Reply With Quote
It might be the financially correct move for the short term, but it would ignore long term effects, much like how New Orleans ignored their levies and spent the money on the governor's mansion instead.
Spurs should start him as long as they're willing to pay him. He's done too much for that city to ever come off the bench.
Now, if he were on another team, there would probably be an argument. I'm surprised more Spurs fans down here are jumping down your throat about this instead of just accepting that Duncan had an unusual decline this year. It seems almost unnatural, and the guy wasn't even injured unless I'm forgetting something. 34 (35 now) years old with 4 years of college ball isn't a crippling amount of time for someone his age.
Although I wouldn't bench him I would question what the Spurs front office knows that they aren't letting everyone else know. It's not every day that a 20-10 guy becomes close to a 10-10 guy, and especially not a superstar that didn't have an injury. I know his minutes were down a couple and his usage dropped, but really is that enough?
It might be the financially correct move for the short term, but it would ignore long term effects, much like how New Orleans ignored their levies and spent the money on the governor's mansion instead.
Another troll on a Spurs forum
It's saturday night, what are you doing here?
I'm bitter, my kids have tuned me out, and my wife won't touch me. At least I have Spurstalk where I can act like the moral authority and crowbar my opinion into all arguments.
What's your excuse, kiddo?
You guys didn't watch until the playoffs it seems. The Spurs up tempo style offense was a shift from the normal inside out game. Duncan has thrived on low post play, but the shooters and slashers and fast breaks this year made it to where Duncan wasn't as needed to win games. He was being "saved" for the playoffs, only he got injured a few weeks prior and when Manu also went down, the game changed.
Ah to get far enough up someone's ass that they create an account just for you.Another troll on a Spurs forum
It's saturday night, what are you doing here?
I'm bitter, my kids have tuned me out, and my wife won't touch me. At least I have Spurstalk where I can act like the moral authority and crowbar my opinion into all arguments.
What's your excuse, kiddo?
Duncan > David Wst , still
ahhhhhh another anti-Duncan BR thread
keep em comin
lol ever comparing David West to Dirk
Your obsession with male anus is ing disturbing.
Son this is 100% truth. Only an idiot would disagree.Duncan > David W
How's yours since, you know. ?
I watched enough of the gimmick ball although admittedly probably not more than a die-hard Spurs fan.
...but...
You're standing behind the idea that the Spurs changed their formula they've used over the Duncan era just for this season for the entire regular season just to shift back to Duncan ball for the playoffs? That the whole hidden agenda they had cooked up backfired because Duncan got injured?
So Duncan is in such a decline that the team shifted away from him? The arguably best PF to ever play the game had a golden decade and then is suddenly the franchises backup strategy?
As I said before this doesn't add up. Plenty of teams have kept their aging stars, made them the focus of the franchise in every game yet still gave them plenty of rest, and still managed to make a splash in the playoffs. I don't for one believe that the Spurs would have asked Duncan to ride the pine during one of his twilight years just for the sake of a few more regular season wins.
DMC,
We here at GLAAD have been watching you closely and notice tremendous potential. You've managed to inspire your very own troll, something lefty has done as well so you're in great company. Your posts paint a positive picture of your sexuality--a message that America--no, the World needs to hear. We'd like to offer you a position as a Donor Services Intern. Just let us know when you can start and we'll send the paperwork right over.
Regards,
GLAAD Human Resources Dept.
Already a member, but thanks!DMC,
We here at GLAAD have been watching you closely and notice tremendous potential. You've managed to inspire your very own troll, something lefty has done as well so you're in great company. Your posts paint a positive picture of your sexuality--a message that America--no, the World needs to hear. We'd like to offer you a position as a Donor Services Intern. Just let us know when you can start and we'll send the paperwork right over.
Regards,
GLAAD Human Resources Dept.
Of course you're a member, but we're offering you a position, thilly!
No. I am suggesting that, because of the injuries and how the team responded, they got into a hybrid form of their old and new styles of play. By then it had nothing to do with Duncan's season stats, but his stats had everything to do with the direction the team decided, in the off season, to go. That's not news to people who have followed the game.
Not a back up. They've always tried to limit his minutes. In years past, the team would do so so before the break, then go balls to the wall afterward. This year they didn't want to be fighting for that 8th spot and expend all that energy late. They had a few misfortunes late. Otherwise it was a decent season. Tim could still average a double double if he got the minutes, but the team would not win with it because they cannot get the stops. Look at the allowed points per game and compare that to the championship years.So Duncan is in such a decline that the team shifted away from him? The arguably best PF to ever play the game had a golden decade and then is suddenly the franchises backup strategy?
Name a few of these teams instead of saying "plenty". My guess is that there are many other factors that allow these "aging stars" to rest.As I said before this doesn't add up. Plenty of teams have kept their aging stars, made them the focus of the franchise in every game yet still gave them plenty of rest, and still managed to make a splash in the playoffs. I don't for one believe that the Spurs would have asked Duncan to ride the pine during one of his twilight years just for the sake of a few more regular season wins.
