Printable View
Sure seemed like he might have thrown the game to teach the guys some humility...
Exhibit A: Beno instead of TP or JV in prime comeback time.
Exhibit B: No Bonner until the last 30 seconds of the game.
Exhibit C: Oberto's "quad bruise"
Exhibit D: Ex-Spurs brand new coaching career...
I know the last two are a real stretch but the first two don't make ANY sense at all!
:monkey
Parker played like dog crap, and deserved to sit,
Why he didn't play Vaughn over Beno, I don't know. I hope JV isn't hurt.
But I believe Parker got pulled for giving up back-to-back And 1's.
As for Bonner, I don't get why he wasn't the 4 in the small ball lineup, if they had to use one.
If that was the condition, Manu and Tim should have sat too :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Trainwreck2100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
Maybe he was hoping for a spark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
Some spur hit a three to get with one, then Parker gives up a 3 point play. Then he comes back and does it again on the next possetion.
Yeah I know - that's what I just said in this thread. He gave up back to back And 1's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainwreck2100
CIA pop...
I just talked to whottt about this very issue, I think this was a tank job, ALL OF A SUDDEN he brings back small ball for some reason
They actually have been playing small ball in long stretches lately. They did so the other night in the win they squeaked out over Portland.Quote:
Originally Posted by mookie2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
Too much of that birthday cake.
Pop doesnt care about wining streaks but what he does care abou is putting questionable players in at critical times to see if they can put something together. Hence beno being in while the two guys that were sure fire were benched...
dang....you're doing the CIA shuffle, lemme think about it.....well, maybe he threw the game, maybe he heard at practice some of the boys talking about streaks and stuff so he experimented with "not my choice!" kinda decisions.........
ok, then, that would explain alot!Quote:
Originally Posted by Clutch20
I think the have spooked themselves about Milwaukee.
I'm really mad Bonner didn't play. I really feel like the team could have used him tonight.
I don't know why Pop didn't at least try playing him.
Pop's a smart coach. Sometimes he doesn't get trapped into that short sighted goal of winning expendable games.
The problem with "expendable" games is that the Spurs need, in Mar/Apr, every game to push themselves, as practice and tune-up for the playoffs.
Tonight was a perfect challenge: on the road against a team 3rd from the bottom of the fucking EC but playing tough. Spurs had no response, couldn't find a way to win in adverse circumstances, couldn't turn it on, not even close. They got over the hump but couldn't keep it going, and looked like crap, physically and mentally, the whole time, like in the Dec-Feb crap streak.
flashbackQuote:
Originally Posted by boutons_
If there was one game we were to lose in the next ten... this one was it. With the Bucks wanting to show their new coach something... like emotion... and the Spurs Big 3 playing like crap, it was a recipe for disaster. :bangQuote:
Originally Posted by ManuTim_best of Fwiendz
don't cook mush and then tell everyone that steaks with all the trimmings are forthcomingQuote:
Originally Posted by boutons_
Just an off night. It happens, especially on the road. Did anybody really think Spurs would never lose again?
Parker punished for saying that he needs to support Eva by living in the same city.
J/K I didn't even know there was a guy named "Lynn" in the league.
...and neither did the Bucks until tonight. :bangQuote:
Originally Posted by Man In Black
:rolleyesQuote:
Originally Posted by ManuTim_best of Fwiendz
I guarantee you that no professional sports coach in their right mind would ever do anything less than everything he can to try and win a game, no matter how "meaningless". These guys are way too professional and competitive, and have way too much of an ego to "throw" a game.
It's a loss. Deal with it. It happens--you don't have to constantly try and rationalize it.
Pop would throw a game... but not this one... Spurs just plain sucked. no excuses.
Heh, Pop has done things in the past to push a message rather than win a single game. So your guarantee means jack.Quote:
Originally Posted by DubMcDub
See this is where you're wrong. One only has to look how things are with playoff positioning almost set to see a plethora of teams sitting their stars to prevent them from exposure to injuries on games that have little meaning other than they are on teh schedule and need to be played.
