Reply With Quote
was there anything on my post that says something about his defense? but you have to agree, if he made more of his shots, the outcome could have been different.
LOL all the spoiled ass Spurs fans on this thread.
Let me break it down for you...Pop does not care about ratings. Pop does not care about tiebreakers. Pop does not care about seeding. He cares about his players and about winning when it counts...which is the playoffs. We just played a fast-paced, overtime game and now we have to play against a good team on their court less than 24hrs later. Sitting our starters does two things...it allows them to get rest and it allows our role players that have not been playing well to log more minutes, which can help the ones that have been struggling re-establish some rhythm.
But all fans can do is whine about not getting to see the Big 3 or bring up weak arguments like seeding and tiebreakers. You know what I want as a fan? A championship...and this was a championship move from a championship coach.
was there anything on my post that says something about his defense? but you have to agree, if he made more of his shots, the outcome could have been different.
I don't think anyone who's taken issue with Pop's decision wants to lose. Saying that you want to win makes you a Spurs fan, ostensibly just like everyone else on this board.
And the point is not what Pop does or does not think. If you can't figure out that he doesn't care about the standings based on his decision to rest the Big 3, then you haven't been paying attention. The reason why some are upset about this decision is because the seeding does matter.
Just some food for thought: the Spurs have only won two playoff series the without HCA--both of which were against the Suns.
Look, Pop is a great coach ... most of the time. But his greatness shouldn't blind you to the fact that he's human and can make bad decisions. Tonight Pop showed he's just another guy.
+1
I want more games with no Fin!!!! Or at leastmore Bruce.
It sucked that Tim/Tony couldn't at least play 5 minutes in each half, but seeing Hairston almost negated that oversight. 6-8 is damn fine, too bad he missed all 3 FTs. But hey, he's avging .67 blocks!!!
I agree with you for the most part, but how can you logically explain how this move will "certainly" increase the odds of a championship? How can you explain that it could have legitimately hurt their chances at another ring?
Well said brother - Amen!
I consider any move that both benefits the role players and allows your starters to rest and perhaps avoid injury to be a move that is focused on the season to come...which is the playoffs. It's nothing absolute, but it's a damn good idea on paper and it seemed to work out well as the role players played hard and competed right up to the end. Having them react in that way against a good team in a hostile environment develops them mentally for what is to come.
I checked 8 WC teams and this is what I found:
LA Lakers
Thursday, Feb. 26, 2009 vs. Phoenix
Friday, Feb. 27, 2009 in Denver
Golden State
Friday, Dec. 12, 2008 vs. Houston
Saturday, Dec. 13, 2008 in Denver
Utah Jazz
Saturday, January 24, 2009 vs. Cleveland
Sunday, January 25, 2009 in Denver
New Orleans Hornets
Friday, January 2, 2009 at Portland
Saturday, January 3, 2009 at Denver
OKC Thunder
Tuesday, March 10, 2009 at Sacramento
Wednesday, March 11, 2009 at Denver
AND
Tuesday April 7, 2009 vs. Spurs
Wednesay, April 8, 2009 in Denver
Damn ploto, either you have no life, or ducks killed your dog.
I'm sorry but that's load of crap. It has nothing to do with not caring about "ratings" or any of that.
I guess that's the perils of internet fandom and being too familiar with teh players and coaches. All of a sudden they start stating cult like statements "we might not like it, but it is not our decision to make. In Pop we trust"
Unless Pop is omniscient and can see into the future, no one has any more right to say it's wrong to complain about the decision. No championships are guaranteed no matter how much you plan. Be conservative limit minutes, but just ing play.
Some of you guys forgot what it's like to watch a random basketball game on a Sunday afternoon, people have a right to on the principle of the matter.
I would hate for the league to adopt Pop's championship strategy back then in the NBC days, during triple headers, where half the championship caliber teams randomly sat their star players all for the sake of some remote unforeseen future, or obscure injury cir stance that may or may not happen.
I won't argue with that - he needs to more consistent on offense, but I've always thought that his worth to the Spurs was on defense. We face a lot of teams with dominating guards - NO, Utah, Dallas, Phoenix, Denver, etc. To me, his usefulness will be in defending those guards in certiain situations. Other than that, he needs to run the offense and not turn the ball over. If he becomes more consistent on offense (mainly finishing at the rim,) that is a bonus.
But where is the proof that this helps you avoid serious injury? Has this happened a lot before on back to backs? Why is this one of the first times this strategy has been employed then? Why do it tonight, instead of yesterday?
Just proving that this whining about the schedule as if it only happens to the Spurs is weak and false. I am sick of reading it this year.
