How did the Spurs evolve into Small Ball play?

[Mel_13]

Ian should get a shot as the starting C. Bogans got his shot and delivered, maybe it can be the same with Ian

Bogans had nearly 10,000 minutes of NBA experience.

Ian has 23.

[FromWayDowntown]

Pop sold out plain and simple. In 06 he should of stayed with Rasho against Dallas.

He never started with Rasho against Dallas in 2006. Rasho played about 9 minutes in Game 1 and almost 4 in Game 2. That's hardly using a guy; after that, Rasho played exactly 1 second of that series.

And it's not like Rasho was getting a lot of minutes against Sacramento in the preceding series. Rasho got about 23 minutes in a Game 1 blowout. He got about 13 in Game 2, which went to overtime. He got almost 18 minutes in Game 3 and played well; Pop rewarded Rasho with the start in Game 4 and the Spurs got run out of the gym. So, in Games 5 and 6, Pop started Robert Horry, and Rasho was back to playing about 10-13 minutes a game.

[Mel_13]

FWD patiently correcting the faulty memories of ST posters.

[FromWayDowntown]

This is not easy to say, but I watched the Utah/Dallas game this past week and Dirk was driving past Okur as though he was standing still. Dirk! Of all players. Now we've got Okur motoring past McDyess. There's another possible revelation forthcoming. I just don't want to talk about it.

You say that as if Dirk struggles to get to the rim and isn't very athletic. I'd argue that the very thing that make Dirk Nowitzki a no-brainer Hall of Famer is the fact that he has the athleticism at 7 feet tall, to put the ball on the floor and get to the rim. Couple that with his ability to shoot the ball, and he is among the toughest covers in basketball.

[SamoanTD]

ehhhhh coulda woulda shoulda we are where we are and cant change that just live with it no matter how painfull lol

[ploto]

It really is a misnomer to claim that Dallas played small ball, and hence so did we. Dallas did not play small ball, at all. They played a traditional center and a 7-foot tall PF. The issue was not wanting Duncan to cover Dirk. Pop put TD on Damp and then had to figure out how to cover Dirk. Pop decided not to let Rasho do it- although he has covered Dirk for years in international play- nor even give Oberto a chance. He decided to use Michael Finley and thus, small ball was born- with Finley at the PF spot. It lives on to this day, no matter who or what kind of big men have followed- whether Franciscio or Bonner up to today with Dice and Ratliff.

[SA210]

He never started with Rasho against Dallas in 2006. Rasho played about 9 minutes in Game 1 and almost 4 in Game 2. That's hardly using a guy; after that, Rasho played exactly 1 second of that series.

And it's not like Rasho was getting a lot of minutes against Sacramento in the preceding series. Rasho got about 23 minutes in a Game 1 blowout. He got about 13 in Game 2, which went to overtime. He got almost 18 minutes in Game 3 and played well; Pop rewarded Rasho with the start in Game 4 and the Spurs got run out of the gym. So, in Games 5 and 6, Pop started Robert Horry, and Rasho was back to playing about 10-13 minutes a game.

My point was that he should have stuck with him and stuck with the Spurs system, but that's when he started to sell out. Many players run Tim out of the arena too and dunk all over him and out rebound him in a game every now and then, but he still starts. And he should.

You sometimes remind me of TPark, the FO can do no wrong.

[ploto]

He never started with Rasho against Dallas in 2006. Rasho played about 9 minutes in Game 1...

Game 1 is the one game we dominated and we did it primarily in the third quarter in which we played either Tim and Rob, Tim and Rasho, or Rob and Rasho. We never played big ball again.

[SA210]

Thanks Ploto

[FromWayDowntown]

My point was that he should have stuck with him and stuck with the Spurs system, but that's when he started to sell out. Many players run Tim out of the arena too and dunk all over him and out rebound him in a game every now and then, but he still starts. And he should.

But that would make sense only if Pop had been playing Rasho a lot to begin with. He hadn't.

Your comparison with Duncan would make sense if Rasho had ever been an elite rebounder, shot blocker, or offensive player. Rasho was never any of those things. Tim Duncan is among the 10 greatest players in the history of basketball because he's a dominant rebounder, a dominant shot blocker, and a dominant offensive player, whatever his athleticism might be.

It's about results, and if Rasho could have shown results no matter the disparity in athleticism, I'm sure he would have played. But he didn't show results -- except to a few Spurs fans who somehow have sainted Rasho with rosy fantasies of defensive dominance. Rasho was a fine defensive player when matched against bigs who were basically the same as him athletically; when matched against players who were much more athletic, Rasho wasn't particularly productive.

You sometimes remind me of TPark, the FO can do no wrong.

Oh trust me, I think the Spurs' FO makes mistakes. By coincidence, while the Spurs have won more games than any other franchise in sports over the last 15 years or so, though, I find that their mistakes are basically limited. Teams that have the sort of successes that the Spurs have enjoyed don't make a lot of mistakes.

I just think the things that you complain about are really poor arguments.

I'll admit to this, though: having been a Spurs fan when things were really bad -- when the front office regularly made hideous trades, when the team wasn't a lock to be in the playoffs, when playoff runs were ended summarily by much, much better teams, when every decision that the Spurs made seemed to go to crap -- I can say I'm fairly content with what Pop and his crew have done.

[SA210]

But that would make sense only if Pop had been playing Rasho a lot to begin with. He hadn't.

Your comparison with Duncan would make sense if Rasho had ever been an elite rebounder, shot blocker, or offensive player. Rasho was never any of those things. Tim Duncan is among the 10 greatest players in the history of basketball because he's a dominant rebounder, a dominant shot blocker, and a dominant offensive player, whatever his athleticism might be.

It's about results, and if Rasho could have shown results no matter the disparity in athleticism, I'm sure he would have played. But he didn't show results -- except to a few Spurs fans who somehow have sainted Rasho with rosy fantasies of defensive dominance. Rasho was a fine defensive player when matched against bigs who were basically the same as him athletically; when matched against players who were much more athletic, Rasho wasn't particularly productive.



Oh trust me, I think the Spurs' FO makes mistakes. By coincidence, while the Spurs have won more games than any other franchise in sports over the last 15 years or so, though, I find that their mistakes are basically limited. Teams that have the sort of successes that the Spurs have enjoyed don't make a lot of mistakes.

I just think the things that you complain about are really poor arguments.

I'll admit to this, though: having been a Spurs fan when things were really bad -- when the front office regularly made hideous trades, when the team wasn't a lock to be in the playoffs, when playoff runs were ended summarily by much, much better teams, when every decision that the Spurs made seemed to go to crap -- I can say I'm fairly content with what Pop and his crew have done.

Rasho isn't Tim of course, but we started with Rasho the whole season, then changed things in the playoffs (kinda like Hill last year, used him in the regular season and he did great, then Pop didn't use him in the playoffs).

That was a huge mistake. Rasho wasn't a HOF'er, but he was decent and the better option at that position and it was spurs basketball. That's when Pop sold out and it's painful to watch this continue.

That system we used to have won us the rings. This new philosophy won't, and I hope you don't believe that it will. This new small ball system makes us like everyone else, and that leads to no championship.

[Mel_13]

Game 1 is the one game we dominated and we did it primarily in the third quarter in which we played either Tim and Rob, Tim and Rasho, or Rob and Rasho. We never played big ball again.

Dallas had a shot at the buzzer for the win.

[SenorSpur]

You say that as if Dirk struggles to get to the rim and isn't very athletic. I'd argue that the very thing that make Dirk Nowitzki a no-brainer Hall of Famer is the fact that he has the athleticism at 7 feet tall, to put the ball on the floor and get to the rim. Couple that with his ability to shoot the ball, and he is among the toughest covers in basketball.

My point is that Dirk's strong suit is his shooting ability - not his ability to get the rim. Though he is more successful at it now, than before, he's still primarily feared as a shooter. No doubt about it. He is one of THE toughest covers in the NBA.

