I don't think he has any idea what the he's doing. It's not like they're working on anything or developing. They are certainly starting to play a bit more consistently, and Victor is figuring out how to get the ball in his spots. No coaching required for that.
I don't know what is going on at practice and if he's has a game plan. I have noticed Wemby doesn't sound dismayed or unhappy in interviews, though this is probably a measure of his maturity and professional at ude. My feelings are, Pop and the coaches notwithstanding, this team is not good enough to do much better than their historic losing streak.....they are getting better.
I am excited to see Collins in the All Star 3 Point contest! Ugh!
Trying to give Pop the benefit of the doubt and hope it's a CIA moment. It's doubtful he planned on such a bad showing thus far, though, I agree - even if he did intend on tanking another season.
The thing about tanking is, if you do it wrong, it’s very possible to win games you don’t want to win. I don’t think he wanted those blowouts, because that’s bad for morale, so he does things in close games like using all of his timeouts so that he can’t challenge. The fine line that you have to walk is to lose a LOT of games, but not get blown out too often.
Is the plan to lose every game this season? That’s some plan.
CIA was always a cover by the sniffers to explain the re ed he has always done. When he benches all his starters before a national game against a conference power, when he benches his centers in the playoffs, when he lets great players rot on the bench until they are facing elimination, when he refuses to foul when up by three, when he subs out a player who just hit four shots in a row...
Have you ever studied game theory? In a zero sum game, where one party wins and the other party loses, the BEST strategy is to avoid the worst possible outcome for yourself. The worst possible outcome is to foul a 3 point shooter in the act, and he makes the shot and the FT. Pop doesn’t not foul because of some personal preference or bias, he does it because it’s good sound strategy. In the long run, it’s the best strategy. Chess.
Okay. Let's use your game theory logic, since you've studied it:
You're up three with 30 seconds to go against a team that has several good three point shooters. They have the ball.
Three and a foul is a fluke play, statistically unlikely, but I'll give it to you.
The worst possible outcome is to give up a three and a foul. The next worst outcome is to give up a three. You avoid both of those by fouling the dribbler when he catches the inbound pass before he shoots. Barring flukes, worst case is they hit two free throws and you get the ball back up one with the shot clock off.
When you play defense, you take NONE of the outcomes away, good or bad. Pop plays defense in that scenario 100 percent of the time, whether the other team has good shooters or not, whether at home or in the road, whether the other team got the rebound or is coming from a time out.
Game theory says Pop is playing Candyland, not chess.
If you play defense, you win 60% of the time with a ‘good’ shooter, 65% with an average shooter. You’re also omitting fouling him, and he misses,but you put him on the line to tie.
Last edited by exstatic; 12-03-2023 at 04:44 PM.
Not fouling while up 3 can be justified. Benching Tim Duncan while playing Tony Parker when you need a stop is absolutely idiotic
Or a rebound ��the old fart really ed that up. Yep let's bench one of the best defenders and rebounders in history on an important finals defensive possession where you desperately need a stop and or a rebound, makes sense. Unforgivable. Idiots forgive because we won the next year but we'd be 5-0 or 6-0 if it weren't for him, either sounds better than 5-1. He's been a fool for many a year. So overrated. Now sniffers and Pop s underrate Duncan just because he was coached by Pop, ffs �� Pop is so overrated. His record in non Duncan years is well well below .500
Not that we want or need moron mainstream media approval, but it would have completely put Duncan in the conversation of Jordan or Duncan, who was better.
Also would have somewhat shut the mouths of delusional casual Kombe Phan. Now we hear the "they both had 5" nonsense, as if Duncan wasn't >>>>> then coatailer + foodstamps Kirby.
What I really would like to know is what are they trying to do on defense? I don’t see any plan. When we had the twin towers we would crowd the shooters to make them drive into the shot blockers. Now they look like slow cats chasing a mouse.
Its a beautiful day, and yall Mfs are crying about 6? Lmao
You just said good strategy is eliminating the worst outcome. Fouling does that 100 percent of the time.
100 > 65
Fouling a shooter is not part of the strategy. Stop trying to pretend it is.
I wish the media guys would at least question what is going on.
Probably from the pissing match he got in with Rodman that cost the Spurs hugely in the 95 WCF. Both David and AJ wanted Hill out which is why they want to bat so hard for Pop before that Houston game in 1999 when he was about to get fired and replaced by Coc Rivers.
Yes Pop told David to break his foot
Not to get into the Sniffer Debate, but for the rebound play, to me, the concern was that Tim was so slow at that point (relatively) that he would be a liability having to run out to the perimeter to defend a shooter on the 3 point line. In retrospect, he should have left him in. But if Tim was in the game and he failed to contest a wide open 3, then Pop would have been hated by the haters also. My issues with Pop is not one play but infatuations with certain players over an extended time. He fell in love with Finley excessively who only stabbed us in the back in the end. He's in love with Sochan right now, which has been a failure so far, but at this point I think they might as well continue.
Anyway. Just some ramblings.
Yeah that's the only thing that happened that season.
So you wanted him to rush David back from a broken foot like Portland did Walton?
lol nobody said that, did they? Again, Robinson was not the one and only thing that happened that year.
We know from the intervening 27 years that he would NEVER EVER fudge an injury report or intentionally lose games to get a high draft pick. But Bob Hill was cast after the fact as unlikeable because he was going to fight to keep his job even if it meant getting Adonal Foyle.
So why not make up some and end Dominique's season?
The reason the players wanted him gone was that every win was due to him, and every loss was on the players, sometimes named specifically in the press. He constantly threw them under the bus.
Lol you're ridiculous.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
