How Spurs can dig out of 2-0 hole
by Charley Rosen, Updated: May 24, 2008, Foxsports
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/8...ut-of-2-0-hole
In Game 2, Kobe Bryant and his sidekicks shot the lights out even before the opening tip-off.
So, after losing an agonizing squeaker and a humiliating blowout, the pertinent question is this: Can the Spurs rally in San Antonio and get back into the series?
If the defending champs can make the following adjustments, the answer is "Yes."
The fact is that Fabricio Oberto cannot adequately defend Lamar Odom. That's why the Lakers' first play was to isolate these two, a move that eventuated in a layup by Odom. Trouble is that Pau Gasol's length and pivotal trickery also abuses Oberto's putative defense. Even worse, Oberto's lack of offensive skills allowed Odom to play a one-man zone. And, since Robert Horry has little left, he certainly showed no presence on defense. Also, both Michael Finley and Ime Udoka were similarly torched by Odom. Why then, did Pop keep Kurt Thomas on the bench until garbaggio time? Surely, Thomas can do a creditable job in defense of Odom or Gasol, and can even knock down short-range jumpers. Simply put, Thomas needs to play starter's minutes.
In truth, the only Laker whom Oberto can defend is Ronny Turiaf. That's why Oberto's playing time should exactly coincide with Turiaf's.
In Game 1, the Lakers played Duncan straight-up (except for a few cursory double-teams in the fourth quarter) — the idea being to concede TD his 30 points while tagging the Spurs' perimeter shooters, and the tactic worked to perfection. In Game 2, the Lakers changed their game plan — variously doubling Duncan on the catch and on the move. This wrinkle was something that the Spurs obviously didn't expect. In Game 3, the Spurs have to plan for every anti-Duncan eventuality. Put him in screen/roll situations, position him at the high post and clear the middle, run more wing-isolations, have him set up deeper in the pivot so that he can spin baseline and away from the incoming doubles.
In Game 2, the Spurs had Michael Finley curl off weak-side screens twice, with Finley burying jumpers on each occasion. Tony Parker was able to zip his way for layups on the two times he likewise curled off similar weak-side screens. That's 4-4 on nearly identical plays. Why not run the same stuff until the Lakers stop it?
The Spurs' only reliable offensive weapon was Tony Parker's penetration. How about a few possessions where Parker is teamed with TD and three shooters (ahem!) and is allowed to create in a 1-4 set?
If Pop is so desperate to get a dead-eye shooter in the game, why not activate Matt Bonner? His defense can't be any worse than Oberto's or Horry's.
It is time to employ non-traditional modalities on Manu Ginobili's ankle. I'll bet Pop's mortgage that acupuncture will bring out a dramatic improvement. It's certainly worth a try.
In Game 2, the Spurs missed 16 layups — five by Oberto, four each by Parker and Duncan, two by Ginobili and one by Finley. The culprits are advised to find a body while attempting any subsequent layups before a body finds them.
Since the Lakers have a convincing advantage in overall team speed, the Spurs absolutely must take the air out of the ball. Force the young, eager Lakers to play defense for at least 20 seconds on every possession. Test the Lakers' patience, stretch their concentration, tempt them into undertaking risky gambles. And, at the same time, cut down on their own turnovers.
Kobe must be judiciously doubled, preferably when he's positioned on either wing, and certainly when he sets up in the low post.
The Spurs are well aware that they were also down 0-2 to New Orleans, and that it took them two games to figure out exactly what they had to do in order to beat the Hornets. The veteran Spurs have the resilience, the courage and the know-how to make radical adjustments in their game plans. They've demonstrated these qualities many times over the years.
Desperation, after all, is at least the stepmother of invention.
Still, the most significant improvement will be in San Antonio's field-goal accuracy when they return to the friendly confines of their home court: The familiar rims and the well-known reflection-patterns of the overhead lights off the glass backboards. The favorite shot-spots. The background that is unique to every arena. All of these factors will turn misses into makes, and vice versa for the visiting Lakers.
That's why, come Sunday night, all signs point to a shoot-out at the AT&T corral.
Personally, the plethora of frontline matchup issues that were exposed during the Hornets series and now this series are getting old. Oberto couldn't guard David West. Now he can't guard Odom. I know he's a smart player, good passer and all, but if he cannot defend and isn't providing much in the way of rebounding or offense, then what is the point of having him on the team? I know he's very popular here, but I have to ask the question.
What is even more troubling is that in championship years past, the Spurs would oblivious to the road crowd. They would go into any arena and win on the opposition's home court. Now they seem to be eagerly awaiting the chance to go home.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 05-24-2008 at 03:19 PM.
They're not hungry anymore???
All the more reason the FO should've infused the roster with a couple of younger, hungrier, players. These guys need the energy jolt.
