lacking.

Show me where in that post that I said those calls cost us the game? You cant cause I didnt say that. I merely was discussing with a fellow Spurs fan, the calls I felt the refs screwed us on. I never claimed the refs cost us the game. I have stated in other posts in this thread and other threads that we lost cause we missed so many layups. We make our layups and we win the game going away.

You confuse criticizing the refs for blaming the refs.....two different things.

I criticized the refs, but blamed the Spurs. Please figure out the difference, and please read the entire thread before coming back with your weak sauce of a comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggems

ok for the 3rd time, and it has become apparent that the reading comprehension of Mavs fans is considerably lacking.

Show me where in that post that I said those calls cost us the game? You cant cause I didnt say that. I merely was discussing with a fellow Spurs fan, the calls I felt the refs screwed us on. I never claimed the refs cost us the game. I have stated in other posts in this thread and other threads that we lost cause we missed so many layups. We make our layups and we win the game going away.

You confuse criticizing the refs for blaming the refs.....two different things.

I criticized the refs, but blamed the Spurs. Please figure out the difference, and please read the entire thread before coming back with your weak sauce of a comment.

---

Whatever you say, man. Where's the same criticism for calls that didn't go the Mavs way? Certainly that would have had something to do with the outcome, as well.

And "make our layups and win the the game going away"?? Please. Is that on top of shooting that amazing 3pt %? Give and take, brother. You can't have it all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shank

Whatever you say, man. Where's the same criticism for calls that didn't go the Mavs way? Certainly that would have had something to do with the outcome, as well.

And "make our layups and win the the game going away"?? Please. Is that on top of shooting that amazing 3pt %? Give and take, brother. You can't have it all.

---

if there are calls you feel went against the Mavs, bring them up...you are free to do so in this forum.....I am sure there were some calls and no calls that went for the Spurs, but I promise, not nearly as many that went the way of the Mavs.

3pt shooting is a luxury. We shot very well beyond the arc. We shot very well at the FT line.....what is give and take about layups? it is a point blank shot...I am sorry but if you are in the NBA, you should shoot an outstanding percentage right at the rim....So dont give me the give and take nonsense. If it were the other way around....and they made their layups, but missed their 3s, I would agree with you. 3s are definitely a lower % shot.

So yes, we make our layups and we win the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

As early as 2005 I was screaming that the Spurs needed to find someone to start grooming for Bruce's position. So we pick up Udoka, and promptly send him to the end of the bench too.

---

So was I. I know the Spurs ran all manner of spares through here during that time. I also know they made a play for Batum in the draft. However as critical as Bowen and his skills, have become to the Spurs defensive scheme, finding a successor should've been top priority. There were all sorts of options they could've explored (Balkman, Ariza, Pietrus). Instead Pop wanted players who could generate more offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

Now Pop is left grasping at straws hoping that one of these old guys can hold down the fort at their positions. The sad truth is that they cannot. Oh sure, they'll have the occasional game where everything clicks, but those are too few and far in between.

---

Damn frustrating, isn't it. There is no question that having productive veterans on the team is an absolute advanatage. However, it's imperative that those veterans have some "shelf-life" left.

That said, how many more playoff calamities does this coaching staff and FO going to endure before they realize they MUST invest in some more younger, better skilled players? By the way, we've seen who the energy guys are on the Mavs. Who are the energy guys on the Spurs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shank

Whatever you say, man. Where's the same criticism for calls that didn't go the Mavs way?

---

I don't know, maybe a Mavericks message board? :donkey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sribb43

Thats the best you've got....is blaming the refs, weak:rollin

---

No. I blame the planets for aligning and giving Dampier, Barea, and Bass the clarity to play out of their minds on the same night. :rolleyes:rolleyes

Akin to a comet that passes through the solar system about once every thousand years or so.

Dick Bavetta is known as a home-team friendly ref. If Dirk can get away with seven fouls in the first half with almost no punishment, and Duncan can't buy a call on legitimate fouls against Erick Dampier, you're goddamn right I'm gonna blame the refs.

BTW, the next time Barea flops in this series will be the first time I've seen him do it. His defense on Parker has zero to do with my complaints.

Texas 2 Step is not far off, although I wouldn't exactly say the Spurs' defense "sucked". It just hasn't been like it's "vaunted" defensive teams of 1998 through 2005-06.

Although the Spurs ranked 2nd in points allowed, they are only 7th in Point Diff. and 9th in Opp. FG% (.453). The Spurs are 24th at guarding the 3-point arc (.379), which is not a heavily weighted category but far from the leadership in that area: 1. Cleveland .333, 2. Orlando .342, 3. LA Lakers .345.

I'm sorry, but the "vaunted" D hasn't been around for 3 years...and it got by with outscoring it's opponents, great effort from 10 players playing 10+ min./game and some good fortune in the '07 championship run.

There has been a fine line between wins and losses this season for the Spurs. In game 1, the Spurs scored 97 points, their average for the season. They just can't win many games allowing 97+.

Face it. The Spurs can be spoilers but the road is filled with land-mines and they currently don't have the individual talent to put on the floor to expect a championship in '09. Great teamwork is it's only hope.

At least now those geniuses who wanted the Spurs to rid themselves of Bruce during the peak defensive years are getting their fill of what the result would have been like.

