Reply With Quote
You don't rotate off the only 3-point shooter to double Mike Conley...Parker screwed the pooch.
I know, we already lost the game. But I was just wondering who should have sticked with Battier? AFAIK, RJ was his defender but I think they switched (don't quote me on this one, can't really remember). So, should Tony have just denied the ball from Battier knowing that a 3 makes them lose or should George be the one rotating to defend Shane?
You don't rotate off the only 3-point shooter to double Mike Conley...Parker screwed the pooch.
Well, RJ was left behind after the Gasol screen. Prolly it was a BB players instinct to cover the person who has the ball. I would have loved if Hill left Tony Allen when Parker made the mistake. Our 2 bigs already locked the rebounders of Memphis.
What about the "defensive play" before that possession? You know, the one where Allen (or Mayonnaise, I'm not quite sure) just barreled through the lane for an uncontested layup? The kind of open layup that says, "We'd rather let you have the sure thing instead of having to rely on our ty defense."
That was the play that screwed the Spurs.
After a while, I was happy that the Spurs were conceding *just* an open layup rather than a layup + foul resulting in 3-point plays.
Was it a defensive breakdown, or were the Spurs just doing what they did and running two guys at the ball like they'd done the whole game? It's not like they've placed a premium on limiting three point attempts lately.
Parker was supposed to rotate. He didn't. On to game 2 now.
A contested layup plus a foul is not a sure thing like an open layup - simple as that. You don't allow teams to get an open layup without even taking time off the clock.
I concur with Deadly Dynasty!! You dont leave the 3pt shooter knowing if he makes it, your down by one. He should of let Mike take it to the hoop for a jumper or whatever he may have decided to do, that way the spurs have the ball tied with a chance to win the game at the end or very least head into overtime! SMH, bonehead error, ahh well, thats over with, on to the next!!
Who gives a ... its over, move on!
Should've used the blue font, or is your sarcasm meter color blind too?
True, they will get it right in game two!
Does it matter? You didn't use the font regardless. Either way, I knew you were being sarcastic, but I just didn't give a .
Really? That's what you think? He should have stayed, denied the ball to avoid the 3 and let the game be decided on an OT or maybe won the game. But it already happened. He left Shane and that was his mistake then George was hoping for a rebound or boxing out his man which in no way Allen can make a tip in with his height, distance from the basket and how clogged it was inside.
I'd rather see them give Memphis a hard foul and earn their points from the line like what the opponent is doing to them. It's like our team is not in PO's mode yet. Too soft really.
GNSF being GNSF in this thread.
It depends on what the coaching staff had called but ordinarily, TP should have stayed with his man (Battier). Since RJ switched to Conley on the right wing in transition after Parker was back-picked by Battier. TP dug down on Conley and since Tony Allen drew George away from the corner and into the middle, that left TP no choice but to stay with Battier. He didn't.
Credit to the Grizzlies execution in that early offense play (I've seen Dallas run that with Dirk and Kidd with similar results). Battier continued flare to the left wing away from TP and Conley's pass led Shane even farther away from TP for the perfect scoring option.
i will always rather defend a layup instead of a 3
If you want to win a championship, you guard both. At worst, Conley ties the game.
TBH, that ty, "I'd rather give up a layup" comment is something a stereotypical GNSF would say.
Actually, the more stereotypical GNSF move is to not recognize sarcasm/trolling, and to respond to every post seriously, thereby making trolls very effective on this site. Glad to see that you've read the playbook.
Actually, as open as Battier was...RJ was even more wide open on the last play of the game.
After the scramble and blitz to George Hill, once Jefferson caught it and fired from the top, there wasn't a defender within 8-10 feet of him. Sometimes shots fall...for the Spurs in the last minute of games recently... they haven't been converting.
Actually, a more GNSF-like move is to make a ty comment to a serious post, continue to act like a when the poster you made the stupid remark to continues to discuss the topic at hand, then fail to read the next reply where he stated he knew you were being sarcastic, and finally close the series of ty posts stating that you were trolling in a GNSF-like manner.
Yea and that was after Bonner had a couple of wide open 3's. Both the Spurs and Grizz had way too many wide open opportunities in the 4th. You're just asking to give away the game like that.
So you knew I was being sarcastic, and yet tried to post a counterpoint to my remark as if it was a serious one?
Looks like you trolled yourself then. Man, you've really set the bar high for the GN community. While you're at it, can you also provide your insightful rebuttals in the 500 or so "lol Spurs" threads on this forum? That'll really show all the " ty posters".
I felt maybe you'd drop the ty poster routine for just a second, but that obviously isn't going to happen.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
