Reply With Quote
So you're saying we need scoring, as in the Mason and Hill scoring we already have?
That doesn't make sense.
I've been reading the posts lately and everybody thinks the big hole or weakness with the Spurs is the big that can block shots, rebound and defend people like Odom, David West..etc!
Actually, I'm looking at last season. Though they had troubles with those issues and defending those players..but I must write the bigger issue was with scoring.
They went through terrible droughts scoring and wound-up getting blown-out in several regular season games. The games at New Orleans, Utah, and the last Lakers regular season game come to mind.
While I agree, we could use another big to fill that hole. But, I have to differ with everybody else and write the bigger issue was scoring outside the Real Big Three and getting some athleticism in the second unit.
So the development of Hill and Mason are so important to me than getting another big (i.e. Ian or many of the numerous trade proposals presented by many on this forum). Because they can get own shot off the dribble (Mason) and get into the lane (Hill).
I felt when Manu when down in the WCF last year...it's exposed the Spurs' main weakness as scoring because outside of Tony Parker there was no one else that could create their own shot of the dribble and help get others better shots because of getting in the lane.
What does the rest of the forum think?
So you're saying we need scoring, as in the Mason and Hill scoring we already have?
That doesn't make sense.
Yes, Mason and Hill are providing scoring. But, I've read from many people in this forum that if we get a big to defend Odom, David West, or Bynum and the Spurs would have solved their main weakness.
Where scoring is the bigger issue than getting another big!
Hill and Mason will help
but one reason they hit so many scoring droughts is because the Spurs have no big outside of Duncan who can ing post up.
You learn that in big man high school 101 but our bigs are wimps.
Thank goodness Hill can rebound.
The defense leads to offense. A big man who can defend well side by side next to Duncan would be killer.
We're scoring enough as it is, and we don't have a 100% Manu or Parker at all.
Anti-Hero,
You are making my point! The Spurs have won les with Nazr Muhammad and Elson at the center. Not Hall of Fame caliber there!!
The Spurs haven't had a big outside of TD that could post-up since David Robinson. Finding quality bigs like that is rare.
Yes...I would love to have another big (hopefully Ian will pan out)....but the bigger issue is scoring. And having Hill and Mason score like they have so far in the season is more important...because it can address those droughts they've had in the 2nd unit outside of Manu.
I believe this development will go further with Spurs than hoping for the next big to come their way.
Yes we are scoring now!!!!! I'm glad about that!
That's my point....because that will make the Spurs a more dangerous team later season if they can keep it up.
By scoring with the 2nd unit.....there isn't such drop-off from the 1st unit.
And we didn't have that last year. Only Finley was the guy who score 12-16 pts per game...but he was inconsistent. Now, with Mason, Hill, and Finley you can put pressure on the other team's defense because they have other scorers on the floor outside the Real Big 3.
This development is more important to me than getting another big!!!
The development is happening. The other big hasn't happened yet. How is that not more important?
i think you are talking about going into the season vs right now. going into the year, yes, additional scoring was probably the priority. but it looks like mason and hill are going to provide that.
so right now, thats not our biggest issue. its the front court quality/depth.
yeah, exactly.
MarHill was saying that scoring was a bigger problem than another big, and now apparantly that problem has been solved with Hill, Mason...
However, NOW our problem IS not having another productive big, so even though MarHill's problem (scoring) has been solved, our "big" problem remains.
so I don't see any problem here...
There can be no doubt that the Spurs are shallowest in the SF and C positions rekative to both Guard positions.. so any improvvement in those areas will be welcome.. my personal wish is tha Santa delivers the long sought after mythical long SF this X'mas.
well, 2006-07 bench was very strong. Spurs had the best bench in the league. that very same bench went AWOL the following year.
... and you do need to score more than your opponent to win games.
People forget that Nazr was actually a solid big. He was a of a rebounder and had size.
Having said that, when the Spurs won with Rasho/Elson/Oberto/Nazz,
Shaq was in the East
Pau Gasol was a non factor in Memphis
Bynum wasnt in the league
I don't really get your post. You are saying that developing another scorer behind the big three is a priority over getting a big but as Bottomtooth said, that is already happening and will continue to happen whether or not we bring another big in. But since the thread le states that bigs is not an issue with us, here are few fun facts.
Oberto - 3.1rpg
Thomas - 3.8rpg
Bonner - 3.4rpg
We have been outrebounded in 9 of our first 14 games.
