Game Grades Dec. 8, 2016, Spurs @ Bulls - Loss

Well these grades were missing and I volunteered myself to do them. My recollection of the game is a fuzzy right now, and this game was very hard to watch very often (plus things at home distracted me at times), so I welcome further input and contributions in the comments. This review is coming as a community service. :toast

Kawhi: A

The game would have been a blowout if not for him. He did a number of Jimmy Butler and was unstoppable at times himself. He nearly willed the team to victory but not quite. Basketball is a team sport and his teammates didn't show up to play for his one.

Lamarcus: F

Terrible game for him. One of a successive trend of very low scoring games for Lamarcus. His shot wasn't falling and he wasn't aggressive trying to get inside. I remember seeing at one point Pop call up a play very close to the basket for him and his jumphook didn't go in. He's not drawing fouls either which means he's not being aggressive enough. This has been a trend in a few recent games and it's a huge concern. Is he still out of shape? What's going on with him? Does he need to close his tweeter account again? He had 4 blocks here, and was active on defense at times, but it wasn't enough.

Gasol: D-

He scored more efficiently than Lamarcus and grabbed a few boards in this one. For that he gets a bit of a higher grade than Lamarcus. However one cannot shake the feeling off that Gasol is empty calories. There were many plays at the rim that he didn't prevent from happening and at times there are layup lines with Gasol out there. Ugly.

Tony: D+

I was glad to see a spry Tony, but Rondo did a number of him, getting to the rim at will, scoring efficiently and almost finishing with a triple double. Tony himself made a few shots that were encouraging. He got to the basket and had a teardrop I remember. Still, he wasn't efficient with his scoring, and nothing really stands out in this game.

Danny: D+

I don't remember Danny that much, so this grade is almost by default. I apologize for that.

Lee: C+

He came in with a lot of energy in the 3rd Q if I remember correctly and was part of a run the bench made. He showed fire and leadership with the team behind big time. However, he had a few lapses on defense and allowed layups at the rim on the other end as well. Overall, his was one of the better games from the squad so it's hard to dock him that much, but it also wasn't enough.

Dedmon: D

He made mistakes on this one, fouling unnecessarily a jumpshooter with an overaggressive close out. 4 fouls in 13 minutes has to dock his grade a bit. The bench started the game playing very discombobulated and I think that doesn't help Dedmon's game. He tries to cover up for everyone and it doesn't help him to play defense under control. Still, his play is on him, he has to do a better job to keep his fouling under control. He grabbed a lot of rebounds in a short amount of time and that gets him a bump from F, but this was a forgettable game for him.

Mills: A

He singlehandedly kept the bench up at times with his amazing 3 pt shots under hard close outs. He came to play and made tough shot after tough shot. He was active on both ends.

Simmons: D+

He can't shoot and at some point that has to affect his grades. He just cannot make a jumpshot lately. He also missed a runout easy dunk due to wanting to show off? His energetic plays got him a few steals and he was disruptive on defense drawing an offensive foul on Wade. His defense gets him a bump in the grade but he has been very inefficient scoring/shooting. I thought he should have played more than Ginobili in this game, even though he could not buy a bucket (bc neither could Ginobili)

Ginobili F-

I have been vocal with concerns that he's done and it's going to be Kirby levels shooting. I hope to be wrong with that TBH... but this was a horrible game for him and I think his play was one of the reasons the bench was playing so unsettled early in the game. 0-9 overall shooting. His + plus/minus is more a result of the work put in by Mills and Lee.

Anderson: Inc.

1 rebound in less than 1 minute. Still not enough to see here.

Pop: F

IMO he should have gone further into the roster and played Bertans and Anderson at some point. The game was getting away anyways and since guys were not making shots, he could have looked elsewhere. As an early season game, he could have experimented more than he did. Bertans helped in the Bucks game and Anderson played well in the Minny game. Since Dedmon was fouling up a ton, why not try Bertans? Manu was having a horrible game and shooting blanks out there, same as Simmons why not try Anderson? He just didn't do enough... even for all his tinkering, he didn't tinker enough. He's not guilty of the guys poor play though, but he stuck with guys that were having a bad game a lot.

