Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SpurSwag
I actually feel the complete opposite, I think Patty is an extremely above average shooter and a very versatile one too. I almost have no doubts about him hitting 3's anymore, and this entire past season he was virtually automatic. I don't know many players that have his combination of lethal shooting and great hustle, especially as a back up. Green in Cleveland was a decent shooter and spotty defender who could barely even hang on to a rotation spot on Lebron's team, but the Danny Green pop has molded would be an absolute perfect fit next to Lebron or in any system. I don't think Green now would only fluorish in our system, as I think 3 and D guys are definitely the most important role players in the league, but I think he was created by the system essentially.
Pop hasn't molded Green at all, skill-wise. He was a great shooter and defender in college. He's just a better version of the player he was in 2008. You really should go back and look at his career numbers if you think the Spurs system has made him. It took a come-to-Jesus moment for him to stick with the Spurs, but that was mainly an attitude thing. He was going to get more shots at the NBA. He was a very good d-league player.
Undersized two-guards are a dime a dozen. Even ones who can shoot at an elite level aren't hard to find. But most end up washing out in the league because they lack the skill to play the one and the size to play the two. It works on the Spurs because Ginobili and Diaw can run the offense, and Mills can focus on shooting. Even so, he almost washed out himself until he lost weight and got stronger. The only reason why he had that opportunity is because he is a great teammate, and he was worth holding onto as the 13th man because of it.
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Probably Green. His skills are maximized because of the "Spurs' Way".
As far as Patty Mills goes...true, he was lighting up the board in the 2012 Olympic Games with the highest average ppg, but he wasn't exactly a household name for 4 years in the NBA. He wasn't, that is, until last season. Yes, Patty can score, but I think the Spurs system really helped Patty to flourish in his third (2 full and a partial) season with the Spurs. He's come a long way since being accused of faking a hammy injury and being released by the Xinjiang Flying Tigers in 2012!
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...-Mills-317.jpg
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
I don´t buy that ¨system¨ thing, most championship teams play with some order/system/scheme, guys like Jordan would be monkeyballers without a plan.
Our FO tries to select players carefully is not like they bring any clown here and VOILA! you have a solid piece!
Hard work and time made players like Splitter to flourish and I dont think the system made that, you need good team chemistry too also this is a game where you have to chase the ball and use balls and emotions and play with odd impredictable stuff that happens during a game, maybe some guys here thinks that the credit goes to some playbook and nothing else.
For example Pop saw potential in Danny Green, remember when Stephen Jackson said to Pop he was better than Danny and Manu? Captain Shack got cut and this was before the playoffs where Green made 3843 3s.
Kawhi could be great on any team too.
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chinook
Pop hasn't molded Green at all, skill-wise. He was a great shooter and defender in college. He's just a better version of the player he was in 2008. You really should go back and look at his career numbers if you think the Spurs system has made him. It took a come-to-Jesus moment for him to stick with the Spurs, but that was mainly an attitude thing. He was going to get more shots at the NBA. He was a very good d-league player.
Undersized two-guards are a dime a dozen. Even ones who can shoot at an elite level aren't hard to find. But most end up washing out in the league because they lack the skill to play the one and the size to play the two. It works on the Spurs because Ginobili and Diaw can run the offense, and Mills can focus on shooting. Even so, he almost washed out himself until he lost weight and got stronger. The only reason why he had that opportunity is because he is a great teammate, and he was worth holding onto as the 13th man because of it.
all good points, you're definitely right about mills being able to excel so much due to Manu pretty much being a point guard.
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Obvious candidates are Splitter, Mills and Danny. Odds are they don't stick in the league if not for the Spurs perseverance with them and handing them roles on the system that maximize their strengths and minimize their deficiencies (which were pretty substantial coming into the league). The constant pounding of the idea that they need to excel on their niches, and now can move on to expanding their games. I think all 3 have moved past the growing pains at this point, and now understand what it takes to be in this league.
Now, for a guy that didn't pan out but the system made him look better than he was, you can look at Roger Mason Jr.
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Eh, Mason also looked bad his second year with the Spurs. If anything, he shows why people should never think the Spurs scheme is making their players good. There's a marked difference between how the Mason-era Spurs were compared to now. I'd say that's 90-percent due to personnel and 10 percent to scheme.
I don't think Splitter was close to washing out of the league, though. I think a terrible coach could have chased him back to Europe, but Tiago always had NBA-caliber game.
I also think people need to look back at 2010-2012 Green. That player was going to stick on any roster. I'm still waiting for Danny to get back to that level.
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Chinook
Eh, Mason also looked bad his second year with the Spurs. If anything, he shows why people should never think the Spurs scheme is making their players good. There's a marked difference between how the Mason-era Spurs were compared to now. I'd say that's 90-percent due to personnel and 10 percent to scheme.
I don't think Splitter was close to washing out of the league, though. I think a terrible coach could have chased him back to Europe, but Tiago always had NBA-caliber game.
I also think people need to look back at 2010-2012 Green. That player was going to stick on any roster. I'm still waiting for Danny to get back to that level.
That player choked in big moments tbh.
Re: Which of our players are as good thanks to the Spurs system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
100%duncan
That player choked in big moments tbh.
That player didn't. He was still the best defender in the WCF that year. Pop made the mistake of not realizing that Danny was still a net plus, even if he was slumping.
Anyway, that Green was a lot better off the dribble than this one. He could handle the ball some and shoot a variety of shots from inside the arc. He was a scrapoy defender. He's much more refined now, but he should bring some of his old game back.