In 02-03, Pop sat SJAx & Duncan in the last game against the Mavs. Neither player was hurt and the Spurs got beat. It can happen.
This game wasn't a "thrown" game but when they didn't exhibit the "fire" that Pop expects, his power as coach is to pick and choose time for the players. The lesson to be learned is, you must show effort. If not, Pop finds a way to teach you.
I don't think he "threw" the game, but I do think he put in certain players who would most likely make it hard for us to win to keep the Spurs' mind on themselves and not on catching Phoenix and Dallas.
The CIA label is :lmao
All his goofy lineup changes and lack of in-game adjustments are stoopid head games that hurt the Spurs.
Props for the 12 game streak and for playing Elson. Before tonights return to small ball :donkey
In MLB your best pitchers don't always have a good night. It happens. Likewise in hoop some nights certain players don't have it. He keeps riding Parker like he is the endless fountain of youth. Would have been great tonight to have gotten Tony out and let JV or Beno take over.
Here after all these years I thought it was spelled stupid.Quote:
All his goofy lineup changes and lack of in-game adjustments are stoopid head games that hurt the Spurs.
Jokes on me!!
What are you talking about? I'm not making excuses for the loss. I actually don't care. Like Timmy said, they just want to win each game. They're not playing for a win streak. They're just focused on improving themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by DubMcDub
Anyway, I wasn't rationalizing the loss. I'm talking in terms of long term adjustments. Seeing what weaknesses other teams can exploit of ours so we can make optimal decisions on the shortened lineups for the playoffs. It's not that hard to believe.
It's like this. I'm speaking from the angle of a coach who knows what he's doing?
Remember when Manu fell on his back in the second game against the Mavs? It was only a stinger. It was minor. He could have very well came back in. Pop was smart in taking care of his player, and would rather sit Manu out, than aggravate his ambiguous injury, possibly playing the risk of exacerbating it, for the sake of winning that statement game.
We CAN AFFORD to lose games in the regular season. Put that same scenario in a playoff game, I think Pop would actually have put Manu in that game for the fourth quarter against the Mavs. No question.
This game was against a team we're most likely not going to meet in the postseason. And the Spurs had an off night. I could see Pop punishing them, or at least being mad enough to not pull out all the stops for them. Of course the coach would rather win, but apparently the Spurs were setting themselves up for this loss with their play, and Pop could see it.
I have a good reason to believe that Pop takes the opportunity to rein his players in to keep them in check and prepared for the playoffs. I think he has a problem with micromanaging a little too much in anticipation of the post season, but for the most part there's a reason why the Spurs are so well-trained, and have been the quintessential NBA team for the last 8 years.
:lol well I couldn't see the game, but I think Pop does make statements with his rotations sometimes in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by phyzik
Whether this was one of those games, I can only guess.
The Spurs were due to lose one, but Pop didn't throw the game.
I know Pop is good, but I'm not sure that even Pop could make them play horrible D and make all of the Big 3 suck offensively. :lol 2-for-10 from Manu, 6-for-15 or whatever from Tony and so many missed FT's from Tim. Plus bad D all around.
He hated the effort in the last game even though it was a win (he even got bleeped in the postgame interviews talking about it) and he hated it again tonight. Hopefully the Spurs can bring the intensity and D against Boston.
Out of the last five games (Portland, Sac, NJ, LAC and Mil) the Spurs were only really sharp in NJ.
I don't think pop would ever throw a game. Although I think he doesn't mind losing this game as to send a message to his team to not get caught up in anything else but getting better on the offensive and defensive ends of the ball.
yeah, thanks for articulating it better. I think "throwing a game" is misleading. But yeah I think Pop doesn't mind letting a game go every now and then, if his players are disappointing him. It sometimes looks that way. Of course they'd rather have them play their best and win! :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by THE SIXTH MAN
What a surprise...we went with small ball down the stretch and we got scored on at will in the post, had our defense broken on the perimeter...and missed just about every crucial defensive rebound during crunch time.
