Reply With Quote
Also what's up with all the sniffing in this thread
Spurs were curbstomping the Celtics from the opening tip. Kemba didn't get ejected until the 3rd. Nice try tho
Also what's up with all the sniffing in this thread
Saying "I don't like what Pop is doing" is much different than thinking you could run an actual NBA team better than the current regime.
Spurstalk GM is unique in that the cba doesn't apply to them, and they don't have to make trade calls, the ESPN trade machine is sufficient to get the trade. Also they don't have to sell tickets or worrry about locker room drama. Sadly the job doesn't pay.
Not even sure why I'm going into this but I'm bored so...
It's not about PATFO being always right or wrong or insecure people playing "I'm smarter than you" on a fan board to get some virtual validation with strangers.
It's not about "sniffing" (you'd swear some of you have inhibated frustrations). It's about factually respecting and trusting professionals who have been succesfully running an NBA team for 2 decades and if not for Nephew nephewing would still be gunning for a ring and prolonging 15 years of big 3 dominance with the next MVP... They earned our respect, big time, even only from a professional point of view.
It's called distance, perspective, not reacting in the moment, big picture, all things why they run and NBA team and you here ting on guys who don't even know you exist.
Don't get me wrong, I'm aware caricaturing, insulting and patronizing anybody who disagrees with your ultimate knowledge is the norm on the Internet, where everyone is a ing genius.
But I'm also aware of how you tough Internet guys and "sniffer nazis" would react in front of them and handle a discussion with Pop or RC about the ins and outs of running and coaching an NBA team for a 82 game season... "Ah, yes yes, yes...!" Thank you coach!
tl;dr: dudes know a couple about ball, you know about barking and sniffing (might have been a dog on a precedent life).
Posters who call Pop lucky or who don't give the front office credit take it too far. Pop is the GOAT (or very close to it) and the Spurs have been the best run organization in the NBA for the past two decades. Pop's coaching tree and PATFO's executive tree are scattered all over the league for a reason.
With that said, even GOATs aren't perfect. There's no other coach in the NBA that would treat Brent Forms like a 30 mpg centerpiece. There's also no other coach that would intentionally prevent their 3rd and 4th best players (White-Murray) from sharing the court. No other coach would've stubbornly stuck with Belli over Lonnie for as long as he did. Those are all truly awful coaching decisions.
Signing nobody rather than Carroll would have been a better move.
Why on earth did poop sign Carroll?
Two things on the Forbes question. One is that we've seen two games against great teams work very well, with Forbes not being a hindrance, and hitting some great shots. That earns him more time to keep that position, his minutes, and Gregg being justified to do so. The other thing is if you demote Forbes, who exactly fills those minutes.
I see a one-to-one starter and backup rotation in place: Murray/White splitting PG, Mills and Forbes at the SG, Walker being DeRozan's backup, and then Gay/Lyles, Aldridge/Poeltl combos.
So if we start Walker in place of Forbes, you need a backup three behind DeRozan. Forbes gets disqualified as he's too small, and would be sharing the court with Mills.
The alternative is Marco (not a chance; already out), Carroll (another seemingly unusable player), or a very inexperienced Metu, or actually any of the other GLeague callups.
That effectively means Forbes is the most 'useful' of the bunch - Marco, Carroll, Metu, Gleaguers, and since you can't have him and Mills playing together, he has to start at the SG.
Let's see if the FO can work a eensy bit of magic by Feb 21 and get that 10th player who's taller than 6'3 and capable enough to replace the underdog Forbes.
This team has looked different since 2017, Sean.
That's a dumb excuse to play a g-leaguer 30 mpg.
There's no rule that states a player can't play multiple positions. Start Lonnie at SG, bring Wombat in for him at the 5-6 minute mark, let DD play most of the quarter then when it's time for him to get a break bring Lonnie in at SF. That's just one easy solution. You can easily do the same with White, let him eat up minutes at both PG and SG.
Get White, Murray, Walker all closer to 30 mpg. Brent can have whatever scraps are left over.
this. a lot of us have on Pop this year, but let's be real, any real Spurs fan is a Pop fan. but that doesnt mean he doesnt deserve criticism, and that doesnt mean that coaches cant decline just like players either
White and Murray are both point guards. If you start them you have no shooter in the backcourt. They both can shoot, but the ability to come off a screen and get a shot off quickly is something that Bryn and Patty and even Marco have that White and Murray don’t. They are more slashers and spot up shooters in their offense.
