Random Thoughts Before Game 3 - Spurs vs. Suns 2010

[dreamcastrocks]

When any member of the Big 3 is vocal, that's a good thing. If anything, this team doesn't have enough vocal leadership.

For the most part, I'd agree. But with players that have their confidence shaken, it might not be the best thing.

[Gooshie]

Yeah, it's definitely a matter of picking your poison. I'd rather Duncan defend Amare than potentially getting worn out on the perimeter but I can see pros and cons each way.

Speaking of McDyess, I wonder if Pop will make the adjustment of giving him more minutes. McDyess eating Bonner's minutes wouldn't be a bad thing.

I agree Dyess should be getting more minutes at the expense of Bonner. The problem is, if Dyess continues to start next to Duncan (I don't see why he wouldn't), what should we do for our first 4/5 subs utions at the beginning of each half?

Usually, Pop has been subbing Bonner for Dyess in the 1st quarter, and then bringing in Blair for Duncan either late in the 1st or to begin the 2nd. The same applies for the 2nd half.

If Dyess is truly going to eat Bonner's minutes, then there are 2 solutions:
1. Subs ute Dyess for a "small" and go small ball for a while until Duncan needs his rest, and then bring in Blair AND Dyess.

OR

2. Just bring Blair directly in for Dyess. Then, when Duncan needs a rest, bring Dyess back in for him, thereby shutting Bonner out of the rotation altogether. This would also increase Blair's minutes. I'm not sure they will choose this route, because this would put Blair and Duncan on the court together for a while; and, besides the obvious of killing the spacing on offense, either Blair or Duncan would have to chase Frye out the the 3 point line while the other would be dealing with Amare down low.

Personally, I wouldn't mind Pop trying the latter. Duncan and Blair have plenty of experience playing together back when Blair was a starter (although not too much recently), and this would alleviate some of the defensive rebounding problems.

I would put Duncan on Amare (as long as TD isn't in foul trouble) and have Blair chase Frye out to the 3 point line. It may or may not work out, but at this point, if Pop decides to completely give up on Bonner, I think it's worth a shot.

[quentin_compson]

I don't know about starting Hill, Manu, and Tony. Benching RJ after a good game (he put up good stats at least, though he wasn't very good defensively) might make him revert to his passive ways - and then, who is going to score on our second unit?

[timvp]

I agree Dyess should be getting more minutes at the expense of Bonner. The problem is, if Dyess continues to start next to Duncan (I don't see why he wouldn't), what should we do for our first 4/5 subs utions at the beginning of each half?

Usually, Pop has been subbing Bonner for Dyess in the 1st quarter, and then bringing in Blair for Duncan either late in the 1st or to begin the 2nd. The same applies for the 2nd half.

If Dyess is truly going to eat Bonner's minutes, then there are 2 solutions:
1. Subs ute Dyess for a "small" and go small ball for a while until Duncan needs his rest, and then bring in Blair AND Dyess.

OR

2. Just bring Blair directly in for Dyess. Then, when Duncan needs a rest, bring Dyess back in for him, thereby shutting Bonner out of the rotation altogether. This would also increase Blair's minutes. I'm not sure they will choose this route, because this would put Blair and Duncan on the court together for a while; and, besides the obvious of killing the spacing on offense, either Blair or Duncan would have to chase Frye out the the 3 point line while the other would be dealing with Amare down low.

Personally, I wouldn't mind Pop trying the latter. Duncan and Blair have plenty of experience playing together back when Blair was a starter (although not too much recently), and this would alleviate some of the defensive rebounding problems.

I would put Duncan on Amare (as long as TD isn't in foul trouble) and have Blair chase Frye out to the 3 point line. It may or may not work out, but at this point, if Pop decides to completely give up on Bonner, I think it's worth a shot.

Very good points. You outlined a major decision Pop has to make. Cutting Bonner out of the rotation is much harder said than done.

[Gooshie]

Very good points. You outlined a major decision Pop has to make. Cutting Bonner out of the rotation is much harder said than done.

Which of the two options would you choose, Timvp? Small ball or Duncan/Blair playing together?

[MannyIsGod]

I honestly don't see why putting Blair on Frye outside woudln't work. Or even Tim. How ing hard is it not to leave a guy on defense and have trust that your teammates don't need your help off that one man?

Its not like a spot up shooter is going to give you a plethora of moves to break you down then shoot.

[MannyIsGod]

That being said I'd probably go with a small ball lineup and have RJ or Hill guard Frye if at all possible. Bringing Bogans in makes me want to puke but it probably makes the most sense. If you put Blair out on the 3 point line you miss his best attribute which is his rebounding.

[Gooshie]

I honestly don't see why putting Blair on Frye outside woudln't work. Or even Tim. How ing hard is it not to leave a guy on defense and have trust that your teammates don't need your help off that one man?

Its not like a spot up shooter is going to give you a plethora of moves to break you down then shoot.

I agree, that's why I wouldn't mind seeing Duncan/Blair together for stretches. Blair is more nimble than Duncan is these days, so I would assign him to Frye and hope that he can somehow also crash the defensive boards.