Michael Finley is not a PF...hell, he's not a SF...Patterson took him to school and was posting him up like he was Boykins.
This ones definitely on Pop...
During our winning streak crunch time has seen a lot more of the Spurs
traditional bigman lineup.
Bonner didn't even get a sniff? I call bs.
Honestly...I know Oberto was hurt tonight, but Oberto + Elson > Smallball.
We won't win squat playing small ball down the stretch.
Whatever gains we may make offensively are lost defensively and in the rebounding dept.
yeah, notice how our offense was never the problem when we played against Dallas.
As for staying big lately. We were playing great D in our win streak and/or, if we were playing poorly we were able to play defense when it counts in the 4th quarter, which was seldom seen during our rocky losses in January.
So though I'm not complaining after one loss and crappy play. Pop should ease up a bit, and NOT insist on going small. Why do we need smallball again still?? to adjust to the other team?
:clap :clap :clap :clapQuote:
Originally Posted by whottt
Pop is just trying to see "If" the Spurs can beat Dallas.
Dallas has shown its weakness in these last to games .... Fast and faster play beats them. Pop wants the Spurs to play small because it works aganst Dallas. In the Playoffs, its what he is going to try again. This time he wants the players to have a feel for what they are doing in those line-ups before the games that really matter start.
That is why he keeps going small.
As to the game .... Its a loss. I don't get the chanse to see many Spurs games, but some of you have said that the Spurs have not played well resently, if this is true, then I guess you can it human nature. The same was true with Dallas as their streak dragged on, their play became bad, but good enough to beat the other team.
Then ... Their play slips one too many notches and you have a loss.
I'm sure that the Spurs will start another steak (Winning that is) starting with the next game. The only two thinks to take from that games was
1) Bad play leads to losses
2) "We have another game coming up, lets not show our asses again"
The Bucks games should be marked MUST WIN by Poppo because we get the Buck's second round pick this year!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarCowMar
We do?
Wow! Thanks, this plus my coffee wakes me up fine MaTiBOF, great analysisQuote:
Originally Posted by ManuTim_best of Fwiendz
LOL...surely he threw the game...that is the only possible explanation :lol
As much as losing to the Bucks sucks; imagine Bucks fan...
Talented enough to beat the Spurs TWICE this season; yet three from the bottom in the East. The team we get to see from Milwaukee (because they apparently get "up" for the Spurs) is NOT the team their fans get to see night in and night out. Every now and then they play a really good game, whereas every now and then the Spurs play a really crappy one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mookie2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
Pop's want to stay under the radar has something to do with his decisions I'm sure.
I'm almost 100% that staying under the radar is a big deal here.
I'm pretty sure he's done it before, he's weird like that. If he's not happy in a game, after several previous games with bad efforts defensively, he'll play all these weird players even when there's enough time for a comeback. I don't think he did it last night though.Quote:
Originally Posted by LEONARD
We lost because there were no adjustments made on the defensive end, as usual. The Spurs stuck with the same defensive strategy the whole game even though it was not working. Who's fault is that?
The Spurs just don't play well on this ugly ass court.
http://www.nba.com/media/bucks/MilBu...actice_604.jpg
"San Antonio receives a 2007 Milwaukee second round pick (the better of Milwaukee’s two second round draft picks in the 2007 NBA Draft [Houston's]) (Damir Markota trade 062806)."Quote:
Originally Posted by Phenomanul
Source: www.nbadraft.net
Also keep in mind that both the Lakers and Dallas will be picking right at that spot as well!
"LA Lakers receive Charlotte's 2007 second-round pick. (Jumaine Jones trade 102605)."
"Dallas receives Atlanta's 2007 second-round pick (Anthony Johnson trade 022207)."
