Printable View
McDyess was 2-8 from the field(10 boards too though) and Jefferson was 3-8 from the field and did nothing else, as usual..I wouldn't call those "decent" games..
There was also no 3-point shooting, no contributions at all from our #4, #5 and #6 wing players, and this team doesn't play D anymore..
I think the big 3 playing at the level we expect is easily enough to win a title..the role players aren't even close to being enough though..
I'm all for the half full approach, but we cannot continue to give games away when we have played so well. Portland made shots, and forced turnovers, so props to them. Where's the mental focus to close the game out? Transition defense was absolutely terrible. Shot selection has to improve in crunch time.
Don't take it out on me because you posted a ridiculous thread and didn't get the usual cadre of bouquets that you're used to and were probably expecting.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Dyess played fantastic d on Aldridge most of the time, better than Tim Duncan did IMO, and snared those boards. He did concede a couple glaring mistakes when he didn't get a hand up on Webster. As for RJ, no it actually isn't a decent game for him, I agree. Blair and Hill both stepped up, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
So after telling me to give it up and saying I'm clinging to hope, you haven't given up and are clinging to hope? Got it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
I'm sure even you can agree that without a healthy Big Three, that 0.5% goes down to 0.0%. (And note that this thread isn't about the Big Three playing well at the same time, it's about the Big Three being healthy for the first time all season. Huge difference.)
This team is one "Bowenesqe" type perimeter defender, who like Bruce, can score enough to keep defenses honest, away from truly contending.
I'll actually agree with McDyess, but he's usually automatic with his J..I'll say that he played well though, other than the missed rotations, which obviously hurt..Quote:
Originally Posted by z0sa
Jefferson is supposed to be a huge part of this team though..
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Now I gotta think this cat is just trolling. Either that or he needs to go back to post one and start from there.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Agreed; while it's a tad bit sad we're happy over our best guys just being healthy at the same period of time, it also gives you hope that this team's best days are still ahead of them. It takes time to get in the groove..
And you're saying I lack reading comprehension? I'm not clinging to hope, but I also can't say with absolute 100% certainty that this team can't/won't win the championship. There's still a good chance they make the playoffs, so from there, technically every team has a chance.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
Yeah, I just basically said as much, genius. But what you don't seem to understand is that, while it's not meaningless, it doesn't mean a whole lot anymore because, this team has major issues outside of them, even when they are all healthy/playing well, as witnessed tonight.
I don't troll, as many who have conversed with me on this board can attest to. What's the matter, shocked someone doesn't agree with you for once? How dare I.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
I saw this one coming...
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145866
Sad, yes. But also not totally unexpected. Heading into the season, most Spurs fans said that the health of the Big Three was the biggest concern. Unfortunately, it has taken this long for those three players to look even close to healthy at the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by z0sa
The Celtics are kinda in the same boat in hoping for health ... so it's not like this is too unique. But Boston's advantage is they actually play well when healthy. The Spurs, on the other hand, still are a mediocre team even at 100% right now.
From what standpoint?Quote:
Originally Posted by z0sa
Blair needs to rotate a lot quicker from the weak side and become more aware on that end of the court. The Blazers' guards were just going straight to him off the pick and roll, where he was either late and out of position outside the circle, or he was late and had good position inside the circle.
All three of your suggested players had horrible and I mean horrible transition defense. I'm tempted to go back and watch the game because I guarantee you the Blazers scored at least 15-20 points off uncontested wide open opportunities in transition because our players lost their man or simply didn't communicate to pick up eachother's man in transition. All that takes is focus and energy. That's why it is so frustrating.
As for McDyess, I thought McDyess played great one on one defense on Aldridge. Aldridge just hit some really tough fade-aways and contested jumpers all game. I think McDyess is an under-rated one on one defender. He's defended Odom, Nowitzki and many other premiere power forwards quite well.
As for Hill, I think 38 minutes is too much for him. I've been beating this to death, but Spurs need to find a starting caliber well rounded wing to replace the Mason/ Bogans/ Finley combination and also to relieve Jefferson and Hill some.
Well..they do have a young guy in Austin that could handle some bench minutes against athletic teams..Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
One check on the list of things we need to contend.