http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=...ng&h=100&w=100Spurs

STARTERS	MIN	FG	3PT	FT	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	+/-	PTS
L. AldridgePF	31	5-15	0-1	0-0	3	3	6	1	1	4	2	1	-19	10
K. LeonardSF	38	10-19	1-2	3-3	3	5	8	5	1	0	2	3	-9	24
P. GasolC	31	6-11	1-3	0-0	2	8	10	3	0	1	1	0	-4	13
T. ParkerPG	24	4-10	0-1	0-0	0	1	1	5	0	0	3	2	-11	8
D. GreenSG	25	3-8	3-8	0-0	0	1	1	1	3	0	1	3	-13	9
BENCH	MIN	FG	3PT	FT	OREB	DREB	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	PF	+/-	PTS
D. LeePF	21	4-6	0-0	1-2	2	2	4	2	0	1	1	2	+12	9
D. DedmonC	13	0-0	0-0	0-0	1	6	7	0	0	1	0	4	+1	0
P. MillsPG	24	6-12	4-6	0-0	0	2	2	1	2	0	1	1	+7	16
M. GinobiliSG	18	0-9	0-4	0-0	0	2	2	2	1	1	1	0	+7	0
J. SimmonsSG	14	1-7	0-3	0-0	0	2	2	1	3	0	0	2	+6	2
K. AndersonSG	0	0-0	0-0	0-0	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	+3	0
D. BertansSF	DNP-COACH'S DECISION
N. LaprovittolaG	DNP-COACH'S DECISION
TEAM		39-97	9-28	4-5	11	33	44	21	11	8	12	18		91
		40.2%	32.1%	80.0%

I'm gonna take sag off my ignore. I usually do it to everyone at a certain point. It's just some of these posts are fucking dumb sometimes. No one replies to her anymore. :lol

If OP calls Kyle fathead, I bet you would increase your rep real quick. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Well these grades were missing and I volunteered myself to do them. My recollection of the game is a fuzzy right now, and this game was very hard to watch very often (plus things at home distracted me at times), so I welcome further input and contributions in the comments. This review is coming as a community service. :toast

Kawhi: A

The game would have been a blowout if not for him. He did a number of Jimmy Butler and was unstoppable at times himself. He nearly willed the team to victory but not quite. Basketball is a team sport and his teammates didn't show up to play for his one.

Lamarcus: F

Terrible game for him. One of a successive trend of very low scoring games for Lamarcus. His shot wasn't falling and he wasn't aggressive trying to get inside. I remember seeing at one point Pop call up a play very close to the basket for him and his jumphook didn't go in. He's not drawing fouls either which means he's not being aggressive enough. This has been a trend in a few recent games and it's a huge concern. Is he still out of shape? What's going on with him? Does he need to close his tweeter account again? He had 4 blocks here, and was active on defense at times, but it wasn't enough.

Gasol: D-

He scored more efficiently than Lamarcus and grabbed a few boards in this one. For that he gets a bit of a higher grade than Lamarcus. However one cannot shake the feeling off that Gasol is empty calories. There were many plays at the rim that he didn't prevent from happening and at times there are layup lines with Gasol out there. Ugly.

Tony: D+

I was glad to see a spry Tony, but Rondo did a number of him, getting to the rim at will, scoring efficiently and almost finishing with a triple double. Tony himself made a few shots that were encouraging. He got to the basket and had a teardrop I remember. Still, he wasn't efficient with his scoring, and nothing really stands out in this game.

Danny: D+

I don't remember Danny that much, so this grade is almost by default. I apologize for that.

Lee: C+

He came in with a lot of energy in the 3rd Q if I remember correctly and was part of a run the bench made. He showed fire and leadership with the team behind big time. However, he had a few lapses on defense and allowed layups at the rim on the other end as well. Overall, his was one of the better games from the squad so it's hard to dock him that much, but it also wasn't enough.

Dedmon: D

He made mistakes on this one, fouling unnecessarily a jumpshooter with an overaggressive close out. 4 fouls in 13 minutes has to dock his grade a bit. The bench started the game playing very discombobulated and I think that doesn't help Dedmon's game. He tries to cover up for everyone and it doesn't help him to play defense under control. Still, his play is on him, he has to do a better job to keep his fouling under control. He grabbed a lot of rebounds in a short amount of time and that gets him a bump from F, but this was a forgettable game for him.

Mills: A

He singlehandedly kept the bench up at times with his amazing 3 pt shots under hard close outs. He came to play and made tough shot after tough shot. He was active on both ends.

