Reply With Quote
What? I wrote many long and detailed posts about how SA pretty clearly was the better team. The bad calls and a lot of fluky play is the only reason it was even close tbh...
Porker is by far the biggest problem. Pau is a problem too. LMA isn't.
What? I wrote many long and detailed posts about how SA pretty clearly was the better team. The bad calls and a lot of fluky play is the only reason it was even close tbh...
Who though? They got Dedmon too.
They can have the second-best record because teams aren't attacking that weakness as much as they could be. Teams aren't going to make changes to their offensive gameplan during the regular season. Once the playoffs role around and teams start seriously game planning they will go at the Parker/Gasol mismatches.
They're better than 25 other teams because the league hasn't been this top heavy in a long time; other teams just don't have the talent to compete. However, come playoff time the Spurs will be seeing the other five teams that have similar, if not superior talent on top of the ability and experience to exploit the Spurs' problems.
Ok, sure, but with all the variables in consideration SA is still a top 5 team. Again, people's definition of problem seems to be "SA didn't get all studs on amazing contracts to ensure they are a team with little to no flaws that is a clear cut favorite".
Yes, in the playoffs, SA will face good teams. SA will also be one of the good teams with as good of a shot as all but 2 teams to win it all if things break right.
The Spurs were mutilated on the boards, Kawhi didn't play up to par, the bench was bad, Pop was too stubborn or maybe even clueless when it came to rotations and gameplans, the lack of athleticism and explosiveness was too much. The officiating was a joke, but two of the games were blowouts in the Thunder's favor for a reason.
And Rob, I'm not going at you. I just think it's easy to get caught up in what if's without really evaluating what is happening and what realistically could have been done better.
When you really talk it out and look back at things and combine that with where they currently are, IMO, you start to see the bigger picture.
Spurs have flaws. The FO has not done a perfect job. They aren't favorites at all. But having said all that, in context of what could have been done and what was done, they have done a damn good job with room to improve as the new guys get more and more comfortable.
Then if things don't work out this year or really fall off, they aren't handcuffed long-term at all. They gave themselves room on both ends of the spectrum (contender & rebuild) and that is incredibly difficult to do.
Fluky shooting had a ton to do with that. Combined with bad calls. Spurs offense generated so many more uncontested looks and just flat out missed from guys that usually don't.
Then not only did OKC create less of those looks (Spurs defense was contesting) they were hitting the tougher looks with lower percentage players.
REB was a huge issue, but even with that, SA created better looks, played better defense and just missed too many open ones combined with terrible calls.
Unfortunately, Parker has another 15 million left on his contract owed to him for next year. I seriously doubt there's a team out there but is willing to trade for Parker this season. If the Spurs chose to deal Parker, next season would be more of a possibility as his expiring contract will have more value to other teams next season.
. Starts a thread. Gets asked about it. Claims its too far in the future to discuss while simply saying "if the team had balls".
Idiot of the highest order.
They got Dedmon, but since they also got Gasol Pop feels like he must start since he's a vet whose earned his keep and "gotten over himself". If they didn't go after Gasol we most likely see Dedmon starting with another playmaking guard on the roster.
They won the le in 2014 and were top contenders from 2012-15 not because they "had all the studs" but because they were a versatile team that didn't put names above team needs. They went for Gasol this past offseason because he was a name, not because of what holes he could fill; if it were the opposite he'd of never been brought in in the first place.
The Spurs will be one of the good teams, but they'll be the team everyone wants to face due to a lack of fear. The Clippers are not better overall, but they might as well be due to how well they match up. Rockets may end up being the better team, but I could see the Spurs beating them in the series. Utah and OKC could definitely beat the Spurs in the first round since they have the players, coaching staff, and styles of play that can attack the Spurs' weaknesses.
Parker, LMA, and Pau are getting paid $60 Million this year...
...and none of them missed two clutch shots at the end of the last game.
The game last night had nothing to do with Tony. He shot as much as he needed to. The problem was that Leonard wasn't up to playing but played anyway and that Pop kept going to him even when it was clear he was only getting muddy water out of that well. If Kawhi sits, the Spurs probably win.
That has nothing to do with Kawhi's overall importance to the team's chances of contending. He's like Giga-Aldridge in the sense that the team simply needs his talent to have any chance to win. It's all about how the offense goes to when Kawhi is in unless he's hitting shots an his usual unreal rate. The team can survive with no Kawhi for regular-season games, but they've really struggled with off-Kawhi this season.
But none of that really changes the point of what I said ^. But I've said more than my share - you have your mind made up on it.
