PTR: The Spurs and LaMarcus Should Destroy Opponents Small Ball

Nice read.

http://www.poundingtherock.com/2015/...ll-ball-poison

In short the post and passing ability of Duncan coupled with the post, passing and outside shooting of Aldridge should prevent opponents from going small against us with much success. The author even talks about the trouble the Warriors would have with a match-up with the new Spurs!

Many PTR members immediately replied that the trouble with staying big comes on the defensive side. And until I am proven wrong by watching the new Spurs pound small ball teams, I think they might be right ...

I actually don't think small-ball will be a huge problem. Most teams have been doing what they can to stay big. Look at OKC and Cleveland. Golden State is really the only concern, but if LMA can't guard Draymond, there's nothing the Spurs can do against the Warriors anyway.

We didn't have a problem against small ball before tbh. Even less of a concern going forward.

I'll take a Duncan layup or dunk every play for an occasional three by Barnes or Green. The Warriors will have no defense that can play Duncan if they go small and leave Bogart out of the game.

The Spurs and LaMarcus should destroy opponents. Period.

My body is ready.

Timmy and LMA arent the only ones to destroy small ball line ups Boris and West also small ball killers. Skilled big men are the death of small ball.

We haven't lost to small ball in the playoffs since the OKC series tbqh. And before that we haven't lost to small ball since the suns abberration.

Not worried

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

I actually don't think small-ball will be a huge problem. Most teams have been doing what they can to stay big. Look at OKC and Cleveland. Golden State is really the only concern, but if LMA can't guard Draymond, there's nothing the Spurs can do against the Warriors anyway.

---

:lol No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

:lol No.

---

Meaning that if Draymond is going to force the Spurs to play small to match up, then they lose. Aldridge simply HAS to be able to check the Warriors fourth option, because the Spurs' wings have other people they need to guard.

Teams that try to play small ball against the Spurs this season might just as well go ahead and change their mascot name to "roadkill."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

Meaning that if Draymond is going to force the Spurs to play small to match up, then they lose. Aldridge simply HAS to be able to check the Warriors fourth option, because the Spurs' wings have other people they need to guard.

---

That supposes that Green can be that much of an offensive force. And that also supposes that someone like Diaw can't then come in an do the job. It's a stretch. The way that the Warriors become seeming unstoppable is when both splash brothers are red hot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

That supposes that Green can be that much of an offensive force. And that also supposes that someone like Diaw can't then come in an do the job. It's a stretch. The way that the Warriors become seeming unstoppable is when both splash brothers are red hot.

---

So you're completely agreeing with me but are taking a contradictory tone for some reason?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

So you're completely agreeing with me but are taking a contradictory tone for some reason?

---

I guess you could say I'm agreeing. But what I'm saying is that Green as an individual offensive force isn't what you game plan for. He's limited.

If Mozgov was killing the Warriors inside, TD and LA should have a field day.

We are going to have a big problem against the Warriors,,,quick and athletic always wins nowadays in the NBA,,,not big and powerful. Why do you think Pop has the Spurs transcended to an offensive team over a defensive one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HemisfairArena

We are going to have a big problem against the Warriors,,,quick and athletic always wins nowadays in the NBA,,,not big and powerful. Why do you think Pop has the Spurs transcended to an offensive team over a defensive one?

---

It's not like Green and Leonard cant guard the splash brothers. You couldn't really ask for better defenders against the big. The biggest issue is the xfactor. Will Barnes and Iggy destroy Parker.

At&t center going off this year, be there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbdog

It's not like Green and Leonard cant guard the splash brothers. You couldn't really ask for better defenders against the big. The biggest issue is the xfactor. Will Barnes and Iggy destroy Parker.

---

Depending on how Parker plays, maybe we just play straight up. Iggy and Barnes are capable enough to abuse Parker and gladly will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

Meaning that if Draymond is going to force the Spurs to play small to match up, then they lose. Aldridge simply HAS to be able to check the Warriors fourth option, because the Spurs' wings have other people they need to guard.

---

When the Warriors are small, Green is the center. To play big against them one of Aldridge/Duncan would have to guard a wing, likely Iguodala since he's such a poor 3 point shooter. In fact excludig Curry and Thompson, there are a plethora of average or worse shooters on the Warriors to hide bigger guys on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richie

When the Warriors are small, Green is the center. To play big against them one of Aldridge/Duncan would have to guard a wing, likely Iguodala since he's such a poor 3 point shooter. In fact excludig Curry and Thompson, there are a plethora of average or worse shooters on the Warriors to hide bigger guys on.