Whatever...cry me a river.
maybe so, but that's the thing about the pros vs. the college game - it's a business and the business is winning championships. Don't worry - Stern will do all he can to make sure that his NBA is entertaining (i.e. the Pasol trade and the Boston free agent/trades.) But honestly, if you need to be entertained you shouldn't root for the Spurs - they're all about the business of winning championships.
I am not sure what you mean about yesterday...we had a day off before the GS game.
As far as the rest of what you said goes, I am thinking it is a combination of what happened against Orlando on short rest, Ginobili being banged up and TD and TP both playing 40+ minutes the night before. With Manu out your are going to need more out of two players that are already playing with half full tanks. No need in pushing Duncan and Parker when it is already unlikely we are going to win this game.
I think the combination of cir stances is what makes is more of a unique situation compared to other back to backs we have played.
By yesterday, I meant why not sit the big 3 out then? Give them 2 days rest before the Nuggets game then let them play that one?
but you forgot on little thing, the time zones, it changes if you go from west to east so that gives you less time to rest
Hopefully you were sauced when you wrote that because that makes no sense.
Like I was talking about before the Warriors game, the only way to conquer that pair of games was to beat the Warriors handily and get some rest. At the very worst, you try to get out of that game playing regular minutes.
Didn't happen. I thought it was a very good move to concede the Nuggets game. The chances of winning were small and the chances of injury were elevated.
Even before the season started, that was a back-to-back that stood out as very odd. Conceding 1/82nd of the regular season wasn't that much of a tragedy.
This move was idiotic...There was no reason for Pop to just hand this game to one of the teams we are battling for the top 3 spots in the West. The people on this forum rationalizing this by saying seedings and standings mean nothing are delusional. The Spurs (as is) need HCA to get out of the West. Pop turned, what could have been a very good RRT, into quite possibly a huge letdown and scramble to break even if they can't pull off the game in Boston...
I never said it was a tragedy. Couple of questions then. Do you think this was a plan before the Warriors game, if the guys did not win handily? Do you think the extra 5 minute overtime really played into the decision? Do you think it could have been determined no matter what before the Warriors game?
wow..we aren't getting homecourt..
HCA was out of the question the minute we learned that Manu and Tony were going to be out for a month..we had absolutely no chance from the get go..just because the Lakers lost Bynum, it doesn't mean they're going to meltdown..they made the finals last year without him, how the would they lose an entire 5-game lead in the standings?..
getting 2nd, 3rd, or 4th is irrelevant..there's no difference between playing any of the teams from 3 to 9, they're all similar..the Lakers are on their own level in the West, and we're alone on the 2nd level IMO..
we're a proven team that doesn't need home court..
I don't understand that logic at all, this was a very winnable game considering how poorly Denver played defense for stretches of this game and the Billups injury. Playing just Parker may have been enough to pull this game out. This game could easily bite the Spurs in the ass come playoff positioning time. We saw first hand last year how much 1 or 2 regular season games can change the outlook of a playoff series. It's quite plausible that we don't even make it out of the first round without the help of HCA against the Suns, which we earned by 1 or 2 extra regular season wins...
spurs fans should respond by "taking the night off" for the next home game. No crowd at the next game? hilarious
Wasn't directing that at you.
I doubt there was a hard plan. The team should have been focused on getting the win and playing as well as possible to have a chance against Denver.
Yes. Five more minutes for Manu and Tony and a couple more minutes for Duncan are a lot. Especially since all those players have their minutes watched closely most of the time.
After the game, Manu said he was dead tired and banged up. He usually doesn't admit to that, especially these days when he knows Pop will sit him at any sign of injury.
No. I'm sure it was more of a feel. The overtime combined by the amount of effort it took to make about four or five comebacks during the game. Plus the game was physical -- with both Ginobili and Parker getting to the line a dozen times. Not to mention Duncan having to expend more energy than usual guarding smaller players.
Usually after a tough front end of a back-to-back, Pop will simply rest the Big Three early and not over play them. But the Warriors game was just an extremely taxing affair ... much more so than could be anticipated.
I was on the concede bandwagon before Pop made the move. Ginobili was all types of banged up. Parker plays on a wobbly ankle that gets more wobbly when he gets tired. Duncan probably could have handled it but you don't want to wear him out by making him carry the load without TP or Manu.
If I disagreed with anything, it was not playing Finley. Finley actually plays well against the Nuggets and his shooting could have really helped tonight. That said, if Finley plays, he probably gets all of Hairston's minutes and letting Hairston get some run was very valuable -- so even sitting Finley worked out.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
