Game thoughts Bulls @Spurs Jan 29

[cd021]

I wouldn't be surprised if Kawhi left to a Cali team. He said he was a big Lakers fan growing up.

Duncan was as well.

[RD2191]

Duncan was as well.

Magic fan wasn't he? And Kawhi is a Cali guy, so he has ties and fam over there.

[DMC]

Again with going off-topic. I never said anything about the Big 3 in their prime, those guys were straight-out legends. Blair is doing just fine in Dallas, not sure what the argument is there. Improved in every category.. so

Danny Green's open threes I will admit came from SA's current system, but I fail to see how the Big 3 made his defense any better. Not just anyone can contain Curry.

Neal always sucked. Spurs system or not, He was just a chucker.

Mills was always an explosion of offense. He led the entire Basketball Olympics in scoring, was that the Big 3 as well? As for this season, Mills has worked his ass off to thin down and improve his touch. The contested shots he takes has nothing to do with the Big 3. All you're proving is Spurs are good at finding hidden talent, not that they make scrubs into good players.

Bonner? Same argument as Gary, they both struggle here. The thing about BonBon is he can't do anything outside of shooting threes, so this a classic case of it going both ways - System makes Bonner better, Bonner makes system better... until the post-season of course.

"Kawhi in LA would be a dunker." What? Kawhi's work ethic thrives harder than any other player on the Spurs. Last season, in his two best scoring games (vs. CLE, @ CHI) he only made ONE three. In the last 2 games of the finals, Leonard only made a total of TWO threes. That's right, he averaged 20/13/2 steals .... while shooting .286% from downtown. Leonard would be near All-Star level on any struggling team, if anything San Antonio's system is holding him back. Don't even try to make him sound bad.

Lol I can't believe I'm actually having this discussion. Seriously, just a couple of years ago Spurs were stuck with the likes of Udoka, Bogans, Thomas, Mason, Jefferson, etc. And now you want to act like Spurs have nothing but scrubs for Role Players?? And you say I'm the troll...

No, I didn't use the word "scrubs". That's your strawman, you joust it. The word was used twice by you and that's the first and only times it's been used other than in this paragraph as a reference.

You said "Spurs fans are spoiled, Leonard/Green/Splitter saved this franchise".

That's patently false. The Spurs have won 50 games a season for how many seasons? Even back when Leonard and Green were puppies in high school the Spurs were winning 50+ games a season.

Now you pretend that three role players saved the franchise? Saved it from what exactly? I think you have it backwards; this franchise saved those role players. Leonard will make more money because he was in the Finals last year. That wouldn't have happened with almost any other team, and no way he gets the time he got last year on any other compe ive team.

You're putting the cart before the horse.

[Prime Time]

No, I didn't use the word "scrubs". That's your strawman, you joust it. The word was used twice by you and that's the first and only times it's been used other than in this paragraph as a reference.

You said "Spurs fans are spoiled, Leonard/Green/Splitter saved this franchise".

That's patently false. The Spurs have won 50 games a season for how many seasons? Even back when Leonard and Green were puppies in high school the Spurs were winning 50+ games a season.

Now you pretend that three role players saved the franchise? Saved it from what exactly? I think you have it backwards; this franchise saved those role players. Leonard will make more money because he was in the Finals last year. That wouldn't have happened with almost any other team, and no way he gets the time he got last year on any other compe ive team.

You're putting the cart before the horse.

Well you claimed they were "irrelevant", by irrelevant did you mean in terms of their recognition or actual talent? We may have a misunderstanding here lol.

Alright, I agree with your argument for the most part. But by "Save this franchise", I more or less meant "Gave the Big 3 a chance for number five." Should have really specified.

If the Spurs didn't have Green/Leonard/Splitter, they would basically be at the level they are at now. Which as you and I know is - no where near the word "contender." That's why I find it humorous when Spurs fans try to make Green/Splitter out to be some no-talented scrubs who could be easily replaced. When if players like those were so easy to find, the whole '09-'11 Saga wouldn't have happened.

[DMC]

They did and they would be irrelevant. Some were irrelevant already as evidence.

Playing well in a game without the big 3 and having a winning season without the big 3 are completely different things.

Your objection is re ed as .

