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
Printable View
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by blizz
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
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
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.
Good points. I didn't look at the game plan at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by GSH
In that case, it seems to me what you are saying is that Pop got outcoached in this one by Hoiberg?
No......no you wouldn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
You are so dumb. You are really dumb. For real.Quote:
Originally Posted by vander
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAGirl
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by SAGirl
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
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.
I feel sorry for people that think basketball is that complicated.Quote:
Originally Posted by blizz