Reply With Quote
I think the NBA will change the intentional foul rule again because of the Spurs.
That's about it.
If the Spurs win it all this year, could they have created a new blueprint for teams to follow? It seems straightforward enough - limit the minutes of your stars to develop your bench and your allaround team.
There seemed to be 2 factors this year - the lockout shortened season and Ginobili's injury - that resulted in extended bench play. Especially with the bench almost coming from behind and beating the Mini s - oh, excuse me, the Mavericks - it seemed to make our subs feel more inclusive to our overall success. It seemed like we became much more of a team after that game. I do hate seeing Blair at the end of the pine, now, I wish he was more integral to the rotation, but I think Diaw is a much better allaround asset.
Even with a full season next year I am already hoping for the same pattern.number five!!!! GO SPURS GO!!!
I think the NBA will change the intentional foul rule again because of the Spurs.
That's about it.
It's a good blueprint. Draft superstar center. Injure superstar center. Win lottery. Draft best power forward ever. Find two potential HOF's late in the draft. Add happy go lucky coach with a gleam in his eye and a bulge in his pants. Rinse. Repeat.
The answer to thread le is yes, but not for the reasons you state. We're going to see a LOT of teams copy the Spurs offense, particularly the floor spacing and passing. That transition is already under way, but this year's Spurs made its benefits so shockingly visible that it'll speed that transition up.
The part about limiting the stars' minutes.... I don't think that's the way of the future. It's worked out great in San Antonio, but having your best players on the floor for as many minutes as possible will probably always be what NBA teams do. SA's limited use of Ginobili over the years is one of my few qualms with how the Spurs coaching staff handles the team.
Meh. It's not like the Spurs are the only ones to recognize how awesome it would be to have a great coach coaching a team with great depth and unselfish stars. The Spurs are an example of a team that through skill and good fortune had everything come together at the right time, not one that's made any kind of magical discovery of some new concept.
Warriors developed their bench players. I mean, their bench players werent worse than starters. And this didnt help them at all.
You have to have solid players who understand their roles and why subjugation to the program is key.
Too many players want to be the man with the media ready to annoint attention.
That! TEAM IS EVERYTHING!
I think so too; I actually think it's genius and last night it completely changed the game, it forced them to go small and play to our style of play for that situation and really the game was in our hands after Evans bricked those two free throws. The NBA has tried to speed up the pace of the game for years now and leave it to Pop to turn it back, love it.
There are already teams trying some of the same plays, but they don't necessarily have the personnel to run it as effectively. But yeah, I'm sure more GMs will be saying "OK, how can we surround our stars with the right role players to execute on something like that?"
Then again, copies of the Triangle or Sacto's Princeton offense from a decade ago never took off, so who knows?
As they should.
"Not to be a smartass, but he's not a very good free throw shooter"
I hate it.
My question is why don't teams do that to Splitter, he is almost as bad as Evans and Jordan.
If I were Thunder, I would do that every time Spurs have ball.
Make your free throws and it stops.
Not hard to understand.....
So the formula is "do a good job of putting role players around three players you were really lucky to get".
Would you want Thunder to do that to Splitter in games 1 and 2 and have him go 2-8, and Spurs lose by 3 points?
It is a fact that some big men just do not have the skills to shoot a decent FT %. They are just not built for shooting Fts.
I hate it that it makes a player a goat, when he is not deserving of being a goat. Reggie Evans is one of a player a player who every team in the league would benefit having him and his hustle and at ude on their roster.
You know he was feeling horrible when he was missing those shots, even though he was trying as hard as he could. He did not deserve being the goat.
He had a good at ude towards Pop, because he is a class guy, he said he had something to work on, but sometimes, you just don't have the tools to be a decent FT shooter.
There's no way the NBA will let big-market teams make a habit out of "resting" their star players during the season. Eventually, they know it would bite 'em in the ass.
I fully expect Brooks to hack-a-Tiago ... and I bet Spurs fans will boo, how ironic.
, I would do it 10 times a game against Splitter, I'd use every scub player at the end of my bench to do it every time Splitter is in the game.
It would be perfect strategy against Spurs.
It's a FREE throw; if you can't make it when the game counts then you need to work on that, same goes for the Spurs, if someone decides to do it to us then so be it. I know Pop won't complain. Don't you think we pretty much had the game won after Evans missed those two freebies?
Splitter sunk two important FT's down the stretch last night, tbh.
Then quit trying to be cool, macho, and tough and shoot them underhand, a la Rick Barry. If you can't master the motion, change the motion... Everyone really should do underhand - your make more shots - don't let your pride stop you from doing the necessary to win!
I think Shaq tried it once.
Oh boo friggin hoo
I trust tiago at the line way more than Reggie Evans....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