Well you claimed they were "irrelevant", by irrelevant did you mean in terms of their recognition or actual talent? We may have a misunderstanding here lol.

Alright, I agree with your argument for the most part. But by "Save this franchise", I more or less meant "Gave the Big 3 a chance for number five." Should have really specified.

If the Spurs didn't have Green/Leonard/Splitter, they would basically be at the level they are at now. Which as you and I know is - no where near the word "contender." That's why I find it humorous when Spurs fans try to make Green/Splitter out to be some no-talented scrubs who could be easily replaced. When if players like those were so easy to find, the whole '09-'11 Saga wouldn't have happened.

You can see what was actually said in context. Irrelevant is irrelevant. Which role player was making the difference for another franchise before we acquired them? They are all talented. Rich white men won't pay you millions without you being at least serviceable in the NBA. That's what the term "role" in "role player" means. They play a role, and that role on good teams utilizes their strengths. With guys like Green and Splitter, that role is more clearly defined because their talent has a narrow bandwidth. Danny cannot run the point, doesn't have a post up game, isn't a great passer. He's a shooter and a decent defender. Splitter has a decent post up game, passes ok, cannot shoot jump shots, cannot handle the ball, defends ok at the rim but not much on anything outside of 6'. Then you get someone like Manu who can do all of that, can even play the post if he was a bit taller, passes, dribbles, shoots, drives, good FT shooter, good defender.... those guys are rarely if ever considered role players. Those guys "save" the team.

If one of these role players steps out of the role and carries the team, I'll reconsider.

Without the big 3, the Spurs role players would be irrelevant. Some were before they came to SA.

You could have said "revitalized" instead of "saved". Calling a role player the savior of a franchise is hyperbole unless that's one bad ass role player. Most of our role players are plug and play guys. We could find better ones but we don't want to spend the money. It works for the Spurs because of the big 3's willingness to sacrifice individual numbers for balance and wins.

Your last paragraph is more flawed reasoning. If they didn't have the three you mentioned, they would have another three in that pay range. It wouldn't be the end of the bench.

[cd021]

Magic fan wasn't he? And Kawhi is a Cali guy, so he has ties and fam over there.

Yes, but that doesn't mean he will bolt. Mainly because he can't. He is a RFA. Spurs can match any offer. They also can offer him a 5 year deal.

[Prime Time]

You can see what was actually said in context. Irrelevant is irrelevant. Which role player was making the difference for another franchise before we acquired them? They are all talented. Rich white men won't pay you millions without you being at least serviceable in the NBA. That's what the term "role" in "role player" means. They play a role, and that role on good teams utilizes their strengths. With guys like Green and Splitter, that role is more clearly defined because their talent has a narrow bandwidth. Danny cannot run the point, doesn't have a post up game, isn't a great passer. He's a shooter and a decent defender. Splitter has a decent post up game, passes ok, cannot shoot jump shots, cannot handle the ball, defends ok at the rim but not much on anything outside of 6'. Then you get someone like Manu who can do all of that, can even play the post if he was a bit taller, passes, dribbles, shoots, drives, good FT shooter, good defender.... those guys are rarely if ever considered role players. Those guys "save" the team.

If one of these role players steps out of the role and carries the team, I'll reconsider.

Without the big 3, the Spurs role players would be irrelevant. Some were before they came to SA.

You could have said "revitalized" instead of "saved". Calling a role player the savior of a franchise is hyperbole unless that's one bad ass role player. Most of our role players are plug and play guys. We could find better ones but we don't want to spend the money. It works for the Spurs because of the big 3's willingness to sacrifice individual numbers for balance and wins.

Your last paragraph is more flawed reasoning. If they didn't have the three you mentioned, they would have another three in that pay range. It wouldn't be the end of the bench.

Disagree on the "decent defender" argument. All of them are good-great defenders, Exhibit A: Look at how ty San Antonio's defense is right now.

It wouldn't be that easy. The only one getting paid is Splitter, Green/Leonard are getting typical role player money. Spurs could never attract role players as lethal as those three. Knowing the Spurs, they'd probably be stuck with re-signing Neal (Marco only signed here to win a ship, his opinion of the team would most likely change had Spurs not made the finals.) and probably end up with someone like Josh Howard or James Johnson.