He would need to be extremely careful on the offensive boards though, because if he doesn't come up with it, you can bet Frye will be running back looking for the open transition 3.

[Gooshie]

That being said I'd probably go with a small ball lineup and have RJ or Hill guard Frye if at all possible. Bringing Bogans in makes me want to puke but it probably makes the most sense. If you put Blair out on the 3 point line you miss his best attribute which is his rebounding.

Good point. The way I'm looking at it though, is our +/- stats show we are losing the small ball war, so why not try something different?

[MannyIsGod]

The most frustrating aspect of the loss the other night was how many points Frye got. Those points off wide open 3s are either repeated mental lapses or some very bad coaching. I'm not sure which it was, but they were just so bad that I simply don't understand how they happened.

[timvp]

Which of the two options would you choose, Timvp? Small ball or Duncan/Blair playing together?

I'd go with Duncan/Blair first to see how that holds up. If the Suns exploit it, going with small ball is a doable fallback option.

[MannyIsGod]

Good point. The way I'm looking at it though, is our +/- stats show we are losing the small ball war, so why not try something different?

You can definitely make the argument that we lost it due to poor defensive rebounding in the 2nd game which is an argument for more Blair.

I would recommend trying a zone at times in order to stop the 3s but I really think that Nash would pick it apart and the main problem with a zone is the lack of rebounding so I'm not sure that is a workable option.

I don't know how you both solve the rebounding problem and the 3 point matchup issues without simply getting better play out of your swingmen.

[MaNu4Tres]

our +/- stats show we are losing the small ball war, so why not try something different?

Part of that is how vulnerable our defense is when Duncan is guarding Amare in the Nash/Amare pick and roll. Their offense becomes virtually unstoppable when small ball is employed during this situation.

In order for us to start getting wins, Spurs need to start making some stops in the latter end of the 4th quarter. Both games we went small and Suns virtually scored every possession and the possessions they didn't score was when Nash and Richardson blew 2 wide open layups.

[boutons_deux]

I wonder if Tony felt he could be vocal because he was hitting his jumpers.

A true leader leads even when he's having an off shooting game, because every serious player knows even the best shooters get cold.

[Gooshie]

You can definitely make the argument that we lost it due to poor defensive rebounding in the 2nd game which is an argument for more Blair.

I would recommend trying a zone at times in order to stop the 3s but I really think that Nash would pick it apart and the main problem with a zone is the lack of rebounding so I'm not sure that is a workable option.

I don't know how you both solve the rebounding problem and the 3 point matchup issues without simply getting better play out of your swingmen.

Agreed. It is a frustrating dilemma. Bottom line is our swings have to rebound the ball better on the defensive end - particularly Manu, Hill, Bogans (if he plays), and RJ (even though he had 10 boards last game, he got beat for a few critical offensive rebounds).

Of course, Frye regressing back to his poor 3 point shooting on the road would help tremendously! But we can't count on that.

[dreamcastrocks]

I would recommend trying a zone at times in order to stop the 3s but I really think that Nash would pick it apart and the main problem with a zone is the lack of rebounding so I'm not sure that is a workable option.

Umm.. no. The zone is designed to force teams to shoot from the outside, not prevent it. Players are usually out of position in the zone. Once the ball makes it past the perimeter of the zone, the entire thing collapses. Passing the ball out leads to a wide open 3. Let alone when you have a player like Nash that can penetrate the zone perimeter. The Suns might surprised by the zone for a couple of possessions, but you don't play zone to stop the 3, quite the opposite.

I don't know how you both solve the rebounding problem and the 3 point matchup issues without simply getting better play out of your swingmen.

Talking about the zone more, with 3 or 4 players out on the perimeter, it makes defensive rebounding that much tougher. You absolutely right about the swingmen. The Suns are winning the rebounding battle at the SG and SF positions.

[sonic21]

I wonder if Tony felt he could be vocal because he was hitting his jumpers.

A true leader leads even when he's having an off shooting game, because every serious player knows even the best shooters get cold.

what's your point exactly?

[DAF86]

I agree with giving Bonner and Mason a couple of shots each to see how they do, the other things I would like to see is McDyess playing more minutes and Parker starting.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I honestly don't see why putting Blair on Frye outside woudln't work. Or even Tim. How ing hard is it not to leave a guy on defense and have trust that your teammates don't need your help off that one man?

It's hard in this case because the Nash-Amare pick and roll is a play that can only be defended well if the big who is not guarding Amare can rotate over and clog up the strong side of the court. There's no way that play will be stopped if the big who's not defending Amare is out there on Frye, that leads to like when Ginobili has to rotate over and give up an and 1 trying to take a charge.

[DAF86]

If Hill and Frye are on the court at the same time for the Suns I would put our SF on Frye and the big that isn't guarding Amare on Grant. Hill isn't a 3 point threat.

[MaNu4Tres]

It's hard in this case because the Nash-Amare pick and roll is a play that can only be defended well if the big who is not guarding Amare can rotate over and clog up the strong side of the court.

That is why I've been advocating all morning that Spurs can't afford going small in the latter end of the 4th quarter because Duncan is being used to guard Amare in the pick and roll.

Spurs need to make this adjustment by playing McDyess on Amare in this situation if they want to be able to get more stops in the 4th quarter. Let Duncan play help defense guarding Hill.

If Hill and Frye are on the court at the same time for the Suns I would put our SF on Frye and the big that isn't guarding Amare on Grant. Hill isn't a 3 point threat.

I agree. McDyess should be guarding Amare and Duncan should be guarding Hill. What I mean by guarding Hill is playing his drive (giving Hill decent space so Duncan isn't beat by Hill going off the dribble. Make Hill take a semi-contested 15-19 footer if he gets the ball on an isolation play.)

If Suns still go to the pick and roll Duncan can play closer to the basket guarding Hill instead of guarding Frye.

[Thompson]

Blair seemed to play pretty well against Amare from what I remember; he had two steals on ball denial and one from when Amare tried to drive past him and he knocked it away to Manu.

[dreamcastrocks]

Blair seemed to play pretty well against Amare from what I remember; he had two steals on ball denial and one from when Amare tried to drive past him and he knocked it away to Manu.

I agree. I thought all along that he could really be a difference maker in this series. Blair and not George Hill is the X-factor IMO.

[objective]

-Continuing on the previous thought, doesn't Pop have to give Matt Bonner and Roger Mason, Jr. a look in the first half tonight? I know, I vomited even writing that sentence and I can't wait for those two players to be off the team for good but Pop's hand is pretty much forced right now. The Suns are too deep to get back into this series by the Spurs running their starters into the ground. Pop has to find at least a few productive minutes from players deeper in the rotation. Both players shot much, much better at home this season. If one of them can hit a few three-pointers, that would be huge. Is it worth the risk?

Is it worth it?

No.

NO.

This is pretty much madness. Every pre-game thread timvp and everyone else is handwringing and mentioning how bad Bonner and Mason are, but always end up wanting them to play and that that game is the one where they'll hit shots. First it was Manu's fault last year for not being there to get Bonner open shots and forcing Mason to handle the ball, then it was just a Mavs thing, then it's just a road game thing. On and on and on. And every single pre-game thread of the playoffs there's been me or someone else who sees Bonner and Mason for what they are pointing out what choking disasters these guys are.

And the result has been the same all playoffs long with those guys.

If Pop plays Bonner or Mason the Spurs deserve to lose.

Now several things.

I expect the Spurs to pull off a win like they did last year. The real Spurs like Parker or Duncan will go off while the Suns relax and end up quitting early to get ready for the next game. After the Spurs have a double digit lead at home I'm sure Bonner will pile on like he did last year and finally score some baskets. Thereby giving everyone nothing but fool's gold before continuing his garbage. That's how it is. But Bonner doing his pile-on routine doesn't mean he can play. And if the Spurs win the series, which I still think they can, it will be because of the real Spurs stepping up like Manu and Parker and TD and them carrying the deadweight across the finish line with them.

Furthermore, people look at Bonner's numbers are being deceived by how good they look. Besides the usual Plus/Minus suckers, you have to break down Bonner's stats by half to see how bad he really is.

If I read the play-by-plays right, in the 2nd half of playoff games this year Bonner is shooting terribly (27%fg and 17%-3pt), but that's including his hot game against the Mavs in game 1. In the second halves of the 7 games since game 1 of the Mavs, Bonner is shooting 14% from the field and 0% from three, that's ZERO on 0/5. Maybe I missed some FG attempts reading the PBPs on nba.com, but those are the numbers I found.

So now how unclutch does Bonner look? This is ridiculous. There's 7 straight games now where I don't know if any Spur has had worse 2nd halves ever, other than Mason. Was Hedo even that bad? Or Steve Smith? And I bet if you had PBPs from the 09 playoffs against the Mavs, the numbers wouldn't improve that much.

So what about the Spurs depth problems? Anybody but Bonner and Mason is preferable. If that means a 3 man big spot of TD-Dice-Blair, fine. If that means more Temple or Hairston, fine. If that means Bogans at smallball 4, as distasteful as that sounds, it's better than playing Bonner. And yes, giving Ian some spot minutes in a first half is a much better alternative than Bonner.

Bonner and Mason aren't the solution to the Spurs depth problems, they are the Spurs depth problems.

[Fabbs]

Guard Richardson on the three point line.
Sick of seeing him get uncontested/late contested treys.

Do not foul him. Doug Collins miraculously made a good point. Richardson was sucking on shots up til nearly halftime of Gm 2. Manu fouled him after the shot when they did the little hand kiss after the ball was released. A ticky tack foul? Yes, but technically a foul. Richardson got three foul shots and it kind of got him out of his shooting funk and going again.
Dont foul or give uncontested threes to the dumbass.

Stop telling me our playoff win chances hinge in part on Matt Bonner.