Reply With Quote
depends if splitter is not a foul machine
booner size makes no differnce he does not rebound only misses threes against lakers
Do we finally have enough size to contend with the Lakers?
Splitter - 6'11"
Duncan - 6'11"
McDyess - 6'9"
Bonner - 6'9"
Blair/RJ - 6'7"
Bynum - 7'0"
Gasol - 7'0"
Ratliff - 6'10"
Odom - 6'10"
Artest/Barnes - 6'7"
depends if splitter is not a foul machine
booner size makes no differnce he does not rebound only misses threes against lakers
Sometimes Bynum and Gasol seem like they are more around 7'1" then 7'0". I wish we would pickup Rasho again.
Bonner is 6'10 but he doesn't play like a 6'10 guy. Neither does Odom though, just doesn't have that style. The size you worry about with LA is Bynum and Gasol and Splitter/Duncan can counter that.
Not enough.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 07-25-2010 at 11:54 PM.
The size will be fine if Bynum is injured..there's a better than 50/50 chance that he's hurt, so the Spurs will need that..
Spurs need a lot of IFs to happen for them to meet the Lakers in the WCFs though..
The best way to overcome a size disadvantage is for Pop's magic formula to go into effect: "Ball go in hoop"
I've noticed that Tim can't get any hook shots or jumpers on Gasol. He has to use his power to back Gasol's ass down.
He had no problems against LA in 3 of the 4 games last year, he'll be fine..
It's the other big man that will be the concern..
Did we have enough size last year? All we did was add Splitter. A resounding NO. Stupid questions deserve stupid answers but its not worth it.
He can in November and December. Tim peters out by April and May.
Yeah like IF Bonner rides the pine, they have a better chance.
The Thunder were not a tall team and they had plenty of success against them. I dont believe they have anyone over 6'11". The Spurs are fine on the frontcourt with Duncan, Splitter, Dice and to some extent Blair.
This Spurs squad offers height, athleticism and depth. Plus we have a huge advantage with Ginobili, Parker and Hill.
You don't think Kobe is an advantage? Dice and Duncan are s s of their former selves, blair is raw, and Splitter hasn't played a minute in the NBA. The only true advantage is a healthy Parker, and that hasn't been enough in previous seasons.
Kobe is the best guard out of both teams but other than that they have Fisher, Blake, Sasha and Brown. While the Spurs offer 2 All-Stars, Hill (who is quickly becoming a star) and of course Anderson (a highly touted pick). That is why I think we have advantage in the backcourt. Parker had one off year due to injuries and has had plenty of time off during summer to heal.
Duncan is still a 20 - 10 guy if need be. Fortunately on this team he does not have to. Dice is getting up their in age but he performed admirably against the Mavs. Splitter hasnt played a minute in the NBA but he was the best big man in the second best league in the world. As far as Blair well we've seen what he has the potential to do when given minutes.
The Thunder team is extremely athletic, quick and young. The Spurs will not play the same type of up-tempo game against LAL. It would be a slow, grind it out, half-court game, and LA will win because of the size advantage. Hoping for Bynum to be injured is fool's gold. He'll only get better as he gains more experience.
The only advantage Spurs have is Parker and it's not a huge advantage anymore as they have Blake and not just Fisher.
Splitter < Bynum (if Bynum can stay health)
Duncan = Gasol (at this point in their careers)
Dyess > Ratliff
Bonner < Odom
Blair/RJ = Artest Barnes (hard to choose...offense vs defense, maybe the edge to LA)
defensively I think they'll fair well against LA. it's on the offensive end that Duncan isn't as good as he was in say 2003 when you knew he'd put up a ridiculous 30-20 game with 5 dimes. he's not as quick and doesn't get as much lift as before and that limits him against Bynum and Gasol.
I don't think we do. We still have no answer for Odom in the wing, and Splitter has yet to play a minute in the NBA, so barring a miracle, I don't think he'll be as effective at least in his rookie season against top teams.
On top of that, they have a solid perimeter defender in Artest, while we don't really have such a thing to try to slow down Kobe when he catches fire.
A lot of this stuff will clear up midway through the season. We'll have more IFs answered from the new guys and a clearer picture of where we stand.
Getting beat by an inch per position isn't the issue, I don't think.
Gasol vs. Duncan one-on-one has historically gone to Duncan, but Tim is getting older, so it's a wild-card. Especially with the unknown of Splitter's help defense.
Bynum vs Splitter is, again, an unknown, but I tend towards thinking Splitter will not only be more skilled defensively, but also more durable. Bynum is a better scorer, but Splitter is a better defender/passer and seemingly passable offensively.
Dice vs Ratliff seems to go towards Dice since he's more offensively gifted and almost equal defensively, and Dice will play more minutes. If Theo plays heavy minutes due to an injury to Gasol or Bynum, he is a weak link.
