Matt Moore: Spurs' supporting cast the worst in San Antonio's history as a contender

[Uriel]

This is the same guy who wrote the article about Kawhi Leonard making the Spurs' defense worse.

[The Spurs] flummoxed, frustrated and outworked the Cavaliers, which isn’t hard these days, but still a credit to the season Gregg Popovich has constructed around Kawhi Leonard and a supporting cast that may be the worst in San Antonio’s history as a contender. They are a terrifying assortment of weapons versus good teams, or at least they have been in the regular season.

The rest of the article, he goes on about how bad the Cavs are and essentially downplaying the Spurs win.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/ca...ncern-is-real/

[SAGirl]

Wow ... he's a hater...

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

He's not exactly wrong though.

It's a little ambiguous whether all of the last 20 years are considered contending, but Duncan had DRob and a bunch of vets, then had Manu and Tony. 2003 is the obvious outlier where Duncan was just that great, but other than that it's easy to argue the current Spurs's 2nd and 3rd best players are worse than in most of the previous seasons. What they have, though, are a bunch of very experienced vets, who can have throwback games, and this raises their ceiling as a team. They also have a very well constructed and balanced team that could play different types of basketball and throw different looks at anyone.

[spurs10]

This is the same guy who wrote the article about Kawhi Leonard making the Spurs' defense worse.


The rest of the article, he goes on about how bad the Cavs are and essentially downplaying the Spurs win.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/ca...ncern-is-real/

Kind of a major contradiction- are they the "worst" or are they terrifying?"

[SAGirl]

He's not exactly wrong though.

It's a little ambiguous whether all of the last 20 years are considered contending, but Duncan had DRob and a bunch of vets, then had Manu and Tony. 2003 is the obvious outlier where Duncan was just that great, but other than that it's easy to argue the current Spurs's 2nd and 3rd best players are worse than in most of the previous seasons. What they have, though, are a bunch of very experienced vets, who can have throwback games, and this raises their ceiling as a team. They also have a very well constructed and balanced team that could play different types of basketball and throw different looks at anyone.

Everything that you're describing there doesn't equal the worst supporting cast of a contender. There are several years in the Duncan era that are worse than this crew and well you could say there were not contenders back then. But something leaders like Manu have said is that they believe every season that they can contend for a championship. If your only contenders were the championship teams that's a very narrow definition of contender after the fact bc they also could have won it other seasons.

It still remains to be seen... but this team doesn't rank in any absolute objective way as the worst supporting cast for a Spurs contender I think. There's a lot of subjectivity there. The statement would be a bit less subjective if he compared it to the championship teams as you did and even then it's not that clear, unless they underachieve which is after the fact again.

[SAGirl]

Kind of a major contradiction- are they the "worst" or are they terrifying?"

And the Spurs bench has been the best in the league.

I think he might have meant that the star power is the weakest of a Spurs contender bc he doesn't believe in Lamarcus, Pau and the rest of the HOF talent bc they are old...

[ElNono]

He posts here under Robz4000, tbh

[Mister Sinister]

'em.

[Arcadian]

It's actually one of the better supporting casts we've had in a while

[BillMc]

It's actually one of the better supporting casts we've had in a while

[Hoops Czar]

He's not exactly wrong though.

It's a little ambiguous whether all of the last 20 years are considered contending, but Duncan had DRob and a bunch of vets, then had Manu and Tony. 2003 is the obvious outlier where Duncan was just that great, but other than that it's easy to argue the current Spurs's 2nd and 3rd best players are worse than in most of the previous seasons. What they have, though, are a bunch of very experienced vets, who can have throwback games, and this raises their ceiling as a team. They also have a very well constructed and balanced team that could play different types of basketball and throw different looks at anyone.

Simmons, Dedmon, Anderson and Bertans (unplayable) are experienced? Manu's more off than on these days, Lee is a journeyman (situational big) and Mills is wildly inconsistent. I'd say this is the tied with the 2016 season as the worst depth the Spurs have had since 2011.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Simmons, Dedmon, Anderson and Bertans (unplayable) are experienced? Manu's more off than on these days, Lee is a journeyman (situational big) and Mills is wildly inconsistent. I'd say this is the tied with the 2016 season as the worst depth the Spurs have had since 2011.

