Reply With Quote
When was that philosophy not in effect?The "shoot when you're open" philosophy took over when there were still players capable of playing lock-down defense.
I had to check the date of Jim's post, because Pop hasn't really emphasized defense since before Bruce Bowen left. The "shoot when you're open" philosophy took over when there were still players capable of playing lock-down defense. I think the Spurs are just taking advantage of the fact that the offense is clicking; Jefferson's aggression, Manu and Parker's customary strong start combined with the contribution of the shooters.
A good adjustment by Pop this year is giving the green light to the players to take some more chances in the passing lanes. Steals are up, and it's fueling the fast-beak game. Gone are the days where the Spurs could just stay home and rely on the consistency of Bowen and Duncan to shut teams down. It's encouraging that he recognizes the need to adapt, but I'm hoping he recognizes how good the Spurs could be defensively if Duncan had a shot blocker next to him again.
When was that philosophy not in effect?The "shoot when you're open" philosophy took over when there were still players capable of playing lock-down defense.
Back when their focus was on defense and not on shooting three pointers. It developed with the arrival of Finley and Barry, and was fully in place when Pop ruined Mighty Mouse by turning him into an anxious chucker.
Exactly.
A lot of people think you need to be some lock down outfit for 48 minutes a game to win a championship, because that's what the Spurs used to be, but it's not true.
The Lakers have been one of the better defensive teams in the league the past few seasons, but they're not even close to historically great. They won because they had balance. Offense, defense and rebounding, so they were never overly reliant on any one thing. At the same time, there wasn't any one thing in particular that could be exploited. The bench was weak last season, but that get's minimized in the playoffs, especially if your top players can play almost entire games.
The Spurs defense needs to improve in order to win a championship, just not to the degree many think. Playing more of Duncan, McDyess and Splitter, while getting Anderson healthy, plus the fact that the entire team is likely to play with more urgency and intensity in the playoffs (Duncan will not be holding back, like he does against lesser compe ion), should improve the defense enough to give them a legit shot, so long as they're healthy.
A big key on defense is getting important stops and so far, this team has shown a penchant for doing so. They'll put together a good stretch in the fourth and because of their offense, pull away or at least get enough breathing room to pull it out.
I remember the green light given to open three point shooters pretty much from day one of the Duncan era. If you can give examples of Pop's discouraging open shooters from shooting, that would help me out.
Go figure.
Ruined Mighty Mouse? Really?
Then you remember wrong. Green light to shooters isn't the same thing as benching them for not taking open shots.
I can't think of an earlier shooter that was as big a pussy as early Brent Barry about taking open threes while being that good at actually taking open threes. If you can give me an example, please do.
lol ruined Mighty Mouse.
Pop ruined might mouse. And I assumed mighty mouse was just too old to anything but become an anxious chucker.
Whether or not you blame the phenomenon on Barry is irrelevant (I agree about Barry though). The Spurs' obsession with the three point shot started during that time. Prior to that, Pop was more likely to call a timeout and shred a player for taking a bad three than he was to pull someone for passing one up.
Given your memory, it's in no way surprising that you don't remember this. Damon was a pretty decent playmaker and was doing a good job of running the offense. He was even efficient at finding his own shot. There's an article about it, and his play before and after are pretty apparent.
Wrong. The Spurs' success has always depended on three point shooters taking and making open shots. It's simply disingenuous to argue otherwise, but I really don't expect anything else these days -- agenda uber alles. I asked you to give examples of players who passed up open threes like Barry back then. I got nothing from you.
Yeah, it wasn't because he was old and done.Given your memory, it's in no way surprising that you don't remember this. Damon was a pretty decent playmaker and was doing a good job of running the offense. He was even efficient at finding his own shot. There's an article about it, and his play before and after are pretty apparent.Given your memory, it's in no way surprising you think he should still have been able to play as he did when he was 23 years old.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 11-26-2010 at 09:15 PM.
I told you exactly when Pop started pulling players for passing up threes. Unless you're implying that NO players EVER passed up threes before Barry joined the team, your request for examples is irrelevant to my point, because Pop has benched several guys other than Barry for doing it, and he never did it prior to that, just the opposite in fact.
Just go look at the number of threes the Spurs have attempted since the beginning of the Duncan era and you'll see how important they've become. When Pop and RC are both telling the press in the off-season that the Spurs need shooting more than anything coming off two or three years where they've masively increased their three attempts, I don't really understand how you can even bother to argue this point. Actually, you aren't really arguing the point, you're trying to change the subject and declare victory as usual.
And we have the Chump strawman sighting right on schedule. I never said he had to play like when he was 23, I said that Pop ruined him. If he were old and done he wouldn't have played as well as he did for the first half of the season. Maybe it's just a coincidence that he was a contributor in his role until the moment Pop told him to shoot more when he was open (there's a McDonald article about it) and his points (and assists) suddenly went in the toilet and he fell out of the rotation by the playoffs, where he got no meaningful minutes.Yeah, it wasn't because he was old and done.
There's nothing wrong with my memory, thanks.
OK. Who? Quit stalling. You'll have to tell us who passed up open threes as a matter of course previously and was not benched because of it. Back up your argument.
I've said they have always been important to the championship teams. That is true and you are being disingenuous to support your agenda. Again, I'm not surprised.Just go look at the number of threes the Spurs have attempted since the beginning of the Duncan era and you'll see how important they've become. When Pop and RC are both telling the press in the off-season that the Spurs need shooting more than anything coming off two or three years where they've masively increased their three attempts, I don't really understand how you can even bother to argue this point. Actually, you aren't really arguing the point, you're trying to change the subject and declare victory as usual.
Your memory sucks ass.And we have the Chump strawman sighting right on schedule. I never said he had to play like when he was 23, I said that Pop ruined him. If he were old and done he wouldn't have played as well as he did for the first half of the season. Maybe it's just a coincidence that he was a contributor in his role until the moment Pop told him to shoot more when he was open (there's a McDonald article about it) and his points (and assists) suddenly went in the toilet and he fell out of the rotation by the playoffs, where he got no meaningful minutes.
There's nothing wrong with my memory, thanks.
Mighty Mouse was done. The whole time he was a Spur. It's not like the Spurs have never signed a guy who was done before. They did it this season.
Twice.
lol McDonald
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