Green, Splitter, and Leonard aren't easy to replace. Just look at how difficult it is for Spurs to attract a BACK-UP SF/C. That's how tough it was before Leonard/Splitter joined the team. Spurs were stuck starting Jefferson and Blair, in case you forgot those days.

No, Spurs could NOT find better ones. Not even if they had the money. Why? No player likes San Antonio. They couldn't even attract Free-Agents when they had a load of cash, let alone finding quality ones now. If it was so easy to find talented players, Why is it so difficult to find a back-up SF? , finding a back-up should be easy since the Spurs could sign a better starting crew if they just spent a little more cash.

Green/Leonard/Splitter saved this franchise from going down to dog- . Call it what you will, but that's the situation.

[DMC]

Disagree on the "decent defender" argument. All of them are good-great defenders, Exhibit A: Look at how ty San Antonio's defense is right now.

Objection: Look at their inability to get stops even with all their players healthy. Look at their record against other seeded teams.

It wouldn't be that easy. The only one getting paid is Splitter, Green/Leonard are getting typical role player money. Spurs could never attract role players as lethal as those three. Knowing the Spurs, they'd probably be stuck with re-signing Neal (Marco only signed here to win a ship, his opinion of the team would most likely change had Spurs not made the finals.) and probably end up with someone like Josh Howard or James Johnson.

So then do you suppose the Spurs hit the jackpot of talent that no one else knew about? That no other role players in the league could prosper in the SA system? When before SA was Danny considered a great defender? When was he considered a lethal outside shooter? Leonard is the highest draft pick of the Spurs since Tim. He's technically not a role player. Splitter is an agile big. They will always demand more money and get it.

Green, Splitter, and Leonard aren't easy to replace. Just look at how difficult it is for Spurs to attract a BACK-UP SF/C. That's how tough it was before Leonard/Splitter joined the team. Spurs were stuck starting Jefferson and Blair, in case you forgot those days.

Danny Green could be replaced by another long outside shooter. Splitter could be replaced by Asik. Leonard could also be replaced. No NBA player who gets minutes can be easily replaced but they can be replaced. The years and years of success in the Spurs organization is testament to that fact.

No, Spurs could NOT find better ones. Not even if they had the money. Why? No player likes San Antonio. They couldn't even attract Free-Agents when they had a load of cash, let alone finding quality ones now. If it was so easy to find talented players, Why is it so difficult to find a back-up SF? , finding a back-up should be easy since the Spurs could sign a better starting crew if they just spent a little more cash.

If the Spurs had 3 starting spots open, there would be interest. No stud wants to come to SA to come off the bench, but there are good bench guys that would love to start on a compe ive team. Every team in the league has at least a couple good players on its roster. How do you suppose that happened?

Green/Leonard/Splitter saved this franchise from going down to dog- . Call it what you will, but that's the situation.

Now you're calling it a save again. I guess the groceries saved me from starving instead of saying my ability to earn money to buy groceries saved me from starving. The Spurs saved themselves with their ability to find affordable talent and create a system to get the most from it. But no, you'd prefer to make a few role players into heroes of the winningest franchise in all of sports.

You cannot see the forest for the trees.

[Prime Time]

Objection: Look at their inability to get stops even with all their players healthy. Look at their record against other seeded teams.

So then do you suppose the Spurs hit the jackpot of talent that no one else knew about? That no other role players in the league could prosper in the SA system? When before SA was Danny considered a great defender? When was he considered a lethal outside shooter? Leonard is the highest draft pick of the Spurs since Tim. He's technically not a role player. Splitter is an agile big. They will always demand more money and get it.

Danny Green could be replaced by another long outside shooter. Splitter could be replaced by Asik. Leonard could also be replaced. No NBA player who gets minutes can be easily replaced but they can be replaced. The years and years of success in the Spurs organization is testament to that fact.

If the Spurs had 3 starting spots open, there would be interest. No stud wants to come to SA to come off the bench, but there are good bench guys that would love to start on a compe ive team. Every team in the league has at least a couple good players on its roster. How do you suppose that happened?

Now you're calling it a save again. I guess the groceries saved me from starving instead of saying my ability to earn money to buy groceries saved me from starving. The Spurs saved themselves with their ability to find affordable talent and create a system to get the most from it. But no, you'd prefer to make a few role players into heroes of the winningest franchise in all of sports.