Again, I applaud what the Pistons have done by applying that philosophy (adding 3-4 younger bench players) to their own aged roster. Seems to be paying dividends.
starting lineup for Game 3 should be this:
5-KT
4-TD
3-Bowen
2-Manu
1-TP
i know i said that Ginobili should be benched, but that was before Game 2 and he played even worse then
So if ginobili plays worse..start him ? huh
It is time to employ non-traditional modalities on Manu Ginobili's ankle. I'll bet Pop's mortgage that acupuncture will bring out a dramatic improvement. It's certainly worth a try.
Manu cant possibly play any worse than when he was a starter
So why start/play him?
choose which game/performance was better: Manu's 10 pts in a 4-point loss in Game 1 as a starter or Manu's 7 pts in a 30-point loss in Game 2 on the bench
best game/performance must be used for at least Games 3 & 4 if not the rest of the series, obviously
Yeah.. but that is misleading. In game 1, spurs made shots, in game 2 they could not buy a basket. So this argument seems to lose its credentials.
may be, but you got to go with 1) the best options available 2) the absolute right adjustments after 2 games and 3) just pray that they hit at least 50-55% of their shots
So you think that Pop will start Manu. I don't know, Pop seems to be trying somehow to limit his minutes. I say he might not be starting according to Pop. But ...
"They're not hungry anymore?"
Spurs know how long, hard it is to win a le because they, esp Tim/Pop, have done it four times. Pistons have been to ECF how many years straight?
Hornets, Celtics, Lakers are all new to, fresh, and excited about just getting into the playoffs and/or getting to the Finals. Spur have NONE of that emotion. Yeah, they know it's wonderful to win the le, but they don't have the thrill, the emotional lift, the extra spring in the legs, that comes from Finals virginity.
It's THE problem with repeated success.
In Game 2, the Spurs missed 16 layups — five by Oberto, four each by Parker and Duncan, two by Ginobili and one by Finley.
that is 32 points
if spurs made it they would have won it by 1
Good point. The long playoff runs with the older roster is a tough combo. At least there appears to be young bodies getting here next year. Splitter, Mahimi, and (yes) Bonner must get out there and help Timmy. Thomas and Oberto can be the old guys on the roster next year.
The core of this team has played a full season of PLAYOFF games the last 6 or 7 seasons. Deep playoff runs.
The desire is still there for the Spurs; otherwise they would not have made the final four this year. The ulative effect of getting there appears to be raising its ugly head.
Let's not forget last year. Deron Williams got hurt and Derek Fisher was in and out of the lineup. That helped the Spurs.
Manu's health situation is helping the Lakers this time around.
You've got to be lucky AND good to win a championship.
The Laker fans need to remember this. The first game was tied at 85 with less than 24 seconds left in the game. Manu was shooting for the win (a 3 I think) with 10 seconds left. We were one shot away from having a 1-1 series.
The Lakers are more than capable of having a rotten shooting night themselves. They will look very mortal when they do.
All that is well and good.
But don't you think it would be easier to just surrender the Alamo?
This is exactly what I was saying back in February but everybody kept saying that the Spurs experience was better.
First the Scola walk-off who would've been perfect. I can't say enough how much Scola would have done for this team.
The Spurs screwed up big-time by not adding some available young legs before the trade deadline. They could have had Artest, any of the Atlanta players (only untouchable was Joe Johnson), sixer young guy (Igoudala is an expiring contract who wasn't sure he'd come back), Luol Deng/Gordon/Heinrich, Mike Miller, Travis Outlaw.
Artest has worn out his welcome and would have come at a price of pennies on the dollar.
I would have gone as far as trading Manu to get 2 quality young guys like LaMarcus Aldridge + Outlaw. Or Jamal Crawford+Nate Robinson. Manu's in his prime but he only has 2-3 max prime years left. These young talents have their entire career along with Parker.
The age thing isn't overblown, this is why they're losing to the young and experienced Lakers.
I think the Spurs FO saw last year's le as a referendum on whether we stay pat or try to improve the with fresh blood. So in the end, it may be our own arrogance, lack of imagination and complacency that will kill this drive to repeat.
I know that people will point to the 4 rings as proof that the Spurs FO has done everything right. They might be correct. But I can't help but wonder what might have been if we would have been just a little bit wiser with our player development and signings. Certainly this year Bonner was a wasted signing...
"That philosophy" is called common sense in my book.
I recall hearing Joe Dumars state that how disappointed he was that his starters were so worn down in last year's ECF. He went onto say that his bench depth was lacking. Look at the commitment that he made over last summer toward retooling the bench. He mandated Flip to give those guys minutes during the season so they'd be ready during for the playoffs. Yes, it is very much a common sense approach. One that the Spurs FO should have copied.
I think one could make a case that the Spurs were a little full of themselves this year.
-We don't need to improve the team, we're the Spurs
-We don't need to take the regular season too seriously. Home court advantage? Who cares, we're the Spurs
-We don't need to sign Scola or try to get anything for him. In fact, we think he's so worthless, lets give him to the Rockets. We're the Spurs
sounds like a make a wish pitch........if the lakers take steal one here....the party is over, for now and for the future, unless the basketball gods rain some youth on us.........go spurs go
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
