Hollins "We're in front of the basket and missing layups, SA didn't do anything"

[Obstructed_View]

You missed the point and I was not going to re-post all of my analysis on the Spurs/Mem match up from previous threads.

Then perhaps you could just list two or three of these "question marks" you referred to so we don't have to go doing searches to see what you're talking about. Only fair since you're accusing other Spurs fans of over-simplifying but didn't provide any substance in response.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You cannot come from behind if you cannot score.

'And least of concerns' is an interesting characterization. I prefer 'a very lopsided advantage.' If Memphis cannot generate 90 points I don't see them winning very much if at all. That would require a dominating defensive performance on their part just to have a shot to win. They shoot a godawful percentage. The 43% they shot today has been their average for the post season and only 1 point worse than their season average.

If we can manage 95 ppg --well below our average-- then I just don't see them being able to beat us.

[DPG21920]

Then perhaps you could just list two or three of these "question marks" you referred to so we don't have to go doing searches to see what you're talking about. Only fair since you're accusing other Spurs fans of over-simplifying but didn't provide any substance in response.

They have been re-hashed frequently, by multiple people. My reference was to Spur fans essentially saying Spurs will sweep Golden State, it's so easy! All you have to do is is "x" and it's game over! Things like that. I picked SA to win the series and listed numerous times why. But when people see a game like this, they get over confident and over simplify things as if it is easy to replicate and win by 20 every game.

The concerns I have in order is: Duncan's health, the amount of 3's taken & rebounding. Rebounding was not an issue today, Duncan's health is still iffy to me and even though they were good looks, taking 30 3's is a lot.

[DPG21920]

You cannot come from behind if you cannot score.

'And least of concerns' is an interesting characterization. I prefer 'a very lopsided advantage.' If Memphis cannot generate 90 points I don't see them winning very much if at all. That would require a dominating defensive performance on their part just to have a shot to win. They shoot a godawful percentage. The 43% they shot today has been their average for the post season and only 1 point worse than their season average.

If we can manage 95 ppg --well below our average-- then I just don't see them being able to beat us.

I agree and have said the same things. That doesn't mean that the Spurs will sweep MEM (which after games like this, people seem to think Spurs should win every game by 20 seemingly).

[GrandeDavid]

After a blowout win, you just hope the opposing coach will say something like this.

Exactly! Surprisingly poor sportsmanship by Hollins and hopefully a little bulletin board material, so to speak, for the Spurs. Pop would never say something so idiotic. Pop truly is on a class of his own.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I agree and have said the same things. That doesn't mean that the Spurs will sweep MEM (which after games like this, people seem to think Spurs should win every game by 20 seemingly).

But you haven't said those things. You have more or less discounted the tremendous advantage we have when Memphis has the ball. And really who do you have more faith in making adjustments? Popovich or Hollins?

I don't think we are going to beat them every game much less by 20 points but I think saying that they are favored over us in any game is completely unfounded. They are a flawed team.

[Budkin]

He was a smug pos in 2011 and it seems like he still is.

[DPG21920]

I have said those things. Exactly (in fact I believe I actually referenced the 90 point mark). I did not repost in here, but in my pre series analysis and even post game 1, I said those exact things. The difference being the tone of my posts was not "it's so easy on paper it's basically guaranteed!"

[DMC]

Huh? I said the defense of the Spurs is the least of concerns. Also, IIRC Memphis was one of the league leaders in come from behind wins this entire season.

The Thunder were up pretty good on them in that last game and the Grizz just walked them down and took it. They came back on us tonight but fortunately we hit some big shots. What the Grizz lack is outside shooting that they can trust. Obviously they don't like to rely on it, having great offensive rebounding and great inside presence, but a fast paced high scoring team that plays defense like SA can put them so far in the hole so fast they might not recover in time.

Still, I don't like how some people pretend the Grizz just got lucky to be here. We could be facing the Thunder. Then what.

[DPG21920]

But you haven't said those things. You have more or less discounted the tremendous advantage we have when Memphis has the ball. And really who do you have more faith in making adjustments? Popovich or Hollins?

I don't think we are going to beat them every game much less by 20 points but I think saying that they are favored over us in any game is completely unfounded. They are a flawed team.

Well think about it this way too: Let's say Zbo and Gasol comine for 50 points (which would be huge and not likely 4 games out of 7) - who gets them the other 40? Look at what the Spurs were able to do to a much better scoring backcourt in Curry/Klay and now you are expecting Prince/Conley/Bayless to get you 40 (a low estimate because that's assuming Zbo/Gasol combine for 50).

Like HH said, it's not that Zbo and Mark aren't capable, it's just one of the stronger things the Spurs are built around (post defense).

If the Spurs don't turn it over and if they rebound and hit a decent amount of three's, they should be able to get that 90-95 points which should win you games against this MEM team. Especially if Zbo struggles.

This was before you posted it.

[DPG21920]

The Thunder were up pretty good on them in that last game and the Grizz just walked them down and took it. They came back on us tonight but fortunately we hit some big shots. What the Grizz lack is outside shooting that they can trust. Obviously they don't like to rely on it, having great offensive rebounding and great inside presence, but a fast paced high scoring team that plays defense like SA can put them so far in the hole so fast they might not recover in time.

Still, I don't like how some people pretend the Grizz just got lucky to be here. We could be facing the Thunder. Then what.

That's essentially the point of what I said to Fuzzy.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Then I fail to see what if any point that you have had in this thread. That we should expect more of the same offensive output by the Grizz and less from the Spurs?