You cannot see the forest for the trees.

1 - Spurs were 19-5 when healthy. 14-8 since Tiago injury, 5-5 since Green injury, 1-4 since Leonard injury.

2 - Spurs found a diamond in the rough with Danny. You can't teach the ability to shut down CP3/Curry, or block LeBron in the fast-break (Overall his fast-break D is astounding.) not just any down-town shooter could do that. , most of them are soft.

Green was always known for being a limited player with outside shooting and lock-down defense.

"Although his average athleticism and ball-handling skills only allowed him to convert on 50% of his field goal attempts in these situations—which ranks amongst the worst in this small forward class. He struggles in isolation situations and running the pick and roll for these same reasons, and only converted on 71 of his 135 shots around the rim, for a dismal 53%. While his shortcomings are pretty obvious, he still brings quite a bit to the table in terms of his role-player potential, being able to make open shots and play lock-down defense, which is what he’s most known for." - DraftExpress

Sounds like good ol' Danny to me. No other team was willing to give him a chance, enter Ferry. Again, tons of players can knock in threes with the Spurs' system - but to me, it's Danny's defense and hustle that makes him unique.

3 - Tiago Splitter was the MVP and Finals MVP of his league before joining the NBA. There's more to him than just 'agility'. He has great instincts on both ends and is really only lacking physicality before being a terrific all-around player.

If you want to use that logic, I could easily say "Timmy could be replaced by Dwight. Tony could be replaced by CP3." 99% of players are replaceable with that mindset. You think Asik would choose SA over Houston? You think any good defensive shooting guards such as Thabo, Tony Allen, Jimmy Butler, etc. would ever join the Spurs? Who could Leonard be replace by? With his salary (1.8m)? Please, intrigue me. I'm curious.

Oh please, the F/O gets all the credit now? How long does this logic apply? Manu/Tony/Bruce aint , the F/O were the ones who discovered them. The F/O is the only reason why Duncan is here, he could have easily left to Orlando. Loyalty? Nah, it was the F/O with the usual goods.


Green/Leonard/Splitter are pretty valuable to the Spurs. They could be replaced by a 3-4 particular players, but the odds of any of them joining the Spurs aren't that high. Which is why I stand by what I said - The three of them saved the Franchise from a very deep struggle.

Also, the blue was completely sarcastic before you go ape- . I know Green/Splitter/Leonard aren't anywhere near the level of a prime Manu/Tony/Bruce, but te ally all 3 of them were diamonds in the rough.

Y'know, after the Phoenix and Memphis series most of us assumed the days where the Spurs were considered legit contenders came to an end. Just the next season, Spurs gave valuable minutes to Green/Leonard/Splitter and all of a sudden they're 2 games from the finals. And now they don't deserve any credit? Please.

[Baam]

Prime Tiago sucks ball, he just an agile vaginal deal with it. Worst player in two elimination series, how many year in a row does he have to the bed before he falls in the Bonner/RJ category? Splitter didn't save , wonder what you have been watching the past 3 years...

You also chose to ignore Boris and SJax PO heroics but then again it wouldn't suit your agenda... Yet they on Stiffler POs contributions...

[DMC]

1 - Spurs were 19-5 when healthy. 14-8 since Tiago injury, 5-5 since Green injury, 1-4 since Leonard injury.

How were they against seeded teams?

2 - Spurs found a diamond in the rough with Danny. You can't teach the ability to shut down CP3/Curry, or block LeBron in the fast-break (Overall his fast-break D is astounding.) not just any down-town shooter could do that. , most of them are soft.

Spurs found a diamond in the rough in Danny, in George, in Dejuan, in Kawhi, in Patty, in ad nauseum.... Notice your sentence starts with "Spurs found...".

Green was always known for being a limited player with outside shooting and lock-down defense.

"Although his average athleticism and ball-handling skills only allowed him to convert on 50% of his field goal attempts in these situations—which ranks amongst the worst in this small forward class. He struggles in isolation situations and running the pick and roll for these same reasons, and only converted on 71 of his 135 shots around the rim, for a dismal 53%. While his shortcomings are pretty obvious, he still brings quite a bit to the table in terms of his role-player potential, being able to make open shots and play lock-down defense, which is what he’s most known for." - DraftExpress

There's a sizeable gap between serviceable in a system and savior of a team. Danny is serviceable in a system, and that system revolves around the big 3.

