Game Grades Nov. 9 Rockets at Spurs-L

I'm not crazy about giving letter grades because it is so subjective, but the site seems to want it so whatever. The most important part of course is how the grader saw the game and the relative contributions of the players. Again, it is subjective and is the basis for the letter grades. I think these comments by all our graders are useful for comparison to our own opinions (if we are open to comparisons and other opinions than our own).

Anyway, I appreciate you taking the time to share and I thought most of your opinions were good analysis. Keep doing them.

this is a lot of work, nice

Thanks for the grades and effort. I thought you described the game well. I'm hoping they study the tape and see they need to get others involved. I'm enjoying seeing Nico out there and have confidence in his shot. He would have had some nice assist if people weren't missing wide open shots. :toast

Thanks for the time and effort to provide ST with your grades. :toast

Good work :tu

Laprovittola has to go back!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chinook

This obviously took a lot of effort, SAG, and thanks for putting it in.

I don't disagree with the grades. This game was certainly a learning experience. The Spurs need to diversify their offense. Even if you want Kawhi to use up like 30-plus possessions, they don't have to be isos. Run him off screens. Have him roll. Do something that actually puts pressure on five guys as opposed to one or two.

Simmons was great because he was doing exactly what the team needed which was to pick his spots and to be aggressive in those spots. Bertans becoming passive concerns me. There is something Pop isn't doing right. Dude was fearless in Europe. Patty and Lee is a good combo, so if he goes back to the bench there's hope there.

---

Wasn't able to watch the game but in the few minutes I've seen of Bertans, he has seemed hesitant to let it fly. Heading into the season it seemed as though he might have a rotation spot at some point, but with Simmons and Anderson ahead of him on the wing, I wonder if he is concerned about getting the short hook, when he does play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bklynspursfan

I don't think it's a Pop thing though, cause we saw him play with confidence in other games when the games were pretty much sealed. Confidence has to come from within. Pop is showing confidence by playing him when he did, I think he brought him in fairly early last night.

---

One criticism I have with Pop is that if his shooters are not getting shots, he will need to call up a play for them like he's done for Danny and Mills at times, when due to the way the game was developing, a long time relatively speaking had passed without them getting a 3 pt shot out. Pop understands that he needs the 3 pt shot to win games and sometimes selectively spoon feeds it to someone.

For both guys, they need to be aggressive with their shots, but if that is not happening, then a play needs to be called to get them a shot. I suspect Pop is watching players play this early (he famously said he wasn't coaching LMA for the first half of last season for example and was just observing him, and he has indicated one of the things he watches is how guys play with each other and fit next to each other). Lack of chemistry and trust in teammates made it so that there is not enough involvement of new guys, or screening for each other.

Good grades and thanks for sharing.

I agree on Kawhi receiving not having an A. He needs to get others involved, period. If he wants to be the leader of this team, he needs to make players around him play better. We all love his improvement with season, but we might have jumped into conclusions too soon. I don't really like this Kobe version of him, taking 20+ shots game after game while having more turnovers than assists and collecting accolades of the best defensive player, or the best two way player in the league.

Nice effort. I... passed out? I don't know. I don't remember the 2nd half and I honestly don't think I watched it.
I did end up at home this time though, when I woke up. Thank God for small favors.

Neymar A++ for beating Messi-led Argentina..

It'll take a while for this team to gel and play consistent basketball. Currently, I'm more disappointed in our vets. They should be able to hold the fort until the new/young guys get acclimated to the playbook. They just haven't stepped up.

Thanks for the grades.

4 A's, 5 if you want to bump Leonard up. And we lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbdog

4 A's, 5 if you want to bump Leonard up. And we lost.

---

Because two of the guys the team counts on heavily (Gasol and LMA) played poorly. Maybe Pop's grade needs to be reduced bc some argue he should have played Danny and Simmons more, less Manu... anyways, it's subjective, but the game was close and winnable bc some guys played well. When your stars don't show up and can't stay on the floor and you are asking roleplayers to up their game or Kawhi to consume nearly 40% of the possessions when he's on the floor and compound that with bad shot selection, the team was in trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Because two of the guys the team counts on heavily (Gasol and LMA) played poorly. Maybe Pop's grade needs to be reduced bc some argue he should have played Danny and Simmons more, less Manu... anyways, it's subjective, but the game was close and winnable bc some guys played well. When your stars don't show up and can't stay on the floor and you are asking roleplayers to up their game or Kawhi to consume nearly 40% of the possessions when he's on the floor and compound that with bad shot selection, the team was in trouble.

---

All of this makes me depressed, but also sad. Many of us loved rooting for a team with several good - if not "first" - options. Watching what Kahistorm calls "Melo 2.0 offense" is pretty sad.

It is quite apparent that the greatness of TD masked some pretty poor decisions by PATFO through the years. And now the team's cupboard is very bare. Pop will try to get past that by overusing Kawhi. It is like Kawhi has become Pop's own personal tool to prove the validity of the Peter Principle. :depressed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RD2191

I'll be happy if Kawhi can get us to the 2nd round with our current roster. I know some idiots here want to compare him to Lebron but let's remember LeBron has played most of his career in a very weak Eastern Conference. Spurs might be the 4th or 5th best team out West if we're being completely honest with ourselves.