---

It's not caliber of shooting that's the primary concern, when trying to hide bigs on a wing (in fact, spot up shooters are ideal), it's whether they're off the dribble threats.

That's what makes the Warriors small ball unit difficult to defend. Even though both Thompson and Barnes have a mediocre handle, they're more than capable of burning most bigs off the dribble.

I'm not the least bit concerned with Aldridge defending Green. Aldridge is surprisingly nimble for not only someone his height, but someone with his bulk. The bigger concern would be Duncan/Parker vs Barnes/Iguodala. I'd go with Duncan on Iguodala, who's a reluctant scorer and mediocre three-point shooter; but if Barnes posting Parker becomes a big enough issue, it might have to be switched.

Overall though, no team is as well equipped as the Spurs to make the Warriors pay for playing this lineup.

Curious to see if we'll see superbig lineups against certain teams. Aldridge-Duncan-West.

Can someone explain me this?

Quote:

---

The Warriors countered by going extra small, knowing that Mozgov wasn't going to be able to take advantage of a wing on offense.

---

Wing on offense? I know what is wing in it's basically meaning. Here, i have no idea what did they want to say.

Can someone write me this, just in a different way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamuza94

Can someone explain me this?



Wing on offense? I know what is wing in it's basically meaning. Here, i have no idea what did they want to say.

Can someone write me this, just in a different way?

---

The Warriors put a 6'7" guy in him and he wasn't able to use his size to punish them in the post

Yeeeep. It did cross my mind at the moment, but I had no idea how I did linked these two things so I gave up of it. :)

Thanks bro. :)

I'm interested to see if the Spurs close out some games with Parker/Manu-Green-Leonard-Diaw-Aldridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richie

When the Warriors are small, Green is the center. To play big against them one of Aldridge/Duncan would have to guard a wing, likely Iguodala since he's such a poor 3 point shooter. In fact excludig Curry and Thompson, there are a plethora of average or worse shooters on the Warriors to hide bigger guys on.

---

Valid point. Iggy hovers around league average and Livingston doesn't even take them anymore. Barnes is a fairly low volume 3pt shooter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Body

Curious to see if we'll see superbig lineups against certain teams. Aldridge-Duncan-West.

---

Diaw-Aldridge-Duncan would be the better pairing. I would assume that lineup would have to have Ginobili and Green to maximize spacing. Aldridge and Diaw are about average 3pt shooters but both are skilled post players.

Several teams have tried this (Utah in 2013 with Milsap, Jefferson and Favors very good defensively, bad offensively) Memphis essentially has been playing like that for a while with Allen/Prince/Green-ZBO-Gasol (A small forward that can't shoot 3's is essentially like having a 3rd big man on the floor).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

I actually don't think small-ball will be a huge problem. Most teams have been doing what they can to stay big. Look at OKC and Cleveland. Golden State is really the only concern, but if LMA can't guard Draymond, there's nothing the Spurs can do against the Warriors anyway.

---

Draymond really isn't that great on offense. He settles for a lot of 3s and takes a lot of dumb high arcing floaters that he almost never makes. He gets a large proportion of his buckets in transition and on layups off broken halfcourt plays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNT Eagles 2016

Draymond really isn't that great on offense. He settles for a lot of 3s and takes a lot of dumb high arcing floaters that he almost never makes. He gets a large proportion of his buckets in transition and on layups off broken halfcourt plays.

---

Pretty much.

Draymond shot 26% from three in both the Playoffs and Finals. Not sure why people think he's Orlando Rashard Lewis, tbh. He's just a hustler, no need to fear his offensive game :lol

There's zero chance we'll ever see a West-Aldridge-Duncan front line.

Diaw playing some SF wouldn't shock me though. It depends if Anderson can do a respectable enough job from 3 and/or defensively because if he can't and neither Simmons/external option can, what would they lose by shoehorning Diaw back into a combo forward? It would also create more playing time for him and West, but less with neither Duncan or Aldridge.

Sure, it's not ideal for obvious reasons, but as we've seen time and time again, within' reason, teams ultimately do what is necessary (like playing Hill alongside Parker and Ginobili for significant minutes or having Neal defend PG's) to get their best players on the floor.

Specifically against the Warriors, Diaw could cause Barnes/Iguodala more problems on the block than they could him on the perimeter, so long as there's enough shooting around him.