Sounds like good ol' Danny to me. No other team was willing to give him a chance, enter Ferry. Again, tons of players can knock in threes with the Spurs' system - but to me, it's Danny's defense and hustle that makes him unique.

No other team was willing to give him a chance because he SUCKED. Danny is the PRIME reason James hit that second look three, as Danny was halfway up the damn court before the rebound was secured on a play where you had to only get the rebound. That's not defense. Sure Danny went off from 3, and he played solid transition defense, but Danny blew a ton of assignments and was cold as ice in the last two games.

3 - Tiago Splitter was the MVP and Finals MVP of his league before joining the NBA. There's more to him than just 'agility'. He has great instincts on both ends and is really only lacking physicality before being a terrific all-around player.

He's an ok player in the NBA. Sabonis also won the award and Scola won it twice. He's not the savior of that franchise. He couldn't even get DeJuan Blair's minutes in his 1st season.

If you want to use that logic, I could easily say "Timmy could be replaced by Dwight. Tony could be replaced by CP3." 99% of players are replaceable with that mindset. You think Asik would choose SA over Houston? You think any good defensive shooting guards such as Thabo, Tony Allen, Jimmy Butler, etc. would ever join the Spurs? Who could Leonard be replace by? With his salary (1.8m)? Please, intrigue me. I'm curious.

When you have a core of talent with chemistry and a system that they believe in, you cannot just replace the talent and get the same results. You can replace the role players though. Great teams do it annually and still win. The Spurs got rid of Jefferson. They got rid of Blair. They got rid of Neal. They got rid of Hill. They still win. That's 4 role players, one slightly better than role player guy as well. They had good fortune last year because the big 3 were fairly all healthy at the same time and because Tim was in the best shape he's been in since I can recall. Role players stepped up, but they don't have the ability to stay up else they wouldn't be role players.

Oh please, the F/O gets all the credit now? How long does this logic apply? Manu/Tony/Bruce aint , the F/O were the ones who discovered them. The F/O is the only reason why Duncan is here, he could have easily left to Orlando. Loyalty? Nah, it was the F/O with the usual goods.

Green/Leonard/Splitter are pretty valuable to the Spurs. They could be replaced by a 3-4 particular players, but the odds of any of them joining the Spurs aren't that high. Which is why I stand by what I said - The three of them saved the Franchise from a very deep struggle.

The front office and Tim Duncan are the commonalities in the success streak. Everything else has been added or removed, but those remain and the streak remains.

Also, the blue was completely sarcastic before you go ape- . I know Green/Splitter/Leonard aren't anywhere near the level of a prime Manu/Tony/Bruce, but te ally all 3 of them were diamonds in the rough.

I know what sarcasm is. You should use that color for your entire post.

Y'know, after the Phoenix and Memphis series most of us assumed the days where the Spurs were considered legit contenders came to an end. Just the next season, Spurs gave valuable minutes to Green/Leonard/Splitter and all of a sudden they're 2 games from the finals. And now they don't deserve any credit? Please.

Ginobili also didn't have a broken arm...that helped.


Also, if these guys that were let go were so ty, how was it the Spurs still made it to the playoffs? Oh I know, the big 3.

[Prime Time]

How were they against seeded teams?

Spurs found a diamond in the rough in Danny, in George, in Dejuan, in Kawhi, in Patty, in ad nauseum.... Notice your sentence starts with "Spurs found...".


There's a sizeable gap between serviceable in a system and savior of a team. Danny is serviceable in a system, and that system revolves around the big 3.

No other team was willing to give him a chance because he SUCKED. Danny is the PRIME reason James hit that second look three, as Danny was halfway up the damn court before the rebound was secured on a play where you had to only get the rebound. That's not defense. Sure Danny went off from 3, and he played solid transition defense, but Danny blew a ton of assignments and was cold as ice in the last two games.

He's an ok player in the NBA. Sabonis also won the award and Scola won it twice. He's not the savior of that franchise. He couldn't even get DeJuan Blair's minutes in his 1st season.

