Reply With Quote
even better, Manu not turning the ball over 8 times in Game 6 and Pop not trying to over coach and over think himself.
Faulty logic chips are faulty.
No. Grabbing either defensive rebound on LeBrons misses or having Kawahi/Manu hit either free throw does though.
Last edited by Agloco; 07-06-2013 at 03:26 PM.
even better, Manu not turning the ball over 8 times in Game 6 and Pop not trying to over coach and over think himself.
Great comeback, racist.
I think Parker will come back okay mentally. He just had one of his best seasons and is still young with quite a few years ahead of him. Duncan on the other hand, I do worry is going to coast now. Guy busted his ass for his best season in years at 37. . .and two of the three guys he trusts the most let him down all at once.
I don't expect either of them to "give up" mentally, but I worry about Duncan's effort level throughout the season now. I wonder if he may go into "I'll just flip the switch when we're back in the postseason" mode at this point. He's never done it before, but there's only so much a guy can take after being a winner his whole career then being benched and having the outcome of the most important game of the franchise since 2005 not even be in his hands to win after being a major key in carrying the team to that point.
With his age, and that letdown, I'm more worried about Timmy than Tony. Mostly because I couldn't even blame him if he packed it in mentally after what happened.
The legendary French comedian Louis de Funes made similar hang-dog faces I guess it's just an expression of French sense of humor imho. And I still don't understand the overwhelming hatred on Manu. Dude pampered you guys too much in the past years which was the only thing he did wrong if anything, so when he came back to real you guys threw tons of trash talk at him like he was the only Spur that played bad, having forgotten the games that the 36yr old bald man won you almost single handedly in the same postseason, like the game one vs. the Warriors. And it wasn't manu's fault that you had to count on role players and kids (like Danny Verde, who shot 1-12 in their most important game of the season) to rescue you team. Your playoff run would've probably ceased as early as in the 2nd round without Manu tbh.
As with my example: should have, would have, could have.
You've got to give Spoelstra credit. He got the Pacers and Spurs to turn away from their best defenders on crucial possessions. He also got Pop to go away from Splitter from game 4 onwards. He's learned from '11. It's easier to win when the other coach handicaps themselves.
TP will be fine. I think in sports the highs and lows are such a roller coaster you move on real fast from the feelings you felt even last game. Best medicine will be getting on the court again next season
I don't know how much credit I can give Spoelstra. He didn't whisper in Pop's ear and make him bench Duncan. The Heat were down 5 with limited time left and were obviously needing two threes and the Spurs to miss a free throw. Pop assumed it'd be better to have faster defenders than any rebounders, apparently thinking we'd get the boards automatically.
So. . .Spo' can't be given much if any credit for being down 5 in an elimination game with less than 30 seconds left and needing two miracle threes and free throw misses imo.
Still can't believe this weeks later tbh...
Gotta be up there as one of the biggest choke of all time...
The thing is down 5 with that much time the Heat didn't necessarily need a 3. They needed the best available shot. It might have been a 3 but it didn't have to be. In that situation you're just trying to extend the game and hope the other team misses some free throws.
Still can't believe ie either tbh. It's like having a royal flush and flopping it away in an all-in pot. ...
I know that's what they always say on tv, but having seen enough NBA games unfold, I'm positive that you do need threes in those situations. By need, I mean it's the higher percentage chance to win the game. It's possible to do it with twos, but not quite as feasable.
They would need even more missed free throws and their time to score decreases and shrinks, as well as their ability to call timeouts disappearing. Every time the other team doesn't miss a free throw while taking twos, you're back to square one with less timeouts (or none), less time, and still needing the same amount of points.
What they did was exactly what they should have. Going for two would actually decrease their chances of tying it up, not increase. The threes are easier to rebound too since they tend to bounce further, giving them better chance for offensive boards. Bricking a layup or a runner all but guarantees the defense gets it since they have too many guys right there.
Nothing compared to the pics of Duncan, the man whose coach didn't trust him in the final 28 seconds of a closeout game of the NBA Finals, despite his legendary career and legacy he left on the game of basketball.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