Unless Hollins can figure out how to defend the three point line without opening up the lane, the Grizz are ed.

[Arcadian]

Some people are defending a fear or concern for the Grizzlies? What the ? We're not gonna win every game by 20, but we should be clear favorites by now, and we might sweep. That's not overconfidence.

Now, if you're defending a fear of the Miami Heat, that's another story. That's totally justified. The good news is, we might have a longer rest period, since the WCF started way sooner than the ECF.

[Whisky Dog]

It's hard to say the Spurs didn't have the easiest road to the WCF when they were paired up with the biggest failure in sports history in the first round.

No it's not. Spurs had the easier first round series (although the clippers are really bad in the playoffs due to their style and no-basketball IQ). That said, GS was playing the best basketball of anyone in the playoffs, had the biggest upset of the playoffs, and were clicking on all cylinders until game 3 when the Spurs were dealt a wake up blow (game2) and clamped their ass down. GS beats the Clippers, the Thunder, or the Grizzlies if they had played any of them in the 2nd round.

Overall the Spurs played the hardest team in the WC in the 2nd round (other than themselves tbh) while the Grizz got a defeated and weak OKC.

[TampaDude]

Then I fail to see what if any point that you have had in this thread. That we should expect more of the same offensive output by the Grizz and less from the Spurs?

Unless Hollins can figure out how to defend the three point line without opening up the lane, the Grizz are ed.

Yup...it's pick your poison time for the Grizzlies. Spurs in 5.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That's essentially the point of what I said to Fuzzy.

They came back on us because we started giving wide open looks to Pondexter. One bad close out and two wide open threes by Pondexter plus a bad turnover leading to a Bayless dunk. It took all of 1:30. TO Spurs and the best coach in the NBA adjusted. The Grizz scored 1 point in the next 4 minutes for an 11 to 1 run of our own.

It's also like you guys refuse to acknowledge that Westbrook didn't play. In order to come back or build a lead on a team you have to get stops. It's easy to get stops when you're up against a simple offense that has one guy that can create his own shot. They lost a top 20 --at the very least-- player and without him their talent level is akin to the Rockets. So they came back on them, whoopedy friggin do.

[DPG21920]

They came back on us because we started giving wide open looks to Pondexter. One bad close out and two wide open threes by Pondexter plus a bad turnover leading to a Bayless dunk. It took all of 1:30. TO Spurs and the best coach in the NBA adjusted. The Grizz scored 1 point in the next 4 minutes for an 11 to 1 run of our own.

It's also like you guys refuse to acknowledge that Westbrook didn't play. In order to come back or build a lead on a team you have to get stops. It's easy to get stops when you're up against a simple offense that has one guy that can create his own shot. They lost a top 20 --at the very least-- player and without him their talent level is akin to the Rockets. So they came back on them, whoopedy friggin do.

Positives:

MEM, even against an OKC team without Westbrook, won a lot of close games. They did a great job at taking Durant out and OKC was still able to be in every game near the end. So it gives you hope because even if they take TP out of the game, Spurs are a better offensive team than the Westbrook-less Thunder and should be able to be in every game even if TP struggles. Not only that, but the Spurs are a better defensive team than OKC so when you look at both sides of the ball and how OKC was in every game even with some sub par Durant play, you have to feel good about your chances.

Negatives:

Tim's play. On both ends. His stamina looks gone as does his effectiveness over the course of a game/series. Can he find his game and the energy to pick it up and not have to be benched?

Spurs offense. Memphis is quite easily a better defensive team than GS and the Spurs offense sputtered this series in a major way. Spurs were able to win with defense, but if they allow MEM to rebound like GS did and their offense goes to , Spurs are in a lot of trouble. Will they find their offense consistently or is their style of play doomed in the playoffs as in previous years when the series gets tough.

Again, before you said any of what you said.

[Sean Cagney]

Cool, hopefully he's telling his players that.

.................

[100%duncan]

You misquoted Hollins tbh.

It was closer to this "Our guys were under the basket and missing shots, I'm sure SA got nothing to do with that."

le's so wrong tbh.

[Obstructed_View]

The concerns I have in order is: Duncan's health, the amount of 3's taken & rebounding. Rebounding was not an issue today, Duncan's health is still iffy to me and even though they were good looks, taking 30 3's is a lot.

Wow, those are legitimately lame question marks.

[DPG21920]

Wow, those are legitimately lame question marks.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Again, before you said any of what you said.

And again, how do you come to said conclusions. We're a better team but.... what? That certainly seems fly in the face of your take that the Grizz are 'resilient.' They struggled beating a severely diminished OKC team. If anything OKC deserves that moniker.

Is your effort just to dampen our enthusiasm?

And for all of your talk of Memphis' defense being 'clearly better.' Neither Allen nor Conley can hold a candle to Thomspon's defense vs Parker. Oh and the Spurs averaged 104 ppg vs the GSW. 'sputtered in a major way.'

[FuzzyLumpkins]

How many of those 3's were not wide open? For a 'clearly better defensive team' their perimeter defense was clearly inferior. You want us to pass the ball inside when we have a wide open looks? We took what they gave us and feasted.

Want to know a legitimate 'question mark.' The Grizzlies defense. The 'clearly better' defense appears to lack the ability to guard against penetration while keeping us off the three point line. It's an obvious tactical advantage that they had no answer for.

[John B]

Spurs defense would have the Grizz missing layups again in Game 2.

[Indazone]

Memphis is big and slow. Somewhat predictable. Spurs have a lot of looks and can match up in a number of different ways. Should be an interesting series but I don't think the Grizzlies match up well with the Spurs.