Printable View
In a discussion about the Spurs post game, a member of this forum who shall go unnamed made the argument that the Spurs do in fact have a legitimate low post game in way of Manu and Tony driving into the paint for runners.
Do you guys consider this a legitimate low post game for your team?
Yes. Manu driving into the paint, not getting calls, and missing shots lately is the perfect offset to Bynum and Gasol. In fact, we have twin towers with Parker also getting into the lane.Quote:
Originally Posted by KobeSynco_TimQuattro
Quote:
Originally Posted by wontstartdumbthreads
That's what I thought.
No, not really, except that it does draw some defenders away from the perimeter. A low post player typically has a better opportunity to score inside against post defenders, one on one. There can be similar results with Tony and Manu slashing, because of their effectiveness and, seemingly, eyes in the backs of their heads.Quote:
Originally Posted by KobeSynco_TimQuattro
That's pretty much how I feel too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solid D
If a low post game were that easy to emulate through slashers, every team in the league would have "legit post games."
I understand the concept behind the 2 of them slashing and kicking out to the 3p line, which seems to be the Spurs new go to play, but I don't think this comes anywhere close to replacing the value on a legit big man who plays with his back to the basketball operating, like you said, 1 on 1 against a defender.
WTF. You agreed earlier with me that Parker and Manu getting into the lane constituted having a good low post game. Now you take the other side. You are horrible at basketball knowledge. I bet you don't even know how to dribble drive.Quote:
Originally Posted by KobeSynco_TimQuattro
I was being facetious with you since you said that Manu and Tony were the equivalent of twin towers.Quote:
Originally Posted by wontstartdumbthreads
Did you really think that warranted a legitimate response?
Oh. Sorry. I assumed you were being facetious with the original post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe_5_Duncan_4
Self-indictment?Quote:
Originally Posted by wontstartdumbthreads
Must be new for ESPN forum regulars... Spurs been running that same stuff for 7+ seasons now...Quote:
Originally Posted by KobeSynco_TimQuattro
any player that has the size advantage should at least get a play in the post. But a runner in the lane/post is not the same thing. So if Ginobili has Barea guarding him I'd day give him the ball in the post.
I'm not smart enough to know if that was directed at me or the OP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solid D
sooo....yes???
Winner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solid D
lol down to the last troll that is still able to start threads
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
New go to play....
For 7 years this has been the Spurs bread and butter play? They didn't look to isolate Tim on the block? Or run the P&R with Tim and Manu?
Hmmm, strange... I thought they preferred those plays over Manu/Tony's drive and kick to a circle of 3p chuckers.
How long have you been watching the Spurs ElNono? I've been watching them longer than 7 years.... how about you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightpulp
:lmao
What's so funny?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe_5_Duncan_4
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightpulp
Your understanding of the game.
Then if my understanding of the game is so feeble, you should have no problem countering my arguments. Let's start again with this one:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe_5_Duncan_4
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightpulp
The go to play is still the pick and roll, even this season. I don't really expect you to know much of anything so I'm not surprised you have no idea what you're talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe_5_Duncan_4
I enjoy h2b more mounted on Midnight's wall than starting threads, to be frank.
To think history has hated the Spurs for several years, and has trolled Spur Forums for several years. What a life he leads. :lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightpulp
Let's start with the premise that you are coming from a Duncan taint licking POV, which forces you to make excuses for his inability to actually play the low post position. This puts you in face save mode and because you fancy yourself to be a wordsmith you think you can rationalize idiotic basketball fallacies. :lmao
Does guard penetration have the ability to break down a defense and force reactions? Of course. But that was never the question. It was whether relying on this type of play can take the place of a low post game and it can't.
Spurs drive with the intention of kicking the ball out for a low percentage shot: the 3p ball, hence the 3p chucking label. You have a slew of 3p shooters camping out 23 feet and beyond for most of the game. Which is why the Spurs have one of the lowest points-in-the-paint totals in the league. These "high percentage shots" are a figment of your Duncan-loving imagination.
Last night you guys even tried to chuck your way back into the game when you were down big in Miami. It was funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjktkk
I don't hate the Spurs. I won't overrate their limited success and have a broader perspective of what lead to that success than their own fans but hate? No.
