Reply With Quote
To be fair he wasn't getting too many touches in the first half. Although he had a few lapses, his defense was pretty solid throughout. He was the best, most consistent player for the Spurs last night. Never could have said that last season.
RJ didn't really have a good "game". He had an exceptional "quarter". Obviously, it would be nice if he was a factor throughout, but so far he answered one of his biggest questions from last year: If he is not involved early, can he stay engaged enough to make a difference when it matters?
The answer is yes so far. Everyone is going to have off games, but for RJ, that used to mean there was no chance of recovery. He did not have a good game, but then he stayed in it and exploded in the fourth quarter.
Tough to complain with RJ's play so far.
To be fair he wasn't getting too many touches in the first half. Although he had a few lapses, his defense was pretty solid throughout. He was the best, most consistent player for the Spurs last night. Never could have said that last season.
RJ "didn't have a good game" because Manu was too busy jacking up most of his 11 threes (of which he made 2). it isn't so much as he "is not involved" as no one involved him.
Of course, nothing is RJ's fault.
pretty much, if you want to believe that your distortion of what i said is what i really said.
There is a reason why some players are usually the guys not getting touches over and over.
I don't think his defense was solid. I think he was able to coast doing nothing on both ends for 3 quarters.
You said he wasn't involved because Manu was jacking up shots. That is faulty. He needs to get himself involved. If he were doing things to get himself involved, he would have been.
He is know for coasting through games. Manu is not just jacking up shots and ignoring a wide open RJ every time he is "coasting".
his defense wasn't solid. that isn't much of a surprise. he's an average defender with average lateral quickness and defensive intuitiveness, and i don't expect him to be great on that end.
how is he supposed to get himself involved if Manu is jacking up 11 threes? that's bad decision making on Manu's part. RJ's ability to get himself involved is proportional to his teammates willingess to get him involved. it's a team game. you can want to get yourself involved all you want bu won't materialize into anything if teammates are making stupid decisions. he did absolutely nothing different in that 4th quarter other than get the ball. since he's not a primary ballhandler, he has to realy on people to help create his shots. if Manu isn't doing that, that's Manu's fault. luckely he changed and created for RJ in the second half.
RJ is supposed to get himself involved the same way everyone else does when Manu is "jacking up shots".
which is how?
You watch the games? Answer how does anyone else ever get open and involved when Manu is chucking shots? Or does everyone coast and stay uninvolved like RJ?
I wouldn't boil it down to Manu vs. RJ...but RJ wasn't getting any touches in the first half for whatever reason. He's been relatively aggressive this year so it's not like he's running from the ball.
don't be a rhetorical question asking douchbag and answer my questions directly. you brought up "getting involved," and that's a general. i'd like to know what you mean by getting involved.
No, you figure it out. If you are going to throw something out like it is a fact (Manu caused RJ to not be involved), then back up what you mean or GTFO.
I already proved your notion faulty as other people in the same game with Manu were obviously more involved than RJ.
not sure what the point of this argument is RJ did not get any plays run for him in first half he barely saw the ball, however, he is the 4th scoring option. He is not suppose to. When given the opportunity he produced good for him. He hasn't been timid I hope he keeps it up. I don't want to see our offense changed our big 3 are all better at producing than RJ just want him to keep playing like he has been.
you made the statement earlier that RJ had "a good quarter," not "a good game." the only thing that changed b/w those other three quarters and that 4th quarter was that Manu turned into more of a facilitator and created open shots and driving possibilities for RJ (and for others).
i explained this already. you've provided absolutely no substantive retort to that. all you've been doing is making general, vague claims that he doesn't get himself involved, by which i have no idea what you mean.
again, this means absolutely nothing to me. you've made a general statement about involvement and haven't given examples of what you mean that this whole time.
LOL @ asking me to figure out what you mean.
No, I am asking you to figure out why what you said is true. It's not. Manu jacking up shots shouldn't simply effect just RJ.
Other people were on the court with the same Manu as RJ. Did they all have the same type of impact as RJ during those first three quarters?
Do those other players consistently coast through large portions of a game like RJ?
Answer those and you will see how your argument sucks.
RJ didn't get the ball until the 4th quarter. in the fourth quarter, he broke out, mostly due to Manu creating shots for him and giving him the ball where he could succeed. Manu's 11 three point attempts hurt the whole team. that's possbily 9 shot attempts that could have gone to someone else: RJ.
also, Anderson, Hill, and Blair missed a lot of shots, some of which were created by Manu. they were missing shots that they should be making. that's going to happen. so RJ's "inolvement" had a lot to do with those guys getting the open looks in the first half as well as Manu jacking up ill-advised threes. the one you can't control: Anderson and Hill should be taking and making those shots. Manu's bad attempts is something you can control, and that's what i'm harping on.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
