So out of curiosity, are there ANY coaches in the NBA that you think are good, or is it only posters on internet message board that know how to run an NBA team properly?Quote:
Originally Posted by freetiago
Printable View
So out of curiosity, are there ANY coaches in the NBA that you think are good, or is it only posters on internet message board that know how to run an NBA team properly?Quote:
Originally Posted by freetiago
Genius move tbh, nobody would've thought that playing the rotation that won us 58 games would make our team better than playing midget ball.:toast
What he was supposed to do....?
Show me the silver misfit or the freetiago post that says put Green on Curry to shut him down?
Bunch of losers that would roll up in the fetal position if asked to coach YMCA.
What cracks me up is the writer of the blog is a hardcore Warrior fan, a guy that knows his team the way we know ours, and he's the one giving the credit to Pop for making this adjustment. We have people who say that GSW was shooting their normal percentages in games 1 and 2 and then we have people who say they just missed shots that were wide open like before, despite the fact that having 2 real bigs in made it possible for the high post big to extend out further.
Sometimes I think we're on a crazy status, you can't stop crazy. However, reality will show us what's what and I am one fan who is happy that Pop is still Executive VP and Coach of the San Antonio Spurs.
True Story - Manager Arsen Wegner of Arsenal in the English Premier League and Coach Gregg Popovich both started leading their respective teams in 1996.
In general Pop doesn't get enough credit on here. Too many fools on here talking about how much he sucks when he's always been a top 3 coach in the NBA for at least a decade. Calling people who disagree "Popsuckers" as their main argument just proves their insecurity over how terrible their takes on him are.
I agree. Pop stuck with De Colo way too long this year when he clearly wasn't performing very well. He should've gone to Joseph earlier, or at least more often once he brought up him from the Toros. CJo really could've used the extra couple months of NBA experience so he could play a larger role this postseason. We're still kinda stuck in the, "If Parker or Manu get hurt we're fucked" mode because we don't have a legit backup playmaker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurs21Fan4Ever
So, out of curiosity, was it just as obvious to you that the key to putting Curry off balance was to bring the double team at the top of the arc instead of closer to the lane? Is that another useful coaching tidbit that everybody knows and that you've been complaining about all along?Quote:
Originally Posted by freetiago
Honestly, I may have missed someone else talking about it, but the only person I saw mention this possibility before the game was Zach Lowe at Grantland, and he got there by watching a crapload of film on Curry and supplementing it with research into SportVU data. He also made a point of noting that Curry's game had changed significantly with the Lee injury, and that the only other NBA coach to get a shot at Curry in the playoffs, George Karl, hadn't been able to counter him effectively.
So I guess Pop only knows how to make the coaching moves that are so obvious that not even other above-average NBA coaches know how to make.
I'm certainly no expert in breaking down NBA film myself, but I know my limitations. You seem to be living in some kind of delusional fantasy world in which all there is to coaching is putting the right 5 guys on the floor and watching the fucking magic happen. You should be fucking embarrassed by the shit you post, and you're just too stupid to even realize it.
To be honest, I don't even really know what you're trying to say here. I agree with you that the Warriors are a streaky team. I also think the Spurs played better defense by limiting the Warriors' possessions. Curry didn't have a bad game simply because he missed shots; he had a bad game because he didn't TAKE a lot of shots. That had everything to do with Green's ball pressure. If you go back and watch the game, you can see Curry's confidence is shot by the end of the third quarter. They stopped trying to give Curry the ball. He is their most efficient player by far. Him not touching the ball hurts their offense. It would be as if the Spurs went away from Parker.Quote:
Originally Posted by DMC
I think your analysis of the Warriors' offense is good. But it doesn't make the Spurs' defensive effort any less noteworthy.
Basically look at the shooting percentages. Many of those shots that have been falling for Curry and Thompson did not fall last night. Curry had a bad night all around. He's a chucker and that's how it goes with them. Win or lose by 1 point and everyone dissects the game as if there are flags that indicate the reasons for the win or the loss, but the fact is that it came down to making or missing shots. Nothing else really changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
The defense isn't really noteworthy. The Spurs turned the ball over like 4 consecutive times in the 4th quarter last night. There were ample opportunities for the Warriors to take the lead or tie the game. They just missed shots. If you miss a shot you can say it was too hard, which equates in this case to too much defense, but the same shot you hit last night with the same hand in your face went in. What do you credit for that? If shooting is a skill, then the skill is lacking on some nights? No, you aren't zeroed in as well, and you aren't hitting. When enough people aren't hitting, your team loses. Defense is important but the defense has been there all series. It's silly to have to defend a guy 7 feet past the 3pt line but when Curry is hitting the Spurs are forced to do that and it opens up the middle. Curry has been off since game 1 so the middle wasn't open since, but Klay was shooting lights out in game 2. Last night Curry is still off, the paint isn't as much a free for all, and Klay wasn't making shots. Simple as that.