Limited success?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe_5_Duncan_4
Limited poster.
[QUOTE=Kobe_5_Duncan_4;5056131]LQuote:
et's start with the premise that you are coming from a Duncan taint licking POV, which forces you to make excuses for his inability to actually play the low post position. This puts you in face save mode and because you fancy yourself to be a wordsmith you think you can rationalize idiotic basketball fallacies. :lmao
:cry
Never stated that. I said they have similar effects, but also recognized they are not completely the same. And I do contend that a team with a great penetrator (or two) can win an NBA title if they're complemented by a defensive frontline, who can control the boards and defend the paint. It's not an absolutely essential need for a team to have a dominant low-post scorer to win an NBA championship. Bill Russell's Celtics kinda proved that theory by winning a few championships despite not having a consistent post-option to rely on. So did the repeat Pistons. So, yeah, I guess I do believe that a great penetration/perimeter game complemented by a good defensive frontline can replace an interior post-game. Prove me wrong.Quote:
Does guard penetration have the ability to break down a defense and force reactions? Of course. But that was never the question. It was whether relying on this type of play can take the place of a low post game and it can't.
No, aside from specific plays called, Parker and Manu look to finish first at the rim and if the shot is not there, they'll kick it out.Quote:
Spurs drive with the intention of kicking the ball out for a low percentage shot: the 3p ball, hence the 3p chucking label. You have a slew of 3p shooters camping out 23 feet and beyond for most of the game. Which is why the Spurs have one of the lowest points-in-the-paint totals in the league. These "high percentage shots" are a figment of your Duncan-loving imagination.
Their points in the paint total is soooooooo bad that it ranks 13th (not one of "the lowest points-in-the-paint totals in the league") in the league and is merely 2.5 points behind the Lakers. Like I've told your self-proclaimed "Basketball Guru" ass over and over again, the Spurs offense isn't their problem. It's the fact they will get killed on the boards against a team like LA, and because of Duncan's decline and the lack of a second defensive big, their interior defense is weak, and does indeed rank near the bottom of the list at number 20.
Glad you got a laugh. But you still don't know shit about basketball.Quote:
Last night you guys even tried to chuck your way back into the game when you were down big in Miami. It was funny.
I wonder if KobeCinco_TimQuatro was taken . . .
[QUOTE=Kobe_5_Duncan_4;5056131]LQuote:
et's start with the premise that you are coming from a Duncan taint licking POV, which forces you to make excuses for his inability to actually play the low post position. This puts you in face save mode and because you fancy yourself to be a wordsmith you think you can rationalize idiotic basketball fallacies. :lmao
:cry
Never stated that. I said they have similar effects, but also recognized they are not completely the same. And I do contend that a team with a great penetrator (or two) can win an NBA title if they're complemented by a defensive frontline, who can control the boards and defend the paint. It's not an absolutely essential need for a team to have a dominant low-post scorer to win an NBA championship. Bill Russell's Celtics kinda proved that theory by winning a few championships despite not having a consistent post-option to rely on. So did the repeat Pistons. As did the '04 Pistons. As did the '08 Celtics (and no, KG is not a great low-poster scorer). And I would like to see how much Jordan slashed/drove as compared to going to the post during his first 3 peat. During the second 3 peat, he definitely looked to post up his man more, but I suspect he slashed more than posted up during the early 90s. So, yeah, I guess I do believe that a very good/great penetration/perimeter game complemented by a very good/great defensive frontline can replace an interior post-game. Prove me wrong. My proof: Russell's Celtics, the repeat Pistons, the '04 Pistons, and the '08 Celtics.Quote:
Does guard penetration have the ability to break down a defense and force reactions? Of course. But that was never the question. It was whether relying on this type of play can take the place of a low post game and it can't.
No, aside from specific plays called, Parker and Manu look to finish first at the rim and if the shot is not there, they'll kick it out.Quote:
Spurs drive with the intention of kicking the ball out for a low percentage shot: the 3p ball, hence the 3p chucking label. You have a slew of 3p shooters camping out 23 feet and beyond for most of the game. Which is why the Spurs have one of the lowest points-in-the-paint totals in the league. These "high percentage shots" are a figment of your Duncan-loving imagination.