I haven't worried too much about health because you can't control that. The largest leap we need to make at the moment is in defense and consistency. These are things that the players and the coaches should be able to fix, whether through a trade or practice or whatever.
All you can do as a fan is hope the FO sees the same things.
He's gone through different stages, but at this point it almost seems like he just can't get into any sort of rhythm in his current role. What even is his current role? He either needs the Spurs to run a lot more, or he needs to dominate the ball a lot more. Neither will happen consistently with the Spurs squad as constructed.. I think he has a lot of unrealized potential with us, but he needs to accept his touches and make more out of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
Hairston is not ready and wouldn't be consistent enough to play 25-30 minutes a night. If Spurs want to improve their chances at getting past the 1st round this year, they need someone better than Mason/ Bogans/Finley and Hairston. Especially with R.J rubbing one out more games than not.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlemHeat37
I wanna see timvp and td 21 throw down in the octagon.
You're not clinging to hope but you haven't closed the door on a championship? What exactly does "clinging to hope" mean to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
That's exactly what I've been saying. Show me anywhere that I said the Spurs don't have major issues. I've said multiple times being healthy in itself means nothing. Again, you are arguing against an opinion I haven't even stated.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
So far you've gone after me for not giving up and supposedly having hope, when you yourself haven't given up and still have hope. Then your next move is to go after me for saying this team doesn't have major problems, which is something I didn't say. At least be based in reality. You are attacking your own opinions more than you are attacking anything I've actually said.
:lmao Wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by TD 21
First of all, more people disagree than agree with me in this thread. Second of all, how can I be shocked when I cued this upcoming flaming in the opening post of the thread?
Got damn.
:lol He's not arguing with me ... I'm not exactly sure who he's arguing with. We actually agree on everything, as weird as that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by jjktkk
He cannot be a huge part of this team. The team and him are not designed that way. Frankly, all I wanted was a Finley that would attempt some defense (and that's all we need). Jefferson doesn't need to go off for 24 ppg to compete, especially when you consider the way he gets his points. We'd be spending all game making plays for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by z0sa
The problem is that he is really expensive for what you get. Tough luck. We either trade him or keep him as a spot up shooter that can dunk and play no defense (pretty much 06 Finley).
Our interior and perimeter D are pretty bad, and they aren't helped by having Finley 2.0 and a coasting/still learning Dice. I don't think you can change Jefferson's output. Dice at least has the potential to turn it around and we know what he can produce as a role player.
As has been the issue all year, we have multiple problems. I have no clue how to solve them. Standing pat looks like it will be a huge gamble, hoping that all the pieces fall in place. A trade for any decent perimeter defender and scorer (the non-existent Bowen heir) is really needed, followed up by an interior defender.
At least we are healthy, for now. In theory the rest can actually be fixed. I dunno what the last team that actually did a massive retooling actually won the title the same year though. We are leaking oil everywhere and headed to a second round exit as is.
Decent might be over exaggerating a bit, I agree, especially on the defensive end, but if you're expecting these guys to suddenly snap and get it overnight, you shouldn't be surprised at your disappointment. There's clearly work to be done and any steps we take in the right direction need to be taken seriously. Especially with a guy like Blair, who's a rookie and who is going to make mistakes, and who is not going to be respected by the refs and who is not going to be perfect. One criticizes him and demands he get better but you do it with the fact he's inexperienced and he's done a lot more than most expected in mind; and even Hill, who is overrated defensively and still has a lot of work to do on that end because he's still not used to playing consistently against this (starting) level of competition yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
Blair definitely has a lot of work to do on defense, and he didn't get a lot of defensive rebounds tonight either.. but he got some shots to fall (including a nice putback dunk) and nailed 3/4 FTs. Gotta take the good with the bad; Pop could simply stop playing him a la Hill, and no one wants that.Quote:
Blair needs to rotate a lot quicker from the weak side and become more aware on that end of the court. The Blazers' guards were just going straight to him off the pick and roll, where he was either late and out of position outside the circle, or he was late and had good position inside the circle.
