Reply With Quote
I wasn't really talking about you -- just that any thread about perimeter D becomes a de facto Hairston lament with some corollary Gary Neal hate thrown in for good measure.
I do agree that the "stopper as starter" era is ovah.
man shut the up malik had the best d on this team since bruce bowen and yall know it quit that noise real talk
I wasn't really talking about you -- just that any thread about perimeter D becomes a de facto Hairston lament with some corollary Gary Neal hate thrown in for good measure.
I do agree that the "stopper as starter" era is ovah.
His philly steak place came back... that's a start.Bring back malikkkkkkkkk h had the best d on this team bring back malik
Well, that is at least somewhat appropriate. I was afraid ceperez was going to turn it into a trade Tony thread.
He wasn't all that great and he chose to leave.
Real talk.
Do you have anything to say besides whining about his departure?
there is no way rj should be in the starting lineup nahmeen, debate that
I agree Hairston>Bogans. I know exactly what pop was trying to do and don't have a problem with it but it's pretty clear he went with Bogans way to long. Same with Mason. Malik should have gotten to play over 1 of these guys.
hairston sure had potential on defense. a shame really.
The pg stopper in g.hill is not a replacement of bruce because pg stoppers are not as valuable as sf stoppers. Most of the elite teams have a elite sg or sf on the team, that needs to be disrupted by a defensive player on the spurs. G.hill's also has to play half of his minutes at the sg position because he is on the court with parker. That transforms him from a pg stopper to a average sg defender at best. That is why I would want to trade g.hill if the spurs resign parker.
On the bright side for the 15 minutes per game he is on the court without parker he can be a pg stopper against the opposing teams backup pg.
On the not so bright side bruce use to play 32 minutes per game on the best sg/sf/dirk in the league.
Sure he should. He's quite a good basketball player.
Much better than Hairston.
Gary Neal hate.
yea rj sure is a good basketball player i epically like how he was left wide open the whole suns series and didn't hit ... smh malik would of shut down dudley rj left him open all day, malik didnt even play that much this season and yet he has better highlights then jefferson .....
Gotta give him credit for still thinking about defense, but I've no idea what the Spurs ever saw in Bogans. The Celtics turned Ray Allen into a pretty damn good defender, so getting a vet to focus is clearly possible if he has the talent to do it. I'd be more than happy if the Spurs decided to try to build a "Bowen replacement" if they did it properly, but the only guy on the roster with the length to do it at this point is Richard Jefferson. They seem to be too busy looking for a "Finley replacement", which is a bit worrisome.
Jefferson is a much better basketball player than Hairston.
Jefferson is still in the NBA.
Hairston is not.
You are white.
Real talk.
Every single player on the Spurs played like garbage in that Suns series. Top to bottom. Blaming Jefferson for that is just absurd. Malik Hairston gets as much undeserved and undue love as RJ gets hate. It's ridiculous. How about a little perspective and balance here people?
shut the up dumper get off rjs nuts nvm stay on em since u like , aint no white in me but there is white on yo lips from rj
Jefferson is a much better basketball player than Hairston.
Jefferson is still in the NBA.
Hairston is not.
You are white.
Real talk.
That's just bull . Come on, man. You know that's not true. Go to youtube and search Spurs top plays of 2010. Half of them are RJ dunks and he is either running the break or making an assist on the other half. RJ had the best highlights of the year second to Manu.
Nah, it's simply very clear that Jefferson is a better basketball player than Malik Hairston.
Real talk.
aight lets take it back to that houston game when we were getting our asses whooped who came in and brought us back and played great? malik and when we caught back up who came in and we lost? rj. how are yall really gonna sit there and say rj is better then malik, i put it on anything if malik would of played more then rj we would of been better
Do you think that rj's hate is undeserved and undue?
I think rj hate from the fans is both due and deserved because sucked balls all season long.
I dunno, Matt Bonner shot 45.5% from three-point range in that series.
In all seriousness, I agree with the general point you are making. It is a flaw that many sports fans exhibit, and unfortunately I don't see it going away any time soon.
I think you're going to extremes when you compare STTE Hairston rhetoric and the majority of people like myself and O_V who were simply pointing out the truth. Which was, Hairston should have been given the opportunity to play and prove himself or fall on his face before Bogans was handed the role -- that's what always seems to get lost in the Hairston talk.
It's not about pretending he's something he's not, it's simply acknowledging Pop's decision to neglect the cold hard truth as to what was shown instead of siding with his predilection to go with the vet.
Jefferson's clearly a better player than Hairston. But there's no reason that should have precluded Hairston from playing last year, given what Malik did bring to the table was something that was a weakness for Jefferson (and Mason and even Bogans to an extent): defense.
There are less than 10-15 players that could come in and do a passable job at filling Bowen's defensive role. There are probably around 5 that could stay on the court because they have the ability to knock down the 3 at a respectable rate or that's defense is solid and their offense would be an upgrade over Bowen.
Top of my head: Webster, Ariza, Battier, Pietrus, Afflalo and someone's slippin' my mind at the moment.
But to suffice is to say, there's not many and they ain't all that easy to acquire . . .
Last edited by Blackjack; 08-01-2010 at 06:45 PM. Reason: There; Their; They're. #1 Poster does know the difference. :smokin
Sure, if he wants to come in and play the Bowen role, I guess we could give it a shot.
I disagree. The league has become a point-guard dominant league. If you can slow down the point guard you can disrupt the whole offense. That's why we might be able to get away without having to have a stopper at the SF position as long as we have G.Hill shadowing opposing PG's and playmaking SG's...The pg stopper in g.hill is not a replacement of bruce because pg stoppers are not as valuable as sf stoppers. Most of the elite teams have a elite sg or sf on the team, that needs to be disrupted by a defensive player on the spurs. G.hill's also has to play half of his minutes at the sg position because he is on the court with parker. That transforms him from a pg stopper to a average sg defender at best. That is why I would want to trade g.hill if the spurs resign parker.
On the bright side for the 15 minutes per game he is on the court without parker he can be a pg stopper against the opposing teams backup pg.
On the not so bright side bruce use to play 32 minutes per game on the best sg/sf/dirk in the league.
Last edited by G-Dawgg; 08-01-2010 at 06:52 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