Explain Demarre Carroll to us. , explain it to yourself. I said this earlier, but he was supposed to be THE big addition for this past offseason. They had planned to give him most of the MLE, and he would have filled the last roster spot. So that was it. Did they not know what they were getting? Did Carroll get worse once he got here?
Any way you slice it, Carroll was a up. You can't blame people for seeing it and commenting. Just like you can't blame them for noticing that Forbes is one of the worst defenders in the league. Just like you can't blame people for seeing that Belinelli was killing the team. And those observations weren't limited to "Spurstalk GM's", were they?
You've gone from sniffing Pop's ass to sniffing your own and thinking it doesn't smell.
So, basically you're saying that ONE aspect of the game supersedes multiple aspects of the game. Is Forbes' 3 point shooting THAT much more important than the multiple skills White and Murray have? Is Forbes' shooting so good that it makes his spectacularly awful defense tolerable enough to start despite having a better defensive option on the bench in White that has started before? Basically, the argument of Bryn starting is that the offense will fall off a cliff just because he was sent to the bench in favor of Derrick White and that it would negate the defensive upgrade White would bring to the starting lineup. If that's true, then we're ed either way because Forbes is far below a starting caliber player. Every advanced stat backs that up along with the eye test. So, you can make the argument that he should start given what else we have on the bench and given how overboard the game is relying on the 3 ball now. Still, I highly disagree with that argument because LMA, Murray and Walker are taking and making threes and confidently. Still, if you still want to insist Forbes' shooting is indispensable to the starting lineup, fine. But that further shows how flawed the team is and how much this team would benefit from making a trade for a two guard who isn't a complete liability on defense that Pop would feel comfortable enough to start. Given that PATFO abhor making in-season trades, that last point is moot. Hence, the clamor for White or Walker to start over Forbes won't go away...and rightfully so.
He played a lot of pf last season and they probably thought he could split minutes at the 3. I think he lost some speed and now probably strictly a 4. The few minutes he got here and there, he seems lost on offense. Plus Lyles has played well and Gay has been healthy, which means there is no minutes for him.
I wanted 2 of Carroll, Morris, or Crowder last offseason at the expense of Bertans. We needed defense, toughness, and not a liability from 3. I thought it was a good decision. But the above combination is concerning.
But don't forget it's leap year, so ...
Carroll is not a g league player.
That’s in poop.
Yea...and kemba was in during the run that brought them that close...u aren't stupid...u know how basketball works...when we had Duncan we fell behind many times and had to go on a run...now if we lost Duncan during the run it doesn't affect the game? Dummy
every run stops at one point and it costs a lot of energy ... this was a well deserved win, stop decrying anything and everything
Only a dumnny would ever put Duncan and Kemba Walker in the same sentence
Only a Dummy ignores the contextOnly a dumnny would ever put Duncan and Kemba Walker in the same sentence
At least you're honest enough to say that you wanted 2 of those other guys at the expense of Bertans. You're not a revisionist. But you're also not the GOAT. The fact is, Pop never saw the value in Bertans. Carroll coming in was going to overlap Bertans - by design. And Bertans already wasn't getting enough minutes. So even though Pop didn't plan on losing Bertans in the whole Morris fiasco, he sure as didn't plan on playing him the way the Wizards have. That decision alone en les people to question the GOAT this year.
Last night (vs Memphis) Pop brought Lonnie in at the end of quarters for 4 seconds, and then for 11 seconds - when Memphis took possession. Everybody who knows anything about basketball knows it was for his defense. So that says he knows Lonnie plays better D, and we all know that Forbes is on D. For the game, the Spurs gave up 134 points. For most of us, that says there is a defensive problem. And, for most of us, that defensive problem is bad enough that it requires some rotation adjustments. But the sniffers believe that no one should ever question the GOAT, no matter what.
The Spurs are 16-21. The very best they can be at the halfway point of the season is one game below .500. During and after last night's game, there were people crowing that Forbes is great, DeRozan sucks, and Pop is still a great coach. Those people have a right to be morons. But I'm not in the mood to be told that no one should question Pop because of things that happened in seasons past.
Not blaming you - you're just having a basketball discussion.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions