George Karl speaks on our defense..

[Bruno]

Well your fellow Frenchman has both size AND mobility.

So have the Na'vis.

Splitter woudl also have been great as this mobile big with size. Now, what is done is done. It's too late for Ian and Splitter Spurs. Spurs badly need to get a gig with a good size/mobility compromise.

[Obstructed_View]

I'm sorry, I missed your credentials that allow you to be a condescending prick when talking about all things defense.
Furthermore, I called them below-average talent because they were pretty good at one thing but horrible at another. As players, OVERALL, they were below-average.

The Spurs don't need offense, they need defense. Guys who block shots, defend the lane and get rebounds don't need to score. None of them were as bad as you tried to make them out to be offensively but even if they were their defense more than made up for it, as the struggles since they left will attest.

In conclusion:

1) They were horrible offensively
2) They provided better defense than our current bigs

Which is exactly what I wrote in my post...

Actually, you took a discussion about defense and suddenly ripped all of them for being terrible offensive players. You then suggested their defense is hugely overrated, and those that characterize them as good positional defenders are mistaken. You went on to say that Matt Bonner is even worse than any of them. Basically you produced an admirable amalgam of every Rasho-Nazr-Elson-Bonnerbashing that's gone on for the past five or six years.

Well, Horry didn't need to make up for lack of size because he was 6'10. I'm not sure where you're going with this though...

I'm not sure how you aren't sure because you yourself said many of the same things about him. Horry was a three most of his career who stands out on the perimeter and shoots. He's an excellent on the ball defender and a crafty weakside shot blocker, but he's never played as big as his height and would never be considered an inside player. The Spurs' success came when he was the regular three and not a smallball 4 or 5. Again, bringing up his name when we're talking about defensive needs at the center position was your idea, not mine.

[temujin]

Amazing.

Even Karl realizes that Bonner is worst than Robinson or Nesterovic at protecting the rim.

I'm impressed.

[guzmangm]

I think if Rasho were back, if possible, then he would be an immediate upgrade in situation defense. We thought Ratliff was gonna be used for his shot blocking ability but for some reason he doesn't get used. Rasho has experience already with the squad. You bring him in when you need him. The spurs have gotten defensively worse progressively and it's not all related to losing Bruce or aging players. When Rasho was here, the Spurs were still good defensesively not exclusive because of him, but he added his element. I never could understand all the Rasho hate back then.

[Spur|n|Austin]

Just another reason we need that trade for another dominant big defender. I actually heard Brent mention this prior to the game.

Amazing.

Even Karl realizes that Bonner is worst than Robinson or Nesterovic at protecting the rim.

I'm impressed.

Has that not been more than obvious to everyone?

[ElNono]

The Spurs don't need offense, they need defense. Guys who block shots, defend the lane and get rebounds don't need to score. None of them were as bad as you tried to make them out to be offensively but even if they were their defense more than made up for it, as the struggles since they left will attest.

When we're talking about Rasho, Nazr and Elson, we're talking about the Spurs of times past, not the Spurs of the present. You seem to be confused.
And yes, they were all handicapped offensively. But they filled their roles properly on our system on defense. They weren't great defensive players by any measurable standard either. None of them were top 10 rebounders, or shot blockers. They just knew where to be and what their role was next to a Tim Duncan who was on a superior tier defensively from the rest of the league back then.

Actually, you took a discussion about defense and suddenly ripped all of them for being terrible offensive players. You then suggested their defense is hugely overrated, and those that characterize them as good positional defenders are mistaken. You went on to say that Matt Bonner is even worse than any of them. Basically you produced an admirable amalgam of every Rasho-Nazr-Elson-Bonnerbashing that's gone on for the past five or six years.

No, you had a rage attack when I said they were below-average players.
But we're not entirely disagreeing here.
All those guys were average defenders and knew their roles. Guys like Bonner (and Blair, but I'll excuse him because he's a rook) have been substantially worse on defense. This is compounded because Tim has lost a step defensively, and now he's just "great", instead of being "awesome". I think we are actually in agreement on this.

And it's not bashing. The reality is that the FO has brought in Kurt Thomas, Drew Gooden, McDyess and now is still looking for another big as we speak because the Red Rocket is a great guy, plays real hard, knows his sandwiches, but he's simply not what we need defensively out there. Exactly what Karl pointed out.

I'm not sure how you aren't sure because you yourself said many of the same things about him. Horry was a three most of his career who stands out on the perimeter and shoots. He's an excellent on the ball defender and a crafty weakside shot blocker, but he's never played as big as his height and would never be considered an inside player. The Spurs' success came when he was the regular three and not a smallball 4 or 5. Again, bringing up his name when we're talking about defensive needs at the center position was your idea, not mine.

I brought in Horry because only when he came around people stopped ing about our defenders in the interior. But at the same time, that's when Pop went away from a classical lineup to the pseudo small ball that has the PF playing on the perimeter.
Please, go take a look at the 2005 Finals. Our crunch time lineup was Duncan, Horry, Bowen, Ginobili, Parker. On offense, Horry played a lot like Bonner now, rotating to the perimeter, but on defense he played inside.
At some point Pop thought Matt would be the next Horry, and that was a massive fail. Horry was unique, and the quicker we run away from that and back to the classical defense, the quicker we'll be back on the right track.

[Pero]

How exactly was Rasho handicaped on offense?

[ElNono]

How exactly was Rasho handicaped on offense?

He averaged 6.3 PPG on 24.3 min as a Spur...
On the playoffs: 3.1 PPG on 15.4 mins...

His first season was the best as a Spur... he quickly declined from there...

[Pero]

He averaged 6.3 PPG on 24.3 min as a Spur...
On the playoffs: 3.1 PPG on 15.4 mins...

His first season was the best as a Spur... he quickly declined from there...

I'm not sure that's a sign of being handicapped on offense. He scored less after his first season because he took less shots (almost half as much). When Tim went down he averaged around 15 pts. As a Raptor he had a period of averaging 16 ppg. If he was handicapped on offense he wouldn't be able to do that. You make it sound like he's Ben Wallace offensively.
Although maybe you meant that he was handicapped on offense because of the Spurs system. In which case I think it doesn't really matter offensively who the center is, he won't average a lot of points, unless he's named Tim Duncan or David Robinson.

[Pero]

But in any case I doubt bringing back Rasho (or Nazr) would help much.

[Obstructed_View]

How exactly was Rasho handicaped on offense?

Rasho's biggest problem offensively during his time as a Spur was the guy he started next to. Rasho always scored far more when Duncan wasn't on the floor with him. That would have been a survivable problem if he'd made less money.

[Obstructed_View]

When we're talking about Rasho, Nazr and Elson, we're talking about the Spurs of times past, not the Spurs of the present. You seem to be confused.

Maybe I just wasn't clear enough. The Spurs of the present need size. Even if it's size that doesn't score points or get rebounds, even guys with size that aren't great defensive players by any measurable standard. It dovetails with what Karl said. The reason I overreacted at your calling them out on offense is because that menality has evolved into Pop running five guys who are undersized out there in the hopes that they can outscore their opponent while two big defensive shot blockers watch from the sideline. We're all too familiar with the layup line that results from that.

Guys like Bonner (and Blair, but I'll excuse him because he's a rook) have been substantially worse on defense. This is compounded because Tim has lost a step defensively, and now he's just "great", instead of being "awesome". I think we are actually in agreement on this.

I'm still not convinced that Bonner and Blair are substantially worse defenders, I think they're sustantially smaller, which is why I resist the attempts to overthink this problem. Timmy is clearly not physically what he was several years back, but a defensive system that pairs him with a legitimate seven footer to block and alter shots in the paint makes his job easier, not harder.

And it's not bashing. The reality is that the FO has brought in Kurt Thomas, Drew Gooden, McDyess and now is still looking for another big as we speak because the Red Rocket is a great guy, plays real hard, knows his sandwiches, but he's simply not what we need defensively out there. Exactly what Karl pointed out.

The problem with all the guys the Spurs have brought in is that they're all undersized, and the defense simply doesn't work when you're plugging 6'9" guys into your center role, particularly now that you've lost Bruce Bowen.

I brought in Horry because only when he came around people stopped ing about our defenders in the interior. But at the same time, that's when Pop went away from a classical lineup to the pseudo small ball that has the PF playing on the perimeter.
Please, go take a look at the 2005 Finals. Our crunch time lineup was Duncan, Horry, Bowen, Ginobili, Parker. On offense, Horry played a lot like Bonner now, rotating to the perimeter, but on defense he played inside.
At some point Pop thought Matt would be the next Horry, and that was a massive fail. Horry was unique, and the quicker we run away from that and back to the classical defense, the quicker we'll be back on the right track.

I'm sort of with you on this point, but in 2005 Rasho and Nazr were getting plenty of minutes, and in the '05 Finals, the Pistons ran a lot of three guard lineups. Remember also that Ben Wallace was their center and he's 6'9". When the Spurs died in the '06 playoffs it was because Horry and Duncan were the center rotation with Finley at the 4 much of the time. When they won again in '07 it was with Oberto playing a more traditional center role with Duncan and Horry in their normal positions. The flawed logic that Horry was a success at the 4 or 5 is what led to the belief that Bonner could do the same thing, and has of course been a disaster. Not, IMO, because Bonner's a rotten player or because he can't defend, but because he's basically being asked to do what Ben Wallace did when he was in his prime. Again, just a laughable expectation if it were happening to someone else's team.

[Chieflion]

While I agree George Karl was right, and that he did mock Pop for putting in small ball by inserting his small lineup as well, when the game was out of hand, the Spurs show that at least they could play some defense. If only they could do it consistently.

[Obstructed_View]

While I agree George Karl was right, and that he did mock Pop for putting in small ball by inserting his small lineup as well, when the game was out of hand, the Spurs show that at least they could play some defense. If only they could do it consistently.

Having every guy that gets game time moving at game speed makes a heck of a difference, and playing 48 minutes is important too. Lets see if they can come in and do it again after a long layoff. I'm not even going to look any further than that for the time being.

[Chieflion]

Having every guy that gets game time moving at game speed makes a heck of a difference, and playing 48 minutes is important too. Lets see if they can come in and do it again after a long layoff. I'm not even going to look any further than that for the time being.

Enjoy the all-star weekend as fans, and lets not think about so much, this is the time when coaches make their final adjustments and trade talks. After the layoff, it will be the final push.

[ElNono]

Maybe I just wasn't clear enough. The Spurs of the present need size. Even if it's size that doesn't score points or get rebounds, even guys with size that aren't great defensive players by any measurable standard. It dovetails with what Karl said. The reason I overreacted at your calling them out on offense is because that menality has evolved into Pop running five guys who are undersized out there in the hopes that they can outscore their opponent while two big defensive shot blockers watch from the sideline. We're all too familiar with the layup line that results from that.

We're in complete agreement on this. And it's not merely size, but as Bruno mentioned, also mobility. I would add a third trait and that is defensive-mentality (shot blocking and above average rebounding). Obviously, you probably can't find a guy that has all those traits without paying handsomely for his services, so it has to be at the very least some kind of combination of those.

I'm still not convinced that Bonner and Blair are substantially worse defenders, I think they're sustantially smaller, which is why I resist the attempts to overthink this problem. Timmy is clearly not physically what he was several years back, but a defensive system that pairs him with a legitimate seven footer to block and alter shots in the paint makes his job easier, not harder.

To me, at the very least to be an effective defensive big you need to be able to bang with the big guys. Bynum, Howard, Shaq. Blair is undersized, but he has the body to bang up, he rebounds well, and he's been developing a good sense of timing for blocking shots. The problem with Blair is that he's getting just his feet wet both in the league and the system. That's why I can't ask much more than the hustle he gives us out there right now. I fully expect him to get owned by the excellent talent in the league (like Gasol the other day) in his first season. Make no mistake, he's a special talent. I wouldn't put it past him he will someday be a 20-20 guy. And if he puts those numbers, then he will more than make up for whatever defense he plays. Bonner is a different story altogether. I can't say he doesn't try hard, because he's one of the guys that works the hardest out there and overcomes some of his limitations by doing so. And for the limited amount of time I've interacted with him personally, he seems like a great guy. But as a basketball player in this league, he is limited. He's simply soft, he doesn't have a great vertical, his shot blocking is limited, and his rebounding is simply below average. He's mostly and offensive weapon for certain matchups, and most definitely a 15 mpg tops bench player.

The problem with all the guys the Spurs have brought in is that they're all undersized, and the defense simply doesn't work when you're plugging 6'9" guys into your center role, particularly now that you've lost Bruce Bowen.

Well, part of the problem is that talented 7 footers that have some experience in this league just simply don't grow on trees. And by experience I mean that they've played enough seasons in this league not to get the rookie treatment from the refs, and also have enough savvy to understand the Spurs defensive scheme. Thomas was probably the closes match on this, but he was neither mobile or tall.

I'm sort of with you on this point, but in 2005 Rasho and Nazr were getting plenty of minutes, and in the '05 Finals, the Pistons ran a lot of three guard lineups. Remember also that Ben Wallace was their center and he's 6'9". When the Spurs died in the '06 playoffs it was because Horry and Duncan were the center rotation with Finley at the 4 much of the time. When they won again in '07 it was with Oberto playing a more traditional center role with Duncan and Horry in their normal positions. The flawed logic that Horry was a success at the 4 or 5 is what led to the belief that Bonner could do the same thing, and has of course been a disaster. Not, IMO, because Bonner's a rotten player or because he can't defend, but because he's basically being asked to do what Ben Wallace did when he was in his prime. Again, just a laughable expectation if it were happening to someone else's team.

I will also give you that it made sense to play Horry more inside in those Finals because Ben Wallace had basically zero offense. But again, Horry was an incredibly savvy player. I still remember him poking the ball off of anybody that wanted to post him up. Drawing charges. Blocking shots. Most people just remember his clutch shots, but he was a pretty smart defender too.

[himat]

Well look you guys who do you have? What other guy can play next to Duncan besides Blair, McDyess, and Bonner? Nobody really. What choice do you guys have?

For us McDyess worked out because he can't stay in front of people anyomore but he can still rebound and out muscle opponents. Sheed, Ben, Chauncey, Rip, Tay were all solid defenders so nobody could really exploit McDyess's speed.

What I think the Spurs need the most is to step it up defensively on the perimeter. Its easy to blame the big men because they are the one's who get scored on the most, but I have watched some Spurs games and Tony Parker and company get beat a lot of the dribble.

Tell me if I'm wrong because I have only watched like 6 or 7 Spurs games this season.

[ShoogarBear]

Well look you guys who do you have? What other guy can play next to Duncan besides Blair, McDyess, and Bonner? Nobody really. What choice do you guys have?

For us McDyess worked out because he can't stay in front of people anyomore but he can still rebound and out muscle opponents. Sheed, Ben, Chauncey, Rip, Tay were all solid defenders so nobody could really exploit McDyess's speed.

What I think the Spurs need the most is to step it up defensively on the perimeter. Its easy to blame the big men because they are the one's who get scored on the most, but I have watched some Spurs games and Tony Parker and company get beat a lot of the dribble.

Tell me if I'm wrong because I have only watched like 6 or 7 Spurs games this season.

No, you're not wrong. The noticeable thing about the Denver game was how much more aggressive the Spurs were on the perimeter, especially the half-court trapping. They picked up a lot more fouls than their accustomed to, but Denver was clearly rattled. The problem is that's less likely to work against smart, patient teams.

[ElNono]

Well look you guys who do you have? What other guy can play next to Duncan besides Blair, McDyess, and Bonner? Nobody really. What choice do you guys have?

For us McDyess worked out because he can't stay in front of people anyomore but he can still rebound and out muscle opponents. Sheed, Ben, Chauncey, Rip, Tay were all solid defenders so nobody could really exploit McDyess's speed.

What I think the Spurs need the most is to step it up defensively on the perimeter. Its easy to blame the big men because they are the one's who get scored on the most, but I have watched some Spurs games and Tony Parker and company get beat a lot of the dribble.

Tell me if I'm wrong because I have only watched like 6 or 7 Spurs games this season.

I think it has to be a complete team thing. Much like the Pistons in 06/07, where you had both great perimeter and great interior defense. For us, it's been also that. We lost Bowen on the perimeter, Manu is a step slower this season, and inside TD needs help. He can't just do it all by himself anymore.

The positives have been mostly Hill on the perimeter, and Blair rebounding. Pop was hoping for RJ to at least try, considering he's still somewhat athletic and has some size at SF, but it's been a complete failure.

So it's a lot more negative than positive overall. A shot blocker would go a long ways, but I've suggested to at least take a gamble on a perimeter guy like Bell, and other people have brought up Nocioni. It's about adding a little toughness, at ude and savvy to the perimeter, and hope the defense picks up. We'll see what the FO is thinking about soon enough I guess.

[SCdac]

Rasho may have been an average overall player, but there's no denying he was a really solid shot blocker and alterer back in the mid 2000's... Looking at our 03-04 roster for instance, when we lead the league in defense (held teams to like 84 PPG), and newly signed Rasho started all 82 games and averaged almost 30 MPG, we really controlled the paint. That regular season, only 6 times did a team score 100 points or more on us, and 6 times we held the opposition to 69 points or less...

Just looking at the league leaders in blocks that year is telling of what kind of team we used to be...

03-04 total blocks

1. Theo Ratliff-TOT 307
2. Ben Wallace-DET 246
3. Andrei Kirilenko-UTA 215
4. Zydrunas Ilgauskas-CLE 201
5. Jermaine O'Neal-IND 199
6. Samuel Dalembert-PHI 189
7. Marcus Camby-DEN 187
8. Tim Duncan-SAS 185
9. Kevin Garnett-MIN 178
10. Shaquille O'Neal-LAL 166
11. Rasho Nesterovic-SAS 165
12. Yao Ming-HOU 156
13. Elton Brand-LAC 154
14. Greg Ostertag-UTA 139
15. Erick Dampier-GSW 137
16. Pau Gasol-MEM 132
17. Donyell Marshall-TOT 124
18. Dikembe Mutombo-NYK 123
Etan Thomas-WAS 123
20. Rasheed Wallace-TOT 122

I would give anything for the Spurs to get back to having two prime time shot blockers in the starting lineup

[Obstructed_View]

No, you're not wrong. The noticeable thing about the Denver game was how much more aggressive the Spurs were on the perimeter, especially the half-court trapping. They picked up a lot more fouls than their accustomed to, but Denver was clearly rattled. The problem is that's less likely to work against smart, patient teams.

Game speed and hustle was really key, and the fouls were smart. How many times last year did Finley's man start out hitting a couple of open shots and then suddenly torch the Spurs for the next 20 minutes? I'd much rather they foul a few times than allow jump shooters to get their range. It's also tough for some of these guys to defend according to a system that preaches funneling dribblers baseline when there are no longer shot blockers there to influence the shot.

[himat]

No, you're not wrong. The noticeable thing about the Denver game was how much more aggressive the Spurs were on the perimeter, especially the half-court trapping. They picked up a lot more fouls than their accustomed to, but Denver was clearly rattled. The problem is that's less likely to work against smart, patient teams.

You can't always count on that you are right, but even though Denver is a stupid team, Chauncey is usually good about not turning the ball over.

Yeah Raja Bell could help you guys a lot. I am not a big fan of his, but the dude hits big shots and was the one guy who could play D on that Suns team a few years back. I don't know who you guys would trade to get him though.

Sheed looks like a bust in Boston, but that whole team is washed up. That would have been sick if you guys could have got him and Dice. He would help a lot on defense, but I'm not so sure about offense.

[Obstructed_View]

Well, part of the problem is that talented 7 footers that have some experience in this league just simply don't grow on trees. And by experience I mean that they've played enough seasons in this league not to get the rookie treatment from the refs, and also have enough savvy to understand the Spurs defensive scheme.

Therein lies the rub. The Spurs have a better chance of teaching Ratliff the system than anyone they can bring in. Ian's probably going to get rookie calls if he plays the rest of the season, but if his time on the floor is potentially a net gain then they absolutely have to find out this season if they want to challenge. They might just think they can get a vet and teach him everything they need, which is possible. They have done it before.

[ElNono]

Therein lies the rub. The Spurs have a better chance of teaching Ratliff the system than anyone they can bring in. Ian's probably going to get rookie calls if he plays the rest of the season, but if his time on the floor is potentially a net gain then they absolutely have to find out this season if they want to challenge. They might just think they can get a vet and teach him everything they need, which is possible. They have done it before.

If Ratliff is to contribute this season at all, he needs to start seeing the floor now. People that think he's just going to be trotted out there in the middle of the playoffs without having a clue how to rotate inside and what to do in our system are entirely delusional, IMO. That's why I originally was preaching to at least give him 10 minutes a night. But it's been a while that I've been suspecting that Pop has really no intention of playing him, unless there's foul trouble, a very specific situation that requires a shot blocker or injury from his rotation bigs. Which is a shame, really.

[newacc]

Pop has to be one of the most stubborn humans on the planet. He'd rather go with someone like Finley or RJ at power forward and lose than try an unexperienced Ian Mahinmi or aged Theo Ratliff and see what happens.

On a related note, Mike Bud has to be a failed underling. That game against Dallas he looked like a lost puppy after I don't know many years of serving as Pop's right hand man. Adding to that, I'll bet he doesn't have the courage to call Pop out on some of Pop's self destructing lineup choices. He's probably just a yes man that runs X&Os over the players.

He's not alone though. Independent media fear Pop's wrath so much they cower their questions to hopefully meet his approval.

All this unquestioned power has evolved Pop into a coach that now routinely embarrasses himself with lineup selection. You can say what you want about the players under performing, but the bottom line is this is one of the most talented Spurs teams ever and before the season they were thought to the be Lakers primary challengers to the le. Now they will surprise a lot of people by getting out of the first round.