---

Considering the way Softridge/Pau/Manu/Porker are playing this team isn't better than the 2013 OKC squad that lost in the 2nd rd to the Grizzlies when Durant had to roll solo w/o WestBrick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

It is quite apparent that the greatness of TD masked some pretty poor decisions by PATFO through the years.

---

That's a little strong. Actually, that's a lot strong. As much recognition as Tim got, he was still under-rated by most. But... the team still has to put 5 players on the floor for 48 minutes a night. The Spurs' FO managed put winning teams together, on a small-market budget. And they managed to never have a rebuilding year (or two, or three) for the entire Tim Duncan era. That part is freaking amazing, if not unprecedented.

Tim carried the team, no doubt. And people are starting to get a better understanding of that. But in the age of the salary cap, the Spurs FO gave him an incredibly consistent supporting cast. One of the biggest things we are seeing is the result of the Spurs investing heavily in the last few years of Tim's career, in an attempt to keep that consistency going and give him another chance to carry them to one more Championship. After the near-miss in '13, and the Championship in '14, they pretty much had to keep it together to try and repeat.

The point is, the FO made a BUNCH of great moves for almost two decades. Then in the last few years, they pretty much did what they had to do. This year, they pretty much took what they could get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

All of this makes me depressed, but also sad. Many of us loved rooting for a team with several good - if not "first" - options. Watching what Kahistorm calls "Melo 2.0 offense" is pretty sad.

It is quite apparent that the greatness of TD masked some pretty poor decisions by PATFO through the years. And now the team's cupboard is very bare. Pop will try to get past that by overusing Kawhi. It is like Kawhi has become Pop's own personal tool to prove the validity of the Peter Principle. :depressed

---

Manu, Parker and Kawhi were steals. You dont win 5 rings with only one great player. Also....its an end of an era, lets admit it, and expecting a smooth transition into a new one with another ring are unheard of unless you are the Celtics of the 60s, 70s, and 80's. We have to wait out Manus, and Parkers belief that they can contribute meaningfully as every fading star feels he can do....and some actually do like Duncan. Having said that LMA should be contributing a whole lot more and as of now, agree that RC Buford may have made a mistake on this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

That's a little strong. Actually, that's a lot strong. As much recognition as Tim got, he was still under-rated by most. But... the team still has to put 5 players on the floor for 48 minutes a night. The Spurs' FO managed put winning teams together, on a small-market budget. And they managed to never have a rebuilding year (or two, or three) for the entire Tim Duncan era. That part is freaking amazing, if not unprecedented.

Tim carried the team, no doubt. And people are starting to get a better understanding of that. But in the age of the salary cap, the Spurs FO gave him an incredibly consistent supporting cast. One of the biggest things we are seeing is the result of the Spurs investing heavily in the last few years of Tim's career, in an attempt to keep that consistency going and give him another chance to carry them to one more Championship. After the near-miss in '13, and the Championship in '14, they pretty much had to keep it together to try and repeat.

The point is, the FO made a BUNCH of great moves for almost two decades. Then in the last few years, they pretty much did what they had to do. This year, they pretty much took what they could get.

---

Preach. Makes me want to raise my hands to the sky. Tell me what it is... Gee whiz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

That's a little strong. Actually, that's a lot strong. As much recognition as Tim got, he was still under-rated by most. But... the team still has to put 5 players on the floor for 48 minutes a night. The Spurs' FO managed put winning teams together, on a small-market budget. And they managed to never have a rebuilding year (or two, or three) for the entire Tim Duncan era. That part is freaking amazing, if not unprecedented.

Tim carried the team, no doubt. And people are starting to get a better understanding of that. But in the age of the salary cap, the Spurs FO gave him an incredibly consistent supporting cast. One of the biggest things we are seeing is the result of the Spurs investing heavily in the last few years of Tim's career, in an attempt to keep that consistency going and give him another chance to carry them to one more Championship. After the near-miss in '13, and the Championship in '14, they pretty much had to keep it together to try and repeat.

The point is, the FO made a BUNCH of great moves for almost two decades. Then in the last few years, they pretty much did what they had to do. This year, they pretty much took what they could get.

---

Yeah, PATFO obviously made some (okay, a BUNCH) of good moves. But they obviously made a bunch of lame moves, too, or the cupboard would not be as bare as it is. For one thing, the team's draft strategies were always a real frustration/concern (I suspect for you, too). In the Duncan era, they basically hit on one draft pick (Hill) which they parlayed into their other hit. I know that you must also lament some guys they let get away so they could keep the likes of Bonner. That was some pretty poor decision-making.

I really didn't like their decisions the last two off-seasons. But, man you make it sound like this off-season Gasol was the only option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RD2191

Spurs might be the 4th or 5th best team out West if we're being completely honest with ourselves.