Simmons: D+

He can't shoot and at some point that has to affect his grades. He just cannot make a jumpshot lately. He also missed a runout easy dunk due to wanting to show off? His energetic plays got him a few steals and he was disruptive on defense drawing an offensive foul on Wade. His defense gets him a bump in the grade but he has been very inefficient scoring/shooting. I thought he should have played more than Ginobili in this game, even though he could not buy a bucket (bc neither could Ginobili)

Ginobili F-

I have been vocal with concerns that he's done and it's going to be Kirby levels shooting. I hope to be wrong with that TBH... but this was a horrible game for him and I think his play was one of the reasons the bench was playing so unsettled early in the game. 0-9 overall shooting. His + plus/minus is more a result of the work put in by Mills and Lee.

Anderson: Inc.

1 rebound in less than 1 minute. Still not enough to see here.

Pop: F

IMO he should have gone further into the roster and played Bertans and Anderson at some point. The game was getting away anyways and since guys were not making shots, he could have looked elsewhere. As an early season game, he could have experimented more than he did. Bertans helped in the Bucks game and Anderson played well in the Minny game. Since Dedmon was fouling up a ton, why not try Bertans? Manu was having a horrible game and shooting blanks out there, same as Simmons why not try Anderson? He just didn't do enough... even for all his tinkering, he didn't tinker enough. He's not guilty of the guys poor play though, but he stuck with guys that were having a bad game a lot.

---

Thanks for the grades. Wasn't able to see this game as I was at The Lion King in SF. 32 points in the first half is ridiculously putrid, but we were due for a terrible shooting game. We have to find some ways to manufacture some offense when everyone is cold, though.

Grades way too low for most players. 4 point road loss to a 500+ team on 3 in 4 nights. Meh game but Danny, Lee, Dedmon, Aldridge, Simmons, Parker, Gasol all too low. You got Manu right though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Splits

Grades way too low for most players. 4 point road loss to a 500+ team on 3 in 4 nights. Meh game but Danny, Lee, Dedmon, Aldridge, Simmons, Parker, Gasol all too low. You got Manu right though

---

To me in reality only Mills and Kawhi showed up for this. I appreciate the input though. This review came up late and my memory is fuzzed. I barely remember Danny TBH. I can't give Simmons even an average grade when he comes up with 1-7 and misses a dunk bc he's showing off.
Dedmon fouled too much thus why he couldn't stay on the court and didn't score. Gasol bad defense.
Tony is the one that I think could be higher, I agree... if more people remark some things I am willing to change grades bc I don't remember details but I remember being surprised Tony was spry and getting to the basket, but Rondo went off, so that tempered my excitement. Tony also fouled a 3 pt shooter in the final minute or so of the game.

In general this team was carried by Kawhi and Mills. The rest of the guys were average (Pau, maybe Tony, maybe Danny, and Lee).... everyone else was below average, which puts them in D to F territory.

They had no business winning this if not for Kawhi's great play.

Giving Manu an F- is stupid. He had a horrific night shooting but he was busting his ass, diving for loose balls. He also finished at +7

In fact, I don't agree with most of your grades since they're based mostly on box score.

Grades were bad and I think you meant to say "did a number ON" in stead of "of". Try reading what you just wrote before submitting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blizz

Grades were bad and I think you meant to say "did a number ON" in stead of "of". Try reading what you just wrote before submitting.

---

hey
these grades were not mine to make. The dude that volunteered them didn't come through...
I just did them way after the fact when I had a moment.. and wanted to be quick as you know.. I don't have all day for these. You could volunteer to add something to this instead of checking grammar in a board when one is getting these out quickly.

But you felt the need to come out not adding anything.

You are sour bc I gave low grades? hah :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yuixafun

Dedmon was going for pump fakes and not being an effective roller or offensive threat.

Lee was playing because he was showing passion and being effective.

If I was Pop and teaching lessons... I would just have said fuck it we're gonna lose anyway, and I would have sat Gasol righr next to Aldridge and had Lee and Bertans playing.

I'm thining in his mind he wanted to sit Gasol for fucking ul on defense and just general laziness, but he was still trying to win the game.

POP is right, those fools get paid to ball and show up ready... Fuck I would have sat Parker too for being dumb... but Lap or Murry as alternatives...

Pop's rotation were okay, he doesn't have much options off the bench.

He has to decide if the game is in balance to go for the best chance to win, if everyone does their job... or if the game is out of reach, time to let the players with promise develop.

Lastly it being a nationally televised game, I think it forced him to the former, even though the latter is what was happening.