When you have a core of talent with chemistry and a system that they believe in, you cannot just replace the talent and get the same results. You can replace the role players though. Great teams do it annually and still win. The Spurs got rid of Jefferson. They got rid of Blair. They got rid of Neal. They got rid of Hill. They still win. That's 4 role players, one slightly better than role player guy as well. They had good fortune last year because the big 3 were fairly all healthy at the same time and because Tim was in the best shape he's been in since I can recall. Role players stepped up, but they don't have the ability to stay up else they wouldn't be role players.

The front office and Tim Duncan are the commonalities in the success streak. Everything else has been added or removed, but those remain and the streak remains.

I know what sarcasm is. You should use that color for your entire post.


Ginobili also didn't have a broken arm...that helped.


Also, if these guys that were let go were so ty, how was it the Spurs still made it to the playoffs? Oh I know, the big 3.

You're taking what I said out of context. I said the TRIO of Green/Splitter/Leonard saved the Spurs FROM sleeping in dog . You're acting as if I'm saying "Spurs were a bottom-feeder before our role players. Thank god Tiago Splitter drops 20/10 like a mad-man."

Yeah, the Big 3 only made the finals because of the Big 3. All that defense Green/Leonard/Splitter did on Thompson/Curry/Conley/Randolph sure helped. Right? No, the Big 3 did it. It's a team game, take away one of Green/Leonard and Spurs don't even make it past Golden State. But sure, Big 3 did it all.

You're trying to tell me RIGHT NOW if Tim Duncan switched talent with Dwight Howard, and same for TP and CP3, the Spurs wouldn't be in better condition? Really?

Spurs fans need to stop using that "B-But Ginobili was injured " excuse. Ginobili averaged more points, rebounds, steals, blocks, better FG%, etc. in that Memphis series than he did in the whole season. Memphis was just the better team that year, Why? San Antonio's defense was crap. And now that's fixed, and why is it fixed? Because they got role players who literally fit every one of their needs.

You need to see it as it is. As of 2014, Tony/Manu/Tim are the offensive Big 3, Danny/Kawhi/Tiago are the defensive Big 3.
Even the Big 3 in interviews acknowledge how important their role players are, they're one of the main reasons we're even discussing #5.

Maybe you're just in denial and like to imagine the Big 3 are still good enough to win a le on their own. If so, your entire argument just made a whole lot more sense.

The difference between Hill, Jefferson, Blair, Udoka, etc. and the players we have now are the fact the former got to play with the Big 3 when they were still a lethal offensive asset every game. Take '10 Parker, Duncan, and Ginobili and pair them up with the 14' Leonard, Green, Splitter, Diaw and you have yourself a dominating championship team. The possibility that #5 could happen with the current Big 3 alone should make you realize how good these role players are.

[DMC]

You're taking what I said out of context. I said the TRIO of Green/Splitter/Leonard saved the Spurs FROM sleeping in dog . You're acting as if I'm saying "Spurs were a bottom-feeder before our role players. Thank god Tiago Splitter drops 20/10 like a mad-man."

Winning franchises don't get saved by role players. Role players get saved by winning franchises. Stars are different.

Yeah, the Big 3 only made the finals because of the Big 3. All that defense Green/Leonard/Splitter did on Thompson/Curry/Conley/Randolph sure helped. Right? No, the Big 3 did it. It's a team game, take away one of Green/Leonard and Spurs don't even make it past Golden State. But sure, Big 3 did it all.

Spurs made the playoffs before any of those three were playing for the Spurs. They made the playoffs with guys they've since traded or waived or released or whatever. I guess those waived players saved them as well or we just happened to find another stud role player life raft in the middle of a sea of mediocrity to pull us to shore.

You cannot be that ing stupid.

You're trying to tell me RIGHT NOW if Tim Duncan switched talent with Dwight Howard, and same for TP and CP3, the Spurs wouldn't be in better condition? Really?

You don't switch talent, idiot. You switch players.

Spurs fans need to stop using that "B-But Ginobili was injured " excuse. Ginobili averaged more points, rebounds, steals, blocks, better FG%, etc. in that Memphis series than he did in the whole season. Memphis was just the better team that year, Why? San Antonio's defense was crap. And now that's fixed, and why is it fixed? Because they got role players who literally fit every one of their needs.