[Chomag]

Thinking back, how many NBA teams have won the championship with so much small ball? I can't think of any off the top of my head. Don Nelson started the small ball experiments and look at the results it's given him in all his years of coaching.

I realy don't understand why this Donny system is getting so much praise to the point of it needing it to be coppied. All I'm saying is that it's a flawed system as it's been proven time and time again.

[SA210]

Thinking back, how many NBA teams have won the championship with so much small ball? I can't think of any of the top of my head. Don Nelson started the small ball experiments and look at the results it's given him in all his years of coaching.

I realy don't understand why this Donny system is getting so much praisse to the point of it needing it to be coppied. All I'm saying is that it's a flawed system as it's been proven time and time again.

[FromWayDowntown]

Game 1 is the one game we dominated and we did it primarily in the third quarter in which we played either Tim and Rob, Tim and Rasho, or Rob and Rasho. We never played big ball again.

When Rasho entered in the third quarter of Game 1 of that series, the score was Dallas 59, San Antonio 56; when he left, the score was Dallas 72, San Antonio 71. Rasho was +1.

[superbigtime]

It really is a misnomer to claim that Dallas played small ball, and hence so did we. Dallas did not play small ball, at all. They played a traditional center and a 7-foot tall PF. The issue was not wanting Duncan to cover Dirk. Pop put TD on Damp and then had to figure out how to cover Dirk. Pop decided not to let Rasho do it- although he has covered Dirk for years in international play- nor even give Oberto a chance. He decided to use Michael Finley and thus, small ball was born- with Finley at the PF spot. It lives on to this day, no matter who or what kind of big men have followed- whether Franciscio or Bonner up to today with Dice and Ratliff.

Thus the Genius of Coach Popovich.

[Fabbs]

And it's not like Rasho was getting a lot of minutes against Sacramento in the preceding series. Rasho got about 23 minutes in a Game 1 blowout. He got about 13 in Game 2, which went to overtime. He got almost 18 minutes in Game 3 and played well; Pop rewarded Rasho with the start in Game 4 and the Spurs got run out of the gym. So, in Games 5 and 6, Pop started Robert Horry, and Rasho was back to playing about 10-13 minutes a game.

Just because Rasho alone got reduced minutes does not mean it was smallballs.
Man From Nazr played 25 min in Gm 1 and 24 minutes in Gm 2.
So thats combined NazrRash Tallball of:
Gm 1 48 min
Gm 2 37 min. Both wins.

Hardly smallballs.

[Fabbs]

I'm not sure how a team that eeks out a 6 gamer against an 8 seed, barely wins Game 1 of a conference semifinal and then gets blasted in Game 2 of that series is well on its way to a le, but to each his own, I guess.

Check back one year ealier to 2005.
Lost Gm 1 vs Denver. Did not resort to smallballs panic.
Next series Seattle, lost Gms 3 and 4 to be tied at 2-2. Once again, did not resort to smallballs and stuck with Man From Nazr.
Championship.

Elson was the Spurs' attempt at a response to their shortcomings against small ball, and he could at least stay on the floor against smaller lineups because he could run and compete athletically. But with that said, as the 2007 playoffs progressed, Elson became the Spurs 4th big; after Game 2 of the Phoenix series that year, he got fewer minutes than both Oberto and Horry in 10 of 13 games -- and he got more minutes than Horry in 2 of the 3 because Horry was suspended.

I posted the stats on Gms Elson played 20+ minutes in the 2006-7 season. Spurs were something like 20-1 as such. Granted, the 2007 Finals were a successful smallballs playoffs. An exception rather then a rule and bear in mind we were playing Cleveland, whose coach is as offensively dense as his mentor Popped.
Elson was never the same after his orbital bone got broken IMO.

[SA210]

Just because Rasho alone got reduced minutes does not mean it was smallballs.
Man From Nazr played 25 min in Gm 1 and 24 minutes in Gm 2.
So thats combined NazrRash Tallball of:
Gm 1 48 min
Gm 2 37 min. Both wins.