---

This is a good summary of the game with input from another person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

Giving Manu an F- is stupid. He had a horrific night shooting but he was busting his ass, diving for loose balls. He also finished at +7

In fact, I don't agree with most of your grades since they're based mostly on box score.

---

He showed much more energy out there than LMA that's for sure. He missed some very easy/open shots, so in that regard he was bad. But he was competing, diving on the floor, etc..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

hey
these grades were not mine to make.

---

But you made them.

Don't be sour for getting low grades as a grader

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

But you made them.

Don't be sour for getting low grades as a grader

---

:rollin
I stated up front that this was way after the fact and that I had things at home.. it's more of a conversation starter IMO. If you disagree and contribute I will review them and already I think there were guys who were average instead of below average... but if you are coming off at me with you suck I tell you to just fuck off bc you are not contributing much either.

These things are never unanimous ppl always disagree anyways.

So when you average all the grades together, the overall team grade is about midway between D+ and C-. Only two players scored higher than C+, and one of them was a PG who finished with 1 AST. The Bulls were playing at home AND had a +22 FTA advantage. And it was only a 4 point game at the end?

Sadly, I still can't disagree too much. I could debate a few individual grades, but what would be the point? That was an ass-ugly game.

I still think people are missing the biggest issue in that game. The Bulls shot 22 more FT's, even though the Spurs only committed 5 more fouls than they did. That's got nothing to do with the refs - they may have gotten a few home-court calls, but the foul count was close enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

So when you average all the grades together, the overall team grade is about midway between D+ and C-. Only two players scored higher than C+, and one of them was a PG who finished with 1 AST. The Bulls were playing at home AND had a +22 FTA advantage. And it was only a 4 point game at the end?

Sadly, I still can't disagree too much. I could debate a few individual grades, but what would be the point? That was an ass-ugly game.

I still think people are missing the biggest issue in that game. The Bulls shot 22 more FT's, even though the Spurs only committed 5 more fouls than they did. That's got nothing to do with the refs - they may have gotten a few home-court calls, but the foul count was close enough.

---

There was Tony fouling a jumpshooter and Dedmon also fouling a jumpshooter.
There was quite a bit of fouling guys in the act of shooting. Some of it was rim protection issues. (maybe one or two of the Wade calls were homecooking, but certainly not all... Spurs were fouling guys shooting...)
What's your take on that?
I mentioned that part of what docked LMA grade wasn't just that his jumpshot wasn't falling. He needed to get aggressive enough to draw fouls...

I don't care about the grades. I think they're stupid anyways. Like any of you are qualified to give grades on a sport you've never played and qualified to give a grade to a HoF coach like any of you could do better. So no. I'm not sour. You made that grammar mistake twice and it's not a grammar issue. You probably thought that's what the saying really is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blizz

I don't care about the grades. I think they're stupid anyways. Like any of you are qualified to give grades on a sport you've never played and qualified to give a grade to a HoF coach like any of you could do better. So no. I'm not sour. You made that grammar mistake twice and it's not a grammar issue. You probably thought that's what the saying really is.

---

ok
dude whatever...

Easily dedmons worst game. Paul should've had a more spirited home coming and he made some shots and the 3 is nice but just doesn't pass the eyeball test at all. LA...just pitiful.

thanks for the grades.... :tu

Manu was a D- at worse though, tbh... one of the few guys that was hustling his ass off and diving for loose balls even if his shot wasn't falling...

Thanks for the grades!! :tu

The fans and the media are saying that Dedmon should start over Gasol or at least play more minutes than him, but 'benching Danny for Simms' is the only move that Pop is willing to make...Y'all know it.

"Pau and LMA are getting killed in P&Rs every game? Nah...Our defense is OK, it's our offense the only issue" :pop:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

thanks for the grades.... :tu

Manu was a D- at worse though, tbh... one of the few guys that was hustling his ass off and diving for loose balls even if his shot wasn't falling...

---

Plenty of Fs dished to Anderson on nights he hustled on D but gave nothing or not much on offense. Same standard.... about the same for Simmons.. in he case due to showing off he blew an open shot. In Manu's case it's worse since his role either requires that he take shots or high usage. I can't give him a pass.

Any of the young kids would have been able to reproduce Manu, or even be better last night... but that is on Pop not on you or Manu.

