Reply With Quote
he is the GNSF takes kingAnd not in a positive way either.
And not in a positive way either.You should look up some of Tjastal's posts. Hes a legend around here.
he is the GNSF takes kingAnd not in a positive way either.
If the Spurs are 100% healthy with, let's say, 10 games left in the season and a playoff spot clinched, do you sit the big 3 completely for those 10 games?Pop won't play the players I want to watch
What's funnier is that the same posters would be in here blasting Pop for playing Parker and Duncan in a meaningless game if he would have played them and one of them would have gotten hurt.
The reason is a regular season record is fool's gold is because of all the bad teams that you play. You want to get wins against quality opponents which the Spurs really didn't do last season. You're going to need to win against quality opponents in the playoffs. If Pop keeps trying to avoid the good teams you think he is helping the team for the playoffs?
You'd have to be a fool to not see him at LEAST resting Timmy after the game in Utah. He played 38 minutes. In fact, I'm glad he rested both of them, not a big deal. Streaks are overrated.
Yeah, the Spurs totally avoided every good team this season.
Great take.
Apparently that's the new plan nowadays. Since seeding and home court doesn't matter anymore. Just do enough to clinch the 8th seed then forfeit the rest of the games and give all the old farts extended rest so they can start the playoffs playing 40+ minutes stiff as a frozen board.
I understand what you are trying to say here...but the situation with this game is a little bit different.
You have several variables working here...a somewhat meaningless game, a back to back and multiple injuries to key players. You also had an overtime game where both Duncan and Parker played big minutes just two days before that. In order to get the win in the current game, they will likely have to play big minutes again. Now, if you want to argue Parker playing then I will give you that. He's young and should be able to handle it. But I don't even think twice about resting Duncan. He's played 79 minutes in the past 3 days. It's just not worth the risk.
Furthermore, if you are going to rest Duncan, why even play Parker even though he could? It's not like you have a chance with him and just the role players against Portland on a back to back.
All in all, if you look at the actual odds of winning this game with Parker and Duncan they weren't very good. The Spurs best bench player was sidelined and they are on a back to back after two games in three days with bigger than normal minutes for both. , they were very lucky to get that win in Utah.
um spurs have already beaten quality teams.....pop is trying to avoid injuries in b2b games.....
Benching Parker is part of the issue since he is the youngest of the big 3. I think you discount how much of a chance San Antonio would have had if Parker had been in the lineup. Defenses have to adjust to his penetration, whereas last night, there was no threat of that and SA became easy to defend.
I also think you have to discount the risk factor. Duncan could take 10 games off, and in the 11th game, he could break an ankle on someone's foot 2 minutes into the game. The risk will always be there no matter how much Pop tries to keep him off the court. The real thing you lose with Duncan is effectiveness (I don't think he would have been more injury-prone against Portland; his shot might have simply been flat). However, having Duncan out there means Portland has to account for him.
Finally, the allstar break is coming up. Duncan will have all the time in the world to rest, and Parker won't see much time behind Kobe, Paul and company. Timing just seems off for doing this.
There is some merit to this. However, I still thing there would be enough of a fatigue factor combined with the lack of Splitter with the second unit would have been too much to overcome. It took 23/11/6 from him the night before and an otherworldly performance from Bonner to just barely get the W. I can't see that being duplicated on a b2b.
Oh there is definitely risk. When you play that many minutes the muscle fatigue can easily lead to a strain, which is something that the Spurs can ill afford right now with Spitter sidelined. You also bring up effectiveness...which brings me back to the night before. Can we get another 20/7 out of Duncan...with the same defensive intensity? I have some pretty serious doubts.I also think you have to discount the risk factor. Duncan could take 10 games off, and in the 11th game, he could break an ankle on someone's foot 2 minutes into the game. The risk will always be there no matter how much Pop tries to keep him off the court. The real thing you lose with Duncan is effectiveness (I don't think he would have been more injury-prone against Portland; his shot might have simply been flat). However, having Duncan out there means Portland has to account for him.
I think it was more about the game itself and less about timing. For reasons I previously stated it just didn't really look like a winnable game on paper. They would be even more tired than they were against Utah and they needed pretty big performances from both of them and huge performance from Bonner to eek out the win. With no rim presence outside of Duncan they were probably going to get destroyed in the paint and on the boards like they were the night before. It just looks like there were too many variables to overcome to bother with stretching Duncan and Parker in order to try to get a win...especially with the team in great shape record-wise.Finally, the allstar break is coming up. Duncan will have all the time in the world to rest, and Parker won't see much time behind Kobe, Paul and company. Timing just seems off for doing this.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