Premature story after one game.

we ranked 5th in the NBA in D this year..if our D sucked, then wow, I don't even wanna imagine how bad the rest of the league was defensively..

at some point, we were going to have to re-tool..the time is now..we have plenty of expiring contracts these next 2 off-seasons, so there's no excuse..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37

we ranked 5th in the NBA in D this year..if our D sucked, then wow, I don't even wanna imagine how bad the rest of the league was defensively..

at some point, we were going to have to re-tool..the time is now..we have plenty of expiring contracts these next 2 off-seasons, so there's no excuse..

---

except there is no extra money. The pockets are not lined, and spurs are incredibly lucky they landed Tim Duncan. Any other superstar, like DRob etc, doesn't take the absolute minimum to playoff after playoff AND expectations of a ship like Tim's teams.

we have the MLE, and we have the ability to package multiple expiring contracts that end in the big free agent pool of 2010..in this state, there will be buyers..

it's obviously up to the front office and whether or not they'll wait until 2010, or start this off-season..it would be foolish to waste another year of Duncan..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SenorSpur

Note to Pop: It is of great benefit for a team to have more than 1 or 2 guys on the team who can create their own shot. Instead of guys whose primary skill set is chucking up 3-pt shots and allowing offensive rebounds to the opposition.



It's an absolute disgrace that the same defensive woes that plagued the Spurs, in the matchup versus this team 3 years ago, are still prevalent today. The Spurs are in decline defensively because they have several players who in decline. They are either slow-footed, unable to move well laterally and cannot rotate well. They have a roster made up of guys who have NEVER been known for their defensive prowess. Again, this is Pop expecting players to magically excel in areas they've shown no proficiency.

The sickening thing is that the FO had ample time to plan and fix this. They elected not to. In fact, they chose to ignore it. The fact that they won a title in 2007 didn't resolve the roster flaws either. It merely hid them . We saw this on full display again last season versus the Fakers. The Spurs were routinely outhustled, outquicked and outrebounded by a younger, quicker and more athletic team. Yet all that was discussed, both locally and nationally, was Manu's injury and the impact.

Now we're all seeing, firsthand, the results of that roster negligence. The mere fact that Pop actually thought he could continue to trot out a roster of consisting primarily of older players, with similarly declining skills sets, is an indication of organizational and coaching arrogance.

I've used this analogy before and I'll use it again. The best time to put gas in the car is not when you're sitting on the side of the road with an empty tank. In that situation, you're truly behind the curve - as the Spurs are now.

---

Uh....the Spurs FO *DID* sign several key additions in the last 1-2 years to get younger and more athletic: Roger Mason, George Hill, Ime Udoka, Matt Bonner, Drew Gooden. They also signed or attempted to sign several people from overseas: namely Splitter and Mahinmi -- they just haven't panned out yet.

If you're going to criticize the Spurs FO get the facts straight. You can criticize WHO they signed but you certainly can't say they haven't tried to get younger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biggems

Spurs dont flop all that much anymore. Manu hasnt really flopped in 2 years. Hell, this year he was hardly on the court enough to flop.

It is nice of you to find one singular post of mine in this thread to call me out on. Why didn't you call me out in other posts where I said we lost cause we couldnt make our layups. We missed 10-12 layups...we make those, we win the game easily. But no, you simply pick and choose which posts you want to reply to....I was using the post you questioned in to discuss the calls I feel we got shafted on. I never claimed that is why we lost the game......but your jaded reading comprehension says otherwise.

next time, try reading the entire thread before making silly assumptions and accusations.

---

The spurs don't flop much because Manu is not playing. He was responsible for 90% of r the team's flops. Glad a spurs fan admits to their flopping past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sribb43

Thats the best you've got....is blaming the refs, weak:rollin

---

man, the spurs have been blaming the refs for the past 10 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pimptaddy

The spurs don't flop much because Manu is not playing. He was responsible for 90% of r the team's flops. Glad a spurs fan admits to their flopping past.

---

i have never denied we flopped....i did say, we were not as bad as the Kings....and i also have stated that flopping didnt start with Vlade.....

Doc Rivers, Dennis Rodman, Karl Malone, John Stockton, Reggie Miller, Sam Cassell, and Bill Laimbeer were all legendary floppers. Sadly, Ben Wallace is a flopper as well.

Right now some of the biggest floppers are Paul, Varajao, Nash, Bell, Dirk, Gasol, Fisher, and AK47.


but to be honest, i dont blame defenders for flopping....the league has taken away pretty much every other move for defenders to use....they have to do something to counteract all the countless calls the offensive players get away with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supergirl

Uh....the Spurs FO *DID* sign several key additions in the last 1-2 years to get younger and more athletic: Roger Mason, George Hill, Ime Udoka, Matt Bonner, Drew Gooden. They also signed or attempted to sign several people from overseas: namely Splitter and Mahinmi -- they just haven't panned out yet.

If you're going to criticize the Spurs FO get the facts straight. You can criticize WHO they signed but you certainly can't say they haven't tried to get younger.

---

The mere fact that you included Matt Bonner in a thread regarding athletic players sullies your whole point. Mason and Udoka are fine additions. Both good role players and we're happy to have them. Yet, both lack the necessary length, skill and defensive capabilities that would make them lockdown defenders. That is, in part, what the Spurs are missing.

All that aside, the fact remains there is STILL a gaping hole at that position. Here we are with Bowen and Finley both near the end and there is still no answer at the spot. In the end, all that matters is a team having the ability to get stops when needed and winning certain matchups against the opponent. At this time, the Spurs are overmatched at that 3 spot, regardless of opponent, on a game-by-game basis.