Are you really Pop just posting as DMC? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DMC
the adjustment for this game was a lot like the adjustment for 4th quarter overtime in game 1.
1) Completely took away the middle by pressuring early past halfcourt. The first line of defense did a great job on this, particularly Joseph. Tony did a great job as well. They didn't allow the Warriors to masturbate at the top of the key and wait for a killer pass to a wing shooter, and they took away dribble penetration. The Warriors were pretty insistent in getting it back up top, so the Spurs immediately denied, and took away the back door as well. Pretty simple Spurs defense basketball concept, that they seem to forget sometimes.
2) Once the ball got to the middle, Green and Leonard did the dirty work. Doesn't really count as an adjustment, moreso than it is the aftermath of the first adjustment of forcing to one side. Also, Green and Leonard were just on defensively, so that helped. They didn't get screened off too much, and simply hustled getting to their man. Diaw and Tim were exceptional if anything got to the middle. Obviously some dunks will occur off slipped rotations, but it's better than a perpetual layup line.
3) Less Bonner and less Neal worked wonders for the defense. Absolute night and day.
4) We all know Parker has an on/off button. Tonight he was "on". Ironically, other than the periodic 4-down, there was less heroball and more motion off the loop and pick and roll. The Warriors took away the paint at first, but once the midrange started going down, everything opened up. Again not so much an adjustment than it is just having an on night--hitting like 80% in the first half helped though.
The main adjustments were minutes-wise. At the end of the day the Spurs just showed up on both ends.
Biggest adjustment was gst shooters finally cooling off and spurs picking up their defensive intensity.green is now bothering curry and kawhai's got a lil something for klay.
What other coach in the NBA would rely on Bonner as much as Pop has? That's got to be one of the biggest issues. It's taking him 3 years to realize our best chance of winning involves Tiago being our starting center. We're not saying he's a superstar or savior but it maximizes our chances of winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseractive
I don't see how people think that Curry much less Thompson were getting as many open looks. There is absolutely no acknowledgment of keeping Curry out of the lane a hell of a lot better either.
So glad Pop's such a brilliant coach that he waited until game 3 to make an adjustment I was talking about during game 1.
Because Tiago couldn't yet play due to his ankle, couldn't one say that Pop had his team adjust and when he had Tiago back to full strength, he just made his team go back to base sets? The adjustment was made and we see Spurs ball because of it. Credit goes to Pop AND his players for sticking to the gameplan and for having the discipline to not freestyle.
The decision to send a big out to help with the pick and roll could have been made at any time prior to game 3, regardless of who was in the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Man In Black
There's a lot of things that go into who goes out on the court. One of them is injuries, and Tiago has had some issues, especially rookie year. Another is putting in the work, learning the system, and making the right plays. You can be a far better player, but if you're not making the right defensive rotations, or you're committing dumb fouls, or you don't know the plays -- or even if you've just been slacking off in practice or something -- you're going to be in Pop's doghouse. Accountability is pretty fundamental to good player development, and Pop has a very strong track record for developing players given the lack of high picks he has to work with.Quote:
Originally Posted by therealtruth
I don't know exactly why Tiago got less playing time in seasons 1 & 2, but I do know that it's far from a given that he would have been just as effective then as he has been this year.
Bonner is a stopgap and he always has been. There are lots of things he's not very good at, and his shooting motion isn't quick enough to consistently get his shot off against good playoff teams. But he plays within himself, he doesn't generally miss rotations or make other unforced mistakes, and he's not a terrible player to have as your 4th or (better) 5th big man. Even Pop knows that he really only belongs in spot minutes, to take advantage of very specific matchups, or if a real player can't go. When Bonner was getting big minutes, it was because of a roster problem, not gross stupidity.
Which big did you think would work best given the choices that Pop had at the time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Which big did you think would work best given the choices that Pop had at the time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
If I could choose anyone, I'd probably choose the one on the floor during the pick and roll. Standing 15 feet away from the play while Bogut and Curry work on Joseph or Parker wasn't very successful. Again, it's a strategic decision, and has nothing to do with who's on the floor (IMHO). The Spurs got pummelled doing it the way they did it. There's not a case to be made that they'd have gotten pummeled worse if they'd disrupted Curry on the picks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Man In Black