They were making a concerted effort to run, as it was essentially their only offensive weapon against us. Miller is just about the best you can ask for to do that, as well. They killed us in transition and they got good looks in the halfcourt, but things didn't look out of hand until the last 5 minutes.Quote:
All three of your suggested players had horrible and I mean horrible transition defense. I'm tempted to go back and watch the game because I guarantee you the Blazers scored at least 15-20 points off uncontested wide open opportunities in transition because our players lost their man or simply didn't communicate to pick up eachother's man in transition. All that takes is focus and energy. That's why it is so frustrating.
Agreed. I thought his d has been amazing through stretches, but when he fouls he totally loses all his rhythm. At least he's begun living up to his second-half reputation.Quote:
As for McDyess, I thought McDyess played great one on one defense on Aldridge. Aldridge just hit some really tough fade-aways and contested jumpers all game. I think McDyess is an under-rated one on one defender. He's defended Odom, Nowitzki and many other premiere power forwards quite well.
On Hill, it's really hard to say what is too much for him. He's got the talent, but he's still rough around the edges. I like him getting the experience but with Mason rotting on the bench it's a questionable call. He also missed a few very open looks tonight and that ended up hurting us.
Yup, I hardly agree with anything he says...Timvp is more of a motivator for the lost sheep that are willing to clinge to any bones of hope that they can get.Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
:hungry:
If this is the case, I was very wrong in my preseason expectations.. I actually believed we would run our offense through him during some stretches, but we've rarely attempted feeding him multiple possessions over a short period of time to try and get him going.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabar
There's a reason we traded our garbage for him - he's not worth the pricetag. Just gotta forget about basing yuor expectations on that, especially when the team never runs their offense through him like he's a 14 million dollar man.Quote:
The problem is that he is really expensive for what you get. Tough luck. We either trade him or keep him as a spot up shooter that can dunk and play no defense (pretty much 06 Finley).
I'm liking what Dyess is doing lately. When he brings what he brought tonight (minus the horribly timed defensive mishaps), we're a much tougher team defensively and opponents have to respect his shot. If he can continue living up to his second half reputation, I have a lot more hope for this season still..Quote:
Our interior and perimeter D are pretty bad, and they aren't helped by having Finley 2.0 and a coasting/still learning Dice. I don't think you can change Jefferson's output. Dice at least has the potential to turn it around and we know what he can produce as a role player.
I have to disagree..Quote:
Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres
There's no reason at all that Hairston shouldn't be getting 10 to 15 MPG on this Spurs team that desperately needs athleticism and D on the wing IMO..especially when inferior players like Bogans and Finley are getting 20 MPG to do nothing..
Of course he isn't ready for 25-30 MPG, I agree..
I agree with you that we need a legit starter on the wing, especially for athletic/defensive purposes..either that or a legit big to help Timmy..the better defenses in the NBA use 1 of these 2 methods to play good D, some teams have both..either have the length/athleticism in the paint or have the athletes/good defenders on the perimeter to pressure the ball-handlers and rotate..
Either one works..the Spurs need to get that legit big or that legit wing player..I won't hope for both since that's too greedy, but we certainly need at least one of them..
Boston has their defenders in the paint and the all-around basketball IQ..Orlando has a 1-man defense in Howard with Barnes to guard the best player(this one isn't a good example to follow..I've been watching every Magic game since I follow Carter and Howard's ability as a defensive anchor is just unreal)..Charlotte uses the good perimeter defenders as pressure..the Lakers have a little bit of both, but they primarily play good D due to their size in the frontcourt..Cleveland has the perimeter approach with Varajeo being a mobile big to help..
So it can go either way..we don't have either right now..so a move has to be made..
As for Jefferson, I really hope they're trying to move him as hard as possible..he really isn't going to fit..
I can't comment too much because I didn't get to see the game. But damnit man...when is someone going to step up and help this team win these types of games?
I appreciate the fact that the big 3 looked great. For timvp is correct...this team doesn't have a chance if they aren't healthy.
But what is it about RJ? This guy should be able to take control at some point in a game and give this team something other than mediocre play. The team gets more out of a second year player and rookie than it does from a high paid supposedly top caliber seasoned vet like Jefferson. You can't tell me it's just the "system" that takes time to learn...others on the team are new to it too and seemed to have gotten it before Jefferson.
As a business person this erks to me no end seeing somebody get paid as much as this guy and produces as little as he does. :bang