Spurs won, but Bonner can't get a got damn rebound when it matters...

[EricD]

lol calling for small ball.

Times certainly have changed.

Watch a game.

Not a Toros, Stampede or w/e Junior Varsity game you spend hours jerking off to.

Watch a Spurs game.

[TJastal]

I think the general consensus here is that any configuration including Bonner @ PF or C is still playing small-ball.

[koriwhat]

bonner stunk it up yesterday... sitting row6 sucked only when bonner was in the game. god damn he stinks except when that 3 is falling but other than that, he's worthless.

i don't like to hate on bonner but when you see how unproductive he is up close it sucks!

[ChumpDumper]

Watch a game.

Not a Toros, Stampede or w/e Junior Varsity game you spend hours jerking off to.

Watch a Spurs game.

I have.

They often play small ball.

People ed about it and now they are calling for it.

lol at your getting mad.

I think the general consensus here is that any configuration including Bonner @ PF or C is still playing small-ball.

I think people are calling for a small ball lineup in this thread.

lol

[Cry Havoc]

I think people are calling for a small ball lineup in this thread.

lol

I would rather have Blair or Tiago on the court than small ball.

However, I would rather have small ball than seeing Matt Bonner get 20+ minutes in a close game, where he has only hit one trey.

[ohmwrecker]

I think people are calling for a small ball lineup in this thread.

Yeah, and so what? Are you going to blindly defend Bonner to the point where you will not acknowledge a legitimate strategy that can be utilized effectively in specific situations?
The only time any reasonable person ever complained about small ball is when it was employed in situations that created mismatches not in the Spurs favor.

Really? Unless you are being purposefully obtuse, I don't get your point.

[angelbelow]

Yeah, and so what? Are you going to blindly defend Bonner to the point where you will not acknowledge a legitimate strategy that can be utilized effectively in specific situations?
The only time any reasonable person ever complained about small ball is when it was employed in situations that created mismatches not in the Spurs favor.

Really? Unless you are being purposefully obtuse, I don't get your point.

Chump loves these types of discussion where he nip picks at your post only to fallback on a ambiguous statement. I dont remember if he was always like this but at least hes having fun.

Small ball in the past has always sucked because we had a Finley or a Mason in the line-up. Some one who couldn't defend and couldn't create - and in the later years, couldn't shoot. Its no wonder that small ball wasnt the most popular strategy to go with. Nowadays, it has some merit. With RJ playing a physical brand a defense (when hes at the 4) and guys like Neal who can stroke the 3 or Hill who can attack or pull up, small ball this year has the most potential. Although, I'm not sure small ball would have been the answer against Bogut, Gooden, and Mbah a Moute. Thats a pretty tall front court.

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, and so what? Are you going to blindly defend Bonner to the point where you will not acknowledge a legitimate strategy that can be utilized effectively in specific situations?

Show me where I blindly defended Bonner in this thread.

Be specific.

[DieHardSpursFan1537]

Bonner had a ty game.

[ohmwrecker]

Show me where I blindly defended Bonner in this thread.

Be specific.

I'm not going to play this game with you. I posed you a legitimate counterpoint and you are avoiding it with this nonsense. Let me rephrase in as simple language as possible without any assumption involved, thread le not withstanding.

Do you believe that a small ball strategy is never appropriate?

If not, do you believe that there are certain situations where the deployment of a small ball strategy can be advantageous?

And finally . . . Do you truly believe the one could be against small ball in one scenario, but for it in another, or is everything black or white?

[jjktkk]

chump loves these types of discussion where he nip picks at your post only to fallback on a ambiguous statement. I dont remember if he was always like this but at least hes having fun.

Small ball in the past has always sucked because we had a finley or a mason in the line-up. Some one who couldn't defend and couldn't create - and in the later years, couldn't shoot. Its no wonder that small ball was the most popular strategy to go with. Nowadays, it has some merit. With rj playing a physical brand a defense (when hes at the 4) and guys like neal who can stroke the 3 or hill who can attack or pull up, small ball this year has the most potential. Although, i'm not sure small ball would have been the answer against bogut, gooden, and mbah a moute. Thats a pretty tall front court.

+1

[crc21209]

Normally, I'd agree, but Gooden was owning Dice with the midrange jumper. Thing is, Bonner wasn't doing much better. Basically, no one could stop Gooden when he was on in the third. It was frustrating to watch. But you know what, nothing was more frustrating than watching Bogut completely own Tiago in the paint. I swear, Tiago has no weight down low.

No need to worry, it was probably Gooden's only good game of the year, now he'll go back to being trash...

[ShoogarBear]

Funniest play of the night was when Boykins posted up Bonner.

[DMC]

I'm not going to play this game with you. I posed you a legitimate counterpoint and you are avoiding it with this nonsense. Let me rephrase in as simple language as possible without any assumption involved, thread le not withstanding.

Do you believe that a small ball strategy is never appropriate?

If not, do you believe that there are certain situations where the deployment of a small ball strategy can be advantageous?

And finally . . . Do you truly believe the one could be against small ball in one scenario, but for it in another, or is everything black or white?

Not to barge in on this, but if he believes the first, he cannot believe the second. If he doesn't believe the first, by default he believes the second.

[DMC]

Funniest play of the night was when Boykins posted up Bonner.

I voted Boykins as well, but it was the play when Neal ran him over on the fast break. That was hilarious, almost as funny as Bogut's flop and Tim left hand fisting him.

[DMC]

i'm shocked whenever bonner hits a shot that's not a three.

+1

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not going to play this game with you.

Just say you can't find it and admit your failure.

I really didn't read the rest of your posts since you failed so spectacularly out of the gate. Admit it and I'll move on.

[DMC]

Funniest thing of the night was (yes) Bill Land's remark that, if Gooden always played well against ex-teams, he would be an All Star.... hilarious.

[mingus]

I don't know who this ChumpDump asshole is, but, dude, get a ing life. IN EVERY ING THREAD I READ i have to scroll past some trivial ing argument of yours.

[Blackjack]

Funniest play of the night was when Boykins posted up Bonner.

I thought it was when he was standing on the tracks when the "Choo-Choo" was coming through.

[ElNono]

Playing Bonner is playing small ball. I just rather have a RJ playing his position this season. Last season I think it was much more debatable.

[DMC]

i thought it was when he was standing on the tracks when the "choo-choo" was coming through.

+1

[EricD]

I thought it was when he was standing on the tracks when the "Choo-Choo" was coming through.

Hey Blackjack, (btw your one of my favorite posters on this site )

Isn't this song perfect for Gary, no?

[ChumpDumper]

I don't know who this ChumpDump asshole is, but, dude, get a ing life. IN EVERY ING THREAD I READ i have to scroll past some trivial ing argument of yours.

Have you been acquainted with the ignore function?

[Blackjack]

That song's much more suggestive than I remembered.

EricD