Are you therious? Oh this is exthiting and ab fab!Of course you're a member, but we're offering you a position, thilly!
I need to shop for new shoeths.
--- TL;DR scroll down ---
Let's just take a step back for a moment. I would say anyone who doesn't read every off-season report on the Spurs has a very high chance of not knowing what you're talking about. I am curious though. I would love to read the article where Tim Duncan, Pop, or the organization admits that Timmy cannot be the centerpiece to a championship Spurs team anymore and the team is going to shift away from his style of offense in a manner that will have him producing the worst numbers of his career.
The regular season was very dominate, so are you back to the idea that they made Tim take a back seat to 'outscore the other team ball' because he couldn't anchor the franchise anymore or because the franchise wanted to dominate the regular season and pray that it translated into wins in the playoffs? If not for the injuries late in the season would they have changed it up to a Duncan-oriented team in the post season?
Of course there will be factors you can pick out. Namely... injuries... and... you guessed it -- the teams openly moving away from their aging star in hopes of rebuilding. Both of these I've brought up with the addition of suggesting that Timmy is going through an atypical decline (read: sudden with no obvious explanation), yet you seem to be against that either is the case with Tim Duncan.
I'll humor you though. Post-95 Rockets. They kept playing Hakeem ball until the wheels fell off. They did everything they could to bring in players that wouldn't take the playing style away from the player that brought the hardware to Houston. With the reemergence of Michael Jordan and the inability to get past the Jazz or the Supersonics they really had no chance, but they weren't giving up on their legendary big man even after his production began to dip. They seemed to do something very similar with Yao over the recent years too.
Post-2007 Pre-2011 San Antonio Spurs. You said it yourself, and I'm sure you know plenty about this era for this team. Even though the chance of making is past the Gasol fueled Lakers was slim the Spurs didn't turn away from Tim. He wasn't leading them to a championship, but who sits down the best player in franchise history and says "You know that thing the Suns were doing? We want to try something similar, sorry about going away from the Big Fundamental."
Not those guys.
Post-2008 Boston Celtics. This is probably one of the ones you were expecting. Three All-Stars (if you don't count the above Timmy, Parker, Ginobili pairing as a three All-Star lineup) that can buy the others some more rest because of the dominance in talent. The major focus here is what they did with Kevin Garnett who after his injury in the 08-09 season was never quite the same. They kept his minutes low, brought down his usage, he missed a lot of games, and he has a good list of reasons why his production fell off.
Despite all of this they still catered to the style that him, The Truth, and Ray Allen brought together. Even after the dismantling that was the Perkins trade these three still played their game. Nobody in the organization suddenly overhauled the approach to basketball.
I could go on, but I think the point has been made. Injuries happen, age happens, players decline, and ball clubs go in new directions.
So let's step back again and return to the original point.
What happened? Injury to Tim Duncan, a sudden unexplainable (or perhaps explainable but kept under wraps) decline that had the franchise moving away from Duncan ball, or a franchise that purposely asked the best player they will probably ever have to take a seat and let the regular season wins stack up?
If the 1994-1995 Chicago Bulls couldn't switch gears from Pippen to Jordan ball and pull off a ring then what makes anyone think that the Spurs could suddenly go from gimmick to Duncan ball right before the playoffs and make a run for it?
--- TL;DR start here ---
I guess what it all boils down to is this: Tim Duncan had a horrible season for a 34 year old oft labeled Top 10 player that didn't have a career altering injury nor a history of major injuries. His knees couldn't have given out that suddenly, or did they? We're talking about a season where people years from now will pull up the stat sheets until the end of the NBA and go 'that one' when talking about where he fell off. It's to the point where I read die-hard Spur fans talking about a possible retirement. It was a tarnish on his legacy, albeit not an altering tarnish, but it's still there. If he can't produce at an All-Star level anymore, why not? If he can, then why did the franchise turn away from him and/or ask him to perform at such a subpar level (at least when talking about Duncan) that it opens the doors for every critic out there to question his legitimacy.
Something has to give.
Last edited by MiamiHeatNumba1; 06-12-2011 at 07:55 AM.
I don't know but I'm sure he can still cuckold your wife
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CccDTN6QVRg
Here's a good interview that explains some of it.
I will respond at length in a few days.
Duncan should just retire, but he won't
I just don't want to see Duncan continue to degrade himself and tarnish his legacy by playing way past his prime. I mean just look at how pathetic Shaq has been in the last few years... Duncan is already there as well. He should have hung it up before last season or maybe even two seasons ago to be honest.
My ! God Bless you and your family son
Much too late. Duncan is nothing more than a check casher now.
Son, none of your questions are serious. Duncan's better than both Splitter and Bonner combined so that at least makes him a starter by default. He's also the Spurs best and ONLY defensive option in the paint.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