Uhh hate to answer to trolls but they have 87 seasons of NBA experience between their 9-man playoff rotation. No one relies on the 10-15th players to contend.

[TampaDude]

Simmons, Dedmon, Anderson and Bertans (unplayable) are experienced? Manu's more off than on these days, Lee is a journeyman (situational big) and Mills is wildly inconsistent. I'd say this is the tied with the 2016 season as the worst depth the Spurs have had since 2011.

And yet they utterly cucked your team last night. GTFOH with that bull .

[DeRozan m8]

This bench rules.

What a dumb ass

[SpursIndonesia]

Everything that you're describing there doesn't equal the worst supporting cast of a contender. There are several years in the Duncan era that are worse than this crew and well you could say there were not contenders back then. But something leaders like Manu have said is that they believe every season that they can contend for a championship. If your only contenders were the championship teams that's a very narrow definition of contender after the fact bc they also could have won it other seasons.

It still remains to be seen... but this team doesn't rank in any absolute objective way as the worst supporting cast for a Spurs contender I think. There's a lot of subjectivity there. The statement would be a bit less subjective if he compared it to the championship teams as you did and even then it's not that clear, unless they underachieve which is after the fact again.

Yeah, the years with washed up Bowen/without him & before Kawhi, those were pretty awful rosters outside the big three.

[Chinook]

Spurs are better than last year, so Moore once again.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

He's not exactly wrong though.

It's a little ambiguous whether all of the last 20 years are considered contending, but Duncan had DRob and a bunch of vets, then had Manu and Tony. 2003 is the obvious outlier where Duncan was just that great, but other than that it's easy to argue the current Spurs's 2nd and 3rd best players are worse than in most of the previous seasons. What they have, though, are a bunch of very experienced vets, who can have throwback games, and this raises their ceiling as a team. They also have a very well constructed and balanced team that could play different types of basketball and throw different looks at anyone.

2003 was definitely worse than this year in terms of supporting cast. It was Duncan and a bunch of turnover prone youngsters, washed up David, and 4 mostly bench warming reserves that were near 40 years old at the end of the bench.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Yeah, the years with washed up Bowen/without him & before Kawhi, those were pretty awful rosters outside the big three.

Yes..... Aside from the big 3, it was George Hill, washed up McDyess, the Original Turd Towers, George Hill, and D-League players (and Splitter warming the bench) beyond that.

[TheDoctor]

Spurs are just missing the Ferrari piece tbh. We got Forbes tho.

[peacemaker885]

More reason why KL is MVP.

[Dex]

Now we have a problem. Maybe. Probably. Or not. It’s the Cavs, in the East. But this was a bad look.

This quote right here pretty much sums up how ty this article is.

First off, don’t overlook how great the Spurs are. On track for 60-plus wins, again, they are currently 3-0 vs. the Warriors and Cavaliers headed into Wednesday’s final matchup with Golden State.

Oh, and he got this wrong, too.

[elbamba]

I like having Manu, Pau, Lee and Patty coming off the bench. I think Murry and Bertans will be better next year. I am not a big fan of Simmons or Anderson, but in certain stretches, they are fine. Not sure where this guy is coming from with this bench being bad.

If anything, our starting lineup is probably the worst that it has even been because Tony Parker is old and Danny Green can't make a shot, or simple pass.

[horsielove]

2002 has the weakest supporting cast in SA history tbh and it's not even close

[LaMarcus Bryant]

This is the same guy who wrote the article about Kawhi Leonard making the Spurs' defense worse.


The rest of the article, he goes on about how bad the Cavs are and essentially downplaying the Spurs win.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/ca...ncern-is-real/

He's one of those weiners who will block you on twitter if you talk smack to him. He also jacks it *hard* to Chris Paul.

[snickles]

2002 has the weakest supporting cast in SA history tbh and it's not even close

you beat me to it. i had to google to make sure the roster was as weak as i remember it? it was.