Also, I will note this was harsher due to being a loss... have to take into account the result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blizz

I don't care about the grades. I think they're stupid anyways. Like any of you are qualified to give grades on a sport you've never played and qualified to give a grade to a HoF coach like any of you could do better. So no. I'm not sour. You made that grammar mistake twice and it's not a grammar issue. You probably thought that's what the saying really is.

---

Lol then WTF are you doing here?

How cute. A white knight trying to score pts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabom

I'm gonna take sag off my ignore. I usually do it to everyone at a certain point. It's just some of these posts are fucking dumb sometimes. No one replies to her anymore. :lol

If OP calls Kyle fathead, I bet you would increase your rep real quick. :lol

---

Nobody gives a fuck who you exclude from your safe space.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Plenty of Fs dished to Anderson on nights he hustled on D but gave nothing or not much on offense. Same standard.... about the same for Simmons.. in he case due to showing off he blew an open shot. In Manu's case it's worse since his role either requires that he take shots or high usage. I can't give him a pass.

Any of the young kids would have been able to reproduce Manu, or even be better last night... but that is on Pop not on you or Manu.

Also, I will note this was harsher due to being a loss... have to take into account the result.

---

I'm not even defending Gino, he had a terrible night, tbh... that said, how is it not expected for a young talent that's in his 3rd season with the team to beat a 40 year old for minutes?

I mean, Manu at least has an average to good game here or there...

And personally I expected more from Bertrans, but while I think he can be a lot better, he's obviously experiencing that transition season that a lot of euros go through when coming over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blizz

I don't care about the grades. I think they're stupid anyways. Like any of you are qualified to give grades on a sport you've never played and qualified to give a grade to a HoF coach like any of you could do better. So no. I'm not sour. You made that grammar mistake twice and it's not a grammar issue. You probably thought that's what the saying really is.

---

If you don't think you're qualified to grade something as simple as round ball, then you might want to call it quits. And I'd be a HOF coach too if I had rode Duncan's coat tails.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blizz

How cute. A white knight trying to score pts.

---

Wow you're still here. And I don't mean just this thread. If no one can critize unless they can do better, what is there to talk about at SpursTalk.

Also, Pop is a HoF coach solely 100% because of Duncan. Your average HS coach could have probably done better the last couple years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

There was Tony fouling a jumpshooter and Dedmon also fouling a jumpshooter.
There was quite a bit of fouling guys in the act of shooting. Some of it was rim protection issues. (maybe one or two of the Wade calls were homecooking, but certainly not all... Spurs were fouling guys shooting...)
What's your take on that?
I mentioned that part of what docked LMA grade wasn't just that his jumpshot wasn't falling. He needed to get aggressive enough to draw fouls...

---

I guess I'm not making the point well, or it's something people don't usually look at:

The Spurs got called for 18 personal fouls against Chicago - that is EXACTLY their per-game average this year. The Bulls shooting 27 FT's on those 18 fouls is a little high, but that accounts for some of those stupid fouls you are talking about. In the previous game against the T-Wolves, the Spurs got called for 20 personal fouls and the 'Wolves shot 18 FT's. That's all pretty normal.

What is really abnormal is that the Spurs only got to shoot 5 FT's off of the Bulls' 13 personal fouls. That is really, really low for 13 fouls. You can't blame that on the refs - they are generally pretty good about saying whether a guy was in the act of shooting. They miss a few of those calls, but not that many.

I don't think it's a coincidence when a team fouls 13 times, and only 4 of them are shooting fouls. Why would you foul people that aren't in the process of putting up a shot? The Bulls weren't being that careless on D, or else they would have fouled more shooters. I'm convinced that was part of their game plan. Get physical on the ball handlers out on the perimeter, to be disruptive. If the refs had called a bunch of them, I'm sure they would have stopped - but refs are generally more inclined to blow a whistle when a guy is in the act of shooting. But the real problem is that the Spurs didn't handle it well, and Pop didn't adjust well at the half.

Just for laughs - the 5 FT's the Spurs got to take were the fewest in a game this year. Only five teams have shot less than that in the last 5 seasons. Only nine in the last 10 seasons. Chicago didn't win that game by getting to the FT line. They won it by not putting the Spurs on the FT line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I'm not even defending Gino, he had a terrible night, tbh... that said, how is it not expected for a young talent that's in his 3rd season with the team to beat a 40 year old for minutes?

I mean, Manu at least has an average to good game here or there...

