Reply With Quote
He made that banker a few times in a row in the Playoffs at a critical point in the game. He then just suddenly went away from it and I wondered why the he did that.
Tim Duncan and the case of the disappearing bank shot
I have a hypothesis that I’ve been bouncing around in my head for quite some time. At its core, the idea is that the Spurs are dangerously close to a not-inconsequential falloff in our offensive efficiency, one that’s going to cascade when it hits and completely change the way the Spurs work on offense. It’s rather complicated, multifaceted, and worrisome. I’ll start from the top and work my way to the theory. But I’ll give you a hint. It all starts with Tim Duncan’s offense.
THE STATS
Let’s break down Duncan’s scoring patterns. Duncan played 31.2 MPG in 2010, and scored 17.9 PPG on 56.0% eFG%. Last year, he played 28.4, scoring 13.4 PPG on a lessened 53.6% eFG%. Not a big gap, right? Correct — in the broader sense, his scoring and efficiency last year took not but a small dive. Nothing particularly concerning — while he decreased his usage (usually leading to increased efficiency), the increase in efficiency from low utilization simply served to offset Duncan’s declining offensive repertoire with age. Which is essentially what Pop wanted, and is perfectly fine. But we’re not quite done yet. Because if you dig into the numbers, you begin to uncover a trend in Duncan’s game that gives me great apprehension as we enter this compressed season. A trend that, given time to stew, may serve to be the Spurs’ offensive achilles heel.
Read more: http://www.48minutesof .com/tim-d...#ixzz1hNTXHsRy
He made that banker a few times in a row in the Playoffs at a critical point in the game. He then just suddenly went away from it and I wondered why the he did that.
I really would prefer Duncan to just stick to the perimeter to save his body. He can draw defenses out a little bit and leave it to Tiago/Blair to hang under the rim. Duncan's jumper has looked pretty damn good this preseason, and I hope that continues so it saves on the wear and tear.
Pretty decent writeup although I think he means "disappearing postup ability" and not "disappearing bank shot". He uses his banker about as much as he's ever used it. It's his postups that have been lost to aging. And now that he's skinnier and a year older, 4-down could be extinct.
Agreed. His jumpshot and bankshot have been steadily declining IMO since 2005 which is the last year I remember him shooting them with no hesitation. However, his post moves last year were depressing to watch. He looked clumsy and out of sync and would just flip some garbage up that had no chance of going in. He went all out in the first quarter of game 5 against Memphis (I think he had like 12 pts) and the rest of the game couldn't get anything to go because he just can't post up like he used to.
Its more depressing to me now because I'm rewatching the 2005 le run. That playoff run, the commentators keep on talking about how he doesn't look right because of his sprained ankles. However, he looked FREAKING AMAZING compared to now.
its fkn bull how he went away from his bankshot
everyone thought he can play till his 40s base on his style of game, relying on fundamentals and not athleticism to get his stats...
players still challenge him to take the bankshots, but he rarely takes them as we seen last season in the regular season...playoffs he was makin them
Is the underlying problem his knees? I was terrible at sports growing up so I have no first hand experience but I would imagine all those post moves require solid knees.
thats pretty much it ... he also had to lose weight because of his knees which makes it more difficult to bang in the post
Write up was good. I think most already know that and it's a common phenomena with aging elite bigs. Seemed like a lot of writing to say Tim is getting older and teams don't fear him as much.
I didn't know Tony had a post game, unless he means the post game interview. What am I missing? I know he drives to the rim ok, but a post game?
This, I believe we got killed last year by the Grizzlies thanks to our defense and our inability to get physical in the paint, whether it's posting up or driving in the lane and creating fouls.. our jump shots killed us and I think this team needs to step away from that.
The dangerous thing about having the vets in our starting line up is that Pop is too afraid of them getting hurt that it carries throughout the playoffs and the jump shot has little by little began to be a huge part of our game.. and I believe that's one of the reasons we have seen Duncan step away from that.
Thanks Fireball. I hope Pop and Timmy find a better way to utilize him in games. Especially if it works during the playoffs when defense becomes suffocating.
Interesting article, but to be honest, why get so technical to say we we as fans could have said in two sentences based on what we have seen the last few years.
You can crunch numbers enough to get them to tell you anything you want.
What the article failed to mention, and I feel is every bit as much to blame for some of the numbers, is Timmy not having a credible big man to play next to. Gone are the days of the high-low game the Spurs used to run. Ever since Horry retired, we really havent seen another big on the floor with TD that can help spacing.
I thought "or sap Bonner of his three point ability" was really funny though. The only thing that saps Bonner's three point ability is the playoffs.
Tony's post game is something fierce man, he can be our big next to Tim (Would not doubt it with POP).
A bank shot in the painted area - isn't that a layup?
Yeah, it's the reliability of Timmy's hook that has declined, not his banker. He doesn't take banks from the paint, he takes hooks and fadeaways, both of which used to be deadly (once upon a time he even had a reliable lefty hook, although that was long ago).
This article smacks of someone tryin to fit ideas onto statistics, rather than letting the statistical evidence inform the ideas, and reads like it was written by a guard who never developed (or understood) a post game!
The central tenet is correct though: Tim's offensive decline means teams respect him less, which makes it harder for the offense. No , Sherlock!
Just ask Dirk, having a midrange jumper extends your career big time. Look at Luis Scola, his is automatic sometimes.
Bumparoo.
I remember reading this article, completely agreeing with it, and thinking the Spurs were fooked. At the time, to the naked eye it seemed obvious that Duncan's shot no longer had the accuracy we needed, this would mean he'd need to play closer to the basket, spacing would suffer, and the offense would go downhill. It wasn't specific to the bank shot -- I'm mostly thinking about the open he shot he often takes near the free throw line, to punish teams that leave him open there.
Instead, since this article, to my naked eye his shot actually looks as good as ever. It's a huge part of why the Duncan/Splitter pairing has been so successful. So what I'm wondering ...
1. Is it actually as good as I think it has been? He missed one at the end of last night's game and I found myself being surprised, unlike 1.5 years ago when I'd be surprised if it went in.
2. If it is this good, how'd it happen? NBA players have been shooting their whole lives, it's very hard to improve a shot in your late 30s. Do the Spurs have a coach or trainer who specializes in shooting?
Yes. They have had a shooting coach for about three years now, and that is the reason that Duncan's foul shots now go in at a much higher rate than they used to, why Tony has developed two or three more shots than he used to have, and why Bonner is now able to shoot floaters, etc., as well as his three pointer. The guy has really helped.
Is that you asking the question for yourself, Coach Engelland?
He plays a whole lot more on the high post than he used to so bank shot opportunities are limited now. Even when he's on the left block he seems to favor a step through the middle more than the face up angle J.
Scola thread
Haha, thanks for the info. I was pretty sure I'd heard they had a shooting specialist, but I thought it was a consultant, not an assistant coach.Yes. They have had a shooting coach for about three years now, and that is the reason that Duncan's foul shots now go in at a much higher rate than they used to, why Tony has developed two or three more shots than he used to have, and why Bonner is now able to shoot floaters, etc., as well as his three pointer. The guy has really helped.
Is that you asking the question for yourself, Coach Engelland?
Good interview with Chip Engelland here, for those interested: http://www.48minutesof .com/the-b...chip-engelland
His shot chart looks closer to KG's than it did before, and... that's not a problem.
Of course, the difference is that the Spurs run more plays to score inside than the jump-shot happy Celtics.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