So then the league leading Bulls who lost in the 1st round would have lost whether or not Rose goes down. OKC would have lost last year to Houston regardless whether or not Frogger goes down. Got it. At least I know who I'm dealing with now.

lol Manu played better with a broken arm, yet the team was saved by the role players.

You need to see it as it is. As of 2014, Tony/Manu/Tim are the offensive Big 3, Danny/Kawhi/Tiago are the defensive Big 3.
Even the Big 3 in interviews acknowledge how important their role players are, they're one of the main reasons we're even discussing #5.

Role players are important. They aren't saviors.

Maybe you're just in denial and like to imagine the Big 3 are still good enough to win a le on their own. If so, your entire argument just made a whole lot more sense.

You obviously haven't read my takes if you think that I believe any of that. Your takes are so off center and fallacious that they are laughable. You truly don't understand the game of basketball. It's ok though, I'm here to teach you.

The difference between Hill, Jefferson, Blair, Udoka, etc. and the players we have now are the fact the former got to play with the Big 3 when they were still a lethal offensive asset every game. Take '10 Parker, Duncan, and Ginobili and pair them up with the 14' Leonard, Green, Splitter, Diaw and you have yourself a dominating championship team. The possibility that #5 could happen with the current Big 3 alone should make you realize how good these role players are.

I am not talking about 2010. I am talking about 2011, 2012 and 2013. Spurs made the playoffs all those years, sometimes with the best record in the conference. I guess those role players back then were beasts as well. Too bad we had to let them go and depend on Manu's broken arm against the Grizzlies.

[Prime Time]

Winning franchises don't get saved by role players. Role players get saved by winning franchises. Stars are different.

Spurs made the playoffs before any of those three were playing for the Spurs. They made the playoffs with guys they've since traded or waived or released or whatever. I guess those waived players saved them as well or we just happened to find another stud role player life raft in the middle of a sea of mediocrity to pull us to shore.

You cannot be that ing stupid.

You don't switch talent, idiot. You switch players.

So then the league leading Bulls who lost in the 1st round would have lost whether or not Rose goes down. OKC would have lost last year to Houston regardless whether or not Frogger goes down. Got it. At least I know who I'm dealing with now.

lol Manu played better with a broken arm, yet the team was saved by the role players.

Role players are important. They aren't saviors.

You obviously haven't read my takes if you think that I believe any of that. Your takes are so off center and fallacious that they are laughable. You truly don't understand the game of basketball. It's ok though, I'm here to teach you.

I am not talking about 2010. I am talking about 2011, 2012 and 2013. Spurs made the playoffs all those years, sometimes with the best record in the conference. I guess those role players back then were beasts as well. Too bad we had to let them go and depend on Manu's broken arm against the Grizzlies.

God damn it you're so stupid. Can you even read a thing I'm saying? The Big 3 aged, they can't DO the things they did in 2010/2011. If they had the same ty role players (Outside of Hill) they had in those specific years they wouldn't be near a contender, why? Because they AGED. What part of aging don't you understand? God damn, Tim is almost 40 and Manu is in his mid 30's.

No you can't switch talent, but your argument was along the lines of "Losing the our stars' chemistry would ruin the flow of this team." which just isn't the case at this point. If you switched Dwight/CP3 with Tim/TP the Spurs would improve, not much else to that. You could make an argument against that had this been 2011, but it's not.

We had Manu, the Bulls didn't have Rose at all. If Derrick was around averaging better stats in the post-season than he did in the regular season the Bulls wouldn't have lost. Seriously? Are you THIS dumb? The situations aren't even comparable.

Damn straight the team's chance to win a le was saved by the role players. We had Manu averaging 20 a game yet the Spurs still lost to the Grizzlies, add Green/Leonard/Splitter and the Spurs sweep Memphis, Want proof? Watch the 2013 WCF.

In 2011 Manu was arguably having the best year of his career. Role players weren't nearly as important then, not when the Big 3 were still playing at high-levels. What part of that is hard to get? The 2014 Big 3 is no where near the 2011 Big 3, the role players are much more important now. Do you even watch the team?