---

I knew that in the offseason, but I let myself get caught up in those first few games the Spurs played and just went stupid. The Spurs could scratch and claw their way to the 4th or even 3rd record in the West, if they really get it together. But even if they did, they are a mid-tier team in decline. Pau, Parker, and Manu have a combined 44 years of NBA experience. (People talk about Manu being old, but I think most forget that Pau has been around a year longer than him.) If the Spurs could field the EXACT same team next season, they wouldn't get better because of playing together. They would be worse, because those guys are at the ends of their careers.

That's why I was arguing for tanking this season and rebuilding. Because they were going to have to do it soon enough anyway. The starting PG, starting C, and perennial 6th Man are all near the bottom of the downhill slope. There's no future in that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sasaint

Yeah, PATFO obviously made some (okay, a BUNCH) of good moves. But they obviously made a bunch of lame moves, too, or the cupboard would not be as bare as it is. For one thing, the team's draft strategies were always a real frustration/concern (I suspect for you, too). In the Duncan era, they basically hit on one draft pick (Hill) which they parlayed into their other hit. I know that you must also lament some guys they let get away so they could keep the likes of Bonner. That was some pretty poor decision-making.

---

The draft-and-stash mostly made sense. The Spurs were so strong in those years that a 29-30 draft pick rookie had virtually no chance of contributing. Sign a first round pick, and you're obligated to put them on the roster, or else renounce them. At least with a stash, there's a chance of getting them back after they've developed. Ian was an almost, and Splitter was pretty damned good.

Signing Jackie Butler was one of the worst, most costly moves in the Duncan era. But I remember a number of articles that said that the Spurs had one of the best off-seasons, because of that signing. That lazy bastard just got his contract and retired. I don't think anybody could see that coming.

Signing Jefferson looked good on paper. I said from the day they announced it that his game wasn't a good fit and didn't make sense with that roster, as did a number of people here. But that was another case where he may have been the best player available that the Spurs could reasonably get.

Roger Mason Jr.? He was another budget signing. And he could shoot 3's often enough that it's no mystery why they put him on the roster. He played in all 82 games his first season, and shot something like .420 from 3P. There's no way of knowing that a guy will go to shit in the playoffs until he gets there. They only had to pay him $3.5M, and that looked like a bargain through his first regular season.

Shit, you could go on and on. Diaw? Baynes? Belinelli? Mills? Danny Green? Stephen Jackson? Bruce Bowen? But the Spurs have gotten a hell of a lot from budget players over the years. Some stuck and got paid, and some they couldn't afford to keep. But damn. The league is full of guys who have been min players on the Spurs' rosters. They've been pretty damned good at spotting and signing budget talent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

I knew that in the offseason, but I let myself get caught up in those first few games the Spurs played and just went stupid. The Spurs could scratch and claw their way to the 4th or even 3rd record in the West, if they really get it together. But even if they did, they are a mid-tier team in decline. Pau, Parker, and Manu have a combined 44 years of NBA experience. (People talk about Manu being old, but I think most forget that Pau has been around a year longer than him.) If the Spurs could field the EXACT same team next season, they wouldn't get better because of playing together. They would be worse, because those guys are at the ends of their careers.

That's why I was arguing for tanking this season and rebuilding. Because they were going to have to do it soon enough anyway. The starting PG, starting C, and perennial 6th Man are all near the bottom of the downhill slope. There's no future in that.

---

Looks like they are tanking this season - just with an old guy who will opt in and keep them in the tank next season, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

The draft-and-stash mostly made sense. The Spurs were so strong in those years that a 29-30 draft pick rookie had virtually no chance of contributing. Sign a first round pick, and you're obligated to put them on the roster, or else renounce them. At least with a stash, there's a chance of getting them back after they've developed. Ian was an almost, and Splitter was pretty damned good.

Signing Jackie Butler was one of the worst, most costly moves in the Duncan era. But I remember a number of articles that said that the Spurs had one of the best off-seasons, because of that signing. That lazy bastard just got his contract and retired. I don't think anybody could see that coming.

Signing Jefferson looked good on paper. I said from the day they announced it that his game wasn't a good fit and didn't make sense with that roster, as did a number of people here. But that was another case where he may have been the best player available that the Spurs could reasonably get.

Roger Mason Jr.? He was another budget signing. And he could shoot 3's often enough that it's no mystery why they put him on the roster. He played in all 82 games his first season, and shot something like .420 from 3P. There's no way of knowing that a guy will go to shit in the playoffs until he gets there. They only had to pay him $3.5M, and that looked like a bargain through his first regular season.

Shit, you could go on and on. Diaw? Baynes? Belinelli? Mills? Danny Green? Stephen Jackson? Bruce Bowen? But the Spurs have gotten a hell of a lot from budget players over the years. Some stuck and got paid, and some they couldn't afford to keep. But damn. The league is full of guys who have been min players on the Spurs' rosters. They've been pretty damned good at spotting and signing budget talent.

---

I am more troubled by their recent judgment/strategy/track record. Yes, they have gotten very good value off the scrap heap. They are much better at player reclamation than player development.