A Bucks loss could be the difference between Quinton Hosley and Bobby Brown! I was really frustrated to see how unwilling the Spurs were to fight for a better draft pick. But this does bring up another question: should we throw games to the Hawks and Bobcats? :wtf
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubMcDub
Can someone please explain how we landed Tim Duncan?
43% shooting didn't help...13/37 from the big 3...Quote:
Originally Posted by td4mvp21
The notion that Pop would "throw" this game is ridiculous IMO...
Yep, the Big Three sucked ass. But our defense sucked worse...letting the Bucks shoot as well as they did was unacceptable. Pop could have made some more defensive adjustments IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by LEONARD
I agree with you, I don't think he threw this particular game.
He wanted to teach Spurs fans a little humility too.
:drunk :hat :dizzy :wtf :smokinQuote:
Originally Posted by bdictjames
:drunk :hat :dizzy :wtf :smokin
That's all it was. I wouldn't read too much else into it. The guys were out of sync and it showed. Milwaukee took advantage of this apparent drop in intensity and execution by the Spurs. But, don't be surprised if the Spurs run off another 13 in a row. Given their favorable schedule that isn't impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by dav4463
Fucking Pop threw the game. You don't just play that bad after playing well for so many straight games. Against the same damn team everytime? They threw it.
So Pop asked Manu to shoot 2-for-10, Tony to get beat on D, and Tim to clank all his free throws? And the overall defense to be horrible?Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuMagic
Were The Big 3 in on the conspiracy to throw it? :rolleyes
Was Lynn Greer in on it too?
The big 3 do what theyre told. take an off night every now and againQuote:
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
Man, who the hell is this Lynn Greer guy? He friggin' owned our asses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
Ummm, yeah. That's why we beat them in the playoffs last year and why they lost to the small-ball Miami Heat in the Finals. Right. You and Poopavitch are both geniuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalhoop
Oh, yeah, and the Suns were able to beat the Mavs last year because they played without their center, Amare Stoudamire. Uh-huh. The Suns are lucky they didn't have Amare last year, cause they woulda played him and lost to the Mavs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuMagic
I REALLY hope you're 100% joking around...Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuMagic
Of course. What the hell is the Shocker?? Is that some sort of German gay-anal sex manuever?Quote:
Originally Posted by LEONARD
ROTFLMFAO!!Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuMagic
The Spurs were very close to winning. Do you think that if they, at some point in the season, had played with a small line-up and gotten used to it, that they had been one point better at it? ... Thats all they needed .... One point. The team was not used to that type of line-up and it costed them.Quote:
Ummm, yeah. That's why we beat them in the playoffs last year and why they lost to the small-ball Miami Heat in the Finals. Right. You and Poopavitch are both geniuses.
He is getting them used to the idea of playing without a center, why do you think that is doing this? Do you think that he has lost his mind? Or maybe he is covering his bases in the event that the Spurs centers are unable to deal with Dirk without getting into foul trouble.
I'm not saying that you will see small ball in the playoffs, but Pop is covering his bases ... Just in case.
They lost because they play a flawed system (It wears them out before the real games start)Quote:
Oh, yeah, and the Suns were able to beat the Mavs last year because they played without their center, Amare Stoudamire. Uh-huh.The Suns are lucky they didn't have Amare last year, cause they woulda played him and lost to the Mavs.
You're joking right? The Spurs suck at small ball, it goes against their whole basketball philosophy. They are always better off with two big men on the floor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalhoop
Maybe you should be the coach of the Spurs, obviously you know the team far better then Pop does.Quote:
You're joking right? The Spurs suck at small ball, it goes against their whole basketball philosophy. They are always better off with two big men on the floor.
I'm curious Coach, whats your plan in the even that Elson picks up three quick fouls and Oberto proves to be ineffective on the floor with Dirk?
Do you have another plan?