Odom is still the Lakers' edge against us as we (and practically nobody) has someone with his mobility, offensive prowess, and occasional defensive ability -- Bonner can play his role as a positional counter, but he's nowhere near the threat on both ends Odom is. At the same time, if Blair learns not to foul and begins shooting midrange, he has the potential to be as disruptive as Odom, I think -- just getting O rebounds makes him useful, but 8-12 pts a game would more or less nullify the best of Odom. Bonner is in a position to potentially score more as a straight shooter than Odom is as a slasher and mid-range shooter, but he's never going to be a real all-court threat.
As to the Artest/Barnes combo... both are very good defenders, but there are only two of them and neither is dependable offensively, so both would have to play simultaneously to make a real impact. I think that Kobe is unquestionable the best back-court guy on either team, but we have much more depth offensively, and the point differential should ultimately reflect this if we play team basketball. All to say that I don't see us having any sort of clear advantage over the champs, but that I think we can compete with them better than we were able to last season.
If it's Gasol, Odom, Artest, Barnes and Kobe vs. Splitter, Duncan, Jefferson, Manu, and Parker, it definitely edges to the Lakers, but our bench is much stronger, meaning that they have less room for injuries while we have much more, not to mention more room for tinkering with our line-ups. I also think that having a much higher proportion of slashers than before behooves us going up against them since they're so thin up front -- their lack of depth could be exploited by slashing with the intention of getting them in foul trouble.
I'm not delusional into thinking the Spurs would currently have a chance against LA, but Bynum being injured is very likely, and Steve Blake is one of the worst defensive PGs in the NBA, so he doesn't make a difference defensively..
Doesn't matter. Even with Bynum/Kobe injured and Fisher/Farmar rotating at PG the Lakers still had the best defense in the playoffs.
They'll be better next season with Barnes taking Luke/Sasha minutes.
Don't forget they have Barnes now too.
I must add that the Celtics competed well and virtually dominated ALL the games they won because of their superior rebounding and defense. They did so, not just by matching size, but they literally imposed their defensive will and made efforts to outrebound the Fakers in the games they won.
During the 4-game sweep versus the Suns, the Spurs were often left playing 3-on-5 on the offensive end. On the defensive end, they were carved up like a turkey by a vastly superior offensive team. The Spurs lack of perimeter and post defense was very apparent. They even got beaten on the boards by a smaller, quicker team.
The Spurs, conversely, have morphed into a team that CAN score a lot of points, but still struggles in the rebounding and defensive areas - against vastly superior offensive teams - of which the Fakers certainly are.
For the Spurs, the key concerns now become how much better is the supporting cast around the Big Three? Can Splitter provide the additional rebounding and post defense the Spurs have lacked? Can Anderson, Hairston and even Gee, provide enough consistent outside shooting, scoring and perimeter defense to complement the slashing, playmaking skills of Parker and Ginobili?
SA isn't any closer to beating LA now than they were 3 seasons ago in the WCF. If anything, they are much farther away because the team just doesn't have anything left in the tank by that time of the year.
SenorSpur is correct in that Boston was only able to give LA a battle because of surpassing LA in doing the dirty work - defense, rebounding, physical play, loose balls. When SA went away from that approach - they lost any realistic hope of beating the Lakers.
No team is going to beat LA on the offensive end. Even when LA isn't efficient - they still have Kobe and the edge inside, not to mention an offense that will get enough when it counts. Whether its a slugfest or shootout, LA is still going to score.
Any team who beats LA has to bring the physical play to LA, dominate the glass, not give up easy points inside to Pau and Bynum, AND make it tough for Kobe on the perimeter. Not many teams have been built to do that in recent years. Houston got close. Boston did once and was right there the 2nd time. Every other team they played - once LA figured them out it was over.
I can't see the Spurs having a chance in the playoffs as long as Duncan and Manu play 60+ games. Even then, Duncan isn't as good as Pau is now and Many isn't Kobe. Yeah - the SA guys have glimpses but they can't do it every night like Pau and Kobe can. And Tony Parker isn't beating LA. No PG is beating LA. You can only beat LA inside-out. Tough to do when LA has the most talented trio of big men.For the Spurs, the key concerns now become how much better is the supporting cast around the Big Three? Can Splitter provide the additional rebounding and post defense the Spurs have lacked? Can Anderson, Hairston and even Gee, provide enough consistent outside shooting, scoring and perimeter defense to complement the slashing, playmaking skills of Parker and Ginobili?
SA's Big Three isn't good enough to beat LA's best Three. When that's the case its all downhill from there.
So unless Splitter is Mose-Malone like, the Spurs won't be able to physically beat up on LA, and because of LA's length, they won't be able to control the glass either. And who is going to slow down Kobe ala Battier, Posey, Allen. LA was slick by grabbing Artest and Barnes - 2 of the better defenders on him.
The Western Conference will likely end just like it did the past 3 seasons. That's not me as a fan - just the evidence at hand.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