And personally I expected more from Bertrans, but while I think he can be a lot better, he's obviously experiencing that transition season that a lot of euros go through when coming over.

---

I don't have the answer to that, if we talk about evaluating any of the players in comparison to Manu strictly... because there is a subjective factor here and that is Pop. It will really take Manu going Kirby for consecutive games in a long stretch to pull the plug on him, at which point I imagine Manu himself would know he's not playing well enough.

But we are chatting, and this is not trolling from you or me... So I will give you my impression. They are really hopeful on JSimms. He's earned his chance. Some things to watch with him are his shooting, but he has played well in every other respect and they can make adjustments to account for his lack of a shot, like cutting more and what they have him doing.

For Kyle, the only thing that is relevant is that getting benched and being under this pressure to value every opportunity seemed like a necessity. He's not passing up shots anymore. He knows he will sit immediately if he does. In the Bucks game, he had 2 shots in 3 minutes, one was a 3 and was playing well... The Minny game, he played well and had 1 of 2 made 3s... He got to the rim and to the FT line as well. The last few games he's played, he's cutting a lot and ready to launch if that pass comes to him. He's currently over 40% on his 3. His development continues to be important to the team. He just has to continue being aggressive with his chances.

At this point, the concern is only if Manu is going Kirby... which one or two games is not enough to know. I suspect Pop gives Manu a bunch of chances. (He gives those to Tony, Lamarcus, Danny, etc)... It's just really unlikely that Pop takes out of the rotation or adjusts the role for any of his veterans IMO... but if Manu is indeed this washed up... I mean if he's going to be shooting 35% from the field in general or less, and having recurrent low percentage outings they have to consider things like cutting his minutes, and diminishing his role further. And that is the thing, I don't think Manu knows any other way to play. If at some point he can't do what he does, why play? I think that is why Timmy said it stopped being fun anymore.

For Bertans, he has played strictly as a 4 (and in the d'league as a 5)... I think rim protection is an area that Pop wants him to focus on (he's been a 5 in the dleague so that makes me infer rim protection and rebounding are areas to improve). He rebounds like a guard and that is a shame for a forward. His competition are Dedmon and Lee and both have been playing well, plus they grab boards. But as you can see, Bertans is a tremendous shooter who can find a niche as a instant offense guy. He may just be situational at this point bc the guys ahead of him are playing well, but if the team continues to have issues scoring, he may find a spot.g

Why didn't Pop try either guy? Pop being Pop. The game may have been a dress rehearsal for his preferred rotation and he stuck to his 10 guys, to see if they could pull this one out regardless. Considering he's settled on these 10 apparently at some point Pop has to put the pressure on his 10 chosen guys bc if they consistently don't get it done, then he needs to consider real changes and adjustments and that opens up the door for Kyle or Davis... and maybe even places in their minds the need for trades for some guys like Lamarcus and Pau. I think that is where Pop is at. I think he learned his chosen 10 have issues and some guys as he said, just flat out need to play better.

This is pure speculation obviously. We are both on the outside looking in, but the season is still young.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

I guess I'm not making the point well, or it's something people don't usually look at:

The Spurs got called for 18 personal fouls against Chicago - that is EXACTLY their per-game average this year. The Bulls shooting 27 FT's on those 18 fouls is a little high, but that accounts for some of those stupid fouls you are talking about. In the previous game against the T-Wolves, the Spurs got called for 20 personal fouls and the 'Wolves shot 18 FT's. That's all pretty normal.

What is really abnormal is that the Spurs only got to shoot 5 FT's off of the Bulls' 13 personal fouls. That is really, really low for 13 fouls. You can't blame that on the refs - they are generally pretty good about saying whether a guy was in the act of shooting. They miss a few of those calls, but not that many.

I don't think it's a coincidence when a team fouls 13 times, and only 4 of them are shooting fouls. Why would you foul people that aren't in the process of putting up a shot? The Bulls weren't being that careless on D, or else they would have fouled more shooters. I'm convinced that was part of their game plan. Get physical on the ball handlers out on the perimeter, to be disruptive. If the refs had called a bunch of them, I'm sure they would have stopped - but refs are generally more inclined to blow a whistle when a guy is in the act of shooting. But the real problem is that the Spurs didn't handle it well, and Pop didn't adjust well at the half.

Just for laughs - the 5 FT's the Spurs got to take were the fewest in a game this year. Only five teams have shot less than that in the last 5 seasons. Only nine in the last 10 seasons. Chicago didn't win that game by getting to the FT line. They won it by not putting the Spurs on the FT line.

---

Good points. I didn't look at the game plan at all.
In that case, it seems to me what you are saying is that Pop got outcoached in this one by Hoiberg?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurtacular

If you don't think you're qualified to grade something as simple as round ball, then you might want to call it quits. And I'd be a HOF coach too if I had rode Duncan's coat tails.

---

No......no you wouldn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vander

Pop is a HoF coach solely 100% because of Duncan. Your average HS coach could have probably done better the last couple years.

---

You are so dumb. You are really dumb. For real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

Good points. I didn't look at the game plan at all.
In that case, it seems to me what you are saying is that Pop got outcoached in this one by Hoiberg?

---

I think that's part of it. You can make the case that it's the players' fault, since the Spurs backcourt can't handle heavy ball pressure, but that doesn't change the fact that he found a way to exploit that.

Parker is already really bad about walking the ball across mid-court, so that the Spurs don't really get into their offense until the shot clock is almost half gone. When they disrupt the offensive set, and force the Spurs to re-group with only 8-9 seconds left, the offense is a LOT less effective. Mostly they got by with the contact, but when they did draw a whistle, it was on the floor. So the Spurs get 14 seconds on the play clock, and the Bulls did the same thing with 8-9 seconds left. It sure looked like an intentional strategy to me.

Think about how many times the ball got shaken loose out on the perimeter. Even though the Spurs only had something like 12 official turnovers, they lost control of the ball a LOT last night. And think about how often the clock went down to 9-8-7, and the Spurs went into improvise mode. Quite a few of those misses were really not very damned good shots - and they took quite a few heaves just trying to hit the rim before the buzzer sounded.

It used to be that a defender couldn't jam Tony or Manu, because they would blow right around them. But not anymore. Danny is a freaking disaster when he puts the ball on the floor. Kawhi is pretty good one on one, but he's not splitting a double team, which they did often. So, yeah, why not come out and jam those guys on the perimeter? Shake the ball loose, don't give them any space to operate in. And when you do get whistled, you aren't giving up FT's most of the time.

Parker and Manu's decline has been terrible to watch. Spurs are wasting Kawhi's prime with old players who are WAY past their prime so that Pop can keep the tradition of the old "big three" alive since Tim is gone. Watch the Spurs are going to get eliminated in the first round because of Pop's refusal to play the younger guys more and limit the vets playing time. Pop should retire along with Manu and TP if they do get embarrassed in the postseason next year. A team with Kawhi and LaMarcus should not be struggling this early in the season. They've had experience under their belt and should be able to incorporate the new guys but the old slowpokes are becoming a detriment to the team. If Kerr was coaching the Spurs he would've made all those changes by now. Instead Pop has to keep Parker's legacy afloat by letting him start (even with poor play the last 2 years) when everyone knows he is hurting the team. Mills is also leaving next summer so we all have the honor of watching Parker continue to be a starting pg for the next how many years smh. No contingency plan for the guard depth should have everyone worried.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAGirl

I don't have the answer to that, if we talk about evaluating any of the players in comparison to Manu strictly... because there is a subjective factor here and that is Pop. It will really take Manu going Kirby for consecutive games in a long stretch to pull the plug on him, at which point I imagine Manu himself would know he's not playing well enough.

But we are chatting, and this is not trolling from you or me... So I will give you my impression. They are really hopeful on JSimms. He's earned his chance. Some things to watch with him are his shooting, but he has played well in every other respect and they can make adjustments to account for his lack of a shot, like cutting more and what they have him doing.

For Kyle, the only thing that is relevant is that getting benched and being under this pressure to value every opportunity seemed like a necessity. He's not passing up shots anymore. He knows he will sit immediately if he does. In the Bucks game, he had 2 shots in 3 minutes, one was a 3 and was playing well... The Minny game, he played well and had 1 of 2 made 3s... He got to the rim and to the FT line as well. The last few games he's played, he's cutting a lot and ready to launch if that pass comes to him. He's currently over 40% on his 3. His development continues to be important to the team. He just has to continue being aggressive with his chances.