I guess this means that you DON'T have a "Plan B", this is why you are not the coach of the Spurs. His job is about beating other teams, to do this you need several options ... several plans of attack and defense. Teams take away somethings and open up other avenues to victory.
Pop knows that the "three quick fouls" senerio may happen. He may not like it, but he knows that it could happen. He has seen Dirk play and he has seen both Elson and Oberto play (More then anyone on this board I would bet)
Something in him is telling him that he needs to prepare for the "Three quick fouls" senerio ... Whether the fans like it or not, doesn't matter ... All he cares about is winning the damn game when it counts.
Oh. I get it. You and Poop are both geniuses. I forgot that if a strategy didn't work before, you should try it again, instead of sticking with a winning strategy.
I guess Avery should stop playing Dirk for the rest of the season. That way, the team can be ready if Dirk should get injured in the first round of the playoffs.
I don't know how you can fail to grasp basic logic. There's no way one can say that small ball is what'll beat Dallas. Because it hasn't, and it won't. Do you really think the Suns would have won the other night if they'd gone small and played without Amare Stoudamire? Do you? You're kidding me, right?
Do you forget the scores of the games last year? Do you forget that "Small ball" got you a Duncan tip-in from the WCF? and most likely NBA Finals? And playing this way was the first time that they had even tried it?Quote:
Oh. I get it. You and Poop are both geniuses. I forgot that if a strategy didn't work before, you should try it again, instead of sticking with a winning strategy.
Maybe you have not noticed, but the League is playing faster and faster. Should the Spurs ignore this? and hope that worked in the past will work again? Should they not even prepare a secondary plan?
Dirk has missed some games, the team did well. This is why to change the players on the floor during the game. Sometime Dirk plays with Terry, sometimes he doesn't, same with everyone on the floor ... Everyone gets used to playing without a certain player .... I guess you think that the Big three should play only with eachother .... Thats rather short sighted don't you think?Quote:
I guess Avery should stop playing Dirk for the rest of the season. That way, the team can be ready if Dirk should get injured in the first round of the playoffs.
Ask the Suns ... and Warriors ... and Wizards almost half of out losses have come from the small, fast teams.Quote:
I don't know how you can fail to grasp basic logic. There's no way one can say that small ball is what'll beat Dallas. Because it hasn't, and it won't.
Amare at 6-10 at the center ... Is this what you call big? The Suns play small ball ALL THE TIME, IN EVERY GAME, FOR 48 MINUTES.Quote:
Do you really think the Suns would have won the other night if they'd gone small and played without Amare Stoudamire? Do you? You're kidding me, right?
Learn your teams.
You still haven't told me your "Plan B" Coach
I guess that your not going to post with me ready to reply ... To bad. I enjoy the conversation.
Instead of complaining about a situation and posting the first thought that pops into your head, you should think about "Why" the team is doing this and "Why" the team is doing that.
The Suns play small all the time, the Mavs will play small. There is a very good chance that at some point the Spurs centers will not be able to deal with Amare (In the second round) and Dirk (in the WCF)
Pop is trying to prepare the team for that situation. You should stop crying about it and hope that the team gets better at "small ball", after all, they only need to be one point better at it then last year.
Do you remember if Pop tried to go big down some stretches in that 20 point blow out Dallas had against us in game 2?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalhoop
Squirt Gatorade in Dirk's eyes? :downspin:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalhoop
BWAHAHAHAHAHA....Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuMagic
doesn't know what "the shocker" is :lol
Wow...
If this was a must win game, Finley, Parker, manu Timmy and Bowen would have closed out the game. Definitly not Beno or Bonner or Ely ever seeing the light of day. If he would have announced this then Milwaukee plus 7 points would be easy money. Fuck you Dallas.
That sounds about right, these guys are quick to critisize, but very slow with an alternate plan.Quote:
Squirt Gatorade in Dirk's eyes?