My problem is that, seeing that the Dubs and Cavs are vulnerable and the rest of the league being mediocre, the Spurs made the wrong decisions to capitalize on it. Yes, they didn't know that, but signing Gasol and ignoring the backcourt issues feels more like the team was resigned to mediocrity as well and just wanted to keep butts in the AT&T Center (which is failing anyway).
Anyone that thinks this post is about the RS.
Guy said LMA would be more efficient than Kawhi and should be the first option.
Disagree 100%. There were no realistic backcourt options that I saw them pass on for both Pau's money/years.
This post is sh*t and adds no value, context or clarity. Shut up.Anyone that thinks this post is about the RS.
Guy said LMA would be more efficient than Kawhi and should be the first option.
Since you're a stupid you wouldn't know the context. Anyone with a brain knows who it's directed at.
First off, Dedmon is hardly someone you can trust with a starting job. Especially recently, he doesn't look to be a stable commodity. Having him as the second-best big on the team would be disastrous, especially for the grind of the regular season. Gasol doubles as someone who has stepped in for Duncan and someone who can step in for LMA when Aldridge needs a rest. He added talent to a team that had little that wasn't old. Also, the team really wanted more front-court talent to make for mismatches with GS. What we saw in the first game of the season was their plan in action. Gotta get that to be the norm by late-March.
The Spurs were so good in 2012-2015 because they had a Big Three who were still more great than done and a Medium Three that was a good as most teams' top guys. The Spurs were oozing with talent those years thanks to smart drafting and guys taking less to stay on. That simply wasn't going to happen when the team signed LMA. Once you have to go under the cap, it takes years to ac ulate the talent you had when you could stay over. The Spurs will likely not have it back until 2020, but then LMA will likely be done or off the team.
Anyway, I wasn't in love with the Gasol signing, but I believed the team needed a legit offensive starter next to LMA and not the complimentary piece others wanted. I REALLY wanted a really good scoring guard as well and considered that the top priority, but once Manu came back, that was out the window. More than the salary, just having Manu and Tony on the team taking up rotation spots with Green and Mills already established killed the effect that signing a big-money guard would have had. The only recourse now is hoping the three oldies play well when the time comes.
They've got the "second-best" record (for now), but really, they're not playing anything like the second best team. The way they are playing, if they continue playing like this, they'll lose that "second-best" record quite quickly when they start playing other top teams consistently.
They keep doing the same thing, game after game - it's like they're not learning anything. Being down at home to teams that are struggling like Portland and Phoenix isn't going to cut it. A team that consistently does that is second round fodder. I know Kawhi was out, but it's not like they haven't been doing the same thing at home with him there too.
Well, you are free to think that, but I'm judging based on what we have seen 40% into the season. And even if they drop from having the 2nd best record that does not in any way change the context of what I was saying.
They made a calculated decision that hasn't really been tested yet. The Dubs and Cavs are REALLY vulnerable to strong front courts, especially GS. The Spurs want to not only pound those teams inside but also to get offensive rebounds and put-backs. The only thing that really matters is how the Spurs play those teams ... there's nothing to be learned from the other games.
But for the love of god, the Spurs would sweep the Thunder in the playoffs. They might have to beat the Jazz in six. People always talk about how the Spurs will get exposed by game-planning, but they ignore that the Spurs will also game-plan for other teams to take away elements that make those teams look good right now. The Spurs can take Westbrook and Harden out of a series -- they have the personnel to do that. It's going to take a lot more than Pau being lazy for the lower half of the bracket to beat the Spurs.
Not only that, but people act like getting to second round is some travesty. I mean, I know standards are high and everyone wants a ring every year, but people are so cut and dry.
Like last year. If the Spurs have a few bounces go their way and make it to another WCF are people complaining. But since they lost a close series to a really good team they are "second round fodder". It's maddening.
Sure, if SA plays awful and things unravel sure, start pointing fingers. But even then they have wiggle room to adjust and change since they aren't tied down with anything too long-term that they don't want to be tied down to.
Well, it's because I want to get to the third round this time. I've felt like we've been cheated the past two seasons. I want that Spurs Vs Warriors matchup this time around in the third round. I felt we should have gotten a crack at them the past two seasons, but it hasn't worked out that way.
As bad as OKC's frontline shat on the Spurs last year, it could be even worse this year. Spurs can limit Westbrook (and Harden to a lesser extent) but the officiating could be even worse than last year's series. Westbrook shooting 20 freebies a game will give him the chance to rest in-game and limit the time he has to be off the court. Not saying they'd beat the Spurs, but the possibility is definitely there. The Jazz, if healthy, definitely worry me; Spurs will have the two best players in the series, but then the Jazz might have the next 3-5 best players potentially; it could be a 2014 Spurs/OKC-type series.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