We need another big.
to be more precise.
Well, I'm sorry if I didn't make my thread clear to everyone. What I was trying to say is....that the biggest issue for the Spurs was scoring not getting another big.
I've read several posts in the forum(including one about Chris Kaman possibly coming to the Spurs) that getting a big is the number one issue over everything else. Well, I disagree.
The bigs beside TD and after David Robinson have been serviceable at best and the team still won championships.
I hope that makes my argument clearer. Sorry for the confusion!!
Thou you took the time to type alot of things that make sense. What your forgetting are the words that come straight from Timmy. We just couldnt make any stops. Have you forgot how easily teams made uncontested layups and ally-oops? Noone in here has. All teams go through periods when the ball just wont go in. The teams that continue to win like the Lakers and the Celtics did it by making stops. And all stops start under the paint. So, once again alot of nice typing. But your dead wrong.I've been reading the posts lately and everybody thinks the big hole or weakness with the Spurs is the big that can block shots, rebound and defend people like Odom, David West..etc!
Actually, I'm looking at last season. Though they had troubles with those issues and defending those players..but I must write the bigger issue was with scoring.
They went through terrible droughts scoring and wound-up getting blown-out in several regular season games. The games at New Orleans, Utah, and the last Lakers regular season game come to mind.
While I agree, we could use another big to fill that hole. But, I have to differ with everybody else and write the bigger issue was scoring outside the Real Big Three and getting some athleticism in the second unit.
So the development of Hill and Mason are so important to me than getting another big (i.e. Ian or many of the numerous trade proposals presented by many on this forum). Because they can get own shot off the dribble (Mason) and get into the lane (Hill).
I felt when Manu when down in the WCF last year...it's exposed the Spurs' main weakness as scoring because outside of Tony Parker there was no one else that could create their own shot of the dribble and help get others better shots because of getting in the lane.
What does the rest of the forum think?
This is exactly why we will get pounded in the paint. And mystartr34 hit it on the money. We were better with Elson and then they traded him for a shorter, slower, over the hill scrub Kurt. If you think we're gonna win a 7 game series from beyond the arc, while at the sametime not being able to make any stops in the paint. Just because we can outscore some of the worst teams in the NBA right now, doesnt mean the better teams are gonna let us score at will. Teams will let us try and win from beyond the arc. Thats been our Mojo since we cant find another big. And in the end, when the games begin to count. Timmy will be left out to hang by himself with this current roster. We just dont have the talent to compete in a 7 game series yet. But its still early. The FO must find a way to loose the worthless bigs they currently have. The west is filled with giants and we got Timmy and Roger and Hill as our bigs.
Once again your looking at the past. When we could get away with playing with sorry bigs next to Tim. Timmy showed us all last season just how bad he got outplayed in the POs. (he got owned by tyson,amare,gasol,shaq,west to name a few). He got doubled team everytime he touched the ball. And with Manu being hurt and not being able to penetrate, opponents left our guys open to shoot 3s all day. And with Timmy getting doubled it clogged the paint and kept TP from making those easy layups he's used to making. And your also looking at the teams we're beating right now. Those are NBA teams so a win is a win. But dont let these wins confuse you with the only real win(houston). Pop has done an outstanding job with what he has while guys were and are out. One game at a time. And heres another little something that might make sense. Most of the fans in here have been watching, playing basketball for many years. When the majority of them say we need another big. Guess what?
I for one, think you yell too in much. Tone it down. I didn't even read your post after all your "!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!". Get a grip. If your logic is undeniable, you don't need "!!!!!!".
Maybe your in the FO, because thats how they think. And thats why the lakers sent us home easily. But your not and we will see soon when the spurs make that trade to get Timmy some real help. Unless of course Austin can part ways with Ian.
Every team can use another quality big.The problem is that those bigs are very expensive and we cannot afford to get any of them. I suppose you can't point to a trade scenario for a serviceable big, can you? And those Vaughn+Bonner for Dwight Howard don't work.
We can't have all-stars on every position, that's the salary cap for, and we as Spurs fans should be happy the rules are like that, otherwise all stars would be in NY/LA/Chi and small market teams would get no one of quality.
Oberto and Kurt will do a decent job.
This whole issue beeing brought up so often over the last two days has probably got to do less with the need for a big then with the uncertainty how will Parker/Manu/Hill/ Mason produce side by side.
----------------------
No - we NOW have Hill and Mason who can score. We still need a big next to Duncan.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
