Reply With Quote
Maybe - we didn't need much.
To all you Small Ball defenders who say we needed a Dirk-Stopper . . .
Could HE have been an answer?
(Why? Because this horse isn't dead enough yet . . .)
Maybe - we didn't need much.
Maybe one point difference. <SNAP>
I think the Spurs were one useful body away from beating Dallas in those playoffs. Whether that useful body was a better backup PG or another wing player with some length (or both) I think the difference of one useful body would have made a tremendous difference in late game situations.
I'll admit it -- I think Glenn Robinson might have proved helpful in that situation.
one point WAS the difference in the series
Damn. If only we had a healthy seven footer who could play team defense to use in spot duty or to burn up a couple of fouls.
Oh wait, we had TWO.
^^^^ Amen
GRob would have been nice. So would have Devin Brown. Or Speedy Claxton. Or freakin' Stephen Graham.
But Spurs fans blasted me last year when I said having more than 13 players on the roster would be needed. Oh well. Long live Peter Holt's piggy bank.
I think that was the joke...
Oh . I missed the part where it says, "To all the small ball defenders."
I have no business in this thread.
Imagine if you'd predicted that Pop would bench Rasho and Nazr for the entire Mavs series. You'd have been laughed off the boards.
Oh yeah, I have no business in this thread.
Two healthy 7 footers whose team went backwards on the scoreboard every single time they entered a game during the WCSF, save one stretch in the 3rd Quarter of Game 1 when Nesterovic was on the floor -- during that time the Spurs outscored the Mavericks by 1 point. Every other instance in which either Mohammed or Nesterovic was on the floor for the Spurs in Games 1-3 of that series, the Mavericks outscored the Spurs.
Every. single. one.
Um. Rasho and Nazr totalled one minute in game 3. The Spurs went backwards on the scoreboard for ALL of game 2, regardless of who was on the floor. They won game 1, so basically you are confirming my point for me. Thanks.
There could have been 50 more players; they wouldn't have played.
Toward the end of his run, GRob's knees robbed him of any lateral quickness.
Good question, though.
In the one minute that Nazr played in Game 3, the Spurs were -4, largely because he couldn't keep up with the pace; a fact that was demonstrated repeatedly in Game 2. The Spurs won Game 1, but not because of anything that Rasho or Nazr did. Indeed, the Spurs were outscored during every stretch that either was on the floor, save one.
How many times did Pop have to watch his team go backwards with his inept centers on the floor before he could be immune from second guessing like this? Would he have been better off showing you that those guys couldn't play in that series by having the Spurs go backwards with them on the floor for 5 minutes in Game 4 -- and losing that game in regulation, instead of overtime. Would it have satisfied you if Pop played Nazr for 3 minutes in Game 5 and the Spurs were -6 or something like that during that time, such that the 1 point victory they realized became a 5 point defeat.
I guess you would have been satisfied with a 5 game exit as long as Pop played his bigs and stubbornly refused to divert from the stategy that prevailed in the regular season. I prefer that Pop actually gave his team a chance to advance.
I'm glad that Pop isn't that Hill-ish.
Pop had given up on the centers long before the Mavs series started, and stubbornly refused to divert from a strategy that happened to work against the Kings. You can quote plus-minus stats all you want, but the damage was probably done when Nazr hit that three and Pop got pissy about it.
What I find interesting is that there was NO SITUATION in FIVE GAMES that you feel either of them might have contributed or been useful, even when Horry and Duncan were in foul trouble at the end of a quarter. What I find even more interesting is that some of you out there find ways to try to justify Pop's decisions with fictional predictions of doom even though the Spurs lost. Predicting that the Spurs would have lost in five games instead of seven games is one of my favorites next to predicting that Dirk would have scored 50 a game. Who gives a ? A loss is a loss.
I think it was a mistake. Personally, I think they would have won the series with Rasho and Nazr as the center rotation instead of Horry and Oberto, but if you think that there wasn't a single moment of the last five games of that series that two healthy experienced seven footers would have been useful, I'm sorry to say you are drunk on the Popovich Koolaid.
+
=
I'm not talking shutdown defense. I'm talking about him being out there for 5-10 minutes a night not getting abused by either Dirk or Howard. He had enough lateral quickness in 05 to play decent defense for probably the first time in his life.
As a bonus, he might have even hit some shots, seeing how Horry wasn't.
Pop gave up on the centers against Sacramento because for the most part, neither of them rebounded the basketball for a damn in that series. Rasho had flashes in Game 3, but a significant portion of his rebounding came on a single possession in that game and Spurs didn't even score on it.
At least by stretching that series to 7 games, Pop gave his team a chance to win. Had he stuck with his 2 centers with glacier-like movement, a 5 game out seems likely. A chance to win in 7 versus a summary dismissal in 5? I'll take my chances in 7.
And if you think that either Rasho or Nazr would have made any sort of positive difference, I'm certain that you're drinking the Popovich Haterade.
It's not like BiggDogg has a better career rebounding avg than anyone on the team other than Duncan or anything...including Rasho and Nazr.
If we had Robinson we would have blown the Mavs out at least once in that series...
Might have been nice if Horry was on the court to take some too...he's only got twice as many rings as the franchise. And he always looks old and washed up, from the day he entered the league....that's how he does what he does.
Anyhoo...the sooner the Finley era at C is a distant memory, the better.
Also might have been nice if Pop hadn't had his head up his ass...see Riley, Pat.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