Hardly smallballs.

[ceperez]

It really is a misnomer to claim that Dallas played small ball, and hence so did we. Dallas did not play small ball, at all. They played a traditional center and a 7-foot tall PF. The issue was not wanting Duncan to cover Dirk. Pop put TD on Damp and then had to figure out how to cover Dirk. Pop decided not to let Rasho do it- although he has covered Dirk for years in international play- nor even give Oberto a chance. He decided to use Michael Finley and thus, small ball was born- with Finley at the PF spot. It lives on to this day, no matter who or what kind of big men have followed- whether Franciscio or Bonner up to today with Dice and Ratliff.

Agree. Dallas didn't play small ball, it was the Spurs who insisted on this kind of line up.

[SA210]

Check back one year ealier to 2005.
Lost Gm 1 vs Denver. Did not resort to smallballs panic.
Next series Seattle, lost Gms 3 and 4 to be tied at 2-2. Once again, did not resort to smallballs and stuck with Man From Nazr.
Championship.



.

This

[ceperez]

BTW, anyone have a good answer as to WHY?

Is there any solid evidence that playing two bigs in the Dallas series was a losing proposition?

There's no evidence that any team has won a championship with small ball. The closest in recent memory may be the Pistons, but it would be a stretch to call the Wallace boys inept with defending the paint.

Let's look at the memory lane:

2009 - Lakers - Bynum, Gasol
2008 - Celtics - Perkins, Garnet

2006 - Heat - O'Neil, Haslem

2004 - Pistons - Wallace, Wallace

2002 - Lakers - O'Neil, Horry

[The Truth #6]

Playoffs are all about matchups. We didn't match up well against Dallas. Playing someone quick who could guard Dirk became necessary so that Tim wouldn't guard him and foul out, because as everyone should remember, Dirk was getting the Michael Jordan treatment from the refs that series.

This doesn't mean Pop should always resort to smallball. Much of smallball now seems like an excuse for Pop to play Finley more. I used to joke about that, but now I hate to think it might actually be true. I don't have any other reason why Finley gets as many minutes as he does, or why we resort to smallball as the only way to get back into a game. When we're down, it's becomes fairly predicatable - small ball! Maybe that's because we go through scoring droughts all the time, which is somehting that confuses me. Is our inability to score an inherent negative side effect of our System? This issue never seems to go away. I suppose its our reliance on the 3 point shot.

But as far as playing Tall Ball - realize that having Tim and David on the team together was a gift from God. Expecting that to be the archetype is just plain silly. I admit that Pop hasn't really found a great idea on how to adjust after Robinson left. He tried to keep it going with Rasho but the reality of Rasho's limitations soon became obvious. The team has tried to find the "next Bowen" and the next "Horry" but living in the past is part of the problem.

We need to find talented players who can play well together and do the best we can. That's reality. We won't have two HOF post players together again. Who does?

[SenorSpur]

Finding talented players is one thing. Trusting, incorporating and using them to their fullest is quite the other. Probably Pop's biggest flaw as a head coach is that he tends overtrust guys that are battle-tested. He tends to over-rely on the long-tooth, veteran, guys, even when it's obvious they are past their prime. He seems to think that he can, at times, squeeze out more of their abilities when their tanks are clearly empty. Finley, KT and NVE are perfect examples. Keeping them around a year or two too long.

Coming into this season, we all hoped and thought that Finley would move down the rotation a bit. We've all thought this for about 2-3 seasons now. However another season comes, and Finley is still a major cog in Pop's rotation. No matter how much Finley continously gets his ass handed to him game after game. Pop stubbornly will not relent. He just inserted Bogans, but has yet to promote Hairston, when it's obvious these are the best two perimeter defenders on the roster. Both should be seeing more floor time than Finley, especially when matched against teams that have boatloads of younger, quicker players, like Portland.

Until Pop is willing to take a gamble on younger, more talented players, who may not be as invested in the system, the Spurs will continue to be deficient in matching up with younger, quicker, more athletic teams.