Reply With Quote
cliff notes, anyone?
As I wrote downstairs, the NBA is turning into an all length game. Because teams are focused on scoring around the hoop and around the 3 point line, there are now two distinct zones that are advantageous to score from. If a 2pt shot is a 2pt shot, why shoot from 21 ft when you can shoot from 1 ft right near the rim? And similarly if a 3pt shot is a 3pt shot, why shoot from 35ft when you can shoot from 23 ft right near the line?
Because the two distinct scoring zones are so far away from each other, defences need to cover a large amount of the court. In the old NBA where 3 pointers didn't exist or weren't shot as much cause players weren't good enough at it, you cover the hoop, then the area nearest to the hoop, then a little bit farther to midrange. You didn't need as much combination of length & mobility to cover.
Also, because of the pick and roll, teams can now force any defender to have to guard the 3 point line. Golden State did this to us by having Duncan's man set the pick up top every play and Curry either coming off of it with daylight to shoot or be able to blow by Duncan for layup or if you help, kicking to corner for 3. Spurs do this to other teams very well with Parker-Duncan & kicking to Manu, Kawhi, Green and also Manu-Splitter & kicking to Patty, Belli, Kawhi.
Teams are doing P&R and Corner threes more often than ever. If you use a bigger guard to play someone like Curry, you often have a small guard like Parker being posted by a Klay Thompson.
Pop and RC know this is the way of the league. They've adjusted the system to best suit this game. The moves they've made has been entirely in this direction. Trading for Kawhi. Trading for Daye. Signing Diaw. Drafting Jean-Charles Livio. Drafting Davis Bertans. Trying to sign Andrei Kirilenko. The future of the league is 5 guys with length and mobility with an ideal lineup being something like Michael Carter-Williams - Danny Green - Klay Thompson - Kawhi Leonard - Tiago Splitter. Defensively, have 5 guys to switch all P&R to not give up the top of the key 3pt shot or the roll or the pop or the layup or the corner 3 or be abused in the post. Offensively, all length and mobility teams have superior spacing and ball movement and shooting with the ability to expose any mismatches if the defending Center is too slow to keep up or if the defending Point Guard is too small to guard the post.
Our defence has improved because we now have 4 new players Green Kawhi Diaw and Splitter who can guard all areas of the court with sufficient mobility and length to stick to any guard or big relatively well. Out of respect for Parker and Duncan, they've held their roles despite the Spurs being better this year with them off the court. Defensively, Duncan gets destroyed on the P&R guarding guards (He's 37 it's not his fault) and Parker gets destroyed being posted by bigger SG's because we use Green / Kawhi on other teams PG's. Offensively, Parker has tried to get a 3 point shot while Duncan has also tried to stretch the floor to suit the Spurs attack focusing on spacing.
I love where Pop and RC have taken this team and their understanding of where the NBA is headed. Today Pop tried a lineup of Cojo Daye Diaw Ayres Baynes. We are more than set for Duncan, Parker, and Manu to depart (I would be really sad of course on that day). But it's not that our bench has stepped up, it's that the Spurs are now good on their own without these 3. Perhaps not top 3, but definitely top 8 in the league.
Not bad. Not bad.
Last edited by Gino-Step; 03-28-2014 at 11:20 PM.
cliff notes, anyone?
The Spurs would be better without Tim and Tony
thanks
Gino-step wasn't always full re was he?
Cliff notes: Manu > Parker and Duncan in their 3 championships
i don't know if i ever saw any of his posts before this anti-pg/anti-center bs.
Curious... there are 2 sides of the court. On the O Side, doesn't the Spurs efficiency with Tony and Tim OUTWEIGHS any disadvantage that you think you cite on the D side of the court. Plus I call BS on this since Tim just this past season, got ALL-NBA 1st Team and All-NBA D 2nd Team.
You can't call Austin Daye anything more than Journeyman or serviceable. Could he grow? Perhaps. It's a good system for his skills. But that's as far as I go for agreement.
Cliff notes: Manu > Parker and Duncan in their 3 championships
And Nellie-ball is the future.
Ha. I got the same feeling after reading the "piece". Basically, the Gol_en State Warriors of the 2000s is the future.
Cliff notes: Manu > Parker and Duncan in their 3 championships
2013-2014 Season
Duncan- Net Rtg- +10
Parker-Net Rtg- +3
2012-2013 Season
Duncan- Net Rtg- +12
Parker-Net Rtg- +10
Net Rtg is defensive rating subtracted by offensive rating.
The big 3 haven't been as good together when they are on the floor this season. That 3 man unit is +1.5 last season they were +3.6.
Thank you. Stats back up my theory.
Sorry no.
To say I'm basically advocating Nellie-ball is to not comprehend my view. Nellie ball = play small at PG, SG, SF, PF and C positions.
I am saying play small at PF and C positions but play large at the PG and SG positions.
Baron Davis and Monte Ellis would not play in my system.
Michael Carter Williams and Danny Green would. Sean Livingston and Klay Thompson would as the guards.
I am advocating close knit versatility across the 5 players.
Would you consider playing at least one traditional big man? I still think PF/Cs (like Duncan) are highly effective if they can shoot a mid-range jumper.
The Tim s up your theory by pointing to...Hey...we've won 17 straight...and lookie here:
http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/140331...er_of_the_week
That is Nellie-ball. Don Nelson didn't always get to play it due to roster composition. Baron Davis and Monta Ellis made too much money to ride the bench all the time; ownership sometimes has a say in rotations too.
Oh and one more thing:
2013-2014 after 73 games: 57-13
2012-2013 after 73 games:55-18
If their D ratings are so bad...then why do they win more?
It's a team concept. And the interchangeability aspect you talk about has been done in Europe for a while now. At the end of the day, if you have a dominant low post player, you can override length with that power.
There is no one way to win at this game. You just play your style and hope that it makes a great fight and you win.
Duncan and parker being not quite as good this year backs up your theory?
Isn't 5'11" Patty Mills the biggest difference in playing time between this season and last? His minutes are replacing 6'4" neal pretty much. kinda shoots a whole in his theory.
oops forgot belinelli. He has replace Jackson's and some of Green's minutes.
Last edited by Aztecfan03; 03-31-2014 at 05:10 PM.
It's actually Bellinelli AND Mills. Unlike Gary and for the most part, Matt Bonner...when you ain't making shots, you're giving the team NADA.
Mills and Belinelli recognize the value of a ball possession and they don't make dumb decisions and don't take bad shots. Plus...They actually understand that Defense is important the entire time on the court.
When Gary Neal let Chalmers hit that Half Court shot at the end of the 1st half, those 3 points ...killer. Had Marco been here or Patty been skinnier...the Spurs could have had a le from just that play alone.
We've been over this. Specialists beat generalists every time in a stable environment. That's a fundamental aspect of fitness. Unless you have five Lebrons to throw out on defense, the opposing PGs will blow passed their men and the opposing bigs will pound them inside. The only place generalists can win is in a chaotic environment. The NBA itself has to change pretty dramatically for amorphous lineups to work at a high level.
Spurs motion offence and the Heat motion offence are exactly predicated on chaos. Pass anywhere shoot anywhere drive anywhere.
Gone are the days of small point guard walk up the court....makes a pass into the post ... and spots up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