Their points in the paint total is soooooooo bad that it ranks 13th (not one of "the lowest points-in-the-paint totals in the league") in the league and is merely 2.5 points behind the Lakers. Like I've told your self-proclaimed "Basketball Guru" ass over and over again, the Spurs offense isn't their problem. It's the fact they will get killed on the boards against a team like LA, and because of Duncan's decline and the lack of a second defensive big, their interior defense is weak, and does indeed rank near the bottom of the list at number 20.
Glad you got a laugh. But you still don't know shit about basketball.Quote:
Last night you guys even tried to chuck your way back into the game when you were down big in Miami. It was funny.
And what the fuck is he talking about me "making excuses for Duncan's inability to play the low-post position?" Does this moron even read what he writes?
First of all, Duncan is still able to play the low-post position, just not at a consistently elite level anymore. Furthermore, the Lakers interior defense is perfectly suited to shut down Duncan at this point in his career. Hell, even at his peak, the combination of Bynum and Gasol would make him work for every point. Congratulations, you have a great frontline. That doesn't mean Duncan is unable to play the post, and it sure as hell doesn't lead to "me making excuses for his inability to play the post," whatever the hell that means. Lol.
Simply another indictment of history2b's lack of intelligence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackjack
Too bad the guy looks up to Kobe Bryant and not Budd Dwyer.
And this faggot still can't explain how the Spurs are a "3 point chucking team" when they average a whopping 2.5 more 3 point attempts a game. Also worth mentioning is that the Spurs average a higher Free throw-to-field goal-attempted ratio than the Lakers. You'd think that the Spurs, "a jump shooting/3 point chucking team" should be nowhere near the Lakers, who supposedly live in the interior, in that stat.
The Spurs' problem is the interior defense. Their offense is fine.
Yeah, they've been scoring at will.Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightpulp
Sometimes you get shutdown. It happens. No need to mash the panic button in that regard. More concerning than scoring 80 against the Heat and 83 against the Lakers is letting the likes of Detroit, Sacramento, and an injured Houston break 100 points.Quote:
Originally Posted by wontstartdumbthreads
No doubt the lack of defense is more troubling. But without the strong low post game needed to grind it out through the playoffs, I wouldn't say the offense is fine. It's fine for the regular season and for getting HCA but not a title.Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightpulp
If they can't consistently win playoff games scoring around 90 points a game, then they have no business being there in the first place. And I'm pretty confident this team will be able to average 90 a game against the elite teams, problem is, they'll probably let the other team average a 100.Quote:
Originally Posted by wontstartdumbthreads
And Duncan's low post game is still above average, it just looks like shit against the Lakers, who have the best interior defense in the league, or at the very least, the best interior defense against a player like Duncan. Perimeter oriented bigs with athleticism like Bosh and Aldrige do much better against them.
Tim's post game is still amongst the best in the league. But you're absolutely right that judging him against the likes of a Lakers team is moronic. Great length and size combined with better mobility = not good for Duncan.
But it's not like they throw the rock to him consistently inside. The Spurs are attacking the Lakers in a completely different way - much more perimeter and pick-and-roll oriented. Tim's been left with sparse opportunities and largely left to take the jumper.
Tim's always been a rhythm player and the older you get, especially for a post player, the more touches/consistency you need. The trick becomes knowing how to get the best from the individual in the confines of a team - Patrick Ewing could have still put up numbers at the tail end of his career had he been fed similarly to his prime years, his teams just would have been blown out the gym on a nightly basis.
But Tim's still an elite post player, he's just not the Tim Duncan we've known on this championship run.
And I agree about the offense being fine. The Spurs are having their best offensive season since 94-95. Offense ain't the problem. It's all about the D. Spurs have won 4 titles with a less potent offense, their D was just light years ahead of this outfit.
Spurs have to close that gap or it's lights out. ... And h2b could learn a lot from Mr. Dwyer. ;)
:tuQuote:
Originally Posted by Blackjack
As for the last point, we can only hope. :lol