Reply With Quote
Dead last in dunks, yet 3rd in the West? We must of done something right in the Reg season.
The lack of dunks didn't cost us anything, it was ty D, jacking up too many 3's and playing Matt freakin' Bonner next to Duncan.
if we dont sign pops mensa bonsu and JAMES WHITE!
Dead last in dunks, yet 3rd in the West? We must of done something right in the Reg season.
The lack of dunks didn't cost us anything, it was ty D, jacking up too many 3's and playing Matt freakin' Bonner next to Duncan.
This adds to the boring tag. Slow pace games with lots of perimeter set shots was basketball 60 years ago.
I want to see the spurs add some players with exciting take it to the basket dunk skills.
Jacking up too many 3's is a result of the lack of ability to break down defenses to take it to the rim.
The spurs were not as good as their record last year. They were incredibly lucky in close games decided by 3 points or less.
By this logic, how do you explain Dwight Howard, who led the league in dunks being in the finals?
Of course the Spurs need to get younger and more athletic, but trying to establish a correlation between Howard's dunk stats with the presence of the Magic in the Finals is a real reach.
Your question could be answered with a question:
How do you explain the fact that only 7 of the top 20 dunkers in the NBA are on teams that advanced past the first round?
I don't think Duncan has ever played above the rim.
Can he even touch the rim?
That is not the point. I was using his logic that "Spurs were last in dunks, but 3rd in the West" and showing how the reverse of that makes no sense either. I was not trying to prove that dunking = winning.
My point throughout is that people are acting like dunking is for losers. Dunking in and of itself is nothing, but a lack of dunking as evidenced by the link I provided, reveals other problems. Lack of youth, athleticism and ability to run the floor and finish around the rim.
Dunking by itself means nothing, having players that have the ability to finish does. They must be able to do other things as well, but dunking helps.
Dwight is just a freak, and he is on a team which compliments his play.
I don't understand what Dunks have to do with going to the finals? We need to go back to the Defensive side of play and become the "Boring Spurs" again. Sure everyone knows we need a slasher, but we don't need dunking machines who can't defend for i.e Phoenix.
Hey i'm not saying I wouldn't like to see more dunks, they can energise the whole team. The thing is who out there can we get via free agency or trades who can supply the ability to slash and has decent D?
Who is saying this? Where did I say this? I said the lack of dunking highlights a bigger problem.
It is never good to be so far behind in any statistical category that you are an anomaly. That goes for shooting, assists, to, rebounds, blks, stls....
Spurs need to improve defensively and offensively. Pop obviously thought that the Spurs needed offensive improvements. It has nothing to do with being boring or exciting and no one said Spurs need guys dunking from the FT line.
They need athletes who can play defense, shoot and get to the rim. I am simply saying and have been saying that people act like the physical act of dunking is a bad thing that in any way corresponds to losing. That is not the point.
Not true. Lakers are top 4 in dunks, and they will win a ring. No one is saying "Spurs need dunkers" for highlight purposes. It is because they need to start getting younger and more athletic.
Do they need to turn into the Suns? Clearly not. But they need to solve those two issues and if they do, the dunks will take care of themselves.
Oh, sorry dude I misinterpreted your post.
My bad. I didn't read right. Ok, well at least there will be more tickets around for me to buy!
Again, dunking is not a good or bad thing, nor is it in any way indicative of winning. If you play an efficient offense without dunking, great. If you play an efficient offense while dunking, still great. The problem comes to be that many teams make a mistake and put out flash rather than substance, and that is what I think most of the people in this thread want to avoid.
If the original poster was just trying to say that we need more athleticism then I think everyone here would agree (and he should have just said that). We all know that the Spurs need an athletic shot blocking big man and an athletic SF who can both defend. Of course, we could just find a rejuvenation machine and hook Bruce and David up to it, and then that would fix all our problems.
I've read the whole thread. There was only one post before your first post that clearly took the bolded position. Your Howard post would have been a perfect response to that post. Muser's post, however, was not among those that suggested that dunking is for losers. He just made an argument that there were other, more valid and proximate, reasons for the Spurs problems. It's not a big deal, but the Howard post did not make sense to me as a response to Muser's post.
I agree with basic premise that Spurs need to get younger and more athletic. I also agree that the dunk stats illustrate the lack of youth and athleticism. You've made your case.
When I asked Muser the question, it was a leading question that was going to lead into my point based on the response I was going to get. But you quoted it before he had a chance to respond and I had a chance to illustrate my point. You actually answered how I thought he would.
Edit: It is also more of a general at ude Spurs fans have had throughout time. Not just this thread. Many people chastise people for bringing up athleticism and dunking. Most people are saying get younger and athletic. I do not think anyone cares to see the Spurs leading the league in dunks, but they want to see an improvement in the athleticism department.
Last edited by DPG21920; 06-10-2009 at 11:07 AM.
Since only 8 teams advance past the first round having 7 of the top 20 dunkers on those teams means that there is statistically almost a top 20 dunker on every team that advanced past the first round. Those are not numbers that show dunkers are not on teams that advance.
bottom line is that the Spurs NEED to get seriously younger and more athletic if they want to compete in todays league.
thats just a fact. anyone denying this, all the old-timers who 'hate dunking' for some reason and would be content rolling out bonner, finely and vaugh next year are just delusional or in denial.
The most discouraging thing for me on those lists is "Tallest Players Without a Dunk"
Top 5:
1. Steve Novak - 1,161 minutes
2. Fabricio Oberto - 677 minutes
3. Kurt Thomas - 1,404 minutes
4. Jason Kapono - 1,831 minutes
5. Brian Cardinal - 909 minutes
and reading this...
"After recording just 82 dunks as a team in ‘07-08, the Spurs managed to drop that number even LOWER in ‘08-09."
Again, dunks aren't everything. But for a team that relies on the three-pointer so much, and has problems with the offense stalling at times, some easy buckets (or attempts at that) would be nice.
The dunk is the most efficient shot.
The lack of dunks on the spurs by such a wide margin shouts problems with the makeup of the roster.
i'd be happy with one guy to help TD who can get up and block a shot...
Two different series with two different outcomes. The lakers are taking this.
Dunking is just for the spectacle of the game, for the fans to enjoy more. Of course I want to see that happen with the Spurs. But I would rather go secure. Secure on getting the points. If dunking is the price to pay for that, so be it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