At this point, the concern is only if Manu is going Kirby... which one or two games is not enough to know. I suspect Pop gives Manu a bunch of chances. (He gives those to Tony, Lamarcus, Danny, etc)... It's just really unlikely that Pop takes out of the rotation or adjusts the role for any of his veterans IMO... but if Manu is indeed this washed up... I mean if he's going to be shooting 35% from the field in general or less, and having recurrent low percentage outings they have to consider things like cutting his minutes, and diminishing his role further. And that is the thing, I don't think Manu knows any other way to play. If at some point he can't do what he does, why play? I think that is why Timmy said it stopped being fun anymore.

For Bertans, he has played strictly as a 4 (and in the d'league as a 5)... I think rim protection is an area that Pop wants him to focus on (he's been a 5 in the dleague so that makes me infer rim protection and rebounding are areas to improve). He rebounds like a guard and that is a shame for a forward. His competition are Dedmon and Lee and both have been playing well, plus they grab boards. But as you can see, Bertans is a tremendous shooter who can find a niche as a instant offense guy. He may just be situational at this point bc the guys ahead of him are playing well, but if the team continues to have issues scoring, he may find a spot.g

Why didn't Pop try either guy? Pop being Pop. The game may have been a dress rehearsal for his preferred rotation and he stuck to his 10 guys, to see if they could pull this one out regardless. Considering he's settled on these 10 apparently at some point Pop has to put the pressure on his 10 chosen guys bc if they consistently don't get it done, then he needs to consider real changes and adjustments and that opens up the door for Kyle or Davis... and maybe even places in their minds the need for trades for some guys like Lamarcus and Pau. I think that is where Pop is at. I think he learned his chosen 10 have issues and some guys as he said, just flat out need to play better.

This is pure speculation obviously. We are both on the outside looking in, but the season is still young.

---

Manu played 18 mins (which should be the max amount of mins, give or take, that he should be playing at this point, tbh). There's a whole another 30 mins, and I'm pretty sure Danny isn't playing all of them. So it's about the kids filling in, and doing a good job there. And if they do, I'm sure they'll get more mins. It just hasn't happened yet. Even Simms has been very inconsistent. I get inconsistency when you're old and on the decline. Your brain thinks faster than what your body can execute. But for young players, it's a bit unsettling. You just don't know if they'll overcome it, and that makes me much more nervous than the old guys. Manu is already playing less than half the game, and will probably be gone next season. I think everybody in the team realizes that, the question is where is the hunger to go out there and bring it to make sure you're next in line to take his spot.

I said it after the first game of the season: the key is consistency. Can Simms do this night in and night out? Same applies to Kyle. And so far the answer is negative. It's a problem looking forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Manu played 18 mins (which should be the max amount of mins, give or take, that he should be playing at this point, tbh). There's a whole another 30 mins, and I'm pretty sure Danny isn't playing all of them. So it's about the kids filling in, and doing a good job there. And if they do, I'm sure they'll get more mins. It just hasn't happened yet. Even Simms has been very inconsistent. I get inconsistency when you're old and on the decline. Your brain thinks faster than what your body can execute. But for young players, it's a bit unsettling. You just don't know if they'll overcome it, and that makes me much more nervous than the old guys. Manu is already playing less than half the game, and will probably be gone next season. I think everybody in the team realizes that, the question is where is the hunger to go out there and bring it to make sure you're next in line to take his spot.

I said it after the first game of the season: the key is consistency. Can Simms do this night in and night out? Same applies to Kyle. And so far the answer is negative. It's a problem looking forward.

---

Good point. But the way I see it, really the bench scorer this season is Mills anyways. The other guys are support.

The problem with consistency is that developing players struggle with that. Simmons has a problem bc he can't shoot. He's not going to be scoring much if his jumpshot isn't falling. Maybe he's slumping, but he's not Neal or anything of the sort, so his scoring has really tended to be low. So far he is consistent with defense, energy, athletic plays in transition... things he was already good at, but hustle/energy type players are not going to have high scoring outputs. Maybe this is all he is. He has a place in the league as an energy player. I think he (and Spurs) hope that he can be more than that, but it's just unknown if he can get there and that would be a new development.

For Kyle, he's a better shooter than 2 seasons ago, but he still plays like a guy that can't shoot and that probably has to stop. So maybe being benched and under this pressure right now to not pass up shots forces him to break through that mental wall. He's played better but his playing time is few and far between right now so he's going to have to play consistently well every chance he gets to earn coach's trust that he's broken through that wall. We just don't know that bc his own playing time is inconsistent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blizz

No......no you wouldn't.

---

I feel sorry for people that think basketball is that complicated.