No I don't, but it would think that he wouldn't. What some of you have a problem with is understanding why a team goes small. Its not something that any team wants to be forced into doing, its not something that you do by choice, its forced upon you.Quote:
Do you remember if Pop tried to go big down some stretches in that 20 point blow out Dallas had against us in game 2?
When the Mavs went to the speed line-up in game two Pop saw very quickly what was happening. the Mavs were getting down the floor and getting shots before his teams defense could get set up .... defence may be very good, but it has to get set up and which Terry and Harris both on the floor, Pop knew that the Mavs were going to force their tempo down the Spurs throats.
He had to go smaller to get faster, not for the offense, but for the defense ... Transition defense. If he had a faster big then Rasho and Nazr then he would have put them in, but he didn't, so he had to get smaller.
Now the other reason to go smaller is if your big has nobody that he can guard, as it pertains to the Spurs.
Elson and Oberto will not be a real part of the offense, if they prove to be ineffective in guarding Dirk (And everythig that goes with that ... Recovering to the basket and such) Or fail to make a differance on the rebounding ... They have to be taken out.
On offense vs the Mavs, the Spurs are already playing 4-5 (Bowen being a virtual non-factor), if the center doesn't participate, then they are 3-5. The Spurs are not going to win vs the Mavs playing 3-5 in the offense side of the ball .... Pop needs production, he goes small to get another scorer into the game (Finley or Barry most likely)
If the Center is not produceing, then the Spurs have to get someone on the floor that will. It is well known around here that Rasho and Nazr were not something to write home about.
The final reason that Pop would go small, is match-up problems. Duncan and Dirk are not going to play each other ... It simply will not happen. Dallas is comfertable putting a foul magnate on Duncan (Sometimes they even play Duncan well ... A bonus) As long as the produce in the rebounds (They do this well)
With the Spurs it is a major issue sense Howard has become the player that he has. Duncan cannot defend Howard (As with Dirk, he would be pulled out to the three point line .... Let the lay-up drill begain). Duncan has to guard Dampier/Diop to stay close to the basket. That would put the Spurs centers on Dirk (This is like a center guarding Manu ... It normally doesn't work out well). Bowan cannot guard Dirk and leave Howard to Manu.
Pops solution (Last year). Go small, and force Dirk to guard somebody and at the same give the Mavs a match-up problem that the Spurs have to deal with. When the Spurs go small, Dirk has to guard a small (Manu, Finley, Barry or Bowen) while Duncan gets to relax while guarding Dampier/Diop.
It was a good plan that nutrilized most of what the Mavs were trying to do. If the team had been practicing with those line-ups, they wouldn't have fallen one point short last year. It is that sort of "Short sightedness" that some of the posters here would like the Spurs to keep doing.
That is "Small ball" ... It is also the Spurs best line-upQuote:
If this was a must win game, Finley, Parker, manu Timmy and Bowen would have closed out the game.
Right on, people have become obsessed with attacking small ball at every opportunity, but it has to be done if you want to win. Small ball by one team forces a mismatch against the other where they have to substitute the center for a faster player so that they aren't playing 3v5 ball in transition. Another thing is that Oberto and Elson are only so good. Yeah, having a large body helps, but it isn't contesting shots unless it tries to contest shots. And when Elson tries to contest anything it ends up being a foul.
The Spurs don't have a "philosophy" of staying big. They were very lucky in DRob in that he was unusually athletic for his size, so there was never a need to downsize to match up with the other team. With Nazr/Rasho, all the other team had to do in transition was lob the ball down the court with their fast small lineup and when they started their offense it was 3v5 with Duncan and the slow center lagging behind. Cue easy uncontested layup. It didn't take Pop long to fix that.
This year Elson is going to be the key in not being super slow like his predecessors. If the Mavs and Spurs meet in the playoffs expect the Spurs to go small when Elson is sitting for rest or foul trouble. They have no choice if they want to compete.
:dramaqueeQuote:
Originally Posted by Kori Ellis
A game? Were you around in 96-97? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalhoop